Introduction
British
democracy appears to be in crisis: contempt for politicians, disengagement from
the political process, low level of participation in elections. A wide range of
arguments are put to explain this: political and media spin, hypocritical
personal behaviours of politicians (sleeze), the perceived failure of local and
central government to deliver on their promises in a way that people can see
beneficially affects their lives, or riding rough-shod over widely held
concerns. The anti-democratic British National Party was been able to obtain
short-term electoral advantage, boosted by anti-asylum seeker and refugee
rhetoric from leading mainstream politicians. The operation of democracy may be
flawed. There any be considerable room for improvement. But local democratic
disengagement is not just down to what central and local government, political
parties and the media have been doing since the mid-1970s. It is also down to
all those - the voluntary and community
activists – who have spent large amounts of energy slagging off local
Councillors, local officials and local authorities, MPs and Government.
Tensions
There
is a continual process of tensions between community and voluntary organisations
and local Councillors. The former are very often frustrated by the lack of
leadership and control over the machinery of their Councils, their apparent
failure to address the needs of people the organisations are working with or
representing. Having a democratic mandate through the electoral process
Councillors often resent the continual criticism from community and voluntary
groups, and argue that they have the democratic mandate while the groups do
not. There is truth in both perspectives.
Community
and voluntary groups which constantly criticise Councillors are in danger of
contributing to the disengagement with the electoral process. Community and
voluntary groups also have imperfections: they can be dominated by a few
individuals, they can be inward looking, they can be arrogant, they often
squabble among themselves; none of which helps the people they claim to be
working with and for.
Councillors
need to understand that they cannot know everything that is going on in their
wards. With the decline in party political organisation they need to link with
other ways in which people get involved in democratic civil engagement – namely
membership of community and voluntary organisations. These organisations can
also be useful sources of information and analysis against which they can test
the advice from Council officers.
Of
course there will often be tensions and conflicts, but community and voluntary
activists need to keep in mind that the promotion of democracy through civil
engagement can only strengthen the way in which local government meets needs.
Background History
Today’s
community and voluntary groups are the heirs of the, mutual and self-help
collective organisations - friendly, loan, building, co-operative and trade
union societies – which helped develop
important aspects of British democracy. This democracy involved the election of
officers and their accountability back to the members at quarterly and later
annual meetings. They developed skills in running organisations that were
transferred into local government as wider suffrage led to activists being
elected. British democracy gained its strength from mass involvement - in its
practice and in debates about its theory.
Low
election turnouts are not a new phenomenon. The Holborn Conservatives bemoaned
it when in 1937 six Labour Councillors were elected for the first time. This
anecdote is a reminder that achieving high levels of local electoral
participation has to be worked at. Where local political parties take their
vote for granted, and/or do not work to convince people to vote, then turnouts
remain low. If political parties reduce their own internal democracy and
alienate members, they will not have enough people to make the face to face
contact with electors that is an essential part of sustaining a culture of
electoral and democratic involvement.
Local Government Reforms
The Labour Governments between 1997 and 2010 considered that local government reform will
reinvigorate democracy. It was debatable whether the implementation of its
largely technical proposals will do so. Government policies about putting
people at the heart of decision making were seen as empty rhetoric, as it
continued to exert heavy central control over spending programmes such as New
Deal for Communities and Neighbourhood Renewal, or imposed unpopular decisions like the expansion of
Heathrow airport and overruled local campaigners, Councils and Planning
Inspectors over development schemes such as tower blocks along the Thames
corridor. While it recognised that regenerating deprived communities would take
15-20 years, it was impatient for results. It did not give people and
organisations a chance to obtain results before forcing another set of reforms.
The consensus about local regeneration and community well-being that might be
achievable through Community Strategies and Local Strategic Partnerships could
result in electors thinking that there is no need to vote, because voting for a
particular political party is not going to radically alter the consensus.
Devolution
in Scotland and Wales has not solved the problem of disengagement. The proposed
devolution for English regions was dubious in terms of any potential claimed
for it for improving democratic engagement. No wonder it was rejected in the
referendums. What might begin to make a difference and enable people to engage
is to require the establishment of neighbourhood governance structures or
reduce the size of local authorities.
The
policies of the ConDem Government since 2010, and there further changes like
the introduction of Police and Crime Commissioners and the recent by-elections,
have only confirmed the public’s deep disengagement. As more and more scandals
have come public, including the media and the banks, it has become clearer and
clear that the politicians have little control over what happens.
Voting Seen as Irrelevant
Electors
cannot be criticised for thinking that voting is irrelevant when so many
decisions seem to be out of the hands of elected politicians: the requirements
of the European Community, the power of multi-nationals, and the devolution at
arms-length of so many services to regulators and other unelected bodies. Nor
can they be criticised for thinking that politicians often get too involved in
issues largely irrelevant to the majority of people, as was the case with
fox-hunting under Labour. The cautious approach to House of Lords reform
reinforces this by missing the opportunity to develop a new equal relationship
between the four nations, and a new approach to UK wide governance.
The
roots of the current crisis have been growing slowly over a number of decades.
As the population sizes of Parliamentary constituencies and local authority
wards have grown, it becomes more and more difficult for people to have regular
personal contact with their MPs and councillors. The cumulative decline of
engagement in democratically controlled organisations, like friendly societies,
co-operatives and trade unions, has eroded people’s experience of democratic
representation and participation. This is underpinned by a popular lack of
historic understanding of the struggle to build democracy and the consequences
of not rigorously defending and promoting democratic participation. The
strength of evolving British democracy lay in mass involvement in its practice
and in debates about its theory through mutual associations.
Commercially
driven ‘consumerism’ makes people only think of themselves, and reject
collective solutions. This has been reinforced by Governments seeing people as
‘consumers’, not as ‘citizens’ with a right to services, and by many mutuals
downgrading democratic engagement.
Popular
engagement in politics has had its historic ebbs and flows. It is difficult to
tell whether we are in an ebb from which we can recover, or are spiralling
downwards to an extent that it will be difficult to recover support for both
representative and participatory democracy.
The Reforms
The
Government reforms to the democratic environment have difficult to understand,
especially with a degree of devolution of power from Central Government:
·
Cabinet
Government and directly elected Mayors in local authorities
·
Local
Strategic Partnerships
·
Devolution
in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland
·
London’s
Mayor and the Greater London Assembly and elected Mayors elsewhere
·
Regional
Chambers, Regional Government Offices and Regional Development Agencies (until
abolished by the ConDem Government).
We may
want to but we cannot ignore the way the democratic structures have been been
re-shaped, and the way in which the ConDem Government cuts may be threatening
the financial viability of many local authorities. Both the re-shaped
structures and the cuts affect the policies being pursued and the resources
available to community and voluntary organisations as service deliverers and
community development agents.
Democracy was Built from Below
British
historical experience suggests that the challenge of reversing political
disengagement and strengthening both representative and participatory democracy
cannot be left just to politicians. Democracy was built from below, and will
need to be re-built from below. There will be an important role in this for practical
organisation of a new 'associationism’. There is considerable scope for this
within local communities. Networking and alliance building is crucial.
All
advances on the road to democracy were pioneered by people with a minority
perspective, whether political radicals or motivated by faith. Such groups need
to be nurtured and funded to play their role in creative questioning and
suggesting new solutions and approaches.
Community
and voluntary organisations indirectly foster democratic engagement in many
ways.
·
They
bring people into contact with each other reducing social isolation
·
They
help build personal, neighbourhood and group connections and understanding
about issues of concern
·
They
support the creation and running of organisations and campaigns that seek to
meet emerging needs, that are not yet being addressed by local and central
government
·
They
work through networks and in partnerships, sitting round the table seeking to
influence the decisions being made by local government
·
They
are self-appointed voices, claiming to articulate the voices of people in the
neighbourhoods in which they work
Possible Actions
There are many ways in which community and voluntary organisations help or can help foster democratic engagement:
·
Advocate
neighbourhood forums
·
Provide
briefing, training and other support to people taking part in neighbourhood
forum
·
Undertake
voter registration
·
Contact
households not on draft electoral registers
·
Offer
their buildings as election polling stations
·
Keep
in touch with any plans to introduce electronic voting, so that people can vote
electronically at their buildings
·
Produce
a guide on how the local Council works, and how to influence it
·
Run
informal learning opportunities that help explain how local government works,
and how people can engage with it
·
Provide
space for Councillor and MP surgeries
·
Run
a community newspaper
·
Take
part in the broad networks
·
Act
as a venue for the posting of planning applications and run sessions about them
with residents affected
·
Provide
activities that celebrate community and democratic history
·
Run
local election meetings at which residents can question candidates
·
Host
report back meetings for local councillors
·
Raise
issues of concern with the members of the Council Scrutiny Committee
·
Get
to know the Leader and the Executive Councillors
·
Invite
local Councillors to events and keep them informed about the organisation’s
work
No comments:
Post a Comment