Thursday, March 15, 2007

What Do We Want? Erm…

And lo it came to pass that the legislators of the land came together in the House of the People and decided that they didn’t have a ******* clue what they wanted. Songs are unlikely to be sung about it…

I’ve been trying not to write about constitutional reform, for three reasons. In the first instance, it’s far too introvertedly Lib Demmic for its own good; in the second, my ideas on the subject are radical to the extent that they make Chris Davies seem positively sane. But fundamentally there’s very little point getting into a debate about reform when most of the participants are resolutely stuck in the past.

Because when it comes down to it, all the work done on the subject by Parliament is based on the idea that the ancient primacy of the House of Commons is a sacred tradition that must be preserved. Which is fine, but it fails to pass my “Single Sarcastic Sentence” test, as in this example;

“An elected second chamber might challenge the power of the Commons? Well someone ******* has to!”

That any parliamentarian seriously thinks a watered-down elected second chamber is acceptable is nothing short of insulting to a country that has lived through ten years of New Labour execuslation. But as ever, veneration for our decrepit constitution defeats any chance of actual good governance.

Ming had it absolutely spot-on when discussing the effects of devolution last year; you cannot change individual elements in a constitution and hope it will sort itself out. The approach must be holistic, and we as a party must ensure that we have a holistic solution when the time comes.

No comments: