2013 – 020 The value of party manifestos

What About the UK Referendum promised by Tony Blair, the Liberal Democrats and the Conservatives?
Is it just another of their many empty promises? Tony Blair and Gordon Brown reneged on this promise but so has David Cameron reneged on his ‘Cast Iron’ promise on the feeble excuse that it is now called the ‘Lisbon Treaty’ instead.
A recent court case challenged the decision by Gordon Brown not to have the Labour Party manifesto promise of a referendum, along with the formal statement by Tony Blair that the Labour Party manifesto was a Contract with the People. But Gordon Brown’s barrister Ms. Cecelia Ivimy said on behalf of her client: “They (NuLabour manifesto promises and contracts) are not subject to legitimate expectation”. Astonishing?
Even more astonishing is that the Brighton County Court judge accepted this defence. His judgement was: ‘The public should not expect promises or contracts made in NuLabour Party manifestos to be kept’. A case of lies, damn lies and NuLabour manifesto promises perhaps? From now on any promise in a NuLabour manifesto will be pointless as they can quite legally ignore all promises and contracts made in that manifesto if they regain power. (ref. 2008-15). Presumably that also applies to the Cameron Tories.
The ‘Treaty’ is the Constitution – with a different name. As previously noted: ‘the label on the tin may be different, but the contents are identical’ (see chapter 15 for Mandelson’s statement on referenda and ref. 2006-54). And it should be remembered that the most insidious part of the Lisbon Treaty is that it’s ‘self-amending. Very similar to the 1933 Nazi Enabling Act to allow Hitler to completely bypass the elected Reichstag.

© Mick Greenhough 2009

One response to “2013 – 020 The value of party manifestos

  1. Stephen Clayforth

    The problem with holding a referendum is that it will not go the way that the politicians want it to (at least the Tories, LibDems and Labour ones). The vote would be for a resounding NO TO EUROPE and that is not what they want. They want to contrive it so that they can, legitimately or otherwise, state that they have the backing of the country. This is the same way that they say they have the majority of the population behind them when less that 60% of eligible voters actually vote and less than 50% of them vote for the winning candidate. Even in the few constituencies where the MP was elected by more than 50% of those voting more than 50% of the electorate either voted against them or did not vote. There are, in this day of electronic devices and smart cards (eg debit/credit cards) many simpler ways of voting, and thus enfranchising the majority of the electorate, than attending a Polling Station. The trouble is the establishment DO NOT WANT people to vote!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *