Politics, arguments, debates and the abdication of responsibility.
The Power Inquiry Report 2006.
If you have not heard of it, then I suggest that you need to know more about it. We all need to read the report and understand it's full implications, not least because it emerged from the grass roots, rather than a think-tank. And it challenges a number of assumptions about the ability of grass roots folk to engage with shared responsibility, robust governance and detailed policy deliberation.
The Power inquiry, an independent investigation into the condition of democracy in Britain, was set up in 2004. The members of its commission (chaired by Helena Kennedy) hosted meetings around Britain and heard submissions from a wide variety of interest groups, professionals, and concerned citizens. The commission published its report on 27 February 2006.
The Power inquiry, an independent investigation into the condition of democracy in Britain, was set up in 2004. The members of its commission (chaired by Helena Kennedy) hosted meetings around Britain and heard submissions from a wide variety of interest groups, professionals, and concerned citizens. The commission published its report on 27 February 2006.
"After eighteen months of investigation, the final report of Power is a devastating critique of the state of formal democracy in Britain. Many of us actively support campaigns such as Greenpeace or the Countryside Alliance. And millions more take part in charity or community work. But political parties and elections have been a growing turn-off for years.
The cause is not apathy. The problem is that we don't feel we have real influence over the decisions made in our name. The need for a solution is urgent. And that solution is radical. Nothing less than a major programme of reform to give power back to the people of Britain..."
Examine it.
D.
Cameron, E. Milliband and Menzies Campbell paid lip service to the report and initiative at the
time. Cameron said, in public, and it's on video, that The Power
Inquiry was the 'most important initiative in Democracy in the UK' in a
long, long time.
I was there. I heard them speak and mouth hearty support for the report, as they stood and spoke before the assembled crowd of more than 500 people.
I was there. I heard them speak and mouth hearty support for the report, as they stood and spoke before the assembled crowd of more than 500 people.
Less than a week after attending the launch of the report, at a conference in Queen Elizabeth Hall, Parliament Square, after praising it during that weekend conference,
after saying how important it was, after speaking about it in glowing terms to the attendees, they dismissed it as 'impractical.'
'Impractical'? Well, yes. Ceding power to people is always 'impractical' to the Ruling Class.
Here's an outline of the recommendations:
http://www.lgcplus.com/give-citizens-power-to-make-laws-urges-inquiry/513437.article
Here's the full document, PDF download, very much worth a reading.
http://www.jrrt.org.uk/publications/power-people-independent-inquiry-britains-democracy-full-report
Power without accountability or shared responsibility is always going to be a serious problem, and open to abuse.
Quite a lot of the comments flying around about Russel Brand, UKIP, and politics in general are antagonistic 'debating' style, rather than mature deliberation or critical analysis. Trying to win or batter the other side down as opposed to learning enough to develop a win-win solution.
What's that phrase they use about the Court system?
Adversarial.
I find that appalling. An abdication of responsibility. Politically immature. Psychologically immature. An adversarial Parliament is immature, and unworthy, easily corrupted - a collegiate parliament would be mature and worthy and would repel corruption.
Because the issue of power and legislation is really about us, we, the people who form the community and how we work together (or not) to create a society that nurtures, that cares for the vulnerable.
The issue is about relationships based on kindness, rather than power.
Healthy discourse is about sharing, exploring and growing together.
Debate is about power, it's about who wins.
The Power Inquiry emerged out of the Community Voluntary Sector, which has decades of providing services at the local community level, dealing with amongst other things : finances, governance, research, best practices, transparency, service provision, understanding their 'clients' needs, overcoming institutional obstacles, overcoming Institutionalised Emotional Blindness, campaigning, fund raising, discourse on policy formulation and much else besides. These are real life skills.
It was these people that David Cameron's BIG SOCIETY was aimed at, as a direct institutional assault. And it was their clients, the vulnerable who suffer doubly as a result.
And it's working.
Speak to any disabled people currently being denied benefits on the false basis of 'austerity'?
Use your voice to nurture the active grass roots, as well as to chastise the powerful.
In another comment, elsewhere, I pointed out how appalled I was at the sniping that is so common.
Instituionalised Emotional Blindness. There's something here for everyone to consider.
The immaturity of the debating style of the discourse, as opposed to an effort to share, learn and grow in order to create a more nurturant society.
An abdication of responsibility. It's really quite ugly.
'Impractical'? Well, yes. Ceding power to people is always 'impractical' to the Ruling Class.
Here's an outline of the recommendations:
http://www.lgcplus.com/give-citizens-power-to-make-laws-urges-inquiry/513437.article
Here's the full document, PDF download, very much worth a reading.
http://www.jrrt.org.uk/publications/power-people-independent-inquiry-britains-democracy-full-report
Power without accountability or shared responsibility is always going to be a serious problem, and open to abuse.
Quite a lot of the comments flying around about Russel Brand, UKIP, and politics in general are antagonistic 'debating' style, rather than mature deliberation or critical analysis. Trying to win or batter the other side down as opposed to learning enough to develop a win-win solution.
What's that phrase they use about the Court system?
Adversarial.
I find that appalling. An abdication of responsibility. Politically immature. Psychologically immature. An adversarial Parliament is immature, and unworthy, easily corrupted - a collegiate parliament would be mature and worthy and would repel corruption.
Because the issue of power and legislation is really about us, we, the people who form the community and how we work together (or not) to create a society that nurtures, that cares for the vulnerable.
The issue is about relationships based on kindness, rather than power.
Healthy discourse is about sharing, exploring and growing together.
Debate is about power, it's about who wins.
The Power Inquiry emerged out of the Community Voluntary Sector, which has decades of providing services at the local community level, dealing with amongst other things : finances, governance, research, best practices, transparency, service provision, understanding their 'clients' needs, overcoming institutional obstacles, overcoming Institutionalised Emotional Blindness, campaigning, fund raising, discourse on policy formulation and much else besides. These are real life skills.
It was these people that David Cameron's BIG SOCIETY was aimed at, as a direct institutional assault. And it was their clients, the vulnerable who suffer doubly as a result.
And it's working.
Speak to any disabled people currently being denied benefits on the false basis of 'austerity'?
Use your voice to nurture the active grass roots, as well as to chastise the powerful.
In another comment, elsewhere, I pointed out how appalled I was at the sniping that is so common.
Instituionalised Emotional Blindness. There's something here for everyone to consider.
The immaturity of the debating style of the discourse, as opposed to an effort to share, learn and grow in order to create a more nurturant society.
An abdication of responsibility. It's really quite ugly.
Kindest regards
Corneilius
"Do what you love, it is your gift to universe."
This blog, like all my other content creation work is not monetised via advertising. If you like what I present, consider sharing my content. If you can afford the price of a cup of coffee or a pint of beer/ale/cider for a few months, please donate via my Patreon account.
Thank you for reading this blog.
https://patreon.com/corneilius - donations gratefully received
https://www.reverbnation.com/corneilius - .mp3 songs
https://www.corneilius.net - archive
https://www.soundcloud.com/coreluminous - .wav songs
No comments:
Post a Comment