Good Afternoon, James
Thank you, so very much, for the link to The Report of the Commission on
Candidate Selection (which I'll refer to as "The Report"). It was well
worth the reading.
My version of Adobe Reader did not allow copying from The Report, but I
did re-type several passages. I wish I could have re-typed more, for
The Report is loaded with grist for our mill.
I have, as is probably evident by now, a bias against partisan politics,
which I hold to be the central cause of society's political problems. I
was a bit surprised ... and delighted ... to learn my attitude is more
common than I thought. This is shown by a passage in The Report:
"The public's ideal of representation, if seldom articulated clearly,
can differ from that of the parties and political professionals. Voters
seem to prefer candidates who are prepared to adopt a consensual
approach to political behaviour in Parliament, the council chamber and
media studios while selectorates and party professionals are more
attached to an adversarial approach."
Of course they are. The party professionals, those who control our
political existence, understand that the best way to control the people
is to keep them fighting among themselves. That's how they maintain
their power. It is the most fundamental strategy of warfare: "Divide
and Conquer"
We neither need nor want to be conquered. We seek to subject ourselves
to the rule of reason. Reason is the antithesis of confrontation and
reason is not served by an adversarial political system.
The Report assumes there is no alternative to partisan politics. This
is almost certainly a result of the fact that the Commission was headed
by leaders of the (British) Liberal Democrat, Plaid Cymru, Scottish
National, Labour and Conservative Parties and "held a number of seminars
with people from all the main parties to discuss problems and possible
ways forward." It also included a leading academic on the selection of
candidates, the head of a major think tank and a leading opinion
pollster. However, these latter members apparently filled advisory
roles. They could not be expected to counter the Commission's central
theme of helping the parties extend their reach.
The Report contains a description of why "... parties remain a central
feature of the political landscape, and vital for the functioning of
representative democracy." The full description is too extensive for me
to re-type here, but is a set of untested assumptions that are presented
as being unchallengeable. Instead of blindly accepting these
assumptions, we should analyze them critically. I hope an advocate of
partisan politics will take the time to present the case for parties,
one item at a time, so we can examine each one carefully.
I stress these points because, in spite of being party-sponsored, The
Report can be seen to be an indictment of Party Politics. Most of the
following citations speak for themselves, although I may interject a
segue between topics:
After quoting statistics showing the 'underrepresentation' of various
minorities, The Report says:
* "These figures add up to a picture of a narrow group of
representatives selected by a tiny proportion of the population
belonging to parties, for which ever fewer members of the public vote
and for whom even fewer people have any feelings of attachment."
* "In most cases .... selection is in the hands of parties, and their
relatively small groups of members. Voters themselves have to choose
between candidates picked by these small groups, and, under the
first-past-the-post system, the outcome in the vast majority of
constituencies is a foregone conclusion."
* "Party selectorates often expect candidates to have gone through
traditional hoops (almost rites of passage) --- length of party service,
door-to-door campaigning, service as a local councillor and fighting a
"hopeless" seat. These are commonly seen as a prerequisite for
selection as a candidate in a winnable seat. Such criteria --- and
evidence of personal commitment and party loyalty --- are important.
But they should not be the sole criteria, especially if they discourage
people with local credentials and a background outside mainstream party
politics from becoming candidates."
* "The whole thrust of our report is against uniformity of candidates
and in favour of diversity. Quality can take many different forms in a
political context. If we wish candidates to be truly representative of
the communities they are elected to serve, we must recognise that there
will (and should) be all sorts of candidates with a wide variety of
backgrounds."
* "Many of the groups under-represented as candidates are also
under-represented as party members. Broadening the appeal of parties is
a pre-condition for broadening the range of candidates selected"
* "The Commission has had to consider whether the ways in which
candidates are selected should any longer be regarded as purely internal
matters of no concern to the wider public."
The Report contains a pretty good description of the waning public
interest in parties ...
* "Party memberships consisting of just over one elector in a hundred
are unlikely to be representative of the population as a whole."
* "As a percentage of the electorate, this share of around 1.5 per cent
is at the bottom of the European range."
* "British parties are not the only ones in Europe to have experienced
declining party memberships. Only Sweden, Belgium and Austria stand out
with significantly higher levels of party membership. But that can be
explained largely by the social cohesion produced by the corporatism of
their societies in which party membership is closely tied to patronage
and jobs, and promotion, in the public sector. This means of shoring up
party membership runs the risk, as in Belgium and Austria, of fostering
an even more corrosive public criticism about the political process than
exists in Britain."
The Report shows how party organizations impede potential candidates,
consciously and unconsciously, formally and informally, and include
examples of parties thwarting the will of the people.
* "The contrast between the Labour government's agenda of devolving
power and the party leadership's centralising behaviour, has been much
noted."
* "It is undesirable that someone can bypass a proper examination of
their credentials simply by virtue of being there, and expect to coast
through on the efforts of the local and national party."
The attitudes of the electorate are shown.
* "There is an apparent paradox that people feel less and less affinity
with conventional party politics, yet many of their most important
concerns remain very political."
* "Ordinary people not involved in politics are either indifferent to
internal party feuds or can react negatively to the priority which
politicians and activists place upon party loyalty. It is loyalty to
the constituency as a whole that the public wants to see in candidates ..."
* "At a local level, any experienced MP knows that the key to success in
their constituencies is appearing non-partisan and almost apolitical
between election campaigns."
* "When people are asked to rank the characteristics they value in their
elected representatives, honesty is rated highest, followed by
trustworthiness, accessibility and competence. Fewer than a quarter
cite experience as one of the three most important attributes in an
elected politician, which suggests that the long apprenticeships valued
by many party activists do not make much of an impact on voters. Other
desireable attributes include independence, understanding, personality,
intelligence, availability and integrity. Saints, please apply."
The closing sentence, "Saints, please apply." is used to imply people of
"independence, understanding, personality, intelligence, availability
and integrity" do not exist. That is not only disparaging, it is
untrue. We don't lack people with those qualities, we lack the means to
select and elevate them to positions of political leadership. When read
in conjunction with the closing sentence of Appendix A (The Decline of
Party Membership), "We have plenty of active citizens, but few active
party members.", it reinforces the notion that the shortage of suitable
candidates is more in the parties than among the people.
Thanks, again, for the link, James. I'm getting pretty old and feared
I'd leave the scene before others began to understand how the ideal of
democracy has been debased by partisanship. It is good to know others
are concerned about the core issues, even if their perspective differs
from my own. In time, we WILL achieve a method of selecting the best of
our people as our leaders.
Fred
----
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
