European Lefty
Labour
Can be bribed with salted liquorice
Posts: 5,621
|
Post by European Lefty on Aug 9, 2023 21:01:08 GMT
Reasonable, although a) I don't like the rules as laid down and b) Warwick and Leamington (the latest in a long run of constituencies within constituencies) and hope that if there is a change of government, the new government passes a law stating that if the number of electors per constituency is to be 1/650th of the UK average with a 5% margin of error for a 650 seat House, then make sure that the previous census is used to calculate the number of electors in a constituency, not the electoral register (at least that data cannot never be leaked) Except that that information isn't included in the census
|
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 13,678
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Aug 9, 2023 22:13:45 GMT
Reasonable, although a) I don't like the rules as laid down and b) Warwick and Leamington (the latest in a long run of constituencies within constituencies) and hope that if there is a change of government, the new government passes a law stating that if the number of electors per constituency is to be 1/650th of the UK average with a 5% margin of error for a 650 seat House, then make sure that the previous census is used to calculate the number of electors in a constituency, not the electoral register (at least that data cannot never be leaked) Except that that information isn't included in the census If you're going to go by population, then my hobby horse: specify that the census asks a person's nationality. That plus the Age question gives the number of adult citizens (barring errors from people lying).
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Aug 9, 2023 22:46:54 GMT
Given the Member of Parliament represents (and takes casework concerning) every person in their constituency regardless of age or nationality, redistribution should be on the basis of usual resident population regardless of age or nationality.
|
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 13,678
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Aug 9, 2023 23:34:10 GMT
Given the Member of Parliament represents (and takes casework concerning) every person in their constituency regardless of age or nationality, redistribution should be on the basis of usual resident population regardless of age or nationality. But we are an elective democracy, so reportionment should be based on the number of people with that elective power. Why should the vote of somebody with 12 kids be different to somebody with no children? Plus, BY WHAT THE F******** RIGHT should foreigners choose *OUR* elected representatives? We keep having complaints and alledged scandals about foreigners interfering in our election system (plus us interfering in foreigners' election systems to be fair), but no way do you "solve" that by actually embedding it in law. I've discussed this with people from various other countries, and they think we must be insane to actually have actual political parties actually proposing actually putting this into law.
|
|
|
Post by greatkingrat on Aug 9, 2023 23:38:16 GMT
Given the Member of Parliament represents (and takes casework concerning) every person in their constituency regardless of age or nationality, redistribution should be on the basis of usual resident population regardless of age or nationality. Do many toddlers write to their MP?
|
|
|
Post by doktorb🏳️🌈🏳️⚧️ on Aug 9, 2023 23:39:27 GMT
Given the Member of Parliament represents (and takes casework concerning) every person in their constituency regardless of age or nationality, redistribution should be on the basis of usual resident population regardless of age or nationality. Do many toddlers write to their MP? Parents of toddlers who need better nursery care certainly do.
|
|
|
Post by doktorb🏳️🌈🏳️⚧️ on Aug 9, 2023 23:41:14 GMT
Given the Member of Parliament represents (and takes casework concerning) every person in their constituency regardless of age or nationality, redistribution should be on the basis of usual resident population regardless of age or nationality. I agree. There's no fairer way.
|
|
European Lefty
Labour
Can be bribed with salted liquorice
Posts: 5,621
|
Post by European Lefty on Aug 9, 2023 23:56:48 GMT
Given the Member of Parliament represents (and takes casework concerning) every person in their constituency regardless of age or nationality, redistribution should be on the basis of usual resident population regardless of age or nationality. But we are an elective democracy, so reportionment should be based on the number of people with that elective power. Why should the vote of somebody with 12 kids be different to somebody with no children? Plus, BY WHAT THE F******** RIGHT should foreigners choose *OUR* elected representatives? We keep having complaints and alledged scandals about foreigners interfering in our election system (plus us interfering in foreigners' election systems to be fair), but no way do you "solve" that by actually embedding it in law. I've discussed this with people from various other countries, and they think we must be insane to actually have actual political parties actually proposing actually putting this into law. But David isn't proposing to let foreigners "interfere" just that they should be taken into account in any reapportionment by population. If you are reapportioning based on elective power, use electorate If you ar doing so on population, use the total population as everyone is represented by an MP. Either way is fine but some kind of compromise or halfway house makes no sense
|
|
maxque
Non-Aligned
Posts: 9,026
|
Post by maxque on Aug 9, 2023 23:57:40 GMT
Given the Member of Parliament represents (and takes casework concerning) every person in their constituency regardless of age or nationality, redistribution should be on the basis of usual resident population regardless of age or nationality. But we are an elective democracy, so reportionment should be based on the number of people with that elective power. Why should the vote of somebody with 12 kids be different to somebody with no children? Plus, BY WHAT THE F******** RIGHT should foreigners choose *OUR* elected representatives? We keep having complaints and alledged scandals about foreigners interfering in our election system (plus us interfering in foreigners' election systems to be fair), but no way do you "solve" that by actually embedding it in law. I've discussed this with people from various other countries, and they think we must be insane to actually have actual political parties actually proposing actually putting this into law. Are people with dementia removed from the rolls?
|
|
carlton43
Non-Aligned
Posts: 48,531
Member is Online
|
Post by carlton43 on Aug 10, 2023 0:54:26 GMT
Given the Member of Parliament represents (and takes casework concerning) every person in their constituency regardless of age or nationality, redistribution should be on the basis of usual resident population regardless of age or nationality. I agree. There's no fairer way. It is an utterly gormless proposition. Why should London, stuffed full of foreigners, suddenly get more seats because they get counted as residents who might wish to generate casework? If they are foreign they have no standing at all and should not be counted for anything and MPs are entitled to bin their letters and ignore their emails as being an irrelevant intrusion by a foreigner in our affairs.
|
|
|
Post by Adam in Stroud on Aug 10, 2023 0:58:35 GMT
Given the Member of Parliament represents (and takes casework concerning) every person in their constituency regardless of age or nationality, redistribution should be on the basis of usual resident population regardless of age or nationality. But we are an elective democracy, so reportionment should be based on the number of people with that elective power. Why should the vote of somebody with 12 kids be different to somebody with no children? Plus, BY WHAT THE F******** RIGHT should foreigners choose *OUR* elected representatives? We keep having complaints and alledged scandals about foreigners interfering in our election system (plus us interfering in foreigners' election systems to be fair), but no way do you "solve" that by actually embedding it in law. I've discussed this with people from various other countries, and they think we must be insane to actually have actual political parties actually proposing actually putting this into law. I don't give a feck if they're foreign or not. Elective democracy is the right of the governed to choose those who govern them. The UK is their government, for the blindingly obvious reason that they are governed by it. If you live here, you are part of the governed, irrespective of your passport; you have a stake, you are bound by the laws, you are subject to taxation, you should get a vote. This is absolutely basic liberal democracy. Anything else prizes bit of paper given out by the fucking government over the rights of the people. It's anti-democratic. If you don't want certain people to live here and have a vote, then OK you can vote for laws* to stop them coming here - and there are people I wouldn't let in - or laws requiring them to take steps (e.g. learning the language) - but once you've let them domicile here (and I use the term advisedly) they're either one of us until they leave or they have no place here at all. If you don't live here, you're not and you shouldn't, irrespective of passport. If you have British citizenship it gives you the right to return here and have a vote, but until you do, you shouldn't. But I'm willing to be flexible on that - some people are operating in more the one country or retain their links with the UK. Foreign influence is an entirely different issue, that is about people domiciled abroad, and often acting on behalf of hostile states, interfering in our political process via fraud or control of the news media in our country while having no stake in it, and in some cases deliberately opting out of doing so. * More accurately, you can vote for MPs who you hope will pass those laws. And the weakness of that is another reason why the right of people who live here, contributing, and obeying the laws should trump bits of paper issued by the government every time. No taxation without representation is sound and exceptions should be applied with caution, primarily to people who are paying tax in more than one jurisdiction.
|
|
edgbaston
Labour
Posts: 3,716
Member is Online
|
Post by edgbaston on Aug 10, 2023 1:03:23 GMT
I agree. There's no fairer way. It is an utterly gormless proposition. Why should London, stuffed full of foreigners, suddenly get more seats because they get counted as residents who might wish to generate casework? If they are foreign they have no standing at all and should not be counted for anything and MPs are entitled to bin their letters and ignore their emails as being an irrelevant intrusion by a foreigner in our affairs. Because they work, pay tax, are part of our society? They should surely all be able to vote for the representative of the community in which they live and contribute.
|
|
carlton43
Non-Aligned
Posts: 48,531
Member is Online
|
Post by carlton43 on Aug 10, 2023 1:08:54 GMT
It is an utterly gormless proposition. Why should London, stuffed full of foreigners, suddenly get more seats because they get counted as residents who might wish to generate casework? If they are foreign they have no standing at all and should not be counted for anything and MPs are entitled to bin their letters and ignore their emails as being an irrelevant intrusion by a foreigner in our affairs. Because they work, pay tax, are part of our society? They should surely all be able to vote for the representative of the community in which they live and contribute. Absolute rubbish. We tolerate them. They should be compelled to produce acceptable full medical insuance cover policies every year, pay for the education of their children and have no entitlement to any pensions or other benefits of any kind or nature and no votes at any level at all. Yes, I am entirely serious.
|
|
carlton43
Non-Aligned
Posts: 48,531
Member is Online
|
Post by carlton43 on Aug 10, 2023 1:13:23 GMT
But we are an elective democracy, so reportionment should be based on the number of people with that elective power. Why should the vote of somebody with 12 kids be different to somebody with no children? Plus, BY WHAT THE F******** RIGHT should foreigners choose *OUR* elected representatives? We keep having complaints and alledged scandals about foreigners interfering in our election system (plus us interfering in foreigners' election systems to be fair), but no way do you "solve" that by actually embedding it in law. I've discussed this with people from various other countries, and they think we must be insane to actually have actual political parties actually proposing actually putting this into law. I don't give a feck if they're foreign or not. Elective democracy is the right of the governed to choose those who govern them. The UK is their government, for the blindingly obvious reason that they are governed by it. If you live here, you are part of the governed, irrespective of your passport; you have a stake, you are bound by the laws, you are subject to taxation, you should get a vote. This is absolutely basic liberal democracy. Anything else prizes bit of paper given out by the fucking government over the rights of the people. It's anti-democratic. If you don't want certain people to live here and have a vote, then OK you can vote for laws* to stop them coming here - and there are people I wouldn't let in - or laws requiring them to take steps (e.g. learning the language) - but once you've let them domicile here (and I use the term advisedly) they're either one of us until they leave or they have no place here at all. If you don't live here, you're not and you shouldn't, irrespective of passport. If you have British citizenship it gives you the right to return here and have a vote, but until you do, you shouldn't. But I'm willing to be flexible on that - some people are operating in more the one country or retain their links with the UK. Foreign influence is an entirely different issue, that is about people domiciled abroad, and often acting on behalf of hostile states, interfering in our political process via fraud or control of the news media in our country while having no stake in it, and in some cases deliberately opting out of doing so. * More accurately, you can vote for MPs who you hope will pass those laws. And the weakness of that is another reason why the right of people who live here, contributing, and obeying the laws should trump bits of paper issued by the government every time. No taxation without representation is sound and exceptions should be applied with caution, primarily to people who are paying tax in more than one jurisdiction. Foreigners are here at OUR will and on OUR terms. They have No rights to anything at all. If they don't like our terms they are free to leave.
|
|
|
Post by johnloony on Aug 10, 2023 2:01:18 GMT
I agree. There's no fairer way. It is an utterly gormless proposition. Why should London, stuffed full of foreigners, suddenly get more seats because they get counted as residents who might wish to generate casework? If they are foreign they have no standing at all and should not be counted for anything and MPs are entitled to bin their letters and ignore their emails as being an irrelevant intrusion by a foreigner in our affairs. Under a Carlton government I suspect that most MPs would probably bin the letters and ignore the emails of most of their constituents anyway.
|
|
carlton43
Non-Aligned
Posts: 48,531
Member is Online
|
Post by carlton43 on Aug 10, 2023 2:11:20 GMT
It is an utterly gormless proposition. Why should London, stuffed full of foreigners, suddenly get more seats because they get counted as residents who might wish to generate casework? If they are foreign they have no standing at all and should not be counted for anything and MPs are entitled to bin their letters and ignore their emails as being an irrelevant intrusion by a foreigner in our affairs. Under a Carlton government I suspect that most MPs would probably bin the letters and ignore the emails of most of their constituents anyway. Probably a staffer would read them and send a printed courtesy response; file a minority and provide the MP with a brief report and digest attached to the two or three letters that they think are possibly worth his attention.
|
|
|
Post by islington on Aug 10, 2023 7:02:53 GMT
It is an utterly gormless proposition. Why should London, stuffed full of foreigners, suddenly get more seats because they get counted as residents who might wish to generate casework? If they are foreign they have no standing at all and should not be counted for anything and MPs are entitled to bin their letters and ignore their emails as being an irrelevant intrusion by a foreigner in our affairs. Because they work, pay tax, are part of our society? They should surely all be able to vote for the representative of the community in which they live and contribute. If they live here, work, pay tax and are part of our society and commited to it, then they can, and in my view should, seek formal citizenship of it. Then they will get the undisputed right to vote.
|
|
European Lefty
Labour
Can be bribed with salted liquorice
Posts: 5,621
|
Post by European Lefty on Aug 10, 2023 7:22:51 GMT
Because they work, pay tax, are part of our society? They should surely all be able to vote for the representative of the community in which they live and contribute. If they live here, work, pay tax and are part of our society and commited to it, then they can, and in my view should, seek formal citizenship of it. Then they will get the undisputed right to vote. Though pretty much financially impossible unless you work in finance making obscene amounts of money. The cost of obtaining citizenship is grossly unfair
|
|
|
Post by batman on Aug 10, 2023 7:47:31 GMT
yes, can't imagine why that should be, can you?
|
|
|
Post by islington on Aug 10, 2023 8:11:13 GMT
If they live here, work, pay tax and are part of our society and commited to it, then they can, and in my view should, seek formal citizenship of it. Then they will get the undisputed right to vote. Though pretty much financially impossible unless you work in finance making obscene amounts of money. The cost of obtaining citizenship is grossly unfair Are you sure? I can think off-hand of three people I know that have done it. None of them worked in finance, although I admit they all had reasonably (not extravagantly) well-paid jobs. I'd make it available at reasonable cost to anyone that has lived and worked here for, say, ten years and has not had any trouble with the law.
|
|