UK: Labour Hits the Ground Running by Shifting Power Out of Parliament

Well, so much for the British Consitution! Starmer seems determined to destroy what's left of the British Constitution after Red Tony Blair did his hatchet job on it.

From The European Conservative

By Michael Curzon

Starmer has launched a “major programme of devolution” which will see powers given to a new “independent secretariat”—and clawed back from the electorate.

Much of the media and the Tory establishment dismissed Sir Keir Starmer as “sleepy” and directionless. But our new left-wing radical prime minister is wasting no time when it comes to tearing up the British constitution—potentially irreversibly.

Starmer’s government yesterday, on July 9th, got to work on shifting power out of Parliament—that is, out of the hands of the British public (more on this later)—in what it described as “a major programme of devolution.”

The prime minister met with England’s elected regional ‘Metro’ mayors to discuss how more decision making will increasingly fall to them, taking place not in Parliament but in local administrations, and facilitated by a new statutory body, the ‘Council of the Nations and Regions.’

That sounds nice and democratic enough. But the under-examined document behind this move—and others that will follow—reveals that the Council will be overseen by a new “independent secretariat,” the full powers of which have yet to be established but which will include “call[ing] meetings and set[ting] agendas” and “active[ly]” mediating between administrations.

This “independent” body will undoubtedly be filled with hard-to-remove Leftists, into whose hands the powers stripped from Parliament will be passed.

In practice, it could see localised leaders split from Parliament. For example, in a possible future lockdown period, such a body could impose its own even more egregious measures—as, again, the document, launched by Starmer and former Labour PM Gordon Brown, behind all this suggests.

Small-c conservative journalist Peter Hitchens, who was vocal about these changes ahead of the election, also suggests that controls given to local government—as Brown’s document puts it, “to generate its own revenue with new fiscal powers”—could “unleash a disguised wealth tax on Britain’s homeowners.” (Indeed, yesterday’s meeting featured a discussion on the “beginning of the process of establishing Local Growth Plans across the country.”)

Starmer himself says that he doesn’t see any of this “as giving power away. I see it as returning power to where it should be.” On this, Hitchens commented that “he would say that, wouldn’t he? Our elected Parliament has always been an obstacle to the fiercer long-term plans of Labour.”

Not that the media has picked up on any of this (they’re too busy asking about the footie, instead). All the mainstream coverage of this meeting that I have come across regurgitates the government’s line that power is being shifted out of “Westminster.” This is a euphemism for Parliament, which itself effectively means ‘the people.’

Of course, the people do still vote for regional mayors (most of whom are conveniently located in left-leaning metropolitan areas), so some will argue that power will remain in the hands of the public—albeit through another layer of bureaucracy which will make it all the more difficult for future conservative governments to effect change. But what about the “independent secretariat,” which will itself hold many powers? The European Conservative contacted the government to try and establish how its members will be appointed but was simply pointed towards the official press release which avoids any specifics.

It is worth noting too that the Tory mayor present at the meeting—Ben Houchen, who has urged the Tories not to move to the Right—had nothing but good things to say about Starmer’s intentions. Also, never forget that some powers were already set to be devolved to more areas—had the Conservatives won the election.

It is difficult to imagine how any future government could succeed in returning these powers to Parliament. They would be widely accused of hampering democracy, when the opposite is the case.

And this is just Starmer’s first step. What comes next will be even more damaging to Parliament—or, once again, to ‘the people’—and will be even harder to reverse.

Pictured: The Right Honourable Sir Keir Starmer, KCB, KC, MP