The Least Democratic Cabinet Since the War

hadrian

..and?
Anyway, far too many unelected peers in our cabinet. How ridiculous and scandalous that it's a Labour government too that's resorted to all these unelected nicompoops- Glenys- unelected and yet representing us over Europe- makes me absolutely incandescent. And Sir Alan Sugar touting for a peerage. Did any of the electorate choose him? Oh, of course one forgets the P.M. himself is entirely without a popular mandate- and they wonder why we are so turned off the political so called -democratic' process;democratic? don't make me laugh.

Nicholas

Actually the coalition government formed during the war was very successful and certainly not undemocratic because so many of its members maintained high ideals of integrity and service. Attlee's membership of and contribution have tended to be overshadowed by Churchill but there was a great deal of merit in the Labour party at that time. I think Attlee, Bevin and others who represented the solid roots of Labour together with an inherent British decency and tradition of service would be horrified at Brown pretending his "government" is a Labour government. It is a sham and most closely resembles the national socialists of Germany. A venal, self-serving gang of self-congratulary distorters of the truth who peddle propaganda and misery but little else. There is not a shred of humility.

In his ghastly "speech" today, Brown's most chilling words were his intention to continue with his "mission" regardless, regardless of democracy, regardless of the clear wishes of the British people to have a General Election. Brown sees his stubborn determination to Carry On Regardless as a strength. I see his wilful and stubborn disregard for reality as a weakness and a weakness that will do untold harm to this country, its people and its political institutions.

Dominic Marchmain, author of http://young-fogey.blogspot.com/

I would have, in other circumstance, supported the inclusion of more Lords in the cabinet since I think that, on the whole, the upper house is much neglected. But this so obviously a cheap trick to hide Brown's desperation in trying to find elected parliamentarians to join his titanic of a government.

BarBar of Oz

The commentariat seems to be united in clamour for a new PM so it can then move onto the next stop on the agenda: an election and Labor thrown out of office now - not in 12 months time.

Watching the last 24 hours (from the colonies) on Sky News it was only Peter Mandelson's door stop that gave hope there was one, sane brain left inside No 10 who could save the Gadarene swine.

No new leader. No early election. No imminent New Labour immolation. That basically summed up Mandy's message.

The time when Gordon could have been removed is long past. Alan Johnson surely must be saved to take over, if necessary, only at the point where an election can be creditably postponed to May 2010? An election campaign Mandelson will be running.

TomTom

Is Lord Sugar a "People's Peer" ?

Ray

It would have been better had Caroline Flint struck a blow for truth-telling twenty four hours earlier.

blueharry

Martin, sure you remember this,

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/party-finds-davies-innocent-1603476.html

'Ms Davies also told the Independent that she intended to issue libel writs against three Islington councillors, Tal Michael, James Purnell and Phil Kelly, unless they retracted allegations that she had "incited violence" and barracked and heckled at an education committee meeting into the closure of a school playground.'

Despite attempts to cover it up,

http://seanparkerperrydossier.wordpress.com/category/liz-davies/

That Purnell is the Spectator/Policy Exchange candidate for leadership says it all. Is it because he used to be chair of Labour Friends of Israel?

R

This appalling man will tear apart the constitutional settlement and destroy the Labour Party all because he can't bring himself to admit the failure that is so obvious to everyone else. How can the spineless dweebs in the PLP endure to be led by Brown?

Alf Tupper C.R.O.F.

I'm nipping down to Ladbrokes today to see if I can get odds on the likelihood of Brown's next speech lapsing into third person attempts at self-aggrandisement. In extra time.

Bryan

@Nicholas
Quite right to observe that the WWII cabinet was democratically representative. I think you would have to go back to Wellington's pre-1832 government to find anything remotely less democratic than this spineless, talentless group of timeservers and pork-barrelers.

KB

"Oh, of course one forgets the P.M. himself is entirely without a popular mandate."

This is an outrage. Gordon Brown is PM of Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath. Possibly more.

logdon

"Ray
June 6th, 2009 8:27am

It would have been better had Caroline Flint struck a blow for truth-telling twenty four hours earlier."

But at that point she was rooting for Gordzilla, obviously brown nosing for promotion.

Only when it failed to arrive did she do her 'woman wronged' bit.

Classic New Labour actually. It's not about us mere voters, it's all about them and their fetid ambitions.

Andrew Zalotocky

It looks increasingly likely that Brown will refuse to step down early and the PLP won't take the drastic action needed to force him out.

That means a 2010 election in which Labour will only retain a handful of seats. If we had a general election tomorrow Labour would probably come third behind the Tories and Lib Dems. By next year they'll be so hated they'd come third in a contest with al-Qaeda and the Ebola virus.

The rise of the Labour party in the early 20th century changed the fundamental dynamic of British politics from conservatives versus liberals to conservatives versus socialists, with the liberals as a minor distraction. The total collapse of Labour support at the next election will change it back to conservatives versus liberals, with the few remaining socialists as a minor distraction.

It won't all be Brown's fault. Blair was right to ditch the failed dogmas of Old Labour but had nothing to replace them with. Without any coherent ideology to guide it New Labour could only govern by short-term expedients and media management. Without socialism, it no longer had any reason to exist.

hadrian

I do believe you're right, Mr Zelotsky. All my leftist leaning colleagues, bar the die-hardest of them, have said they voted the LibDems( and this is Scotland!) I think Labour has a very real prospect of pulverising into third place or even worse!

Jon Rosenberg

I'm glad you've blogged on this point, seven unelected members of the cabinet! Hell, it would have been a cause for near fury if the last Conservative government had done such a thing, and rightly so, but for a Labour government...? The distrust between Brown and the PLP can never have been higher. Nor can the commons, as a whole, have felt so bypassed irrelevant to the executive, not for generations.
Brown is now utterly exposed. There can no longer be any pretence that the man believes in democracy, or the rights of the people. He has proved himself to be a machine politician. Please god the backbenchers will show the spine lacking in most of cabinet and throw this scandalous man out of power.

Jack R

And let's not forget the installation of another unelected Europhile, KINNOCK, Gleyns, into the House of Lords and thence the Minister for Europe, despite her appalling rating as a MEP.

Brown says he is going to continue to implement Labour's policies; apparently the policy of democratic deficit is one of his stealth policies. Another, apparently, is to continue Labour's campaign for Turkey's 75 million Muslims to enter E.U., and ipso fact increase Islamization of Europe, despite the views of British people expressed today in E.U. elections.

Kevin Barry

I don't have a problem per se with unelected (and hastily ennobled) Secretaries of State, so long as they are brought in for their experience and first-rate abilities, and so long as they are brought into an administration that has direct democratic legitimacy through the election of its leader.

That's the US presidential model, which, at least in principle, has a lot to recommend it against the lottery of the British model of restricting a Prime Minister's choice of cabinet to, in the main, the mixed bag of people elected to serve as constituency MPs. General Elections may furnish a Prime Minister with sufficient numbers of first-class candidates for high office, but equally may not.

I appreciate that there are obviously problems with both systems in practice, but in principle I feel the combination of direct election plus non-elected cabinet has more going for it than the present lottery.

Slim Jim

Having stuffed the Lords with their cronies as their version of 'reform', then placing some in the cabinet, how can this be seen as democratic? I would suggest that any future reform of the upper house should include existing members standing for election. How the constituencies/boundaries would be determined is beyond me, but the very threat of being accountable to the electorate will put fear into the hearts of the likes of Mandelson, eh?

Liz Brown

Mandelson is Prime Minister in all but name - what price democracy, where is our General Election?

Emily

One or two cabinet members from the Lords is acceptable, if they can bring specific experience and skills to the Cabinet.

But the latest reshuffle frankly shows a contemptible disregard for the democratically elected House of Commons, and specifically to the PLP.

Surely there are enough good Labour MP's to fill these roles, without needing to bring in former MEP's and computer salesmen.

Susan Hill

Don`t forget Mrs Kinnock, unelected, unwanted, promoted way way beyond her ability. And the joke that is the SurAlansugar appointment. How many are left who actually WERE elected ? After all, none of us voted for Brown as PM either

JohnAnt

Glenys Kinnock's an even more undemocratic appointment. She's not yet the Europe minister, and can't be until she resigns her MEP seat in July, and she won't resign before then as there's too much pension involved, see.
So Gordon pretends he's appointed a Europe Minister, she pretends she is one, but she's not.
We then have Suralan suddenly twigging that he' stands to lose a nice little earner, as the Beeb aren't allowed to employ a government spokesman as a presenter, so suddenly he's not a minister, just an 'advisor'. He says. (But one who gets a peerage, that'll do nicely.)
You'd think the Kinnocks would have got the message after the EU Commissioners were all sacked. But like true Labour politicians, they've both learnt absolutely nothing.

JohnAnt

Perhaps we should hold a referendum in Kirkcaldy, with the simple alternative:
When you voted for Brown at the last and previous GEs, knowing as you did the result would preserve your remarkably high local subsidies and not affect your own local legislation, were you
a) attempting to hurt the English?
b) just having a laugh?

Simon Stephenson

I'm waiting for James Purnell to announce that his decision to leave the Cabinet is to correct a mistake that HE made when he decided to join it in the first place. If he fails to do this then all his decision is about is his desire to look after his own interests.

I'm afraid I can't find anything commendable in that.

Graeme Stewart

You've got to admire GB's intuitive grasp of what the people want. Its just a good job that the re-shuffle didn't come a week later when The Apprentice was done with, and we were into Big Brother or christ alone knows who the enterprise tsar might have been. Why can't we have that "really nice person" Susan Boyle as Culture secretary -after all someone actually voted for her?

Dirty Euro

None of Obama government is elected.I do not care I hope they appoint the best people. They should not have to become lords to become secretaries of state..

journeyman

Martin
Did somebody say "Demos".Now who would they be when one peals away the onion layers ?The name keeps cropping up.

The Bellman

'Least democratic'? I think we're all well used to this shower disregarding democracy, along with plenty of other traditions, like not lying to parliament, usually on the grounds that it's not modern or helpful enough to their Project/Mission/whatever. Frankly, this is only to be expected from the fag-end of this arrogant and ineffectual thug of a Prime Minister's regime.

However, this is also shaping up to be the least *able* Cabinet since... Well, I struggle to think of a timeframe that would do justice to the dearth of leadership, talent, stature, authority, gravitas etc on display here. Even the Italian government has a few redeeming features, but this hastily-assembled mess of disgraced re-treads and Happy Shopper placemen is devoid even of the virtue of looking good in swimwear.

M. H. Forrest

The whole government is full of peers. Five out of ten junior ministers at BIS are peers.

I, however, would contest the idea that this makes the Cabinet any less democratic. Cabinet ministers are generally elected in safe seats chosen by the PM. What's more people don't go to the poles and vote for the best potential Home Secretary. What makes ministers democratic is there accountability to Parliament, which is not diminished by their being in the Lords, as select committees do all the real scrutiny.

When our American cousins appoint their equivalent to ministers the President's choice must be confirmed by the Senate, who scrutinise all top public sector appointments. US executive/legislative seperation creates a darn sight more accountability than our greasy pole system.