Having followed all the discussions so far (admittedly mostly as an observer) I have to say that this is not that clear to me what the purpose of the Lobby Group actually IS.
We need some convincing answers to the following: What difference will that make to anything? Will it make my job more secure? Will it stop my house being re-posessed if I lose my job? Will it stop my children – and theirs – being ripped off by the greedy people in positions of authority? If so – how does that work, then? Is it really so simple? If not, why should I get involved?
As I mentioned on a previous post I was once in PR and one of my functions was to put awkward questions to clients before they dealt with the media. So please don’t take this as negativity on my part.
We also have the following suggestions/themes”:
“Re-organisation and genuine regulation of the banking system and public sector financial institutions”.
“Increased accountability and responsibility from elected officials and other persons of public office”
“Investing and encouraging the re-growth of domestic industries, including but not limited to education in core skills in engineering, science and agriculture”
“A publicly honest appraisal of proposed policies detailing not only the advantages, but the disadvantages of a given policy proposal backed up by data.”
“Free from political influence/associations with political parties”.
I don’t have any objection to these but they all beg similar questions. Most importantly “exactly what are we going to do to make this happen?” Chatting amongst ourselves won’t change anything, will it?
Here’s a suggestion from me:
Big businesses will not change their ways unless forced to do so by the legal system. The legal system is controlled by elected officials (local and national). Elected officials are pretty much in the pockets of big business – there are some snouts in the trough. They will not change their ways unless threatened with loss of access to the trough. The only people who can deny this access are the electorate – but the elected officials are not really bothered about this because the electorate follow a fairly set voting pattern. In a way it’s a divide and conquer methodology because you can only decide the outcome in your own constituency. So why bother?
But what if someone in a very marginal constituency (the political party is irrelevant here) were seriously threatened with loss of access to the trough? Would they be prepared to change their voting habits to keep the status quo? Would they be prepared to ask the questions that their electorate wanted asking? It might just be possible that if one person – the easy target – could be made to do this then it would encourage the others. Otherwise they might be next!
We would then only have to convince a few hundred (or maybe a few thousand) people that what we are doing is right – and ask for their support in this.
Just an idea!
Contact your local elected officials - for free
by Jericoa
14 Feb 2009 at 12:42
John,
Your pragmatism the questions you pose and the strategy you propose are very useful.
I can see from your words that the legal system is the real way to effect sytemic change and the influence route you suggest to change the law is the most efficient one by far.
A powerful public platform i think in that respect is to give the legal system back to the people.
There has been a steady erosion of trial by jury and over-reliance on what has become a parallel language, the language of lawyers, self serving and often inpenetrable language to the general public which only seems to serve the lawyesr as far as i can see. The best wordsmith wins.
I strongly believe that values and what is ‘right’ do not need a Phd to be expressed. It should be the job of lawyers to explain things in away that 12 people as a cross section of society can understand and debate and draw a conclusion upon. the legal profession has been heading in the opposite direction in my view.
The increasingly complex nature of society has been used as an excuse to erode fundamental legal principal which has stood this country so well in the past.
I think your strategy is sound John. I suppose the next step is to identify those individuals to target, I rather suspect rahere may be able to assist us there…
looking forward to the grand opening, I like the home page.
your a star John.
jericoa
by Goldtop
14 Feb 2009 at 15:01
John,
I thought the whole purpose of the group was to use the system that the establishment has in place against it. The whole purpose of lobbying parliament is to influence the ideas and aims of the decisions government makes is it not? Therefore we should use the same methods that the individuals/organisations and companies that have brought us the mess that we are currently in have used. But where they have used cronyism, bribery, collusion and deceit we must use the genuine anger of the electorate, the courage of our convictions and a tenacity born of the will to force change and a desire to actually stop the passive acceptance of the masses and the ideas that things can’t be changed by the public out there. Its not a lot to begin with I know, but little acorns and all that. I mean,we’ve got to start somewhere.
Jericoa-
“I suppose the next step is to identify those individuals to target, I rather suspect rahere may be able to assist us there…”
I believe he already has in his own inimitable fashion.
by Goldtop
14 Feb 2009 at 15:14
PS John-
“Most importantly “exactly what are we going to do to make this happen?” Chatting amongst ourselves won’t change anything, will it?”
But chatting among ourselves will hopefully bring up ideas to achieve what we want AS LONG AS WE KNOW WHAT IT IS WE WANT IN THE FIRST PLACE. Chicken/egg etc…
If you are really worried about this, perhaps we should postpone the public section until we have a clear ‘mission statement’ I do not mind drafting this and, as you say, we have some good suggestions so far. Lets have more- some input from the so far silent portion of the followers would be nice. I will try to have version 1 of the ‘mission statement’ ready by end of Tuesday- family commitments will stop me working on it until then.
by Nick Taylor
15 Feb 2009 at 00:59
My 2c etc:
A simple reminder of who works for whom, I think.
What we (and by that I mean the royal we) want from the people that we elect and pay to represent our interests, is authenticity, transparency and competence.
They can’t do this if they’re attempting to serve two masters, which they are, so we’re not getting any of these things at the moment… if we ever did, but times are changing.
We’re going through a bit of a funny phase at the moment (we as humanity I mean)… and I don’t think it’s ever going stop being funny ever again. In fact I personally give it about 20 years before things start going decidedly weird – based upon various trends… to pick a few examples, the effects of Climate Change, Peak Oil, large-scale (particularly marine) ecosystemic collapse and the bio-tech explosion (which hasn’t happened yet, but believe me, it will). Those are the things we know about… and as right now my life is dominated by things that weren’t invented 5 years ago, I’m guessing there will be more.
And on top of that we have this financial crisis which appears to be based upon architectural flaws that go to the very heart of the system, and it’s probably not going to “simply go back to being the way it was”, and I’m not sure that’s what any of us want anyway.
And on top of that we now have an internet, and a society that has an internet is qualitatively different from one that doesn’t. The fundamental atoms that make up our institutions and organisation are not only not equipped to deal with what’s up ahead, and they’re not equipped to deal with… us.
Whatever happens, we need to be part of the process. More than we are now. It needs to be our process.
This has been a party political broadcast on behalf of Nick Taylor. Hello etc.
by John Bray
15 Feb 2009 at 01:50
Goldtop – no I’m not worried about any of this. I’m just fishing for answers for the FAQ part of the site
) Keep them coming.
by Nick Taylor
15 Feb 2009 at 04:42
Hi John
As a web dev, my pre FAQ, FAQs would be:
Who is the intended audience of the site/FAQ?
What response are you hoping to elicit?
In fact (now I come to think of it) a mate of mine in Brighton has this http://www.clearleft.com/
and for years now they’ve had a rather good client-information-extraction document that they’ve craftily renamed as a “Client Ideas Sheet”, a (big friendly green) link for which is down the bottom.
About 1/2 of it will be relevant, but it’s not a bad place to start structuring ideas about why you’re putting an online presence together.
Everything flows from a why.
by John Bray
15 Feb 2009 at 05:04
Nick, fair questions. At the moment I’m trying to guess at some of this from posts of the founder members. I agree we could do with a better method.
by bobajob
15 Feb 2009 at 05:11
A few disjointed comments….
Ideas floated in a marginally held seat area may wash if it was a real local tipping point. The electorate in the constituency involved would largely have to be baying for the changes. The Lobby Group issues are more universal than local I feel – does that matter?
Are we thinking of private members’ motions?
Obviously we want main policy change. This can come via the Manifesto of a party, because they know that’s what the election promise was, and they are morally-bound to deliver on that during their period of governing. I think manifestos are drawn up by taking into account things that the Party thinks will be “popular” The drafting of manifestos must be happening right now, surely, in preparation for the next general election.
Unfortunately “popular” needs can be short term, and can ignore problems not generally seen as threats to daily life, which is where some of our aims might lack immediate support.
Also, there need to be long term strategies built into manifestos.
Formulation of the manifesto – how do we penetrate the conscousness of those busy with it?
If we had a more universal appeal for our policies, and a suitable medium to publicise them? Nick Taylor alluded to the Internet. Obama used it, but I don’t know the detail – he used $millions though.
Another problem is, will the electorate agree with everything we say? They may agree on some things, but not on others. Maybe we can have a voting system on our website. This will allow them to vote on a scale of strongly agree to strongly disagree with 5 degrees of choice. Policy suggestions out of general favour could be put on the back burner.
Petitions to the #10 petitions website are for single issues and need to be heavily publicised in order to get support – unless you are already a celebrity!
by John Bray
15 Feb 2009 at 06:26
Bob,
“A few disjointed comments….”
“Ideas floated in a marginally held seat area may wash if it was a real local tipping point. The electorate in the constituency involved would largely have to be baying for the changes.”
That’s the point I was getting at. In a marginal seat the decisions are made by the MINORITY. The majority just cancel each other out and so can be virtually ignored. Use the system!
“The Lobby Group issues are more universal than local I feel – does that matter?”
I don’t think it does matter. I wasn’t suggesting that people pester their elected officials solely on local issues.
“Are we thinking of private members’ motions?”
A possibility but there are others: questions asked in Parliament and votes cast could be other “indicators” or to use the dreaded management-speak “measurable outcomes”.
“Obviously we want main policy change. This can come via the Manifesto of a party, because they know that’s what the election promise was, and they are morally-bound to deliver on that during their period of governing. I think manifestos are drawn up by taking into account things that the Party thinks will be “popular” The drafting of manifestos must be happening right now, surely, in preparation for the next general election.”
I think manifestos are drawn up to get people elected and are then simply shelved – so should we be spending any time worrying about them?. Additionally, I don’t really think that realistically we can hope to affect any party’s manifesto.
“Unfortunately “popular” needs can be short term, and can ignore problems not generally seen as threats to daily life, which is where some of our aims might lack immediate support.”
Why try to get immediate (and popular) support? I agree it’s not likely to happen. Who needs poular support? For example: Dundee East needs only 383 votes to change the incumbent. Edinburgh South needs only 300.
“Also, there need to be long term strategies built into manifestos.”
)
“Formulation of the manifesto – how do we penetrate the consciousness of those busy with it?”
You obviously have more faith in manifestos than I have
“If we had a more universal appeal for our policies, and a suitable medium to publicise them?”
I suppose I’m proposing looking at alternative means of achieving the aims. Do we really need to “connect” with the general public – or just a select few? There are people out there – as we’ve seen from this blog – from ALL walks of life. About the only things we have in common is internet access and a desire to see things change for the better. Why not concentrate on them rather than on the general public or “the man in the street”? As Sid Vicious once said – when asked ‘Do you want to appeal to the man in the street?’ ‘Nah; I’ve met the man in the street, and he’s a ***t.’
“Nick Taylor alluded to the Internet. Obama used it, but I don’t know the detail – he used $millions though.”
But we ARE using the internet – and it doesn’t necessarily have to cost much at all.
“Another problem is, will the electorate agree with everything we say? They may agree on some things, but not on others. Maybe we can have a voting system on our website. This will allow them to vote on a scale of strongly agree to strongly disagree with 5 degrees of choice. Policy suggestions out of general favour could be put on the back burner.
I’d go along with that – but of the 23 founder members only four have so far cast their votes on this issue.
“Petitions to the #10 petitions website are for single issues and need to be heavily publicised in order to get support – unless you are already a celebrity!”
Agreed – but every little helps.
John
by Jericoa
15 Feb 2009 at 06:32
what it boils down to is
1) johns way – probaly peaceful will give a shot at ‘redemption’ for the existing political elite.
2)everybodys elses..which sounds like revolution to me and people are bound to get hurt.
Give peace a chance, if they dont take it you can have your revolution with a clear conscience.
jericoa
by John Bray
15 Feb 2009 at 07:24
Anybody know someone who lives in Selby?
http://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/john_grogan/selby
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Grogan
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selby
http://www.selbytimes.co.uk/
http://www.selbypost.co.uk/
by Jericoa
15 Feb 2009 at 08:01
John,
I am not very far away maybe 20 miles. Why?
This guy is stepping down at the next election if you are thinking of lobbying him or am i missing something?
by John Bray
15 Feb 2009 at 08:31
Jericoa,
But his replacement would be just as vulnerable. As would the opposition. What are THEY doing to make things better? 500 people could decide their prospects (and pension pots) and nearly 28,000 people didn’t even vote.
If 500 people on the electoral roll in Selby made it clear that unless the candidate did something serious about the situation, they would deny them access to the trough, maybe those candidates would have a change of heart.
Obviously you or I couldn’t do this because we’re not constituents. We just need to find someone (or ideally 500 people) who can. You don’t have to be a constituent to write to the letters page of a local newspaper though.
by John Bray
15 Feb 2009 at 09:03
Jericoa,
Maybe Selby isn’t an ideal first choice. Didn’t know he was off soon – not enough research! Do you agree on the general principle though?
by Jericoa
15 Feb 2009 at 09:38
The general principal yes, I think any labour guy with a majority less than 10,000 has probably given up all hope already though and is probably planning his alternative career outide of politics already!
Given the proximity of the election would we be better off lobying those with the best chance of defeating labour in seats with say, a labour majority less than 10,000.
I was hoping rahere would re-appear with some helpful suggestions also as he seems to be well connected / may know where lobbying could most efficiently be applied.
Jericoa
by John Bray
15 Feb 2009 at 09:55
Surely anyone (from any party) who will stand up and ask awkward questions, vote against some of the lunacy or propose early day motions etc is worth getting on board. After all, the next government will need to understand the system as well: do as you’re told or you’re out of it
)
I agree that 10,000 would be a good starting point – though the easier the better as a test for us.
by John Bray
15 Feb 2009 at 10:26
Jericoa, What have you said to upset the moderators on the Newsnight blog? All I posted was
“Trouble with the moderators? Put it on the lobbygroup so we can all see it!”
Even that has been referred to the moderators
by Jericoa
15 Feb 2009 at 11:17
Top secret stuff.. comprising a sensible suggestion as to how to re-organise society, I tried to slip in a reference to the lobbygroup.org site which may be the reason.
I am a bit gutted though as it was one of my more coherent posts i think inspired by Pauls ‘ road to wigan pier piece on newsnight which i watched today on i-player.
Now it is lost to cyberspace. My second post was requesting the moderators to e-mail my original post back to me. Nothing has shown up yet!!
First time I have ever fallen foul of the moderators. There on to me now, better start checking my rear view mirror for ‘tails’ from now on
by John Bray
15 Feb 2009 at 11:30
On my machine you can use the “back” button and there is a copy there of what you posted.
by Jericoa
15 Feb 2009 at 11:35
john,
Too late, the kids had been on in the interim, it only remembers the last few pages so its gone. I Jotted down the ideas so I will have another go later.
by John Bray
15 Feb 2009 at 11:42
Back in the early days of desktop publishing (using Quark in the 80s) the machines would hang up frequently (yes – even Macs!). We all knew that the way round this was to save the drafts very frequently but of course you don’t, do you? The consensus was that the version you rewrote from scratch was normally better than the one you had lost. I found this to be the case also
)
by Jericoa
15 Feb 2009 at 12:07
Just curious,if they lost the original one, how did they know the re-write was better?
by John Bray
15 Feb 2009 at 12:28
I suppose it was because the one you’d just lost was typically just at the point of being good enough – sod’s law. You knew it could have been improved on but couldn’t justify the time. But when you had to rewrite it anyway you might as well do it right.
When you start with a blank sheet it’s sometimes only after you’ve finished writing that you get to understand what it is you want to say. If you knew that when you started you would probably have written it differently.
by CoralBloom
15 Feb 2009 at 12:32
Didn’t see this post until now!
Politicians are in the pockets of business.
Now over the past few years there are a new breed of business men such as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ray_Anderson_(entrepreneur) with a view to sustainable business over the long-term.
I’m wondering if they are actively lobbying yet?
Is anyone a union member? I noticed over the weekend there are reports that Labour and the Unions are having a bit of a dust up. Could the unions be part of a multi-pronged lobby effort?
by Jericoa
15 Feb 2009 at 13:59
It would be quite something if the tories returned labour’s compliment.
labour jumped in with the bankers, imagine if a couple of trade unions aligned themselves with the tories publicly.
It could just happen. It would really pull the rug out from labour.
Nice idea!
by CoralBloom
15 Feb 2009 at 14:04
Can I have a picture of Ruth Lee’s at the moment of the announcement!
On more series point.
What seems to be under discussion here is a need for radical change in social values and behaviours. Now haven’t organisations like Greenpeace etc tried that?
I’d say they have fundamentally failed. If that is correct, then what can we learn from that failure?
by CoralBloom
15 Feb 2009 at 14:13
What about a questionnaire for all prospective politicians? If you want my vote then fill in the form, don’t forget to sign and date it.
Some good questions would make them stop and think rather than just the guff they talk. A bit of if you want my vote, sign this…
by Jericoa
15 Feb 2009 at 14:17
It is like everything else, it is a question of timing I think.
Greenpeace have a mainstream image problem that revolves around ‘hippies’ and communes etc that they will not be able to shake off now.
Certainly their time has come for certain elements of their policy agenda but, strangely, they will not be the the organisation to succesfully deliver it.
It has to be something mainstream sold by level headed professionals of all types not ‘swampy’ in a baggy jumper and a woolly hat. Rightly or wrongly I cant see the electorate buying it / forgetting their image.
I really do think it is that simple. The best chance is the conservatives to diversify away from thier traditional base.
They will probably win no matter what, there is not enough time for something completely new to emerge.
Maybe we should focus on assiting the conservatives to be more ‘useful’ when they do get in?
I just want to find the most useful strategy, I really dont care whether its colour is blue or red or yellow or green I just want it to be right.
by Tigerjayj
15 Feb 2009 at 16:24
hi all,
I am here, but my phone Internet connection keeps dropping out when I try to post!
I want to help, but i’ll put more stuff on tomorrow at work-just a little confused as to where I’m supposed to post-I’m relatively unitiated in the world of Blogosphere, and just getting to grips with Facebook.
Coral Bloom, I’m still a member of the NUT, although don’t teach now cos of the after effects of the brain surgery. If I can help from there you know I will.
Happy to put stuff on facebook too. I can also get my daughter to do some on her Facebook if it helps. She is at Uni, has a wide circle of friends, and plans to work in climate change when she’s done her PhD.
Fingers crossed this posts…!
Please feel free to email me if it’s easier than waiting for me to be on here.
Kindest regards to everyone
Jen
by Jericoa
16 Feb 2009 at 11:46
We seem to have a potential media concept which may be worth protecting legally as discussed on the 'media' discussion space. Given your background any idea how we may protect it for the benefit of the members?
It could roll as an idea I think and it may be of benefit to try and protect it legally as a so we can collectively keep some ownership of it.
Let me know what you think.
Jericoa
by John Bray
16 Feb 2009 at 12:58
Jericoa,
I would suggest you get in touch with Wharfgirl. It’s much more in her line.
by Jericoa
16 Feb 2009 at 13:32
John- will take your advice, it belongs to the members though not to me if anything comes of it for the record.
by Jambo
16 Feb 2009 at 19:37
Ok so I didn’t see the media idea, someone want to e-mail me an overview.
The idea of campaigning in marginal seats for the candidate best suited to our agenda is semi-plausible. The problem is individual MPs do not have much power when you take into account party whips. Once they’re elected they may well ignore any promises as most people won’t remember 4 years later.
What does matter to the parties is general popular opinion, affecting this does not necessarily mean there will be some bloody revolution. Labour didn’t even stand up to the fuel protests for goodness sake!
I’m quite sure they’ll deliver any policy that is clearly strongly supported by a majority of the electorate, the Torys seem equally spineless.
SO, for that we’d need to get popular opinion strongly supporting our goals. The easiest way to do that is to pick our battles to the things which are most obviously good and easy to explain.
by CoralBloom
16 Feb 2009 at 20:17
Jambo, I’ve posted it in the media section of discussions for you.
by CoralBloom
17 Feb 2009 at 00:19
All,
I changed my details on my google accounts page (where it says ‘edit your personal info’ )to show my screen name.
by John Bray
17 Feb 2009 at 09:16
Jambo,
“The problem is individual MPs do not have much power when you take into account party whips.” I would agree o that in most cases. The threat of having the whip withdrawn is as good as being made redundant for most because they won’t ever be offered a safe seat. The electorate can’t threaten them with is. But in a marginal seat a few hundred people can.
I would stress that this idea was not intended as a long-term strategy – it’s entirely the opposite. Once elected they will do as they please. But – with an election looming – their constituents have the chance to say to them, “I’m not interested in your promises. I want you stand up in parliament in the next month and ask why the Government is doing this to MY constituents?”
By the time the election comes it will be too late to influence these people. I am also concerned that by the time the election comes it will be too late to recover from the situation.
by CoralBloom
19 Feb 2009 at 01:04
We have a Parliament. In that parliament are a bunch of our employees. The ones I’m talking about are the MPs.
What we do as a population is give them a job. But we do not behave as bosses.
Most of us sit and complain or cheer at what they do, all through the media.
The others are out demonstrating, getting arrested in the midst of a demo that has gone wrong, with shop windows being smashed etc.
Is that how your boss behaves?
Of course not.
He/She interviews potential employees.
He/She then issues instructions.
He/She then asks for regular updates on your progress.
Now what would an MP do if he had his bosses making more demands on him/her than a lobby group for bankers. There are more of us than them. Your MP would be snowed under with correspondence and your MP would have to deal with it. The loudest get listened to.
But we do not uphold our part of the contract! So no wonder the MPs don’t worry too much about what we think until it is time for that interview every 4 years or so.
We need to find a way of ensuring that contract of employment is maintained in both directions.
What we need are report cards and league tables on MP performance, just as we do with kids and schools. Set them targets!
by Jambo
20 Feb 2009 at 08:44
OH, got you John, thanks for the clarification.
I think it’s an excellent idea! We should get on it.
Coral – http://www.theyworkforyou.com
There’s your report cards.
by asymetric
20 Feb 2009 at 17:49
Hi,
Sorry not been in communication for a while – had to earn a living while I can!
Rergarding profiles, what about asking some national newpapers to put the lobby group’s URL frequently in their editorial pages? Worst case is that they refuse.
by asymetric
20 Feb 2009 at 17:58
Another idea.
We ask written questions of our local MPs and post our questions and their responses – making clear that these are questions which the lobby group are also interested in. We also inform them that it will become public – so everyone will know either their answer or that they do not answer the questions.
For this we also need a private forum to formlate the questions (we would need such a forum anyway).