I believe in the moral mandate

The word mandate derives from the Latin word mandatum, and has several meanings, but is commonly used in politics in the context of the electoral mandate.  A basic rule of democracy is that when you win an election to public office, then the electorate has given you a mandate to serve in that office for an allocated period of time.

I believe in democracy, and yet I am aware that the concept of the electoral mandate is open to abuse.  In fact it is very rarely not abused.  What we need is for people to recognise the need for a moral mandate.

Following a general election the winning party forms a government.  The members of that government should then move fast to ensure that between them they address the needs of the country.  Unemployment must fall, as must crime.  Standards in schools should rise, and so on.

If they realise after a year or two in government that they are not delivering, then they should abandon power, and let the public choose another ruling party in a general election.  Sadly this never happens.  Either our rulers do not realise that they are not delivering the policies that the country needs, in which case they are too stupid to be in power; or else they are too obsessed with their own self-importance to care, in which case they are immoral and should not be in power.

Has there ever been an example of the moral mandate in British politics?  The best I can think of is that Oswald Mosley quit as a minister in the Labour government of 1929 to 1931, apparently on the grounds that it was not taking the action necessary to bring down unemployment.

While this can be seen as a noble act on his part, it could also be construed as preening petulance.  Mosley had written an employment policy document, and was frustrated when it was ignored.  He did however resign from the Labour Party, to which he never returned.

There are other instances of government ministers resigning from office, such as Peter Carrington resigning as Foreign Secretary in 1982 over his failure to foresee the Falklands War.  However he did not resign from the Conservative Party, and so his resignation can be seen as an attempt to deflect criticism from the government as a whole.

Despite his failure in high office, Peter Carrington was happy to return to high office just two years later - as Secretary General of NATO.

Also there is nothing remotely honourable in a politician defecting from one mainstream party to another.  It is merely exchanging one form of oppression for another.

I urge all readers of this site never to vote in elections for any government which has failed to move fast to address the needs of the country.  This is not merely a matter of morality, but possibly also of self interest.  If you allow bad politicians to remain in power, then you could be the next victim of their wickedness.

Related previous posts include:
What is an Act of Attainder?