Cultural Vs Civic Nationalism: It's not that simple

Emmigrant Brits and their numbers:
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/so-many-brits-now-live-abroad-that-theyre-causing-immigration-debates-oh-the-irony-a6723006.html

The Rise of English Nationalism, and the schadenfreude in watching them sleepwalk into independence
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jun/18/england-eu-referendum-brexit

Rise of Racism:
http://robertsomynne.blogspot.ca/2016/06/the-whistle-and-dogs-when-being-racist.html?m=1s

Comparison to the IndyRef in the Herald:
http://www.heraldscotland.com/opinion/14569205.Iain_Macwhirter__Nicola_Sturgeon__Nigel_Farage_and_two_very_different_kinds_of_nationalism/

L'heure du Monde

I thought that my last post would be pretty much all I had to say on the EU-Referendum. I vote, we move on with life. However, I was slightly mistaken.

Turns out all the media attention that the IndyRef got over here, and the fact I was willing to go on record to talk about it means there are some journalists out there who have our details. To that end I was contacted my a rather desperate CBC journalist, looking for Brits who were willing to talk to her about the referendum. I did say to her that I don't think I had anything much to say of interest in the matter, but she convinced me to talk. She came over one evening and spoke to K and I, and the resulting interview can be heard here. Click on the link in red just under the story to hear our part of the show.

Still not sure I have much of interest or depth to say on the matter, but it's nice to be asked!

The Scotsman Abroad and the Quantum Vote

I had never got round to figuring out a postal vote here. The first UK General Election to be held since our move was 4 years in, and I tried to get a postal vote, but had left it too late. I didn't bother sending the forms away, as I thought the time limit to have a postal vote in the UK was 5 years after leaving, so that would have been my last chance.

I've never been allowed to vote in Scottish elections since leaving, as they count as local elections, and even though my last residence is in Edinburgh, overseas voters don't get to vorte in local elections. This was the same rule that was extended to the Referendum. In a way I can see the logic, and I have covered that in detail previously, so there's no gripe there.

However, I recently found out that the legal limit on voting from abroad is not 5 years after leaving the UK, but 15 years. I discovered this as the time limit to register for a postal vote approached repidly, so I faxed off my form on the last day of the deadline and squeaked in under the wire. I am now a registered postal voter in UK general elections, and I get a vote in the upcoming election on May the 7th, and will do so in the next one in 5 years time, then I'll be done! Unless of course there's another election in between, which is not to be ruled out with the currently predicted outcomes of the election.

So, I am on the list. However, when on the phone to a helpful person in Edinburgh about the best way to do things, she did warn me that the ballot would not be sent out till the 29th of April, and that it had to be back by the 8th by the close of the business day. Thankfully, the ballot did arrive quite quickly, on the 1st of May. I posted it off on Sunday, with the promise that it would go Monday morning, but that it would take 4-6 days to get there. Which brings us to the quantum part of the title. I have made a decision, and posted off my vote, but I will never know if it arrives in time to be counted. If my candidate of choice loses by 1 vote, then I can blame the postal system (or myself for not organising the postal ballot quicker), if they win, then I shall happily claim my part in that victory.

Some people may be a little miffed that I can vote in the UK, and yet have chosen not to live there, and indeed become a citizen of another country. They can then take solace in the fact that my vote will be unlikely to be counted. But otherwise they can quit their whinging. The law states I am able to participate in the democratic process in two countries. In fact, one of the main reasons for becoming a citizen is to be able to vote in the running of my chosen country of residence. I do also have a vested interest in the outcome of the UK general election, as a full citizen of that country too. Lucky me. This affords me a privilage, and it is one I intend to use to the fullest potential.

With the upcoming Canadian general election this October, this means I get to vote in two general elections this year. But Canadian politics, compared to the open book that exists in the UK right now, are really dull. Who could possibly blame me for wanting to take part in what I believe will be a rather historic election? I really believe, that whatever the outcome, there will be a big shake-up in how things are run over in the UK following this election, whether it's over the Scottish question, or electoral reform, and I have a vested interest in both those subjects. But I digress, that's leading off into a whole 'nother series of blog posts.

The Future of Democracy Part I: Archaic Democracy.

Yesterday morning, I clicked on a link on Facebook to this article. It's a joke article, and a really funny one, poking fun at the way religion can stick it's nose into policy based on science, but the other way around is just not done, at least in the UK. As with all good jokes, it works well because it contains more than a grain of truth.

Lords Spiritual

The thing about this article that stuck with me after the laughing had died down was that it included a wikipedia link to the Lords Spiritual. I must admit, that as much as I am against the House of Lords in principal, it is not something I have researched much, not know much about, so when I read that 26 of it's sitting and voting members are made up of Bishops of the Anglican Church, to say I was gobsmacked is an understatement. I find this fact abhorrent, and counter to all modern democratic principles, even more so that the existence of the House of Lords to begin with.

Okay, so they are only 3.3% of the voting members of the House, (there are a further 5 former Lords Spiritual, who still sit in the House, due to life peerages so really it's 3.9%) but that is not the point . These are men (Women can be anglican bishops, but since the first one was only ordained last month, none of those sitting are female) have not been elected by the public (as all Peers), they have a very definite bias towards religion, thereby denying the division between church and state that I believe should be the cornerstone of all progresive societies. Furthermore, they are all Anglican. For historical reasons, and reasons of established religion, only English Bishops can sit. There is no representation from Scotland (Scottish Bishops were excluded from the Scottish parliament in 1638), Wales (the Church of Wales split in 1920, and the Welsh Bishops lost their seats) or Ireland (dissestablished in 1871). Not to mention people of other faiths within England and the rest of the UK. Only 19.9% of the population of the UK consider themselves members of the Church of England. This is not what we could call an equal representation of constituent states, is it? Don't get me wrong, I don't think the answer would be to install Bishops, or Bishops equivalents from the other member countries of the UK, but to dissestablish the Anglican Bishops sitting now.

The coalition Government slated reform to reduce this number, but these reforms have been dropped, due to lack of Tory support for the bill. Quelle surprise!

Canada

Yes, the House of Lords is an aberration, and one that seems particular to the UK, but a lot of the faults it has are mirrored in the Canadian Senate, another unelected body of power, granted with different selection criterea, but un democratic all the same. Especially since the numbers of Senators per Province are grossly out of date. The second issue, for both upper houses, is that they perpetuate the two party system. This is less so the case in the UK, which has Lords from many (but not all) parties, but even there, there is an inbuilt bias towards the two party system that cannot be easily eradicated. In Canada, it is much worse, with only two of the countries parties having seats (No NDP, Bloc or Green Senators). Last year, all Liberal Senators were removed from the Liberal Party, making them nominal Independant mambers, but the reality is, it seems more a PR stunt than actually making the senators functionally independant.

Reform

Democratic reform, is not a luxury, it is a neccesity. These Houses of sober reflection are undemocratic, and extremely out of date. It is also debateable if they actually do work as brakes on the Houses of Commons, since they can be filled by the Government of the day with their own people, thereby allowing laws to be passed anyway. These systems are centuries out of date, and don't fulfil the role intended of them, and in fact hinder modern democratic processes and full representation of the citizens of these countries. Is it no wonder then, that people are disengaging from politics under these systems, and are actively searching for alternatives?

I had intended to go on to look at some exciting developments and alternative democratic procedures, but I have ranted on for far too long, so that must now become a second post.

Edit:
Seems, the number of members is going up, at an astounding rate!

King Edward I presiding over his Parliament c.1300. The Lords Spiritual are assembled on the left (bishops and abbots dressed in red, priors in black) with Lords Temporal on the right. - See more at: http://holyredundant.org.uk/2012/06/26/test/edward-i-c-1300/#sthash.7TvRBdnj.dpuf

King Edward I presiding over his Parliament c.1300. The Lords Spiritual are assembled on the left (bishops and abbots dressed in red, priors in black) with Lords Temporal on the right. - See more at: http://holyredundant.org.uk/2012/06/26/test/edward-i-c-1300/#sthash.7TvRBdnj.dpuf

King Edward I presiding over his Parliament c.1300. The Lords Spiritual are assembled on the left (bishops and abbots dressed in red, priors in black) with Lords Temporal on the right. - See more at: http://holyredundant.org.uk/2012/06/26/test/edward-i-c-1300/#sthash.7TvRBdnj.dpuf