Peter Facey (London, Unlock Democracy): Last Sunday night (19th October) I was watching the end of Simon Schama's documentary The American Future on the BBC waiting for Steven Fry’s excellent programme about America. It had a US General giving a speech to World War Two veterans. The General called upon all Americans to engage in the debate at this critical time and vote in the election in November whether they voted Democrat or Republican.
As the final credits rolled I was struck that it was a speech that was unlikely to be made in the UK. I speak as someone who spent much of my childhood growing up on RAF bases and who feels a strong affection the UK military. Our military has been, and on the whole remains, strictly outside formal party politics, for which I am thankful.
But there is a difference between being outside party politics and having a democratic approach. American soldiers have always been encouraged to vote to the extent that. in the midst of the American Civil War, Union soldiers participated in a presidential election in which the central issue was whether the war should continue. At the time there was a real possibility that Abraham Lincoln could lose to the popular General George McClellan. In the end, Lincoln’s victory in the election was secured by the capture of Atlanta.
This basic democratic culture permeates all aspects of American society from the school board to the sheriff. There is a general belief that if a job is important to the community and paid for by the community then it should be elected. Now I am not getting all dewy-eyed about the quality of American democracy, it has many aspects that repel me. But its basic faith in democracy is strong and inspiring.
Britain by contrast has a long history of elections, but we not have a democratic culture to the same extent. Where Americans elect people to do a job our tendency is to appoint someone or to set up a quango to depoliticise it. Even the Conservative Party that has spent much of the last few years attacking the quango state, what was their first response to the Credit Crash at their conference, set up another quango!
The contrast been our two political cultures can be clearly seen when it comes to dealing with a crisis, for example the responses to the credit crash. In America the Paulson Plan caused huge debate and saw Congress reject it, then amend it and finally pass it.
Here by contrast politics as normal was suspended, the political class closed ranks and the Brown plan was passed with very little debate and a single amendment. Now for the record, I think the Brown plan is much better than its American cousin, but the lack of scrutiny the plan had in Parliament for something this far-reaching worries me profoundly.
To many people this was an example of Britain at our best, with all our elected representatives all pulling together. For me, it shows that under a democratic outer covering we still have a political culture that distrusts debate and discussion and when a crisis happens we rally behind our leaders and close down discussion rather than engage in vigorous democratic debate.