Jump to content
IGNORED

General Election/UK Politics


johnh

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, rubecula said:

I am seriously surprised mike and matt

democratically elected mps follow the dictates of the people who voted for them yes they may have different view points but if they were voted in then the people were not informed otherwise or the person who was elected would not have been.  I have no objection to the mps having private concerns but making the public is wrong in my opinion.

They are not dictates. There’s a leadership style that employs dictates but isn’t that something to avoid?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, rubecula said:

I am seriously surprised mike and matt

democratically elected mps follow the dictates of the people who voted for them yes they may have different view points but if they were voted in then the people were not informed otherwise or the person who was elected would not have been.  I have no objection to the mps having private concerns but making the public is wrong in my opinion.

Yes, I am also seriously surprised Rubes.   There is a word for individuals who, having been elected to represent a party and a manifesto, instead force their own (and different) views onto the people who voted for them.  'Dictatorial' is the word that comes to mind.  If these people had any integrity they would resign as MP's and trigger a by-election and put their views to the test.  Some hope, we are talking politicians here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"...it ought to be the happiness and glory of a representative to live in the strictest union, the closest correspondence, and the most unreserved communication with his constituents. Their wishes ought to have great weight with him; their opinion, high respect; their business, unremitted attention. It is his duty to sacrifice his repose, his pleasures, his satisfactions, to theirs; and above all, ever, and in all cases, to prefer their interest to his own. But his unbiassed opinion, his mature judgment, his enlightened conscience, he ought not to sacrifice to you, to any man, or to any set of men living. These he does not derive from your pleasure; no, nor from the law and the constitution. They are a trust from Providence, for the abuse of which he is deeply answerable. Your representative owes you, not his industry only, but his judgment; and he betrays, instead of serving you, if he sacrifices it to your opinion."

Edmund Burke.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, johnh said:

Yes, I am also seriously surprised Rubes.   There is a word for individuals who, having been elected to represent a party and a manifesto, instead force their own (and different) views onto the people who voted for them.  'Dictatorial' is the word that comes to mind.  If these people had any integrity they would resign as MP's and trigger a by-election and put their views to the test.  Some hope, we are talking politicians here.

But where does this start and stop? The main parties change their minds all the time and then on the other hand they dont change their judgment when new information comes to light (ie Brexit). How many times has May said something that she has gone back on? Corbyn doesnt even follow the decisions made at their party conference. 

I get why people would suggest these independents should trigger a fresh election and in 'normal' times I would probably agree with them but the two main parties themselves are that bad that I would like to see more MPs become independent. Generally speaking, I actually think the country would be in a better place and politics would be more transparant if MPs were given more freedom to make their own decisions.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Bailey said:

But where does this start and stop? The main parties change their minds all the time and then on the other hand they dont change their judgment when new information comes to light (ie Brexit). How many times has May said something that she has gone back on? Corbyn doesnt even follow the decisions made at their party conference. 

I get why people would suggest these independents should trigger a fresh election and in 'normal' times I would probably agree with them but the two main parties themselves are that bad that I would like to see more MPs become independent. Generally speaking, I actually think the country would be in a better place and politics would be more transparant if MPs were given more freedom to make their own decisions.

I've been saying that for ever Bailey, I despise the system as it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bailey said:

But where does this start and stop? The main parties change their minds all the time and then on the other hand they dont change their judgment when new information comes to light (ie Brexit). How many times has May said something that she has gone back on? Corbyn doesnt even follow the decisions made at their party conference. 

I get why people would suggest these independents should trigger a fresh election and in 'normal' times I would probably agree with them but the two main parties themselves are that bad that I would like to see more MPs become independent. Generally speaking, I actually think the country would be in a better place and politics would be more transparant if MPs were given more freedom to make their own decisions.

 

Government by compromise would be a nightmare.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Bailey said:

How many times has May said something that she has gone back on?

For me there should be another election if the ideals aren't being pursued and if it's for their own agenda boot them out or even prison. Country is being pilfered by the self serving bar stewards. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, johnh said:

Government by compromise would be a nightmare.

It's all working well at the moment though isn'tt it:huh:?

Bailey (if I understand him right) is talking about government by conscience, not compromise. Compromise is just two opposing sides coming to agreement by ceding things they believe in in return for being allowed to keep some they do; something that would be more easily achieved (as I alluded to earlier but narrowing it a bit) by all of us going into a polling booth and hitting a blue button or a red button. Then the two party leaders could play paper, rock, scissors (with the winner having the first three choices) over every issue because individual MPs would be superfluous as they all agree on everything and debates would be a complete sham, like they are now..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 23/02/2019 at 19:58, johnh said:

Government by compromise would be a nightmare.

Why? Works very well here in Switzerland and actually represents everyone, not just the supporters of one side:

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2019/02/in-switzerland-cabinet-members-take-it-in-turns-to-be-president?utm_source=Facebook Videos&utm_medium=Facebook Videos&utm_campaign=Facebook Video Blogs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Matt said:

not sure I would want to live under swiss laws though Matt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the evidence that Chris Grayling has had a prominent role in the loss of £2.7billion of tax payers money should he be forced to resign his post instead of being backed by May. 

Personally I think he should be fired and not praised by a desperate PM more concerned about losing allies than the country losing the sort of money that would make a huge difference to care for the elderly hospitals councils or schools, I hate paying my taxes to this government I feel like pursuing to see if I have any rights to sue them for mishandling of my taxes and demanding it be refunded because they are to incompetent to look after it, okay I know it won’t happen but it makes my blood boil how this sort calamitous attitude with our money is allowed to go on. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brexit if anything has completely highlighted how politics and politicians in this country is and are completely nonfunctional, we need a better system when electing a government and cross party decisions from the off on national issues such as Brexit 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@rachshabi

I do think the Labour party has an antisemitism problem, but everyone is ill-served when the Conservative party, which has an Islamophobia problem, is let off the hook. This isn'tt to deflect or minimise - it's simply asking for consistency in the fight against prejudice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Chach said:

Eh, he wasn't hurt and went on with his day?

So? As the guy who committed the crime is charged with "assault by beating" it would suggest the he was punched in the head because CPS guidelines say...

"A battery is committed when a person intentionally or recklessly applies unlawful force to another. Where there is a battery, the defendant should be charged with ‘assault by beating’. (DPP v Little (1992) 1 All ER 299)."

So the press suggesting an egg was thrown at him (without reference to distance) is misrepresenting what seems to have happened. Even the Met put out a statement that, "On Sunday, March 3 at around 3:52pm an egg was thrown at a Member of Parliament."

I have no idea what actually occurred but on the face of it someone's not telling the truth; the fact that he wasn't hurt (although punching a 69 man in the head is quite likely going to cause a fair bit of pain) is irrelevant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, MikeO said:

So? As the guy who committed the crime is charged with "assault by beating" it would suggest the he was punched in the head because CPS guidelines say...

 

Not to make light of the assault, but it seems curious he was holding an egg at the same time; do you think he beat it later, as well? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Chach said:

Eh, he wasn't hurt and went on with his day?

 

Point is the beeb misreported it to down play the seriousness of the act because it's Corbyn. The headline would most likely be punch had it happened to anyone else. They're meant to be independent and fair, yet their tory bias is very strong. Most of our political news is more similar to North Korean propaganda than to a civilised European country. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, pete0 said:

Chairman of the committee is "my" MP so thanks for that Pete, I think that's probably the first time I've ever heard him speak. Lovely bloke Neil Parrish.

Chairman of the Associate Parliamentary Group for Animal Welfare but a die-hard supporter of hunting (no conflict there obviously) https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/mp-tells-hunt-supporters-devon-975729  and an opponent of same sex marriage, saying it's "for the Church and Christians to decide [upon], not for parliament to legislate."

Don't blame me I didn't vote for him but with a 20,000 majority to defend he'll be around a while I fear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, MikeO said:

Chairman of the committee is "my" MP so thanks for that Pete, I think that's probably the first time I've ever heard him speak. Lovely bloke Neil Parrish.

Chairman of the Associate Parliamentary Group for Animal Welfare but a die-hard supporter of hunting (no conflict there obviously) https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/mp-tells-hunt-supporters-devon-975729  and an opponent of same sex marriage, saying it's "for the Church and Christians to decide [upon], not for parliament to legislate."

Don't blame me I didn't vote for him but with a 20,000 majority to defend he'll be around a while I fear.

Love to know whether he knew the cup he was using was biodegradable or whether he was blind to the fact Gove was drinking from a plastic cup at that time. 

Poor thing with our politics. No voice or consideration to the minority. MPs grease up to the majority whereas they should have a greater social conscious, rather than play to the hunters for their vote they should ban it as they 'know better'. 

From the article you put this bit is very damning for the 'sport'. Hopefully the rest of Parliament will push through enforceable punishments soon. 

'According to the International Fund for Animal Welfare, no genuine trail hunting was witnessed at 98% of the hunts observed in 2015, with trails seen being laid at just eight of the 478 hunts monitored.' 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, pete0 said:

Point is the beeb misreported it to down play the seriousness of the act because it's Corbyn. The headline would most likely be punch had it happened to anyone else. They're meant to be independent and fair, yet their tory bias is very strong. Most of our political news is more similar to North Korean propaganda than to a civilised European country. 

https://skwawkbox.org/2019/03/06/breaking-bbc-under-ofcom-investigation-for-bias/?fbclid=IwAR2CiyA1k7jTlR5focQReQXTFG6Td623juH448J555DCphZ7pSYl1MiixcY

Ofcom are now looking into the BBC for being politically bias. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...