I have made reference to the existence of a democratic deficit in many pieces that I have written over the past 12 months. Many will ask why? We have elections every 4 years and we elect a government. Is that not democracy? Well I hope to convince you that it is not. It is a massive subject but here goes as briefly as possible.
Like most things in life, was it only to be so simple. Democracy has many ingredients elections are but one. If democracy stopped and started at the right to vote, there would, for example, be no guarantee that an election would be held after the first government was elected. They would simply carry on indefinitely. This is simply an example that there is a "higher" authority that governs what democracy actually is. What then are ingredients of democracy? It is not possible to answer this in a short piece but it is possible to briefly give examples and examine their application in Gibraltar.
Equal in importance to achieving representative government are the characteristics of equality before the law and freedom. These factors are present in Gibraltar, everyone has the right to vote, everyone has the right to stand and the fundamental rights included in the 2006 Constitution protect everyone. Is this then the end of the story? It should be but it is not because to ensure the effectiveness of all these principles there is a need for their appropriate implementation and the availability of recourse. It is in these areas that there is a deficit in Gibraltar.
Let us start with representation. Representation is provided in any western democracy by the ability to stand for election and by the voting system. Standing for election in Gibraltar is unhindered save that the electoral system militates against individuals standing outside the party system. This could be classed as a hindrance. The 10 votes per person system sounds ideal. It is not. It results in it becoming one vote for one person. People militate toward the party that they perceive will deliver to them the Chief Minister that they prefer. Of course in other jurisdictions this is an important determinative factor in voting patterns but it is not the only one. The bias built into the system applied in Gibraltar makes this factor the overriding one thus skewing away from true democracy.
A second aspect of representation is that it should channel the views of voters through an elected representative. Gibraltar constituents do not get a representative who they can speak to at all. We get 10 members of the Government and 8 members of the Opposition, elected by all for Gibraltar as a whole. If any constituent has a problem he has no one to turn to except the Chief Minister. Yes, technically he can go to any Minister, if one happens to know a particular Minister that is sometimes helpful. If the problem is very minor he can resolve it. If the problem is slightly bigger he can smooth the lines of communiocation to the Chief Minister. This is inadequate.
The upshot of this electoral system is that, in effect, we have "Presidential" elections that create an all powerful being to whom all have to be beholden. This in turn reduces democracy and creates a tribal fanaticism amongst groupings in Gibraltar that is divisive and destructive. A system of elected individual representatives who are beholden to a particular part of the electorate and represent them, not only provides better representation, but is also a unifying factor. Unifying because whether or not a voter has voted for his representative becomes an irrelevancy during the term of office. He represents that constituent irrespective of party loyalty.
Democracy is also delivered by balancing factors. The fundamental balancing principle is the separation of powers. There are three arms of government, the legislature (Parliament), the executive (the Council of Minister which is the government) and the judiciary (the judges and court system). The separation between the judiciary and the other two arms of government is defined and institutionlised in the 2006 Constitution. The same cannot be said of the other two arms of government, the legislature and the executive.
The executive is made up of 10 Minister who also make up the majority side (or government benches) of the legislature. The chance of a government being defeated in Parliament on any measure is nigh on nil. Two Ministers would have to be so guided by principle on any given issue that they would be prepared to risk their high salary (probably unobtainable by most of them outside politics) in order for them to vote against that measure and bring the government tumbling down. Is this likely?
The result is that a Chief Minister has the power to bulldoze through Parliament any and all counter-democratic legislation (subject to constitutionality) that he wishes with the only downside being the ability of an electorate not to elect him at the next election. Electoral defeat would only be possible if the electorate has not by them been so terrorised or so bribed that a free election continues within the realms of possibility. The effect of this is to undermine the concept of the Rule of Law another staunch plank of western democracies. Relying on the benignity of any incumbent Chief Minister is not an answer. A void in the separation of power conjoined with a lack of Parliamentary Supremacy, in the sense of inability to defeat the executive, combine to create a huge democratic deficit.
Majority rule is certainly crucial to democracy but not to the exclusion of the protection of minorities. The persecution or discrimination of minorities by the majority is equally abhorrent in a democracy. In this field Gibraltar is better but not best served. It is better served because fundamental human rights are included in the 2006 Constitution with recourse being available to the Supreme Court, part of the independent judiciary. It is not best served because of financial difficulty of access to due process. The Supreme Court is an expensive court to access. availability of legal assistance is narrow. Risk of awards of costs exists although it can be mitigated. Confronting the government openly in court is a disincentive in itself. Lack of having individual MPs in Parliament representing constituents bars that route of protection. There is a need for access to other bodies, be they councils or tribunals that need to be created.
All these concerns are basic. They have existed for years. They do not arise only under the 2006 Constitution. They pre-date that constitution by decades. The AACR (Association for the Advancement of Civil Rights) owes its existence to that fight. Some founders of that movement are probably turning in their grave that decades after it was founded a democratic deficit continues to exist. What is by far worse is that it is not at the hands of the colonial power, which is who our forefathers in the AACR were campaigning against. It is at the hands of our own elected representatives for years and years. Why dont they do something about it once and for all. Bits and pieces have been tinkered with but the basic deficits continue.
Thinking out loud said,
ReplyDeleteWe should have a system of government that reflects the way that Gibraltar's process has always worked - elected dictator. A presidential system with elections every two years.
The Chief Minister’s salary should be raised substantially - at least tripled. He would stand as an individual in his own right. By law he would have to stand on the basis of a series of specific pledges – his manifesto. He would directly make political appointments of four people who would assist him in running the show – vice presidents. Their salary would also be at least double the current ministerial salaries. The law would be changed so that a presidents / vice presidents former employment remained open to them on completion of a term in office (a bit like maternity leave).
The CM’s executive powers would be balanced by a legislative council – a Town Council essentially – contested in separate elections – also every two years. There would be 14 members.
The CM would be obliged to attend weekly legislative council meetings where he would be held to account for his actions or inaction. The committees would be a “Prime Minister’s Question Time” meets “Commons Committee” style forum. A unanimous or 2/3s majority vote of the council would be able to veto not just legislative proposals – but also any executive decision except decisions for which the CM has a specific electoral mandate –either by way of inclusion in his manifesto or by way of referenda. Technology will permit us to hold referenda quickly, cheaply, and regularly.
Any voter in Gibraltar would be able to call a referendum on a proposal by petitioning the town council who could unanimously agree and proceed to a referendum. Alternatively any voter could instigate a referendum by getting certain percentage of the electorate to support a petition for a referendum.
Freedom of Information would become embodied in our constitution – all public finances for payments or receipts of more than £x in y period of time would be made public unless an application to make the matter private was made by the CM to the legislative council. All government quangos / committees (town planning / transport etc) would sit in public – publish minutes – publish reasons for decisions. The Government Gazette would cease to be a paper publication. It would be a website portal for public information – from streaming live video of the courts, town planning, transport, to online access to planning application documents, license applications, legislative council meetings, publication of official notices.
Llanito World would become an archive of historical political rantings, as a newly empowered voters dedicate their energy to shaping Gibraltar’s future.
Citizens would be able to pay for MOTs using debit cards.
Anonymous at 09:39
ReplyDeleteI do not agree with the proposals but brilliant intervention, more please. Llanito World would like nothing more than to become otiose! :)
Ghost Says:
ReplyDeleteAnon 09:39 makes valid points and describes a similar system to that of the US. I personally have argued that a US type model may suit us best; i.e. CM's office / Finance Centre / Tourism, followed by a city council (congress if you like). It separates domestic with financial and other private sector issues and allows for more accountability. It also gives way to cleaner separation of powers and may well settle the party political issues of the day (to a point).
The reality though is still would not work; the US system is essentially focused on too many checks and balances and too much freedom if that makes sense and hinders the ability of Govt to function the way the founding fathers had hoped.
Robert, you have touched on this before and although I believe there is margin for some reform, I maintain that democracy and accountability is not just about the letter of the law or the substance of the constitution, it is about the willingness of the people to play a part. In Gibraltar we are inherently pansista, si no me afecta me da igual. An example, the shenanigans of the PWD would essentially have had any other community up in arms; we however, not only keep shut, but we allow the opposition the opportunity to hijack for their own benefit and therefore force Govt to go down a non-aggressive route to try to resolve a long standing matter which requires addressing.
You again take issue with the powers of the executive and the failings in the ability of the legislature to be effective; I do not totally disagree but would argue that he failing may not just be on the part of Govt but the eagerness of members in the community to become involved in back bench politics which I assume is what you refer to.
Democracy is not just what is written on a piece of paper it is about the community taking responsibility, it is about freedoms that allow pressure groups to function, it is about opinions being made, it is about open and free press (a problem I admit we have); it is also NOT about having the establishment imposing and implementing democratic theory for the sake of appeasing technical liberal theorists with Marxist Leninist ideals…)…and which will come to no
So, do we have a democratic deficit……well yes, but you fail to highlight many of them in your piece….:) In the words of FDR, “Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country”
Que tal el Patio hoy…:)
G
Ghost
ReplyDeleteI cannot agree more. Democracy and accountability is not about the law or the letter of the law. That is precisely my argument. It is about systemic checks and balances on which Gibraltar, which due to its size needs them more, fails, miserably. I deal with making the system more attractive so that we get more participation. Facilitate participation and people will come up to the mark. If the system works against people why would they volunteer? The community must be enabled and empowered before it will take responsibility. Give them a direct representative and watch what happens. FREEDOMS come with facilitation. I am glad we agree on so much.
Sorry that you think I have not highlighted the deficits. I believe that I have. What do you think they are?
Wow what it this? People are talking sense in this blog. When's the circus coming to town? No fun anymore.
ReplyDeleteGhost,
ReplyDeleteYou mention the US model but concede that it actually hinders progress. True, the possibility of having a bunch of 'filibusters' vetoing anything that goes against their interest through delayed votes and congress bureaucracy scares me. Ironically, according to Wiki, the term filibuster comes from the spanish word 'filibustero', which translates as "pirate" or "freebooter."
You are right to say that it is effectively the participation of the people (Renan), however in a pluralist society, the strongest 'interest- groups' will take domain (take the PWP example that was highlighted) over the otherwise apathetic members of society.
Perhaps, by finding creative ways of involving a 30,000 population (media: blogs, campaining)and implementing higher transparency in an otherwise flawed and biased system could solve the above problems.
I agree with Ghost that its not so much the system that is hindered but the desire to mobilize change by an otherwise apathetic population. Perhaps the current system, whereby more power is vested in a strong and fair ''philosopher ruler'' is flawed but the way forward could involve implementing focus groups to police irresponsible, underhand, even sly dealings!(note: one could say at present we have a strong one, though its also up to the rest of us to make it fair).
Usually, the strong/ fair attributes cancel each other out, so again like I said yesterday, its also about the right personnel and having someone who will excerize rule of law against the bullies, and take the neccesary precautions to ensure that fairness overides even muscle. I understand that main stream media, money and muscle is to a large extent controlled by the party in power (''politics IS power'') but in a population as small as Gibraltar I like to think change could be easier.
Llanito World, 2 questions- building on your 2 points regarding policing and empowerment(i.e. direct representation and facilitation)
1)you mention the need for more systemic checks and balances on which Gibraltar. Could this involve a separate, non governmental, legal institution which measures ''fairness''? If this is a realistic possibility, how could this be facilitated?
2) How would the population be given a direct representative? Would this involve, in effect, a person/ interest group advocating, promoting, empowering the will of the people?
BERT JANSCH
ReplyDelete1) I make reference to the main checks and balances that are missing. First greater separation of legislature and executive. This can be achieved in many ways, for example restrict the number of Ministers to ensure backbenchers. This alone s not sufficient but there is nothing to prevent the electoral system from being reformed to allow the election of a tier of MPs who would represent constituents in each electoral district but would not be eligible to be ministers. Second increase access to systems that uphold and enforce individual civil rights guaranteed in part 1 of the 2006 Constitution. I do not think your suggestion is sufficient or viable.
2) Representatives directly elected mid-term in each polling district see 1).
Llanito World,
ReplyDeletePerhaps not viable. I am new to this. I was going for transparency in employing a non governmental, rational legal body to ensure ''fairness''. Like your suggestions above, mine would also need to be facilitated by the party in power. Given the lack of personnel and the fact that it would involve creating another organization, it might not be as sufficient(much like the UN in world affairs) as imposing the measures you have highlighted above.
Cheers
p.s. Ghost, I got back to you in the other January: 'state of the nation/ new years blog)
Ghost says:
ReplyDeleteYep saw it Bert thanks.
G
Ghost says:
ReplyDeleteRobert, I have a hangover from hell so apologies if my post is weak in any way.
You highlight the most talked about of deficits, those which are inherently tied in with political systems with democratic principles at the core. I have argued previously on the matter of too much freedom or too much accountability, the key in my view is balance. The fundamentals of democracy and the political model that a society chooses are written in the constitution and the key feature in all these models is the separation of powers; I need not tell you this of course, you have a wider insight and knowledge of the constitution than I do. I do however think that you sometimes throw the baby out with the bath water on the issue.
My point on the deficits relates to the accountability that is achieved by the people for the people. I am not of the opinion that our system allows for the manipulation of powers because I believe that our society pansista though we are, have always expressed strong opinions when it matters and that in itself is a testament to the fact that no executive now, in the past, or the future, can or will abuse the system. I do think that there are deficits that relate to the responsibility of groups, individuals, pressure groups and associations. We have seen how the ESG has admirably played an apolitical role and in my view won over Govt, they have proved to be a huge asset to Gib; the relationship between the unions and Govt is in my opinion stronger and more productive than ever and has shown how effective positive (non-political) negotiations with a will to understand positions and interests have worked in all our favors; more of this is my point. We can profit from less political hijacking which in our case is actually stimulated from a misconception that we suffer democratic deficits and that the ruling party are somehow running some sort of dictatorship.
The key factor and that thorn in our side is the deficit of bi-partisan politics! We are plagued with the ever increasing negativity from an opposition who's only action is to attack on every single issue, therefore blowing away consensus on issues where there can and should be middle ground and in matters which are not political. such as the environment. You will recall that the environment was an election highlight in 2007 in which we had one party promising a new power plant by 2010 and the other promising..........wait for it, a carbon neutral Gibraltar, both of which were too ambitious and had been spun by knee jerk politics with no duty of responsibility to the electorate and the latter of which was an insult to the intelligence of the electorate.
Our deficit is good opposition and by this I do not mean a walk over for Govt, but we cannot continue with an opposition whose sole purpose is to massacre Govt with no substance or will to work together on issues where it is possible to do so and which should not be politically hijacked, but should provide for the input of the groups, associations and pressure groups to run with......far more productive and democratic.
I want royalties from that book by the way...:)
G
Fred says:
ReplyDeleteConyo Robert, Ghost's posts are too long too read when I've had 8 pints of Guinness. Can you please get him to write an executive brief?
I agree with what you've said in your post.
BLUF (Borrom Line Up Front): we have a presidential system. Anon 09:39 might have a point, musch as I dislike the current set-up.
Ghost,
ReplyDeleteI agree with a lot of your post. We CAN profit from less political hijacking and more from pressure/ group involvement and awareness. Although I do not think that there is a misconception that we do suffer democratic deficits. Picking up some functionalist frequencies here! With regard to your comment about 'The ruling party not running some sort of dictatorship' (or oligarchy for that matter), at times we are not that far from it. The Lions and the foxes differ only in form.
Sometimes I think that we need a system that will allow the best ideas to 'rule', and not the best/most successful party. In effect, having a good constitution protecting against political and economic hegemony. I earlier suggested a non governmental pressure group to maintain involvement/ ''fairness'' but I agree that it is not a viable or sustainable idea. Building on this, I think the constitution should be something that is makeshift and changing. To cater for and protect opportunism (a double edged sword!). I would therefore like to ask; who decides what constitutes the constitution, when, and is it always adhered to?
LW,
Two questions: 1) you mentioned the 10 votes per person system is not ideal as it results in one vote for one/their person. What other options do we have?
2) You mentioned that 'standing for election in Gibraltar is unhindered save that the electoral system militates against individuals standing outside the party system'. How could this change?
Ghost
ReplyDeleteI do not accept your premise that Gibraltar's electoral system has democracy at its core. What it has at its core is the principle of electing one all powerful individual.
I agree balance is the key. In a territory where ther is no distinction between the executive and the legislature there is no balance at all. I have shown that our constitution is deficient in providing for this aspect of separation of powers.
It cannot be just left to the belief that people will revolt and remonstrate in the event of a government going to an extreme. First this can actually be controlled by a policy of divide and conquer, secondly it is divisive and we need unity and third it results in instability which benefits no one. We need systemic inbuilt and institutionalised safeguards.
Buying peace by paying the undeserving more is good government? Hey it is everyone else's money that is being spent. I cannot agree with your comment ref-the Union. Misspending public monies is unforgivable.
The bipartisan criticism cuts both ways. The blame cannot be put on the Opposition alone. The vitriol spoken by the CM of the opposition is most unhelpful, especially in a New Years Message which should be an opportunity for a CM to unite and not divide the community.
To achieve your laudable objectives, with which I agree, we need fundamental change in our electoral system to provide the necessary checks and balances. It is extraordinary how direct accountability will be a unifying factor, most voters reward unity and discard disharmonious negatives.
BERT JANSCH said:
ReplyDeleteGhost,
I agree with a lot of your post. We CAN profit from less political hijacking and more from pressure/ group involvement and awareness. Although I do not think that there is a misconception that we do suffer democratic deficits. Picking up some functionalist frequencies here! With regard to your comment about 'The ruling party not running some sort of dictatorship' (or oligarchy for that matter), at times we are not that far from it. The Lions and the foxes differ only in form.
Sometimes I think that we need a system that will allow the best ideas to 'rule', and not the best/most successful party. In effect, having a good constitution protecting against political and economic hegemony. I earlier suggested a non governmental pressure group to maintain involvement/ ''fairness'' but I agree that it is not a viable or sustainable idea. Building on this, I think the constitution should be something that is makeshift and changing. To cater for and protect opportunism (a double edged sword!). I would therefore like to ask; who decides what constitutes the constitution, when, and is it always adhered to?
LW,
Two questions: 1) you mentioned the 10 votes per person system is not ideal as it results in one vote for one/their person. What other options do we have?
2) You mentioned that 'standing for election in Gibraltar is unhindered save that the electoral system militates against individuals standing outside the party system'. How could this change?
Ghost,
ReplyDeleteI agree with a lot of your post. We CAN profit from less political hijacking and more from pressure/ group involvement and awareness. Although I do not think that there is a misconception that we do suffer democratic deficits. Picking up some functionalist frequencies here! With regard to your comment about 'The ruling party not running some sort of dictatorship' (or oligarchy for that matter), at times we are not that far from it. The Lions and the foxes differ only in form.
Sometimes I think that we need a system that will allow the best ideas to 'rule', and not the best/most successful party. In effect, having a good constitution protecting against political and economic hegemony. I earlier suggested a non governmental pressure group to maintain involvement/ ''fairness'' but I agree that it is not a viable or sustainable idea. Building on this, I think the constitution should be something that is makeshift and changing. To cater for and protect opportunism (a double edged sword!). I would therefore like to ask; who decides what constitutes the constitution, when, and is it always adhered to?
LW,
Two questions: 1) you mentioned the 10 votes per person system is not ideal as it results in one vote for one/their person. What other options do we have?
2) You mentioned that 'standing for election in Gibraltar is unhindered save that the electoral system militates against individuals standing outside the party system'. How could this change?
BERT JANSCH said:
ReplyDeleteGhost,
I agree with a lot of your post. We CAN profit from less political hijacking and more from pressure/ group involvement and awareness. Although I do not think that there is a misconception that we do suffer democratic deficits. Picking up some functionalist frequencies here! With regard to your comment about 'The ruling party not running some sort of dictatorship' (or oligarchy for that matter), at times we are not that far from it. The Lions and the foxes differ only in form.
Sometimes I think that we need a system that will allow the best ideas to 'rule', and not the best/most successful party. In effect, having a good constitution protecting against political and economic hegemony. I earlier suggested a non governmental pressure group to maintain involvement/ ''fairness'' but I agree that it is not a viable or sustainable idea. Building on this, I think the constitution should be something that is makeshift and changing. To cater for and protect opportunism (a double edged sword!). I would therefore like to ask; who decides what constitutes the constitution, when, and is it always adhered to?
LW,
Two questions: 1) you mentioned the 10 votes per person system is not ideal as it results in one vote for one/their person. What other options do we have?
2) You mentioned that 'standing for election in Gibraltar is unhindered save that the electoral system militates against individuals standing outside the party system'. How could this change?
Bert Jansch:
ReplyDelete1. By adopting a single transferable vote system for Ministers combined with elections for a representative in each electoral district who could not be ministers but would be backbenchers i the legislature, see my comment above.
2. With an electoral system as in 1 above which does not convert 10 votes into 1.
Ghost says:
ReplyDeleteRobert you misunderstand my example of the unions; I have made my opinion quite clear with regards to the reason behind Govt's inability to do anything other than create new contracts to hold rogue civil servants to account and with the assistance of unions.
Anything else would have been disastrous because you have an opposition with soo much baggage particularly in this regard, and whose only game plan was to stir it up (divide and concur). Therefore I disagree that the lack of bi-partisan politics is the fault of both parties; I assure you that without Bossano and his 40 years of power over the GSLP the prospect of consensus on issues would be far more forth coming.
Yes we now have 15 years of political bashing that has done nothing in the way of seeking middle ground politics; interestingly though we have also had 15 of the most successful years in our history, economically, socially and politically (with regards to our international politics)......one might argue that one of the two parties has has taken the right decisions and the others performance has not quite lived up to the democratic expectations of progress that we all aspire to.
Pleased to see that we have still found agreement between us though.
G
BERT
ReplyDeleteAs far as I can see I have published all the comments that I have received from you.
Ghost, you do not have to look far to find small societies that function well, but are far more accountable and open to public scrutiny. Any local council in the UK would qualify. Nobody wants a Government that can’t carry out its mandate or run Gibraltar. That doesn’t mean that we should be happy with a constitution that has swapped the colonial power of the Foreign Office for a elected local with all the same powers.
ReplyDeleteIn my view it is not simply a question of whether Gibraltar has a democratic deficit. It is also a question of whether or not Gibraltar would do better if more people could play any active role in its running. Perhaps you do not agree, but in my view, the pace at which Gibraltar can take decisions and move them forward is pathetically slow. It would be improved if more people had the ability to take decisions and implement them, or directly influence decision takers.
I agree that Gibraltar suffers from a bit of a panista problem. But that problem is made worse by the perception (if not the reality) that pissing off one guy (the guy at the top) can seriously affect your prospects. Its not surprising that people have that perception when one Minister is Chief Minister, Minister for Finance, Minister for Employment and Personnel, Minister for Civil Status etc
Gibraltar is a small place and perhaps there are not many that have the qualities to lead. But in the last 15 years there has been more than just one and I for one think that Gibraltar would have benefited from a little diversity of thought and humility that might naturally come if leaders could more easily be changed.
A system where any pretender to the thrown needs to find 9 semi decent men or women to stand behind him before he can even begin to play a part greatly favours the incumbent (in gov or opposition). Yet it is plain to see that a great number of the 9 ladies or gents who end up being Ministers do very little if any policy creation and implementation – which is after all what they are there for. Why should we have them at all.
If we have an election which was Peter C. v Joe B v Fabian P v Peter M v Danny F v Keith A I think the race would be wide open, that leaders once in office would act as if their neck was on the line (because it would be) and those waiting in the wings, in our legislative council might be a little more eager to show what they were capable of.
Lastly – our MPs are supposedly “The Hon Gentleman” – recently the punch and judy show has deteriorated substantially and in my view that CM is as much to blame as the bloke with the moustache and the glasses. They should not be calling each other liars.
Robert we all know Gibraltar has a democratic deficit, we just choose to ignore it.
ReplyDeleteIt is always easier to follow the “flock “rather than take an alternative path.
The dictatorial manner in, which the Union carried out the B & W negotiations (regardless if they were right or not) is one of the many examples of this.
The problem does not lie in the acknowledgement of a democratic deficit, we all know it is there. But rather in the apathy shown towards such deficit from members of our community. The sad reality is that people just don’t care. The strong sense of patriotism and unity of the past has been replaced by feelings of indifference and a narcissistic mindset. None the less brought on by the current state of affairs we live in.
I will not proceed to bash the current Government on this particular issue (as per usual LOL) but I will state that in my humble opinion I do think they are at fault.
Regards,
K
Every day there are 383,000 babies born in the world that is 12 times the whole population of Gibraltar. Gibraltarians account for only 1 in 229,813 of the people on the planet. Wembley stadium seats 3 times the local population. The number of people having sexual intercourse at any given moment is 6 times our population. Are we perhaps taking ourselves a teensie weensie bit too seriously?
ReplyDeleteAnonymous at 15:22
ReplyDeletePerhaps you should tell that to our politicians?
"The dictatorial manner in, which the Union carried out the B & W negotiations (regardless if they were right or not) is one of the many examples of this."
ReplyDeleteHahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Si they had to put a gun to their heads. Valiente cara. And then the best of all is that " strong sense of patriotism" that we have lost. What because we don't support Bossano or because it's the only thing you have left to split the community into some sort of protest for a cause which you ain't got support for.
Kafab, if you really were interested in democratic deficits your first question should be how democratic can the GSLP be with a leader of 40 years +. oh and please do not preach to us about patriotism, I think you'll find that most if us are and what's more, we do not use it as a political tool.
Anon 15:22 how can you state such a thing?
ReplyDeleteThe rights of each and every individual should be considered equally . Sheer mass and numbers should not dictate the relevance of one’s thoughts or actions. Justice to our humanity is owed regardless if we are 30 thousand or 30 billion.
We might be but a mere speck in the map, but we also have voices that should be heard and respected.
Taking ourselves "a bit" to seriously? It this type of apathetic attitude that could get us all into a lot of trouble.
Regards,
K
Anon 15: 42
ReplyDeleteIn reponse to your comments regarding "how democratic can the GSLP be with a leader of 40 years +."
Please let us note that the GSLP is the ONLY politcal party in Gibraltar that democratically (via member votes) elects a leader EVERY year.
I wonder if the GSD do such a thing. Actually I doubt it!
Regards,
K
Kafab, if you say it enough times we might believe it. I can just see political theorists and democrats around the world puzzling over that one. Hhmmm let's see a democratic party socialist at the core, with a history or privatising anything that walks, only eight years in power, And wait for it, with the same leader since the 1970's. HahahahahahahahahahHahah. Brilliant stuff. But it's ok porque el niño Picardo viene, que viene.
ReplyDeleteAnon 17:13
ReplyDeleteOnce again you opt to launch an attack on the opposition rather than produce adequate counter arguments.
Your comments carry no weight what so ever. Would you mind elaborating on the above and enlightening us all with your infinitive wisdom?
PS - "with a history or privatising anything that walks"???? Is this not a predominate GSD trend? LOL
K
Kaelan, de verdad, I wish I could meet you & have a coffee & a chat. I have followed you on FB since you started the "We want a Dolphinarium" Group (not that I agreed !), but I enjoyed the way that you stood up for your beliefs, you didn't run with the pack & you were objective. I believe you even met with the the developers to get their facts & you were open to listen to the opinions of the "No" campaigners. What has happened to you since then?
ReplyDeleteYour passion is admirable, but where has your objectivity gone? Like most Gibraltarians who lived through the closed frontier era, I have been on more demonstrations than I care to remember. You cannot make blanket statements about apathy & lack of patriotism. I believe that the reason we are not all up in arms today, is simply because,...there is no need. Because whether we like it or not, this government has given us a security & a stability that allows us to , simply get on with our lives. I can assure you, that if & when the need arises, Gibraltarians would mobilise as they always have.
So, before you come to some of the conclusions you come to on occassion, why don't you find out more about the PDP & the GSD & speak to Independants like RV or Charles Gomez...just a thought.
Ghost says:
ReplyDeletePart 1
Anon 12:52. How you can compare Gibraltar to just another local council in the U.K. is beyond me. I am unaware of any with their own airports, power stations, finance centre, shipping industry with a bunkering port rated as number 1 in the Europe, Insurance industry underwriting 10% of the entire U.K. motor insurance, e-gaming leader worldwide, lowest unemployment rate in Europe, GIP of near £1b and not to mention low crime. So although we may be a small society we could not be more different to most other small communities around the world. But hey, we are talking about accountability and checks and balances, reforms…. but quite apart from the obvious success that we all enjoy today, we continue to lambast the CM with innuendos of running a dictatorship in which all the democratic principles of our constitution are not adhered to and are manipulated to suit the Govt of the day…..Not So!
Yes there may be room for reforms in which back benchers are able to play a part and in which the legislature is able to counter balance the executive more efficiently, but can we please end this crusade driven by the opposition and in which on the one hand we are told that there is a conspiracy by one man to manipulate our democracy, and on the other we quite clearly experience a Gibraltar that is in fact stronger, more secure and more progressive than ever before.
Part 2
ReplyDeleteWhat is most impressive is that we do all this without once taking a step back and asking ourselves whether it is the Govt at fault (only) and whether they are indeed imposing these democratic deficits, or whether we might look at an opposition that has failed to create a political ambiente that not only shows them up as serious players, but is also able to challenge a Govt that has lead with success…….Oh sorry, on this score you suggest that PRC is so controlling and our system so undemocratic that anyone wanting to challenge the CM is unable to do so, I quote for fear that I am imagining your statements “I for one think that Gibraltar would have benefited from a little diversity of thought and humility that might naturally come if leaders could more easily be changed.” What is that about? Joe Bossano / Fabian Picardo, even Keith, lambast the CM daily, the problem they have is not a deficient democracy, its credibility and seriousness in their ability to convince anyone least of all themselves that they have what it takes, and therein lies your problem.
You make a great comment ………..“the pace at which Gibraltar can take decisions and move them forward is pathetically slow” this again you attribute to PRC’s dictatorial and undemocratic credentials; but you also say that “Gibraltar suffers from a bit of a pansista problem” and that “Gibraltar is a small place and perhaps there are not many that have the qualities to lead”. Yes Caruana is arrogant. Yes he has likely been CM for too long, but he has carried out his brief to the best of his ability and not because he is out to manipulate, dictate or control, but because this is his style and that’s not going to change, as was the case with Maggie.
You vote a Govt into power to lead, not to debate about whether or not he / she has too much or too little power, (the democratic system and our ability as players in that system will prevent abuses as they have in the past). Leaders are there to take decisions, tough ones, complicated ones, political, human, social, there is an array of interests that one might not appreciate and which are to be considered in every executed policy and which has to be in the collective best interests of society. We talk about freedoms, fear of repercussion, decisions that should be taken etc etc, in the same way that we talk about the manager of a football team getting it wrong, only to jump in and conveniently say…….. I would have done it this way.
Apologies for laying into Anon 12:52 in this way, I have had a shit day at work and trust that you will understand - it’s not personal and I think you make good points, but the realities in my view are a little more complex and our eagerness to see a leader of 15 years ousted is based on misconceived propaganda from a party with a leader of 40 years with a cheek to suggest that they represent change.
Finally, if I you believe I am wrong and feel that PRC has abused his powers, you will have the opportunity of exercising your right to stop him this year and choose change by voting Bossano / Picardo as your next leadership.
Oh and apologies to Fred fpr dragging on - sorry mate.
Robert we need to talk royalties man..:)
G
Anon 17:43
ReplyDeleteI might do just that.
I did indeed meet with the Dolphinarium developers but after "hearing them out" refused to partake in any of the projects proceedings thus forth. To state I was not impressed with what I was told would be an understatement, though I will leave it at that.
I have retracted comments on LLW before and I have always been receptive to diverse perspectives and ideas (as long as they are objective of course). Furthermore contrary to what many will have you believe I am not part of the GSLP network nor I’m a big fan of Joe Bossano.
At the last elections my votes reflected my choice of candidate rather than my choice of party and amongst my choices where admittedly some GSD candidates.
“What happened” you ask? The Theatre Royal SHAM happened . The “airport deal” happened. The angling campaign issues happened. The CM’s Andorra statements in Seville happened and to top it all off a particular GSD minister happened to mix politics with Sport and it hit VERY close to home. That happened. But please do not confuse this for some type of personal vendetta against one of the ministers, which has in turn escalated into an anti-GSD crusade. I am far to open minded for such things. What this means is that I have had enough and I have chosen to do something about it.
Please note I would be willing to meet for coffee. Vamo que no muerdo! And just for the record you are not the first person to offer! hahaahah
K
Ghost
ReplyDeleteRoyalties? Ask PRC for these no? LOL
Your justification for PRC/GSD is good but does not convince me for one. All that you talk about is not down to one person or one party. Much of it is down to our collective ability. A collective ability that should be better used by better democracy.
You omit to mention all the extra cost to tax payers on most construction contracts that GOG has entered into or had to take over. This is tax payers money used to bail out mistakes made.
I am Mr. Apathy who wrote at 15.22 and no apologies - in Gibraltar we seem to breed the most arrogant big headed politicians in the civilised world (there are many such people in the Third world however so I suppose the imperiousness of the Caruanas and Picardos and Azopardis of this village third world politicians). What we need in this here 2 horse chicken shit town is people with manners and humility que no somos nadie cojones!!!!
ReplyDeleteMr Apathy
ReplyDeleteTotally agree with you ... there is a need to grow up and get real!
Ghost says:
ReplyDeleteRobert the arrogance will supersede the generosity in PRC's case don't you agree...:)
We agree yet again Robert, it is our collective responsibility to hold politicians to account and across the board too. This is my point, its not just the reforms, its about the people for the people; I maintain however that there is great deal more to hold to account on the part of the pretenders. Sadly, I do not see anyone with the grasp of political strategy, integrity and ability to quite match PRC and I believe that the longer we have Bossano as the leader of the GSLP with Picardo wishing behind, the longer we will continue to have a void of democracy.
Your joking on the construction contracts aren't you? You're not really suggesting that Govt is to blame for the mistakes by private companies? I agree though that they may well have been let off too easily, much like el Patio Chico.
G
Ghost
ReplyDeleteI am absolutely not joking on building contracts ... its all about management, judgment, choice and vision (don't forget that one!). It is not just about getting the cheapest price. Crap in Carp out, cheap upfront double expensive outback!
Agreed? Don't think so systemic reform is required to deliver what I believe Gibraltar is capable of delivering. It is about collective responsibility and empowering more people not about one individual being all things to all men and changing that individual rarely!.
Ghost says:
ReplyDeleteRobert no more wine for you man - el ano que viene te compro un vinasol..;)
I still want Royalties though.
G
Anon 19:59 aka Mr Apathy
ReplyDeleteIt seems I mispercieved your comments.
I agree! (Only to a certain extent though).
K
Kaelan, I am glad you decided against supporting a Dolphinarium after meeting with the developers, but my point is that you did so after looking at it from all angles. You did not accept all the hype you got from either side, you went further, listened to all the arguments, informed yourself and in the end came to you own conclusion.
ReplyDeleteI hope you do the same politically and next time I see you around town, I'll say Hi & invite you to that coffee.
Is anon 23:03 mother teresa's reincarnation or something. No fun! Maybe she can organise a peaceful protest of sorts with Kafab, who is just itching to get on the streets.
ReplyDeleteListening to the news this morning and the story on how Tony Blair is set to again appear at the Chilcot Inquiry as a result of the Attorney Generals written statement, I can`t but help think how we lack all of these parliamentary committees, bodies and inquiries that we so regularily see questioning ministers on a wide variety of matters. Is this not further evidence of a democratic deficit?
ReplyDeleteAnd while Ghost might think it perfectly acceptable for the tax payer to be funding new doors for the latest affordable homes (not to mention the aftermath of the OEM/Haymills collapse) to the tune of 10`s of thousands - if not more - I don`t ! Someone screwed up here big time with OUR money and this is where a parliamentary committee would come in handy.
But then again what might be beneficial to the tax payer might not neccessarily be so for the Govt - or the Opposition for that matter!
Anon at 12:52 says
ReplyDeleteGhost - as you rightly point out - "we are talking about accountability and checks and balances, reforms". Bunkering / airports / finance centre have nothing to do with the simple point being made. Gibraltar lags behind by western standards of local democracy. If Gibraltar was going down the pan rather than doing so well (although I wonder how our GDP would fare if we removed annual Gov expenditure based on massive borrowing that will take years of future generations of tax payers money to repay) then my criticisms of our system of Gov would apply just as much. If the GSLP won the next election my criticism would still apply.
I have not “lambast[ed] the CM with innuendos of running a dictatorship in which all the democratic principles of our constitution are not adhered to and are manipulated to suit the Govt of the day”. Nor are my comments part of “this crusade driven by the opposition”. I have barely mentioned the Government of the day in my post. As far as I am concerned it doesn’t matter whether a leader does or doesn’t abuse power. Its whether he can or can’t. We must not just be fair, we must be seen to be fair. When the executive tied by a doctrine of collective responsibility, is also the holder of a majority in parliament, when most of our day to day business does not requirement any parliamentary input, where access to information in respect of many important matters has not improved since colonial times, then I say we are failing.
Ghost, in 12 months, or in 60 months time, or in 10 years time, PRC may not be in his post. Perhaps we will have another leader and perhaps he won’t be as incorruptible as others. I don’t think our present system of checks and balances adequately caters for that eventuality. I also think it favours incumbents and makes it very difficult for other talents to play a meaningful role.
The fact of the matter is that our Government has formed around one individual. Our system of Government should reflect that. It would make the bar to entry easier because those individuals would compete on their own merits alone. Competition would flourish. Gibraltar would benefit.
Anonymous at 09:55 and 10:37
ReplyDeleteTotally agree with both your comments. The defence of the democratic deficit by reference to any particular incumbent in the office of Chief Minister is no defence at all. Safeguards must be objective and systemic. Reliance on the subjective characteristics of any individual who may or may not be a benign Chief Minister adhering more or less to internatuional standards of good governance is not the issue.
The issue is that the system of government should have built into it the necessary democratic checks and balances both in the electoral system and in safeguards against abuse of power. The abuse of power does not have to exist as a pre-requisite to introducing the safeguards. Usually if the abuse exists it is too late to introduce any safeguards.
Such safeguards as exist in Gibraltar are too high level, insufficient and do not prevent the harm, that they are inetnded to prevent.
I want to confirm part of what Anononymous who wrote yesterday at 15/22 wrote saying that the number of people having sexual intercourse at any given moment is 6 times Gibraltar's population. Uncannily at that precise moment (15/22) I was in throes of coital extacy with a consenting adult in the privacy of my own car. It occurs to me that politicians, pundits, concerned citizens, lawyers and patriots would be much less stresed out and aggresive if they had more sex. I mean who thinks of democracy or elections or litigation or any of the other heavy "issues" when in the middle of a good old shag (if you will pardon the exprerssion)?
ReplyDeleteAnon's 2303hrs tone is soooooooo patronising! Definitely GSD hardcore! And no Im not GSLP nor PDP nor GSD.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous 23:03
ReplyDeleteI shall conceed you do have a point and I look foward to that Coffee :)
Con educadesa se llega muy lejo! Maybe Anon 09:24 should take heed of such advice! LOL
regards,
K
Dear Anon @ 14.32 I suggest you go & do some of what Anon @14.28 recommends. :)
ReplyDeleteGhost says:
ReplyDeleteI accept that there are further reforms and mechanisms that would improve our democracy. I agree with Robert in that "Usually if the abuse exists it is too late to introduce any safeguards". Reforms had indeed been promised in the 2006 Constitution, as Robert rightly pointed out in an earlier blog, so why don't we calmly and democratically (with no political agenda in mind), use the power of free speech that is LW and propose our collective ideas to Govt. Any reason why LW cannot be a pressure group, if there are sensible ideas to be proposed?
This blog is useful, but at this stage only serves to fuel our own egos and political machinations. There is clearly a valid argument to what is being discussed here, although may take it to extremes.
Robert, you have serious posts that you can use in order to support the argument.
The question is how its done??
Just thinking out loud here people.
G
Ghost
ReplyDeleteThis forum is open. Politicians read it. Let them take up the thread. Let them undertake the necessary work. Let them revive the promised Parliamentary Committee. Let them undertake the necessary reforms. Let them do what they are elected for to be our DEMOCRATIC representatives. As for the GSD, well, they promised it over and over again in their manifestos they should deliver NOW!
As to LLW becoming a pressure group, well one problem, most people are anonymous :)
Ghost says:
ReplyDeleteI had a feeling you might say that…:)
Still, the blog itself represents a varied school of thought on local politics. There is consensus by many on issues as there is disagreement, but surely you agree that anon or not, the blog represents free speech and on occasion brings serious and valid arguments to the fore. Yes I agree that many politicians from both sides of the bench read this blog, but in politics democratic or not, it is a free society who present opinion, task, issue and pressure to the politicians. This blog is passive in that it’s easy for the establishment to ignore or dismiss. My point is, take it to them!
Your posts have been recognized by existing media already, your following is admittedly and frighteningly large (if your numbers are to be believed), there is no reason why you should not be able to summarize what the gripe of the month is. The key to this is avoiding political hijacking, and that requires any summary that is made to take form with no agenda and on issues such as the one we are in at present.
So why not speak to the editors of our press (god knows they need news) and explore the idea of bringing Llanito World to the coffee shops in town, the restaurants in Casemates, the desks of politicians, even table 3 at the Royal Calpe..:)
G
I don't agree that LW should become a pressure group. After all, recent pressure group history in Gibraltar suggests that such organisations are often hijacked by political parties and/or individuals attempting to raise a public profile before taking the political plunge.
ReplyDeleteLW does an excellent job in raising issues for debate in a society otherwise starved of such opportunity, and thus those of us who choose to (or must) remain anonymous welcome a platform for discussion without fear of being added on to any political "black-list".
Ghost:
ReplyDeleteThe figures that you see published on this site are not mine. They are GOOGLE statistics so please believe them.
Occasionally brings serious and valid arguments to the fore? How condescending! I think that the number of readers alone are indicative that this is achieved rather more often than not, so “occasionally” is gratuitous.
As for Editors of our press, they are free to publish any piece in Llanito World. In the HEADER, from inception of the blog, I gave blanket consent to re-publication subject to attribution. PANORAMA has availed itself of this facility on a few occasions.
Ghost says:
ReplyDeleteRobert, your reaction although understandable after re-reading my post was not intended to cause offence. I think you know full well by now, that I value the opportunity that LW affords us all and suffice to say that if you have been offended by my comments, I apologize.
My intent here was actually more of a compliment than an insult, and based purely on the success that you have had with this blog.
Your feelings on my suggestion are noted.
G
don't become a pressure group
ReplyDeleteLW works best as a forum for debate
Ghost
ReplyDeleteNot offended at all ... relax! :)
GENERAL ELECTION 17 MARCH 2011.
ReplyDeleteIs that before or after the GSLP have their democratic leaders election?
ReplyDeleteexcellent i won't be here
ReplyDeleteSt Patrick's day
ReplyDeleteAnonymous at 07:51
ReplyDeleteWhere does this random suggestion of an election on the 11th March 2011 come from? It is a most unlikely date!
I very much doubt the GSD would risk calling such an early election.
ReplyDeleteA General Election has been called for the 11th March 2011 in the Republic of Ireland.
ReplyDeletePerhaps Anon at 07:51 thinks we are in Dublin.
I can confirm that a general election has been called for the 11th March 2011 ... in EIRE!
ReplyDeleteI can confirm that the election this year will (for a change) have some new candidates in both line ups. The opposition however, will likely remain with there democratically elected leader of 40 years or el niño picardo y si no esta mickey.
ReplyDeleteREAD THE F**ING POST: "GENERAL ELECTION 17 MARCH 2011". Lo tengo de buenisima tinta.
ReplyDeleteAhh de buena tinta entonces el 17 ... esta seca la tinta? LOL
ReplyDeleteLlanita from Gibraltar says...
ReplyDeleteAnon at 17:56: Who's Mickey?
Mouse
ReplyDeleteThe Mouse that wears this governments watch ;)
ReplyDeleteIf there is an election of the 17th March the GSLP will be slaughtered because quite simply they are not prepared for it. Trust Caruana to pull a trick like that. Fabian has turned out to be an anticlimax and there are no people of sunstance in teh GSLP any more. The only feasible opposition is the PDP.
ReplyDeleteFinally someone making some sense, pity that the penny has dropped so late for the PDP. In the last election the plan was join GSLP under the premis that the GSD would loose. The integrity of politics! doesn't bode well for team clean when they evidently started off with pure tactics as opposed to real issues of substance in the interests of the people. Let's see if they truly have the muscle to display what anon 22:23 says and hold the abysmal performance of the opposition to account.
ReplyDeleteLlanita - Mickey is Garcia. Or so he has been labelled by the GSD sycophants.
ReplyDeleteI think anon 22:23 underestimates both the PDP party and the GSLP/LIBS coalition. One thing I have learnt the hard way (quite literally lol) is to NEVER underestimate your opponent. The GSD might be in for a BIG surprise if they do.
If the 2007 elections were close I think these are going to be EVEN closer, especially after the CM’s Seville “screwup”.
Ps - The democratically elected leader of 40 years must be doing something right. Aside from being elected and re-elected as the opposition leader he keeps getting ALOT of votes year after year after year. I guess the figures and facts speak for themselves.
K
I would suggest that those posters calling for the "abysmal performance of the opposition" to be held to account do a similar exercise on the performance of the government. After all, elections are essentially referenda on the political record of a government, less on the record of an opposition.
ReplyDeleteLlanita from Gibraltar says...
ReplyDeleteKaelan, I hope you are wrong, as I don't think its very nice to poke fun at other people, especially when their problems may be physiological, after all, other politicians who also have physiological differences to the rest of us, are referred to by name and not by their disability.
However, should you be right, I think some Anons should grow up and be more respectful of others.
Calpetano, thumbs up! :)
ReplyDeleteLlanita
ReplyDeleteI agree with your sentiments entirely if Kaelan is right but I would not class it as a "disability".
Respect always adds weight to an argument.
llanita from Gibraltar says...
ReplyDeleteI think it can be a disability for someone who needs to speak out loud as Politicians need to and perhaps this may be a medical condition.
It would be a very sad day indeed if we spoke here of 'el cojo' or 'la gorda', for example. Respect, not only adds weight to an argument but also shows the maturity of the poster and reflects on the strength of his/her opinion. When posters resort to nasty insults, they do their cause no good!
Llanita I totally agree!
ReplyDeleteThe Opposition's delay in establishing a clear leadership should worry the electorate. If the GSD decides to call an early election - something they are entitled to do as it is not their job to wait upon the Opposition to finalise their internal organisation - the Opposition will be caught on the hop and this is detrimental to the worth of the election as the field is weakened even before campaigning begins. That an election would be happening in 2011 is hardly a surprise and it is disturbing that the GSLP, however democratically it runs itself, has taken this long to finalise their leadership status.
ReplyDeleteThe Devils Advocate .....
ReplyDeleteRobert this ties in with my previous comment...
interesting quote by Clement Attlee British Prime Minister "Democracy means Government by discussion,but it is only effective if you can stop people talking"
The Devils Advocate...
ReplyDeleteGot to say one thing Robert, didnt know about this website untill I read the chronicle today. Thank God there is a forum for good debate without effects!!
Robert,
ReplyDeleteOwing to the fact that this is your blog and you have initiated the topic
Just curious to know what your views are on the Whistleblower Joanna Hernandez . What are your views with regards her allegations and the manner in which the GOG tackled both her allegations and response to the industrial tribunals recommendations?
Im curious to know other peoples opinion on this matter?
The Devils Advocate.
Devils Advocate
ReplyDeleteAlthough I know of the case, I am ashamed to admit that I did not follow it closely enough to feel that I am competent to comment on it.
Superb Piece of Web site, you’ve got right here. I am so fortunate to run into your web site through yahoo queries. I just bookmarked to read your articles.
ReplyDeleteI really appreciate your post and you explain each and every point very well.Thanks for sharing this information.And I’ll love to read your next post too.
ReplyDelete