| The Comments |
Tadd, "May did not like Heseltine so she sacked him and she would do the same to any cabinet minister who opposes HER views says a lot about uk democracy ".
Your view, although i agree with it somewhat, is fatally flawed in that you call UK politics a DEMOCRACY. I feel that this is untrue, as a democracy is governing by common consent. To me common consent is some mechanism that represents all subjects, of what ever belief, and this is untrue in the UK. What we have is a eliteist situation where the majority votes in a governing body, which the minority do not want (which is not democratic) and that body is led by one person, the Prime Minister, and that person has the veto on most decisions taken in Parliament.
When one person administers a Parliament isnt this a DICTATORSHIP? I feel Parliament should listen to the masses, and in this day and age it could be achieved by common consent, done by the population having a vote on Government policy (a referendum) It would be claimed that this would be impossible to arrange for all policies in Parliament, but it would be easy with internet connections and electronic votes. The only reason we have politicians in Parliament is they are SUPPOSED to represent the electorate, and is because previously there was no other way of reporting the countries electorate in each area of the UK. Technology has now provided the means to change, a change which i think would be for the better.
0
Like
|
Robert
Early last year I would have agreed with you,but:
It appears that Referendums are only ADVISORY, and if the result is not liked by the minority they will try and overturn it anyway.
0
Like
|
And if we held a referendum and only one person turned out to vote would all of you accept that the majority voted in favour of abc and therefore it should be adopted?
0
Like
|
hugh_man- Amazing which chumpions the remoaners will now hero worship.
It's the message not the messanger or the personality that matters.
_______________________
Time is the school in which we learn
Time is the fire in which we burn.
Delmore Schwartz.
0
Like
|
I thought Heseltine was working in an advisory capacity so are you suggesting TM had no right to sack someone who appears to be potentially compromising the Govt's upcoming negotiating stance?
I once again hear little critical analysis of the lack of EU Commission's political independence and their politicisation and the impact their failures have on citizens.
This message was last edited by ads on 08/03/2017.
1
Like
|
Big Al, i used the word Referendum, as currently a poll of the electorate is exactly that. The legal position would of course have to change to cope with the application of the electorate voting in this manner, as it is not provided for in current legislation, things change.
Perrypower, it is exactly the same in the current Parliamentary protocol, as your local Member Of Parliament does not have to attend a vote in chambers, so as with your scenario, if there is only one Member Of Parliament who votes in chamber on a particular vote, that becomes the result. Not so different. Your comment also raises the times Parliament votes to the "Whip". This means if a party decides that the party vote is , say, no, the party is expected to vote in that manner, opposing the party opinion is usually penalised with a fine for the member, not so Democratic. If a member of parliments constituents want a vote of yes, and the party wants no, the MP would be called to vote no, not a representation of the electorate, non democratic, and like i said in my previous contribution, it makes the UK a DICTATORSHIP, a political view forced on the electorate without their consent.
0
Like
|
ads -I once again hear little critical analysis of the lack of EU Commission's political independence and their politicisation and the impact their failures have on citizens.
Maybe that’s because you are the only one who seems to believe it. Still don't let that put you off. I'm sure now I have said that others on here will join you. You really do sometimes write about imaginary issues which then become a bee in your bonnet.
Do you really believe for one moment that if the EU Commission was failing in the ways you suggest remedial action would not result? How do you define political independence? Independence from what?
Believing in the Commission and it's political vision for a future Europe without the UK? For that is it’s raison d'être is it not? That would be very odd if they failed to act other than 'political'. Your thinking is muddled if I may say so.
Junker has just published various balanced options for change and the way forward. I published them on here, yet you still claim the Commission is not trying to reform, among all the other allegations that don't hold water.
'Impact of failures on it citizens' easy to write but what failures are you referring to? What about the failures of national governments to behave in a responsible manner and in accordance with the treaties they signed? That has impact on its citizens far more than anything the Commission does and I think you know that.
Example - National Governments are supposed to have no more than a budget deficit of 3% of their GDP, yet very few tow that line. There are many other examples of failures among member states to behave responsibly and in accordance with EU policies. That impacts negatively not just their own people but the neighbors as well.
Your priorities of constantly knocking the EU Commission are wrong and out of sync with the actualité.
_______________________
Time is the school in which we learn
Time is the fire in which we burn.
Delmore Schwartz.
1
Like
|
democracy
dɪˈmɒkrəsi/
noun
-
a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives.
"a system of parliamentary democracy"
| synonyms: |
representative government, elective government, constitutional government, popular government;
self-government, government by the people, autonomy;
republic, commonwealth
If there is no compulsion to vote, democracy in actio, surely the democratic way is to listen to the majority who voted and enact their will, its called listening to the citizens.
Government for the people by the people.
Not by its elected representatives or even worse unelected Lords orcEU Commissioners
|
1
Like
|
Well, there's been some weird posts on this subject but, hugh man, I think your last one would be right up there.
Not by its elected representatives? Really? Just who do you think governs the country, then? Joe Bloggs and his mates from the local council estate or Ahmed Baqtar from Tower Hamlets roll up to the Houses of Parliament and start debating what next year's budget will be, do they?
Of course the UK is governed by their representatives, that's what they are voted in to do. No amount of American "for the people by the people" rubbish will change that. The USA is a representative republic, UK is a constitutional monarchy which power devolved to the Houses of Parliament, not to the aforementioned Joe Bloggs and Ahmed Baqtar and certainly not democracies in the true sense of the word. Otherwise we'd have referendums on everything that currently goes through parliament where our elected "representatives" propose, debate and vote on our behalf.
1
Like
|
Bobaol, your reply to Hughs attempt at proving he has a higher education i totally agree with, and it only reinforces what i said previously, and that is the UK is a DICTATORSHIP, and not true democracy.
0
Like
|
A representative democracy/republic/constitution/monarch or whatever is not, in any way, a dictatorship. The representative bit gives it away.
1
Like
|
even a Dictator , on the world stage is the REPRESENTATIVE of the country they control, the word representative gives nothing away Bobaol. The bottom line is that under current UK Parliamentary protocols the country is no more than a dictatorship. We the masses, and even the Members Of Parliament have to toe the line (due to voting to the Whip) and when you have to toe the line (do as you are told) and under that sort of control we are in the grip of a regime which is nothing short of a dictatorship, as there is no such thing in this country as a free vote.
0
Like
|
bobaol and Robert
In the U.K.,
the voters or members of a party choose who will represent their party of choice to fight an election
they then elect either an independent candidate or a candidate representing their party of choice, hence we have many political parties in the UK, some larger than others but nevertheless, lots of choice, normally.
every 5 years or possibly sooner we are asked to confirm our support in the sittting candidate or kick him or her out and elect an alternative.
How can that not be true democracy working?
Democracy, indeed any sensible constitution can only reflect the will of a majority who wish their voice to be heard.
No system exists for every single voters opinion to be taken into account.
I attempted to show that democracy reflects the will of the majority of voters and the elected representatives are expected to follow up and deliver on their mandates and promises.
The ultimate power lies with the people and they will get angry eventually if elected representatives ignore them.
They will get even more angry when unelected Lords and EU Commissioners ignore them.
A point Ads has been trying to make for ages, listen to the people and stop ruling out of self interest or disillusioned ideals.
Someone commented on differences with the US, how is that a better democracy when the President is elected with a lower popular vote than his competitor?
1
Like
|
when you have to toe the line (do as you are told) and under that sort of control we are in the grip of a regime which is nothing short of a dictatorship, as there is no such thing in this country as a free vote.
Robert, oh come on.
Thats exactly what an IN or OUT vote in a referdum was, a Free Vote where EVERY single vote counted and was important, how can that not be democratic?
1
Like
|
Members of the House of lords are not elected by anyone and are not accountable to anyone
EU commissioners are voted into office by the European Parlaiment which is a body of elected MEP's after nomination by member state leaders. They are accountable to the European Parlaiment who can have them removed from office
_______________________
“The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance; it is the illusion of knowledge”
0
Like
|
"There can be no ifs and buts about it – the EU is a Dictatorship. How come? Answer: When the Commission headed by Herr Juncker issues a Regulation it has the force of law for all 28 member States immediately.
Nobody has the right to question this Regulation – it is incontestable. It simply arrives from the EU and it is Law! There are no discussions in Parliament, no processes, no debate, absolutely nothing. "
0
Like
|
" And if we held a referendum and only one person turned out to vote would all of you accept that the majority voted in favour of abc and therefore it should be adopted? "
The answer to that has, of course, to be yes.
When you exercise your right not to cast your vote you are in effect saying that you trust the judgement of your fellow citizens.
If you did feel strongly that the result should have gone the other way, and you chose not to vote, then you would have only yourself to blame.
2
Like
|
When the Commission headed by Herr Juncker issues a Regulation it has the force of law for all 28 member States immediately.
Another Myth, yes things need the approval of the president (not unlike many other democracies) and is not hsi decision or his power to act on his own
_______________________
“The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance; it is the illusion of knowledge”
1
Like
|
Just me Mickeyfinn?
Perhaps best you read the following from Charles Grant who is director of the Centre for European Reform...
https://www.cer.org.uk/insights/what-wrong-european-commission
No, not just me Mickeyfinn.
Please stop generalising and personalising in this way whenever anyone with a difference of opinion to your own raises an alternative analysis.
You appear to have misunderstood the point about independence so best I repeat it again, as identified in this article.
"The problem is that over the past four years the Commission has become much closer to the Parliament than to the Council on many issues. The Commission should be accountable to both – it is appointed by governments and approved by the Parliament. But it should also be independent of both."
As for Junker and reform, I repeat the options and reform you refer to has only just happened and appears only as a consequence of the UK Brexit vote. At no time during these recent years has Mr Junker ever demonstrated any willingness to address the uncomfortable realities associated with citizen disillusionment across Europe with regard to EU policies ( or lack of), in fact in public he frequently demonstrated growing irritation, preferring to be dismissive, arrogant and condescending to the media whenever tackled on this matter, so please don't infer that debate re reform on these matters has not been rigourously resisted on his part.
You asked about impact on citizens, well what have we all be discussing on this thread, ad infinitum, if not the impact on UK citizens, Greek citizens, Southern member State citizens, and that's not to mention the failures associated with the eurozone, lack of forward planning, lack of intellectual analysis of how best to manage wide differentials between member states, growth strategies, etc.!!!
2
Like
|
Tad
EU comissioners are chosen by the governments of the member countries in association with the President of the Council. Effectively this means it is the patronage of the PM of the country involved. Exactly now as the H of L is chosen.
Both bodies are undemocratic. We should reform the H of L. We are no longer interested in the EU I hope.
1
Like
|