Democracy v dictatorship

How democratic is Britain when the right to protest is being greatly cut? Guardian Dec 2020 opinion piece.

SUPREME COURT is it's independence under threat?

The UK Supreme Court came into being through the Blair government's reforms of the House of Lords. Before then, the Law Lords sat in the upper house to give a final say on legal issues, after they were a separate institution, split off from the legislature.

This made the court system closer to the US model, where the Supreme Court forms part of the separation of powers between a bicameral house, elected president, state powers and the court. But ... obviously without the intense partisan element that we see there, most recently with the Trumpian packing of the court with 3 new conservative judges (or justices) despite having blocked Obama from appointing one a year before his second term ended.

Then again ... despite the right-wing press fury at the UK Supreme Court blocking Johnson's attempt to prorogue Parliament to force through a no-deal Brexit without a vote, the legal system is notoriously narrow in its demographics. The legal system is not representative of the ethnic or social class mix of the UK.

In November 2020, the Tory government launched proposals to reform the Supreme Court - to effectively scrap it. This would start with a renaming, plus making it multiple themed courts, all reducing its status. Labour critics argue this is a direct reaction to Conservative fury (at least on the Brexiteer side - former Tory Attorney General Dominic Grieve led parliamentary efforts to resist Johnson's attempt, and lost the whip) at the Court's decision on prorogation.

Whether those critics are right or not about the motivation, such a move would reduce the status of the Court at a time when it and the Speakership have emerged as key counterbalances to the executive, with the legislature struggling to fulfil its constitutional role of holding the executive to account.

Are unelected judges any better or more democratic than unelected peers? That is another way to look at the Court. 

Here's a Nov 2020 article from the Guardian on those government reform plans. The bias is evident in the prominence given to the Labour critics rather than the Tory government; I'd equally expect the likes of Jacob Rees-Mogg to be more prominently featured in a right-wing paper's coverage. This appears to be what The Telegraph (source of The Guardian's report) did (it's behind a paywall) - here's the start of the Guardian article:

Government-backed plans to reduce the size of the supreme court and rename it have been condemned by Labour as an assault on the independence of the judiciary.

The proposals, said to be under ministerial discussion, are supposedly aimed at curtailing the court’s ability to become involved in constitutional issues such as last year’s parliamentary prorogation case, which ended in a resounding defeat for Boris Johnson.

The report in the Sunday Telegraph said Jacob Rees-Mogg, leader of the Commons, had privately accused the court of a “constitutional coup” after the justices unanimously ruled that the government’s attempt to prorogue parliament to prevent it debating Brexit was illegal.

...

The proposals resemble a policy paper published by the thinktank Policy Exchange in July entitled Reforming the Supreme Court. That also suggested replacing the supreme court with an “upper court of appeal” and having specially selected panels for separate cases.

...

The press showed the usual split on the prorogue ruling; the Mail took things quite far (see Gdn analysis + Wiki)

JUNE 2021 - MPs/PEERS TAKE PM TO COURT OVER RUSSIA EKECTION INTERFERENCE REPORT

WOW!!! MPs and peers are taking the PM to court over his treatment of a report into Russian links. The Trump parallels grow stronger. Evening Standard

DEC 2020

JOHNSON TAKES REVENGE ON SUPREME COURT, REMOVES ITS POWER TO BLOCK PROROGATION. UNCODIFIED CONSTITUTION...

Guardian. 

The most controversial change is an attempt to bar the courts from ruling on the powers of the government to dissolve parliament. The move will be seen as a direct retaliation against the supreme court, which humiliated Johnson last year after it ruled that his prorogation of parliament at a key point in the Brexit talks was unlawful.

The Cabinet Office confirmed the legislation would “reaffirm the longstanding position that the prerogative powers are not reviewable by courts, providing legal clarity”.

Dr Jessica Garland, director of policy and research at the Electoral Reform Society said the government should be making efforts to decentralise power, rather than reclaim it. “The UK already has one of the most centralised political systems amongst modern democracies so any plans to give our already dominant executive more powers should be carefully scrutinised and treated with caution,” she said.

“Any reforms to our politics should be made with the view of moving powers away from the centre, which already has significant control over the Commons and the Lords, which the Prime Minister can pack with appointees at will.

...

4 KEY POLICY AREAS: immigration

THE 4 POLICY AREAS TO TRACK

Education

Environment

Economy

Immigration

Keep up to date notes on the major NI (SDLP, Sinn Fein, Alliance, UUP, DUP) and UK (Lab, Tory, Lib Dem) parties policies on these specific areas.

COURTS RULE HOME OFFICE ACTING ILLEGALLY AGAIN. SECRET NEW POLICY?

Guardian.

HOME SECRETARY TO BLOCK VISAS FOR COUNTRIES REFUSING TO ACCEPT RETURNED IMMIGRANTS

Guardian

UK THREATENS TO SEND IMMIGRANTS BACK TO EU COUNTRY THEY TRAVELLED FROM ... BUT THAT BREAKS INTERNATIONAL LAW + NO EU NATION WILL ACCEPT THEM (BBC)

Note also the return to a quota system; specific number limit/target which Blair brought in and Tories have kept repeating in manifestoes despite consistent failure to meet their targets.

UK insist that the first safe country a migrant reaches must be where they claim asylum.

UK PULLS OUT OF MEDITERRANEAN RESCUE SHIP SCHEME (Guardian)

There have been other such policies which lead to international condemnation: initially refusing to take in refugees from Calais (750 children were eventually taken in)

The left-wing v right-wing split on this is very simple, and very clearly reflected in newspaper coverage too. The 'hostile environment' that Theresa May brought in when Home Secretary (before she was PM), to make things as tough as possible for asylum seekers to put them off from coming here, is a big, ongoing story.

The UK government has repeatedly been found guilty of illegal practices linked to this, notably their deportations of many of the Windrush generation of Carribbean immigrants originally invited here

LEFT-WING

Broadly supportive of the right of asylum seekers to claim refuge in the UK

Support the right of foreign family members of immigrants to join them in the UK

Emphasize the positive economic benefit of immigrants

Celebrate multiculturalism as another positive impact

Oppose integration requirements like compulsory English and citizenship (knowledge, attitudes)

- reject the extent (if not the general need) of police/secret service scrutiny of Muslim communities for extremists/terrorists

Oppose immigration limits or links to income

- BUT concerned about economic migration from eastern European migrants undermining wage levels and working conditions

- BUT former leader Ed Miliband is typical of more 'centrist' Labour leaders (like Starmer???) with his notorious Controls on Immigration mug (condemned by the left-winger Diane Abbott)

-- Labour strategists argue they need a tougher line on immigration to win popular support, as demonstrated by the Brexit defeat

RIGHT-WING

Seek to restrict and undermine rights under international law to claim asylum in the UK

- aggressive policy to stop migrants from crossing UK borders (especially from Calais, France)

- restrict asylum seekers' right to work OR claim benefits OR use public services (especially healthcare: NHS)

- opposed EU efforts to divide Syrian asylum seekers through national quotas

- work with authoritarian regimes like Erdigan in Turkey to prevent migrants from reaching the EU

Opposed to allowing family members of legal immigrants to join them in UK

Emphasis on immigrants as an economic drain, putting strain on public services (schools, NHS)

See multiculturalism as wrong and harmful expression of political correctness, celebrate and promote a notional traditional British identity

Support compulsory integration measures like English lessons (oppose use of translators as waste of public money) and citizenship tests

- particularly concerned about the separatism/failure to integrate or accept/adopt British values of Muslim communities

- linked to this, strong police/secret service powers to monitor these communities for extremists or terrorists

Support annual limits on immigration (though consistently fail to meet these targets)

- much controversy over how this impacts the NHS, farming, universities and the sporting/cultural sectors

- favour income/wealth tests

NEWS STORIES 2021

TORIES LOVE IMMIGRATION!

When immigration matches up to other nationalist policies, in this case trying to look strong against China, even the most anti-immigration party can suddenly find some enthusiasm. PM Johnson has announced a programme to welcome potentially 10s of 1000s Hong Kong citizens, knowing this will greatly antagonise China - but please America in doing so. Guardian.

NEWS STORIES 2020

DECEMBER

PRITI PATEL DISMISSES LETTER BY 80 BLACK CRITICS CALLING FOR JAMAICA DEPORTATION FLIGHT CANCELLATION 'DO-GOODING CELEBRITIES'

IMMIGRATION LAWYERS REPORT MORE DEATH THREATS

Guardian details on the flights, campaign letters, death threats and Labour's opposition - though very low profile. Starmer isn't making this an issue, possibly further evidence that he's avoiding anything that seems clearly left-wing and would attract flak from the press. He's planning not even to vote against any Brexit deal, which is strongly linked to anti-immigration rhetoric and sentiment, though may be forced to drop this approach with a huge rebellion likely.

You can read the utterly different Daily Mail report, which mocks "leftie lawyers", here.

NOV

EHRC DECLARES HOSTILE ENVIRONMENT ILLEGAL

Yet another blow for the Tory tough stance on immigration. 

The Home Office broke equalities law when it introduced its hostile environment immigration measures, a critical report from the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) has concluded.

The department now has a legal duty to review these policies to ensure they are not racially discriminatory, and that they comply with equalities legislation, the rights body announced. 

In the latest damning report on the Home Office’s record in relation to its hostile environment policies and the Windrush scandal, the EHRC study detected “a lack of commitment” within the Home Office to the importance of equality.

The report found “there was a narrow focus on delivering the political commitment of reducing immigration, and a culture where equality was not seen as important. Identifying risks to equality was therefore not encouraged.”

A series of hostile environment policies were introduced by Theresa May from 2012 during a drive to bring down net migration; the measures made it harder for people without documentation proving their right to be in the UK to get jobs, rent properties, access healthcare and open bank accounts. Large numbers of people who had the right to live in the UK, but no documentation, were adversely affected by the policies.

(Guardian).

HOME SECRETARY FOUND GUILTY BY COURTS OF IGNORING OFFICIAL POLICY

Priti Patel is a very controversial Home Secretary, previously sacked for secret meetings with Israeli officials, facing multiple accusations of bullying, repeatedly found guilty by the courts of breaching migrants' rights.

Equally true, she is a very popular figure on the right with her tough stance on immigration and asylum seekers, and her condemnations of 'lefty lawyers' who defend migrant rights (despite the legal profession warning about death threats that this caused).

So, this is far from the first ruling against her. She was ordered to stop the deportation of 3 asylum seekers. Guardian: The deportation of hundreds of asylum seekers who arrived in the UK on small boats could be halted after a judge ruled that the home secretary was departing from her own policy on identifying victims of trafficking.

...

CAMPAIGNING DIRECT ACTION

ALL posts are TBC + added to over time...

TECHNOLOGY: HOW THE TELEGRAM APP IS ENRAGING AUTOCRATS WORLDWIDE, eg BELARUS

Lengthy Guardian feature.

You can probably guess which newspaper site this comes from?

Most modern campaigns seek to respond to the perceived failings of mass/mainstream media by using the potential of social, and stunts designed to gain coverage in mass media outlets. This extends to financing - which the newspaper above noted with distaste! 

The latest LBD Crowdfunder.co.uk campaign has been a success (the Wiki gives the impression they're almost defunct!)

KEY LINKS FOR SOME USEFUL CASE STUDIES

The 1st 3 are campaigning from a left-wing stance; Fathers4Justice largely from a right-wing stance (though there is considerable variation amongst its membership)

Lions Led By Donkeys 

wiki; official: FB, Insta, Twtr + Twtr podcast; Guardian; Daily Mail; BBC; Crowdfunder (current 2020)

Stop Funding Hate 

wiki; official: FB, Insta, Twtr; Guardian; Daily Mail; BBC; crowdfunding; Spectator [r-wg]; Impaktr case study;

See also No More Page 3 (DB MediaReg blog) which used similar tactics, + won the support of Caroline Lucas - who was warned for wearing their tee-shirt in a Commons debate!

Greta Thunberg 

wiki; official: Twitter, FB, Insta; FridaysForFuture; Guardian; Daily Mail; BBC; Time 2019 PotYear; TED Talk; TheYearOfGreta.com; I am Greta (2020 Hulu doc film; google on this)

FATHERS 4 JUSTICE / NEW FATHERS FOR JUSTICE (from 2010)

wiki; official: FB (various: international), Insta, Twtr; Guardian; Daily Mail; BBC; crowdfunding; Spectator [r-wg]; 

NEW FATHERS: wiki; official: FB, Insta, Tumblr; YouTube; Guardian; Daily Mail; BBC; 2016 Santa stunt;

Extinction Rebellion protesters may sue Met as ban ruled unlawful.

PARLIAMENT how it works

 Some resources on how the UK Parliament works. Or doesn't....

Trust in government has fallen away significantly since 2016. A similar survey in 2016 showed that 22% of people said they trust the government “most of the time” or ‘“just about always”, the highest level in NSCR surveys since 2007.

By 2019 this had dropped to 15%, the lowest level recorded in over 40 years, with more than twice as many people, 34%, saying they “almost never” trust the government. (Guardian)

The government’s Brexit strategy is in danger of driving the UK down a “very slippery slope” towards “dictatorship” or “tyranny”, according to a former president of the supreme court. 

Addressing an online meeting of lawyers, Lord Neuberger on Wednesday evening condemned the internal market bill, which enables the government to breach international law and exempts some of its powers from legal challenge. 

[Former Tory Attorney General] Grieve said not only did the bill breach international law, it contained an “ouster clause which goes to the heart of parliamentary democracy”, preventing the government being challenged over its actions.(Guardian)

The UK Parliament YouTube channel is an excellent resource (though as an official site it can sometimes present an over-optimistic view of how the Parliament functions in real life). Below is a screenshot of some of their playlists.

Example of the Parliament: An Introduction to Parliament (most of the vids are shorter, 1-2mins)

PLAYLISTS:

INTRODUCTION TO PARLIAMENT

WHAT IS THE HOUSE OF COMMONS

WHAT IS THE HOUSE OF LORDS

HOW DO ELECTIONS WORK

HOW LAWS ARE MADE

This video on Select Committees is very useful!

The Parliament channel also have much longer videos from 9 years ago: Select Committees (19mins)

SPADS! UNELECTED...UNACCOUNTABLE?

The role of the special advisor is a very controversial one, with Dominic Cummings' role in government widely seen as undermining democracy: as PM Johnson's most senior/influential advisor, he is overseeing an attempt to centralise power even further in Number 10, and sideline even the cabinet, never mind Parliament! He made history when he was given the Number 10 garden for his press conference to make a statement following the press revelations about his trip to Durham, seemingly in breach of covid regulations.

As neither formally a civil servant nor an elected politician, yet as a clear part of the executive, he cannot be called for questions in the Commons nor held formally responsible for any policy decisions. Can the legislature have any real impact on or scrutiny of him? The 18-rated BBC TV series the Thick of It satirises the role of such (usually) shadowy figures.

Here's the notorious episode of BBC's Newsnight when a fed up senior journalist calculated that Cummings' behaviour was so clearly out of line that the usual 'balance' wasn't required (her bosses disagreed and warned her).

This controversy was even covered in breakfast TV - it was the dominant media story for a week. For once the right-wing press were also highly critical of the Tory government and PM Johnson - notably the Daily Mail. Cummings/Johnson seem to have calculated that the press was not as powerful as it used to be and dismissed all the pressure to sack Cummings. Months later - perhaps they were correct. Cummings remains at the very centre of the UK government, as unaccountable as ever to the UK legislature (or the executive?!).

THE ROLE OF THE MP

MPs' reputation has been absolutely battered in recent years, from the endless series of sex and corruption scandals that wrecked the premiership of Thatcher's successor, John Major to the Daily Telegraph's expenses scandal (MPs were found to be claiming for all sorts of things including...have their moat cleaned; some were actually jailed for fraud: claiming payment on a house they didn't actually live in), to multiple cash for questions cases.

The DUP's Ian Paisley Jr even faced a recall vote when he was revealed to have asked questions in the Commons about Sri Lanka ... but hadn't registered his paid visit to Sri Lanka. This requires 10% of constituents to vote for a recall and force a bye-election. He narrowly avoided this: 9.4% registered for a recall vote.

But that can give a very unfair impression of the work MPs actually do - and such stories clearly contributed to the protest vote element of the Brexit vote. MPs routinely hold surgeries (open office) for constituents, regardless of how they voted, to help them with problems they face with branches of government especially.

Here's a great example of a passionate MP at work. Mhairi Black (SNP) was just 20 when elected!

THE SPEAKER:

ALONG WITH SUPREME COURT + GOVERNMENT BACKBENCHERS, THE MAIN BARRIER TO ELECTIVE DICTATORSHIP?

Betty Boothroyd kickstarted the 1990s modernisation of the role, ditching many of the ceremonial aspects that went back centuries in an effort to make the Commons (by then always televised live) look more relatable and professional to modern voters. The traditional wig was an early casualty!

John Bercow will be studied for decades to come - his battles with Boris Johnson (and Jacob Rees-Mogg) and his treatment by the right-wing press (who felt he was overstepping his role/powers and actively trying to block Brexit) were extraordinary. Johnson broke with centuries of tradition by refusing to give Bercow a peership when he stood down at the 2019 election.

This video, from right-wing tabloid The Sun (Murdoch), doesn't show MPs at their best (though the likes of Skinner are arguably standing on points of principle!), but do show examples of the Speaker intervening to ensure order. Will current Speaker (Bercow's former Deputy) Sir Lindsay Hoyle prove such a notable figure? He has already blocked MPs from voting to stop the extension of emergency covid powers (as Bercow was Tory and Hoyle is Labour, both are arguably good examples of how The Speaker must be neutral).

YOUTH VOTE - LOWERING VOTING AGE

San Francisco drops voter age to 16.

PROTEST ENVIRONMENT police Prevent strategy

So - schoolchildren who take part in the climate school strike are being potentially added to a list of extremists requiring government surveillance...

Extinction Rebellion could sue police over extremist ideology listing (Guardian)

Charities and campaigners are being undermined by right-wing media/politician attacks (what Chomsky's propaganda model calls flak) for being woke or politically correct, with the Tory government passing laws to restrict thire free speech too. Guardian, Jan 2021.