Democratic Deficit: Mandates a-go-go

You may wonder, what right does  'Da Government' (tm) have to levy taxes on us at all (ok I wonder? If I don't will there still be a post? - ed).

Well, unfortunately for us, we keep giving 'Da Government' (tm) a mandate at the infrequent elections they deign to let us have. Once they have this mandate (and my word it is a powerful money raising device - ed), they then have the democratic legitimacy to raise money from us via taxes, spend it as they see fit and create new laws to encroach on our freedoms with barely a murmur from us once the election is over.

"Hang on a moment", I hear you say, "But I didn't vote for this latest lot of good for nothings, I voted for the other useless bunch of nerks!".

But you must understand, it doesn't matter that you didn't vote for them, or that you didn't vote at all, enough of the other guys and gals did vote for them! Now, you've had your vote (so give us your money - ed), so now the winning party can do what they like to you and in your name, (secret courts anyone, suppresssion of the press, raising taxes, misspending your hard earned money, killing non-UK-voting foreigners in the name of our/their freedom and security etc - ed)

Now, obviously this mandate (No! Not man date Esmerelda, my lovely Australian reader, mandate a political concept - it has nothing to do with your dating life - ed)  is a powerful thing. It could be seen as the ultimate power pill, once you've got it, the UK is your oyster baby and my oh my don't those politicians just love it.

So you could argue that each vote cast creates an amount of political power (nano-mandate - ed), so the more votes a party garners then the larger the mandate they can lay claim to if they manage to win the election.

You'll just have to bear with me whilst I explain the profoundly unfair democracy we appeared to be lumbered with i.e. a paliamentary majority voted for by a minority of the population which then gets to inflict on us their whims and wheezes, thanks to this mandate.

So, as ever, it is not that straightforward (really - ed). What we need to remember is this; given the proportion of the voting population who actually vote and then taking into account the percentage of the vote cast for the winning party (or parties - given the current coalition - ed), you will almost always find that the party winning a UK election were given this mandate by a minority of the total voting population (Note: anyone under the age of 18 obviously doesn't get a say in matters, because, because, well I am not sure why, but they aren't allowed a say, and if they get shirty about it they will be sent to bed early without dinner, or worse, sent to the naughty step - ed).

So the winner of the most recent UK election (or non-winner in the case of the 2010, there was no outright winner, just a no-score draw - ed), now has a mandate and can, not only change the laws of the land, but also gets to run the country!

In most, if not all other, serious grown-up countries in the world this is not that unusual (are you sure - ed), but what is unusual about the UK's democratic system is that

• the Upper House is toothless (and it is not just the age of the members that makes this so - ed)
• there is no separation of powers (one government to rule them all - ed)
• there is a lack checks and balances (surely we have the scales of justice and all of those powerful select committees - ed)

How can this be? This sceptered isle, this magnificent country with such a deep rich democratic history, the land that contains the Mother of all Parliaments, just how can this be so?

I mean (rant mode engaged - thrusters ahead full - trekkie ed) effectively we have a unicameral system, (actually bicameral - as there is the House of Lords - ed), as the House of Eleven Lords a Leapin' is toothless as it cannot stop 'Da Government' (tm) from pushing through legislation that it wants, (three strikes and we override any sensible suggestions you may have to improve our legislation, and we will it the law anyway - na na na na na - yaboo sucks - we have a mandate - political posturing ed).

So what the Government wants it gets! In fact, the House of Lords will not even veto any Government legislation that was written in the winning party's election manifesto (the little known, and of course as befits our great nation the unwritten Salisbury Convention - ed). Does that make you want to actually read the party manifestos come the next election - it should do!

Now you (obviously I am not - ed) may be surprised about how toothlessness the Upper House is. But this has been a deliberate policy by all political parties to ensure that the Lower House (House of Commons - politics ed), is the source of all political power in the UK.

I mean, let us look at the facts, reform of the Upper House was first mooted over one hundred years ago (yes, really - historical accuracy ed) and this democratic deficit and its potential check (checks and balances anyone - ed) on the untrammelled power of The House of Commons has been kept on the back burner with no serious attempt at reform for a very long time

Ok,  there was some attempt in the early years of the Blair Labour administration, but at the end of the day no-one in the House of Commons seemed to want to have the Upper House actually voted for, as that would give it some of that voter generated political legitimacy and more importantly a large dose of mandate and that could not be allowed under any circumstances (would be like turkeys voting for Christmas - ed)

So, no Government wants this reform, as it would weaken the supremacy (as it is known - ed)  of the House of Commons.

I mean, honestly, what is the point in going through all of that election malarkey if you don't get a free hand to legislate as you see fit and run the country to boot (does make you wonder where the other hand is, in the till perhaps? - ed).

So, to sum the above up, a minority of the population give the winning political party a mandate to do as they see fit and the rest of us who didn't vote for them or in fact for anybody at all, are bound nevertheless to pay the taxes and abide by the laws that the new Government enacts (shurely shome misthtake - ed).

Afterthought

Here are the figures for the UK election in 2010:


Total electorate: 45,673,633 (approx, hard to find the actual number for 2010)

Eligible but non voting: 15,985,633 electing 0 MPs
Tory:  10,703,654 electing 306 MPs
Liberal Democrats: 6,836,248 electing 57 MPs
Labour: 8,606,517 electing 258 MPs
Others: 3,541,185 electing  29 MPs

Total who voted for the coalition parties: 10,703,654 + 6,835,248 = 17,539,702
Total  who didn't vote for the coalition parties: 15,985,633 + 8,606,517 + 3,541,185  = 28,133,135

So: (17,539,702 / 45,673,633) * 100 = 38.40% of the total electorate voted for the coalition.

So, the current coalition's mandate was given to them by less than 40% of the electorate, so most of us didn't want them, but we got them irrespective of that. Some democracy, eh!