Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Dishevelled Den]

I also, personally, think that we should have more segregation between the legislature (who make the laws), and the government (who run the country).

Interesting, would you expand on that a bit Egg?

Hmm! A large Egg.

I bought a dozen at Tesco today.

Sorry, Den. Been a long day. I know you'll forgive me. 

  - I'll happly hear your confession any time Nick - I'm good at soothing fevered brows.

[albitz]

Ben Bradshaw hadnt a good word to say for AV less than 18 months ago. He is now heading up Labours YES campaign.
As for Huhne - there are no words which begin to describe the utter stupidity of the bloke. Rumour has it he is after Cleggs job, hopefully that will finish the Limpdems off once and for all.

[Vamps]

At the moment, we have one bloke who picks a team to manage each department of the government - the cabinet.
He's also the same bloke who (by wielding the "whip") decides what new laws are passed through parliament.
So he controls EVERYTHING, and can pass laws to make sure it stays that way.
why not say that the prime minister and cabinet cannot have any say in parliament about which laws are enacted.

There would have to be some things where the cabinet and parliament would need to interact - whose decision would it be to go to war?

but, ideally the prime minister and cabinet should be forced to work within laws which parliament set, and NOT be able to change laws to suit themselves.

Put like that it rather sounds like a 'dictatorship' to me....

[jerry]

the problem with any democratic  system-leastways this is how it seems to me-is that of large minorities and how their views can be taken into account. At a simplistic level say you have a million people voting for either A or B , even if 90% or whatever vote for A that still leaves a considerable number of people who want B. The real nubb of the matter though is that when it comes to voting most people either are either apathetic or else do not know where to get reasonably unbiased information from in order to help them to make a more informed decision when voting. Throw in the fact that the majority of people will obviously only vote for something that only benefits them personally and no wonder it gets complicated. After all its not like its only a small group of people having a meeting where each person can actively participate in the discussion, its all sort of done by proxy with the issue about how accurately a particular party or person will represent your views being the moot point :-/

[bigegg]

At the moment, we have one bloke who picks a team to manage each department of the government - the cabinet.
He's also the same bloke who (by wielding the "whip") decides what new laws are passed through parliament.
So he controls EVERYTHING, and can pass laws to make sure it stays that way.

Put like that it rather sounds like a 'dictatorship' to me....

we've certainly had some laws passed which were only wanted by a minority of people in this country:

poll tax
clamping
speed cameras
gulf war
afghanistan war

that's off the top of my head.
last two not strictly laws, but forced through parliament by a majority party block vote.

sure there's more.

[Dishevelled Den]

At the moment, we have one bloke who picks a team to manage each department of the government - the cabinet.
He's also the same bloke who (by wielding the "whip") decides what new laws are passed through parliament.
So he controls EVERYTHING, and can pass laws to make sure it stays that way.

why not say that the prime minister and cabinet cannot have any say in parliament about which laws are enacted.

There would have to be some things where the cabinet and parliament would need to interact - whose decision would it be to go to war?

but, ideally the prime minister and cabinet should be forced to work within laws which parliament set, and NOT be able to change laws to suit themselves.

Yes I can see the allure in that following the travesty that was the New Labour experiment.

I can foresee one problem in that if it were left to parliament as a whole to draft new legislation there may well be considerable slippage - too many cooks and all that.

I think it's fair enough for the individuals duly elected on a clear mandate to choose the legislation their ethic dictates (or alter existing legislation to better reflect their ideals) but in essence, governance needs to have a clear driver and that, for me at least, really needs to be the party and, by extension, the leadership chosen by the voters.

I’m not fully discounting your suggestion as I need to think about it a bit more, but I would agree that there is something lacking in the parliamentary system at the moment that allows abuse of process to be practised with impunity.

Such abuse has devalued the sanctity and moral content of this Parliament where personal gain, avarice and lust for power seems to have overridden standards of propriety and good judgement.

[albitz]

I tend to agree with you Bigegg. IT sounds like old fashioned Parliamentary democracy, rather than the recent trend towards decisions being made by a very small "inner circle" who then give the whips the responsibility of doing whatever it takes to make sure the MP,s vote how they are told.

[Dishevelled Den]

I tend to agree with you Bigegg. IT sounds like old fashioned Parliamentary democracy, rather than the recent trend towards decisions being made by a very small "inner circle" who then give the whips the responsibility of doing whatever it takes to make sure the MP,s vote how they are told.

MP,s vote how they are told

This suggests to me that the overall quality of those duly elected is questionable.

If that were to be the case (and I think it is sadly) would they, as a group acting in parliamentary session, have the nous, skill and determination to raise, debate and vote for proposed legislation with any hope of attaining a meaningful result?

6oo (or so) morons - morally challenged, mendacious or generally there for everything but serving the interests of the country - meeting to choose legislation (howsoever apparently democratic) - doesn’t necessarily guarantee that the end result will be worth enacting.

[albitz]

Very true Den, but whats the alternative ?
Personally I think they should just do it my way. Everything would be just fine then.

[Dishevelled Den]

Very true Den, but whats the alternative ?
Personally I think they should just do it my way. Everything would be just fine then.

I don't know how to approach this as a lot depends on the content of those elected - as with much nowadays, the number of people in possession of morals, concern for others and the willingness to do the job they said they'd do seems to be rapidly diminishing.

In the case of your own manifesto, I can say only one thing - Vote early - Vote often.