Brexit starts today - now we wait, and wait...

[oggbashan]

Oops, Brexit just stalled lol

As I said in the original post of this thread.

We wait, and wait...

The French don't want to do anything until after the second round of their Presidential election; the Germans are facing an election too; we don't know what impact Turkey's referendum result will have on the EU...

27 countries each have their individual reasons to delay any discussions about what happens with Brexit.

 

[BiAsianGirl]

No election debate on TV?

Good. We don't want US Presidential style politics. We will get too much TV air time devoted to politics anyway. Last night's BBC Ten O'Clock News went on and on and on about the election saying not much and repeating themselves frequently.

I may decide to just watch DVDs for the next seven weeks. I might READ the actual party manifestos to see what lies are being offered.

That made me smile...

Everyone should vote on manifesto not who performed best on a tv debate.

I recall ours from the last election, yes agreed we do not want US style politics as we vote for a political party by choosing a local candidate.

 

[DeYaKen]

That made me smile...

Everyone should vote on manifesto not who performed best on a tv debate.

I recall ours from the last election, yes agreed we do not want US style politics as we vote for a political party by choosing a local candidate.

It rather depends on how they are done. Probably the best ones are the ones where the candidates face questions from the floorIt, a bit like Question Time. There is no room for script writers and it immediately shows up those who are evasive. Whether we like it or not the direction a government takes is largely dependent on the Prime Minister. What the last election debates showed up was that Ed Milliband really had no clear idea of the way forward. Probably because he was trying to show a difference between a blairite Labour Party and the conservatives. Compare that with now when the Tory Media is trying desperately to stop the electorate from seeing the difference between the two parties. The real reason Mother Theresa doesn't want a debate is because she wants to make the election all about Brexit. That is a smokescreen. Article 50 is triggered, it's going to happen. In a debate she would have to defend her party's record.

Starving the health service of funds.
reducing the income of disabled people.
Pumping taxpayers money into private companies for no return
Failing to hit the same immigration targets that she is putting out again

 

[Exescort]

I think it's an absolute disgrace that May won't debate on TV.
TV debating exposes the debaters personality, therefore she'd be shown up for what she is!
Campaigned Remain remember?
Now blows on and on as if she headed the Leave campaign.
May bows to business and takes from the poor and infirm!
Put her in a debate, even a head to head with Corbyn, she'd be exposed for the self serving person she is.
Just saying. I know you all think your views are more important than the rest of us.

 

[oggbashan]

I think it's an absolute disgrace that May won't debate on TV.
TV debating exposes the debaters personality, therefore she'd be shown up for what she is!
Campaigned Remain remember?
Now blows on and on as if she headed the Leave campaign.
May bows to business and takes from the poor and infirm!
Put her in a debate, even a head to head with Corbyn, she'd be exposed for the self serving person she is.
Just saying. I know you all think your views are more important than the rest of us.

We have Prime Minister's Question Time every week Parliament is in session and Ministers face questions in the House of Commons all the time. The opposition has frequent opportunities to challenge the government and make significant points. US politicians don't have to face that sort of attack so TV debates are unusual for them.

Unfortunately for Labour supporters Corbyn, despite his strong points, is NOT good at debate. A TV debate would be very awkward for him and counter-productive for Labour.

A TV debate really only favours the minority parties - Lib Dems, Green etc. by giving them more prominence.

 

[DeYaKen]

We have Prime Minister's Question Time every week Parliament is in session and Ministers face questions in the House of Commons all the time. The opposition has frequent opportunities to challenge the government and make significant points. US politicians don't have to face that sort of attack so TV debates are unusual for them.

Unfortunately for Labour supporters Corbyn, despite his strong points, is NOT good at debate. A TV debate would be very awkward for him and counter-productive for Labour.

A TV debate really only favours the minority parties - Lib Dems, Green etc. by giving them more prominence.

The difference is that for Prime Ministers question time the questions have to be provided in advance so the reply comes not from the PM but from her scriptwriters. Tory script writers are definitely superior to Labour but you would expect that, given who is paying them.

Minority parties only get prominence in proportion to their share of the vote. The fact that their share is not proportional to the number of seats only shows how unfair our voting system is. UKIP got more than 20% of the vote and got one MP Conservative got 40% and 300 plus MPs.

 

[Hard_Rom]

Minority parties only get prominence in proportion to their share of the vote. The fact that their share is not proportional to the number of seats only shows how unfair our voting system is. UKIP got more than 20% of the vote and got one MP Conservative got 40% and 300 plus MPs.

That's due to the first past the post system. All the Westminster systems and the US use it. Without it you would have tiny fringe parties and unworkable coalitions. Radical fringe parties would have power far beyond their representation because a mainstream party might have to seek power sharing with them and make concessions. Threats to withhold support would result in non-confidence votes and early returns to the polls.

The Westminster system of governments has produced the most stable of governments. While still having enough 'democracy' to rank at the top of any freedom list.

If the UKIP wants more power they should change their policies to attract the more middle of the road voter. The real power in politics is the middle road.

 

[DeYaKen]

That's due to the first past the post system. All the Westminster systems and the US use it. Without it you would have tiny fringe parties and unworkable coalitions. Radical fringe parties would have power far beyond their representation because a mainstream party might have to seek power sharing with them and make concessions. Threats to withhold support would result in non-confidence votes and early returns to the polls.

The Westminster system of governments has produced the most stable of governments. While still having enough 'democracy' to rank at the top of any freedom list.

If the UKIP wants more power they should change their policies to attract the more middle of the road voter. The real power in politics is the middle road.

The first past the post system results in government which does not represent the people.

It leads to simmering unrest as shown by the referendum result.

I chose UKIP because their result was the most obvious anomaly. Effectively FPOP denies minorities a voice and in the British System means that a minority of voters can command a huge majority.

Margret Thatcher had a majority of 160 with only 38% of the vote and that is supposed to be democracy.

Still at least we don't have an unstable government like Germany.

 

[Hard_Rom]

The first past the post system results in government which does not represent the people.

It leads to simmering unrest as shown by the referendum result.

I chose UKIP because their result was the most obvious anomaly. Effectively FPOP denies minorities a voice and in the British System means that a minority of voters can command a huge majority.

Margret Thatcher had a majority of 160 with only 38% of the vote and that is supposed to be democracy.

Still at least we don't have an unstable government like Germany.

But 100% of voters don't turn out. If only 70% do then 38% is a majority of voters who could be bothered to vote. FPTP is not the problem. It is low voter turnout that is the issue. If upwards of 80%+ or even 90% bothered to vote we would get a much more representative number. So don't blame FPTP blame lack of interest in the election system. Coming up with small fringe groups that pander to special interests and radical elements is not the answer.

 

[BiAsianGirl]

It rather depends on how they are done. Probably the best ones are the ones where the candidates face questions from the floorIt, a bit like Question Time. There is no room for script writers and it immediately shows up those who are evasive. Whether we like it or not the direction a government takes is largely dependent on the Prime Minister. What the last election debates showed up was that Ed Milliband really had no clear idea of the way forward. Probably because he was trying to show a difference between a blairite Labour Party and the conservatives. Compare that with now when the Tory Media is trying desperately to stop the electorate from seeing the difference between the two parties. The real reason Mother Theresa doesn't want a debate is because she wants to make the election all about Brexit. That is a smokescreen. Article 50 is triggered, it's going to happen. In a debate she would have to defend her party's record.

Starving the health service of funds.
reducing the income of disabled people.
Pumping taxpayers money into private companies for no return
Failing to hit the same immigration targets that she is putting out again

I do agree but it's always scripted even question time they know the questions beforehand.

Look at prime ministers questions on Wednesdays the pm reads from a script literally.

This election is about brexit, there are the issues you mention as well as others:

Housing or lack of
Education spending
U-turns on badly thought out budgets
All of the industries that are subsidised by the EU

Xx

 

[DeYaKen]

But 100% of voters don't turn out. If only 70% do then 38% is a majority of voters who could be bothered to vote. FPTP is not the problem. It is low voter turnout that is the issue. If upwards of 80%+ or even 90% bothered to vote we would get a much more representative number. So don't blame FPTP blame lack of interest in the election system. Coming up with small fringe groups that pander to special interests and radical elements is not the answer.

I said she had 38% of the vote, not 38% of the voters. To be clear, only 38% of the people who cast their vote, voted conservative but they still got a 160 seat majority over all the other parties combined. That is the sort of system you are defending, one where 62% of the people who voted were not represented. You can have 25% of the votes cast and not win a single seat. That is the fault in the system we have. The number of people actually voting is irrelevant.

I would say that first past the post is the biggest cause of low turnout. Voters know that in a "safe" constituency their vote doesn't count. That's why the turnout was so high for the referendum. Everyone's vote counted and we got a result which confounded the politicians.

 

[DeYaKen]

I do agree but it's always scripted even question time they know the questions beforehand.

Look at prime ministers questions on Wednesdays the pm reads from a script literally.

This election is about brexit, there are the issues you mention as well as others:

Housing or lack of
Education spending
U-turns on badly thought out budgets
All of the industries that are subsidised by the EU

Xx

No it's not about Brexit. That will happen whether we like it or not. Both main parties are committed to it. We are not re-running the referendum no matter what the Conservatives might say. We are choosing, First and foremost how we want our country to be run.
Do we want it to become a place where paramedics ask for your insurance details before they put you in the ambulance?
Do we want it to be a place where getting anything beyond a basic education depends on the size of your pockets?
Do we want to see more people sleeping in doorways because there is no way they can ever afford to rent a house let alone buy one.
Do we want it to become even more of a tax haven than it already is?
Do we want to see disabled people unable to get out of their houses because the benefits that paid for their mobility have been taken away?
Do we want to see our government pumping large sums of taxpayers money into private companies while the people who work for those companies can barely afford to live?

Those are the things we should be focussing on and those are the things that Mother Theresa does not want to discuss.

 

[ishtat]

The first past the post system results in government which does not represent the people.

Of course it doesn't, it was never intended to. Edmund Burke's Speech to the Electors of Bristol Nov 3rd 1774 explained the exact relationship of an MP to his electorate some 245 years ago. It is still worth reading; Google it. It was a significant influence on both British and American political thinkers.

Most constitutional Democracies such as USA and Constitutional democracies like the UK are very and rightly suspicious of 'representing the people' Excessive democracy and especially proportional representation leads either to gridlock and the blackmailing of the major by the minor parties - example Belgium; or to chaos, examples Italy and France in the 1960's.

 

[BiAsianGirl]

No it's not about Brexit. That will happen whether we like it or not. Both main parties are committed to it. We are not re-running the referendum no matter what the Conservatives might say. We are choosing, First and foremost how we want our country to be run.
Do we want it to become a place where paramedics ask for your insurance details before they put you in the ambulance?
Do we want it to be a place where getting anything beyond a basic education depends on the size of your pockets?
Do we want to see more people sleeping in doorways because there is no way they can ever afford to rent a house let alone buy one.
Do we want it to become even more of a tax haven than it already is?
Do we want to see disabled people unable to get out of their houses because the benefits that paid for their mobility have been taken away?
Do we want to see our government pumping large sums of taxpayers money into private companies while the people who work for those companies can barely afford to live?

Those are the things we should be focussing on and those are the things that Mother Theresa does not want to discuss.

Yes she has been avoiding those very questions for months, but now its critical as we need to vote. Some of the media such as the daily mail are already stating the conservatives are the only party for a hard brexit - as though it's the only thing that matters.

Once brexit has happened I can imagine employment laws changing, relaxing our regulations on food and farming chemicals and so many other issues.

We are already asking families with a third child to prove that said child was due to rape so they can receive benefits. PIP for the disabled and pensions too? I recall Ian Duncan Smith quitting his job in the cabinet as a protest to how hard the cuts were and he is conservative through and through.

I think we all know the NHS's days are limited...

Funny, she never met her own immigration targets as Home Secretary and as PM she hasn't really explained to the average person that post brexit our country will start to look even less white / European as we will have to go further a field to find workers in the industries we have shortages.

 

[DeYaKen]

Of course it doesn't, it was never intended to. Edmund Burke's Speech to the Electors of Bristol Nov 3rd 1774 explained the exact relationship of an MP to his electorate some 245 years ago. It is still worth reading; Google it. It was a significant influence on both British and American political thinkers.

Most constitutional Democracies such as USA and Constitutional democracies like the UK are very and rightly suspicious of 'representing the people' Excessive democracy and especially proportional representation leads either to gridlock and the blackmailing of the major by the minor parties - example Belgium; or to chaos, examples Italy and France in the 1960's.

Edmund Burkes speech may just about have held water 245 years ago, It certainly doesn't now. MPs are not allowed to use their own judgement they have to vote according to the party line or risk having to pay for their own election campaign when the time comes. An MP has to be very sure of their own personal support to do that. TV advertising doesn't urge you to vote for your local candidate, it urges you to vote for the party. It is now the parties judgement that is exercised. This makes it even more important for parliament to be full of many and more diverse parties. First past the post guarantees smaller parties will be squashed out. People without a voice resort to desperate measures to get themselves heard. What FFtP normally results in is an elected dictatorship and total distrust of the political system.

It is interesting that you cite Belgium. that is the case normally used by people who say their vote doesn't matter. That country went 18 months without any government and nothing ground to a halt. The country carried on as normal, no one outside the country even noticed.

I was around in the 1960s I remember the Paris Riots caused by disenfranchised youth being expected to fight for their country but having no say in the way it was run.

I'm sure the people of Germany, Denmark and the Scandinavian countries would be surprised to hear that they should be in gridlock, they all think their system is working fine.

 

[DeYaKen]

Yes she has been avoiding those very questions for months, but now its critical as we need to vote. Some of the media such as the daily mail are already stating the conservatives are the only party for a hard brexit - as though it's the only thing that matters.

Once brexit has happened I can imagine employment laws changing, relaxing our regulations on food and farming chemicals and so many other issues.

We are already asking families with a third child to prove that said child was due to rape so they can receive benefits. PIP for the disabled and pensions too? I recall Ian Duncan Smith quitting his job in the cabinet as a protest to how hard the cuts were and he is conservative through and through.

I think we all know the NHS's days are limited...

Funny, she never met her own immigration targets as Home Secretary and as PM she hasn't really explained to the average person that post brexit our country will start to look even less white / European as we will have to go further a field to find workers in the industries we have shortages.

Immigration target will not be met until our economy falters. All the time employers need labour the government of the day will let them in. Anyone who believes otherwise is living in a dream world. The fact of the matter is that people require less investment than automation and we have a short term economy.

The NHS survived Thatcher but she tried to hide what she was doing to it. Our current health secretary wrote a book calling for the NHS to be dismantled and replaced with an American Insurance system. Rather than trying to hide what is happening to the NHS he makes a point of highlighting every inadequacy. when he can't find them he invents them. The whole point is to undermine the public's confidence in a system which is not only the best in the world (according to a washington think tank) but also one of the cheapest,

 

[oggbashan]

Impact of the French on Brexit?

The first round of the French Presidential election has had a dramatic result.

The choice in May will now be between a committed European and one who wants France to leave the Euro and have a Frexit referendum.

Whichever one wins, the impact on Brexit will be significant.