Further devolution

The Conservatives yesterday in a speech by their leader laid out the several ways in which they would move power and decision much nearer to "the people".

Among other proposals, they wish to repatriate powers to local authorities in areas such as finance and planning, and to abolish the unaccountable and central-government-stooges in the regional planning development boards. It is in the power directly to voters that the proposals are revolutionary rather than merely turning back the clock. Voters will be able to elect (and and perhaps fail to re-elect) police commissioners, and also mayors in the large cities where they elect to have them. They will also be able to call for a referendum and hold a vote in such items as the council budget and proposed rates. They will be able to make decision on the number and type of new housing to be built.

There will be many established interests who will oppose all this from their special interest positions or ideologies. There have already been claims that planning has to be on a massive scale, and that electors when once they have exercised wise choice in electing councillors (or MPs) are incapable of understanding large issues. (The logical extension of this latter point is that they should not have a a vote at all!)

Vast layers of bureaucracy and administrative costs and time would be saved, and people affected would be able to express their wishes, have an interest and actually turn out to vote at local elections - this would be really revolutionary!

There is still an objection that all must remember, that in an elective democracy 51% of the voters can impose their will on the other 49%. (In fact, as we see at Westminster with multi party voting, we have at present a dictatorial government returned by less than 40% of electors and we rarely have a government party with in excess of 50%.) To avoid civil strife such majority decisions must be kept to a minimum.)

On his website yesterday Jeremy Hunt the shadow minister for Media, etc., commented from his brief. Why not, he asked, extend this to broadcasting as well? He pointed out that Birmingham, Alabama, has a population of 230,000, but has 8 local TV stations, while Birmingham, UK, four times as large, has none. The stations in Alabama compete for local advertising moneys and for viewers. They stay in business only if they are successful in reflecting viewers' needs and opinions. Hunt promised that any incoming Conservative government would make it easier for local TV than it is at the moment.