citizen magazine (autumn 2011)

8/22/2019 Citizen Magazine (Autumn 2011)

1/20

itize

inside: Whr xt for lctoral rform? Challggcorporat powr, Hou of Lor rform a mor...

Autumn 2011

The magazine of Unlock Democracy


2/20

2 | citizen | autumn 2011 | contents

etoral 3Peter Facey

Rg rom th Ah 4James Graham

What Ma You Tc 7Samir Ahim

succ story Ur Thrat 8Steve Shaw

Your dmocracy Uloc 10Emily Randall

Pr Prur 12Alexandra Runswick

Challgg Corporat Powr 14

Anthony BarnettMa Rgulato 17Ivor Gaber

Ulct Olgarchy 18David Beetham

About Unlock Democracy

Unlock Democracy, 69 Cynthia Street, London N1 9JF

Tel 020 7278 4443

Fax 020 7278 4425

Email [email protected]

Website www.unlockdemocracy.org.uk

Director Peter Facey

Deputy Director/Parliamentary and Policy OcerAlexandra Runswick

Campaigns and Communications Manager James Graham

Outreach Assistant Emily Randall

Oce Manager Simon Howard

Finance Ocer Osman Mustaa

Finance Ocer Margaret Mathews

VoteMatch Co-ordinator Matthew Oliver

VoteMatch Project AssistantAlexander Rawle

Sustainable Communities Co-ordinator Steve ShawSustainable Communities Campaigner Daniel Flanagan

Unlock Democracy is the UKs leading campaign or democratic

reorm. Established in 2007 ollowing the merger o Charter 88 and the

New Politics Network, we argue and campaign or a vibrant, inclusive

democracy that puts power in the hands o the people.

Citizen is published by Unlock Democracy.

The views expressed in this magazine are not necessarily those

o the organisation.

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution

NonCommercial 2.0 License. To view a copy o this license, visit

www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/uk or contact us at

the address above.

ISSN (print): ISSN 0966-0208, (Online): ISSN 2040672X

Thanks to all our donors andvolunteersMany thanks to everyone whohas supported our work with

donations, phone banking orlocal campaigning over the lastyear. All your help has beengreatly appreciated. Specialthanks go to Chloe Dunne, JonWard, John Franglen, Tom Miller,David Newsome, Jack Maizels, AiYamauchi and Maria Smith or alltheir help.

Goodbye and Thanks to

Bethan and SamBethan Rigby, our Publicationsand Projects Manager, let theorganisation last October, tobecome Research and CaseworkOcer at British Irish RightsWatch. Our Fundraising andMembership Manager, SamirAhim, has also let to becomeHead o Individual Giving atRethink. They were both integralmembers o the Unlock Democracyteam and we wish them well in alltheir uture endeavours.

Welcome toSimon Howard, Emily Randalland Alexander RawleSimon Howard has been our OceManager since last September.He ensures the smooth running

o our busy oce and helpsmanage the two properties ownedby Rodell Properties Ltd. EmilyRandall started work as ourOutreach Assistant last October,supporting our local groups andensuring that our undraising andmembership administration is upto date. Alexander Rawle startedas VoteMatch Project Assistant inAugust, working on VoteMatch or

the Republican Primaries o the2012 Presidential election in theUSA.

contents news in brief


3/20

Unlock Democracy was established tocampaign or a vibrant, inclusive democracythat puts power in the hands o the people.We deliberately chose to be a campaigningorganisation and not yet another think tank.It was not enough or us to identiy problemsand solutions; we believed we had a dutyto try and bring about change. We have

constantly sought to empower communities,strengthen transparency, accountability,rights and reedoms.

This has meant that we have not shied awayrom a struggle however hard it may havebeen. It has led us to champion many causeswhether it be human rights, reedom oinormation or the decentralisation o powerthat have not always been popular.

One o the causes we have consistentlychampioned has been to make our parliamentand politics more representative o andaccountable to voters. A year ago this ghttook thousands o people to the streets oLondon, and towns and cities across the UK,to protest against our unjust electoral system.It then took many o us into the campaign ora Yes vote in the reerendum on AV.

In May we watched what or many o uswas a very small change, get resoundinglyrejected. AV was seen as a politicalstitch-up that would only benet one party.Those o us who campaigned or a Yesvote, ailed to convince the electorate thatthis was a change worth voting or in theace o a political and media establishment

determined to protect the status quo.

While the battle or AV is lost, theunderlying unairness o First Past the Postremains. As long as there remains morethan two sides to every argument, millionso voters voices will go unheard as politicalparties obsessively chase a handul oswing voters in marginal constituencies.For this reason, electoral reorm is liable toreturn as an issue sooner than most o itsopponents like to think; and next time wewont be satised with a takeitorleaveitproposal agreed by politicians in a backroom deal.

When change happens in Britain, it canhappen quickly, as anyone watching thecollapse o the News o the World cantestiy. So as campaigners, we will dustourselves down and head back into battle.

We have other ghts to win, such as Lordsreorm where or the rst time since the1911 Parliament Act, we have an actualdrat bill or a elected second chamber tobe debated and voted on. Lords reorm isundamentally dierent rom AV becausethe dividing line has not been drawn onparty lines, but is one where democraticreormers, and deenders o patronage,can be ound in signicant numbers romall parties. The importance o ensuring the

accountability o transnational institutionsand corporations has also shot up thepolitical agenda.

editorial | autumn 2011 | citizen | 3

So it has been a challenging

year but now is not the time to

run for cover. Unlock Democracy

will not shy away from the battle

to strengthen accountability,

defend our fundamental rights

and freedoms. We will continue

to march to the sound

of the guns.

editorialPeter Facey argues that Unlock Democracy must

always be willing to march to the sound of the guns


4/20

Rising fromthe Ashes

James Graham examines where the campaign for

electoral reform can go from here

In the long run, this May will probably beremembered more or the SNP winning amajority in the Scottish Parliament election,than or the AV reerendum. It means that, in thenext our years, there will be a reerendum inScotland, that could end the United Kingdom.Regardless o the outcome, the constitutional

status o the British Isles will continue tochange. It is untenable or the process odevolution to continue to bypass England; thequestion now is what orm that devolution willtake. We need to ensure that any proposedchange actually deals with the centralisednature o power within England, and empowerspeople and communities. Devolution andlocalism in name alone will not suce.

So it has been a challenging year but nowis not the time to run or cover. UnlockDemocracy will not shy away rom the battleto strengthen accountability and to deendour undamental rights and reedoms. We willcontinue to march to the sound o the guns.

Peter Facey is Directoro Unlock Democracy

Following the AV reerendum, the usualsuspects were very quick to claim that theresult represented a rejection o any electoralreorm and indeed reorm in general. In sodoing, they conveniently orgot that one o thearguments o the ocial No campaign wasthat supporters o proportional representationshould oppose AV on the grounds that it was

a step backward away rom PR.

Losing the reerendum was certainly asetback, but the only system that wasrejected on 5 May was the Alternative Vote.The undamental problems with rst pastthe post a complete disconnect betweenvotes cast and seats won and an undue ocuson swing voters in marginal constituenciesat the expense o everyone else still verymuch applies. Indeed, it is notable that the

UK public show absolutely no enthusiasm ora return to the sort o two party politics thatsupporters o First Past the Post advocate.

Despite the all in the Liberal Democratspopularity over the past 12 months, the SNPare riding high in Scotland. None o the mainparties are enjoying widespread support,with the party leaders currently embroiledin a race to the bottom in terms o opinionpoll approval ratings. The assertion thatthe reerendum result represents a vote o

condence in the status quo blithely ignoreswidespread and unprecedented levels odissatisaction in the British political systemand the alse choice it oers us, refected asmuch by low turnout as by votes or smallparties and independents at every level.

One way o examining the stability o anelectoral system is by looking at what isknown as the eective number o partiesor ENP. This is an abstract number which

takes into account the number o partiescompeting in a political system, and theirrelative strength. In her chapter in Unlocking

4 |citizen | autumn 2011 | Rising rom the Ashes


5/20

Democracy: 20 years of Charter 88 (2008),Helen Margetts writes that the wide disparitybetween the eective number o parties inthe UK in terms o votes and seats in theHouse o Commons, is already destabilising.While the political scientist Josep M. Colomerargues that i the ENP in the UK reaches 4

maintaining a majority rule electoral systemwould be highly risky or the incumbentlargest party. In 2010, the UK ENP was 3.7.

However much the political class might resistit, the current voting system is set to growincreasingly unstable, thus lending weight tothe arguments or reorm. Opportunities willcontinue to arise to make the case; the role ocampaigners will be to ensure that we makethe most out o these moments.

In the meantime, there are other levels ogovernment where the case or electoralreorm is, i anything, even more pressing.In local authorities in England and Wales,

uncontested elections have become endemic 533 councillors did not have to ace theirelectorate in 2007. For parish and towncouncils, the situation is even worse. Thisproblem was swept away in Scotland with theintroduction o the Single Transerable Voteor local elections.

The voting system has led to massively unairresults at a local level. In Newham in 2010 orexample, at least 37% o voters supported

a candidate other than Labour; yet Labourreturned 60 out o 60 candidates. In NorthSomerset this year, the Conservatives got

nearly 70% o the seats with less than 45%o the vote. First past the post has alsodirectly led to the rise o the British NationalParty, which became the ocial oppositionon Barking and Dagenham Council in2006 despite polling ewer votes than theConservatives (like Newham, Labour is now

the only party represented on Barking andDagenham council). Proportional systemsare oten criticised or allowing extremistcandidates to get elected, yet only under rstpast the post could an extremist party gaincontrol o a council with a minority o the vote which has been a real worry or placessuch as Burnley during the last decade.

Most o the arguments which opponents oproportional representation employ when

objecting to its introduction or the Houseo Commons simply dont apply to localgovernment where multi-member wards arestandard practice and hung councils arecommon, even with rst past the post. Andnowhere is the degradation o the currentpolitical system more keenly elt. I we wantdemocratic renewal, we need to start locally.

Unlock Democracy has campaigned onthis issue in the past, drating the ElectoralChoice Bill which sought to give local peoplethe right to call or a reerendum to changethe voting system or their area. Such apower operates in New Zealand, and simplybuilds on the existing right to demand adirectly elected mayor, and the generalright to demand a reerendum in the recentLocalism Bill.

The Sustainable Communities Act alsoprovides people with a mechanism todemand a potential change to the electoral

system and Unlock Democracy plans towork with local people who are interested inexploring this option.

In Newham in 2010, at least37% of voters supported a

candidate other than Labour;

yet Labour returned 60 out of 60

candidates.

Rising rom the Ashes | autumn 2011 |citizen | 5


6/20

We also need to look at the voting systemcurrently being used to elect MEPs. Theclosed list system is certainly proportional,but ails to oer the public any say at all overindividual candidates. This puts all the powerin the hands o political parties, and hasbeen used as a means to attack proportionalvoting systems by deenders o rst past thepost (which is ironic given that rst past thepost also denies voters a meaningul choicebetween candidates). There is a strong casethat by demanding this reorm, electoralreormers will not only make individual MEPsmore accountable, they would also help makeurther reorms easier.

Back to Westminster, our immediate goal isensuring that the system used to elect thedemocratic replacement or the House oLords is both proportional and allows votersto choose specic candidates. We cant aordto lose sight o our ultimate goal however -to change the voting system or the Houseo Commons. The big lesson to be learnedrom the reerendum campaign is that inuture we must be more careul to avoid the

voting system being presented as a politicalstitch-up. Never again must the voting systemput to a reerendum come out o a ve day

negotiation behind closed doors, conductedby an elite group o senior politicians. UnlockDemocracy has always supported holdinga convention comprising o a group orandomly selected members o the public todecide what, i any, voting system should beput to a reerendum and the experience o thepast 12 months has only reinorced that view.

The next opportunity or electoral reormcould come at any time. We simply dontknow when the next political crisis mightarise, or i the next general election resultwill be even more palpably unair than thelast one. It is crucial that Unlock Democracy

and other campaigners or electoral reormmake sure they are ready or when suchmoments arise. I we are, then there is everyreason to be optimistic that meaningulchange will come sooner than ouropponents like to think.

James Graham is Campaignsand Communications Managerat Unlock Democracy

6 |citizen | autumn 2011 | Rising rom the Ashes


7/20

What makes you tick? | autumn 2011 |citizen | 7

What makes

you tick?Samir Ahim reports back on the resultsof the membership survey

Unlock Democracy is very proud o being anorganisation that is owned and run by you,our members, but or that to be a meaningulstatement and not just a marketing slogan,

we need to understand our members andsupporters. That is why we recently sent allmembers and emailed all our supporters adetailed survey to nd out what you think ourpriorities should be, what activities you thinkwe should be doing, and what motivates youto campaign or democracy. We had a veryhigh response rate, so thank you to everyonewho took the time to ll in the survey.

What did we learn? Your answers reinorced

some things that we knew already. Forexample, the top three priorities or ourmembers and supporters are electoral

reorm, House o Lords reorm, ollowedby strengthening local democracy anddecentralisation. These are all areas thatare core campaigning priorities or us and

echoes what you have told us in previoussurveys. Interestingly though, there werekey concerns that you identied about thestate o our democracy that we are not yetworking on and dont have policy on. One othe main lessons that we learned rom thesurvey was that you are concerned aboutaccountability. There are a large numbero organisations and bodies rom nancialcorporations, transnational institutions suchas the EU and the IMF to the media, thatimpact greatly on our daily lives, but thereis no democratic oversight o what they do.You also expressed concern about the waythat these organisations oten infuence eachother, or example the way that the media,now dominated by corporations, has pursueda low regulation agenda. We dont have anyeasy answers but we are starting, with thismagazine, to ask these questions and this isan area where Unlock Democracy will work to

develop our thinking, our policy and o courseultimately, our campaigning work.

So now that we have learnt some moreabout you, what happens next? The rstthing that we did with the results rom thesurvey was report them to your Council. Thendings were debated at their meeting inJuly so Council could begin to think abouthow your priorities should help shape UnlockDemocracys work. This is an ongoing

process and we will reer back to the surveyin uture discussions.


8/20

The most obvious infuence o how we haveresponded to the survey ndings so ar isthis magazine. This edition is entirely shaped

by what you told us in the survey, witharticles on electoral reorm, House o Lordsreorm and how we should address issueso corporate governance and accountability.The desire that many o you expressed inresponding to the survey, to be more involvedin your organisation, led to the article on

how you can infuence our work through theAnnual General Meeting and standing orelection to Council. We hope that you enjoythe magazine but dont orget that you canalways contact the oce to let us know whatyou think o what were doing - you donthave to wait or the next survey to infuencewhat we do.

Samir Afhim was Membershipand Fundraising Manager at

Unlock Democracy

Success StoryUnder ThreatSteve Shaw reports on the quiet revolution started by the

Sustainable Communities Act and why Whitehall isnt pleased.

The Sustainable Communities Act becamelaw in October 2007. The Act established,or the rst time in UK law, a bottom upprocess where communities and councilscan drive the actions central governmenttakes, to reverse community decline andpromote local sustainability.

Communities, together with their councilshave the right to put proposals under theAct to central government. Government

then has a duty not just to consult but to tryand reach agreement with an independentselector body.

Since the Act became law our Local Workscampaigning team (we built the coalitiono over 120 organisations that got theAct through Parliament) have mobilisedcommunities across the country to lobbytheir councils to get involved.

Last year, in response to attempts romsenior Whitehall civil servants to kill the Act,we achieved the impossible by getting theSustainable Communities Act Amendment

Act made law in a Parliamentary sessionlasting only six months. This ensured thatthe original Act was made an ongoing

8 |citizen | autumn 2011 | Success Store Under Threat

Fair, Openand Honest

Elections

Rights,Freedoms

and aWritten

Constitution

StrongerParliament

andAccountable

Government

BringingPower

Closer tothe People

A Cultureof Informed

PoliticalInterest and

Responsibility

Members Interested in

becoming membersNon Membersnot interested

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0


9/20

process and also empowered parish andtown councils to submit proposals togovernment.

So the Sustainable Communities Act hasseen success - a number o proposalshave been agreed by the government andcommunities will certainly benet. The Actspotential is greater still; it is the perecttool to use to do things like reorming theundemocratic planning rules and give powersback to communities and councils.

Leiston-cum-Sizewell Town Council inSuolk currently aces an application ora new Tesco store. We are helping themuse the Act to get more powers or parishand town councils to help them assessapplications or major developments in

their area. We have gained the support oover 1,100 (and still rising) parish and towncouncils across the country and submittedthis list o support to the government. I theLeiston proposal is accepted, it would be amajor success or the Act and help inspiremore people to get involved.

However, the Act aces an ongoing threat- the resistance o the Whitehall machine.This resistance was enormous during the

campaign to get the Act passed into law. Ithas continued: the governments rejection ocertain worthy proposals that would not cost

money and would only aect a particular localarea is evidence o this. This Whitehall knowsbest culture is deeply ingrained in our systemo governance and the Act challenges thisstatus quo directly. It will take time and eortto erode it, but with your help it can be done.

Steve Shaw is NationalCo-ordinator of Local Works

TAke ACTiOn nOW

1. A your parh or tow coucl

to upport th Lto propoal

- www.localwor.org.u

or mor ormato

2. Local Authort to agr to

u th Act - ma ur that your o

o by gog to www.localwor.org.u

Fally you wat a or how to u

th Act to rorm mocracy, protct

th vromt or av a local pot

ofc www.localwor.org.u

Thr hav alray b om otablucc through th Act, clug:

new powers or councils to oerdiscounts on business rates to supportsmall businesses and local shops;

new permitted development rights orcertain types o renewable energy;

a new community right o purchase orcommunities to take over local assets;

a pilot scheme or councils to supportthe post oce network in their area;and changes to planning rules to endgarden grabbing.

Success Story Under Threat | autumn 2011 |citizen | 9


10/20

Where next or Unlock Democracy is or youto decide!

We greatly appreciate all the things you door us, rom donating to the organisationand supporting our campaigns, to readingthis magazine or lling in eedback surveys;but there can be more than this to being amember o Unlock Democracy. There aremany more ways to get involved howevermuch time you have to spare.

Unlock Democracy is owned and run by itsmembers. Every member has the right to beinvolved in leading us nationally and to leadcampaigns locally. As a member you canstrengthen the grassroots o the organisation.How? By getting more active!

It is you the members who make UnlockDemocracy what it is. This is what keeps usthriving and is why we need every memberto be engaged in shaping the uture o ourcampaigns.

At the heart o our democratic structure areour annual general meetings where activistscome rom across the country to hold ourelected Council to account and to vote onpolicy motions, to decide the uture o ourcampaigns. I you cant make it dont orgetto vote by proxy!

We are entering an exciting new time ordemocracy campaigners and with the AGM

just around the corner, i you thought thingscould be done dierently now is the time tobe vocal.

Your Democracy

UnlockedEmily Randall explains how you can help

set Unlock Democracys agenda

submttg a Moto Chc Lt

1 Write your motion2 Find a seconder

3 Post or email your motionbeore the deadline

4 Attend the AGM

5 Both you and the seconderspeak on the motion

6 Vote

How o i wrt a moto?

A motion is your way to get UnlockDemocracy to have a view on certainissues that in turn guide the directiono the campaign. Your rst step whenwriting a motion is always to check wedont already have it covered in ourconstitution or policies. There is no setway to write a motion but here is a roughguide to what you need to include andhow you could ormat it.

Uloc dmocracy not: Outline your issue or policy area.

Uloc dmocracy Blv: Provide evidence to support

your proposal.

Uloc dmocracy Rolv:

Describe the actions that UnlockDemocracy must take.

10 | citizen | autumn 2011 | Your Democracy Unlocked


11/20

Not sure about the motion you want to submit?We will happily help you write it and doublecheck your idea isnt covered by existing policy.

Your CouclThe members elect the Council, withthe general meetings providing the bestopportunity to keep them to account. Hereyou can put questions to Council andscrutinise their reports. Think you can do abetter job? The elections are held every twoyears by postal ballot. The next elections willtake place at the beginning o 2012.

Any member can stand or Council you dont need to be nominated by othermembers, just ll in the nomination orm andwrite a brie statement about who you are andwhy you want to be on Council.

Being a member o Council is rewarding andwill give you a unique insight into campaigningor democratic reorm. Meeting three timesa year, the Council members set the overall

strategy o the organisation, implement themotions rom the general meeting, agreenew policy, set our priorities and approve thebudget. Council also elects the ManagementBoard which oversees the day to day runningo the organisation. Make sure your councilrepresents you dont waste your vote.

Throughout the year, keep the Councilaccountable by putting questions to themand or really critical issues you have a right

to petition them. Your council members arecommitted to replying to your questions andpetitions.

Ulocg dmocracy LocallyThere are lots o ways or you to be activein Unlock Democracys campaigns, rom

signing petitions, to donating or ollowing uson twitter all these very simple actions arewhat make you a local activist. However youdont have to do it alone. You can be a criticalpart o a nationwide activist network ourlocal groups.

Through adding your voice to localgroups you can have a greater impact asa campaigner and strengthen your voiceto infuence the national direction o ourcampaigns. Nationwide, activists in groupswork hard to get people locally involved inour campaigns, rom socials to street stalls tospeaker events.

I you cannot nd a group in your local arealet us know so we can put you in touch withactivists locally to help you in getting yourown group set up.

Find out i there is a local group near you bychecking the website or [email protected]

Emily Randall is OutreachAssistant at Unlock Democracy

Your Democracy Unlocked | autumn 2011 | citizen | 11


12/20

Peer

PressureAlexandra Runswick outlines how we can makeprogress on House of Lords reform

Its all too easy to be cynical about Houseo Lords reorm. The three main parties areall ormally in avour o an elected secondchamber and yet unprecedented numbers o

Peers are being appointed to the House oLords. The Government is committed to therst elections taking place in 2015, yet ewthink this timetable is likely to be kept. Whatmakes this white paper any dierent rom anyo the others that have been published?

One dierence is that this is the rst timewe have had a drat House o Lords reormBill. This might seem like semantics, but untilnow all we have had were general policyideas, sometimes good, oten not. This is therst time we have had specic proposals inlegislation that can be voted on in Parliament.However, the real dierence when it comes toproposals on House o Lords reorm is you.On this issue more than any other UnlockDemocracy has, through the campaigning oour members and supporters, kept this issueon the agenda and has kept steadily makingprogress.

In 2003, when the House o Commonshad the opportunity to vote on all reormoptions in a ree vote and rejected them all,the issue was supposed to be dead andburied. Commentators declared that theopportunity or reorm had been lost or atleast a generation and ew politicians evenwanted to talk about it, never mind bringorward new proposals. Rather than simplyaccepting this, we set up the Elect the Lords

coalition and built consensus around theneed or an elected second chamber. Sothat, when the House o Commons voted

again on this issue in 2007, both the 100%and 80% elected options passed. We havemoved rom a position in 2001, where thethen governments proposal was or an 80%

appointed 20% elected second chamber, to2010 where all three main partys maniestoscontained a commitment to at least apredominantly elected second chamber. Thisis the consensus that you helped to build.

12 |citizen | autumn 2011 | Peer Pressure


13/20

There are things to be welcomed in theseproposals, particularly the smaller chamberand the choice o a proportional electoralsystem that gives voters the chance tochoose not just between dierent politicalparties, but also between individual

candidates i they so wish.

One o the main criticisms that has beenmade o the White Paper and drat Bill hasbeen that they very deliberately sidestep theissue o the powers o a reormed secondchamber; the White Paper simply statesthat the powers would be the same as orthe current House o Lords. There are goodreasons or avoiding the powers debate. Itis a standard delaying tactic o those who

oppose reorm to argue that nothing canpossibly be done until there have been yetmore commissions and reports. However,

in this case not talking about powers isa mistake because it drags us o intodiscussion o dry technical details o electoraltimetables and constituency sizes rather thanthe undamental case or reorm.

Would an elected second chamber inevitably

challenge the primacy o the House oCommons and break through all existingconstitutional constraints? An electedsecond chamber, with greater legitimacy,would almost certainly be more willing touse the powers that it has and to use themmore ully. Meg Russell at the ConstitutionUnit, UCL has published a detailed analysiso the Governments deeats in the Houseo Lords since the removal o the hereditarypeers in 1999. This shows that where the

Commons has rejected Lords amendments,the second chamber has become moreassertive and has been more willing toinsist upon the changes it wants. Howeverthe signicance o the change is otenoverstated; much more requently the Houseo Lords still agrees to give in. This is not thesecond chamber challenging the primacyo the House o Commons, it is merelyexercising its existing powers. This is onlyreally a problem i you dont believe that thesecond chamber should have a delayingpower to argue that they should have onebut not be allowed to use it is nonsensical.

There would need to be agreed procedures orresolving conficts between the two Houses oParliament, but there is no reason or this tobe an obstacle to reorm. The Parliament Actsalready provide a basis or the relationshipbetween the two Houses o Parliament

and international experience suggests thateven powerul elected second chamberscan be constrained by convention and theirconstitutional role. The Australian Senate orexample, which has ar greater ormal powersthan the House o Lords, is still essentially areviewing chamber and passes 75% o Billssent to it without making any changes. So,while the Senate can undoubtedly make liedicult or governments, it does not makeAustralia ungovernable.

I we are to achieve reorm and not just keepthe issue on the agenda, we have to go back

so what th coaltoGovrmt wht papra rat Bll?

A smaller chamber o 300 members.(The total membership o the House

o Lords is currently 831.)

An 80% or 100% elected chamber.In an 80% elected chamber therewould be 12 places reserved orBishops rom the Church o England,with the remaining membersbeing nominated by a statutoryAppointments Commission.

Elections would be held at the same

time as a general election using aproportional system either theSingle Transerable Vote (STV)system or an Open List system.

Members would be elected in thirdsor single, non-renewable, terms o15 years. (This is to coincide with3 electoral cycles in the House oCommons and assumes that theFixed Term Parliaments Bill whichsets the parliamentary term at 5years gets passed.)

Peer Pressure | autumn 2011 |citizen | 13


14/20

to rst principles and make the case or whyelections matter. It is not just that the majorityo second chambers around the world areelected or that patronage is an outdatedthrowback to our eudal past.

Fundamentally, it is about power. Do you

think that power should be accountable andthat there should be checks and balancesto ensure that power cannot simply beaccumulated by small unrepresentative elitesand exercised in an arbitrary manner? Ispolitical patronage or election a better meanso strengthening the checks and balances inour legislature? While the House o Commonsshould retain its primacy, this is not the sameas it being unchallenged. We also need toget over the British disease o thinking that

reorm is too complex and too dicult toeven attempt. Is the ght or reorm goingto be easy? No. Can we make it happen?Absolutely.

Alexandra Runswick is DeputyDirector of Unlock Democracy

TAke ACTiOn nOWA Jot Commtt mad up of both

MP ad pr currtly codrg

th govrmt propoal for

Hou of Lord rform. Ma your

voc hard. s our wbt www.

ul cdmocracy.org.u for morformato o how to gt volvd

or mal commt to lordrform@

ulocdmocracy.org.u

ChallengingCorporate PowerA personal view fromAnthony Barnett on how

corporations can be held to account.

How can Unlock Democracy expand to makeclaim over corporate power and hold it toaccount? The question is rooted in the recentsurvey we were all sent. Here is what I was told:

One o the issues that came through verystrongly in response to the survey was thatpeople elt that there are a wide range oinstitutions, rom nancial corporations,transnational institutions such as the EU

and the IMF as well as the media, thatimpact greatly on our daily lives but thatare not accountable, there is no democratic

oversight o what they do. There was alsoconcern about how these institutions areinterlinked. For example, corporate infuenceon the EU aects our laws. The media,dominated by corporations, has generallypursued a low regulation, pro-corporateagenda.

The question is spot on. It is hugelyimportant. So much so, that or those o

us committed to the democratic reorm oBritain, it also means we must rethink ourwhole strategy.

14 |citizen | autumn 2011 | Challenging Corporate Power

o


15/20

Id argue that although very arreaching,only some such ramework can deliver thecall to make corporate power accountable tous as a democracy.

From the point o view o democracy

campaigners, this approach cannot be anadd-on to the traditional list o demands orreorm put orward across the last quartercentury in the UK.

We should eel emboldened to adopt a newapproach because we want one that that istting or the new era that has begun.One symbol o the eras end is the all oRupert Murdoch. He was the most powerulsingle gure to operate continuously through

the whole previous period. Now hackgatehas exposed the complicity o corporatepower with the executive, its corruption o

the police, and its intimidation o Parliament.These are no longer conspiratorialallegations they are established acts.Another marker o the end o an era is the

recent crushing deeat o the AV reerendum.It marked the end o a campaign that beganin the eighties and took the orm o a callor a reerendum in 1993 when John Smithhad just become leader o the Labour Party(declaration o interest, I played a direct rolein making this happen.) The campaign wasalways about two things: putting some ormo PR on the agenda and bringing the LibDems and Labour together as the agento change in an antiTory, progressivealliance.

Mays reerendum limited the choice to thenon-proportional AV. Worse, the Lib Demleader stated unambiguously that whateverthe outcome the issue would be settled orthe oreseeable uture. Worse still, rom thepoint o view o the old constitutional reormapproach, the coalition o the Lib Dems withthe Tories brought to an end the hopes or a

progressive coalition o the kind supporterso such reorm have worked or since theeighties. Instead it wedded the third party tothe corporate allegiances o the Tories.

For those o you interested in the roleand history o Charter 88 in all this, thereis a version o this article on the UnlockDemocracy website. To summarise:the success o the initial impact o thereorm movement in 1988 that captured

the imagination and brought reorm intoelectoral politics came rom a combinationo its purity and its emphasis on the totality.

Hr th tart o my awr trmo op, owrhp a how wvalu coomc actvty.

Weneedeconomictransparency,whichshouldincludetheendofcommercialcondentialityofallcontractsaftertheyaresigned.

Weneedcommonownership(inavarietyofforms:national,municipal,mutual)ofmostbanking,toensurethatnanceisapublicinterestservice.

Forthistoworkweneedoptimisation

toreplacemaximisationasthemeasurementofeconomicreturn.

Challenging Corporate Power | autumn 2011 |citizen | 15


16/20

Its purity meant its reusal to build in socioeconomic demands and to include corporateand nancial power. This distinguished itrom a decomposing Labour movement. Itsemphasis on the totality a linked set odemands culminating in a new constitution distinguished it rom traditional British

calls or reorm dedicated to partialimprovement.

Instead it called or the replacement oelective dictatorship, then displayed in allits tawdry glory by Margaret Thatcher, withconstitutional democracy. The tragedy oNew Labour was that, instead o embracingthis orm o modernisation in 1997, it did theopposite. It built on Thatchers direction,took her support or the market much

urther, and developed what I called in 1999a manipulative, corporate populism. But, inthe process, it was obliged to pass a set oproound changes: the Scottish and Welshparliaments, a Human Rights Act, Freedomo Inormation.

The result today is twoold. On the onehand a unied Britain no longer exists. Thismeans purely British politicalconstitutionalreorms no longer touch the energy o reality.This is cryptic and it is hard to convey but,to give an example o what I mean, therecent riots, which are as huge a challengeor democratic campaigners as or others,had to be ocially recognised by that mostBritish o British institutions the BBC asbeing English riots. But how can Englandrespond? The patriotic basis o reorm soessential or any democracy movement is inquestion.

At the same time the State itsel has beendeeply penetrated by scalisation andmarketisation. The Coalition onslaughto any willing provider on the NHS, orexample, builds on the PFIs used by NewLabour to rebuild the hospital inrastructure.One o the starting points or makingcorporate power accountable is that it is, inact, already directly running much o theadministration o government. Again there is

a patriotic subtext: many o the corporationsare global and even British ones mayheadquarter in tax havens.

The underlying crisis o democracy in Britaincan no longer be addressed in primarilyconstitutional terms. First Labour and now theCoalitions embrace o market undamentalism with its extreme inequality and themarketisation o the state means thedemocratic crisis is now ar more extensive.

The Corporate and Financial Dominance inBritains Democracy has just been mappedby David Beetham or the DemocraticAudit. UK Uncut and False Economy havedemonstrated the attractions o challengingeconomic privilege. Its potential must notall into the hands o populists. This shouldbe the task o Unlock Democracy andthe wider reorm movement. The moraldecapitation o News International could

help greatly.

What is clear is that we need a newmovement to inspire the imagination o thepublic with the promise o democracy, andto set out a set o reorms that will challengeboth executive and corporate power inWestminster, Whitehall and the City.

Anthony Barnett is a writer,journalist and democraticactivist. He co-founded of

Charter 88 and also foundedOpenDemocracy, where he nowco-edits the Our Kingdom blog.

TAke ACTiOn nOW

Th frt tp to holg corporato

to accout to trouc traparcy

thr alg wth poltca a

ofcal. Uloc dmocracy part o

th Allac or Lobbyg Traparcy

whch ha b campagg or a

tatutory rgtr o lobbyt. Th

Govrmt prom to act but ar

raggg thr t.

Pla wrt to your MP a athm to upport early day Moto

339 statutory rgtr o Lobbyt

poor by klv Hop MP.

For mor ormato www.

lobbygtraparcy.org.u

16 |citizen | autumn 2011 | Challenging Corporate Power


17/20

The phrase democratic media is acontradiction in terms. The only countrieswhich claim to have democratic media arethose where the media is state controlled. Itsthe very independence o the media be thatas a private concern or as a public servicebroadcaster that enables it to act in itsclassic role o speaking truth to power.

However, and its a big however, thatdoes not mean that the media should

be unregulated. The catch is how toachieve meaningul regulation that doesntcompromise the medias independence romgovernment.

Broadcasting is statutorily regulated byOcom and the BBC Trust neither bodyis perect but both, I would suggest, doa reasonable job at regulating radio andtelevision in this country. Alas, one cannotsay the same or the Press ComplaintsCommission.

Selregulation is always problematic, andnever more so when it comes to the press.Any suggestion that selregulation has beentried on a number o occasions and hasalways ailed raises the cry rom proprietors,editors, and some journalists Big Brother,state control resist!

But statutory regulation does not have tomean state regulation, as broadcastingdemonstrates. Indeed, even that model couldbe improved upon.

The Chairs o Ocom and the BBC Trust areboth appointed by the Government, whichalso approves the members o their respectiveboards, but it doesnt have to be this way. Anew Press Regulation Authority could haveits Chair and board members approved by

the AllParty Culture, Media and Sport SelectCommittee and that body could also receive,and approve their annual reports.

Its powers would be largely those traditionallyassociated with the monarch The right tobe consulted, to advise and to warn. Butwhere it believed that lines had been crossed,then it would have the power to order acorrection with the same prominence as theoriginal article. Should an editor reuse topublish such then, in the last resort, nancialpenalties could be imposed.

But this would not mean a proprietor or editorreusing to pay and ending up in prison, tothe accompaniment o cries o reedomo the press imperilled. I a member o the

public reuses to pay a courtimposed ne,and i he or she has assets or income, thenthe court can order that the money owed isdeducted directly at source by Her MajestysRevenue. A similar process could be used tosanction newspapers that have been oundguilty o publishing a misleading article andthen reusing to publish a retraction.

Will it work? Well back in 1998 CarltonTelevision, then part o ITV, ran a documentary

about Columbian drug mules. There werecomplaints about the way that certain scenesin the programme, reconstructions, had

Media Regulation | autumn 2011 |citizen | 17

Media RegulationIvor Gaber examines the way orward or media regulation

in the atermath o the phone hacking scandal


18/20

Unelected OligarchyIn an extract rom his pamphlet recently published by Democratic Audit,

David Beetham examines the Corporate and Financial Dominance in Britains Democracy

not been properly labelled. Following aninvestigation, the ITC (Ocoms predecessor)ruled that viewers had been misled and nedthe company a record 2 million.

This story is signicant in two ways. First,that ollowing that documentary, and

despite the ne, there was no discerniblereduction in the quality or robustness othe journalism produced by ITV, the BBCor any o the other television channels. Inother words, tough regulation does not leadto a ettered media. And second, a CarltonTV insider was reported by the press assaying: We will take this on the chin

which was the appropriate response. Butone cant help wondering whether thatinsider was in act Carltons then Directoro Corporate Aairs, a man by the nameo David Cameron? As uncomortable as itwas, he saw statutory regulation working orbroadcasting - it can work now or the press

as well.

Ivor Gaber, a formerbroadcaster, is Professorof Media and Politics at theUniversity of Bedfordshire andProfessor of Political Journalismat City University London.

18 |citizen | autumn 2011 | Unelected Oligarchy

Answering this question series involvesexploring a two-sided historical processsince the 1980s, whereby, on the one hand,governments have increasingly lost capacityto control key areas o policy, particularlyeconomic; and, on the other, the corporatesector as a whole has come to enjoy anunprecedented level o infuence acrossall aspects o government and public lie.Certainly governments, especially in the USand UK, have oten proved all too willingcollaborators in these processes. Yet theoutcome o them has been an extraordinarylimitation in governments discretion on issueso substantial public concern, especially whenaced with determined pressure rom key

corporate and nancial elites.

As a starting point or reviewing the changesthat have taken place since the 1980s whichhave led to where we are today, it will beuseul to consider an analysis o the relationbetween business and government writtenin the 1970s by Charles Lindblom in aninfuential book entitled Politics and Markets.In this he describes what he regards as thenormal position o government in a market

democracy. Fundamental is the act that, ina market economy, economic activity is notdirectly under the control o government, but

How hav w arrv at a tuatowhr th govrmt:

has been unable to prevent a near-terminal crisis o the banking systemrom taking place, with a subsequentrecession aecting all sectors o theeconomy including the public nances?

has only been able to prevent a totalcollapse o nancial markets by usingenormous sums o taxpayers money tobail out the banking sector?

expects the burden o resolvingthe crisis to be borne by ordinarytaxpayers, service users, welare

dependants and other vulnerablegroups, rather than by the banks whichwere mainly responsible or the crisis?

is seemingly unable to control thebonus culture in the nancial sector, orto get credit fowing to the businesseson which economic revival depends?

is so pusillanimous in reorming theway the banking system is organised,which Sir Mervyn King, Governor o the

Bank o England, has described as theworst it is possible to have?


19/20

Unelected Oligarchy | autumn 2011 |citizen | 19

depends upon private business decisionsor investment, production and the deliveryo employment and services. This meansthat a governments goals or the economy,which lie at the heart o all government policy,can only be met indirectly, through securingconditions avourable to business, and givingpriority to its interests. In short, government isin a condition o dependency in relation to thebusiness sector.

There may be nothing particularly sinister inthis, says Lindblom, once one understands

the simple act o lie in a market economy.However, this inherent dependency ogovernment on business or the realisationo its own goals is reinorced by otheradvantages that business has, whencompared, say, with other associations thattry to infuence government. It has ar superiorresources o wealth and organisation. Aboveall, it has attained an insider position inmany government ministries, where it actsas a privileged consultant and provider o

necessary inormation in the ormation opolicy. Because o their key unction in theeconomy, he writes, businessmen cannot

be let knocking at the doors o the politicalsystem, they must be invited in. Lindblomconcludes that business cannot be regardedsimply as one pressure group or interestgroup along with others. It constitutes apower that in many cases is equal to that ogovernment.

And although its interests may well coincidewith the interests o society at large, this isnot necessarily so. At the very least, whatgovernments believe to be in the publicinterest is itsel reracted through the lens

o the particular interests o business. AsLindblom concludes, what we call democracyis in act a compromise between the powero the vote and the power o business, withgovernment negotiating the interace betweenthe two. Yet the changes since the 1980shave radically tipped the balance in avouro business as government has increasinglybecome its promotional agent.

David Beetham is Professor Emeritus,

University of Leeds and Associate Director,Democratic Audit. To download the fullpamphlet go to www.democraticaudit.com


20/20

U l d 6 9 C th st t L n1 9JF

I the answer is yes then stand or election toour Council!

Unlock Democracys Council sets ourcampaigning strategy, approves new policyand holds the Director to account or therunning o the organisation.

It is made up o 16 directly elected members just like you. The Council also elects theManagement Board which oversees the dayto day running o the organisation.

The Council meets three times a year, usuallyin central London travel expenses arereimbursed.

The next elections will be held in early 2011,so why not stand?

I you would like more inormation about whatthe Council does please contact Peter Faceyor Alex Runswick on 0207 278 4443 [email protected]@unlockdemocracy.org.uk

dO YOU WAnT TO RUn

UnLOCk deMOCRACY?

dot orgt to att our Aual Gral

Mtg it your chac to hav a ay!

Wh: Saturday 26 November 2011rom 10.30am 4pm

Whr: NCVOThe National Councilor Voluntary OrganisationsRegents Whar

8 All Saints StreetLondonN1 9RL

In addition to ull reports on this years work,nancial matters, and member debates, therewill be two topical sessions with high prolespeakers.

Here is what people said they enjoyedabout last years AGM:

Lively debates & discussions, inormation

Exciting, inspirational. Democratic

The good evidence & good natured

participation throughoutgood selection o speakers

The inspiration it has provided

I you would like to attend, please let theoce know either by sending back the ormon the enclosed letter or by contactingEmily on 020 7278 4443 [email protected]

citizen magazine (autumn 2011)

Documents