6. THE ROLE OF THE SECURITY SERVICES IN UK POLITICS

THE ROLE OF THE SECURITY SERVICES IN VETTING PROSPECTIVE PARLIAMENTARY CANDIDATES IN THE DEMOCRATIC PROCESS


General Sir John Nichols joined the ranks of the Conservative Party’s scrutiny Committee of those applying for the ‘Candidates List’ in the 1980’s. Since then all three major parties have allowed their lists of prospective Parliamentary Candidates to be scrutinised by ex service personnel with links to Military Intelligence, (see Tony Benn’s diaries).

As Tony Benn said in his diaries it is worrying that Military Intelligence should be involved in the vetting of Parliamentary candidates. The fact that more and more ex-military officers are also putting themselves forward for public service, as elected representatives, may indicate some sort of military take over of the democratic process. The newest party to stand in the European Elections in 2009 was Libertas, headed in the UK by an ex-army officer and with links to suspected neo con Declan Ganley in Ireland (see File on 4 – radio 4 broadcast on 14th March 2009).

Having failed to make the security services accountable for their actions, ever since that mooted coup against Harold Wilson in the 1970’s our elected representatives have been warned off asking questions about our security services on the basis that this is ‘bad form.’

The Security Services should be accountable to the establishment, not vice versa. Unfortunately we are now in danger of bowing to unelected members of the security services who have, like overmighty lords, over reached themselves for some time and who are becoming increasingly right wing, neo con and fascist in their bid for power, with little idea of the philosophy of freedom or the nature of political representation.

Oliver North has entered the American political arena, entirely convinced of his rectitude in the Iran Contra Affair. That these sorts of men believe the ‘end justifies the means’ and that the law is a ‘sissy’ is clear. It also sounds the death knell for democracy.

We have come through an era when water boarding and outright torture have become evident in both Iraq at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay in Cuba. That we have been asked to believe that low-level operatives like Charles Graynor and Lindy England were solely responsible for these breaches in civilised behaviour is incredible. General Janis Karpinski, the American General in charge at Abu Ghraib gave evidence that Donald Rumsfeld himself was involved in the decision to ‘Gitmoise’ Abu Ghraib, importing Miller to Abu Ghraib from Guantanamo Bay.

Independent candidates, those who are not part of a party machinery, should be increasingly wary of accepting the water provided on the table at hustings events during General Elections. They should also be aware that the ‘rules’ have changed so utterly that they cannot rely on a level playing field.