Who are we?

A Twenty-First Century Separation of Powers

This manifesto does not feign to address every question of the nation's house-keeping, the temptation pursued so vigorously by the established but fading and failing parties. The NHS, the economy, education, policing, housing, the environment, transport and many other areas besides assuredly demand the devoted engagement of the elected government yet let us not pretend these are ordinary days, when lies abound and hatreds proliferate. Abraham Lincoln, a daring and dishevelled lawyer, at a critical and treacherous moment for his own nation simply made the pledge to be 'the representative of the truth' and history proved that truth under his watch did not go undefended as it did not in our own family of nations as a once distrusted outsider, Winston Churchill, proved to be a sound and steadfast steward as a great evil approached. The Constitution and Reform Party attests that a cataclysm lurks beneath the hysteria of Brexit, a new strain of fascism which has advanced as Mr Orwell predicted in 'sedate and subtle' form, marshalled by the malevolence and ingenuity of Nigel Farage. The longer myopia over Brexit distracts the populace the firmer the jaws of fascism clench. The greatest threat to the  future of the United Kingdom comes from within. The Constitution and Reform Party is a small party with a big responsibility yet as the prophet Zechariah warned.."Who dares despise the day of small things?"

The finest and surest way to confront the instability and menace of these days is to protect and reform the constitution, the foundation on which the nation stands and of far greater importance than this or that prime minister. The Constitution and Reform Party identifies Parliament and the Church as the two institutions most damaged by the ferocious and unrelenting winds of neglect. The legislative and civil service has been considerably weakened by conflicts of interest, a politically and economically harmful capitulation to unscrupulous commercial schemes and the interference of the state with the Church in redefining marriage marks a dangerous shift towards the collapse and co-opting of the institutions, the ultimate objective and deepest desire of a ruthless tyrant and heresiarch. What next? The Judiciary? The press? Below I have outlined the legislative objectives of The Constitution and Reform Party. A Twenty-First separation of powers : Business from politics, Church from state. This does not hinder the cooperation of these moving parts of the nation (for the private sector can still pitch for and procure state contracts) or forbid constitutional convergence (Bishops sit in the Lords and the Anglican Church presides at coronations and royal occasions). In words from the Federalist Papers, perhaps the most respected document articulating the separation of powers 'it goes no farther than to prohibit any one of the entire departments from exercising the powers of another department'.

Economic prosperity cannot return to endure until political corruption is exposed and removed by legislation. Conflicts of interest do not distribute wealth but in their very nature hoard it and damage the legitimate exchanges of business elsewhere. Economic growth built on conflicts of interest is superficial and ultimately destructive to the life and health of a nation.The  Parliament that presently sanctions and conceals political corruption must now become the Parliament that ensures its abolition. The Transparency of Lobbying, Non-party Campaigning and Trade Union Administration Act passed into law on 30th January 2014; it neither addresses nor prevents this damaging and destabilizing entente between bribing and bullying business and an increasingly pliable Parliament. Conversely, inherently dishonest, it was designed to protect the misuse of taxpayer revenue. The existing legislation is not fit for purpose and a bill removing the hidden and widespread conflicts of interest must be prepared, presented and enacted.

The Transparency of Lobbying, Non-party Campaigning and Trade Union Administration Act exhaustively defines the ‘meaning of consultant lobbying’ and describes the formal exchanges between consultant lobbyists, politicians and civil servants and the breadth of government activity discussed comprising legislation, regulation, procurement and more whilst failing to halt the misappropriation of public funds that often stem from the promise of unjust and personal gain. Hansard records William Wilberforce speaking out on the issue in 1805 when political corruption was contained and not contagious. He identified the grave consequences of the practice, reaching well beyond Parliament. Unchecked he urged such conflicts of interest would lead to ‘every species of corruption and there would be no security left for the faithful discharge of any public trust’. Though the existing legislation established a statutory register of lobbyists it fails to arrest the corrupt compensation, immediate or deferred, offered to the public servant or servants that ensure the legislation, policies or contracts favour the needs and desires of their paymasters outside Parliament (including wealthy foreign individuals and companies).

Conflicts of interest endanger our democracy. Unchallenged and left to run rampant, the forces and advocates of greed are increasingly dominating our Parliament and economy. The disquieting result of our compromised and weak politics has been a growing distrust between those that govern and the electorate. Dangerous sympathies are aroused, seeking to exploit instability and a brittle economy, to establish a political liturgy of blame, fear and xenophobia. Anti-Semitism and Islamophobia have infected the Labour and Conservative Parties. The growing propensity of parliamentarians to espouse or ignore this corrupted politics, these conflicts of interest, to surrender their objectivity to avarice, must be stopped. It is indeed possible for a Secretary of State, minister or civil servant under him or her to treat their department like a personal and unregulated business empire. Time in office or employment allows the individuals to establish the relationships and understand the processes which he or she can manipulate when returning as a consultant lobbyist or in the employ of a business seeking to win government contracts or benefit from new or revised policies or legislation. Indeed serving politicians are often connected openly or secretly to individuals or companies ruthlessly seeking to influence or benefit from government business. Often they are remunerated. Sometimes the politician and the unscrupulous business figure are one and the same person; their position in Parliament is little more than rewarded corruption paid for by the taxpayer. These destabilizing practices can also hide in opposition or on the back benches with the proliferation of all-party parliamentary groups. These are the areas of concern and intended legislation.

In the U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren moves past empty theorizing and pursues practical, intelligent and fearless opposition to the commodification of politics. This  rampaging practice, dressed in the slick language of the lobbyist, unchecked, can destroy an economy and play havoc with a political system by the entrenched distrust it creates. It invites the establishing dictator to walk with mock outrage in the ruins of  a constitution, in the words of another great American, Alexander Hamilton (whose life is presently being chronicled by Lin Manuel-Miranda's hip-hop in the West End), like those 'paying an obsequious court to the people, commencing demagogues and ending tyrants'. Warren understands that friendship to the economy involves stopping, in the words of Theodore Roosevelt, 'the damage done by the combination of politics with big business'. Dismantling monopolies and conflicts of interest was the cornerstone of Roosevelt's presidency. Our aim in this area is indistinguishable from Warren's, to 'padlock the revolving door between government and lobbying', to prevent 'sham research from undermining the public interest' and seek a responsible culture of recusal.

The Marriage (same-sex couples) Act 2013 forces the Church and state together to the detriment of each other.The  state altering the definition of marriage removes Parliament as the ‘buttress’ of the Church as Winston Churchill defined its role in this regard. This interference with a Sacrament recalls the disastrous consequences when through poison or folly nations and empires have incrementally co-opted and crushed their Church. In the twentieth century large swathes of the German Church became a sanctioning and powerless instrument in the hands of Hitler’s terrible regime. It was an emasculated Church that was so hypocritical and helpless during the Spanish conquest in the Americas. A weak or politicized Church removes the heart from a nation. Our finest Prime Ministers, William Gladstone and Winston Churchill, correctly insisted that ‘Christian ethics’ must underpin our political system, the latter quoting the former, asserting that the nation must ‘rest with assurance upon “The impregnable rock of Holy Scripture”, the title of Gladstone's precious book (1890). However furious and concerted the opposition to this spiritual tenet and accepted secular political science (the separation of powers is not a theological principle) it is possible and desirable to retain every legislative advance won against the horrors of homophobia (we seek in no way to interfere with civil partnerships and tax legislation pertaining to those relationships) and oppose foul abuse experienced by the transgender community and yet remove from law the prerogative to reconfigure the oldest commitment bestowed on humanity. Many in the gay community hold that the original and diverse  definition (two sexes are surely more diverse than one) is reasonable and desirable. Some have spoken out such as the late Brian Sewell. The Constitution and Reform Party simply states that an effectively functioning constitution and diverse society must not homogenize marriage. 

In Federalist 47 and 48 James Madison describes the 'Constitution of England' as 'the mirror of political liberty' before going on to explain the principle of the separation of powers, warning of the 'danger of improperly blending the different departments' and of the need to secure 'practical security for each, against the invasion of the others'. These principles are clear, reasonable and enduring and not vindictive and regressive. It is fascism that poses the greatest threat to the homosexual and transgender constituency. Christian ethics opposed the totalitarianism that degraded and massacred the Jews and homosexuals in the death camps and deplores and condemns the oppression of any citizen regardless of sexual orientation. Fascism empties Christianity of Christ and bewitches a nation. Hitler described his dark creed as “positive Christianity” in the Nazi Party’s published constitution in the 1920s. Such sinister masquerades concealing extremist sympathies are once more gaining consensus in Europe. These political movements see society in warped hierarchical terms where immigrants and homosexuals are inferior. The black, French Justice Minister, Christiane Taubira, was racially abused by a crowd with ‘banana skins and obscenity-chants about monkeys’ for ‘her part in steering the same-sex marriage bill through parliament’. Nationalist parties seek to exploit the legislation and inflame prejudice and homophobia binding Christianity and homophobia together in false and sickening doctrine. UKIP and the Brexit Party have often been connected to homophobic remarks and sentiment.