November 4, 20169 yr That's why many people have been working at reforming the HoL. In fact it is the now despised Tony Blair who got rid of hereditary peerage in the Upper House and there has been no other reforms since 1999. Some feel that the Upper House is essential into holding into account the HoC, others feel it holds up parliamentary process. I think most people feel a largely elected Upper House is the way forward.
November 4, 20169 yr Don't do yourself down MH. The democracy we live in allows anyone to stand for election or indeed to form a party. Ukip showed this despite being loons and as Kent said previously farage has had a huge impact on the country. Should all this brexit business not happen then I can see ukip or some other manifestation of it causing huge ripples in a future election. But only if people exercise their vote; as many did at the referendum. Going back to your post re education and kids' fears I'd put that down to the ready availability of information in today's media. Its a form of education and used readily in schools. I agree that you're perhaps being a bit over idealistic but there's nowt wrong with dreams and aspirations. Personally I'd love society to adopt a more environmentally aware approach, done right I reckon it can be economically viable; but it would need some fundamental changes that folk won't make- hey ho that's life. Edited November 4, 20169 yr by Tonge moor green jacket
November 4, 20169 yr I'm curious as to when you think the 'common' man got the vote in the UK. It was not until after 1918. And a large part of Hitler's appeal to voters in his early days was in opposition to the extremely onerous terms Germany faced in the Treaty of Versailles. I was of the understanding it was mid 1800's but happy to be corrected America has had it for 200+ years then I'd assume? Either way considering it's a relatively new thing it's had it's fair share of shockers Granted Hitler did well of the back of opposing Versailles, generally voters do turn to extremes following difficult ecenomic periods The Wall Street crash didn't do the world many favours either You can trace a lot of the change in the political landscape now down to the knock on effect of the 2008 crash, the likes of Trump & Corbyn wouldn't have got out of the traps ten years ago when things were rosey Edited November 4, 20169 yr by birch-chorley
November 4, 20169 yr If you think the High Court is interfering in democracy, then you don’t understand how Britain works not my words carol, the words of the independant http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/high-court-ruling-article-50-brexit-eu-referendum-parliamentary-vote-leaving-european-union-british-a7395966.html
November 4, 20169 yr Author That's why many people have been working at reforming the HoL. In fact it is the now despised Tony Blair who got rid of hereditary peerage in the Upper House and there has been no other reforms since 1999. Some feel that the Upper House is essential into holding into account the HoC, others feel it holds up parliamentary process. I think most people feel a largely elected Upper House is the way forward. I'd agree - but i'd 'elect' like the judicial/juror system. Basically a cross section of the public that are picked randomly (maybe certain things needed to qualify such as speaking the Queens etc) and changed yearly or something like that. Having a counter Gov. or 'safety net' as it were would be a good thing imo - but how people think the current system is democratic is beyond me!
November 4, 20169 yr I was of the understanding it was mid 1800's but happy to be corrected America has had it for 200+ years then I'd assume? USA first gave black males the vote in 1870, after the end of the Civil War, but the southern states mostly got round this until universal franchise was imposed in 1965.
November 4, 20169 yr Author Don't do yourself down MH. The democracy we live in allows anyone to stand for election or indeed to form a party. Ukip showed this despite being loons and as Kent said previously farage has had a huge impact on the country. Should all this brexit business not happen then I can see ukip or some other manifestation of it causing huge ripples in a future election. But only if people exercise their vote; as many did at the referendum. Going back to your post re education and kids' fears I'd put that down to the ready availability of information in today's media. Its a form of education and used readily in schools. I agree that you're perhaps being a bit over idealistic but there's nowt wrong with dreams and aspirations. Personally I'd love society to adopt a more environmentally aware approach, done right I reckon it can be economically viable; but it would need some fundamental changes that folk won't make- hey ho that's life. That's a fair point. I don't want some sort of revolution and head-lobbing off of all those in charge or anything but getting people to at least question what a democracy is, should be and looking at ours objectively would be a start. I honestly believe most folk think their vote is 'worth' more than it really is. Kent has a point too - but if the country want to vote in a loon then they should be able to. It would be the business of folk to counter that with reasoned arguments and . . . oh wait, I see where I 'm going wrong here ha ha Yes I could start a party and potentially run for PM. But how would I implement the will of the people? I don't think I'd be able to, not the way the current system is set up. I am idealistic, but if we can't see something is broken, or could be better, then it will never change.
November 4, 20169 yr That's a fair point. I don't want some sort of revolution and head-lobbing off of all those in charge or anything but getting people to at least question what a democracy is, should be and looking at ours objectively would be a start. I honestly believe most folk think their vote is 'worth' more than it really is. Kent has a point too - but if the country want to vote in a loon then they should be able to. It would be the business of folk to counter that with reasoned arguments and . . . oh wait, I see where I 'm going wrong here ha ha Yes I could start a party and potentially run for PM. But how would I implement the will of the people? I don't think I'd be able to, not the way the current system is set up. I am idealistic, but if we can't see something is broken, or could be better, then it will never change. Whatever you decide don't pontificate too much over it. It'll do your head in! Thinking too much is bad for you.
November 4, 20169 yr I'd argue we've never really had it. - someone correct me here but even if a decision/policy is put through parliament does it not then go the house of Lords who basically yay or nay it? I know that they are not elected but appointed so how is that democratic in any way, shape or form? Always thought it was madness but folk just seem to accept that's the way it is. I know that's an over simplification and they serve a kind of 'critical friend' type role but still . . . One man one vote for me is the only true democracy. My vote means fook all! The House of Lords cannot block a Bill going into law, only delay or pass it back to the Commons to reconsider. And if needed whoever is on power can create enough new Lords to get their bill through.
November 4, 20169 yr Author If you think the High Court is interfering in democracy, then you don’t understand how Britain works not my words carol, the words of the independant http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/high-court-ruling-article-50-brexit-eu-referendum-parliamentary-vote-leaving-european-union-british-a7395966.html I find it hard to believe that the consequences of such a big 'vote' were not fully understood by those in charge. Especially if I read about it in a newspaper article prior to the referendum! If that is the case then, Jesus wept, we're being run by bigger incompetents than I thought . . .
November 4, 20169 yr Author Whatever you decide don't pontificate too much over it. It'll do your head in! Thinking too much is bad for you. Aye
November 4, 20169 yr Author The House of Lords cannot block a Bill going into law, only delay or pass it back to the Commons to reconsider. And if needed whoever is on power can create enough new Lords to get their bill through. So, in effect, they certainly can 'yay' it and as near as damn it 'nay' it. And if not, the Gov makes sure they tip the scales in their favour Aye, it reminds me of that Blackadder episode with the 'cat' robes " . . . You made B . . .aldrick a Lord?!" ha ha Edited November 4, 20169 yr by madthatter
November 4, 20169 yr Not sure if these have already been posted on here but looks like a shitstorm of popcornical proportions coming.... http://www.vaskal.ca/podestafiles
November 4, 20169 yr If you think the High Court is interfering in democracy, then you don’t understand how Britain works not my words carol, the words of the independant http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/high-court-ruling-article-50-brexit-eu-referendum-parliamentary-vote-leaving-european-union-british-a7395966.html Top Gear magazine!
November 4, 20169 yr I'd agree - but i'd 'elect' like the judicial/juror system. Basically a cross section of the public that are picked randomly (maybe certain things needed to qualify such as speaking the Queens etc) and changed yearly or something like that. What could possibly go wrong with this idea? :-)
November 4, 20169 yr If you think the High Court is interfering in democracy, then you don’t understand how Britain works not my words carol, the words of the independant http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/high-court-ruling-article-50-brexit-eu-referendum-parliamentary-vote-leaving-european-union-british-a7395966.html Top Gear magazine! Progress towards Brexit is already too leisurely to be called fast, for some the slow pace has really become a pain.
November 4, 20169 yr Not sure if these have already been posted on here but looks like a shitstorm of popcornical proportions coming.... http://www.vaskal.ca/podestafiles As predicted by yours truly....http://www.wanderersways.com/forum/topic/85859-donald-dead-cat-on-is-head-trump/page-10
November 4, 20169 yr Author What could possibly go wrong with this idea? :-) ha ha well it was a bit flippant but I don't think the practice of having a public led 'vetting' of Gov policy etc is that bad of an idea - more like a safety net, but a democratically elected, or otherwise, one. It would be more democratic, imo, than having Parliament and the House of Lords in its current form.
November 4, 20169 yr In other news, Lucy Verasmay still looks fit as fuck on the ITV weather. She's hotter than Stevie Wonder's iron.
November 5, 20169 yr You wonder why no one listens to you round here? Do I care (or even wonder as you suggest)? Not a fucking jot. I think you are wrong though and that's what really worries you.
November 5, 20169 yr One man one vote for me is the only true democracy. ...and you are correct. There is a caveat though - once each man has voted, the majority decision absolutely must be observed.
November 5, 20169 yr ...and you are correct. There is a caveat though - once each man has voted, the majority decision absolutely must be observed. That's where it gets messy though, it's been said above, the whole thing was done shambolically For example we could leave the EU and have free movement and free trade like Norway & Switzerland. In this circumstance the majority decision of leaving the EU will have been met but would people be happy with it? I guess not What the leave camp said doesn't mean fuck all, the £350m to the NHS, a full hard BREXIT, at the end of the day they have fuck all to do with anything just like the remain camp What matters is what's on the ballot paper, Should the U.K. leave the EU Folk can say BREXIT means BREXIT all they want, BREXIT can mean 1,000 different outcomes that are all the UK leaving the EU and the majority decision being honoured It shouldn't be a tombola machine that decides which of the thousands of options we go for, or should it be for a handful of MP's to decide what they fancy. It should be worked through by Parliament like everything else even if it's behind closed doors as such IMO the ballot paper should have asked a series of questions such as free movement yes / no. Free trade yes / no, full membership yes / no. Soverignity yes / no - then there would have been a true mandate. But unfortunately it didn't so it's a fucking mess Edited November 5, 20169 yr by birch-chorley
November 5, 20169 yr ...and you are correct. There is a caveat though - once each man has voted, the majority decision absolutely must be observed. Best of 3?
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.