Kenneth Roy
Paxman now reserves
the right to address a guest
as ‘Mr Idiot’
The Cafe
Bone and Black
Eileen Reid
A radical cure for
the partisan blight
on Scotland
John Cameron
Why so few volunteers?
David Torrance
The second question
in the referendum
is the vital one
The Cafe
A remedy for our lack of sunshine
Barbara Millar
The woman with three
months to live was told
to move to the corridor
Rear Window
A rebellious teacher
Islay McLeod
Memories
of summer:
a photo-essay
Friends of SR
We need your help
06.10.11
No. 461
John Cameron
The closing years of my career as a parish minister were clouded by the increasing difficulty I experienced in recruiting volunteers to help with church youth activities.
Given the obstacles placed in the way of anyone wanting to help, I suppose it is hardly surprising that the number of people volunteering in Britain is drying up.
A survey from the Office for National Statistics of the proportion of the population ‘engaged in civil participation’ showed a fall from 40 to 25% in the last decade.
Undoubtedly the biggest disincentive to volunteering has been the increasingly onerous regulatory impositions on those who wish to give of their time. From football coaches to parents merely wishing to help out in their children’s school, millions of volunteers have been forced to submit to criminal record checks. Even elderly ladies volunteering their services as flower arrangers in English cathedrals open to the public on weekdays have found themselves caught up in this nonsense.
While it is clearly important to keep children safe, this is unlikely to be achieved by discouraging well-meaning adults from helping out in their communities. A disproportionate obsession with health and safety and an irrational aversion to risk has made volunteering needlessly expensive, bureaucratic and intrusive.
The root of the problem is partly the Human Rights Act and partly ‘big government’ with its mania for micro-managing the lives of everyone from cradle to grave. There is no need for CRB checks when what is required is a register of those convicted of the sort of offence which makes them unsuitable for work with children or the vulnerable.
Having volunteers repeatedly waiting months for details of their past lives to be given to potential ’employers’ in an effort to exclude this minority is just plain daft.
Only a jobsworth with a totalitarian mentality could have come up with such a mindless response to the tragic – but mercifully extremely rare – murder of innocents.
A radical cure for
the partisan blight
on Scotland
Eileen Reid
The party conference should be scrapped. We are in the midst of a global economic crisis. Our representatives and leaders are making us nervous with their conference speeches and gaffes: either because of their trepidation as to how to resolve our economic troubles or, and sometimes worse, are so certain of the road to recovery that no Plan B is required. But the party conference also flags that we are also in the midst of a political crisis.
While the Arab Spring reminds us that right enough, democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried, it cannot be ignored that hundreds of thousands of ordinary people around the globe – from the ‘indignados’ of Spain, to the Indians fighting corruption in Delhi, to the Israelis taking to the streets in protest against their leaders from all parties, to the occupation of Wall Street – are becoming more and more disillusioned with the democratic political process.
To keep faith with democratic politics the widespread and deep-seated malaise that has crept into our political culture needs to be addressed. It is true that democracy has never been as popular in the history of ideas as it has with the general public. But the traditional concern of political philosophers, going back to Plato, that democracy leads to the tyranny of the majority, has largely been addressed and ameliorated. Even those with an absolute majority at the ballot box must govern within the confines set by agreed constitutions (or equivalent) which lays down the principles and rules designed to protect all, regardless of political affiliation. The modern problem of democracy is that voters are beginning to suspect that their genuine concerns cannot be addressed through the traditional democratic process.
Politicians seem more responsive to powerful interest groups than the individual. Interest groups and lobbyists do have an inordinate influence on governments. But this is exacerbated by the existence of one particular kind of interest group: the political party. Suspicion of political parties has a long history. Plato and Rousseau pointed out long ago that political parties inevitably give rise to partisanship, factionalism, and with it the dispiriting pandering to interest groups.
Rousseau, the proto-Marxist, warned that in representative democracies ‘Factions arise, and partial associations are formed at the expense of the great association’. But the democrat George Washington echoed Rousseau in his Farewell to the Union address: political parties have an unavoidable tendency to place the good of a section above the good of society as a whole. Political parties by their very nature divide a country and its communities by actively promoting the interests of their respective bases at the expense of the others.
In Scotland partisanship is prevalent at every level. This troubling
tendency is a blight on our culture. But partisanship and sectarianism
has reached new heights at a time when we need it least.
Listen to most politicians today and it is easy to hear partisanship at work. The unseemly debacle over raising the debt ceiling which pitted Democrats against Republicans two months ago is only one of many examples. But given the entrenchment of the party political system we should expect nothing different. Party politicians have little incentive to concern themselves with the good of the country as a whole. This is not a moral failing but the inevitable result of the party political process. Great leaders usually buck the system.
In Scotland partisanship is prevalent at every level. This troubling tendency is a blight on our culture. But partisanship and sectarianism has reached new heights at a time when we need it least. That Scotland has an extraordinary opportunity to unite and plan for the future of our small country is being seriously damaged by party conflict. Politicians often have to agree with policies and decisions they genuinely do not like. They also have to pretend not to agree with policies they do agree with. How is good debate possible when intellectual honesty can damage your career? What impact has this had on the general calibre of those seeking to represent us?
How can an advanced democracy conduct its political affairs without parties? A direct democracy a la Rousseau is one impractical solution. For an interesting answer to this question, visit the webpage of the government of the north-west territories in Canada. Their legislative assembly operates as any traditional legislature, but there are no political parties in their consensus system. Potential members of the assembly stand as independents in their respective constituencies.
Once elected the members meet to choose from their number six ministers and a premier by secret ballot to form the cabinet. Those not selected act as the official opposition. Then matters proceed as normal, bills being passed if they receive an absolute majority in the assembly. But every member of the assembly had to be elected on merit. And no one has a natural base of voters that is narrower than the entire electorate in each of the constituencies.
It is far harder to be in hock to any narrow interest group in such a system, and so the good of the whole tends to be prioritised, as it should. The level of debate is higher, as one would expect; and as yet there are no ‘indignados’ in the north- west territories. And just think, there would be no more conferences.
Eileen Reid is head of widening participation, Glasgow School of Art, writing here in a personal capacity.
in the referendum
is the vital one
The Cafe
A remedy for our lack of sunshine
Barbara Millar
The woman with three
months to live was told
to move to the corridor
Rear Window
A rebellious teacher
Islay McLeod
Memories
of summer:
a photo-essay
Friends of SR
We need your help
06.10.11
No. 461
John Cameron
The closing years of my career as a parish minister were clouded by the increasing difficulty I experienced in recruiting volunteers to help with church youth activities.
Given the obstacles placed in the way of anyone wanting to help, I suppose it is hardly surprising that the number of people volunteering in Britain is drying up.
A survey from the Office for National Statistics of the proportion of the population ‘engaged in civil participation’ showed a fall from 40 to 25% in the last decade.
Undoubtedly the biggest disincentive to volunteering has been the increasingly onerous regulatory impositions on those who wish to give of their time. From football coaches to parents merely wishing to help out in their children’s school, millions of volunteers have been forced to submit to criminal record checks. Even elderly ladies volunteering their services as flower arrangers in English cathedrals open to the public on weekdays have found themselves caught up in this nonsense.
While it is clearly important to keep children safe, this is unlikely to be achieved by discouraging well-meaning adults from helping out in their communities. A disproportionate obsession with health and safety and an irrational aversion to risk has made volunteering needlessly expensive, bureaucratic and intrusive.
The root of the problem is partly the Human Rights Act and partly ‘big government’ with its mania for micro-managing the lives of everyone from cradle to grave. There is no need for CRB checks when what is required is a register of those convicted of the sort of offence which makes them unsuitable for work with children or the vulnerable.
Having volunteers repeatedly waiting months for details of their past lives to be given to potential ’employers’ in an effort to exclude this minority is just plain daft.
Only a jobsworth with a totalitarian mentality could have come up with such a mindless response to the tragic – but mercifully extremely rare – murder of innocents.
A radical cure for
the partisan blight
on Scotland
Eileen Reid
The party conference should be scrapped. We are in the midst of a global economic crisis. Our representatives and leaders are making us nervous with their conference speeches and gaffes: either because of their trepidation as to how to resolve our economic troubles or, and sometimes worse, are so certain of the road to recovery that no Plan B is required. But the party conference also flags that we are also in the midst of a political crisis.
While the Arab Spring reminds us that right enough, democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried, it cannot be ignored that hundreds of thousands of ordinary people around the globe – from the ‘indignados’ of Spain, to the Indians fighting corruption in Delhi, to the Israelis taking to the streets in protest against their leaders from all parties, to the occupation of Wall Street – are becoming more and more disillusioned with the democratic political process.
To keep faith with democratic politics the widespread and deep-seated malaise that has crept into our political culture needs to be addressed. It is true that democracy has never been as popular in the history of ideas as it has with the general public. But the traditional concern of political philosophers, going back to Plato, that democracy leads to the tyranny of the majority, has largely been addressed and ameliorated. Even those with an absolute majority at the ballot box must govern within the confines set by agreed constitutions (or equivalent) which lays down the principles and rules designed to protect all, regardless of political affiliation. The modern problem of democracy is that voters are beginning to suspect that their genuine concerns cannot be addressed through the traditional democratic process.
Politicians seem more responsive to powerful interest groups than the individual. Interest groups and lobbyists do have an inordinate influence on governments. But this is exacerbated by the existence of one particular kind of interest group: the political party. Suspicion of political parties has a long history. Plato and Rousseau pointed out long ago that political parties inevitably give rise to partisanship, factionalism, and with it the dispiriting pandering to interest groups.
Rousseau, the proto-Marxist, warned that in representative democracies ‘Factions arise, and partial associations are formed at the expense of the great association’. But the democrat George Washington echoed Rousseau in his Farewell to the Union address: political parties have an unavoidable tendency to place the good of a section above the good of society as a whole. Political parties by their very nature divide a country and its communities by actively promoting the interests of their respective bases at the expense of the others.
In Scotland partisanship is prevalent at every level. This troubling
tendency is a blight on our culture. But partisanship and sectarianism
has reached new heights at a time when we need it least.
Listen to most politicians today and it is easy to hear partisanship at work. The unseemly debacle over raising the debt ceiling which pitted Democrats against Republicans two months ago is only one of many examples. But given the entrenchment of the party political system we should expect nothing different. Party politicians have little incentive to concern themselves with the good of the country as a whole. This is not a moral failing but the inevitable result of the party political process. Great leaders usually buck the system.
In Scotland partisanship is prevalent at every level. This troubling tendency is a blight on our culture. But partisanship and sectarianism has reached new heights at a time when we need it least. That Scotland has an extraordinary opportunity to unite and plan for the future of our small country is being seriously damaged by party conflict. Politicians often have to agree with policies and decisions they genuinely do not like. They also have to pretend not to agree with policies they do agree with. How is good debate possible when intellectual honesty can damage your career? What impact has this had on the general calibre of those seeking to represent us?
How can an advanced democracy conduct its political affairs without parties? A direct democracy a la Rousseau is one impractical solution. For an interesting answer to this question, visit the webpage of the government of the north-west territories in Canada. Their legislative assembly operates as any traditional legislature, but there are no political parties in their consensus system. Potential members of the assembly stand as independents in their respective constituencies.
Once elected the members meet to choose from their number six ministers and a premier by secret ballot to form the cabinet. Those not selected act as the official opposition. Then matters proceed as normal, bills being passed if they receive an absolute majority in the assembly. But every member of the assembly had to be elected on merit. And no one has a natural base of voters that is narrower than the entire electorate in each of the constituencies.
It is far harder to be in hock to any narrow interest group in such a system, and so the good of the whole tends to be prioritised, as it should. The level of debate is higher, as one would expect; and as yet there are no ‘indignados’ in the north- west territories. And just think, there would be no more conferences.
Eileen Reid is head of widening participation, Glasgow School of Art, writing here in a personal capacity.
06.10.11
No. 461
John Cameron Given the obstacles placed in the way of anyone wanting to help, I suppose it is hardly surprising that the number of people volunteering in Britain is drying up.
A survey from the Office for National Statistics of the proportion of the population ‘engaged in civil participation’ showed a fall from 40 to 25% in the last decade.
Undoubtedly the biggest disincentive to volunteering has been the increasingly onerous regulatory impositions on those who wish to give of their time. From football coaches to parents merely wishing to help out in their children’s school, millions of volunteers have been forced to submit to criminal record checks. Even elderly ladies volunteering their services as flower arrangers in English cathedrals open to the public on weekdays have found themselves caught up in this nonsense.
While it is clearly important to keep children safe, this is unlikely to be achieved by discouraging well-meaning adults from helping out in their communities. A disproportionate obsession with health and safety and an irrational aversion to risk has made volunteering needlessly expensive, bureaucratic and intrusive.
The root of the problem is partly the Human Rights Act and partly ‘big government’ with its mania for micro-managing the lives of everyone from cradle to grave. There is no need for CRB checks when what is required is a register of those convicted of the sort of offence which makes them unsuitable for work with children or the vulnerable.
Having volunteers repeatedly waiting months for details of their past lives to be given to potential ’employers’ in an effort to exclude this minority is just plain daft.
Only a jobsworth with a totalitarian mentality could have come up with such a mindless response to the tragic – but mercifully extremely rare – murder of innocents.
Eileen Reid
While the Arab Spring reminds us that right enough, democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried, it cannot be ignored that hundreds of thousands of ordinary people around the globe – from the ‘indignados’ of Spain, to the Indians fighting corruption in Delhi, to the Israelis taking to the streets in protest against their leaders from all parties, to the occupation of Wall Street – are becoming more and more disillusioned with the democratic political process.
To keep faith with democratic politics the widespread and deep-seated malaise that has crept into our political culture needs to be addressed. It is true that democracy has never been as popular in the history of ideas as it has with the general public. But the traditional concern of political philosophers, going back to Plato, that democracy leads to the tyranny of the majority, has largely been addressed and ameliorated. Even those with an absolute majority at the ballot box must govern within the confines set by agreed constitutions (or equivalent) which lays down the principles and rules designed to protect all, regardless of political affiliation. The modern problem of democracy is that voters are beginning to suspect that their genuine concerns cannot be addressed through the traditional democratic process.
Politicians seem more responsive to powerful interest groups than the individual. Interest groups and lobbyists do have an inordinate influence on governments. But this is exacerbated by the existence of one particular kind of interest group: the political party. Suspicion of political parties has a long history. Plato and Rousseau pointed out long ago that political parties inevitably give rise to partisanship, factionalism, and with it the dispiriting pandering to interest groups.
Rousseau, the proto-Marxist, warned that in representative democracies ‘Factions arise, and partial associations are formed at the expense of the great association’. But the democrat George Washington echoed Rousseau in his Farewell to the Union address: political parties have an unavoidable tendency to place the good of a section above the good of society as a whole. Political parties by their very nature divide a country and its communities by actively promoting the interests of their respective bases at the expense of the others.
tendency is a blight on our culture. But partisanship and sectarianism
has reached new heights at a time when we need it least.
In Scotland partisanship is prevalent at every level. This troubling tendency is a blight on our culture. But partisanship and sectarianism has reached new heights at a time when we need it least. That Scotland has an extraordinary opportunity to unite and plan for the future of our small country is being seriously damaged by party conflict. Politicians often have to agree with policies and decisions they genuinely do not like. They also have to pretend not to agree with policies they do agree with. How is good debate possible when intellectual honesty can damage your career? What impact has this had on the general calibre of those seeking to represent us?
How can an advanced democracy conduct its political affairs without parties? A direct democracy a la Rousseau is one impractical solution. For an interesting answer to this question, visit the webpage of the government of the north-west territories in Canada. Their legislative assembly operates as any traditional legislature, but there are no political parties in their consensus system. Potential members of the assembly stand as independents in their respective constituencies.
Once elected the members meet to choose from their number six ministers and a premier by secret ballot to form the cabinet. Those not selected act as the official opposition. Then matters proceed as normal, bills being passed if they receive an absolute majority in the assembly. But every member of the assembly had to be elected on merit. And no one has a natural base of voters that is narrower than the entire electorate in each of the constituencies.
It is far harder to be in hock to any narrow interest group in such a system, and so the good of the whole tends to be prioritised, as it should. The level of debate is higher, as one would expect; and as yet there are no ‘indignados’ in the north- west territories. And just think, there would be no more conferences.
