Democracy in Disrepute

© OECD

The United Kingdom has for long prided itself on having one of the world’s most highly regarded democracies. The history and workings of the parliamentary political system have facilitated the smooth transition of power for generations. However, recent going ons has meant that its gilded reputation has become less than sparkling. In recent times other than Tony Blair and David Cameron there hasn’t been a prime minister that has been elected into the post. Now a new prime minister is about to be chosen but by a narrow partisan political group rather than a national mandate. Of the two contenders for prime minister; one is seeking to defund civil servants who work in the North, and the other wants to defund deprived neighbourhoods all over the country. So we are left to put up with a pantomine prime minister playing out his last days; and two witless clowns spouting inanities in the slap dash scramble to succeed him in the circus.

The parliamentary and presidential political systems in the United Kingdom and United States are generally considered to be the foremost examples of the democratic process. However, neither of them actually make provision for the country prime minister or president to be elected directly by a straightforward majority count of votes. The U.K. is comprised of four nations yet in recent years the country’s prime minister has come from a political party that barely wins enough votes to come second in three of those nations. And still the prime minister is able to assume office as the leader of a United Kingdom! In America there have been two recent elections in which the winner of the presidency actually failed to win the popular vote. At least Vladimir Putin had the decency to dispense with the people’s mandate and take power by trickery and scheming. 

Across the world democratic elections now represent a trade off between partisan jingoism and nationalist fear mongering. Ideology and public service barely get a look in anymore. The notion of a democracy being a government of the people for the people has become a distant ideal. Now government’s get voted in to protect special interests. No true democracy should elect a national leader without a national vote in which the whole electorate gets a say. France’s elections are one of those to adopt this approach but even  then it doesn’t guarantee the election of a universally liked candidate. Too often a compromise has to be settled on between aspirants who might often be considered a choice between bad and worse. 

Democracy has evolved from from a political idea into a universal ideal. However, a system in which the will of the citizens is subverted by the desires of a select few is not ideal or even acceptable. However, while a powerful elite only seek to perpetuate their control and power then the majority will remain disenfranchised. 

Brexit: Theresa May's Bunker Buster

Brexit has proven to be Theresa May’s own personal Waterloo. Not so much because of the epic disaster it has turned into for her but because it has exposed her as the pedestrian politician she really is. Had David Cameron not resigned after the EU Referendum vote she would not have found herself catapulted into the role of prime minister. Had that not happened she would have continued her mediocre error prone stewardship in a ministerial capacity. 

As it is Theresa May assumed the role of prime minister promising; "Brexit means Brexit", "no deal is better than a bad deal" and the UK was about to take world trade agreements to a whole new level. What we are now left with is an ineffectual leader who has both failed to rally her own troops or put up much of a fight against her foreign opposition.

What we have seen is a prime minister who threw away her parliamentary majority, attempted (unsuccessfully) to conceal her true intentions during Brexit negotiations, and really has ended up broken and on her knees at a time the nation needs strong leadership. Theresa May has at every step of the way in the Brexit journey sacrificed sound management for political expediency. She came up with a deal that she didn't canvas support for before presenting it to the EU because she knew it was unlikely to be found acceptable by Westminster factions but she knew she could get agreement with the EU on it. This was despite the fact that she knew she had to come back to Westminster to have it ratified. Her strategy seems to have been to present Parliament with a 'fait accompli' then blame everyone else for not agreeing a deal. This was even though she knew her deal would not be agreeable to anyone.

I don't think Theresa May can be blamed for leaping at the opportunity to be prime minister. However, her almost total lack of a sense of duty that should come with the role has been startling. At every turn she seems to have opted to try and secure her position rather than secure the nation's best interests. Her initial cabinet appointments were designed to curry favour with the Brexiteers in the Conservative Party. At the early stage of negotiations with the EU she opted to go for a transitional post exit arrangement rather than embrace the nettle of actually negotiating new trade tariffs with EU. Even if she had agreed some indicative interim tariffs at that time it might have provided some reassurance to the public and economy about what to expect. Instead, she was swayed by the Business sector to go for a transitional period and remain in the Custom Union. She hadn't factored in the issue of what would happen to border arrangements in Ireland after the end of the transitional period.

Had Mrs May paused to think about the need to make some tough choices it might have occurred to her that the Republic of Ireland needed to maintain the trading status quo even more than the UK did. That is something she could have used as leverage in the negotiations rather than falling to her knees leopard skin pumps in hand begging for a transition period. By restricting her own options May allowed the Republic of Ireland to secure a veto when in fact it should have been pleading for a reasonable compromise.

At this point the British Government has run out of both ideas and time to negotiate an acceptable withdrawal from the EU. Theresa May has to take a huge part of the responsibility for that. Not only did she make a lot of wrong choices but she also appointed a lot of incompetent and uncommitted ministers. For a woman who has been the consummate political operator it appears that Theresa May’s political capital has finally run out. Unfortunately neither the nation nor history will judge her kindly and that is the tragic legacy of her long and dogged political career.