Peter Oborne, the Daily Telegraph’s chief political commentator, has a blogpost in which he endorses the candidacy of John Prescott in his attempt to secure the position of Police Commissioner in Humberside.
Oborne writes that:
“There’s something absolutely wonderful about Lord Prescott’s bid for power in his home town. He’s been a Cabinet minister, deputy prime minister and deputy leader of the Labour party. He’s had almost every job any ambitious politician could ever hope for.
Most members of the Labour Cabinet he served in are now off doing rather grubby jobs in the private sector and feathering their nest, whereas John Prescott, well into his 70s, is still filled with the desire to serve.”
For starters, the only reason Prescott secured the positions of Deputy Leader and Deputy Prime Minister was as a sop to the the ‘hard left’ of the Labour party when Blair became Leader – and to act as a mediator twixt the egos of Blair and Brown. Like any politician, Prescott’s “need to serve” is utter b/shit – it is purely about retaining some position of power – and in the process “feathering his own nest”. Needless to say, had it been down to ‘ability’ and ‘capability’ Prescott would no doubt have served out his working days as a ship’s steward – oh and the difference between ‘most members of the Labour Cabinet in which he served’ – and Prescott, is…….?
“The Coalition – our programme for goverment” – yup, that mandate on which no-one had been given the opportunity for which to vote – states in Section 6, page 13:
“We will introduce measures to make the police more accountable through oversight by a directly elected individual, who will be subject to strict checks and balances by locally elected representatives.”
This idea of a “local sheriff was ‘nicked’ from Hannan/Carswell’s series of papers under the title of “Direct Democracy” (a misnomer if ever there was one), or subtitled “the Localist Papers”, published by the Centre for Policy Studies and subsequently serialised in the Daily Telegraph – and as is the way of our centrally-controlling political class, it was then ‘watered-down’.
In February of this year I posted on the ‘bartardization’ of the Hannan/Carswell idea of “Local Sheriffs”, a post which readers may well wish to re-read. What has resulted from the Coalition’s plans is, in effect, the politicisation of the police force as the political parties have allowed their candidates to stand under a ‘party ticket’. One only has to refer to the comment by “elizabeth”, who writes:
“This morning a Labour spokesperson said that while Labour initially objected to the role of Police Commissioner being created, they had decided to enter Labour representatives for the post to enable them to hold the government to account for all the police budget cuts. Great. Not to represent the local people as intended – but to yet again use and abuse a position in order to attack the Coalition. Just what we need Mr. Oborne ? I thought this article may be a wind-up – but the last two sentences suggest otherwise.”
Contrary to that which I asserted in the post from February of this year, I have tracked down an on-line version of the particular paper in Hannan/Carswell’s series, the one entitled “Send for the Sheriff“. While I hold no brief for “The Plan”, or for all the suggestions of the “Localist Papers”, what is beyond question is that the political class have once again ‘misled’ the electorate in a manifesto.
If this is democracy, as presented to us by the political class, then I spit on it, as I spit on the leaders of all political parties whose only objective is to control us, as I spit on all those members of their parties who, once elected, ‘bend their knee’ to their leaders to ensure that they do not endure the ignominy of suffering ‘deselection’ and thus losing their positions of privilege.
And this country is not rotten? And the answer to all our ‘ills’ is not the adoption of the Harrogate Agenda?