Monday, 22 October 2007

Now Here's A Thought

In response to a previous post came the following anonymous comment:

He [i.e., I] should tell this nasty East German Block Party operation [the Electoral Commission] where to go. In fact as many people as possible should set up mass parties like this through the media and the blogosphere and refuse to have anything to do with this "Commission". Like the Liberal who got rid of ID cards after the War. A "Commission" to decide which political parties are and aren't allowed to exist? Has Britain really come to this?

In reply to which, one Bob wrote:

Not registering things like this is what the Electoral Commission was set up for. It can cope with joke parties and politically fringe parties. But a serious, mainstream alternative to the Establishment cartel parties is exactly what it was invented to prevent. Look at its persecution of UKIP, for a start. And that's just a glorified golf club. It would have a field day with the BPA.

Anonymous 2:35 PM is right, people who want proper parties should just set them up anyway, with enough publicity that the Electoral Commission would be visibly interfering in the electoral process by insisting on "registration" (State/Political Class approval).

Of course that is the whole point of it. But it can't really be seen to be, can it?

Quite. But we were actually going to register this with the Electoral Commission, or at least try to. And we might yet.

However, I really am beginning to wonder. If enough people who insisted on proper parties set them up and secured enough support to make themselves well-known at least locally, then the Electoral Commission would stand exposed for what it really is if it tried to keep their names of the ballot paper because the necessary "State/Political Class approval" had not been received, not only for those names (obscenity, libel and so forth were already covered by the law), but also, let the reader understand, for the Constitution (including the Aims and Objectives) and the Party Leader. All of these things currently require "State/Political Class approval". For a fee!

Away with it all! We must refuse, point blank, to stand by and let Britain descend into something like the old East Germany, never the worst Eastern Bloc country (not that that's saying much), but still ghastly, and kept that way largely because ostensibly separate parties which merely appeared to embody different political traditions (liberal, Christian Democratic, even ex-Nazi, as well as Marxist), and which certainly appealed to different sections of society accordingly, contested sham elections which were incapable of changing anything because all of those parties were really exactly the same, and were even being run as a single organisation.

A device like the Electoral Commission belongs to that sort of country, not to the Britain that we know, love, and are utterly determined to preserve and restore. Should we therefore refuse to have anything to do with it, dare it to do its worst, and encourage others (right across the political spectrum) to do likewise? Or should we, albeit regretfully, accept that that would get in the way of fighting the bigger battles? What do people think?


  1. You don't want to make it too easy for them, so you might as well register. But yes it's disgraceful that this thing exists in Britain. Even the Leader and the Aims & Objectives have to be approved, good God!

  2. And it's going to get worse. State funding, and closed party lists for the second chamber. The BPA is the last hope.

  3. Wont pay the money to register then? If you cant even afford to register with the Commission how do you plan to contest every seat in the country?

  4. It's the principle.

    Still, we probably will in the end, so that we can fry the bigger fish.

    Just how many people know, or would even believe, that political parties' names, Leaders, and Aims and Objectives, all have to be approved by the government? Yet such is in fact the case.

    Give that a moment to sink in, and then ask yourself exactly which country this is supposed to be. Well, let's make this that country again.

  5. And charge for the privilege. Yes, that is the banana republic that Britain has become.

    After this, State funding, party lists, and who dares imagine what else.

    Labour and the Tories are already dependent on a billionaire each, at least one of whom is a non-dom. And he's the Labour one!

    But through this "Commission" they can block any attempt to set up a serious alternative party.

    Like I said, a banana republic.

  6. but that's not the case though is it? The Leader, Aims and Objectives are not "approved" by the Commission, they just have to be registered.

  7. They can say no. They sometimes do.

    The whole concept is throughly objectionable, but I suppose that we are going to have to go through it in order to get rid of it. Aren't we?

    None of the three old parties would ever have started if this sort of thing had been in place. That's why it's now in place.

  8. I think we can safely say that they wouldn't dare give you any trouble now. Old fashioned politics, David. Wherever did you learn about that?

  9. Whom have they said no to, and why?

  10. They've never before been faced with a mainstream alternative to the Block Parties.

    When UKIP looked like it was picking up middle-of-the-road votes (middle-of-the-road opinion in the country at large being in fact Eurosceptical), they went for its jugular, even though it was never a very serious outfit to begin with. Kilroy? I ask you!

    So they'd merrily strangle the very serious BPA in the cradle. That's what they are for.

  11. Well, we shall see, won't we? It looks like we're going to have to put ourselves through it. Officially, it exists to ensure financially clean politics. Doing a grand job, isn't it?

  12. Oh I am sure that David will judge the situation correctly, as he always does.

  13. You are very kind, Clive. Welcome back.