Where liberty is, there is my country
Sunday February 19th 2006, 1:36 pm
Filed under: Politics, Civil Liberties

First the link dump…

Great Britain, Not Little England

Getting New Labour out of office

Coalition: feedback and where next?
Coalition: Bringing the Right onboard

Strage Stuff

Coalition: Bringing the Right onboard

Blairwatch

The Tipping Point

Charlie Whitaker at perfect.co.uk

The Tipping Point

Europhobia

Those who forget their history, etc.
The delights of the British constitution

Got the general picture?

A non-partisan grand coalition of the British people with a uniform objective - a new constitutional settlement with all the trimmings; a written constitution, bill of rights, electoral reform, the full works. Think the Levellers, the Chartists. Think John Locke, J S Mill and Thomas Paine.

You’ll also see me popping up in conversation in relation to hosting a new website called Liberty Central, which will hopefully provide a central gathering point for the ‘coalition of the willing’.

This new site will be up in a few days with a target ‘official’ launch date of March 6th to coincide with the return of the ID cards bill to the House of Lords.

The purpose of this site will be all the usual things, to educate and inform, lobby, campaign, help people to organise, meet and shared ideas plus one very special purpose that I want to flag up.

There have been campaigns of this kind before, many of which are still active. Some of these have been ‘global’ in scope (Charter 88), others like Elect the Lords, NO2ID, Make My Vote Count focus more on specific issues - and naturally we want them all to work with the ‘coalition’ and contribute their expertise and experience.

I’ve spent the last day or so mooching around some of the existing campaigns and form what I’ve seen, I’ve come to what I see as an important conclusion - to make a real impact we need to take this one step further than any of them have done as yet.

There is a hell of lot a good material in all these campaigns, information and resources which need to be taken on board to frame the debate - but what is lacking in pretty much of all of the them is, to varying degrees, specificity. It is not enough, I believe, for us campaign, lobby and inform in general terms; to say ‘yes we want a Bill of rights and these are some of the issues that should be debated, but we’re really not sure what will come of this at the end’.

We have go beyond debate and beyond principles and be bold enough to say exactly what is it we do want in quite precise terms - if a Bill of Rights is one of our objectives, then we should debate and discuss it, of course, but we should also be clear about what the contents of that bill of rights should be, take the debate beyond principles and actually draw up a Bill of Rights.

We have the tools to do this - the site will incorporate an integrated Wiki module, part of which will be turned over to actually drafting a constitution, Bill of Right, etc - and we also have amongst bloggers, I believe, the necessary talent and ability to do this. In the case of a Bill of Rights I believe the skills are out there to go as far as drafting the necessary legislation, on the constitution we may not get quite that far but we should get far enough to be clear about what it should look like and what should be in it, even if it requires the work of a specialist in law, or two, to draw up the finished article.

I realise this also opens up a number of potentially contentious debates, on the role of the Monarchy and the Church of England for starters but also the dreaded spectre of Europe.

My own position on this is that even here we can find a consensus that accommodates everyone, even if that consensus in not everyone’s ideal. At the heart of this lies a simple principle; that any substantive change in the status of the Monarchy or Britain’s relationship with Europe must be subject to a referendum, that these are issues on which only the people of this country can make the final decision.

There is not, I believe, widespread public support for bringing about the end of the Monarchy, even as a republican I have to concede that. Any such debate must therefore focus not on the Monarchy itself but on the constitutional position of the royal prerogative and how we curb its misuse by politicians.

As for Europe, there is no absolute compromise position between pro-Europeans on the left and the Eurosceptic/nihilist wing on the right and therefore no perfect solution - what I hope we can agree is a position which stresses the primacy of the British constitutional settlement we are working towards and that implicit - or even explicit - in what we do is a message to the technocrats of the European Union that on constitutional issues says ‘this far and no further’, that here are the boundaries of sovereign national authority in the UK and we will go no further. Hopefully that principle is one behind which we can all work together in ways which do nor make Europe a wholly divisive issue.

Liberty Central will serve as a open hub for the coalition - which reminds me of how much work I should be doing on it rather than waffling on about it here - and will be live in a few days, before the Terrorism Bill returns to the Lords on Feb 28th.

The server side of things is sorted - Joomla powered site with an integrated Nick 02.19.06 @ 3:05 pm


Nick - we look at everything, hence the Wiki which will allow for collaborative working.

Comment by Unity 02.19.06 @ 3:11 pm

An excellent idea. Well done to those who have come up with this.

For far too long, this criminal bunch have got away with all sorts of abuses, and it’s long past time for those to end.

Comment by Voice 1 02.19.06 @ 3:26 pm

Sorry for the additional comment here, I wanted to mention it in my last post, but clicked on send comment too soon.

Given the murder of innocent Brazilian, Jean Charles de Menezes on the London Underground last year, shouldn’t police reform, and more accountability be included in this agenda?

The reason I mention this, is that there appear to be several cases, reported on recently, including Mr de Menezes murder where the police are not policing themselves. Is this really the right way to go about things in a so called “civilised society”? I don’t think so.

Anyway, good luck with this project, i’ll post about this over at A Logical Voice as well.

Comment by Voice 1 02.19.06 @ 3:46 pm

I’m up for any assistance you need with the site. Just let me know. Joomla is a fork of Mambo, is that right? Can’t say I’m a big fan (for simplicity I really like Website Baker - that is a recommendation), but I have a passing familiarity with it. Does it still have all the layout tables embedding in the backend code like Mambo does? Ugh. Relatively easy for users though, I guess.

Not sure where I fit in on the left-right scale (political compass has me swithering from one side to the other of the centre line on left right, probably depending on my mood of the day), but I know where I stand on liberty v authority. This is the issue that got me involved in politics again - now I truly fear for the sort of country my children will live in.

Now let’s get cracking, while the enthusiasm is still hot within us.

Comment by Pete Gray 02.19.06 @ 5:23 pm

OK this looks all very interesting. My concern would be over the suitability of a wiki for something as contentious as a Bill of Rights. I can imagine this getting completely out of hand with deletion following insertion following deletion ad infinitum. I wonder if a better idea would be a moderated blog with a post to discuss inclusion of particular clauses, and perhaps a poll to gauge opinion.

Do we just need to stand back a bit and spend some time studying how, say, the US Constitution was drafted and how different strands of opinion were brought together? I would suggest a little caution about piling straight in to discussion of particular issues.

For example, on one of the earlier threads on the subject, it was suggested that we look at a citizen’s basic income. Now while this is an idea which I consider worthy of serious consideration for implementation, I’m not sure that it is worthy for consideration as part of a Consititution or Bill of Rights. Tax policy should not be enshrined in this way.

We must not lose sight of what (I think) we are trying to acheive which is limited government and a real and lasting dispersal of power. I would suggest that that obtaining agreement on this overall aim should be the very first thing considered on the new site.

Comment by Bishop Hill 02.19.06 @ 7:22 pm

the new British Constitution
A few ideas to get the ball rolling on any new constitutional settlement.

Comment by strange stuff 02.19.06 @ 7:34 pm

British Constitution
I thought I’d put down a few ideas on the higher-level stuff by way of complementing Chris’s start.

Comment by Bishop Hill 02.19.06 @ 8:24 pm

An idea whose time has come - I think there are more than a few people up and down the country who are looking at the current shenanigans thinking more or less along these lines.

I’d be pleased to help out if I can. Right, time to set up a blog of some sort…always swore I wouldn’t too.

Comment by Tom 02.19.06 @ 11:36 pm

Could Pickled Politics be forced to shut down?
I briefly covered the passing of the terrorism law and what it meant for British Muslims last week. I have not read up enough on it yet, however there are many issues of concern.
One of the directives is that ‘offending material’ on websi…

Comment by Pickled Politics 02.20.06 @ 4:04 am

I think Noam Coamsky got this right;

“it is elementary that freedom of expression (including academic freedom) is not to be restricted to views of which one approves, and that it is precisely in the case of views that are almost universally despised and condemned that this right must be most vigorously defended. It is easy enough to defend those who need no defense or to join in unanimous (and often justified) condemnation of a violation of civil rights by some official enemy.”

Comment by Neil Harding 02.20.06 @ 5:26 am

If you take George Bush’s 2005 Inaugural Address literally,

http://www.whitehouse.gov/inaugural/”>President

then there should be US Government funding and support for this “Orange Revolution” against the NuLabour apparatchiki and political commissars:

“We will persistently clarify the choice before every ruler and every nation: The moral choice between oppression, which is always wrong, and freedom, which is eternally right. America will not pretend that jailed dissidents prefer their chains, or that women welcome humiliation and servitude, or that any human being aspires to live at the mercy of bullies.

We will encourage reform in other governments by making clear that success in our relations will require the decent treatment of their own people. America’s belief in human dignity will guide our policies, yet rights must be more than the grudging concessions of dictators; they are secured by free dissent and the participation of the governed. In the long run, there is no justice without freedom, and there can be no human rights without human liberty.

Some, I know, have questioned the global appeal of liberty - though this time in history, four decades defined by the swiftest advance of freedom ever seen, is an odd time for doubt. Americans, of all people, should never be surprised by the power of our ideals. Eventually, the call of freedom comes to every mind and every soul. We do not accept the existence of permanent tyranny because we do not accept the possibility of permanent slavery. Liberty will come to those who love it.

Today, America speaks anew to the peoples of the world:

All who live in tyranny and hopelessness can know: the United States will not ignore your oppression, or excuse your oppressors. When you stand for your liberty, we will stand with you.

Democratic reformers facing repression, prison, or exile can know: America sees you for who you are: the future leaders of your free country.

The rulers of outlaw regimes can know that we still believe as Abraham Lincoln did: “Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves; and, under the rule of a just God, cannot long retain it.”

The leaders of governments with long habits of control need to know: To serve your people you must learn to trust them. Start on this journey of progress and justice, and America will walk at your side.”

Comment by Watching Them, Watching Us 02.20.06 @ 10:28 am

This sounds like a good idea.

BH,

What are your feelings on a Colorado-style TABOR.

After all, the original US constitution had limits on what taxes could be raised.

Comment by mark adams 02.20.06 @ 11:56 am

Count me in.

Comment by Paul Linford 02.20.06 @ 2:51 pm

I Tip My Hat to the New Constitution
I have just got word that there are moves afoot to write a British constitution. The basic idea is summed up at Talk Politics. I am entirely in favour of a written constitution. I have some concerns about writing one

Comment by Outside Story 02.20.06 @ 3:07 pm

Mark

Well I would be in favour of it, but I wonder about our left-wing colleagues. What do you reckon Unity?

(I had to look it up - so if you don’t know what it means it’s a Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights requiring government to put tax increases to a referendum.)

Comment by Bishop Hill 02.20.06 @ 9:42 pm

An important aspect that must not be forgotten if we’re to look at this at a UK level is the inequity caused by devolution and especially the Scottish Raj.

As Bishop Hill said yesterday (though not in these words) we must be very careful about creating a Constitution that enshrines a partisan political view. The EU Constitution, IMHO, made that mistake.

Comment by Gavin Ayling 02.20.06 @ 9:47 pm

Had to look TABOR up myself.

Like all things it seems to have some plusses and minuses - they’re currently looking at amendments in Colorado that will loosen its strictures somewhat due to it creating some fiscal inflexibilities which appear to work against the State.

Not sure at this stage if a TABOR would work on a national level, but might make for an interesting idea at local government level, but could do with some of the economics ‘heavyweights’ like Wat Tyler and Chris Dillow looking at it to say how they think it might work in practice.

Comment by Unity 02.21.06 @ 1:24 am

Fiscal inflexibilities which appear to work against the state seem like a promising idea to me. ;-)

Comment by Bishop Hill 02.21.06 @ 7:06 pm

Constitution for Britain
Great Britain
MatGB seems to have set a Indiana Jones-type ball rolling… First I agreed, tentatively, to support a coalition of the willing to remove our dangerously authoritarian government, and now we have a British Constitution effort.
My resp…

Comment by Gav′s POLITICS 03.01.06 @ 9:14 pm



Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>

(required)

(required)