I, like most of the people living in Britain, abhor the BNP and all they stand for.

Personally I would like to see the BNP completely removed from the legitimate political system. However, I’m in what I can only describe as a philosophical and political quandary.

No matter how much I want to agree with everyone over how much of an affront it is to see the BNP have two elected MEPs, there is an instinctive part of me that says I should be glad to see democracy in action no matter how offensive it may seem to me. I know many people will be very disappointed that I could hold such a viewpoint, yet I can’t help it.

Whether we like it, or not, the BNP is a political party that has the right to put candidates forward at elections, their members views and the party policies and membership conditions may offend me, but until they break the law there is nothing we can do about it. I don’t like having to accept that a member of the BNP now represents me in Europe. I don’t like having to think that the rest of Europe will look at the North West of England and think that we all support an odious man like Nick Griffin. Yet I am still struck by the point that this is democracy, for all its faults.

My question is, how do we stop this from happening again in the future without making a mockery of democracy, and the very freedoms we want enjoy as our rights?

I am sorry to be the one to have to tell you this, but it seems that few, if any, of your lickspittles and lackies have the courage.

I know you have tried your best and that you think you are the only man for the job. I know you truly believe that only you can bring about the revival of the economy of the UK. I understand that deep in your heart you know that it is only the expenses scandal that has robbed you of your share of the national vote. I am sure you believe that all your cabinet ministers are absolutely loyal to you, and would die a slow political death for you.

Gordon, what you don’t seem to realise is that you are completely delusional. If you were anyone else there would be a senior police officer and a doctor on the way to your house to section you. You are detested by the majority of the British public, you, your policies, and your government held in complete contempt by the electorate. Those that do support you, do so out of utter despair because there is no one better in the Labour party at present.

If you were really listening to the British people you’d be on your way to Buckingham Palace right now to ask for a disolution of parliament. Instead, your meglomaniacal tendencies have taken over, you cannot concieve the depth of harm you are doing to the country, and you do not realise that in the future you will be held up as an example to all aspiring politicians of the wrong man for the job. You failed in the treasury and you failed as PM with no mandate to be in power.

You would do well to remember the words of Percy Bysshe Shelley, he foresaw you long ago.

OZYMANDIAS

I met a traveller from an antique land
Who said: Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
Stand in the desert. Near them on the sand,
Half sunk, a shatter’d visage lies, whose frown
And wrinkled lip and sneer of cold command
Tell that its sculptor well those passions read
Which yet survive, stamp’d on these lifeless things,
The hand that mock’d them and the heart that fed.
And on the pedestal these words appear:
“My name is Ozymandias, king of kings:
Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!”
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare,
The lone and level sands stretch far away.

Gordon, you need to realise that the similarities between Ozymandias and yourself do not make this poem an instruction manual, it is a warning for you. You have tarnished everything you have touched, politically the country is falling apart, now go, so we can clean it up before it becomes a barren desert and a monument to your own blind pride.

In amongst all the calls for constitutional change that we have seen since MPs expenses hit the Telegrpah headlines, one of the changes called for has been a move to PR, Proportional Representation. Tonight we have seen what PR means, the election of a party, which, while legally constituted, is an affront to to what the majority of people would consider decent.

I’m not surprised it has happened though, if you look through the list of parties represented in europe there are a number with similar views. PR encourages it by its very nature, because it isn’t a first past the post system, you don’t vote for an individual representative, you vote for a party and a list of candidates. However, PR is not the prime reason that that the BNP has two MEPs heading to Brussels, no, that honour goes to the three main political parties in England.

If you look at the turnout for the elections, and then look at the numbers voting for the BNP last Thursday there is one very obvious point to take away, hundreds of thousands, if not millions of people in this country feel utterly disenfranchised and disconnected from politics, MPs, the government and Westminster. If less than 50% of the population is voting it means that more than 50% of the electorate either don’t care enough to walk to a polling station, or they don’t feel like politicians truly represent their views. The actual turnout for the European elections across England and Wales was under 40%. For example, out of every 1,000 voters less than 400 turned up, of those only around 100 voted Conservative to give them their 26% of the vote. Is that really democracy? One in ten voters voting Conservative gives us however many Conservatve MEPs.

Why are the figures so low? Why did the BNP get this foothold in Europe? I can’t say for certain, but I can make a few educated guesses.

• Political parties are now all aiming for the same voters and have forgotten their political base.
• Those abandoned by their traditional parties are looking for someone who speaks their language.
• A failure by the three main parties to engage the BNP, and similar parties, in serious debate.

If as politicians, you don’t engage with the electorate on the issues that interest them you will lose them, if all political parties aim to attract the votes of middle England then you ignore everyone else at your peril. Tonight we have seen that peril take a very real shape.

If as politicians you abandon the working class and ignore their fears, real or imagined, over immigrations and its effects on jobs then they will go to a party that will play on those fears. If as politicians you ignore peoples views on europe, deny them a referendum, or won’t commit to one even if a treaty is ratified, then they will go to the parties that promise change on europe.

If as a mainstream politician you wail about the BNP without confronting them, you are just an oxygen thief. Being interviewed by some talking head doesn’t stop the BNP, just saying they are racist doesn’t stop them either, the people who vote for them are likely to be racist as well. The only way to expose the BNP is through confrontation on their policies and what they will cost, how realistic they are, whether they would even work at all. Burying your heads in the sand, or putting your hands over your ears and singing la-la-la-la I can’t hear you, doesn’t work as we have seen tonight.

What can politicians do to stop a repeat of tonight?

Forget about PR, the British version of democracy works well as it is, it isn’t perfect by any means, but it makes it harder for fringe parties to gain ground, I’m a member of one of those parties, I’d like it to do better, but if I want the BNP kept out I have to accept it. PR also takes the selection of candidates out of the hands of the constituents, it also encourages our representatives to care more about the party than their constituents if they wish to remain an MP.

Bring in open primaries for all candidates before every election, it will give the electorate a real say in local politics and a chance to find out if they are looking at the right issues. That will also allow sitting MPs to be challenged from within their own parties, the constituents will then have real power if an MP is not working on their constituents concerns. I may not vote for a Labour candidate at a general election, but I want a say in which Labour candidate is selected to ensure that he is the best one available, just in case he does end up representing me in parliament.

Finally we should have real debates between selected candidates for a constituency, why shouldn’t we have town hall debates? I’d like to hear what all the candidates at a by-election would say about how they will fight on behalf of their constituency. Surely in that sort of situation the BNP could be shown to be what it really is, rather than a bogeyman put up by our elected representatives to scare us into voting for a mainstream party that doesn’t really care what we think.

I’d like to see a system where the priorities are the people, the country, the party and parliament, in that order, where an MP should really fear the electorate, because if they fail their electorate, they go. A system which it is completely transparent in which our elected representatives make the law, not some unelected demi-dictator in europe.

I’ve noticed this question being asked a number of times on different news channels and no one seems to understand. I have a very simple theory for why people don’t bother voting.

If you vote against a treaty in a referendum and your vote is ignored, why bother voting? If your government breaks a manifesto pledge to give you a vote, why bother voting?

I’m sure the French, Danish and Irish electorates feel like that, I know the English do.

Europe cannot be a democracy until people have a voice that the unelected leaders have to listen to.

James Purnell, the cunt cabinet minister that has managed to get a lot more than his fair share from the trough without any censure, is now advocating even more troughing, this time by the parties themselves.

He has got a fucking cheek, in a period when the main political parties are in the doghouse with the electorate he is advocating that we fund the very political parties we fucking detest.  Well he can fuck off, if he wants to be in a political party he can fund it himself, or go begging for donations, I refuse to.

Of course the only reason this is back up for discussion is the lack of donations to the Labour party, is it any wonder that their financial backers are keeping their distance? Who would want to be associated with the bunch of fraudulent fuckers and con artists in power in Westminster these days. Who wants to donate money to a party with a leader paralysed by fear when it comes to elections.

If a political party can’t fund itself then it should go out of business, there is no reason at all why the tax payer should support it.

I know, people are probably sick of me writing about Nadine Fucking Dorries, but this time she has gone too far.

I’m really glad I don’t vote Conservative any more, If I’d read about something like this back then I would have been tempted to vote Labour. It seems that Nadine is having a war of words with the the Labour candidate for her constituency.

This all started when her oponent David Reeves mentioned his military service when criticising Ms Dorries over the MPs expenses. Forget the fact that her expenses appear to break the rules , Nadine is straight on the attack against David reeves, and she gets it completely wrong. She starts off by claiming that, “I stand in awe and admiration of our soldiers, their professionalism and bravery.” It doesn’t last long though, even though her oponent has served in the TA and has been to Iraq. Her attack is based on a completely cretinous understanding of the nature of warfare in Iraq in which she believes that there are specific, ‘danger zones’.

Only, did he fight in Iraq? Did he go out into the danger zones along with the a regiment on Op Telic 8, and risk his life and limb side by side with our soldiers, for the sake of freedom and democracy? The values for which he claims to have “fought in Iraq” .

I’ve got news for you Nadine, you are talking shit, again.

In Iraq everyone is in danger, if you go out in a vehicle you are in danger of being hit by an IED or of having your vehicle mobbed, if you’re in a base location there are mortars, car bombs and snipers. None of these methods of attack by insurgents are discriminatory, they don’t only attack members of the teeth arms, they will kill anyone. It doesn’t matter if you’re just a LCpl in the Int Corps, a medic attached to another unit or someone stagging on the gate at a HQ location, you’re fair game. Trying to make a distinction, as Nadine does, is disgusting, but what else do you expect from her?

I’ve tried to leave a comment on her blog, but I doubt that it will pass her version of moderation, moderation to Nadine means silencing anyone who may disagree with her point of view, no matter how wrong it may be. This also ensures that her comments are full of sycophantic ravings and probably full of sockpuppetry as well.

Personally I think she should be sacked.

I have been thinking about this since I was asked twenty questions for the Mars Hill Blog. My reply then was:

Do we need electoral reform in this country?

Yes, we need the right to recall MPs. We all need to have a say in which candidates are put forward by the parties. We need fixed terms so that elections take place regardless of the political situation. I would also like to see a system in which the PM is considered to be elected by the whole country and can’t step down without triggering a general election.

I have been thinking a lot more about the issue and I’m going to outline some of my thoughts here.

• Right To Recall.

Having seen the way that many of our MPs have acted I think we, the electorate, need to have a mechanism to recall our MPs and hold a by-election in the constituency. This would ensure that MPs do as the majority of their constituents wish them to rather than as the party wants them to. They are elected to represent their constituents, not a political party, nor commercial concerns.

• Open primaries for MPs.

MPs are supposed to represent the constituency, all people living in the constituency should have a chance to say which candidates they want to vote for. I might not vote for a candidate in an election, but I still want a voice over who does represent me.

• Fixed Terms.

I want to know when an election is due to take place, I want it to take place no matter the political situation, and I don’t want a bad PM to be able to put it off in the hope that conditions might improve. Contrary to Jack Straws belief, there are no situations which should stop us exercising our right to vote.

• Prime Minister To Be Elected.

Technically we don’t elect a PM at the moment, though we might vote for a party because of a leader, that isn’t acknowledged. I would change that, the party leader at the time of an election would be classed as voted for, and elected. There would only be one way for them to leave office, a serious debilitating illness, or death. If either of those things happened it would trigger a referendum on which cabinet member would take over.

• Reform The House Of Lords.

One third to be hereditary peers, they have done a pretty good job over the centuries, I think they deserve to stay, let them hold elections amongst themselves. One third to be appointed for life by the house of commons on a free vote. One third to be elected using proportional representation. Peers should not be party members, or represent any political party

• Remove The Parliament Act.

We don’t need the parliament act, if a bill was to be passed between the house of lords and the commons three times it would trigger a referendum. That would enable the people to decide if our politicians cannot.

• Remove Ex MPs From The Lords.

Why should failed or retired MPs be allowed to go on making legislation? They have had their chance, let new people in with new ideas.

• The Queen To Appoint Hereditary Peers.

The Queen should have the power to appoint hereditary peers . So far the process for appointing peers has been mired in controversy, let the queen appoint hereditary ones. I think it is a good system for rewarding anyone who gives outstanding service to the country, knowing that their family will benefit in the future. Also, anyone giving that sort of service should have a chance to have a seat in the lords if elected.

• Stop Crossing The Chamber.

I would stop MPs crossing the chamber, if you are voted in for a party by your constituents you can’t change allegience when you feel like it, if you want to cross the chamber call a by-election.

• Remove Statutory Instruments and have binding votes on European L:egislation.

The statutory Instrument should be removed from UK law making, it allows the goverment to bypass parliament and places to much power in the hands of the government. If something is going to become law it should be debated on and voted on. The same principle should apply to European law and legislation. Unless people are elected by us, other than in the case of the house of lords, they should have no power over us.

• Allow The Public To Raise Issues For Debate.

This is my final point for now, we, the electorate, must be able to raise issues for serious debate. I would envisage a system such as… If one hundred people in a constituency agree that an issue should be raised at a general election, then it goes on the ballot paper in that constituency, if it gets more than half the vote it should go to parliament for debate in the name of that MP.

One other point I would like to make is that, if laws were debated properly in parliament, letting each member speak for a long as they wanted then we might have decent laws passed. If that means that other laws have to wait to make it onto the statute books then it is no bad thing, it may just encourage the government of the day to think about what laws it really needs to pass, or whether we already have existing legislation that might be suitable.

As well as Andrew MacKay standing down, it looks like the NoTW has a story tomorrow on Julie Kirkbride and her brother Ian Kirkbride living  for free at her Bromsgrove apartment. Of course she is denying everything, so we’ll have to wait to see what the NoTW says tomorrow.

Sky has more here.

… Bromsgrove MP Julie Kirkbride, claimed for another property.

Ms Kirkbride faces more questions over reports in Sunday’s News Of The World that she allowed her brother Ian Kirkbride to live rent-free in her luxury Bromsgrove apartment.

She described the report as a “total distortion” of the truth, maintaining that her brother had stayed at the home but was only helping her with childcare.

Interesting stuff, has she held a meeting with constituents yet?

The creative genius that is Beau Bo D’Or has posted an excellent video that deserves to be seen by as wide an audience as possible.

If you do want to embed it on your  blog please make sure you at least give him credit and a link back to his blog or the page.

I’ve noticed a fair few political commentators claiming that at the moment we are going through some sort of revolution, I think they are talking bollocks. I say that is bollocks, because apart from a little bit of heckling the British people haven’t really done anything. I know bloggers have had a lot to say, but It has all really been between the media and the political classes, so far.

Personally I would say that what we are seeing could only be called evolution. As with any other organism, if the conditions change then organisms have to change with it, or it will be the death of them.

If you will forgive me using the analogy of money being food, then in this case one source of sustenance has just just become poisonous. For those organisms that have either hardly used it as a food source, or have used it in moderation it isn’t a problem. However those organisms which  have eaten a lot of it are going to end up sick and regurgitating it with some dying of the after effects, other who have gorged on it will definitely die, unless of course some bigger organism spends a lot of time keeping them on life support until they can evolve as well, or appear to, though it may take longer. It all means that as one source of food has dried up the remaining organisms have to evolve to live in an altered ecosystem.

If you can follow that analogy you can see that it is obviously a case of political evolution that we are watching, some MPs have already evolved and used little of their ACA, others are trying to evolve by handing money back, others know they can’t evolve and are giving up trying now, and the final lot are hoping that someone else keeps them on life support, while hoping people forget they haven’t evolved.

If there had been a revolution it could have been nasty, I’m sure there are plenty of people who would like to see the greediest MPs swinging gently in the wind as they dangle by the neck from a lamppost. There may be some protest voting, but that is little different from poking MPs with a stick to remind them we are still here and sending them a message. The only other way a revolution could take place is if no one votes, or if they do go to the polling station they spoil their ballot papers.

So for all you commentators and columnists out there, drop the ‘R’ from revolution and you  and you might look like you have a clue.