![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
Direct Democracy
Mar. 10th, 2010 07:02 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
ex_peasant441Daniel Hannan is one of the bright young things of the Conservative Party here in the UK. He is also something of a radical (yes, it is possible to be both conservative and radical) and is well known as a lively and outspoken proponent of more direct democracy.
His latest blog post on localism may be of interest to members. It raises some interesting points about what limits can and should be put on localism - and what should not.
The example he discusses is an intriguing one - of giving local people the ability to deny developments that are locally unwelcome but nationally necessary, such as power stations or waste disposal facilities, but at the same time bribing them by letting them share in the profits.
This has been tried on a small scale in this country with some wind generators. Wind generators are a hugely contentious topic since they are considered an eyesore, need to be sighted in open and hence valuably attractive areas, and are of doubtful value in generating electricity. Yet the Labour government has altered the planning laws to make them very hard to block because it is desperate for their contribution, however small, to reducing our carbon footprint. However there have been one or two cases where local people are entitled to a share of the profits from the turbines, and are far more accommodating as a result.
Hannan mentions
I would also be interested to hear what people thought of Hannan's use of the word 'localism' to describe his beliefs. A quick glance at the Wikipedia article shows that the word is more generally used by the left wing and green movements as part of their opposition to capitalism.
N.B. When he refers to a 'Sir Humphrey' he means a senior civil servant who is resistant to any erosion of his own powers.
ETA the tags don't seem to display for some reason. They should be:
His latest blog post on localism may be of interest to members. It raises some interesting points about what limits can and should be put on localism - and what should not.
The example he discusses is an intriguing one - of giving local people the ability to deny developments that are locally unwelcome but nationally necessary, such as power stations or waste disposal facilities, but at the same time bribing them by letting them share in the profits.
This has been tried on a small scale in this country with some wind generators. Wind generators are a hugely contentious topic since they are considered an eyesore, need to be sighted in open and hence valuably attractive areas, and are of doubtful value in generating electricity. Yet the Labour government has altered the planning laws to make them very hard to block because it is desperate for their contribution, however small, to reducing our carbon footprint. However there have been one or two cases where local people are entitled to a share of the profits from the turbines, and are far more accommodating as a result.
Hannan mentions
A similar system works successfully in a number of US states.Does anyone have any thoughts or direct experience of this?
I would also be interested to hear what people thought of Hannan's use of the word 'localism' to describe his beliefs. A quick glance at the Wikipedia article shows that the word is more generally used by the left wing and green movements as part of their opposition to capitalism.
N.B. When he refers to a 'Sir Humphrey' he means a senior civil servant who is resistant to any erosion of his own powers.
ETA the tags don't seem to display for some reason. They should be:
country: britaintopic: *:direct democracytopic: *:power generation
