Loading... Please wait...

Power 2010: we need to reclaim power from the executive and reward scrutiny and bravery

Power2010By Jessica Asato / @Jessica_Asato

I’ve written a fair bit in these virtual pages about the pressing need for constitutional reform. One idea Progress pushed for much of last year was that of a Citizens’ Convention. It seemed to me that the expenses scandal threatened to cover our democratic institutions and the notion of elected representation with such a deep layer of crap, that only an assembly of randomly selected citizens from across the country could decide what needed reforming and how.

Well, that didn’t go anywhere, sadly, but last weekend, Power 2010 - a follow-on from the Power Inquiry – staged a unique deliberative event. Working with YouGov, it brought together 200 citizens, scientifically chosen, to whittle down 58 ideas from over 4,000 submissions to reform our democracy. It was pretty much a citizens’ convention, just without state backing.

You can find out more about the process by visiting Power 2010’s website, but it was an exciting experiment and, depending on how many citizens get involved in the final round of voting, could help transform the nature of debate about constitutional issues in this country.

I proposed reform of select committees as one of the ideas to go forward to the assembly. Sure, it’s not as sexy as, say, setting MPs pay, or recall, but I firmly believe that we need to enable Parliament to exert greater power over the executive in order to shift the culture in Parliament. Recall and pay levels are important, but won’t do much to change the day-to-day practice of politics. As I said in my initial submission:

“There is really only one career path in Parliament, and that's through ministerial office. This route rewards politicians who are loyal, can keep their mouth shut and who eschew risk-taking. This leads to a dull safety-first politics, aided and abetted by a 24/7 media which leaps on the first scent of dissent and brands it a split or a u-turn.

What we need is an alternative career path for politicians which rewards scrutiny, diligence and bravery in defending the public interest.”

By allowing MPs a free vote to elect select committee chairs, for example, we would remove the ability of the Government to determine patronage and turn it into a contest between peers as to who can prove their independent credentials. Similarly, by giving select committees powers to introduce Bills, the stature of committee chair would be raised and political success won’t simply be defined by ministerial office, but by also how well you’ve performed in Committee. Moreover, if select committees had the power to make major public appointments, it would introduce a greater sense of transparency and accountability into unelected public office. There would be less opportunity for quango chiefs to pass the blame for failure of Government, and vice-versa.

I was pretty surprised, to be honest, that Power 2010’s forum chose the reform of select committees as their top idea to go forward to a national poll which launched today. But when people who are unconnected with politics are given full possession of the facts they don’t necessarily choose the easy options. Lots of other good ideas, such as changing the electoral system, fixed term parliaments and a fully elected House of Lords were also nominated last weekend by the selected citizenry. I was particularly impressed that they suggested compulsory politics lessons in schools. That’s like a politician’s wet dream.

Anyway, the whole point of what Power 2010 is doing is to get loads of people to vote for five ideas to lobby our politicians to introduce if they get elected this year. There are 29 to select from and I hope you might consider voting for strengthening select committees as one of your five!

People + the internet = Power 2010.

Share


Posted on Jan 14, 2010 at 03:53pm


13 Comments · Show / Hide
Leave a comment »   show trash comments ·
I think we ought to scientifically choose say 6 people to run the government - as long as one of them is Gordon Brown, and 4 of the other 6 are Scottish MPs.
That'll do the trick!
Why bother with letting people errrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr - "vote" ?
William Silver @ 28 weeks and 1 day ago
So you expect the public to go along with dictat by randomly selected juries, espaecially ones that make sensible decisions, like legallising drugs and closing prisons?!
Jonathan Morse @ 28 weeks and 1 day ago
@Jonathan Morse

No the idea is to involve the people in the modernising of our seriously out of date Constitution. We have already seen first hand MP's bumbling and stumbling when it comes to sorting out the House.

It is only fair that the public should have a say about Constitutional issues and begin to build the bridge that is necessary between Parliament and the people.

The simple reality is that MP's have too much power over themselves and their conduct, the executive is merely a result of a bad culture in the House. We even watch as David Cameron prepares to make the same old mistakes we have.

Constitutional reform requires the public and you would be amazed at how capable many people are. I have approached many people already on matters regarding a Written Constitution and other reforms and been surprised by the rersponse. Whether they agreed or not with my points they seemed to like very much the idea of being consulted and involved.

I support Jessica Asato completely on her work on this matter 100% and I am no sycophant as I have disagreed and debated with her on numerous occasions.

But on this matter I think she has yet to play a pivotal role in the future.
Ralph Baldwin @ 28 weeks and 1 day ago
Weren't local authorities run as committees, and didn't we drop them for cabinet style local authorities because committees are just plain daft, like reforming select committees, which at the moment are just a load of has-been's and never-going-to-be's in search of a headline - them asking the question that gets the questionee in trouble/gets him tongue tied but doesn't serve any useful purpose but promoting that MP.
Jonathan Morse @ 28 weeks and 1 day ago
Danny, I've watched debates where I've opposed what the government wanted, heard a few opposition MP's trash the government for what I know the opposition MP's would have supported had it been their side pushing it, and quickly become willing to support the government just in anger at the opposition MP's. If I was an MP I'd avoid debates to protect my sanity and vote as requested.

Besides, those of us not in Parliament want to influence government, surely the best way is to have a say over the manifesto and for the whips to enforce that. The problem is that we're stuck with GB who we didn't get a choice over, except to stay away on polling day and when our MP wants help getting re-elected.

Also there's the issue that is the party splits, MP's fear that it will be someone they disagree with who wins, not their lot, better to stick with the system.
Jonathan Morse @ 28 weeks and 1 day ago
Hi Labourlist

Why dont mps follow there convictions instead of the whips ? wouldnt that solve the problem ?

Danny
ricki lake @ 28 weeks and 1 day ago
Looks interesting-anything which will help to
give the "average" citizen a voice is a good
thing,something which will press our political
masters on civil liberties might turn out to something
great.
I will follow this with interest and if I can play
a part,I will.
Good luck.
ian jordan @ 28 weeks and 1 day ago
Jessica- you are doing some great work, and I've been really inspired by you articles.I will have to read this tonight in detail.But I'm very interested in the Citezen's Convention, and would like to know more.

Jo.
Hazico 28 @ 28 weeks and 1 day ago
Sensible. I would prefer to look at this issue in holding the executive to account by the legislature.

The UK system, whilst notionally based on a system of separation of powers, obviously has an inherent problem with the Eeecutive branch of government consisting of the legislature.

At the other end of the constitution reform there is of course the Queen as head of the Executive proper (rather than the PM as the head of the Executive branch of government - that's a totally different problem entirely, but also is relevant to the issue of RP (royal prerogative) which some of us don't want to see swept under the carpet whoever comes into government next.)
Shibley Rahman @ 28 weeks and 2 days ago
"The UK system, whilst notionally based on a system of separation of powers, obviously has an inherent problem with the Eeecutive branch of government consisting of the legislature."

But it isn't and has never been based on the separation of powers - that's the US constitution!

One reason why Blair's constitutional changes have been such messy disasters (apart from their being introduced hurriedly as a short term publicity measures to take attention away from other disasters) was that he never took the trouble to understand the British Constitution: it is essentially non-theoretical, historic, pragmatic - to use a term not much mentioned in constitutional debate since the 19th century, essentially organic.

It is a good example of a process of "evolution" and any attempts to pack it into some sort of 18th century framework of political philosophy are usually bound to fail - specially if based on underlying ignorance of how and why it works!


Matt London @ 28 weeks and 1 day ago
Shibley - The Queen is Head of State.
She is the constitutional monarch BUT the Government decide on policy, strategy and so on.
The Queen has NO power except that of signing into law those Laws passed by Parliament.
William Silver @ 28 weeks and 1 day ago
William, that's not correct. The Queen has quite considerable powers, it's just that most of the time she doesn't use them.
Graham Smith @ 28 weeks and 1 day ago
Impressive and a move in the right direction. I was gutted when the Citizen's Convention did not take flight. In a recession it is the perfect platform for potent reform that does not assault tax payers and can in fact restore public confidence in the political system which would not hurt an economic recovery.

Thank you Power 2010!

Give the people a taste and they will always be hungry for more.

This is part of the solution to the long-term problems of this country and to my mind a core issue. With Democracy in the state it is in currently in it will require Politicians with legal/Constitutional expertise/understanding, who are able to project outside the "box" and mend the problems. Bringing the people in to play a role and celebrating the very fact can do this. It is after all their country.

Thos prospective politicians who are addressing the issues with the exclusion of Parliament, and exercising initiative are the leaders of the future. When such leadership is displayed in the interests of the public and only the public. Then you are untouchable too.

Who would be stupid enough to try?

Probably the greatest praise I have ever given on this website.

It certainly is a time to be radical.



Ralph Baldwin @ 28 weeks and 2 days ago