Optimistic? Cynical? Apathetic? Angry? What's wrong with politics? Is it politicians, our political system or what? Have your say!

Post here to discuss political participation, inclusion and exclusion in the 21st Century.
• What is wrong with our political system?
• Why don't people vote in elections?
• How accountable and transparent is public sector governance?
• What frustrates you most about our administrative systems?
• Do you think you get a fair deal?
• Do you want Local Government to take over from National Government?
• Are you happy with health care?
• What would you like to see done to improve Law & Order, Civil Rights?
• Do you think there should be more regulation of the corporate sector?
• Are you happy with the way the legal system works in practice?
• Should voting be compulsory?
• Do you want an all postal ballot?

The POWER Inquiry is a major research project. It aims to consider potentially permanent political disaffection, mistrust and disconnection between governors and governed as a major threat to the vitality and legitimacy of Britain's Democracy. Our Event will consider all aspects of Inclusion, Participation & Exclusion for the Power Inquiry funded by Joseph Rowntree Foundation.

The POWER Inquiry does not have any executive powers to change the British constitution which must follow due process .


Everything you post here will be very seriously considered during the POWER Inquiry's investigations in to the issues affecting political inclusion, participation and exclusion. We are particularly interested in your opinions about transparency, accountability and governance across the full spectrum of issues likely to affect your attitudes and decisions.

If you have any queries about the Event or how we are organising it please post them in our thread in the Notices & Events Admin details for the Power Inquiry Sheffield Event (http://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/showthread.php?s=&threadid=52444)

Although it's obviously far too early to be at all definitive I'm not surprised to see the trends developing in our poll and just wondered why people have voted the way they did.

I don't particularly like the poll options. it's not a some of the time kind of thing.
I'd have characterised it as somewhat democratic. It could certainly be more democratic, and some easy changes would make it much 'fairer'.
A true democracy is as much a pipe dream at the moment as working communism.

Of course we dont have true democracy if we did parties like mine would have represention in parliment,the voting system is in need of change to reflect the views of ALL the voters which at present is not happening.
Lets do this first then we can tacke the other issues ,but of course it wont happen as the big 2 dont want ANYTHING which challenges their strong hold on the system.
Of course the other issues are equally important but to me this has to be the priority for odvious reasons.:thumbsup:

• What is wrong with our political system? It is geared for the poiticians to do whatever they want and forget the citizens.
• Why don't people vote in elections? No one trusts any of the parties as they all lie and use deciet to get their own way.
• How accountable and transparent is public sector governance? Not transparent at all! and not accountable to anyone but themselves.

• What frustrates you most about our administrative systems? What systems?

• Do you think you get a fair deal? Born Free, Taxed to death!

• Do you want Local Government to take over from National Government? Local Government is just as bad as National Government they both enjoy spending the tax payers money on projects doomed to failure without consultation with the people.
• Are you happy with health care? What health care? If you need to see a doctor in a hurry you need o predict 2-3 weeks ahead if you are going to be sick to be able to get an appointment....same goes with lack of dentists.

• What would you like to see done to improve Law & Order, Civil Rights? Bring back hanging and the birch, Make the prisons a hell on earth and remove the civil rights of criminals as at present they seem to have more rights than the victims.
• Do you think there should be more regulation of the corporate sector? Already there is too much regulation for the corporate sector.
• Are you happy with the way the legal system works in practice? THe legal system is for solicitors not the people.
It is geared to draw out minor offences at the tax payers expence.
The legal system also helps the criminals and disregards the victims.
• Should voting be compulsory? NO! To force someone to vote would be against democracy and, Who would they vote for? surely not the idiots we have at present!

• Do you want an all postal ballot?
NO! the only reason they brought in postal balloting for all, was so that some politicians could abuse the system and get into power through fraudulent means.

Delboy I entirely agree with everything you've posted and am very glad to read your forthright comments which I hope will start a well informed and constructive debate on what is wrong and an effective way to take things forward.

1. Should democracy represent the wishes of the majority of the citizens?
2. Should democratic government result in running society to the benefit of the majority?

Are 1 and 2 actually compatible?

(looking after the minority can also be to the benefit of the majority)

Originally posted by cgksheff
1. Should democracy represent the wishes of the majority of the citizens?


In order to have this don't we need to make voting compulsory otherwise democracy only represents those who have chosen to vote?

Originally posted by Mo
In order to have this don't we need to make voting compulsory otherwise democracy only represents those who have chosen to vote?

not really. Just because you are elected to a ward with only a 30% turnout, doesn't mean you shouldn't do your best to represent the other 70% as well.

The big lack IMO is proportional representation at the moment.

2) That means that the government will act in what they see as our 'best interests' even if we don't want them to do that, I'm not sure I agree with that.
On the other hand the alternative is (as an example) to allow the masses to make economic policy decisions. This would be disastrous as most people have only a vague grasp of basic economics and very little understanding of international politics and trade.

Another remit of the government is to act for the majority whilst protecting the rights of minorities, this should be maintained even though it may be contrary to the wishes of most people.

I definitely agree with proportional representation, although this may mean that the extreme right wing parties may get seats. But then if there is enough support maybe they should be represented.

I think the statements of Delboy3 though making some good points strike me as a rather paranoid and exaggerated. Do we really have that corrupt a government? I don't think so. Democracy is and always will be the best of a bad bunch of political systems and is flawed in some ways. You will never be able to please everyone.

One idea I strongly agree with is tax and non privatisation. If it weren't for tax we would all be paying lots of health insurance/private road charges etc. At least in theory no one makes direct profit from tax (ok cynical comments here we come!) - in a totally free market system, a part of every penny you paid would be going into the back pocket of someone, guaranteed.

There are a lot of questions in this thread - interesting though.

Originally posted by cgksheff
1. Should democracy represent the wishes of the majority of the citizens?
2. Should democratic government result in running society to the benefit of the majority?

Are 1 and 2 actually compatible?

(looking after the minority can also be to the benefit of the majority)

Elaborate....

All democratic systems are flawed. If we desire representational democracy, ought we not to consider proportional representation (PR)? The late Robin Cook was a strong and consistent advocate of PR, but oft times a voice in the wilderness.

It was interesting to note that in the all postal ballots last year, voting returns increased, by 50% in some wards. Food for thought.

Compulsory voting is the norm in Australia, but you are allowed to cross your ballot paper with a "none of the above" option.

Can wendygs tell us where this event is happening and when? Also, is there an address to send e-mails or written submissions?

Originally posted by redrobbo
Compulsory voting is the norm in Australia, but you are allowed to cross your ballot paper with a "none of the above" option.

THat option would be fine, providing that if it was the winning 'candidate', a reselection would have to take place, with no previous candidates in that election being eligible to stand twice

Also - wendygs should not take any information from this poll as being useful in any way whatsoever..

One of the most interesting questions to come on S.F. for a long time , in my opinion.
Pure democracy is out of the question , I think , as our society is too large and complex for that. On the other hand we have definitely not got a fascist society , as some would have us believe. So , we lie somewhere between the two extremes ......but where ...?
The main problem at the moment , I think , is the fact that people can only vote in a , "package " fashion .In other words a Labour voter might vote Labour because they believe that Labour 's policies are good for the economy and , say , for the N.H.S. However they may violently oppose Labour's policy on Crime and Punishment. Similarly with a Conservative or a Liberal voter. It seems we have to accept a sort of blunt , "sledgehammer " effect when we vote for a particular party. Maybe , that's why large numbers of people don't vote . It's not that they haven't thought about it but perhaps they say to themselves , " Well I'd like to vote for X party because I agree with 1 & 2 policies but I can't bring myself to vote for them because of 3 &4 policies ."
Is there any way round this ? If we had too many referendums , it just wouldn't work . National policy would be changing all the time and it would be chaotic . But.....perhaps a limited number of referendums [ referenda ?] would do the trick.?
For example the parties would set out their main policies , each allowed to publish a manifesto on a certain number of policies . Then they would be allowed to mention , say 3 topics that people would be allowed to vote on during the life of the government. The party would have to agree to abide by the result of the referendum. The result of the referendum would remain law , for say 10 years , so as to avoid chopping and changing.
It sounds complicated but I don't think it is . With all the technology we have now , the actual mechanics should prove pretty simple.A party would present its plans for the economy . foreign policy .....etc ...as they do now . Then they would promise to hold referenda on say , Crime , Hunting ......etc....They would be allowed 3 referenda in addition to their main policies .
In this way , we would have a balance between policies that were " long-term " and fixed by the party in power and policies that had to be followed by popular vote.
If people feel they might be listened to on at least some important aspects of their lives they may become more involved. A classic example of what I mean is the fact that in every survey since 1965 , 80% of people interviewed have wanted capital punishment brought back for certain types of crime. All 3 of the main parties have consistently voted against such a measure. So , how do people express their democratic rights under this system ? That is just one example .

to red robbo if you have any comment please email sheffieldpowerinquiry@gmail.com or for details of the event you can check out the Power Inquiry website at www.powerinquiry.org.uk. The event will be held on Sun 18th Sept and as soon as we have confirmed all final details will post to let all know!!

Many thanks

Originally posted by redrobbo
It was interesting to note that in the all postal ballots last year, voting returns increased, by 50% in some wards.

Yes... and how many Labour party members were jailed for fraud due to rigging the postal voting system :suspect:

Originally posted by tim_rutter


I think the statements of Delboy3 though making some good points strike me as a rather paranoid and exaggerated. Do we really have that corrupt a government? I don't think so. Democracy is and always will be the best of a bad bunch of political systems and is flawed in some ways. You will never be able to please everyone.

One idea I strongly agree with is tax and non privatisation. If it weren't for tax we would all be paying lots of health insurance/private road charges etc. At least in theory no one makes direct profit from tax (ok cynical comments here we come!) - in a totally free market system, a part of every penny you paid would be going into the back pocket of someone, guaranteed.

There are a lot of questions in this thread - interesting though.

I have not exagerated any of my statements and I am not paranoid.
On your posting, None privatisation? The governments have sold off all the peoples assets.
They have nothing but the taxes that they can claw from the working population.

As far as paying health insurance: Surely my Paye, Nic pays a form of insurance that I may see a doctor?
If not then where is all the money going?
It is not going on our defence as we have cut the defence budget by over 50% over the past 10 years.

Private road charges? We all pay a road tax , an amount of around 42 billion a year yet only 7 billion is actually spent on the roads.
My mistake...Actual Revenue inserted:taxes from motorist amounted to at least £40 billion last year. £6 billion was spent on the roads. Hence the profit to the exchequer was £34 billion.

Council Tax: A tax charged for services that in all honesty are not there!
If anyone in the forum can actually explain to me why I pay over 1000 pounds a year and what I personally get in the way of any services besides my bin being collected and the sewage then please do so.
Our current democracy is as follows: Do as I say, Not as I do!
One law for you, One law for us!

Examples: Jack Straw caught going over 100MPH....Not Charged.
Over 400 police caught speeding....None charged!

I am sure there are many other examples of do as I say Etc!

Mod. Note

Just a quick note - any questions about the running of this event, admin details, etc. please use the thread in the otices and Events section.

Cheers

Joe

I voted yes because we do have a representative democracy.

All that means (to me) is that the minority of people living in marginal seats get to have a small say in which dictatorship will run the country for the next 5 years.

Democracy is the best form of government that politicians will let us have.

Compared to the various other forms of government around the world, as well as the many varieties of democracy, Britain is undoubtedly the best system of governance. If any of us had to learn to live under the jurisdiction of any other government in the world, i am sure we would find just as many, if not far more faults with the particular system.
We ought to have a bit more faith in the people that run this country and if one feels that they really are failing us, then it is up to the public to hold them accountable by getting involved.
We live in a representative democracy not a popular democracy. The maths of a representation do not work because it is inconceivable that one person within a certain area of town/county/region etc can adequatly represent the interests of so many others. Therefore, it is our responsibility to make sure that our voices are heard by getting involved in a much more extensive manner. Hence, instead of pining after a popular democracy, we should work to make it a reality.

Squidge :|

Originally posted by Abdul
Yes... and how many Labour party members were jailed for fraud due to rigging the postal voting system :suspect:

None Abdul. You are probably confusing recent convictions of
Labour councillors which arose in postal-vote scandals in 2003. I was referring to the experimental all-postal ballots which took place in selective parts of the country in 2004. As far as I am aware, no-one has been charged with any criminal activity relating to those elections, let alone jailed for a conviction.

Postal ballot rigging is nothing new, alas. In the 1990 local elections a Labour councillor in Chorley, a Conservative councillor in West Lancashire and a Liberal agent in Sheffield were all separately convicted for forging absentee votes.

The security of the postal ballot needs to be improved, and the government is currently looking at various recommendations of the Electoral Commission. The security of voting in person is not always guaranteed, and is also subject to abuse.

Well at least my party has never been involved in postal fraud,unlike all the rest.
We had labour councillors convicted of fraud in the last election,abdul is correct.

"Council Tax: A tax charged for services that in all honesty are not there!
If anyone in the forum can actually explain to me why I pay over 1000 pounds a year and what I personally get in the way of any services besides my bin being collected and the sewage then please do so." - Del Boy

Sorry don't know how to do the quote thing but in reference to your comment I really don't think you see the bigger picture, if you look beyond the basic services such as refuse collection etc.. you might notice all of the other services that the council provides.

Most of the councils budget is spent on education and social services, would you prefer if we didn't provide our children with an education and would it be a better society if the vunerable and elderly were left on the streets?

Perhaps you should have a look at the councils budget which is available on their site and then you may be in a position to make a more informed decision.

Our system isn't perfect but it does pretty well, we would be better off if we had PR but in the meantime how many people are actually prepared to get involved and think of positive constructive methods for change?

If we had compulsary voting with a 'none of the above' option people who are genuinely interested in voting but do not feel they are represented by any political party would be able to express their concerns in a valid manner, and if 'none of the above' turns out to be a major player perhaps we would have better political parties who tried harder to explore the concerns across the full range of society.

FPTP isn't working anymore and it isn't true to say that PR would lead to extremist politics, a moderate system such as the one already in place for the European elections would give people a far greater opportunity to see that their votes actually counts and isn't wasted.

Harris ,

Well , I suppose we all know what we pay national and local taxes for -------but the important question that I think Delboy3 was aiming at , is -------do we get full value or even reasonable value for the enormous taxes that all working people pay for in the U.K.?
It would be interesting to find out , for example , how much money is spent on people who actually do work such as policing , nursing , teaching , refuse collecting ......etc...... and how much money is spent on people who sit behind desks supervising the such workers ?

Originally posted by Fareast
Harris ,

Well , I suppose we all know what we pay national and local taxes for -------but the important question that I think Delboy3 was aiming at , is -------do we get full value or even reasonable value for the enormous taxes that all working people pay for in the U.K.?
It would be interesting to find out , for example , how much money is spent on people who actually do work such as policing , nursing , teaching , refuse collecting ......etc...... and how much money is spent on people who sit behind desks supervising the such workers ?

Yes it would be good to have a look at those statistics and I'm sure it would make a really good research project!

But if you want to look at America where they do pay less in direct income taxes etc.. they still end up paying as much or even more indirectly for other services such as healthcare and education. Having an x ray can cost over $300, women have to pay $75 (approx) a month on the pill which we get here for free.
If you want to study law at a good university you will have to pay at least $50'000 and that isn't even the top 'ivy league' schools.


We pay the taxes and contribute because we are not autonomous individuals, we are part of society and for all that it is not perfect at least there is some degree of equality.

Think of it in terms of a veil of ignorance - if you were designing society with various options in front of you, but no idea of what your final status would be, isn't it better to try and have a system such as ours with support networks in place?

If I fall sick and cannot work I know that there will be help there for me. If I want to send my children to university I know at least for the time being that I don't have to remortgage my house.

If I was hit by a car, the ambulance wouldn't have to check I had insurance before it picked me up.

Value for money isn't just about what you personally get, its about how we all benefit as a whole.

Originally posted by harris
a veil of ignorance

Lovely phrase, what does it mean, to whom and how does it apply?

Originally posted by redrobbo
If we desire representational democracy, ought we not to consider proportional representation (PR)?

Good idea, shame it was stolen from the LibDems though;).


Originally posted by redrobbo
The late Robin Cook was a strong and consistent advocate of PR, but oft times a voice in the wilderness.

Only within the Labour confines!



In answer to the OP.... I voted no.

What we do have is an elected dictatorship, that works for those within

In answer to your question - I guess the simple answer is that it is as democratic as it can allow it to be. There are and will be times when decision making needs to be made by the people we voted - or not to represent us. Iraq and the recent terror outbreak in the UK fall immediately to mind. The problem is as I see it there is *NO* opposition to the current government which makes it seem like they just steam roller their way through policy. Who's fault is that?

Perhaps proportional representation is the answer? but in that case who represents the huge majority of people who don't vote, can't vote? PR is a real vote winner for the opposition but I can't see the government at the time ever agreeing to it, regardless of who is in.

I have registerd with this inquiry and I do intend to go along to the meeting at the uni in sept.
I suspect its just another talking shop with no real clout with the main political parties,but hey you have to try to get things changed by as many means as possible.
I look forward to a good debate.

i hope it ends up as a debate and not a slanging match as some of these often do

Originally posted by sccsux
Good idea, shame it was stolen from the LibDems though;).



Who's stolen the idea of proportional representation from the Lib-Dems? Neither the Labour Party nor the Conservative Party has adopted PR as official policy. Who can you be referring to? :suspect:

Until we can seperate businessmen from politicians, and business from politics, we will never have a system that works for everyone because politics is a dirty, wealthy business.

We need strong leadership that is prepared to take a stand on the continuing growth in the wealth gap. In order for this to happen we need to have a political environment conducive, or at least capable of allowing the existence of, political movement capable of existing without the funding or support of business.

The reason this is important is because many of the decisions are made by businessmen whose prime concerns are the financial margins, rather than the human impact.

This is not specific to our government or economy, but is a trait common amongst western countries who are members of organizations such as the World Trade Organization, the World Bank, the International Monetry Fund and others.

Sadly, it would seem we have no option but to be members of these institutions and yet whilst we are, we continue to give up our national control, our social structure and our individual human rights.

The solution, well that is for you to decide but I urge anyone who reads this to read the following books:

I.O.U. The Debt Threat And Why We Must Defuse It by Noreena Hertz ISBN 0-00-717898-0

Everything You Know Is Wrong (The Disinformation Guide To Secrets And Lies) ISBN 0-9713942-0-2


and if any of you out there are misguided enough to believe the "War On Terror" is genuine then I suggest you read 1984 by George Orwell.

I hope that in this Power Inquiry the VICTIMS of the abuse of Power and the lack of any help at all from the system will be listened to attentively and that something will be done to redress the faults of the system. If I can manage to attend - which will be very painful and difficult for me as my skin and veins are so thin and delicate - then I hope I will be listened to and something done to prevent/protect others from being treated as I was and harmed as I was.

Originally posted by margarete
I hope that in this Power Inquiry the VICTIMS of the abuse of Power and the lack of any help at all from the system will be listened to attentively and that something will be done to redress the faults of the system. If I can manage to attend - which will be very painful and difficult for me as my skin and veins are so thin and delicate - then I hope I will be listened to and something done to prevent/protect others from being treated as I was and harmed as I was.

I am confident the Power Inquiry research will give full, serious consideration to all of the issues and concerns raised by everyone participating in this major research programme. I must stress it is research and we do not have any executive powers to change Government practices or thinking. THe Power Inquiry is keen to establish what has happened to undermine political credibility, what needs to be done to change that and how to create political inclusion. I therefore think it is important for people who believe they have suffered abuse of power on whatever basis to submit their evidence in a suitable format for the Power Inquiry's consideration.

I have seen many threads on this forum which seem to indicate the abuse margarete mentions is widespread. An immediate example which comes to mind are the serious access problems fathers have when trying to see their children after separating from their wives or partners and CAFCASS' apparent lack of impartiality.

What is the deadline for sending submissions and what is the email address that they should be sent to?

As stated above the power enquiry is about "Having Your Say".
Does these mean that people will be able to have a say e.g. address the audience?

I believe this is important as there may be some people who have had experiences of where they have had NO power and the system has let them down badly.

Therefore for the event to address the issues that it sets out to it shouldn't just be about invited speakers giving their views on the system and then giving people only the opportunity to ask them questions.

I do hope this wont be some left wing talk shop and every view is taken on board,otherwise it certainly wont be democratic,will it?

As previously stated the Power Inquiry remit is to consider democractic government. Power Inquiry Sheffield Event will explore the issues of Transparency, Accountability and Governance in the context of local and national government.

For debating purposes we have put forward some key areas which we consider to be critical for the wider Sheffield Community and not any one particular section of society or political beliefs.

Hopefully it should be clear that the Power Inquiry does not have any party political leanings and therefore invited prominent members of the key political parties to give evidence which can be found on the Power Inquiry website.

All queries about the Event should be posted in our Admin thread Event Admin Issues Only (http://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/showthread.php?s=&threadid=52444)

Fuller details about the Power Inquiry are on the links in my signature, see below

bump bump bump......

Roll on Sunday 18th Sept- 'Have your Say', 1pm - 4pm The Stoddart Building, Sheffield Hallam University.

City Centre Venue, fully accessible, creche available if you let us know before 3pm at the very latest on Friday!

Speaker, Question & Answers, and Working Groups

This is your opportunity to be heard, and to make a difference, plus prizes to be won include two tickets to a Sheffield United home game and a free hair cut at the renowned Taylor Taylor Salon (worth over £200!)

For further info see the event thread (it has all the answers!)
http://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/showthread.php?s=&threadid=52444

See you all there:clap: :clap:

[QUOTE]Originally posted by wendygs
.

therefore invited prominent members of the key political parties to give evidence which can be found on the Power Inquiry website.

Without being too critical since when have respect been KEY political party??
I was going to attend with some colegues from our party the BNP who by the way got many more votes than Respect did,but looking at the make up of this event I have decided you are biased in your leanings.
We will therefore not be in attendance.

Originally posted by royjames
[QUOTE]Originally posted by wendygs
. Therefore invited prominent members of the key political parties to give evidence which can be found on the Power Inquiry website.

Without being too critical since when have respect been KEY political party??
I was going to attend with some colegues from our party the BNP who by the way got many more votes than Respect did,but looking at the make up of this event I have decided you are biased in your leanings.
We will therefore not be in attendance.

I am disappointed to have been misquoted and taken out of context.

To be perfectly frank I feel this is nit-picking and a failure to look beyond and outside the small square box to identify the issues with a view to finding suitable solutions.

The key political parties WERE invited to give evidence by the Power Inquiry Witness Sessions at various venues around the Country.

That is, of course, an entirely separate matter from the Power Inquiry Sheffield Event we will be holding on Sunday 18th September at Sheffield Hallam University.

As Harris has previously stated ALL are welcome to attend.

Originally posted by wendygs
I am disappointed to have been misquoted and taken out of context.

To be perfectly frank I feel this is nit-picking and a failure to look beyond and outside the small square box to identify the issues with a view to finding suitable solutions.

The key political parties WERE invited to give evidence by the Power Inquiry Witness Sessions at various venues around the Country.

That is, of course, an entirely separate matter from the Power Inquiry Sheffield Event we will be holding on Sunday 18th September at Sheffield Hallam University.

As Harris has previously stated ALL are welcome to attend.

For further clarification on my previous post, I should add the evidence from Michael Howard and the late Robin Cook were taken by Power Inquiry Chair, Baronness Helena Kennedy QC.

As I attended the latter Witness Session in February 2005, I can say Robin Cook presented his evidence in an authoritative and credible manner, particularly on the important issue of constitutional law.

Nevertheless, I recall a sense of disappointment at the way he addressed questions put to him when thrown open to the wider audience.

Although I agree with the late Robin Cook on the concern at the low level turnout at local elections I felt unhappy with the glossing over of Public Sector issues unrelated to Council services and decisions.

I found the power enquiry quite interesting,some good points were made and I hope to be able to attend the next one also.
Oh and nice to see our Joe P in attendance,good speech bye the way Joe.:thumbsup:

Like Roy, I found the power enquiry interesting, and I enjoyed meeting people, and I'd like to thank all the organisers and helpers, especially Siân, who gave me a great deal of help and kindness.

Let us hope it bears fruit.

Thanks Roy - I enjoyed it!

There were indeed some interesting issues raised and some good points from both speakers and the floor. For anyone who's interested, the slides I used this afternoon and my 'speaking notes' (the latter got modified on the fly) are at www.communitynet.org.uk on the downloads page.

I'm looking forward to getting the full feedback from this session, and also will keep an eye open for the full report back from all the other sessions across the country.

Thanks to the orgnisers as well - these things are nigtmares to set up!

:thumbsup:

Joe

Originally posted by royjames
Of course we dont have true democracy if we did parties like mine would have represention in parliment,the voting system is in need of change to reflect the views of ALL the voters which at present is not happening.


What percentage of the vote would the BNP get? And how do you arise at the figure that you give?

Originally posted by wendygs
For further clarification on my previous post, I should add the evidence from Michael Howard and the late Robin Cook were taken by Power Inquiry Chair, Baronness Helena Kennedy QC.

As I attended the latter Witness Session in February 2005, I can say Robin Cook presented his evidence in an authoritative and credible manner, particularly on the important issue of constitutional law.

Nevertheless, I recall a sense of disappointment at the way he addressed questions put to him when thrown open to the wider audience.

Although I agree with the late Robin Cook on the concern at the low level turnout at local elections I felt unhappy with the glossing over of Public Sector issues unrelated to Council services and decisions.

So how was it?

I would have thought Respect, the Greens , the BNP and some of the other small parties share of the vote would actually be minimal even if clumped together..

Originally posted by SHsheff
What percentage of the vote would the BNP get? And how do you arise at the figure that you give?

from a quick calculation based on the figures shown on the bbc website - it looks like the BNP polled 192,850 votes across the UK (approx 0.7%) and Respect a mere 68,065 ( approx 0.25%) which would probably make them almost 3x as big.

I don't think either party will be making the next government somehow ;)

Originally posted by royjames
I found the power enquiry quite interesting,some good points were made and I hope to be able to attend the next one also.
Oh and nice to see our Joe P in attendance,good speech bye the way Joe.:thumbsup:

Roy - you said you weren't going m8. (further up the thread) so I didn't bother - I only wanted a photo with you in my Gerry t-shirt :D

Joe,

Thank you very much for posting your presentation.

Thank you also for contributing in this way.

It would be wonderful if the other presentations could be linked to the forum so as to get a wider reaction.

Originally posted by cgksheff
Joe,

Thank you very much for posting your presentation.

Thank you also for contributing in this way.

It would be wonderful if the other presentations could be linked to the forum so as to get a wider reaction.

Thanks! You're welcome!

I believe that more formal notes form the session will emerge - watch this space, so to say, for the organisers to come back with them.

It was an enjoyable way to spend the afternoon, and very interesting to hear different and diverse opinions.

Joe

Joe [/B][/QUOTE]

Originally posted by JoeP
Thanks Roy - I enjoyed it!

There were indeed some interesting issues raised and some good points from both speakers and the floor.

I'm looking forward to getting the full feedback from this session, and also will keep an eye open for the full report back from all the other sessions across the country.

Thanks to the orgnisers as well - these things are nigtmares to set up!

:thumbsup:
Joe
As others have said: excellent speakers, debate, venue and support from the people who count. :D We have copious notes; Paul and I developed a questionnaire that led to well informed debate and forms the basis of our Power Inquiry report which we will also publish for Sheffield Forum.

Accolade to "behind the scenes" Forum member Madblast and her colleagues for very generously giving Sunday afternoon for a non-chargeable creche. :thumbsup: That no parents used it warrants a debate in that if offered but not used is it time to remove childcare from the political debate.

Very grateful appreciation to my University for an excellent City Centre venue; impeccable in relation to the serious invisible disabilities affecting Paul and I. Disability is an issue Sheffield City COuncil and Sheffield 1st Partnership could usefully add to their vision of being "a successful, distinctive city of European significance with opportunities for all" which I find disregards speech impairment and has only limited acceptance for other disabilities. I am therefore profoundly grateful to Hels for reading a statement without interpreting, adding or diluting 1 word; a unique experience since I lost my voice after an urgent medical procedure to investigate a life-threatening condition nearly 2 years ago.

All our speakers were excellent: Ruggie Johnson on invisible exclusion of Sheffield minority communities; Donald Hislop of Respect on political apathy; Hels gave an unplanned talk on work-place disability; Jack Scott about ground up Labour politics; and JoeP on internet communities for single-issue politics. As a result of what I heard today, I am delighted by Internetowl's statistics that the Respect Party and BNP are most unlikely to gain a political stranglehold in the foreseeable future.

I would be remiss to overlook the mods JoeP, Tony & Sian most specifically all of whom have the final say which may ultimately suggest the best we can hope for in any system is a "friendly dictatorship" :)

In summary much of interest and the Event itself yielded a micro political arena. While I was sorry to close, ALL good things come to an end to enjoy new beginnings. Although organising the Event had its moments on balance, it was fun. From the interest shown we plan to run further events in future.

Originally posted by wendygs
All our speakers were excellent: Ruggie Johnson on invisible I am delighted by Internetowl's statistics that the Respect Party and BNP are most unlikely to gain a political stranglehold in the foreseeable future

I have to say that you are entitled to your point of view as regards the BNP and Respect,although I dont know what you heard from us both that made you come to your conclusion?
Especially as I did not have the floor for any kind of speech,still everyone is entitiled to their voice although I have to say this comment from you has somewhat made me and probably the respect people think long and hard about future involvement in the power debate.

Originally posted by royjames
I have to say that you are entitled to your point of view as regards the BNP and Respect,although I dont know what you heard from us both that made you come to your conclusion?
Especially as I did not have the floor for any kind of speech,still everyone is entitiled to their voice although I have to say this comment from you has somewhat made me and probably the respect people think long and hard about future involvement in the power debate.

I am disappointed that it is thought, even remotely I will allow my personal views to interfere with producing an accurate report of the well informed and stimulating discussions which took place during our Event.

This was a personal opionion. I was not speaking on behalf of any organisation whether or not the Power Inquiry. In the same way that Sheffield Forum mods are ENTITLED to their opinions which they DO post, I too have the same right of expression. My recollection is all of the other Organisers expressed their views in our debate and were not taken to task for doing so.

BUT as was evident, when I tried to do so during the debate I was forcibly cut off by a participant.

NOT ONE PERSON IN THE ROOM STOOD UP FOR MY RIGHT TO CONTINUE DEVELOPING MY LINE OF REASONED ARGUMENT SO THAT I COULD ALSO HAVE MY SAY.

It was not at all clear from the little I was allowed to say before I was cut off that as well as exploring my concerns regarding the Respect Party and BNP I had then wanted to look at the major political parties which enabled me to make the very strong statement I made before the interruption.

My recollection of my unrecorded input is I said "based on very substantial documentary evidence all of the systems in place to protect people from harm are corrupt". I cited Customer Services and Complaints Procedures specifically. I had then wanted to evaluate other systems designed to prevent harm. Regrettably I was not given an opportunity to develop this theme any further.

That I was denied the same right as everyone else to develop my thoughts and put questions to either Don Hislop or you in the manner I would have liked within that forum is regrettable but again reflects my experience of the macro-world.

This underlines the difficulty which I and an estimated 2,225,000 fellow speech impaired people face insurmountable odds to convey even most basic needs. For many speech impaired people the chance to participate in a highly informed debate is a far-fetched luxury. Our window-cleaner, for example, was forced to retire after a tracheotomy.

Although respective inputs left clear impressions, without the precise details in the context of that particular forum I do not see it serving any useful purpose to develop my particular concerns further.

Originally posted by wendygs

As others have said: excellent speakers, debate, venue and support from the people who count.

Hi Wendy,

I enjoyed the event and found the speakers to be interesting, especially Joe, and Hels I feel did an excellent job standing in at short notice.

I was dissapointed that our Council's Chief Exec did not honour his committment to speak.

I do feel, though, that the kind of people who attend any event like this are people who do have a voice anyway, and know how to make themselves heard. The people we need to speak to are those who won't vote and won't have any interest in attending this sort of event. How we reach them I do not know.

I'm not from Sheffield (hence the name) but did attend the event on Sunday, so wanted to post my feedback for all to see.

Firstly I would like to thank and congratulate the organisers for their efforts in staging the event which was very interesting and well-worth attending.

The main points I took away are as follows:

Ruggie made a useful point about the lack accountability for money spent on behalf of communities by bodies that have no popular mandate to do so. Though he was talking particularly about minority communities, it is true of any community, as we all have money spent on our behalf and have little say in how it is used.

Don's suggestion that Respect's (limited) success was partly due to the fact that people were looking for something different to what's on offer from the main parties was a valid one.

Jack's major contribution for me was to demonstrate just what's wrong with politicians. Here was someone with little experience of the world reading what sounded like one of Millbank's centrally prepared speeches (which are available to activists along with pre-drafted letters to be sent to newspaper editors praising government successes). It was also disconcerting to be patronised by a 19 year-old. If he continues in this fashion, I'm sure in a few years time he will be an MP. A truly sad indication of the state of our democracy!

From the floor, what impressed me most was Margarete's contribution. I think we could have used all the time available just to discuss the issues arising from her campaign to highlight the health risks of salt in conjunction with steroids. No-one in the public services, government, parliament or the health professions comes out of this tale with any glory. How do we get these bodies to admit ther mistakes and do something about it?

On the whole, I thoroughly enjoyed the afternoon and thank everyone for the part they played (even Jack!).

Paul, an Event Organiser who is not wired up has asked me to let Sheffield Forum users know that we are happy to include evidence in our report to the Power Inquiry from those people who were unable to attend our Event if it is submitted by Monday 26th September.

There is also a questionnaire which can be completed and returned by email if I am able to organise hosting arrangements.

Please download the Survey Questionnaire from here (http://alexhudson.50megs.com/ ) - it is the file named 'Survey Questionnaire (version 4)' unsurprisingly. Once downloaded, please embolden your choices, and then attach it to an eMail to this address: sheffieldpowerinquiry@gmail.com

Cheers,
KB - :)

Any problems with downloading, feel free to send me a PM!

Originally posted by kentboy119
Please download the Survey Questionnaire from here (http://alexhudson.50megs.com/ ) - it is the file named 'Survey Questionnaire (version 4)' unsurprisingly. Once downloaded, please embolden your choices, and then attach it to an eMail to this address: sheffieldpowerinquiry@gmail.com

Cheers,
KB - :)

Any problems with downloading, feel free to send me a PM!

Should anyone who has not yet done wish to download, complete and return our questionnaire for inclusion in to the evidence we are submitting to the Power Inquiry please note the closing date is this evening.

I'd also like to remind anyone who was at our Event last Sunday that we would also appreciate any feedback, comments and your notes which you can send to us by clicking on the email link in my signature below.

Many thanks
wendy