The New Constitution
Posted by thenewconstitution on 1 January, 2007
Welcome to the New Constitution Blog. This blog aims to give a perspective of British Politics that is all but ignored by the mainstream media. I believe the current political scene in the United Kingdom is stagnant because of centuries of political defeatism. I hope to highlight some of the injustices in our political landscape, and suggest alternatives.
As such, I hope to compile an extensive document outlining my theories for a better, more just constitution for the United Kingdom. I hope to use this blog to cover issues of constitutional importance as they occur, and ultimately add them to The New Constitution.
For starters, I can give you a brief summary of what I would change.
1. Abolish the monarchy.
2. Real, radical reform of the House of Lords – or the abolition thereof.
3. Implement a proportional electoral system in the United Kingdom.
4. Set out key principles in human rights, including:
a. Right to peaceful protest in all circumstances
b. Right to trial by jury in all circumstances
c. Right to freedom from control orders, etc, unless charged with an offence.
5. Renationalise certain industries, including:
a. Bus services
b. Train services
c. Water supplies
d. Electricity supplies
… and much more.
In the coming weeks and months, I will add to this list and suggest a New Constitution, founded on liberal principles. And all the while, I will comment on British politics, and analyse the mainstream media coverage thereof. I hope you will join me for my voyage through the smokescreen of the status quo to a political system the world will envy.
Cranmer said
Dear New Constitution,
His Grace is not persuaded of the merits of any of your ‘what you would change’ priorities.
And, moreover, he can think of nothing worse than a constitution forged on the likes and dislikes, weaknesses and foibles, prejudices and ignorance of the bloggong public. The Constitution is far too important to be subject to the whims of the zeitgeist, and the sophist should have no place in its formulation.
That said, His Grace warmly welcomes you and your blog, and wishes you blessings for the New Year.
Buenaventura Durruti said
Government institutions and a constitution are important but not the be all and end of it. At the first (and last) lecture on political theory I attended at Keele University some idiot lecturer told me: ‘on the continent [spoken with distaste] you’d hear a lot about the state but here in Britain we know the state is just an idea but government is about concrete institutions’. But we all know that power is about far more than written laws or constitutions.
Oh, I didn’t give up on the course just recognised that reading the paper took less time than attending the lectures and would be at least as useful in passing the exam.
But on the constitution do not forget the complete separation of church and state, and the removal of charitable status from (1) religious organisations apart from their ‘charitable activities’ (eg the Church of England Children’s Society but not the CoE; (2) any supposedly educational institution who’s admission procedures and charges do not comply with the guidelines laid down by the relevant elected local educational authority.
thenewconstitution said
I can see a religious theme so far…
I learned from the playground that it’s not usually good to be called words that you don’t understand, but thank Cranmer for his comments nonetheless.
On the other point, I consider the matter of the separation of Church and state pretty clear-cut. If the monarch goes, so does the last remaining archaic link between two naturally dissimilar institutions. There should, of course, be no link between them.
Cranmer said
His Garce has not called anyone names.
On sophistry, he was referring to the salesmanesque imperative inherent in being a politician. Formulating a constitution when one is dependent on one’s popularity for being elected is likely to result in a constitution which necessarily promises Utopia but delivers nothing but purgatory.
Attempting to formulate a constitution by blog, when you have already set out your absolutes, is hardly approaching the subject with an open mind…
thenewconstitution said
“Attempting to formulate a constitution by blog, when you have already set out your absolutes, is hardly approaching the subject with an open mind…”
Call me facetious, but I would hate to see something written if it had no standpoint to start from. A Tory blogger will, naturally, write from that viewpoint, as will a Labour supporter. I am merely suggesting what I think would be a good set of principles upon which to build a nation. Having an opinion on what those should be is surely a good thing!
If I may also point out that our current constitution is a product of centuries of tweaking by successive governments: it is already written by those dependent upon their popularity to enact it. It is simply because this it is not currently a Utopia that a new one is necessary.
Ross Cowling said
“I am merely suggesting what I think would be a good set of principles upon which to build a nation”
What you are suggesting is not a set of principles at all, they are merely things which you would like to change with the current system by which this country is governed.
billy said
No.1 = No Monarchy!
There’s a principle I can agree with.
No.2 = No unelected government.
There’s another.