Power to the people must be our aim

We don't just need a new set of politicians, we need a new politics that puts the public back in control, argues Tony Blair

Disaffection with politics is growing. It seems to take place in another world and the issues that worry many people never seem to find a voice.

Of course part of this is due to the Tory sleaze of recent years. MPs taking cash for questions, a former Chancellor having his legal bills paid by the taxpayer, and the endless conveyor belt from the Cabinetroom to the boardroom have certainly made people cynical about politicians.

And broken government promises don't help improve the image of politics either. Trust is tested to the limit when a country votes for a government that promises to cut taxes, only to find them increased by the equivalent of 7p in the pound.

But despite all that, I don't think it is enough for any Labour politicians to say to people, "Vote for me and it will all be different". Of course we have to change the Government if we want to turn the country around, but we also have to change the way things are run so that people exercise more power over those they elect and what is done in their name - not just a new set of politicians but a new politics.

After all, politicians are there to serve the public, so why should the public not have more control over what they do? And people are used to more choice in their lives than in the past, so why should they not have more power to decide things in politics?

Tonight I am making a speech in honour of John Smith that will set out Labour's agenda for constitutional reform - our plans to create a new politics that will alter the relationship between the people and the Government, giving them more of a say in what government does.

Some people say political reform only interests the chattering classes - it may be an issue round the Hampstead dinner tables, but not something most people are interested in. That was not John Smith's view, nor is it mine.

That attitude only benefits the Tories and the Establishment who run most things at the moment. They don't want the majority to think about these issues. But the fact is they matter to everyone because they are about power - who holds it, who uses it and how people can control it.

These days most power is held at Westminster and Whitehall. That is not only bad for our politics, it is also highly inefficient.

Look at the poll tax. This was the biggest public policy disaster since the war. It cost billions to set up. It ran for a couple of years and was then abandoned in total chaos. Almost every effect it had was predicted in advance, yet the Government drove it through. They abused their power to create a disastrous law which nearly destroyed local government in this country.

The poll tax was a product of how much the Conservatives had come to detest local government. They want to kill off its ability to act once and for all. I know some councils got it wrong in the Eighties, but these days the vast bulk try to do a good job for their communities, often in partnership with the private sector. Projects such as the Manchester Metro and the Huddersfield Stadium have made a real difference to those areas.

We should encourage councils to operate more partnerships like this. Petty rules and regulations should not be allowed to stop local councils from acting in the public interest.

Of course this carries its risks. The freedom to act means the freedom to make mistakes. But local communities should have the power to take their own decisions. And if councils get it wrong, they should be punished at the ballot box. We plan to have annual elections for a third or a quarter of all councils so that people get a constant chance to give their verdict on the council's performance.

But passing power out from Whitehall and Westminster should not stop at the local level. In London, for example, there is a strong case for an elected city-wide authority.

London is a wonderful city, but it is the only capital in Europe not to have an elected voice of its own. The result, as Geoffrey Howe said recently, is that people don't know where to turn to deal with things such as transport. An elected body for London would be able to face up to those problems and give the city the future it deserves.

In Scotland, Wales and some English regions there is a real desire for decisions to be made by the people there. In places like my constituency in the north of England, people want to make accountable the quangos and government offices which already exist and want to have a regional voice on economic development.

In Scotland and Wales there are already huge government bureaucracies spending billions of pounds and employing thousands of civil servants. And in Scotland they already have a separate legal system and separate education, housing and local government systems.

The trouble is, it is all controlled from Westminster. I believe Scotland and Wales are crucial parts of the UK and I would fight separatism to the last ditch, but I do believe it would be fairer and more democratic for people in Scotland and Wales to have a greater say in what goes on there.

Of course there are consequences for the United Kingdom in what we plan and we do not ignore them. But let us be clear what this is all about. In devolving power, Westminster is deciding to allow people to have more control over their own affairs. This is good government and responsible government. And it is the strength of British institutions that allows us to accommodate change of this kind.

It is also time government stopped being so secretive. I want to bring in a Freedom of Information Act to really open up government and give people access to their own personal files. Obviously, there will be exceptions where national security is involved, but in general there is no reason why people should not have this kind of information.

And who would disagree that Parliament itself needs a shake-up? Legislation could be handled much better than at present, and there is an obvious need for reform of the House of Lords. Why on earth should hereditary peers still be allowed to vote on legislation? It is completely undemocratic for such people to have a vote on Bills going through Parliament - and Labour intends to legislate to remove their rights to sit and vote. That would be a start on the road to a democratic, elected second chamber and would keep the benefits of having a wide range of experience represented in the Lords.

An agenda for constitutional change must also look at the question of electoral reform. I have never been convinced by the case for proportional representation but I think this is a question that should be decided by the people themselves. That's why I think we should have a referendum on this issue.

John Smith wanted to popularise the constitutional debate. So do I. That is what tonight's speech is about. Power to the people is not a slogan but a necessity if we are to reconnect politics with the majority and create the new politics on which a new Britain will, in part, be built.