Should voters have a say in trade policy?

David Gauke MP writes about why Britain is no longer able to control its own trade policy - and the appalling consequences this has for the developing world. The British public is disenchanted with our political system because voting does not, in the eyes of many, make any difference. Whoever we vote for, whatever the result, the same policies are pursued because power is not in the hands of the elected but in the hands of the unaccountable.

Essentially, that is the new localist analysis of what is wrong with modern politics. There is no more striking example of this, in the eighteen months I have been an MP, than policy towards trade and the developing world.

Like most MPs, I have received a huge number of letters from constituents urging me to help Make Poverty History. Dozens of my constituents travelled to Westminster as part of a mass rally to urge action as part of the World Trade Organisation's Doha trade round. Although I did not agree with every aspect of their campaign, I agreed with their key demand that more should be done to reduce trade barriers with the developing world. And so did the Cabinet, the Shadow Cabinet, the Liberal Democrat front bench and pretty well every other MP.

So what is the trade policy of the United Kingdom? Are we tearing down tariffs on agricultural produce from Africa? Are we removing cumbersome rules about origin requirements which keep exporters from the developing world out of our lucrative markets? Er, no.

Given the support of both the British public and British politicians for this objective, presumably the UK was doing all it could to reach a deal and open up our markets to the developing world? Er, not really.

Trade is a matter not for the UK Government but for the European Union. Within the EU, we make the case for trade liberalisation but, when it comes to the actual negotiations in the WTO, there is one EU voice. The fact that that voice is literally a British one - Peter Mandelson - does not disguise the fact that the words are more in line with the protectionist instincts of the French. As a consequence of EU intransigence on agricultural tariffs (as well as US intransigence on agricultural subsidies), and to the condemnation of David Cameron and Tony Blair, the Doha round failed.

The protesters who called for us to Make Poverty History are entitled to question the effectiveness of the democratic process when MPs and the Government were able, in all honesty, to say that we were on their side, and yet nothing was done.

Of course, alleviating world poverty is just one aspect of trade policy. Did any candidate at the last election stand on a platform demanding that we get more expensive shoes by imposing tariffs on imports from the Far East? No, but that is what is happening thanks to a new tariff introduced to protect Italian shoemakers.

Trade has been one of the key political issues in the past. It remains one of the most important economic and moral issues we face - increasingly so, given the pace of globalisation. But it is no longer an issue in which the British voters and their elected representatives have any kind of say. It is a state of affairs that is not in the best political or economic interests of this country, nor those of the developing world.

This article was written for Direct Democracy and independent think tank supported by a broad range of MPs, MEPs, candidates and activists from within the Conservative Party.