The FINANCIAL — Twenty years ago the Berlin wall came down and the yoke of Soviet totalitarianism was lifted. In the wake of these momentous events waves of experts descended on the former Soviet space to tell the new governments how to create a market economy and a consolidated democracy.
What matters most, they said, were well constructed institutions with proper checks and balances, an independent judiciary and a legislature which could conduct proper scrutiny of the executive. What was needed was a political class that was honest, elections that represented the will of the people and a speaker who could command the authority of parliament. What mattered most in the private sector was a light touch in terms of regulation: let the market rule.
Twenty years on and there are very few experts who would have the temerity to board a plane from the UK and offer advice about democracy and the free market. In the last year the British government has had to nationalise banks because they have failed to behave responsibly and were unregulated in their lending causing the worst financial crisis since the 1930s. The speaker of the British Parliament has been forced out of office for the first time in 300 years. Why? Because British MPs were caught fiddling their expenses to claim for second homes, some of which did not exist. Some MPs claimed for cleaning the moats around their country houses. Some continued claiming for loans that had already been paid off. Unprecedented numbers of people said they would not vote for the major parties, the PM became the most unpopular since polling began.
Georgian politics are in a difficult phase. British politics are in a difficult phase. The John Smith memorial trust fellowship, for which applications are now open, is designed for the future of leaders of Georgia to come together with their UK equivalents and their peers from six other countries, and learn from each other. For five intense, life changing weeks in Edinburgh and London, the John smith Fellows form a commission of enquiry into the health of British democracy, they become the experts visiting the old UK democracy. They learn how Britain is responding to this crisis and they think about how they can make a difference when they come home.
The 2009 Fellows arrived just as there was a concerted attempt to remove the PM from office. The 2010 fellows will arrive in June next year just after a general election. What might they learn about? They will learn about a system in transition. There is going to be a significant constitutional shake up if Labour win, there will be major challenges to the normal way of doing politics if the Conservatives win.
There might be referenda on signing the Lisbon treaty and on a new electoral system. There have been significant changes to the way the House of Commons works, there will be more. There have been primary elections for selecting candidates, these will be extended. For the first time in British political history there is likely to be televised debates between the party leaders.
Voters may have the right to recall their MPs if they are not performing well enough. The last hereditary peers will be tossed out of Parliament. The British supreme court has just started sitting. It is not a question of if politics in the UK will change, it is a question of how far these changes will go. For all this the John Smith Fellows will have a front row seat out. What lessons might they take away?
There are two kinds of lessons to consider. John Smith Fellows will be considering how they might apply in Georgia. The first is the role of consensus in the process of change. There will be significant constitutional changes in the UK over the next year but these, like the new supreme court, will enjoy broadly based support even if they have not been tested in a general election. Consensus in the UK periodically breaks down but, up to now, it has always reasserted itself. That process is happening now and will continue over the next year. This leads into the second lesson – all democracies, no matter how old or young, need to renew themselves. That renewal is not a sign of weakness but a sign strength and confidence.
The British House of Commons and its speaker failed, so we changed the speaker and reformed the house. Market deregulation failed so we introduced a new tougher system of regulation and our PM spearheaded a global change in systems of regulation. Our ancient legal system needed renewal so the supreme court was created. The period of reform is challenging but if reform is underpinned by consensus, democratic renewal can always be achieved.
Discussion about this post