Common Decency

I couldn't agree more. Only with truthful politicians will we be able to make informed positive decisions about the future of our country.

The obsolete architecture of the house of commons with its sets of government and opposition benches confronting each other at two sword lengths is a big part of the problem. It dates from the era of only Whigs and Tories, furthers the two party "you're either with us or agin' us" atmosphere sets and plays into the crowd mentality of insulting and heckling those opposite. Most parliaments use a less confrontational horseshoe layout, and this is by nature better suited to multiparty representation. We shouldn't simply cling to this architecture out of a sense of tradition: it is an impediment to modern democracy. Can an architect come up with a new chamber layout for the hallowed halls of Westminster, or must it be mixed seating for all?

Just a question: If we abolish the party-system and we abolish the whip system, this will significantly increase the primacy of the Legislature at the expense of the Executive Branch of Government. It would effectively be the end of Prime Ministerial...or even Cabinet Government in this country if there is no parties, there are no manifestos and every vote in the House of Commons is basically a 'free vote'. What would replace Prime Ministerial/Cabinet Government?

I apologise if my question is a little wonkish, but because we are still debating what underpins this idea of "decency", I figure it's reasonable to clarify theoretical matters at this stage.

You have a good proposition, and a public that is likely to be more receptive to proper progressive change than ever before. So please don't start by alienating any sector of the population!

You really should know better than to suggest that by making the rich poorer, you will make the poor richer. There is no evidence of that ever having worked as a sustainable policy – especially in a “trading economy” like ours – ie not one bolstered by an accident of birth like oil.

The real enemies of our times are the globalised companies made possible by the past 20 years of technology dividends- where a handful of dangerously monopolistic companies can displace 250,000 traditional jobs with 10,000 high tech jobs in call centres and robot warehouses. Politicians doing the same would once traditionally have been obliged to try and think through the consequences, and phase-in alternative wealth creation strategies over time – and if one country like China was getting a massively unfair advantage through leveraging an oppressive regime, then trade barriers would have been an option. However, now China effectively owns the US, there is little scope to apply any pressure anywhere.

Whilst I can understand why you say "a Government like the present one", this is a naive viewpoint since all government in this country since the 60s has been based on "unelected" power blocks seeking leverage for their backers. The present government is a compromise of compromises – one of the first things the LibDems – supposedly all about proportional representation - did was to childishly block a move to alter constituency boundaries to more fairly represent the voters in those areas that had new demographics. The fact that this government has put the UK economy on top of the European pile seems undisputable, no matter how much that fact rankles with its detractors, and how unlovely many aspects of the Eton common room may seem to ordinary folk. Most EU governments are run by educational elites, and people who have rarely done anything like a proper job before politics.

Ironically, the right wing of British politics has always been more radical, pragmatic and ready to instigate change than the left. The image of the left as the change bringers may be built of the fact that the left seems to the first to get agitated and throw eggs and insults, but there is little evidence that once the Labour Party has the levers of power and use of “the comfy chair”, it does anything more than take care of its traditional power blocks. Remember that David Milliband was the party’s popular choice, but the Union paymasters put Ed into the job because they felt he would be more accommodating. The stench of hypocrisy is nauseous and pervading when any of that regime open their mouths.

The challenge of the Health Service is so vast that to try and conflate the issues into slogans and emotive misdirections such a “threat of privatisation” is tribal misnomer. After all, the catastrophic PFI schemes are a legacy of the last Labour government - and a fundamental unrealistic grasp of economics that seems endemic when emotions can be roused.

The bottom line and guiding principle of the revolution has to be that no politician is ever going to spend your money more wisely than you can.

I totally agree we have a broken system and something needs to change. Voting for a candidate I feel I can trust is a sound ideal. But what to do if I, as many others do, don't trust any of them?
The current system needs breaking but how? Maybe the electorate would be better this time around writing 'I support Common Decency' across the ballot paper to let all parties realise they need to change.

Totally agree with regard to party whip system. Why should there ever be any reason for an MP to do anything other than to vote on each issue on behalf of their constituents? To subvert this through the whip system is corruption of democracy right at the heart of the system. In effect it means that only a handful of people i.e. senior party leaders actually have a vote and the vast bulk of the 600 odd MPs are just doing what they are told. I believe this is the single most important issue to address to regain trust.

A clear example of this corruptive effect in action is the rise of the SNP. For decades Scottish Labour voters have become more and more disillusioned with Labour because the MPs have carried out a party agenda which has not been aligned with local needs resulting in migration to the SNP, believed to be more closely aligned. However exactly the same effect will eventually cause disillusion with the SNP as its Party interests become more powerful than those of the constituents.

In any other walk of life the risk of a conflict between Party interests and those of the constituents would be seen as a massive conflict of interest and would be outlawed. In this most important of forums it is regarded as normal and not a problem not just amongst politicians but also all those closely associated such as the journalist community.

The mud-slinging is still going on during the election campaign. All parties are spending most/all of the time saying how bad the other parties would be if they win the election rather than giving in depth details of what they themselves would do. I support no party , I despise them all, what I will say though is the Tories are still blaming labour for the mess that they were left to sort out but what a lot of the electorate don't realise is they all sing off the same hymn sheet. Conservatism and socialism is obsolete, it has been replaced by Neo-liberalism, started by Thatcher and Reagan and carried on by Tony (The third Way Blair) and now carried on by the Tories aided and abetted by the poodle that is Clegg and his bunch of no-marks

I'm going to sign up, I like the sound of these proposals.
Regards John

There are 178 independent candidates waiting for the public to elect them and restore the democratic republic and end party politics, but every year the majority of voters have let us down. If the majority do not unplug from the Party Political Media "Matrix" soon then independents will probably be stamped out by the Political Parties.

The heading of this thread is spot on. The party in power appease their pay masters (The masters of the universe), hey that sounds similar to a Queen song. The public do not matter to them. Capitalism rules everything under Neo-liberalism which is the main ideology of today as I have previously stated. New Labour (They've dropped the new I see) are no different to any of the other parties. The choice of candidates in my constituency is abysmal, red,blue, yellowy- orange and purple. I will turn up on 7 May but non of the above will be written on my ballot paper

Perhaps another Golden Age of history, without any government would be a nice idea. In 1683 there was a death plot to kill Charles II of England and his brother James, some Whig leaders were executed or forced into exile. Charles dissolved the English Parliament in 1681, and ruled alone until his death on 6 February 1685. I can't quite remember, but I don't think there were any wars during his Rule and the people of England were content.

The main political parties have themselves indirectly admitted that our FPTP system is broken by stating "a vote for .... is a vote for .....". What kind of democracy do we live in where we are told not to vote for certain political parties because it would give others advantage? Go figure!

Bring on the 'Coalition of Chaos'.... at least that moves us towards something approaching democracy! Nicola Sturgeon has expressed eloquently how minority government or coalitions can result in debate (not the childish bun fight of PMQs but real, intelligent debate) and compromise to achieve the best, most constructive solution for the common good. Of course, that approach requires a level of maturity that seems to be sorely lacking in much of our current political class. And I have specific concerns with the role of vested commercial interests in the formulation of policy, especially in the construction, banking and energy sectors.

The fact that MP's are not required to attend the house, or to vote, is wrong. That's why they are elected, to represent their constituents

A good Idea in principle Eileen but I would get rid of the royals and become a republic. regarding Nicola Sturgeon, she's a storm trooper in stilettos They lost the vote of independence so she is trying to get all she wants through the back-door, I can't stand to listen to all her false promises of how she could benefit England, She has interest in one thing only and that's what's in it for Scotland. I also agree wholeheartedly with J Childes (See above ) last sentence about outside businesses having vested interests in the formation of policy. finally I think Milliband did the right thing being "Interviewed" by Russell Brand, Cameron is too busy appeasing his paymasters than taking part in "Jokey" stuff like that.

We appreciate all your comments, please refer to our link https://www.commondecency.org.uk/may-7th-2015/2015-candidates-2. Commenting is essential, and so please go to your candidate, then tell everyone about them and why they should vote for them.

The point is no one is worth voting for A radical change is needed before i vote for anyone, I thought that was one of the objectives of this (Common decency) site. I am going to turn up at the polling booth and putting pencil to paper but not voting for anyone. I have contacted My present MP and got the same tired old rhetoric in reply.. If more people turned up to vote but spoiled their paper someone might cotton on to the fact that society is tired and disillusioned with politics and politicians. Politicians are only interested in wahts in it for them and their funders. Time for a change me thinks!!

A petition on change.org or similar should be started to end this corrupt first past the post and to establishing Alternative Voting or proportional representation.