Coalition's internet 'consultation' sham as ministers reject every suggestion

[-:Undertaker:-]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...uggestion.html

It was meant to show that the new Government is in listening mode. But a major public consultation on the coalition Government’s new programme descended into farce yesterday – as it emerged ministers had rejected every single idea for change. Members of the public were invited in May to send in ideas for tackling the problems facing Britain.

Ministers were bombarded with suggestions that clash with existing policy, including restoring the death penalty, ending all immigration and pulling out of the EU. In a series of Government responses slipped out at the end of last week, departments simply restated existing policy. Labour MP Denis MacShane last nightdismissed the exercise as ‘PR gimmickry of the worst sort’. He said: ‘The Government’s job is to govern. If it runs around asking people what they want it will get answers that it can never deliver on. 'I thought the new Government was pledged to do away with this sort of thing, but they seem to have been infected by the worst of New Labour’s obsession with fake consultations.’

Simon Burall, director of Involve, which advises organisations on consultations, said: ‘You have to give the Government some credit for trying to do this, but badly designed consultations like this are worse than no consultation at all.' The initiative was the Government’s first attempt at so-called ‘crowdsourcing’, which involves drawing on the knowledge and expertise of the public to come up with new ideas. Two similar initiatives have been launched to generate ideas for cutting waste and suggest laws that can be scrapped. The latter consultation, launched by the Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg, was branded a farce after members of the public called for the repeal of a ban on marrying a horse and for drugs and murder to be legalised.

The consultation on the coalition’s programme attracted 9,500 responses from the public. The Home Office received numerous calls to stop all immigration into the UK. But in its response the department said: ‘We are pleased to see broad support for our proposal to limit migration.’ The Department for International Development was bombarded with suggestions that its entire budget should be axed. One member of the public commented: ‘If we are cutting back in the UK why should our own people suffer so we can borrow money to give away overseas?’ The department responded by saying it would stick to its pledge to spend 0.7 per cent of national income on foreign aid by 2013, adding: ‘Dropping this pledge would be a serious mistake.’

The Ministry of Justice faced numerous calls to introduce harsher sentences, including longer jail terms, the reintroduction of the death penalty and even the introduction of medieval-style punishments, such as amputating the hands of thieves. The department responded by saying it has launched a review of sentencing policy, although Justice Secretary Kenneth Clarke has already questioned the effectiveness of tough sentences for many crimes. The Foreign Office was deluged with suggestions that Britain should leave the EU. In its response the Foreign Office said it understood why ‘so many of you feel jaded and sceptical about the EU’, but made it clear the Government had no intention of quitting the EU.

Fantastic, Britain speaks and.. it's politicians aren't interested!

Thoughts?

[Robbie]

Not surprised. Cameron's all about PR gimmicks and this was just that. The 'big society' and all his other crappy schemes are just more examples of this. Ignoring the public is just going to alienate them even more. I don't expect them to implement the stupid ideas but if they can see that certain ideas are getting a very positive response from the public, why not take it further?

[MrPinkPanther]

Fantastic, Britain speaks and.. it's politicians aren't interested!

Thoughts?

What? Thats why we have an elections. The thing is this was a flawed plan from the start. They were never going to be able to introduce every policy because people have different view points, of course they weren't going to reintroduce the death penalty just because one person called for it. It had good intent, I fully agree with that but it was never going to work.

[-:Undertaker:-]

What? Thats why we have an elections. The thing is this was a flawed plan from the start. They were never going to be able to introduce every policy because people have different view points, of course they weren't going to reintroduce the death penalty just because one person called for it. It had good intent, I fully agree with that but it was never going to work.

Oh i'm sure more than one person asked for the death penalty back, I would gurantee that. No it was not good intent at all, just another spin job from the Liberal Democrats and the Conservative Party - because in reality they are never going to listen and do not want to listen and the same goes for the Labour Party. This is important to point out (as are other stories) because its worth it even if just one person wakes up to smell the coffee.

The same happened at the election and continues to happen in parliament between the government and the 'opposition' - they all agree on crime & justice, they all agree on foreign affairs, they all agree on the welfare state, they all agree on the EU - they agree on virtually everything but each time an election comes around, one usually pretends to make a big fuss on one issue when in reality its a dud-issue (the Conservatives and Labour arguing over £6 billion worth of cuts - complete and utter farce). The same happens everytime with the Labour & Conservative Parties; in 1997 and while in opposition Labour was eurosceptic - then the Tories turned eurosceptic to win votes and now they have swapped places with Labour again.

[alexxxxx]

the most passionate shout the loudest.

[MrPinkPanther]

The same happened at the election and continues to happen in parliament between the government and the 'opposition' - they all agree on crime & justice, they all agree on foreign affairs, they all agree on the welfare state, they all agree on the EU.

Its populism. They give the public what they want to hear. Thats why the Conservative party from the right towards the centre, they were unelectable in their current form. I accept that most people don't agree with Liberal Democrat policies and thats why they didn't get the greatest share of the vote, you need to accept that the vast majority of people support the three main parties and thats why they received almost all of the vote. UKIP should have more seats in parliament, as should every other medium sized party but the fact is they didn't win for a reason. People don't agree with them.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Its populism. They give the public what they want to hear. Thats why the Conservative party from the right towards the centre, they were unelectable in their current form. I accept that most people don't agree with Liberal Democrat policies and thats why they didn't get the greatest share of the vote, you need to accept that the vast majority of people support the three main parties and thats why they received almost all of the vote. UKIP should have more seats in parliament, as should every other medium sized party but the fact is they didn't win for a reason. People don't agree with them.

But polls show that people do agree with them. You yourself know how FPTP works and how it locks in the main parties (Labour and Conservatives mainly) and the fact is that people will not bother voting if they do not believe a party has no chance, hence why Labour politicians and ministers were urging all Labour supporters to come out and vote as it was predicted that many would simply not bother to vote.

I will give an example of how flawed the system is and why it keeps the main parties in power;

Under the current system the results of this years General elction were:

Con-306
Lab-258
Lib-57
SNP-6
PC-3
DU-8
Gre-1
SF-5
SDLP-3
Others-4

Under AV the election results would be as follows:

Con-281
Lab-262
Lib-79
SNP-6
PC-3
DU-8
Gre-1
SF-5
SDLP-3
Others-4

Under PR the election results would be as follows:

Con-234
Lab-189
Lib-149
SNP-11
PC-4
DU-4
Gre-6
SF-4
SDLP-2
UKIP-21
BNP-12
C&U-2
EDP-1
others-11

Polls showing support for EU withdrawal for example are common, however pro-EU parties continue to govern the country. The same happens with various issues from crime & justice, foreign policy, taxation and various other issues. The same can also be said for newspaper sales - in which right-wing papers sell far better than left wing papers and greatly outnumber them. The only way a small party has a chance in FPTP is to break the perception that its impossible to win, when in reality - to break that mindset you have to win in the first place.

[Inseriousity.]

The death penalty argument recieved a rating of 2.4, 2.1, 1.8 out of 5.

http://yourfreedom.hmg.gov.uk/repeal...eath-penalty-1

http://yourfreedom.hmg.gov.uk/restor...dealth-penalty

http://yourfreedom.hmg.gov.uk/repeal...-no-exceptions

I won't look for the others but maybe there are more lefties (as you put it) than you realise. Newspaper sales aren't everything, I don't buy one, for example. With the internet more accessible and news online, there isn't much point!

edit: However, I do agree the voting system's wrong. I wonder how many 'independants' would get voted in if it wasn't seen as a wasted vote.

[xxMATTGxx]

The only one I commented on and it has 2019 votes!

http://yourfreedom.hmg.gov.uk/restor...l-economy-bill

Dam governments.

[MrPinkPanther]

The only one I commented on and it has 2019 votes!

http://yourfreedom.hmg.gov.uk/restor...l-economy-bill

Dam governments.

No one but Labour want the Digital Economy act. I'm leading a local campaign to lobby MPs to repeal the act.