Tuesday, April 28, 2009

Thought for the day - British Democracy Fundamentally Corrupt?

I hope its not me and hope the local Tories are wrong, but just digest the magnitude of these extracts from Conservative bloggers in Thanet “With both local council and elections now taking place in a short period of time, I'm now very constrained, under the code of conduct, over what I may or may not write in regard to political content” writes Simon Moores and this from Ken Gregory “As a result, in order to comply with electoral law, I will, until the election is over, restrict my postings to Non Political issues

Two things strike me, if these two councillors are saying that they are restricted in the comments they can make on political issues during an election, then we don’t live in a democracy and maybe more infuriation are the apparently bland and compliant comments from Simon with this “I can make a quick comment about yesterday's budget without having my wrists slapped by the Monitoring Officer” and Ken Gregory saying this “Sorry for the inconvenience , but I do not wish to fall foul of the law”

Here’s what I say if some monitoring officer tried to slap my wrist they’d get more than a slap back, and as for falling foul of the law I say **** the law.

Men and Women throughout history have gone to incredible lengths and still do today, for the right of self expression and the limp acceptance of being constrained is for me untenable.

Still I suggest you click on video below in which the late Peter Finch, expressed more eloquently how I feel.


  1. Yes Tony. Public servants not only tell elected representatives what to do. It is the same with Crown appointments.

    All I want is a letter with a Magistrate signature on it.

    but it is a public servant not a Magistrate who replies Our elected representatives and our Crown officers (Judiciary and Police) are being ruled by government employees.

    The law is clear (Common Law). I must report to a Justice. Or to an independent ministerial officer of the Crown.

    So I have sent the report in querstion direct to the Royal Courts of Justice for attention of a High Court Judge (don't care who .. but must be a Judge)

    The Court staff decided that I should have punched holes in the copy for the defendant (Michael Fuller Chief constable). And so posted back my report.

    This morning I told postie to return to sender. They are not entitled to post a Common Law obligatory report outside the bounds of their Court until it has been read by a Judge.

    I understand that when the documents arrive back at the Royal Courts of Justice the civil servants have a procedure. They run an address check ready to post the files again.

    "Ah but you know my address. I will be refusing the package for legal reasons. Give the files to a Judge to read"

    "Not until they are hole punched and paginated as one and not by sections"

    "No Common Law does not stipulate how I must prepare the report. It only makes it mandatory for me to report to a Judge to discharge my duty. You are just a clerk and cannot be allowed to undischarge my duty. Give my report to a Judge"

    In the spirit of reconciliation I have said that if they want me to punch the holes in the defendant copy they should invite me to the Court and I will attend with a hole puncher on the understanding it is not taken off me by security.

    Some things have to matter Tony.

    The law says it must be reported to a Judge. Who the ..... do civil servants think they are ?

    Strictl;y speaking by posting the file back they committed Misprision and should go to prison for life. The Chief Clerk thinks I am wrong. But he appears to have been educated in the Tony Blair abridged and Napoleonic Code approved version of law.

  2. Tony
    As elected representatives we are bound by certain rules of behaviour during any election. At times and in the age of the internet these appear a little ambivalent but the monitoring officer exists to give guidance on such matters and it's only sensible to follow his recommendations as to what is and is not permissable.

    This isn't any form of censorship, rather it exists to prevent any abuse of the democratic system in the election period.

  3. I always thought it was candidates and agents that were governed by rules(representation of the peoples act etc.,) regarding expenses and publicity in these elections and not other elected members whose authority is not up for election.

  4. As I said Simon compliant, if you cant understand how feeble words like sensible sound in relation having your freedom to speak eroded by some jobsworth.

    What can you say

  5. Tony,
    The law is basically sound, but in these times it has not kept up with computers. I may not like the law as it stands, but I prefer to work from inside to change it, not become a statistic. I am no Emily Pankhurst, just trying to avoid needless hastle.

  6. gosh! I was a little taken back by the clip, it is how I feel, was it a movie? if so, have you just ruined the end for me? I get sooo cross people arn't involved in the world sitting in their little rooms watching the TV, I have a cousin who spends her whole life moaning about her benefits!!! just given up work again!!! but in her 36 years has never voted! shut up!
    thst said when she and others don't vote, my vote counts for more, what do I vote? I am your classic undecided, I vote for people who have been doing a good job, against when they arn't, liberal in attitude