|
Though Parliament finally succeeded in establishing supremacy over the monarchy in 1702, the situation as far as the ordinary citizen was concerned changed very little. The Upper Classes, the minority of educated landholders and the new industrialists who could read and write and had some grasp of domestic and international affairs, ruled the country. They knew best, and there was neither need nor opportunity to question their actions.
Has this changed much today? It would hardly seem so. Once elected, governments are as arrogant, as dictatorial, as secretive, spendthrift and generally "superior" as they ever were. Yet "we, the people" are today every bit as well informed as the government (save in those instances where government deliberately conceals information); indeed, the plain common sense of ordinary citizens is often needed to bring governments down to earth. It is, after all, the "ordinary people" who enjoy the benefits, or suffer the discomfort and the cost of government actions.
We need to update the relationship between government and people, better to reflect the times in which we live. Government is the nation's biggest spender, taking anything up to 50%-plus of the nation's earnings. It is also a monopoly, subject to little or no discipline in the efficiency of its operations and its cost-effectiveness. It is virtually unanswerable to anyone for its actions; it taxes and spends at will with very little meaningful accountability.
For both political and economic reasons, we need to establish a new relationship: a relationship which accurately reflects reality, namely that government is a service to its citizens, its wages paid by its citizens as its customers. The process of government must be clearly defined in its field of action and subject to strict financial and administrative disciplines, so that it fulfils its functions productively without incurring an over-burdensome tax on our earnings.
Each and every department and function of government must be clearly and separately identified, its function clearly defined and its costs enumerated so that those who pay the bills can review the different functions and assess their utility and desirability.
Welfare Programmes
It has become an accepted principle of our society that the disadvantaged should be supported. More important however, is precisely how we achieve this.
The first aim of any political and social administration must surely be to ensure that the rules, facilities and opportunities are in place to ensure that as few people as possible become disadvantaged in the first place. There are very few among us who, given the necessary economic climate and supportive services, do not have the potential to provide for themselves with dignity and in relative prosperity.
If everyone had the opportunity to receive a meaningful, productive education, with opportunities for further re-training right through into retirement, if everyone had the opportunity to do a challenging job of work for a fair remuneration, to obtain the necessities of life, particularly a decent home in decent surroundings for a fair price, and if we all lived in a productive society where both the commercial and more importantly the government sector provided quality goods and services cost-effectively…. there would be little need for "welfare". Welfare is counter-productive in that it can only give to the disadvantaged by taking from the working population – less a government handling charge.
A Welfare State may be a current necessity. Better a Well State.
A sound education, with on-going re-training facilities, together with a healthcare system which not only treats ill-health but also encourages the maintenance of good health, these are two essential prerequisites of a properly functioning society.
When these facilities are operated under government monopoly, there is no innovation, no element of choice, little or no incentive to improve either service or productivity.
By opening up these services to competition, we can achieve the benefits of commercial services. Adding strict government supervision ensures that these essential services are conducted in a socially responsible manner. And Pay, Profit and Price Evaluation guards against profiteering. By providing a properly structured safety net, we can ensure full, worry-free access to all citizens.
Peace is Government Productivity
The Principle of Peace, applied in Economics and Commerce as a policy of socially responsible free enterprise sets high standards of management and customer satisfaction, quality and productivity, performance and accounting for the private sector.
Governments today exempt themselves from commercial law. If the Principle of Peace were to be consistently and correctly applied there could be no exceptions, not even for government.
The Principle of Peace charges government with the specific duty of interpreting, applying and enforcing the Principle in terms of everyday law. Government is a service to its consumers and as such should be subject to the strictest possible commercial disciplines; its performance should be at least as good as and preferably better than the private sector. Any commercial legislation relating to accounting, standards, productivity or quality of private sector business and commerce should immediately and automatically apply to any and all functions of government.
Government should not be outside the law; government legislation, conduct and operations must at all times be subject to the Principle of Peace and to all its resultant legislation.
Indeed the process of auditing and applying the necessary disciplines to government should be entrusted to a specially constituted Committee of Constitutional standing. No institution, least of all government, can be trusted to discipline itself.
The aim of government should be the same as that of any well-run private sector industry or service: to provide the best possible service at the lowest possible price.
The productive efficiency both of government itself, and of essential infrastructure and welfare services needs to be maximized, either by contracting out under government supervision, and/or by imposing performance standards, cost limits, benchmarking checks, and any other of the many devices for improving productivity which may be applicable.
The major problem is a fact of life: Government is also a monopoly, subject to little or no discipline in the efficiency of its operations and its cost-effectiveness. It is virtually unanswerable to anyone for its actions; it taxes and spends at will with very little meaningful accountability.
Can we change that? Yes, by harnessing the potential of Britain's membership in the European Union. Let's face it, the EU is not high in Britain's popularity stakes. But we're in, and here's a chance to make use of it.
The idea is simple, and would be simple to set up. Basically, we enumerate and define each individual department and function of government. Then we create a European standard consisting of named government departments and definitions of each. We also need to establish standard objectives, and standard methods of evaluating the achievement of those objectives.
So for example, the Ministry of the Environment has a standard EU definition, standard goals measurable by standard definitions. Reports on all EU government departments to be published quarterly.
It then becomes possible to compare all EU - say - Environment Ministries side-by-side, and to view the degree of fulfilment of their objectives and cost of operation. We can then benchmark the most cost-effective, with other Environment Ministries can analyze and copy.
A Powerful Combination
A government committed to Peace and Non-Aggression, confined to legislation and its enforcement, productive and cost-effective in its operation..... a powerful combination indeed!
The ideal of Peace and Non-Aggression requires that we should confine ourselves to those actions and activities which are not detrimental or disadvantageous to others, which do not harm or injure others. It is as old as human conscience.
The parallel concept of government, that it exists primarily to prevent actions harmful to others, has likewise existed in political philosophy as expounded by reformers throughout recorded history.
And the ideal that government, its function clearly defined and limited, should exercise its duties efficiently and at minimum cost to its customers, is a dream long cherished by reformers and tax-payers alike.
Accurate and consistent application of the Principle of Peace by a government strictly disciplined in its conduct and expenses would reflect the ideal summarized by Thomas Jefferson in his first Inaugural Address given on March 4th, 1801:
"A wise and frugal government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another yet leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and which shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned: this is the sum of good government necessary to complete the circle of our felicities".
Today, over two hundred years later, most of Britain's good citizens would probably, if asked, say that a wise and frugal government is an excellent idea... and one they are still waiting for.
|
|
