Current Affairs EU In or Out

In or Out

  • In

    Votes: 688 67.9%
  • Out

    Votes: 325 32.1%

  • Total voters
    1,013
Status
Not open for further replies.
So, you are saying that we currently live in a form of dictatorship? What form of governance would you replace the current system with?


We live in an elected dicatatorship. Don't you realise that? The country votes for a party to take power. That party then governs the country as they see fit. Not always in the best interest of the people - that's blindingly obvious.

We are saddled with a system that is better than most others, if not all others, warts and all.

What would you replace the current system with...?
 
When we vote for a local MP the idea is that we vote not just on the individual issues we agree on with them but that they are able to understand and inform on constant issues that arise.

Have you ever spoken to MPs? In the Government Department I worked in, I did so on many occasions in the Management grade I was in. Couldn't believe the lack of basic understanding of simple issues from most of them (I will not reveal names on a public forum), and for the more complicated issues, forget about it.

If you think it's MPs who work through complicated issues and bring them to fruition, think again. It's senior civil servants. Why do you think MPs never answer the questions put to them when they are interviewed on TV? Either they're too thick to provide a cogent answer, or too cunning to reveal what they really think. WHen the 'Minister for X' stands up in Parliament to hold forth on a particular issue, that has been prepared and written for him by his staff of civil servants. 'Yes Minister' & 'Yes Prime Minister' are way closer than people realise...

The only two MPs I've ever had time for are Dennis Skinner and Jack Ashley.
 
If you believe that we should have a referendum on this, do you believe we should have a referendum on every bill put forward? If not, what is the line that we draw for when a referendum should take place? Privatisation of state run infrastructure? Taxation rates? Minimum wage?

Now this is silly. A referendum is held on very rare occasions on a major issue. Going in to the Common Market in the 1970s, or coming out of the EU in 2016.

To even raise the suggestion that one might support referendums for a whole host of things does, I put it to you, appear to show that you are talking down to people.

As I said earlier, I believe your choice came second in a two-horse race...
 
I don't believe it was okay to have a referendum on this issue. I don't agree with a plebiscite democracy. We live in a parliamentary democracy. When we vote for a local MP the idea is that we vote not just on the individual issues we agree on with them but that they are able to understand and inform on constant issues that arise. The public will not have the time or ability to understand the complexities of every issue, and we hope that our MPs are in a position to debate and come to a reasoned understanding on them. Therefore, we allow them the power to vote as the House of Commons.

If you believe that we should have a referendum on this, do you believe we should have a referendum on every bill put forward? If not, what is the line that we draw for when a referendum should take place? Privatisation of state run infrastructure? Taxation rates? Minimum wage?

I think the difference in this case is that this was a clear constitutional issue (just like joining the common market was in the first case, or Scotland's referendum for independence).

Even more so since we had never voted for ever closer political union which has been happening by stealth.

Another example would be if there was ever a mood in the country to become a republic rather than a monarchy.

That would be something that should be decided by a referendum rather than by parliament.

The other things you mention are fine IMO to be decided by Parliament. For me the lines are pretty clear on what decisions should be carried out by referendum and what by Parliament
 
I think the difference in this case is that this was a clear constitutional issue (just like joining the common market was in the first case, or Scotland's referendum for independence).

Even more so since we had never voted for ever closer political union which has been happening by stealth.

Another example would be if there was ever a mood in the country to become a republic rather than a monarchy.

That would be something that should be decided by a referendum rather than by parliament.

The other things you mention are fine IMO to be decided by Parliament. For me the lines are pretty clear on what decisions should be carried out by referendum and what by Parliament

My 'like' button has disappeared, so I am giving this a written 'like.
 
I would have invoked Article 50 the day after the referendum result if that was possible. .

Which really is what should have happened. But we have been through the process, no one can argue that it has not been legal and we are now on the verge of enacting article 50 with a majority of both the Commons and the HoL having voted for it. It's done........
 
I see that the Welsh nationalists and the Sinn Fein are now demanding independence votes. This could work out exceedingly well if we can palm off NI as well as Scotland........
 
Cheaper to just give the English one to see if we want any of them.

I'd keep the Welsh, they don't really want independence or to be part of the EU. The other two can just bugger off tbh, they contribute zero and just give us grief. Bring shipbuilding back down and put it on the Mersey. Snaffle the financial services. Stop all open borders from Ireland and Scotland and send the travellers back.....oh and I prefer Welsh Whisky to that crap from the north anyway so we can get rid of that.......just about covers it really........
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top