…… which so many of our politicians do not seem to understand.
Reading the Hansard report of yesterday’s debate on the European Union (Withdrawal) Bill there were many usages of the word ‘democracy’; and not one Member of Parliament appears to understand, or have any knowledge of the meaning and derivation of the word.
Witness Bill Cash (Sir) and from his speech (4:45pm):
The Bill and this whole issue are about one main question, namely democracy, which is what everything else necessarily flows from. All the economic arguments and questions relating to trade and other matters are ultimately dependent on the question of whether we have the right to govern ourselves in this sacred House of Commons. That is the basis on which the people of this country make decisions, of their own free choice, in general elections—whether it is to vote for the Labour party, the Liberal Democrats, the SNP or the Conservative party—and then a decision is made in this House as to how they will be governed (my emphasis).
I do not intend to bore readers with the meaning and derivation of the word ‘democracy’; I have covered this point too many times already. Suffice it to say while the people may have a free choice in a general election; half, if not more, understand not the issues, to which one must add in the aspect of ‘tribal voting’. Not only that, but any party political manifesto is meaningless as invariably what is ‘promised’ is not that which is delivered – think recall of MPs ‘enshrined’ in the Coalition government.
The point Cash makes: ‘then a decision is made in this House as to how they will be governed’ is a dictatorial statement when it is realised that if the people disagree with a policy they have no opportunity to halt said policy. If MPs, Cash included, had any understanding of the word ‘democracy’ then they would not use words phrases about governance as did Cash.
Questions/interventions in the debate to which I link only serve to illustrate that our ‘learned’ Members of Parliament have not the slightest clue about that which they maintain they do – and, in this context, to the Baker from Wycombe one can only say: doh!
That so many Members of Parliament, at the forefront of which is Theresa May, seem to conflate ‘leaving the EU’ with leaving the political construct of the EU is beyond my comprehension. Perhaps this is but a ploy by our ‘Remainer’ Prime Minister to create such a ‘pigs ear’ of the Brexit process that she will, ultimately, recommend that the UK must remain a member of the European Union. In which case where will be the voice of the people who voted to leave. But, perhaps, yet again I digress?
Digressing, as is my wont at times, Tom Harris – ex-MP and now a columnist for the Daily Telegraph – has an article in which he makes the statement: It’s high time the Government began setting out what our immigration system will look like after we leave; to which one can only add that it is about time the Government began setting out what all the other aspects involved in leaving the European Union will look like. In mitigation to the statement from Harris, coupled with my observation of his statement, it must be obvious to those with only half a brain cell that when you ask children to act like adults then the reason why Brexit is in the mess it is, it then becomes crystal clear.
Harris is, in my opinion, wrong to believe that immigration is a local matter for settlement, as I believe it is a national matter. That which he appears to omit is the agreement of the people in those local authorities to the subject. Whether it may ‘local’ or ‘national’ is, to a certain extent, immaterial as if we are to have true democracy (people power) then it is for the people to decide and if necessary negate decisions by government (local or national) made by means of petition and subsequent referendum.
The meaning of the word ‘democracy’ is being ‘engineered’ by those (the oppressors) who wish to maintain their power over us (the oppressed). Five centuries ago, starting with Cromwell and culminating in what was termed ‘The Glorious Revolution’ our nation was yet again, ‘taken over’. When the ‘penny drops’ with the people and they finally realise what the word ‘democracy’ means, one can but hope that there will be another ‘glorious revolution’, only then it will involve the oppressed and the oppressors; a battle which the latter will – and must – lose if democracy per se is to triumph.