reformers identified as a group in the petition. The mailboxes of every constituency MP were bulging with demands for action, and even for MPs who had made a career out of avoiding other peoples concerns, it all became a little hard to bear. To a man, or woman, they could all see the writing on the wall, and, slowly at first, but gaining pace rapidly, they started to respond to the concerns , if only to ensure they had a chance at the next election. Every parliamentary session included a private members ballot, which allowed an MP to suggest a bill to the house. In that session of two thousand and thirteen to fourteen the ballot was won by Peter Mahew, the member for Newcastle South. It wouldn’t really have made much difference who won it as just about every offer was on the same subject. His bill proposed the appointment of an ombudsman, armed with a far reaching and draconian set of rules that could be enacted retrospectively to ensure that ‘ten-times’ would be enacted fairly and fully within the spirit of the act. The Government had little choice but to allow a vote and, on its third reading, it was passed into law. The office of the Ombudsman opened in late fouteen and Mr. Patrick Finch set about his work.
Of course it had now been well over a year since the original act was introduced and, in that time many people had further enriched themselves, or been further impoverished. The retrospective nature of the new legislation came down on the guilty parties like the sword of Damocles. Every legal entity that had tried to protect itself before was now made responsible for reintroducing the proper rules and making the necessary changes. The fat-cats were made to repay and the newly disenfranchised workers were re-employed. A victory, of sorts, had been won by the electorate.
The Country now got on with other things and the MPs began to think that their own demise had been averted. No seats had been lost, nor had the issue been party based-they were all as guilty, or innocent, as each other.
The Parliamentary clock kept ticking towards the next general election in May 2015.
Of course, in those years, much else was happening. Europe had slid from crisis to crisis, finally ejecting Greece from membership at huge financial cost. The newly weakened Euro had made the euro-zone states immensely poorer overnight and less able to afford the now relatively expensive imports from China and other developing nations. Markets had risen and fallen, risen and fallen to the point that few people would trust their money to a system that offered no peace of mind. Banks had become entrenched institutions only interested in their own survival, careless of the economic devastation they left in their wake. The Middle East had reverted to a completely lawless, primitive no-mans-land of tribal and religious conflict. All western powers had long since deserted the scene, resolved never to go back. The military were busy erecting a virtual fence around Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran, Iraq and Syria and the world had a new refugee crisis to deal with. Israel had long since blown up Iran’s nuclear reactors and the safe passage of oil through the Straits of Hormuz was now the biggest priority for the West.
‘Growth’ had disappeared from economic language.
Now, at the end of 2014, all eyes at Westminster were focused squarely on the election. Other eyes were similarly focused, but with a quite different agenda. A new movement emerged calling itself ‘the campaign for true democracy’. CTD was not a political party but rather a group of well financed and well connected individuals who had witnessed the most recent machinations of government like everyone else but had the money and influence to try and do something about it. The plan was quite simple. CTD would donate the deposit required for someone to stand at election to one person in each constituency who would go through a rigorous selection process and sign up to the principles that CTD propounded. It would also supply, at cost, a branded publicity campaign of leaflets, posters and media coverage. At the time the electoral deposit was fifteen hundred pounds. In the search for candidates the CTD made it clear that it would be looking for people who wanted to make a difference NOW, who would be pleased to serve but would not seek to make a career from it. The overriding principle was that , ideally, anyone who put themselves forward for election really ought to be automatically barred from being elected, just for having put themselves forward, so the only candidates to be considerred would have to be nominated by unconnected third parties and demonstrate that they had never served, or sought to serve, in any public office.
The policy was very simple and straightforward. Every candidate would swear a statement that would appear on every item of publicity in his constituency. That statement was that, if elected, he or she would open all constituency or private records, without exception, to any constituent, on demand.
In its wider publicity the CTD proposed a number of policies that its candidates would all need to sign up for. The first, and most important, was Parliamentary reform. Members would always vote for abolition of the House of Lords and for the criminalisation of any abuse of power, however small . Members would always demand an on-line national referendum on any proposal requiring its support to be passed into law.
There were a number of other policies outlined but the gist of the CTD approach was to offer a more open and democratic form of government where the ordinary citizen could play a properly active role and help to influence decisions regularly.
Unsurprisingly the demand to nominate a CTD candidate was enormous and before long every constituency in the kingdom had one. Each had been vetted and tested and each had signed in blood a statement of loyalty to the ‘party’s’ policies, both public and private - for there were other agendas behind the scenes.
The established political parties were not unduly worried by this new arrival. To them it was just a better organised monster raving loony party operating around the margins of the election. However, this view quickly changed when the first opinion polls were carried out. These showed a massive swing from the Labour and Conservatives to the CTD. The Liberal Democrat vote stayed steady, albeit at a low percentage. The damage was potentially enormous and the leading parties very quickly drew their guns on to the new competition.
But, try as they might, they could not find any weapons to use against the CTD that could not be thrown back against them with even more force. The ‘safe pair of hands’ approach was laughed out of court as was every variety of ‘experience in government is important’. The personal appeals made by those least likely to offend the public sensibilities were seen to be false and self-serving.
May the seventh, two thousand and fifteen was election day. The Campaign for True Democracy passed into history with a result that saw their candidates sweep the board . Conservative, Labour and Liberal Democrat parties were left with a smattering of seats from their traditional strongholds. Seventy percent of the electorate voted and sixty percent of these voted for a CTD candidate. The CTD quickly organised its own internal elections and, true to its mandate, published the details of all candidates on the internet and asked the electorate to make the final choice.
The age of accountable democracy had arrived and the process was like a breath of fresh air for all. Of course the open process led to unrealistic demands and expectations but, by the time the new government assembled for the State Opening of Parliament, the CTD was ready for the next step.
The Parliamentary programme of the first session was to be dominated by a total review of every level of democracy, the target being to develop a system that could not be abused by personal interest but would always be driven by regular reference to the electorate, by referendum.
Perhaps unsurprisingly the skill set of the four hundred or so CTD MPs was far more varied than any
