The Revenge of the REMAINERS : It's got to be a thing now?

[Deleted]

Sept 3, 2021 11:00:17 GMT Defenestrated Fipplebox said:

We are a parliamentary democracy, referendums shouldn't ever come into play.

Getting rid of parliament and having referendums on anything is an option, but not one I'd choose.

We have MPs to make these decisions because most of us aren't interested enough to familiarise ourselves with the issues in the detail required. That is not a slight or an insult but a simple fact. If people are really unhappy they always have the option to write to elected officials, join a political party, or stand for office themselves

[peterl]

Sept 3, 2021 11:00:17 GMT Defenestrated Fipplebox said:

We are a parliamentary democracy, referendums shouldn't ever come into play.

Getting rid of parliament and having referendums on anything is an option, but not one I'd choose.

Getting rid of parliament would get my vote. Parliament is completely out of touch with everything and entirely unrepresentative. Time for a fresh start.

[Deleted]

Sept 3, 2021 11:22:22 GMT peterl said:

Sept 3, 2021 11:00:17 GMT Defenestrated Fipplebox said:

We are a parliamentary democracy, referendums shouldn't ever come into play.

Getting rid of parliament and having referendums on anything is an option, but not one I'd choose.

Getting rid of parliament would get my vote. Parliament is completely out of touch with everything and entirely unrepresentative. Time for a fresh start.

Then why don't you stand yourself and encourage other who feel that way to do the same?

[peterl]

Sept 3, 2021 11:26:36 GMT @europeanlefty said:

Sept 3, 2021 11:22:22 GMT peterl said:

Getting rid of parliament would get my vote. Parliament is completely out of touch with everything and entirely unrepresentative. Time for a fresh start.

Then why don't you stand yourself and encourage other who feel that way to do the same?

Why would I bother standing for a body that I regard as inherently out of touch? Even in the remote possibility I was elected, I would be unlikely to change much, as backbench MPs have basically no say, which is one reason incidentially that Parliament is completely unrepresentative.

[The Bishop]

Sept 3, 2021 11:26:36 GMT @europeanlefty said:

Sept 3, 2021 11:22:22 GMT peterl said:

Getting rid of parliament would get my vote. Parliament is completely out of touch with everything and entirely unrepresentative. Time for a fresh start.

Then why don't you stand yourself and encourage other who feel that way to do the same?

Its not true that we always get the politicians we deserve everywhere, but it is that we do in most places most of the time.

[sirbenjamin]

Sept 3, 2021 10:56:14 GMT Merseymike said:

Sept 3, 2021 10:45:21 GMT sirbenjamin said:

I'm not convinced that referendums need to mean Swiss-style micromanagement - I see them more as a vehicle for ensuring that popular opinion is represented more proportionally and mitigating against the threat (whether real or perceived) of an 'out of touch elite' controlling everything.

It was very clear that when 52% of voters elected to leave the EU, the % of declared leavers in parliament was a lot less than this. The referendum exposed the underrepresentation and subsequent actions by politicians only served to underline the disparity.

This is almost certainly still the case on issues like capital punishment, immigration and foreign aid. The case for denying the right to referendums would be stronger if parliament were more representative, but it's clearly very lacking.

But on those sort of issues, we need protecting from the mob. This is why I'm not a populist.

That's exactly the kind of 'we know better' attitude that foments resentment and ultimately causes the rise of populist movements...

[islington]

Sept 3, 2021 10:56:57 GMT Merseymike said:

Sept 3, 2021 8:47:32 GMT islington said:

... and therein lies the greatness of FPTP. It concentrates the mind and forces voters to think about what really matters to them. Vote with your head, not with your heart.

But it was exactly the opposite. It was purely a negative vote to keep out the Tories.

My point exactly. The system forced you to think about what mattered most to you, and that was it.

There's nothing wrong with casting a vote for negative reasons. 

In fact one of my (many) beefs with PR systems is that they make it much harder to vote against people (or parties), even though for me (and I suspect for a lot of other people) that is often my principal motivation in voting.

[sirbenjamin]

Sept 3, 2021 12:14:00 GMT islington said:

Sept 3, 2021 10:56:57 GMT Merseymike said:

But it was exactly the opposite. It was purely a negative vote to keep out the Tories.

My point exactly. The system forced you to think about what mattered most to you, and that was it.

There's nothing wrong with casting a vote for negative reasons. 

In fact one of my (many) beefs with PR systems is that they make it much harder to vote against people (or parties), even though for me (and I suspect for a lot of other people) that is often my principal motivation in voting.

This is why list systems are particularly horrible. You can't vote for the candidate you want without risking electing the candidate you don't like and still not electing the one you want.

[manchesterman]

Sept 3, 2021 11:22:22 GMT peterl said:

Sept 3, 2021 11:00:17 GMT Defenestrated Fipplebox said:

We are a parliamentary democracy, referendums shouldn't ever come into play.

Getting rid of parliament and having referendums on anything is an option, but not one I'd choose.

Getting rid of parliament would get my vote. Parliament is completely out of touch with everything and entirely unrepresentative. Time for a fresh start.

..I'd be interested to hear what you plan to replace it with. 

[Merseymike]

Sept 3, 2021 12:10:10 GMT sirbenjamin said:

Sept 3, 2021 10:56:14 GMT Merseymike said:

But on those sort of issues, we need protecting from the mob. This is why I'm not a populist.

That's exactly the kind of 'we know better' attitude that foments resentment and ultimately causes the rise of populist movements...

I don't think many of the reforms which meant, for example, I'm no longer classed as a criminal, would have happened if left to referendum.

[peterl]

Sept 3, 2021 12:27:57 GMT manchesterman said:

Sept 3, 2021 11:22:22 GMT peterl said:

Getting rid of parliament would get my vote. Parliament is completely out of touch with everything and entirely unrepresentative. Time for a fresh start.

..I'd be interested to hear what you plan to replace it with. 

Well you asked for it.

The executive would be apolitical and consist of privy councillors nominated through the public appointments process on merit and based on what they can bring to the role, not their views. There would then be a series of advisory boards that feed into the privy council, for instance on the budget or on education. A smaller, more agile National Assembly would hold the executive to account and could work up legislation through committee. Committee members would likewise be appointed based on what they know about the subject matter. Elections would probably be held using AMS. There would be requirements in terms of having knowledge or experience in an approved field before you can stand. Approval against the criteria would be handled by the returning officer and the list would be created by the privy council. The Assembly would be a part time voluntary body and members would not be paid. Any kind of paid lobbying would be illegal. The power of local authorities would also be increased, and councils would be run on the committee system.

[Merseymike]

Sept 3, 2021 12:14:00 GMT islington said:

Sept 3, 2021 10:56:57 GMT Merseymike said:

But it was exactly the opposite. It was purely a negative vote to keep out the Tories.

My point exactly. The system forced you to think about what mattered most to you, and that was it.

There's nothing wrong with casting a vote for negative reasons. 

In fact one of my (many) beefs with PR systems is that they make it much harder to vote against people (or parties), even though for me (and I suspect for a lot of other people) that is often my principal motivation in voting.

Absolutely wrong. Negative voting doesn't reflect what I wanted at all, and is no way to choose a representative parliament. I think it's completely wrong to cast a vote for negative reasons hence my regret. I was even more annoyed when Labour were re-elected in the seat with a reasonable majority.

I don't think it's at all desirable to do anything but vote positively and that's why I didn't vote in May as well as regretted it in 2005. I will never do anything other than vote positively again. I'd like a system which makes it as redundant as possible.

[islington]

Sept 3, 2021 12:36:43 GMT Merseymike said:

Sept 3, 2021 12:14:00 GMT islington said:

My point exactly. The system forced you to think about what mattered most to you, and that was it.

There's nothing wrong with casting a vote for negative reasons. 

In fact one of my (many) beefs with PR systems is that they make it much harder to vote against people (or parties), even though for me (and I suspect for a lot of other people) that is often my principal motivation in voting.

Absolutely wrong. Negative voting doesn't reflect what I wanted at all, and is no way to choose a representative parliament. I think it's completely wrong to cast a vote for negative reasons hence my regret. I was even more annoyed when Labour were re-elected in the seat with a reasonable majority.

I don't think it's at all desirable to do anything but vote positively and that's why I didn't vote in May as well as regretted it in 2005. I will never do anything other than vote positively again. I'd like a system which makes it as redundant as possible.

So you don't think the classic election-time battle-cry of "Throw the rascals out!" is a legitimate one in a democracy?

[Merseymike]

Sept 3, 2021 12:45:39 GMT islington said:

Sept 3, 2021 12:36:43 GMT Merseymike said:

Absolutely wrong. Negative voting doesn't reflect what I wanted at all, and is no way to choose a representative parliament. I think it's completely wrong to cast a vote for negative reasons hence my regret. I was even more annoyed when Labour were re-elected in the seat with a reasonable majority.

I don't think it's at all desirable to do anything but vote positively and that's why I didn't vote in May as well as regretted it in 2005. I will never do anything other than vote positively again. I'd like a system which makes it as redundant as possible.

So you don't think the classic election-time battle-cry of "Throw the rascals out!" is a legitimate one in a democracy?

Nothing ever changes that way other than the name above the door. Get rid of Tweedledum, replace him with Tweedledee.

I'm very strongly against negative voting and all systems which enable it.

[gwynthegriff]

Sept 3, 2021 12:35:01 GMT peterl said:

Sept 3, 2021 12:27:57 GMT manchesterman said:

..I'd be interested to hear what you plan to replace it with. 

Well you asked for it.

The executive would be apolitical and consist of privy councillors nominated through the public appointments process on merit and based on what they can bring to the role, not their views. There would then be a series of advisory boards that feed into the privy council, for instance on the budget or on education. A smaller, more agile National Assembly would hold the executive to account and could work up legislation through committee. Committee members would likewise be appointed based on what they know about the subject matter. Elections would probably be held using AMS. There would be requirements in terms of having knowledge or experience in an approved field before you can stand. Approval against the criteria would be handled by the returning officer and the list would be created by the privy council. The Assembly would be a part time voluntary body and members would not be paid. Any kind of paid lobbying would be illegal. The power of local authorities would also be increased, and councils would be run on the committee system.

What do you mean by "Returning Officer"?

[islington]

Sept 3, 2021 12:49:21 GMT Merseymike said:

Sept 3, 2021 12:45:39 GMT islington said:

So you don't think the classic election-time battle-cry of "Throw the rascals out!" is a legitimate one in a democracy?

Nothing ever changes that way other than the name above the door. Get rid of Tweedledum, replace him with Tweedledee.

I'm very strongly against negative voting and all systems which enable it.

Well then, we must agree to disagree because for me, one of the most important things about a voting system - probably the most important single attribute it can possess - is that of empowering the voters to eject a Government that they have come to dislike.

It's a healthy feature of a free society, it's very good for democracy, and it concentrates the minds of ministers to know that the electorate can summarily dismiss them.

I wasn't a huge fan of the late George Brown, but he hit the nail on the head when after losing his seat at Belper in 1970 he ruefully said something to the effect that it wouldn't be a democracy if politicians didn't sometimes get democked.

[islington]

Sept 3, 2021 12:59:17 GMT gwynthegriff said:

Sept 3, 2021 12:35:01 GMT peterl said:

Well you asked for it.

The executive would be apolitical and consist of privy councillors nominated through the public appointments process on merit and based on what they can bring to the role, not their views. There would then be a series of advisory boards that feed into the privy council, for instance on the budget or on education. A smaller, more agile National Assembly would hold the executive to account and could work up legislation through committee. Committee members would likewise be appointed based on what they know about the subject matter. Elections would probably be held using AMS. There would be requirements in terms of having knowledge or experience in an approved field before you can stand. Approval against the criteria would be handled by the returning officer and the list would be created by the privy council. The Assembly would be a part time voluntary body and members would not be paid. Any kind of paid lobbying would be illegal. The power of local authorities would also be increased, and councils would be run on the committee system.

What do you mean by "Returning Officer"?

The officer who decides who's going to be returned, apparently.

[Merseymike]

Sept 3, 2021 12:59:50 GMT islington said:

Sept 3, 2021 12:49:21 GMT Merseymike said:

Nothing ever changes that way other than the name above the door. Get rid of Tweedledum, replace him with Tweedledee.

I'm very strongly against negative voting and all systems which enable it.

Well then, we must agree to disagree because for me, one of the most important things about a voting system - probably the most important single attribute it can possess - is that of empowering the voters to eject a Government that they have come to dislike.

It's a healthy feature of a free society, it's very good for democracy, and it concentrates the minds of ministers to know that the electorate can summarily dismiss them.

I wasn't a huge fan of the late George Brown, but he hit the nail on the head when after losing his seat at Belper in 1970 he ruefully said something to the effect that it wouldn't be a democracy if politicians didn't sometimes get democked.

Once again I fundamentally disagree! It's I think one of the very basic problems with our political system. One of many.

[Defenestrated Fipplebox]

Sept 3, 2021 12:35:01 GMT peterl said:

Sept 3, 2021 12:27:57 GMT manchesterman said:

..I'd be interested to hear what you plan to replace it with. 

Well you asked for it.

The executive would be apolitical and consist of privy councillors nominated through the public appointments process on merit and based on what they can bring to the role, not their views. There would then be a series of advisory boards that feed into the privy council, for instance on the budget or on education. A smaller, more agile National Assembly would hold the executive to account and could work up legislation through committee. Committee members would likewise be appointed based on what they know about the subject matter. Elections would probably be held using AMS. There would be requirements in terms of having knowledge or experience in an approved field before you can stand. Approval against the criteria would be handled by the returning officer and the list would be created by the privy council. The Assembly would be a part time voluntary body and members would not be paid. Any kind of paid lobbying would be illegal. The power of local authorities would also be increased, and councils would be run on the committee system.

Sound like a cronies charter with the 'educated elite' appointing the 'educated elite'. 

[nodealbrexiteer]

Sept 3, 2021 12:59:50 GMT islington said:

Sept 3, 2021 12:49:21 GMT Merseymike said:

Nothing ever changes that way other than the name above the door. Get rid of Tweedledum, replace him with Tweedledee.

I'm very strongly against negative voting and all systems which enable it.

Well then, we must agree to disagree because for me, one of the most important things about a voting system - probably the most important single attribute it can possess - is that of empowering the voters to eject a Government that they have come to dislike.

It's a healthy feature of a free society, it's very good for democracy, and it concentrates the minds of ministers to know that the electorate can summarily dismiss them.

I wasn't a huge fan of the late George Brown, but he hit the nail on the head when after losing his seat at Belper in 1970 he ruefully said something to the effect that it wouldn't be a democracy if politicians didn't sometimes get democked.

This destructive power is vital. I think the great Tony Benn described getting rid of fptp as 'taking an axe to the roots of the tree of accountability'.