Oh goody, the Fabian’s have come with an 11-point plan for a new definition of ‘Britishness’ (yawn), let’s see what they have to say
Write down the constitution
While we now have a Human Rights Act, the lack of public debate over its introduction means that it is not embedded in our political system. The lesson should be that the public process by which we renew our political system and create a homegrown Bill of Rights will be as important as the outcome. If it is to renew our democracy, further constitutional changes must arise not from a committee of the great and good but after a “great national debate” involving the largest public deliberative gatherings ever conducted: what rights and responsibilities should we have? What role should religion play in a society of many faiths and none? Should more power be held locally? Is the electoral system fair? Could voting be considered a duty of all citizens? This could then lead to a British constitutional convention.
Ok, we’re actually off to a pretty good start. A written constitution, a proper bill of rights and a ‘great national debate’ – yeah I can go for that.
Except, what all this about “the role of religion in a society of may faiths and none
I agree with every word of this apart from the sweary bits, which give the impression that you’re very, very angry about something but can’t actually think why at the moment. They also make it hard to quote this post without making you look slightly deranged.
Don’t blog angry, as Bill Murray never said.
Not angry, just thoroughly frustrated with the banal and vapid stupidity of the political classes.
At one time, the Fabians were pretty much the intellectual heart of the left and now they’re reduced to this kind of thinly veiled pandering to special interest groups.
“the role of religion in a society of [many] faiths and none” is relevant to a written constitution because it needs to deal with the role of the established church and the Lords Spiritual in our constitution.
I absolutely love this bit: