Politics - The Future
Discussion
Whatever happens with Brexit, it is clear that we need to sort out our politics.
This thread is for people to discuss what they think will improve our system.
My view is that we need;
1 A written constitution including rules for how Parliament, the Government and Judiciary work together
2 An English Parliament alongside equalised devolution of powers to each home nation, so that all voters are equally represented and powers of each devolved government are the same
3 Equalised constituency sizes, for the same reason
What are your views and suggestions...?
This thread is for people to discuss what they think will improve our system.
My view is that we need;
1 A written constitution including rules for how Parliament, the Government and Judiciary work together
2 An English Parliament alongside equalised devolution of powers to each home nation, so that all voters are equally represented and powers of each devolved government are the same
3 Equalised constituency sizes, for the same reason
What are your views and suggestions...?
Cupramax said:
loafer123 said:
3 Equalised constituency sizes, for the same reason
Wasn’t this proposed by the Conservatives? Thought it would obliterate many Labour majorities or something so there’s no way they’ll get that through.I believe the Commission should be able to impose changes.
The last time the world saw the kind of popularist nationalist nonsense currently afflicting our politics it created a real mess.
One consequence in the aftermath was that Churchill called for the creation of a “council of Europe” to ensure such nationalist nonsense was kept in check.
Ironically, one country seems to have forgotten those lessons.
It really brings home why the wise talk about the wisdom of “never forgetting”.
One consequence in the aftermath was that Churchill called for the creation of a “council of Europe” to ensure such nationalist nonsense was kept in check.
Ironically, one country seems to have forgotten those lessons.
It really brings home why the wise talk about the wisdom of “never forgetting”.
loafer123 said:
PR has been rejected in the past.
In my view it would create a less stable system, not least as the separatists in each country use the instability to gain disproportionate leverage to push for independence.
I thought it was AV that was rejected?In my view it would create a less stable system, not least as the separatists in each country use the instability to gain disproportionate leverage to push for independence.
Stability depends on what the objective is. Ours seems to be "winner takes all" which has always seemed a little odd given everyone has to be represented by our politicians.
Other countries seem to have settled on co-existence and coalition and appear to manage it.
DeepEnd said:
The last time the world saw the kind of popularist nationalist nonsense currently afflicting our politics it created a real mess.
One consequence in the aftermath was that Churchill called for the creation of a “council of Europe” to ensure such nationalist nonsense was kept in check.
Ironically, one country seems to have forgotten those lessons.
It really brings home why the wise talk about the wisdom of “never forgetting”.
I think you may be confused.One consequence in the aftermath was that Churchill called for the creation of a “council of Europe” to ensure such nationalist nonsense was kept in check.
Ironically, one country seems to have forgotten those lessons.
It really brings home why the wise talk about the wisdom of “never forgetting”.
The Council of Europe still exists to achieve the same thing that Churchill espoused.
It isn’t the same thing as the EU, even though the latter adopted the former’s flag.
https://www.coe.int/en/web/about-us/do-not-get-con...
loafer123 said:
Whatever happens with Brexit, it is clear that we need to sort out our politics.
This thread is for people to discuss what they think will improve our system.
My view is that we need;
1 A written constitution including rules for how Parliament, the Government and Judiciary work together
2 An English Parliament alongside equalised devolution of powers to each home nation, so that all voters are equally represented and powers of each devolved government are the same
3 Equalised constituency sizes, for the same reason
What are your views and suggestions...?
I think England is of a population where several "states" with more of their own governance, to some degree, would work better.This thread is for people to discuss what they think will improve our system.
My view is that we need;
1 A written constitution including rules for how Parliament, the Government and Judiciary work together
2 An English Parliament alongside equalised devolution of powers to each home nation, so that all voters are equally represented and powers of each devolved government are the same
3 Equalised constituency sizes, for the same reason
What are your views and suggestions...?
I wonder if you could build a system where regional assemblies do dual duties of both regional and national politics as required.
b
hstewie said:
hstewie said:loafer123 said:
PR has been rejected in the past.
In my view it would create a less stable system, not least as the separatists in each country use the instability to gain disproportionate leverage to push for independence.
I thought it was AV that was rejected?In my view it would create a less stable system, not least as the separatists in each country use the instability to gain disproportionate leverage to push for independence.
Stability depends on what the objective is. Ours seems to be "winner takes all" which has always seemed a little odd given everyone has to be represented by our politicians.
Other countries seem to have settled on co-existence and coalition and appear to manage it.
Is a Parliament voted partly from FPTP and partly by PR the answer? I think that works elsewhere.
Teddy Lop said:
I think England is of a population where several "states" with more of their own governance, to some degree, would work better.
I wonder if you could build a system where regional assemblies do dual duties of both regional and national politics as required.
I don’t feel, personally, that England is divided in that way, and the danger is that, by creating artificial divides, you pull England apart as well.I wonder if you could build a system where regional assemblies do dual duties of both regional and national politics as required.
loafer123 said:
DeepEnd said:
The last time the world saw the kind of popularist nationalist nonsense currently afflicting our politics it created a real mess.
One consequence in the aftermath was that Churchill called for the creation of a “council of Europe” to ensure such nationalist nonsense was kept in check.
Ironically, one country seems to have forgotten those lessons.
It really brings home why the wise talk about the wisdom of “never forgetting”.
I think you may be confused.One consequence in the aftermath was that Churchill called for the creation of a “council of Europe” to ensure such nationalist nonsense was kept in check.
Ironically, one country seems to have forgotten those lessons.
It really brings home why the wise talk about the wisdom of “never forgetting”.
The Council of Europe still exists to achieve the same thing that Churchill espoused.
It isn’t the same thing as the EU, even though the latter adopted the former’s flag.
https://www.coe.int/en/web/about-us/do-not-get-con...
The principle of unity not division is key.
Our politics are riven with division. That is the core issue. It is at the dark heart of the Brexit Party who offer no solutions.
DeepEnd said:
I’m not at all confused.
The principle of unity not division is key.
Our politics are riven with division. That is the core issue. It is at the dark heart of the Brexit Party who offer no solutions.
A key cause of the Brexit vote is lack of representation - the feeling that people’s views are ignored and they can’t be heard.The principle of unity not division is key.
Our politics are riven with division. That is the core issue. It is at the dark heart of the Brexit Party who offer no solutions.
This thread is about trying to fix that.
Whilst you might think the EU is a good thing, it can’t fix our national politics, which is the subject of the thread.
loafer123 said:
My worry is that a small party use a coalition to gain disproportionate power and influence.
Is a Parliament voted partly from FPTP and partly by PR the answer? I think that works elsewhere.
But you kind of have that now under FPTP with the DUP being the obvious example.Is a Parliament voted partly from FPTP and partly by PR the answer? I think that works elsewhere.
There will always be some drawback with any system.
I was listening to an interview with someone, I forget who but it may have been Lord Hesseltine or Jeffrey Archer, where they were recounting some time back in the 60's when either the PM or leader of the opposition had run quite a personal advert about his opposite number and in the Commons.
That opposite number had pointed out his career both politically and militarily and said of the advert "I don't need that" and by that afternoon it had been pulled with an apology.
This lot need to learn to work together.
fk that. The answer to bad government is not more government, and certainly not more politicians.
Get rid of the three regional assemblies.
Reduce the number of MPs to 500 or fewer.
Equalise constituency sizes.
Reduce the Lords to 100 or so.
Reduce the general scope and reach of government altogether.
k that. The answer to bad government is not more government, and certainly not more politicians.Get rid of the three regional assemblies.
Reduce the number of MPs to 500 or fewer.
Equalise constituency sizes.
Reduce the Lords to 100 or so.
Reduce the general scope and reach of government altogether.
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: But you kind of have that now under FPTP with the DUP being the obvious example.
There will always be some drawback with any system.
I was listening to an interview with someone, I forget who but it may have been Lord Hesseltine or Jeffrey Archer, where they were recounting some time back in the 60's when either the PM or leader of the opposition had run quite a personal advert about his opposite number and in the Commons.
That opposite number had pointed out his career both politically and militarily and said of the advert "I don't need that" and by that afternoon it had been pulled with an apology.
This lot need to learn to work together.
I agree with you overall, but on your first point about FPTP, isn’t the DUP example a reason not to do PR - that sort of issue will result each time?There will always be some drawback with any system.
I was listening to an interview with someone, I forget who but it may have been Lord Hesseltine or Jeffrey Archer, where they were recounting some time back in the 60's when either the PM or leader of the opposition had run quite a personal advert about his opposite number and in the Commons.
That opposite number had pointed out his career both politically and militarily and said of the advert "I don't need that" and by that afternoon it had been pulled with an apology.
This lot need to learn to work together.
technodup said:
fk that. The answer to bad government is not more government, and certainly not more politicians.
Get rid of the three regional assemblies.
Reduce the number of MPs to 500 or fewer.
Equalise constituency sizes.
Reduce the Lords to 100 or so.
Reduce the general scope and reach of government altogether.
I don’t think any of the three devolved Parliaments are going anywhere, however much some might want them to.k that. The answer to bad government is not more government, and certainly not more politicians.Get rid of the three regional assemblies.
Reduce the number of MPs to 500 or fewer.
Equalise constituency sizes.
Reduce the Lords to 100 or so.
Reduce the general scope and reach of government altogether.
I completely agree on the need to reduce the number of MPs and the size of the Lords, though.
loafer123 said:
I agree with you overall, but on your first point about FPTP, isn’t the DUP example a reason not to do PR - that sort of issue will result each time?
I'd guess (and it is just a guess, I'd need to see some PR scenarios) that with PR you'd be less likely to see a single party just a couple of seats short of "winner takes all" and seeing them turn to some undesirables as kingmaker.They'd all have to work together.
loafer123 said:
Teddy Lop said:
I think England is of a population where several "states" with more of their own governance, to some degree, would work better.
I wonder if you could build a system where regional assemblies do dual duties of both regional and national politics as required.
I don’t feel, personally, that England is divided in that way, and the danger is that, by creating artificial divides, you pull England apart as well.I wonder if you could build a system where regional assemblies do dual duties of both regional and national politics as required.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff