Money, Government constitutional change and Local Liberation…

There is an interesting article in the FT that suggests we should be abolishing the House of Lords in order to fix the democratic deficit.

Regional inequality, the same article suggests, is entwined with the democratic deficit.

I rather thought that the democratic deficit was something that was supposed to be unique to the EU – but it seems still to exist under Brexiter rule in the UK…

Oh well – the article states

While money is important for tackling the decades-long disparities across England, power and local leadership are more crucial.


Surely without the power of money creation you are always subservient.

Money creation is power and vice versa.

So regional inequality is really about money creation – and local authorities should be allowed to create it- just as government does. (And of course, as private banks do as loans. )

That would be local liberation.

Nonetheless I would endorse the FT sentiments of co-opting local authority representatives into a second house – it could actually make local elections more important.

And it is also what they do in France.

The disadvantage is that the UK prevents non elected members being a member of the executive government- so, for example, Zac Goldsmith, defeated in an election as he was, could not be a government member, as he now is, simply because he could not be appointed, as he’d need to be actually elected.

Yet, for example none of the US presidential cabinet is elected, but are simply confirmed – or not – by the Senate.

In France, by contrast the President appoints a Prime Minister from the elected representatives in the Assemblée Nationale and then the Prime Minister’s cabinet is so formed from other members.

The resultant ‘Conseil des Ministres’ is still led by the Prime Minister – but attended by the President.

From all this, we can, I suggest, conclude that a UK Prime Minister is, when he has a majority in the House of Commons, nationally, more powerful than almost any of his fellow national leaders.

He or she has absolutist power, which is, I’d suggest highly undesirable.

When we have a UK government not run by, as Peter Hennessy would say, decent chaps, we are snookered.

We really do need more local control and also proper constitutional change…

Write a reply or comment Comments Policy

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Name *