• We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies from this website. Read more here

Politics Today

IndoMike

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
May 9, 2010
Messages
34,044
Location
Touring Central Java...
Adding to this, the Fixed Term Parliaments Act was hugely important constitutionally, no referendum there though. The introduction of secret courts and civil partnerships and gay marriage were significant, too.

Referendums on anything are generally a bad idea. A referendum on a complex issue with a badly-set question where even three years after the biggest supporters still don't understand the basics are an even worse idea. It's genuinely shocking how often people need to be corrected about very basic EU legal principles.
My question is simply "are we a parliamentary democracy or not?". What is the point of electing representatives if they are not capable of deciding on vital issues?
It is not good enough to say "we can't decide so we must pass the buck to the people".
We can't pick and choose what decisions should be made by the people. If Parliament can't do its job it must be scrapped. If it can, we don't need referendums. If we have referendums, it has to be on every issue which can effect people's lives, not just a select few issues.
One system or another, please.
 
Last edited:

tavyred

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
Aug 23, 2004
Messages
13,897
The decision to give the people a say on our continued EU membership was sanctioned overwhelmingly by parliament. It only became a problem when the people returned the ‘wrong’ verdict.
 

arthur

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
Aug 18, 2004
Messages
11,475
The rule of thumb on referendums in the U.K. seems to be that it involves something that would be a major constitutional change. A vote on our continued EU membership fits that criteria quite nicely.
Yes, and a vote on a major constitutional change would normally require a two thirds majority or some other threshold like 40% of the electorate being in favour of such a change. Not to mention that exactly how that constitutional change would be effected would also be considered and presented to the electorate in the referendum question..... Again, it all comes down to Cameron's arrogant complacency and the House Of Commons' mediocrity in not thinking such a major issue through properly. The signs were there in the AV referendum in the early years of the coalition - get this thing over with, we'll have kept our promise to have a referendum and the people bleating for it will have to shut up. There was barely a hint of a serious discussion about whether and how to reform our voting system - exactly the same sloppy template was used for the EU ref and now both sides, Leave and Remain, are facing the consequences
 

Alistair20000

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
May 5, 2009
Messages
52,234
Location
Avoiding the Hundred
Yes, and a vote on a major constitutional change would normally require a two thirds majority or some other threshold like 40% of the electorate being in favour of such a change. Not to mention that exactly how that constitutional change would be effected would also be considered and presented to the electorate in the referendum question..... Again, it all comes down to Cameron's arrogant complacency and the House Of Commons' mediocrity in not thinking such a major issue through properly. The signs were there in the AV referendum in the early years of the coalition - get this thing over with, we'll have kept our promise to have a referendum and the people bleating for it will have to shut up. There was barely a hint of a serious discussion about whether and how to reform our voting system - exactly the same sloppy template was used for the EU ref and now both sides, Leave and Remain, are facing the consequences
Good luck with persuading Wee Jimmy Krankie that a 2/3 majority is required for constitutional change.
 

arthur

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
Aug 18, 2004
Messages
11,475
Evening Al.. 40% will do!
 

Alistair20000

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
May 5, 2009
Messages
52,234
Location
Avoiding the Hundred
Evening Al.. 40% will do!
Evening to you art.

I suspect WJC would argue the any majority should do.
 

Mr Jinx

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
Nov 28, 2006
Messages
14,792
And so it's farewell Spreadsheet Phil.

Favourite Hammond moment - err...umm...errr….

Just like Theresa's May's highlights, I'm a strugglin
 

Grecian2K

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
Mar 9, 2004
Messages
32,826
Location
Busy knitting muesli
Favourite Hammond moment?

I'd say the bemused look he gave Andrew Marr this morning when asked whether he'd now be changing his nickname from Spreadsheet Phil to Phil Guevara. :D
 

Temporarily Exiled

Active member
Joined
Feb 6, 2018
Messages
1,647
Hammond has shown unswerving loyalty to his Prime Minister, it's boring (spreadsheet Phil) but vital for government stability. For Boris to survive for any length of time he'll have to pick out someone with that trait from the viper's nest that is the Parliamentary Conservative Party.
 

DB9

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
Jun 19, 2005
Messages
24,495
Location
Hampshire. Heart's in N Devon
Hammond has shown unswerving loyalty to his Prime Minister, it's boring (spreadsheet Phil) but vital for government stability. For Boris to survive for any length of time he'll have to pick out someone with that trait from the viper's nest that is the Parliamentary Conservative Party.
Highly unlikely Temp, If he is anything to go by, Any sign of weakness and his "Loyal" Cabinet will soon stab him in the back, It's what the Tories are good at
 
Top