Martin Kettle’s opinion piece (Our democracy desperately needs a reset – and, behind the scenes, that’s the plan, 16 May) gave an almost palpable sense of the change starting to happen in the country’s movers and shakers. It was particularly pleasing to see his reference to the Institute for Government. Its recent report, Power With purpose, sets out why the centre of government has failed successive prime ministers and provides insights on how it could be much more effective.
It included two key recommendations that would surely be of interest to an incoming administration. The first is for the government to agree its priorities and announce them as part of a modernised king’s speech. The second is for these priorities to be reflected in a shared strategy, budget and performance management process owned collectively at the centre.
The implementation of these simple and practical suggestions might help articulate, formalise and operationalise the changes that this country so desperately needs.
Bill Kingdom
Oxford
• There won’t be a “grand national reset” without a meaningful, funded and permanent transfer of power from Whitehall to local communities. This will involve giving local authorities new fundraising powers, passing a fair funding bill, drawing up a constitutional settlement that guarantees their rights, allocating budgets that cover at least three years and locking in genuine community participation in decision-making processes. Bets are off on whether the “instinctive centralisers” in Labour will frustrate or facilitate this transition.
Tom Brake
Director, Unlock Democracy
• Martin Kettle mentions ongoing discussions about the extent of devolution, aiming to “bring central and local government together in a more adaptive way”. While this is important in the short term, a much more significant change is needed to restore confidence in our democracy. Both houses of parliament need to be replaced in a nationwide redistribution of powers that includes an English assembly. This will resolve the ongoing tension created by having devolved assemblies for all the nations except England, where Whitehall has far too much control over English spending and local authorities are trapped in endless bidding processes.
Labour must quickly establish a commission to review the options and report within three years so that change can be implemented before the end of the decade.
Christopher Rainger
York
• Martin Kettle points out that in the past half-century, there have been only three changes of governing party at Westminster. But these do not necessarily bring a change of policy regime. In my lifetime, this has happened only twice. First, in 1945, when the first majority Labour government consolidated the wartime shift to a managed form of capitalism, and placed the pursuit of full employment, the welfare state and the common good at the heart of public policy. Second, in 1979, when the first Thatcher government abandoned these commitments and put market forces back in charge of society’s development.
After 45 years of neoliberal social engineering, we desperately need a new policy regime, but on current showing it is hard to believe that a Labour victory will produce one.
David Purdy
Stirling
• No mention of first past the post or proportional representation in Martin Kettle’s piece? Is it a tacit recognition of the reality? As long as parliament is predominantly made up of Labour or Tory MPs, no real democratic change in Britain will ever happen or be possible.
Paul Woodin
Hitchin, Hertfordshire
• Do you have a photograph you’d like to share with Guardian readers? If so, please click here to upload it. A selection will be published in our Readers’ best photographs galleries and in the print edition on Saturdays.
