Published on 12, July, 2020
Do we need them, I think we do, I don't like the first past the post system and would like to see some form of PR,although I'm not sure which version yet.
I did find something I agreed with Jacob Rees Mogg about, not something that happens often, that a new PM should hold an election to get a mandate from the country. We had Truss and Sunak foisted on us, it's all very well sayiing that in a party system you vote for a party not a person, but when a new PM comes in mid term, they seem to rip up the manifesto of the previous incumbant and do something completely different that no body asked for. The idea that a small percentage of the population, those who are Tory Party members can foist their will on he rest of us is ridiculous, of course it could happen with any party, but it has happened with the Tories more recently and often.
I think reshuffles should be kept to a minimum too, ministers need about a year to really get to grips with their brief and start making changes, many are in place for about this time or less before being replaced by someone who has to go through the same process all over again. It dosen't lead to coherant management or policy.
Id like to see the second chamber reformed but I'm not sure how, I don't like all the superannuated politicians, crony's and hereditary peers, but whats the alternative? WOuld we have the same lot of failed politicians seeking reelection to the second chamber, would we end up with a situation like America often does, where govermnet grinds to a halt because what one house does the other blocks?
I'm a reluctant royalist, I dont' like the idea of kings and queens, but I like the idea of a President Blair or Johnson even less.
PR is not a good idea for us. It typically leads to coalitions, which is ok when national politics are less oppositional than ours, but would be unworkable with our own - as we saw with the coalition of 2010.
PR would have given Farage's fascist party around 60 seats - a terrifying idea. The FPTP system doesn't favour small parties, a very good thing in this case. It can also give us strong government, which is what the electorate hoped for in 2019, and what I hope we'll get now.
As for needing an election if the governing party changes leader, we don't, because we vote for a party and not a person. Change of leader is a party matter. Usually it goes to the memberships, which is how we as individuals can have a say.
We would like to remind you of Rule 5:
Be nice to one another and enjoy chatting with others. We encourage conversation and respectful debate; please be aware that individuals may give opinions which are not shared by other members. Insulting posts or comments making personal jibes will not be tolerated.
We allegedly vote for a party and not a person, but when a new leader is chosen by a tiny number of party members and become PM, they can radically change the direction of government and make it something that we did not vote for. Like it or not, we're are becoming more presidential with our PM's and I think that why we ended up with the disaster that was Liz Truss, who apart from party members voted for her?
If we're not a party member we can't vote for a change in party leader, not all parties choose thier leaders in the same way. Many parties won't let you vote for a new leader unless you've been a party member for some months before, it stops a pile on for a Corbyn type figure.
I think the HoL is more often the opposition than the formal opposition in the HoC,
Pegg said:PR would have given Farage's fascist party around 60 seats - a terrifying idea.
What is more terrifying, the idea of a fascist party or the fact that they represent the will of the people (of that constituency).
If the people want it then they deserve to have it, regardless of what you think I'm afraid. Just because it does not conform to your ideals does not make it bad or wrong in spite of what the press would have us believe.
If the country elected a dictator (think Donald Trump in the USA next election) then that is what they want. Respect their wishes and if you don't like it, move.
That is democracy.
I have to respectfully disagree about PR and I am a person that votes for one of the so clawed big 2 so have benefited this is why I don't like first past the post-
1- Any vote in a seat once the winning party has won by 1 seat is wasted.Equally in a safe seat if you vote fro anyone else you waste your vote.
2- Although Reform are an issue I do not think just because they are disliked they an be denied a voice.There are laws that can deal with racism etc.
3-It gives an MP in safe seat a job for life basically and also they are used as fodder for the part line in votes.They also very rarely represent constituents as they are torn by the national policy.
4-You could have a threshold for to stop lots of small parties.
5- Coalitions can be a good thing and who is to say how we would vote of we had PR tactical voting would be not needed.parties would form alliances.It seems to wrk well in Germany.
6- I would also bring in a bill of rights governments have too much power to rule by decree with no oversight.
7- I would also make parties have open primaries so the selected candidates has some legitimacy
I have a lot more ideas but I think sadly the system will stay the same
Despite the fact that yuo are (presumably) a lovely person who does fine, fine artwork, I've just flagged you for spam/abuse becuase I'm tired of reading you calling a swathe of people fascists incorrectly.
I'll be doing Martin next when I read a third post of his calling Reform voters fascist.
"Gaslighting" is ABUSE.