Martin addressed the 2014 Hull and Humber Chamber of Commerce Expo on 'Power and Politics - The Cleethorpes View'
Martin's full speech can be found below:
"Thank you Mr President it’s a pleasure to be here.
First a quick poll: hands up those of you who are members of a political party...
As expected very few, so why do you choose not to use what power and influence that is open to you? I’ll return to this point later.
The topic I’ve been given for this address is 'Power and Politics - The Cleethorpes View' I toyed with how I was to interpret this. Where does power lie in the constituency? How does Cleethorpes influence those who hold power? Do politicians really have power at all or does it lie with others – the business community perhaps? The Civil Service – certainly because it needs strong ministers to master Sir Humphrey.
People often say to me and other politicians – ‘well you run the country, etc, etc.’ Of course, Parliament doesn’t run the country – the government does. Parliament is there to scrutinise government, represent the interests of our constituents, and to grant supply – the money government needs to go about its business and very occasionally to send the government packing.
In my 26 years as a councillor – first on the old Great Grimsby Borough Council, and from 1999 until 2011 on North East Lincolnshire Unitary Authority, I was never a part of the majority political group. In Grimsby Borough days I was, for a brief spell of around 18 months, a Committee Chairman in a minority Conservative administration; and between 2003 & 2009 a cabinet member in a Conservative/LibDem Coalition – a coalition that was formed to deal with a financial crisis. The Council we inherited was in financial meltdown. All went well for two or three years (since we had no money we couldn’t argue about how to spend it) but as things improved so the tensions increased. The party supporters on both sides grew restless of the compromises that coalition brings and the partnership withered on the vine. Sound familiar? Ask Messrs Cameron & Clegg about the tensions and difficulties of managing a government made up of two parties. Government is difficult at the best of times when you have majority but when you don’t it becomes doubly challenging and when on top of that money is almost non-existent tensions can reach boiling point.
But, returning to the topic of power, Of course ministers, council leaders and those who hold executive positions can make decisions and things happen – often slowly and months, sometimes years down the line change is noticeable. I have reached the conclusion that as one progresses up the political ladder that power is limited but influence increases and it is how you use that influence that matters. I suspect that the public expect us to have more influence that is actually the case.
I mentioned that change can take years; one of the rather amusing things that can bring a wry smile to those of us who follow the political scene closely is that decisions are taken about some major project. It is embarked upon, usually it will be heavily criticised by the opposition. A year or two later political control changes, the project is finished, most likely late and over budget. There’s a grand opening ceremony at which the new leader says what a privilege it is to be there to open this new auditorium, leisure complex or whatever, what great vision was possessed by those who embarked on the project and in the background the now opposition leader smiles and thinks how unfair life is as this scheme that was pushed through against the wishes of local people is now seen as a marvellous new facility that will transform the area, and one, no doubt, that decades later when some future council wants to demolish it will be the subject of a major campaign to save it from the Philistines now running the local authority.
You spend half your life in government implementing and defending decisions resulting from policies put in place by your predecessors and by the time your radical, far-sighted ideas find their way to the statute book and begin to take effect you are lounging on the opposition benches.
Nowadays more than ever, voters want a relationship with those who hold ‘power’ , we are constantly told that we politicians are somehow different, not like those we represent; foolishly we keep agreeing. How many times in the last week have you heard politicians of all parties say ‘we are not connecting with voters’ or ‘clearly we’ve got to listen to the message the voters are sending us.’ Of course we should be listening and have a dialogue with those we represent. I do that every time I walk down the street, or go to the supermarket, or to that centre of sporting excellence, perhaps, in deference to this magnificent setting I should say other centre of sporting excellence – I refer of course to Blundell Park, the home of Grimsby Town FC. I’m sure there are some of my colleagues who are remote and live lives completely different to those they represent but most do go about their daily lives among the people they represent. I have the great advantage of representing the constituency that bears the name of my hometown. Despite popular opinion I am not unusual on the Conservative benches, many of my colleagues in this region come from working-class backgrounds and have spent their lives living and working in or close to their constituencies.
When, in the forties and fifties Attlee, Churchill, MacMillan, Eden & co were the occupants of Downing Street were voters able to identify more with them? If turnouts at elections are anything to go by the answer is a resounding yes; but they all lived lives completely remote from those over whom they held power. The difference I suspect is that society has changed beyond recognition from those days fifty and sixty years ago; it was much more deferential and accepting that there was a class ‘born to rule’ and that they knew how to wield power, they knew what was best, they were the masters for the time being.
Some of the biggest difficulties facing the political process is how to make it more relevant to the electorate when so many are completely switched off from the whole process. Politics is, and has to be a two-way process – voters have to want to take part. I can speak, write, tweet, or whatever, as many times as I like but if the recipient of those words is unwilling to take part the decision-makers – those who wield power – whether in Cleethorpes or Westminster will be elected by fewer and fewer members of the public and, as a result possess less legitimacy and the public, understandably, could grow even more disenchanted.
But returning to my earlier question; how many of you belong to a political party? A handful, exactly what I expected and yet we are fortunate to have a sophisticated, liberal, participative democracy with hardly anyone participating. Of course around two-thirds participate by voting but the most effective way to increase your influence over those who seek political power is by joining the Party that most represents your own views.
For better or worse we have a winner-takes-all, first-past-the-post electoral system (when I was reading through my speech on Sunday evening I noticed that I had typed sinner-takes-all – a Freudian slip).
It is designed for a two-party system and almost always gives one-party a working majority. In a strange way it delivers what the public wants. Consider the sea-changes in public opinion that have occurred when the electorate was desperate for change such as 1979 when voters wanted rid of a failing Labour government; 1997 when it was clear that the Conservatives, worn out by eighteen years in power were in need of a rest – in came Tony Blair with a massive majority. And in 2010 it was clear the voters wanted rid of Labour but were not wholly convinced that the Conservatives were the answer to their prayers. What happened the system delivered a hung parliament. The great thing about our way of doing things is that people vote on Thursday and, usually by breakfast-time on Friday the new Prime Minister is on the doorstep of No. 10. The people have used their power to effect change. The public can see the change of power and the individual can see that his or her vote contributed towards that change.
Up and down the country new MPs are being elected and ex-MPs remaining just that – ex-MPs. Will the new ones identify with the voters, will they be local men and women who instinctively know the views and concerns of local people? Surely that would be more likely of local people had played a part in selecting the candidates. And who chooses the candidates? The political parties. Think how much more likely it is that those candidates would be representative if you, and all of those voters out there had taken part.
At the moment, and it has to be said for the foreseeable future the parties will remain the dominant players in the selection process. But you could all be part of that process. Please get involved.
What I would like to see is everyone in the Cleethorpes constituency and elsewhere be given the opportunity to be involved through Primary elections. That would be a real spreading of power and influence not just in Cleethorpes but up and down the country.
Now the thought of Primaries probably fills you with dread as your first thought is the seemingly endless process in American presidential elections. Be reassured I’m not suggesting anything like that. In the short-term it’s probably not going to happen though there is significant group of MPs and others who are arguing in favour of such a move.
Before the last election the Conservatives did select two of their parliamentary candidates by way of a full postal ballot throughout the constituency. The costs are considerable but democracy does have a price.
Certainly a start could be made by ensuring all candidates are selected by a wider group than just local party members. I and others were selected by a wider group – a closed primary; quite simply an advert in the local press giving time and place and an invitation to go on-line to register to attend the final run-off between the two candidates selected by the Party. It would be a start.
The further away the centre of power is, or is perceived to be from those subject to its authority the more likely it is that there will be widespread dis-satisfaction and alienation. We dislike rule from Brussels because what goes on there is remote and, to a great extent unaccountable. The feeling of ‘them’ and ‘us’ increases. We have local experience of this with the ill-fated County Humberside. On the South Bank it was seen as rule from Hull; and in Grimsby it’s hard to imagine anything worse. We always thought, rightly or wrongly, that more resources went to the North Bank.
In the 1955 General Election the Labour and Conservative parties attracted 96.1% of the votes cast. In 2010 it was 65.1%. There are a host of reasons but one is certainly that the main political parties have, to a considerable extent, lost touch with their core supporters.
It was never entirely true to say that the Labour Party represented the workers and the Tories the bosses; had it been so the Conservatives would never have won any election. It is certainly the case that politics was more tribal in the past but the parties in an effort to widen their support have, to some extent, left their core supporters feeling unrepresented. New Labour recognised the need and became a Party completely unrecognisable from the traditional Labour Party. Whilst they were winning that was considered acceptable. The Conservatives also recognised the changes in society, decided it had to modernise but also left many of its traditional supporters behind and, of course, when there is a vacuum there will be those attempting to fill it. Will UKIP achieve that or, much more likely, the major parties regroup and recover sufficient support to provide the electorate with a choice that they feel confident enough to place their trust in? Nowadays that’s much more difficult for the parties as a society we have choice beyond the wildest dreams of their parents and grandparents. Supermarket with tens of thousands of products, internet sales offer products from all over the world. But in politics you can’t choose the health policies of one party but the education policies of another; you can’t have a manifesto tailored to your personal needs. To be a credible party fit for government the offer must be a coherent set of policies across the board.
Though we have a parliamentary system it has become much more of a presidential contest. We have direct elections for Police & Crime Commissioners, we see Boris lauding it over London having collected more votes than any other individual politician in the UK – a very real mandate, and to return to the issue of identity, someone recognisably the voice of London. Think how much more influential an elected mayor would be for other towns and cities. But that was rejected by voters a year or two ago. Yes because local politicians, understandably hesitant, chose not to engage with the process.
Those of you familiar with the Michael Heseltine agenda will know that he has for many years advocated elected mayors. I agree with him. Where he’s wrong is that he advocates a mayor of Humberside. That fails the test I set earlier – that people must identify with those who exert power and influence. I won’t trespass on what would best suit Hull & the North Bank but the South Bank could and should lead the way. The Business world, familiar with mayors from many other countries would quickly come to terms with this new concept. Why don’t we take the lead? Elected mayors working with local MPs could very soon become a more powerful voice for this area.
Another tool of direct democracy is the referendum: democracy in its purest form. When we have referendum on our EU membership, and rest assured there will be one, I realise that the business community want certainty but in the case of Europe it has been a running sore in the body politic of this country for at least a generation. On Thursday it will be the 39th anniversary of the last vote asking if we wanted to remain members. As a rebellious member of the Young Conservatives I was campaigning against my Party – I voted No. Whatever Ed Miliband may say at some point there will have to be another vote. If not, this issue will continue to be the running sore I mentioned. If we, as I sincerely hope, elect a majority Conservative government next year the referendum will come by, at the latest, the end of December 2017. That doesn’t rule out 2016. The point is the voters will not tolerate being ignored for any longer and if, as the business community, you want certainty that must be the way forward.
My case against the EU is that it continues to aim for political union. Will the people not just of this country but elsewhere in Europe tolerate power and influence being exerted by a remote and unaccountable bureaucracy? I doubt it, if the EU is to survive it must change and change significantly.
As we can see from this successful Business Week event this area buoyed by the Siemens announcement, hopeful of an early decision about the Able UK development and so much more is undergoing an economic renaissance. The political process in that it can create the conditions in which business thrives but it is the business community that will deliver the goods. But please involve yourselves more with the political process. Who knows, you might benefit."