UK General Discussion
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 19, 2024, 05:37:39 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  International General Discussion (Moderators: afleitch, Hash)
  UK General Discussion
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 ... 93
Author Topic: UK General Discussion  (Read 263419 times)
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,157
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #100 on: April 18, 2012, 08:34:04 PM »


Wouldn't privatizing the state-sun schools also be easy?
Logged
bore
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,274
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #101 on: April 19, 2012, 02:48:32 PM »

No. If I want to make money by setting up a better-quality school than the government does and charging students to enter, who's to stop me from making money?

The government and the voting public who don't want you to make money from schooling?

Meh...private schools are a bad idea in general, but the government really shouldn't be allowed to stop me from making money in a way that doesn't hurt anybody.

But it does, people don't exist in a vacumn and there is only a limited amount of anything, so private schools give an advantage to the already rich over everyone else.
Logged
YL
YorkshireLiberal
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,507
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #102 on: April 23, 2012, 04:27:17 PM »

From http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-17815769

Quote from: Restricted
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Logged
MaxQue
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,588
Canada


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #103 on: April 23, 2012, 04:36:13 PM »

Well, she is right on that, but that's rather strange to attack your own leaders.
Logged
You kip if you want to...
change08
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,940
United Kingdom
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #104 on: April 23, 2012, 04:39:20 PM »

Well, she is right on that, but that's rather strange to attack your own leaders.

It's not too rare for the Tories really. And she's just fuming that her seats probably going to be abolished.
Logged
Leftbehind
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,639
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #105 on: April 23, 2012, 05:17:44 PM »

Well that and his (perceived) slight against her in PMQs.

In response, Cameron replied that he "does a lot of his own shopping". Cheesy
Logged
You kip if you want to...
change08
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,940
United Kingdom
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #106 on: April 23, 2012, 06:36:42 PM »

Well that and his (perceived) slight against her in PMQs.

In response, Cameron replied that he "does a lot of his own shopping". Cheesy

Sainsbury's Chipping Norton. Roll Eyes

He rightly didn't say Waitrose, he wrongly didn't realise that Sainsbury's is for posh folk these days.
Logged
Silent Hunter
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,300
United Kingdom


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #107 on: April 24, 2012, 01:12:14 PM »

Right, how long before Mr. Hunt stands down?
Logged
bore
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,274
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #108 on: April 24, 2012, 02:39:20 PM »


Well, David Cameron has expressed his full support for him...







I give him a week
Logged
You kip if you want to...
change08
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,940
United Kingdom
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #109 on: April 24, 2012, 03:23:24 PM »


Well, atleast he'll known for something more than just being called Jeremy c**nt (that's in context, mods) once.
Logged
You kip if you want to...
change08
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,940
United Kingdom
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #110 on: April 26, 2012, 07:15:59 PM »



A Daily Mail front page praising Labour! What is this sourcery!?!?
Logged
k-onmmunist
Winston Disraeli
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,753
Palestinian Territory, Occupied


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #111 on: April 26, 2012, 09:08:44 PM »

Only because they want to interfere in people's personal lives, apparently.
Logged
afleitch
Moderator
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,822


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #112 on: April 27, 2012, 02:54:18 AM »

I take it the Mail is trying to start a moral panic again?
Logged
bore
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,274
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #113 on: April 27, 2012, 04:26:37 AM »

Why won't someone think of the children?
Logged
afleitch
Moderator
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,822


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #114 on: April 27, 2012, 05:23:56 AM »

Why won't someone think of the children?

Well obviously parents don't. It's up to them to look out for what their teenage son is getting up to, whether it's restricting internet access in 2012 or throwing dirty mags in the bin in 1992. Teenagers will always find it though Smiley
Logged
You kip if you want to...
change08
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,940
United Kingdom
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #115 on: April 30, 2012, 02:38:01 PM »

Dave certainly bungled that statement today. Difficult to watch.
Logged
You kip if you want to...
change08
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,940
United Kingdom
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #116 on: May 01, 2012, 05:11:30 PM »

Just for some perspective on Lord Reform, if we had the Clegg plan, Senators elected during the 1997 Labour landslide would only just be leaving office today.
Logged
afleitch
Moderator
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,822


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #117 on: May 02, 2012, 03:33:37 AM »

Just for some perspective on Lord Reform, if we had the Clegg plan, Senators elected during the 1997 Labour landslide would only just be leaving office today.

At least we're doing something about it, rather than stuffing the Lords with peers Wink
Logged
afleitch
Moderator
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,822


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #118 on: May 02, 2012, 06:50:51 AM »

I do think the Lords proposal is interesting. I'd prefer it to be 100% elected, not 80% elected and would rather the Bishops be booted. They seem to be trying to go for a pre 2004 style French Senate which makes sense if you want to create a neutered upper house almost from scratch.

The Lords is to be elected in 3rds, every 5 years with members having one 15 year term. As a result, it will probably not be a place in which to build a career. The problem is though, if it becomes a carehome for old politicians the number of by-elections would be enormous. Given that the proposals suggest large STV constituencies so that Scotland for example would be one constituency, that means setting up polling stations nationwide to fill one seat.

Having 5-7 elected per seat every 5 years means that smaller (read: crazy) parties would have a chance to get in. 3-4 per seat would mean smaller more manageable seats and less crazies.
Logged
minionofmidas
Lewis Trondheim
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,207
India


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #119 on: May 02, 2012, 06:54:53 AM »

I do think the Lords proposal is interesting. I'd prefer it to be 100% elected, not 80% elected and would rather the Bishops be booted. They seem to be trying to go for a pre 2004 style French Senate which makes sense if you want to create a neutered upper house almost from scratch.
Britain already has a neutered upper house, so a reform that recreates one makes no sense. Not that I'd expect the current government - or a Labour majority government for that matter - to come up with anything else.

Logged
afleitch
Moderator
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,822


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #120 on: May 02, 2012, 07:06:42 AM »

I do think the Lords proposal is interesting. I'd prefer it to be 100% elected, not 80% elected and would rather the Bishops be booted. They seem to be trying to go for a pre 2004 style French Senate which makes sense if you want to create a neutered upper house almost from scratch.
Britain already has a neutered upper house, so a reform that recreates one makes no sense. Not that I'd expect the current government - or a Labour majority government for that matter - to come up with anything else.


I would agree with you. However the Lords could be kept down by the Commons in the era of suffrage on the basis that it was illegitimate and unelected. If you start electing members to a body then the balance of power can shift. So you just make sure you set out the ground rules for what the Lords can do (and more importantly what it can never do) before you then consider trivial matters like how to populate it.
Logged
You kip if you want to...
change08
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,940
United Kingdom
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #121 on: May 02, 2012, 12:34:38 PM »

Just for some perspective on Lord Reform, if we had the Clegg plan, Senators elected during the 1997 Labour landslide would only just be leaving office today.

At least we're doing something about it, rather than stuffing the Lords with peers Wink

Oh no, I'd support the proposals in any referendum, don't get me wrong. We just deserve better really, like with AV.
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,157
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #122 on: May 02, 2012, 04:56:33 PM »

I do think the Lords proposal is interesting. I'd prefer it to be 100% elected, not 80% elected and would rather the Bishops be booted. They seem to be trying to go for a pre 2004 style French Senate which makes sense if you want to create a neutered upper house almost from scratch.

The Lords is to be elected in 3rds, every 5 years with members having one 15 year term. As a result, it will probably not be a place in which to build a career. The problem is though, if it becomes a carehome for old politicians the number of by-elections would be enormous. Given that the proposals suggest large STV constituencies so that Scotland for example would be one constituency, that means setting up polling stations nationwide to fill one seat.

Having 5-7 elected per seat every 5 years means that smaller (read: crazy) parties would have a chance to get in. 3-4 per seat would mean smaller more manageable seats and less crazies.

Why bother with by-elections for a toothless body?  If the voters (or the parties) pick people who die in office, tough luck.  If the Lords would actually have some power then I could see the need for by-elections, but as it is, there is no need, or at least none that could not be put off until the next nationwide vote.
Logged
Pilchard
Rookie
**
Posts: 37
United Kingdom


Political Matrix
E: -5.16, S: -4.87

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #123 on: May 02, 2012, 06:55:50 PM »

Why bother with by-elections for a toothless body?  If the voters (or the parties) pick people who die in office, tough luck.  If the Lords would actually have some power then I could see the need for by-elections, but as it is, there is no need, or at least none that could not be put off until the next nationwide vote.

The draft bill and the joint committee report propose filling vacancies with substitute members until the next election (unless it's close to the next election - the committee recommends 1 year - in which case it would be left vacant). For some reason they propose filling the vacancy with the first unsuccessful candidate for the party at the previous election, which could involve going back to election results that may be more than 10 years old.
Logged
Хahar 🤔
Xahar
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,731
Bangladesh


Political Matrix
E: -6.77, S: 0.61

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #124 on: May 03, 2012, 11:36:24 AM »

Why not just get rid of the Lords and be done with it? The current legislative system doesn't seem to be crying out for an effective second house.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 ... 93  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.052 seconds with 12 queries.