The Erosion of Parliamentary Government JOHN MAJOR CENTRE FOR POLICY STUDIES 57 Tufton Street London SW1P 3QL 2003 THE AUTHOR THE RT HON JOHN MAJOR CH was Prime Minister of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from 1990 to 1997, having previously served as Foreign Secretary and Chancellor of the Exchequer. He was a Conservative Member of Parliament for Huntingdon from 1979 to 2001. Since leaving politics, he has returned to business in the private sector. He also lectures around the world and is active in many charities. The aim of the Centre for Policy Studies is to develop and promote policies that provide freedom and encouragement for individuals to pursue the aspirations they have for themselves and their families, within the security and obligations of a stable and law-abiding nation. The views expressed in our publications are, however, the sole responsibility of the authors. Contributions are chosen for their value in informing public debate and should not be taken as representing a corporate view of the CPS or of its Directors. The CPS values its independence and does not carry on activities with the intention of affecting public support for any registered political party or for candidates at election, or to influence voters in a referendum. ISBN No. 1 903219 62 0 Centre for Policy Studies, October 2003 Printed by The Chameleon Press, 5 – 25 Burr Road, London SW18 CONTENTS Prologue 1. The Decline of Democracy 1 2. The Decline of Parliament 3 3. The Politicisation of the Civil Service 9 4. The Manipulation of Government Information 12 5. Conclusion 16 PROLOGUE IN THE SIX YEARS SINCE LEAVING DOWNING STREET, I have been approached almost daily to express my views on the Government, the Opposition or the issue of the moment. Generally, I have resisted. As well I know, government is a tricky business and I have a degree of sympathy for the mistakes that are sometimes made – often for reasons not apparent to the casual observer. And so, by and large, I have kept my counsel and remained silent – even when provoked by former friend or foe. It has not always been easy but it has been right. The resignation of Alastair Campbell and the evidence revealed to the Hutton Inquiry have drawn attention to much that is wrong in the way that New Labour governs our country. But these, and the many other similar issues that have arisen over the last few years, are merely symptoms of a far deeper malaise: a malaise that is undermining Parliamentary democracy itself. I do not pretend that we have reached the point at which this is irreversible. But I do believe that if we do not act now, then it may become too late. In such a situation it is necessary to speak out. And – perhaps – it would even be cowardly not to do so. When style and substance intermingle in politics, substance must predominate: where it does not, the fall-out can be unpredictable and far-reaching. New Labour’s obsession with spin, with style, with perception, has given it great presentational successes. But our political system has paid a high price as, on occasion, have its own most skilful practitioners. Slick presentation has proved to be the forerunner of distrust. CHAPTER ONE THE DECLINE OF DEMOCRACY WE TAKE DEMOCRACY SO MUCH for granted in our country that we scarcely notice any longer whether it exists; how it is exercised; or the ways in which it is being undermined. The visible structures appear intact: mature political parties; a universal adult franchise; free elections with a specified maximum term of office; a two-tier Parliament supreme in authority; an independent Head of State; the rule of law; an impartial Civil Service; a free press; traditions of behaviour that amount to hidden institutional safeguards and restraints.1 It is familiar and comforting. Indeed, so familiar and comforting that we have scarcely noticed that the timbers which support it are creaking and diseased; and are in danger of collapse. The structures remain but many of them are being hollowed out. The erosion is evident from the top to the bottom. At the grassroots, our political parties are shrinking in membership from mass movements to the size of special interest groups. The old convictions and prejudices that sustained them through the generations have been replaced by widespread disinterest and complacency. The broad mass of the nation is detached from politics. Many feel a distaste for it. They do not share the ancient tribal loyalties and look askance at the enthusiasts who underpin our system, attend party conferences, and work for the local party machine. W S Gilbert once wrote that _____________________________________________________________ 1 Such as consultation and, if possible, consensus on constitutional change. 1 THE EROSION OF PARLIAMENTARY DEMOCRACY every child was “a little Liberal or a little Conservative”. If any lyricist did so today, he or she would be regarded as seriously out of touch. Our democracy owes a great debt to grassroots activists. But that should not blind us to the reality that all the party machines are moribund, near bankrupt, unrepresentative and ill-equipped to re-enthuse the electorate as a whole. Nothing is clear cut any more. These days, New Labour ministers are political cross-dressers with a policy portfolio borrowed heavily from their Conservative predecessors and a hard nose for social policy that a Victorian capitalist would envy. No wonder our largely apolitical electorate is puzzled. But it is not the only puzzle. The widespread (but mistaken) view that “they’re all the same” and “nothing makes any difference” has led to a General Election turnout of under 60%, with the “don’t knows” and the “won’t votes” scoring as highly as the winning party. The campaigners for universal suffrage would have agonised had they lived to see such a day. No-one should dismiss the turnout at the last election as a “blip”, brought about solely because New Labour was unappealing and the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats unready. The malaise is deep and is getting worse: it needs to be understood and acted upon. 2 CHAPTER TWO THE DECLINE OF PARLIAMENT THE ROT IN OUR POLITICAL SYSTEM is not only at its roots: it is evident in Parliament, too. The behaviour of individual MPs is the lesser part of the mosaic of disregard for Parliament but it cannot be ignored. Parliament has always contained a number of bad hats. But their ruthless exposure over the last decade, aggravated by the unappealing public response of some of the miscreants, has been damaging. In the 1990s, the Labour spin machine in opposition, allied to elements of a receptive media, was so successful in labelling the Conservative Party as a whole with the sins of individual members, that it was able to damn the Conservative Government, too. But the appetite for scandal, once awakened, is not easily sated and, since 1997, it has repeatedly come back to harm and undermine New Labour. The failings of a minority of politicians should not be allowed to get out of proportion. Most Members of Parliament have standards comparable to the general public and the Commons is big enough to deal with the abuses of those that do not: far more dangerous is the institutional undermining of our political system. This arises if any major party is careless of Parliamentary traditions and propriety; if its use of power becomes an abuse of it; if it resorts to character assassination as a political weapon. From time to time, our present Government has demonstrated all these traits. New Labour has certainly not been ‘purer than pure’: the Prime Minister’s famous promise has not been kept. Since 1997, New Labour offenders have been far closer to the centre of power 3 THE EROSION OF PARLIAMENTARY DEMOCRACY than their much-maligned predecessors: moreover, there is a perception that New Labour’s failings may have influenced government policy.2 This charge is vigorously denied. But the suspicion is vivid enough for it to linger since the age of spin has made reality of perception. And the perceptions are damaging. When senior members of the Labour Party were investigated by the Parliamentary Commissioner, there appeared to be an organised attempt to obstruct the inquiries or to withhold proper co-operation. This perception deepened when the Prime Minister established a Committee to examine issues relating to Standards in Public Life and then refused to let his own key officials appear before it. These are murky depths. It is no surprise that many of the public are disillusioned with politics. All these are factors in the fall in the reputation of the House of Commons. There are wider elements as well. While some of these are inevitable they have rendered it less influential in our lives. Nowadays, vital decisions are often decided in wider fora: in the G7, the UN or – most likely – the EU. This is understood broadly by electors but resented bitterly by swathes of opinion – with the European Union a special target. An antipathy to the EU is the Approved Text for many politicians and commentators. This is not the place to examine this phenomenon in depth, except to note that it does reflect the unease felt by many people that decisions affecting the UK are no longer the sole prerogative of our Parliament. The fact that it is part of our bargain with Europe – we surrender some of our powers and gain some of theirs – does not assuage deeply felt reservations. The House of Commons is losing control over decision making and, as it does so, many in the electorate look on in disinterest, not least because of the peripheral factors that have brought politics into disrepute.