Over at The Guardian’s Comment Is Free, blogging Lib Dem and former British Ambassador to Uzbekistan Craig Murray argues that – with postal ballot-rigging, partisan officials, censorship of candidates, etc – no independent observer could call our elections free and fair. Here’s an excerpt:
In my diplomatic career, I spent a great deal of time assessing the democratic merit of elections in various countries abroad. That gives me a peculiar perspective in looking at elections in the UK, and wondering what a foreign observer would make of them. I can do this also with the insight of having twice run as an independent parliamentary candidate. Against international standards, British elections leave a great deal to be desired. …
So, there we have British elections today: an unfair electoral system, censorship of candidates’ electoral addresses, little real political choice for voters, widespread postal ballot-rigging and elections administered by partisan council officials in a corrupt political climate. …
So are British elections still free and fair? If this were a foreign election I was observing, I have no doubt that my answer would be no.
You can read Craig’s article in full here.
Follow @LibDemVoice on Twitter
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
The wonderful Lynton & Barnstaple Railway
Back home
On the (micro)farm
Our six great Party Award winners from Bournemouth Conference
Lib Dem democracy versus Labour control-freakery
Event at the Botanic Garden this Friday! #dundeewestend
Peter Martin
Joe Bourke
Mary Regnier-Wilson
Simon R
33 Comments
Great, the new Tonge Tendency raises its ugly head on CiF.
Here’s Murray on standing up for civil liberties:
http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2007/05/the_end_of_libe.html
I would question his ability to recognize flaws in British democracy.
I would question whether the above posters just want to dissuade you from reading Murray’s full article. Not very helpful.
If you do read it, you’ll find that at his worst, yes, Murray does go over the top. At his best, he points out real and major “flaws in democracy” which far too many people complacently overlook.
By all means, read the article! I’d also heartily recommend reading the comments, including the one from Murray himself in which he points out that he did *not* choose the tagline.
He’s still quite an odd person.
Yes, Alec, and odd people have no place in a liberal society! We hate nonconformists.
He has always struck me as the sort of ego-tripper who lives to be at the centre of attention, a natural guest for shouty opinion programs. The best thing is to ignore him.
Tom, there’s engagingly-odd, and then there’s odd-oh-my-god-did-he-just-vow-to-punch-a-policeman-on-the-nose.
I doubt he’d get the chance as the thugs in blue seem more likely to beat up any slightly dissenting member of the public first and ask questions after. Just don’t carry a camera ….
“Partisan election officials” ?
The only bias I’ve ever detected in election officials is a distaste for the BNP. But even then, they afforded them every necessary facility.
Alec – I won’t deny that Craig writes in quite hyperbolic, polemical tones, and the article you quote is a good example, but the point he is addressing is the sort of point that the Lib Dems as a party do not make anywhere near enough.
I am fascinated to know if Edward, Alec and Paul Barker actually claim to be liberals.
I note that all three of them make attaks on my character and do not address a single point in the article referred to. As for crewegwyn who has never met a politically biased council official, I accept it is your personal experience but it is by no means universal – ask John Jemmings, for example.
Speaking for myself, I would sooner dunk my head in a bucket of horse wee-wee than call myself a lower-case liberal.
Nothing he said of Karimov wasn’t part of the formal FCO position, but he did it in a highly undiplomatic manner. His off-stage behaviour often was no more temperate, and everything up to and including the tales of ‘misusing’ the Embassy Range Rover is to be considered well-within the realms of possibility.
It should be remembered that whilst he was doing what has made him famous, he was experiencing untreated bi-polar disorder and hypersexuality. In the case of the latter, he recounts eyeing up a female relative of a detained man… like one of those day-dreams JD would go into (cf. Scrubs), he was then more interested in the shape of her legs through her dress than whether or not her relative was being boiled to death.
Of course, he should be treated sympathetically for this, but I would say he wasn’t necessarily suited for such a sensitive diplomatic position. As shoddily he was treated by the FCO (not least, as a mediocre graduate from a non-Oxbridge university who’d risen through the service), any sting must have been taken by his receiving several years salary in redundancy.
PS Sorry for referring to you in the third person, Craig.
Craig, if ever there were one sentence of yours which sums up my assessment of you, it’s what you’ve just said to Writerman and his “the Poles should have offered Germany a spare lebensraum” argument:
http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2010/04/death_of_polish.html
“Quite”? You think there’s *some* merit to that deranged nonsense???
Alec,
You are plainly to anyone being deliberately obtuse. No I do not believe there is a speck of merit in what he said. That is why I can’t quite believe he said it.
You may have changed since I last followed the comments in your blog, Craig, but on previously occasions when I’ve dared to look in, there has been coded antisemitism passing-by unremarked.
If I say I can’t quite believe you are putting this much effort into these strange personal attacks on me, plainly my use of the word “quite” does not mean I agree with your attacks.
~*sigh*~
We’ve had similar discussions elsewhere, Craig. I may not be without respect for you, not least your work in West Africa; and that mediocre Oxbridge graduates are more likely to rise than highly-able non-Oxbridge graduates. Yet, you place yourself in the public sphere and, often, make highly specific criticisms of others; so should expect others to discuss your public statements.
I do think Steve Coogan will be perfect as you.
Alec,
I abhor all kinds of racism, including anti-semitism. The only content on my blog which reflects my own views is what is written by me. Hundreds of people comment on my articles ranging from neo-cons to communists, catholics and muslims to atheists, and from all over the world. Comment is not moderated or routinely monitored because it would be a full time job. Anti-semitic comments, and other racist comments are deleted when I see them. Actually more comments have been deleted for anti-semitism than for any other reason.
Most people have the sense to differentiate between the views of someone who writes a blog, and the views of people who comment on what they write.
As for your contention that I was merely following New Labour policy in criticising Karimov, try reading this:
http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2010/04/britain_boosts.html
Personally, no matter how well-intentioned this sentiment may be, ultimately I find it as shallow as a claim to love/hate all religions equally. But, that’s another story.
I can distinguish between the maintainer of an unmoderated blog and the commenters, but I was not referring to this. I was referring to the times I had seen you [attempt to] repudiate personal criticisms whilst said coded antisemitism passed-by unremarked by yourself. Maybe your response to Writerman represents a developing political intelligence, in which case I welcome it, but that was what’d happened in the past.
Ultimately, though, my doubts were of your political judgment… the ludicrous “Mossad? Why not?” (remember that?) was absolutely guaranteed to attract a certain sort of commenter, just as the BBC’s ‘question’ about whether “Homosexuals Should Face Execution” did.
Likewise, even if you didn’t choose the tagline for the CiF article, when you speak of the “insights” offered by your “diplomatic career” (popularly associated with the democratic basket-case of Uzbekistan) and proceed to issue the British system with a Fail, you can’t really be too surprised by such a tagline. Furthermore, it’s clear you have a personal gripe with the incumbent at Blackburn which goes beyond your concern for electoral reform.
Voting is just one part demonstrating of social justice – that people can be discouraged from voting due to the weather or of simple apathy (whereas, in Iraq,similar turn-outs appear despite bombs) suggests many of the major battles have been won).
Yet, our electoral system definitely is not perfect – but it is still better than many. I, for one, consider ‘celebrity campaigning’ to be one of the problems (although I’d pay to watch you run for Stoke-on-Trent Central). I forget where you lived in London during the 2005 GE, but find it difficult to believe you elected to campaign several hundred miles away against a safe-seat out of civic duty… if you had to involve yourself in Blackburn, you could have offered your assistance to a locally-raised candidate.
Stop right there! I said formal FCO position, not New Labour!
Alec,
Whether you view it as New Lab or FCO policy, the link shows it is not as you characterise it.
Plainly I was completely nuts to suggest that Mossad might have assassinated someone abroad. They would never do that.
There are 40,000 comments on my blog. I have read well less than half of them. It is essentially a free speech forum. It does attract its fair share of nutters. I have deleted a good many anti-semitic comments. I may have missed some. I should be most surprised if any I missed were not robustly rebutted by others. Please do so yourself if you see them. If you are trying to hint that I sympathise with anti-semitism you are entirely wrong.
I recognise you now as one of the Harry’s Place Euston Manifesto proponents of the Iraq War. Support for Israel and a neo-con foreign policy is your main political creed. We therefore have differing views on foreign policy. So what? My best mate in the world is probably the most adamant Zionist among senior Lib Dems, and a former senior full time office holder. He is still my best mate even though we disagree on Israel.
I am a former member of the National Exec of the Young Liberals, of the National Council of the Liberal Party, a former Lib Dem Students’ Union President and a former very active member of the anti-apartheid movement and the anti-Nazi League. I was a Liberal then Lib Dem member from 1973 to 2005 and have recently rejoined. I left to stand against Jack Straw to publicise torture and extraordinary renidtion, which was very little known in 2005. You are trying to imply that I secretly sympathise with Nazis. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Blimey, you must have asbestos cheeks to come out with this guff! You made a blooper, admit it.
I am not and never have been a member of the Labour Party. I only ever have voted LibDem.
Given that you’ve suggested that Dundee University may be a tool for New Labour, this is another area of your judgment I’ll question.
No, Craig… you were not floating the idea that Mossad would pursue targeted assassinations. You were floating the idea that they were responsible for the July 2005 London bombings.
Would it be obtuse of me to observe that you alluded to William Cobbett who, despite his opposition to the rotten boroughs, was still a bit on the loopy reactionary side?
Can you not distinguish between a blog and commenters? The Euston Manifesto (which I did not sign) was also supported by opponents of the Iraq War (which I also opposed).
I wish people could investigated what neoconservativism actually is before flinging it around like flour bags at St Trinians. It used to be called neoliberalism. It is much closer to the roots your Party that you seem to realize.
Good for you. I hope you were a low-ranking member of the ANL, and not involved with the Squadism of the SWP which controlled it (or even Red Action, the pro-IRA splinter group).
Oh, come on! The Stop the War Coalition was founded in September 2001, and we knew about Camp X-Ray soon afterwards.
Heather Brooke didn’t need to stand for Parliament to achieve what she did. I am suggesting that you’ve gone for the quick-fix, meejah-style approach and also, deliberately or inadvertently, confused the noble cause you espouse with personal aggrandizement.
Okay, let’s put that down to dramatic license – just as you used lower-case liberalism as a badge of being human. You, however, have directly accused me of having supported the invasion of Iraq and continuing to support Israel. One of those is utterly false, and the other is a problem only if you *oppose* Israel – distinct from disagreeing with named state policies – in which case the question of antisemitism (or, at least, calling for the destruction of a nation state which only ever will be atrociously violent) does become pertinent.
I don’t believe that myself. I merely believe you should try engaging mouth before brain at times.
Scratch that: bombs in London
Alec,
That is a straight lie. The July 2005 bombings were done by some deranged lads from Dewsbury. I have never suggested anything else.
I was referring to an incident on June 29 2007.
Craig
Alec,
Well so far you have admitted to not being a liberal, and you seem to acknowledge being a regular on Harry’s Place. You also claim neo-conservatism is compatible with being a Liberal Democrat. You then yet again accuse me of anti-semitism saying.
“in which case the question of antisemitism (or, at least, calling for the destruction of a nation state which only ever will be atrociously violent) does become pertinent.”
I do not support the State of Israel in the same way I did not support apartheid South Africa, and for the same reason. The State of Israel has hundreds of laws in place which distinguish between peoples by racial origin. Any liberal must believe that is wrong.
That does not mean that I wish any harm at all to anybody in Israel, or to force anybody to leave Israel. I do not. And I condemn all terrorism, just as I condemned the disproportionate Israeli attack on Gaza. I regard Hamas as an extremely unpleasant aberration that just makes things still worse for the Palestinian people.
But I do not accept that there is no alternative between a racially defined Israeli state with all its racially based laws, and a second holocaust. To claim that anybody who opposes the state of Israel as presently constituted is anti-semitic, because the only alternative to the current Israel is “atrociously violent”, is untrue. I do not accept your premiss.
Nobody who reads through this entire thread can believe anything other than that you are trying systematically to tar me with anti-semitism. You have repeatedly mentioned anti-semitism linking it to me. Please say openly if that is or is not the accusation you are making.
As to whether you consider me vain or egotistical, you are perfectly entitled to your opinion.
Alec,
Interestingly here is an article by you on Harry’s Place where you accuse people of precisely what you accuse me of – spreading silly theories about 7/7 and glorifying the Nazis.
http://hurryupharry.org/2009/07/11/upload-in-the-uk-obey-british-laws/
I know in your last comment you denied accusing me of supporting the Nazis, but plainly in the thread above you specifically accused me of supporting Hitler’s quest for Lebensraum – a ludicrous and extremely insulting accusation. You based it on the fact that when someone made such a statement, I replied “I can’t quite believe you said that.” You claimed my use of the word “Quite” showed I sympathised with the speaker – nobody would hold that deduction to be true.
I do not know in the case of your Harry’s Place article whether what you say about these people sympathising with the Nazis and being anti-semitic is true or not. It may very well be so, in which case they would be deplorable people.
But it would be difficult for anyone to read that article and then read this thread, without concluding that you feel that you have a mission to root out anti-semites, and that you feel that by definition that description encompasses even liberal critics of the state of Israel and/or the War on Terror.
I see much evidence that is where you are coming from. I see no evidence to sustain your claim you are actually a Lib Dem – particularly as I found another entry by you on Harry’s Place where you use liberal as a term of insult. I also not that while you claim to be only a commenter on Harry’s Place, these are articles by you there, not comments.
To be quite clear on where I stand myself, I am quite certain that Osama Bin Laden and his gang were responsible for 9/11. I am quite certain that a gang of disaffected Muslim lads from Dewsbury were responsible for 7/7. I know that the holocaust happened, having met many concentration camp survivors when I was involved in the organisation in Poland of the anniversary celebrations of the liberation of Auschwitz. I have no sympathy whatsoever with anti-semites or Neo-Nazis of any kind.
And the incident – in which no-one was injured – in June 2007 on which I urged everyone to keep an open mind at the time rather than immediately concluding it was done by Muslims – indeed naming Mossad among a list of organisations who might have wanted to create a non deadly incident at that time – did turn out to be a bomb attempt by more deluded Muslims.
Craig, please explain to me what you think neoconservationism is (without mentioning death squads or the like) and what you think lower-case liberalism is (without mentioning sugar and spice and all things nice).
So does Britain – including but not limited to the legal concept of Lex familiaris – and, indeed, just about every country on Earth. What’s your point?
Something I’ve always wondered about the Israel = Apartheid guff is that, considering the latter was based on judicial and social separation of defined racial groups, how suicide-terrorists get into pizza parlours or onto buses or at Purim parties?
Surely, if they were separated by state control, this wouldn’t be possible?
Your country hasn’t had any clout in that part of the world for 60 years. Some might say it’s time to come to terms with it.
Don’t be bleeding stupid, Craig. I corrected myself immediately when I recalled it was the Tiger Tiger attempted attack you were referring to… but it takes weapons-grade mendacity to liken what I’ve said to you to what I said about Simon Sheppard with Stephen Whittle: two genuine neo-Nazis.
And, I didn’t accuse them of anything… they admitted to it.
Is this the one you meant?
http://efrafandays.wordpress.com/2009/10/04/freedom-of-information-act-does-not-apply-to-the-bbc/
I was not speaking in my own voice there.
Alec –
Accepted, and sorry I didn’t notice your correction on Tiger Tiger. Can we stop attacking each other now?
All life is on the Internet, Craig, and sometimes it’s close to the bone.
For accuracy’s sake, Harry’s Place defended you in November:
http://hurryupharry.org/2009/11/12/defend-craig-murray/
I also recall you were defended during the threats from Usmanov.
I acknowledged your defense of Richard Wilson against the Manky Poo of West African business interests, Tony Baldry:
http://efrafandays.wordpress.com/2010/03/21/tory-mp-threatens-blogger-with-libel-manky-scots-git-threatens-to-scupper-libel-reform/
This always makes me roffle with laughter *with* you:
http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2009/04/warning_this_po.html
For the record, I don’t consider lower-case liberalism to be an insult, but I do question those who habitually use it as a badge of honour for themselves.
All life is on the Internet, Craig, and sometimes it’s close to the bone.
For accuracy’s sake, Harry’s Place defended you in November.
I also recall you were defended during the threats from Usmanov.
I acknowledged your defense of Richard Wilson against the Manky Poo of West African business interests, Tony Baldry.
This always makes me roffle with laughter *with* you.
For the record, I don’t consider lower-case liberalism to be an insult, but I do question those who habitually use it as a badge of honour for themselves.