Hengists If there is a hung parliament and the only possible combinations are Tory-DUP-LD (with the Tories the largest party) or Labour-SNP-LD then no one will get what they want or be happy, tough! But eventually the LDs will likely give confidence and supply to the first
Hengists If Labour are not largest party Miliband will be gone anyway, the LDs are split on the EU referendum, there would have to be concessions but there is not an absolute bar in negotiations for one, the DUP as well as UKIP also demand an EU referendum in return for any confidence and supply http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/oct/06/lib-dems-split-eu-referendum-tactics-concessions
sure that there won't be. No negotiations, no compromises, no concessions on that issue.
As for the article (which is 5 months old) the obvious conclusion is Clegg now realises he will not get the things he wants and so the issue has been decided.
What about Labour rebels? I feel that there would be enough to ensure that the referendum would pass.
There is going to be a referendum sooner or later. The sooner it is held and with the least fuss and resistance the more likely the people will vote to stay in the eu.
There will be no referendum because there should not be one. We are Europeans as we are part of the world. The best Tory success in the last 5 years has been getting in 300k net immigrants despite all their talk. Good for the economy !
Only oldies want referendum and soon most of them will not here any more.
Pro-Europeans most of all should realise that the renewal of consent that a referendum would confer would greatly strengthen our position in Europe. The sooner that happens the better. Determined obstruction from the likes of Clegg will only boost the antis
It matters not either way just as it mattered not with the Scottish referendum on independence. Just as the Scots have the English question to bring Independence to the fore again and again so 'ever closer union' and political integration will keep Euroscepticism front and centre. Polls indicate that less than 2 in 10 citizens want further integration with the EU but that is the only offering on the table in reality. So withdrawal is pretty much inevitable at some point.
The only questions really are when will we leave?, how many domestic political parties and institutions will it destroy in the meantime and how many referendums will it take for people to vote to leave?
I have lived in Chelsea London for over 20 years and I have also lived for extended periods in Glasgow plus have traveled all over Scotland..much more than most SNPers I imagine..Scotland is a great place but I prefer Chelsea.
Hengists If the LDs have the choice between either giving a majority to a Miliband-SNP government or a Tory-DUP government in the end they will go with the latter and, through gritted teeth, will not vote down an EU referendum. Cameron in turn will have to give some concessions like abandoning the 35% spending target and early tax cuts, but a deal is possible
The tax cuts maybe but the 35% spending is a misrepresentation. No doubt the LDs could say somehow that there would be no doctrinaire policies. Renegotiation is needed anyway - even on the basis of LD policies and assumptions. Will England vote for a Miliband SNP government.
Hengists If Labour are not largest party Miliband will be gone anyway, the LDs are split on the EU referendum, there would have to be concessions but there is not an absolute bar in negotiations for one, the DUP as well as UKIP also demand an EU referendum in return for any confidence and supply http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/oct/06/lib-dems-split-eu-referendum-tactics-concessions
sure that there won't be. No negotiations, no compromises, no concessions on that issue.
As for the article (which is 5 months old) the obvious conclusion is Clegg now realises he will not get the things he wants and so the issue has been decided.
What about Labour rebels? I feel that there would be enough to ensure that the referendum would pass.
There is going to be a referendum sooner or later. The sooner it is held and with the least fuss and resistance the more likely the people will vote to stay in the eu.
There will be no referendum because there should not be one. We are Europeans as we are part of the world. The best Tory success in the last 5 years has been getting in 300k net immigrants despite all their talk. Good for the economy !
Only oldies want referendum and soon most of them will not here any more.
Pro-Europeans most of all should realise that the renewal of consent that a referendum would confer would greatly strengthen our position in Europe. The sooner that happens the better. Determined obstruction from the likes of Clegg will only boost the antis
It matters not either way just as it mattered not with the Scottish referendum on independence. Just as the Scots have the English question to bring Independence to the fore again and again so 'ever closer union' and political integration will keep Euroscepticism front and centre. Polls indicate that less than 2 in 10 citizens want further integration with the EU but that is the only offering on the table in reality. So withdrawal is pretty much inevitable at some point.
The only questions really are when will we leave?, how many domestic political parties and institutions will it destroy in the meantime and how many referendums will it take for people to vote to leave?
Euroscepticism is prevalent I don't doubt. But evidence suggests that voters do not rate it highly as an issue of importance. I think that more likely than a unilateral decision for the UK to leave would be an implosion of the Eurozone brought about by the intolerable strains caused by monetary union. The Brussels elite always seems to keep kicking the can down the road, but can that go on for ever?
Hengists If there is a hung parliament and the only possible combinations are Tory-DUP-LD (with the Tories the largest party) or Labour-SNP-LD then no one will get what they want or be happy, tough! But eventually the LDs will likely give confidence and supply to the first
None of which has anything in particular to do with the likelihood of there being an EU referendum or not.
There can never, as I understand it, under UK constitution, not be a government.
Pretty much. You could argue that the gap of 15-45 minutes between Brown's resignation and Cameron's acceptance (of the Queen's request that he form a new government) was a gap between governments, but it's a stretch.
The Government consists of the Cabinet (who are in charge) and the Civil Service (who do the heavy lifting). It is headquartered in Whitehall. It spends money allocated to it, wields the power of the Crown via statutory instruments, orders-in-council etc. The Prime Minister chairs the Cabinet, and the Cabinet is appointed/fired by the Prime Minister using the powers of the Crown. It always obeys the law. If it wants to change the law it proposes such a change to Parliament.
The Parliament consists of the Commons and Lords. It is headquartered in Westminster. It considers requests for new laws and to change old ones. Sometimes it can initiate such requests itself but mostly it gets them from the Government. It inspects those requests and if it agrees, it sends them to the Crown for consent: after consent those requests become law. It also allocates money to the Government: this is known as supply.
General Elections choose those who make up Parliament, not those who make up Government. However if Parliament changes so drastically as to significantly impede the Government then a new Prime Minister is appointed, a new Cabinet appointed, and we go round again
Flightpath Even Laws was quite clear he wanted spending closer to 40% than 35%, as you state the LDs will not prop up a Miliband-SNP government as that would also destroy their remaining seats in England.
Hengists If Labour are not largest party Miliband will be gone anyway, the LDs are split on the EU referendum, there would have to be concessions but there is not an absolute bar in negotiations for one, the DUP as well as UKIP also demand an EU referendum in return for any confidence and supply http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/oct/06/lib-dems-split-eu-referendum-tactics-concessions
There is going to be a referendum sooner or later. The sooner it is held and with the least fuss and resistance the more likely the people will vote to stay in the eu.
Only oldies want referendum and soon most of them will not here any more.
Pro-Europeans
It matters not either way just as it mattered not with the Scottish referendum on independence. Just as the Scots have the English question to bring Independence to the fore again and again so 'ever closer union' and political integration will keep Euroscepticism front and centre. Polls indicate that less than 2 in 10 citizens want further integration with the EU but that is the only offering on the table in reality. So withdrawal is pretty much inevitable at some point.
The only questions really are when will we leave?, how many domestic political parties and institutions will it destroy in the meantime and how many referendums will it take for people to vote to leave?
Euroscepticism is prevalent I don't doubt. But evidence suggests that voters do not rate it highly as an issue of importance. I think that more likely than a unilateral decision for the UK to leave would be an implosion of the Eurozone brought about by the intolerable strains caused by monetary union. The Brussels elite always seems to keep kicking the can down the road, but can that go on for ever?
Certainly there is always that possibility of that but if anything I think the implications of political integration are more likely to cause the EU's implosion. When it finally sinks in with the people's of France, Spain, Italy, Holland etc and to a lesser extent (because our Euroscepticism is further advanced) the UK what it means to their country in terms of loss of sovereignty then I suspect there will be a procession of countries contemplating invoking article 50.
PS They may not recognise the importance of the EU directly currently but they recognise issues like Immigration which are directly the result of EU membership. Increasingly failure to address such issues will be traced back to the EU and heighten its profile.
Hengists If Labour are not largest party Miliband will be gone anyway, the LDs are split on the EU referendum, there would have to be concessions but there is not an absolute bar in negotiations for one, the DUP as well as UKIP also demand an EU referendum in return for any confidence and supply http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/oct/06/lib-dems-split-eu-referendum-tactics-concessions
Let make this simple for you. At this moment Miliband does not think denying a referendum harms his chances. Clearly Clegg thinks the same on the basis of that article. I do not believe there is a cats chance in hell of the Tories forming a Tory led majority government without the Libdems. Without a Tory led majority government there will be no referendum. What the DUP and UKIP want is irrelevant because neither on their own will be able to get Cameron into majority territory.
The simple reality is Clegg has already fallen foul of breaking election commitments. If he comes out and says that there will not be a EU referendum on his watch then you can be pretty sure that there won't be. No negotiations, no compromises, no concessions on that issue.
As for the article (which is 5 months old) the obvious conclusion is Clegg now realises he will not get the things he wants and so the issue has been decided.
What about Labour rebels? I feel that there would be enough to ensure that the referendum would pass.
There is going to be a referendum sooner or later. The sooner it is held and with the least fuss and resistance the more likely the people will vote to stay in the eu.
There will be no referendum because there should not be one. We are Europeans as we are part of the world. The best Tory success in the last 5 years has been getting in 300k net immigrants despite all their talk. Good for the economy !
Only oldies want referendum and soon most of them will not here any more.
Tell that to the poor factory worker who has not enjoyed a pay rise for years. There will be 100s of hungry EU migrants ready to step in and replace him.
Oxford Uni's Migration Observatory have conducted research which has shown that immigration has harmed the lowest earners and therefore the most vulnerable in society.
That is because of the nasty Tories who instead makes sure that tax evaders and avoiders are protected.
Hengists If Labour are not largest party Miliband will be gone anyway, the LDs are split on the EU referendum, there would have to be concessions but there is not an absolute bar in negotiations for one, the DUP as well as UKIP also demand an EU referendum in return for any confidence and supply http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/oct/06/lib-dems-split-eu-referendum-tactics-concessions
Let make this simple for you. At this moment Miliband does not think denying a referendum harms his chances. Clearly Clegg thinks the same on the basis of that article. I do not believe there is a cats chance in hell of the Tories forming a Tory led majority government without the Libdems. Without a Tory led majority government there will be no referendum. What the DUP and UKIP want is irrelevant because neither on their own will be able to get Cameron into majority territory.
The simple reality is Clegg has already fallen foul of breaking election commitments. If he comes out and says that there will not be a EU referendum on his watch then you can be pretty sure that there won't be. No negotiations, no compromises, no concessions on that issue.
As for the article (which is 5 months old) the obvious conclusion is Clegg now realises he will not get the things he wants and so the issue has been decided.
What about Labour rebels? I feel that there would be enough to ensure that the referendum would pass.
There is going to be a referendum sooner or later. The sooner it is held and with the least fuss and resistance the more likely the people will vote to stay in the eu.
There will be no referendum because there should not be one. We are Europeans as we are part of the world. The best Tory success in the last 5 years has been getting in 300k net immigrants despite all their talk. Good for the economy !
Only oldies want referendum and soon most of them will not here any more.
I hadn't realised almost two thirds of the country counted as oldies? You undemocratic arrogance is shameful.
Pro-Europeans most of all should realise that the renewal of consent that a referendum would confer would greatly strengthen our position in Europe. The sooner that happens the better. Determined obstruction from the likes of Clegg will only boost the antis
One of the few arguments for a referendum that I actually agree with is simply that it is the right thing to do. It shouldn't be considered as a pro- or anti-European thing, but simply as a courtesy to the governed to know their will, and an opportunity for them, after deliberation, to work out what that will is
Pro-Europeans most of all should realise that the renewal of consent that a referendum would confer would greatly strengthen our position in Europe. The sooner that happens the better. Determined obstruction from the likes of Clegg will only boost the antis
One of the few arguments for a referendum that I actually agree with is simply that it is the right thing to do. It shouldn't be considered as a pro- or anti-European thing, but simply as a courtesy to the governed to know their will, and an opportunity for them, after deliberation, to work out what that will is
That same argument could be used by the Scottish Nationalists for regular referenda on independence.
Hengists If there is a hung parliament and the only possible combinations are Tory-DUP-LD (with the Tories the largest party) or Labour-SNP-LD then no one will get what they want or be happy, tough! But eventually the LDs will likely give confidence and supply to the first
None of which has anything in particular to do with the likelihood of there being an EU referendum or not.
Hengists If there is a hung parliament and the only possible combinations are Tory-DUP-LD (with the Tories the largest party) or Labour-SNP-LD then no one will get what they want or be happy, tough! But eventually the LDs will likely give confidence and supply to the first
Neither of your suggested coalitions sound stable. The numbers may dictate Con/Lab or Lab/Con grand coalitions. Now that would be interesting ;-)
Pro-Europeans most of all should realise that the renewal of consent that a referendum would confer would greatly strengthen our position in Europe. The sooner that happens the better. Determined obstruction from the likes of Clegg will only boost the antis
One of the few arguments for a referendum that I actually agree with is simply that it is the right thing to do. It shouldn't be considered as a pro- or anti-European thing, but simply as a courtesy to the governed to know their will, and an opportunity for them, after deliberation, to work out what that will is
That same argument could be used by the Scottish Nationalists for regular referenda on independence.
Of course it could, and undoubtedly will be, though I somehow doubt they will be offering regular votes on reunification if they ever won.
logicalsong Well the Nats have just had their referendum on Scottish independence less than 12 months ago, there has not been an EU referendum for 40 years
Hengists Of course it does, if the Tories and DUP both demand an EU referendum as non-negotiable and the alternative is a Miliband-SNP government
And you think a Libdem conference will support an EU Referendum that ensures a Tory led government over a Labour led government. Good luck with that one.....
Pro-Europeans most of all should realise that the renewal of consent that a referendum would confer would greatly strengthen our position in Europe. The sooner that happens the better. Determined obstruction from the likes of Clegg will only boost the antis
One of the few arguments for a referendum that I actually agree with is simply that it is the right thing to do. It shouldn't be considered as a pro- or anti-European thing, but simply as a courtesy to the governed to know their will, and an opportunity for them, after deliberation, to work out what that will is
Indeed it will be comforting to know that the political ruling classes are being 'courteous' to us mere voters! Frankly such attitudes explain why the political class is so despised.
Pro-Europeans most of all should realise that the renewal of consent that a referendum would confer would greatly strengthen our position in Europe. The sooner that happens the better. Determined obstruction from the likes of Clegg will only boost the antis
One of the few arguments for a referendum that I actually agree with is simply that it is the right thing to do. It shouldn't be considered as a pro- or anti-European thing, but simply as a courtesy to the governed to know their will, and an opportunity for them, after deliberation, to work out what that will is
That same argument could be used by the Scottish Nationalists for regular referenda on independence.
If you define "regular" as "once every twenty/thirty years" then I don't have a problem with that. More often than that is silly.
logicalsong Well the Nats have just had their referendum on Scottish independence less than 12 months ago, there has not been an EU referendum for 40 years
So how many years between referenda would you suggest? We used to have a parliamentary democracy, referenda were viewed as un British before 1975.
logicalsong Well the Nats have just had their referendum on Scottish independence less than 12 months ago, there has not been an EU referendum for 40 years
So how many years between referenda would you suggest? We used to have a parliamentary democracy, referenda were viewed as un British before 1975.
Tell that to the poor factory worker who has not enjoyed a pay rise for years. There will be 100s of hungry EU migrants ready to step in and replace him.
Oxford Uni's Migration Observatory have conducted research which has shown that immigration has harmed the lowest earners and therefore the most vulnerable in society.
The median family income in the US is below where it was in 1998.
The developed world has a crisis: it's not to do with debt levels, but with the share of world resources it gobbles up. We - in the UK - are less than 1% of world population, but we use more than 3% of world oil consumption. Technology and global supply chains and improving education in other parts of the world are narrowing the advantages we had.
You can choose to make immigration the major determinant of falling wage levels if you like - and I'm sure it hasn't helped - but you you need to accept that in Japan and the US (the latter of which has basically no immigration, of course) incomes have fallen too. And you also need to accept that the value of someone's labour does not suddenly increase because competition has lessened. That's would be like claiming Coke would make a better soft drink if Pepsi didn't exist.
Flightpath Even Laws was quite clear he wanted spending closer to 40% than 35%, as you state the LDs will not prop up a Miliband-SNP government as that would also destroy their remaining seats in England.
I saw the news the other day and discerned that there may be an election soon. Laws and the LDs are electioneering. The issue would be one of preventing alleged 'ideological' cuts. The %age is a smoke screen. The Times' David Smith's economic commentary points out - ''The OBR has no good data for overall government spending before 1948 so has extrapolated this from a narrower and different measure produced by the Bank of England'' And - ''A better measure of spending on public services is public sector current expenditure, not least because during the past half century - when more of industry was in the public sector - public sector gross investment often reached 10% or more of GDP, three times its current level. On this measure, public spending will fall to its lowest level in relation to GDP since 1972-3 to deliver a 1% budget surplus, and its lowest since 1973-4 to eliminate the budget deficit.'' and - ''In cash terms, total managed expenditure will rise by 8.3%, to £779.9 billion, in 2019-20 compared with last year, 2013-14.''
None of this should in truth inhibit the LDs. Personally I would prefer that they were never put in the quandary.
you need to accept that in Japan and the US (the latter of which has basically no immigration, of course) incomes have fallen too.
Are you sure that the US has 'basically no immigration'? Seems a bit unlikely given they have Mexico next door! Also, don't forget the huge numbers of skilled workers who work for companies based in America and periodically relocate there.
I would be interested to see your source for that claim.
logicalsong Well the Nats have just had their referendum on Scottish independence less than 12 months ago, there has not been an EU referendum for 40 years
So how many years between referenda would you suggest? We used to have a parliamentary democracy, referenda were viewed as un British before 1975.
One every 35 years for each seems fair.
That is only fair if its a static (unchanging) arrangement. If an issue involves significant change then referenda should be used with every significant change.
For example, the idea that Parliament say had a independence referendum in Scotland and then targetted the next for 35 years time and then the year after the independence referendum repealed the 1998 devolution act for example would be an outrage.
Hengists Of course, if the LDs do not support a Tory led government then they will have to support a Labour-SNP led government, it is a simple either/or choice, most of the most social democratic LDs have now left and the conference endorsed the deal in 2010, allowing a democratic referendum of the people is hardly the worst thing they will have agreed
'There will be no referendum because there should not be one. We are Europeans as we are part of the world.'
How lefties hate democracy, you just can't trust those stupid voters.
We have had precisely one referendum on Europe, and that was under Labour. It was the Tories who took us in without a referendum; the Tories who hated democracy; the Tories who did not trust those stupid voters.
Referendum on critical issues of democracy and sovereignty should be held:#
1) If there is a significant change in the arrangements for that particular issue 2) If there is significant public demand for it 3) Once every 25 years as validation
Referendum on critical issues of democracy and sovereignty should be held:#
1) If there is a significant change in the arrangements for that particular issue 2) If there is significant public demand for it 3) After every 25 years
So the 32nd Magna Carta referendum should be coming up in a few weeks?
logicalsong Referendums are most suitable for key constitutional changes of which Scottish independence and the EU are both part, a Scottish independence referendum was inevitable once the SNP won a majority at Holyrood, an EU referendum is increasingly inevitable after endless EU Treaty changes since we joined the EEC and UKIP's victory in the 2014 elections
'There will be no referendum because there should not be one. We are Europeans as we are part of the world.'
How lefties hate democracy, you just can't trust those stupid voters.
We have had precisely one referendum on Europe, and that was under Labour. It was the Tories who took us in without a referendum; the Tories who hated democracy; the Tories who did not trust those stupid voters.
Except even when they had the referendum Wilson didn't trust people with the truth. Instead he created a total charade to con them into voting the way he wanted. Deception is the greatest subversion of democracy there is and Labour are masters of it. They are just as guilty of subverting democracy (and lets not forget the Lisbon Treaty debacle either).
Referendum on critical issues of democracy and sovereignty should be held:#
1) If there is a significant change in the arrangements for that particular issue 2) If there is significant public demand for it 3) After every 25 years
So the 32nd Magna Carta referendum should be coming up in a few weeks?
Referenda on votes for women, hanging, abortion reform, homosexual equality, every 20 years.
Flightpath It would be one of their red lines regardless, as well as that spending cuts alone do not take all the brunt of producing a surplus, but the wealthy pay their fair share of tax too
Referendum on critical issues of democracy and sovereignty should be held:#
1) If there is a significant change in the arrangements for that particular issue 2) If there is significant public demand for it 3) After every 25 years
So the 32nd Magna Carta referendum should be coming up in a few weeks?
Well if it was validated every 25 years then perhaps we wouldn't still be talking about 800 year old agreements? They'd be updated more regularly. I see no problem with the idea that electorate validate a constitution / bill of rights periodically. Of course the question would be what to do if it was voted down?
'There will be no referendum because there should not be one. We are Europeans as we are part of the world.'
How lefties hate democracy, you just can't trust those stupid voters.
We have had precisely one referendum on Europe, and that was under Labour. It was the Tories who took us in without a referendum; the Tories who hated democracy; the Tories who did not trust those stupid voters.
Except even when they had the referendum Wilson didn't trust people with the truth. Instead he created a total charade to con them into voting the way he wanted. Deception is the greatest subversion of democracy there is and Labour are masters of it. They are just as guilty of subverting democracy (and lets not forget the Lisbon Treaty debacle either).
Of course for right or wrong what Heath (and parliament) took us into was the 6 member EEC, a 'common market' not an 'EC' or 'EU'. It was according to Labour at the time all a capitalist plot.
'There will be no referendum because there should not be one. We are Europeans as we are part of the world.'
How lefties hate democracy, you just can't trust those stupid voters.
We have had precisely one referendum on Europe, and that was under Labour. It was the Tories who took us in without a referendum; the Tories who hated democracy; the Tories who did not trust those stupid voters.
Except even when they had the referendum Wilson didn't trust people with the truth. Instead he created a total charade to con them into voting the way he wanted. Deception is the greatest subversion of democracy there is and Labour are masters of it. They are just as guilty of subverting democracy (and lets not forget the Lisbon Treaty debacle either).
Of course for right or wrong what Heath (and parliament) took us into was the 6 member EEC, a 'common market' not an 'EC' or 'EU'. It was according to Labour at the time all a capitalist plot.
I believe Heath repeatedly denied in public that the long term aim was 'ever closer Union' whilst of course knowing that the intention was always there. He was no better than Wilson
Referendum on critical issues of democracy and sovereignty should be held:#
1) If there is a significant change in the arrangements for that particular issue 2) If there is significant public demand for it 3) Once every 25 years as validation
Define "significant".
On the basis of that, we could still support slavery.
'There will be no referendum because there should not be one. We are Europeans as we are part of the world.'
How lefties hate democracy, you just can't trust those stupid voters.
We have had precisely one referendum on Europe, and that was under Labour. It was the Tories who took us in without a referendum; the Tories who hated democracy; the Tories who did not trust those stupid voters.
I consciously avoided referring to Surbiton as a Leftie when I criticised him earlier. The majority of my friends from the left of the political spectrum are very much in favour of a referendum although of course they vary on what the outcome should be.
Surbiton's warped views have nothing to do with him being a 'leftie' any more than Ken Clarke's are because he is a 'rightie'.
Labour regain a narrow one point lead over the Conservatives, as the numbers intending to vote for one of the two major parties rises to its highest point for two years.
Referendum on critical issues of democracy and sovereignty should be held:#
1) If there is a significant change in the arrangements for that particular issue 2) If there is significant public demand for it 3) After every 25 years
So the 32nd Magna Carta referendum should be coming up in a few weeks?
Nope. If you had bothered listening over the last few weeks when the Magna Carta celebrations were being held you would know that the Magna Carta is not directly part of statute any more. Its influence on our laws is of course huge and large parts of its intent have formed the basis for our modern ideas of democracy and law. But anyone going to court to try and argue a case based on Magna Carta itself will find themselves spending a lot of money for no result - as has happened on a number of occasions over the last couple of decades.
Referendum on critical issues of democracy and sovereignty should be held:#
1) If there is a significant change in the arrangements for that particular issue 2) If there is significant public demand for it 3) Once every 25 years as validation
Define "significant".
On the basis of that, we could still support slavery.
I would not define slavery (or for example the death penalty) as an issue of democracy or sovereignty. Clearly it is a social issue. 'Significant' would be changing the voting age, changing the voting system, a major redistribution of political power (abolition of the House of Lords, political motivated changes in the levels of representation at a level of government, joining the EEC, Maastricht, Lisbon treaty, the 1998 Devolution Bill, Regionalisation etc)
Referendum on critical issues of democracy and sovereignty should be held:#
1) If there is a significant change in the arrangements for that particular issue 2) If there is significant public demand for it 3) After every 25 years
So the 32nd Magna Carta referendum should be coming up in a few weeks?
Nope. If you had bothered listening over the last few weeks when the Magna Carta celebrations were being held you would know that the Magna Carta is not directly part of statute any more. Its influence on our laws is of course huge and large parts of its intent have formed the basis for our modern ideas of democracy and law. But anyone going to court to try and argue a case based on Magna Carta itself will find themselves spending a lot of money for no result - as has happened on a number of occasions over the last couple of decades.
I don't live in the UK at present, so I am less exposed to the media coverage. As far as I am aware it has mostly been repealed, but there are still a few sections still in force. I was simply using it to make a point that there would be lots of things we would periodically have to vote if they required renewing once every 25 years.
you need to accept that in Japan and the US (the latter of which has basically no immigration, of course) incomes have fallen too.
Are you sure that the US has 'basically no immigration'? Seems a bit unlikely given they have Mexico next door! Also, don't forget the huge numbers of skilled workers who work for companies based in America and periodically relocate there.
I would be interested to see your source for that claim.
Pro-Europeans most of all should realise that the renewal of consent that a referendum would confer would greatly strengthen our position in Europe. The sooner that happens the better. Determined obstruction from the likes of Clegg will only boost the antis
One of the few arguments for a referendum that I actually agree with is simply that it is the right thing to do. It shouldn't be considered as a pro- or anti-European thing, but simply as a courtesy to the governed to know their will, and an opportunity for them, after deliberation, to work out what that will is
Indeed it will be comforting to know that the political ruling classes are being 'courteous' to us mere voters! Frankly such attitudes explain why the political class is so despised.
Would you prefer a discourteous government?
The state is the state. It is the biggest bully in the schoolyard, it is that entity with the monopoly of violence. It enforces its will with laws and backs it up with imprisonment, and takes its authority from a Crown appointed and anointed by God Himself. It is in everybody's interest that it represents the will of the people being governed, and it recognizes that that will is contradictory, conflicted, illogical and transitory. Until human nature changes and the answers to all questions known, the Westminster System is the best form of government yet invented. You want a better government? Make better humans.
Pro-Europeans most of all should realise that the renewal of consent that a referendum would confer would greatly strengthen our position in Europe. The sooner that happens the better. Determined obstruction from the likes of Clegg will only boost the antis
One of the few arguments for a referendum that I actually agree with is simply that it is the right thing to do. It shouldn't be considered as a pro- or anti-European thing, but simply as a courtesy to the governed to know their will, and an opportunity for them, after deliberation, to work out what that will is
Indeed it will be comforting to know that the political ruling classes are being 'courteous' to us mere voters! Frankly such attitudes explain why the political class is so despised.
Would you prefer a discourteous government?
The state is the state. It is the biggest bully in the schoolyard, it is that entity with the monopoly of violence. It enforces its will with laws and backs it up with imprisonment, and takes its authority from a Crown appointed and anointed by God Himself. It is in everybody's interest that it represents the will of the people being governed, and it recognizes that that will is contradictory, conflicted, illogical and transitory. Until human nature changes and the answers to all questions known, the Westminster System is the best form of government yet invented. You want a better government? Make better humans.
Discourteous Government?
We've had that for 40 years or more.
The stench of arrogant condescending bullshit in the air is suffocating
Pro-Europeans most of all should realise that the renewal of consent that a referendum would confer would greatly strengthen our position in Europe. The sooner that happens the better. Determined obstruction from the likes of Clegg will only boost the antis
One of the few arguments for a referendum that I actually agree with is simply that it is the right thing to do. It shouldn't be considered as a pro- or anti-European thing, but simply as a courtesy to the governed to know their will, and an opportunity for them, after deliberation, to work out what that will is
Indeed it will be comforting to know that the political ruling classes are being 'courteous' to us mere voters! Frankly such attitudes explain why the political class is so despised.
Would you prefer a discourteous government?
The state is the state. It is the biggest bully in the schoolyard, it is that entity with the monopoly of violence. It enforces its will with laws and backs it up with imprisonment, and takes its authority from a Crown appointed and anointed by God Himself. It is in everybody's interest that it represents the will of the people being governed, and it recognizes that that will is contradictory, conflicted, illogical and transitory. Until human nature changes and the answers to all questions known, the Westminster System is the best form of government yet invented. You want a better government? Make better humans.
Discourteous Government?
We've had that for 40 years or more.
The stench of arrogant condescending bullshit in the air is suffocating
Pro-Europeans most of all should realise that the renewal of consent that a referendum would confer would greatly strengthen our position in Europe. The sooner that happens the better. Determined obstruction from the likes of Clegg will only boost the antis
One of the few arguments for a referendum that I actually agree with is simply that it is the right thing to do. It shouldn't be considered as a pro- or anti-European thing, but simply as a courtesy to the governed to know their will, and an opportunity for them, after deliberation, to work out what that will is
Indeed it will be comforting to know that the political ruling classes are being 'courteous' to us mere voters! Frankly such attitudes explain why the political class is so despised.
Would you prefer a discourteous government?
The state is the state. It is the biggest bully in the schoolyard, it is that entity with the monopoly of violence. It enforces its will with laws and backs it up with imprisonment, and takes its authority from a Crown appointed and anointed by God Himself. It is in everybody's interest that it represents the will of the people being governed, and it recognizes that that will is contradictory, conflicted, illogical and transitory. Until human nature changes and the answers to all questions known, the Westminster System is the best form of government yet invented. You want a better government? Make better humans.
Discourteous Government?
We've had that for 40 years or more.
The stench of arrogant condescending bullshit in the air is suffocating
Invent something better.
Indeed and that's what parties such as the SNP, UKIP, Greens, Plaid, SF are in large part about. All aspire to significantly redistribute political power in the United Kingdom. By redistributing power you redefine government. They are the result of 'discourteous government'
PS And perhaps those who vote for them are voting for 'better humans'
Pro-Europeans most of all should realise that the renewal of consent that a referendum would confer would greatly strengthen our position in Europe. The sooner that happens the better. Determined obstruction from the likes of Clegg will only boost the antis
One of the few arguments for a referendum that I actually agree with is simply that it is the right thing to do. It shouldn't be considered as a pro- or anti-European thing, but simply as a courtesy to the governed to know their will, and an opportunity for them, after deliberation, to work out what that will is
Indeed it will be comforting to know that the political ruling classes are being 'courteous' to us mere voters! Frankly such attitudes explain why the political class is so despised.
Would you prefer a discourteous government?
The state is the state. It is the biggest bully in the schoolyard, it is that entity with the monopoly of violence. It enforces its will with laws and backs it up with imprisonment, and takes its authority from a Crown appointed and anointed by God Himself. It is in everybody's interest that it represents the will of the people being governed, and it recognizes that that will is contradictory, conflicted, illogical and transitory. Until human nature changes and the answers to all questions known, the Westminster System is the best form of government yet invented. You want a better government? Make better humans.
Discourteous Government?
We've had that for 40 years or more.
The stench of arrogant condescending bullshit in the air is suffocating
Invent something better.
Indeed and that's what parties such as the SNP, UKIP, Greens, Plaid, SF are in large part about. All aspire to significantly redistribute political power in the United Kingdom. By redistributing power you redefine government. They are the result of 'discourteous government'
...If Navalny who's a small fish can be under house arrest, why not Nemtsov?
His murder is very unusual, nobody had got murdered that close to the Kremlin before, though there was an attempt on Brezhnev in 1969...
Speedy, Navalny really isn't a 'small fish' - he's very respected and admired as one of the most courageous and vocal opponents of Putin. His blog is an extraordinary catalogue of injustice, but also has a dark sense of humour about the Kafkaesque moments he has experienced himself, with photos, films, etc. I've followed it for years.
Nemtsov and Navalny - they are remarkable men.
I think the murder last night was planned so that the Kremlin would loom large in all the news stories. It was an act of propoganda as well as a murder.
Navalny is popular as he is a nationalist, although he has little support outside Moscow. Nemtsov was a nobody, symptomatic of the liberal opposition, who has no support.
Putin is a cautious pragmatist and it really isn't his style. Certainly nothing to gain.
Pro-Europeans most of all should realise that the renewal of consent that a referendum would confer would greatly strengthen our position in Europe. The sooner that happens the better. Determined obstruction from the likes of Clegg will only boost the antis
One of the few arguments for a referendum that I actually agree with is simply that it is the right thing to do. It shouldn't be considered as a pro- or anti-European thing, but simply as a courtesy to the governed to know their will, and an opportunity for them, after deliberation, to work out what that will is
Indeed it will be comforting to know that the political ruling classes are being 'courteous' to us mere voters! Frankly such attitudes explain why the political class is so despised.
Would you prefer a discourteous government?
The state is the state. It is the biggest bully in the schoolyard, it is that entity with the monopoly of violence. It enforces its will with laws and backs it up with imprisonment, and takes its authority from a Crown appointed and anointed by God Himself. It is in everybody's interest that it represents the will of the people being governed, and it recognizes that that will is contradictory, conflicted, illogical and transitory. Until human nature changes and the answers to all questions known, the Westminster System is the best form of government yet invented. You want a better government? Make better humans.
Discourteous Government?
We've had that for 40 years or more.
The stench of arrogant condescending bullshit in the air is suffocating
Invent something better.
Sure. I'll be dictator, and tell everyone what to do. I'm sure I can cut through all the red tape and make the country a better place. And make better decisions then anyone in parliament.
Pro-Europeans most of all should realise that the renewal of consent that a referendum would confer would greatly strengthen our position in Europe. The sooner that happens the better. Determined obstruction from the likes of Clegg will only boost the antis
One of the few arguments for a referendum that I actually agree with is simply that it is the right thing to do. It shouldn't be considered as a pro- or anti-European thing, but simply as a courtesy to the governed to know their will, and an opportunity for them, after deliberation, to work out what that will is
Indeed it will be comforting to know that the political ruling classes are being 'courteous' to us mere voters! Frankly such attitudes explain why the political class is so despised.
Would you prefer a discourteous government?
The state is the state. It is the biggest bully in the schoolyard, it is that entity with the monopoly of violence. It enforces its will with laws and backs it up with imprisonment, and takes its authority from a Crown appointed and anointed by God Himself. It is in everybody's interest that it represents the will of the people being governed, and it recognizes that that will is contradictory, conflicted, illogical and transitory. Until human nature changes and the answers to all questions known, the Westminster System is the best form of government yet invented. You want a better government? Make better humans.
Discourteous Government?
We've had that for 40 years or more.
The stench of arrogant condescending bullshit in the air is suffocating
Invent something better.
Indeed and that's what parties such as the SNP, UKIP, Greens, Plaid, SF are in large part about. All aspire to significantly redistribute political power in the United Kingdom. By redistributing power you redefine government. They are the result of 'discourteous government'
Nah they are about throwing rocks.
Thank you for that most insightful intelligent intervention. I don't know what we'd do without it.
Indeed and that's what parties such as the SNP, UKIP, Greens, Plaid, SF are in large part about. All aspire to significantly redistribute political power in the United Kingdom. By redistributing power you redefine government. They are the result of 'discourteous government'
Nothing more comical than seeing another Kipper believing that their party of the establishment is offering anything radical or different to the status quo.
Pro-Europeans most of all should realise that the renewal of consent that a referendum would confer would greatly strengthen our position in Europe. The sooner that happens the better. Determined obstruction from the likes of Clegg will only boost the antis
One of the few arguments for a referendum that I actually agree with is simply that it is the right thing to do. It shouldn't be considered as a pro- or anti-European thing, but simply as a courtesy to the governed to know their will, and an opportunity for them, after deliberation, to work out what that will is
Indeed it will be comforting to know that the political ruling classes are being 'courteous' to us mere voters! Frankly such attitudes explain why the political class is so despised.
Would you prefer a discourteous government?
The state is the state. It is the biggest bully in the schoolyard, it is that entity with the monopoly of violence. It enforces its will with laws and backs it up with imprisonment, and takes its authority from a Crown appointed and anointed by God Himself. It is in everybody's interest that it represents the will of the people being governed, and it recognizes that that will is contradictory, conflicted, illogical and transitory. Until human nature changes and the answers to all questions known, the Westminster System is the best form of government yet invented. You want a better government? Make better humans.
Discourteous Government?
We've had that for 40 years or more.
The stench of arrogant condescending bullshit in the air is suffocating
Invent something better.
Indeed and that's what parties such as the SNP, UKIP, Greens, Plaid, SF are in large part about. All aspire to significantly redistribute political power in the United Kingdom. By redistributing power you redefine government. They are the result of 'discourteous government'
Nah they are about throwing rocks.
Thank you for that most insightful intelligent intervention. I don't know what we'd do without it.
talk me through a single thing that Ukip MEPs have achieved apart from filling the party coffers and claiming allowances.
Indeed and that's what parties such as the SNP, UKIP, Greens, Plaid, SF are in large part about. All aspire to significantly redistribute political power in the United Kingdom. By redistributing power you redefine government. They are the result of 'discourteous government'
Nothing more comical than seeing another Kipper believing that their party of the establishment is offering anything radical or different to the status quo.
Well there is definitely a more comical party and that is a party that wants independence from a remote detached ruling institution in order that it can give away its independence totally to an even more remote and detached ruling body.
At least UKIP is consistent in its outlook and not a contradiction in terms.......
'There will be no referendum because there should not be one. We are Europeans as we are part of the world.'
How lefties hate democracy, you just can't trust those stupid voters.
We have had precisely one referendum on Europe, and that was under Labour. It was the Tories who took us in without a referendum; the Tories who hated democracy; the Tories who did not trust those stupid voters.
Except even when they had the referendum Wilson didn't trust people with the truth. Instead he created a total charade to con them into voting the way he wanted. Deception is the greatest subversion of democracy there is and Labour are masters of it. They are just as guilty of subverting democracy (and lets not forget the Lisbon Treaty debacle either).
Of course for right or wrong what Heath (and parliament) took us into was the 6 member EEC, a 'common market' not an 'EC' or 'EU'. It was according to Labour at the time all a capitalist plot.
I believe Heath repeatedly denied in public that the long term aim was 'ever closer Union' whilst of course knowing that the intention was always there. He was no better than Wilson
We joined a customs union which is the salient point about reference to referendums. As for taking part in 'ever closer union' - the 'long term' has now arrived and it is the stated policy of the Tory Party not to take part. It campaigned against the Euro and voted against Lisbon. It put in place the triple lock and proposes renegotiation followed by a referendum.
Pro-Europeans most of all should realise that the renewal of consent that a referendum would confer would greatly strengthen our position in Europe. The sooner that happens the better. Determined obstruction from the likes of Clegg will only boost the antis
One of the few arguments for a referendum that I actually agree with is simply that it is the right thing to do. It shouldn't be considered as a pro- or anti-European thing, but simply as a courtesy to the governed to know their will, and an opportunity for them, after deliberation, to work out what that will is
Indeed it will be comforting to know that the political ruling classes are being 'courteous' to us mere voters! Frankly such attitudes explain why the political class is so despised.
Would you prefer a discourteous government?
Discourteous Government?
We've had that for 40 years or more.
The stench of arrogant condescending bullshit in the air is suffocating
Invent something better.
Indeed and that's what parties such as the SNP, UKIP, Greens, Plaid, SF are in large part about. All aspire to significantly redistribute political power in the United Kingdom. By redistributing power you redefine government. They are the result of 'discourteous government'
Nah they are about throwing rocks.
Thank you for that most insightful intelligent intervention. I don't know what we'd do without it.
talk me through a single thing that Ukip MEPs have achieved apart from filling the party coffers and claiming allowances.
Well they have managed to keep their party afloat long enough to become a thorn in the side of yours! Now talk me through the thing of how you have managed to reduce net immigration to 10's of thousands?
Pro-Europeans most of all should realise that the renewal of consent that a referendum would confer would greatly strengthen our position in Europe. The sooner that happens the better. Determined obstruction from the likes of Clegg will only boost the antis
One of the few arguments for a referendum that I actually agree with is simply that it is the right thing to do. It shouldn't be considered as a pro- or anti-European thing, but simply as a courtesy to the governed to know their will, and an opportunity for them, after deliberation, to work out what that will is
Indeed it will be comforting to know that the political ruling classes are being 'courteous' to us mere voters! Frankly such attitudes explain why the political class is so despised.
Would you prefer a discourteous government?
Discourteous Government?
We've had that for 40 years or more.
The stench of arrogant condescending bullshit in the air is suffocating
Invent something better.
Indeed and that's what parties such as the SNP, UKIP, Greens, Plaid, SF are in large part about. All aspire to significantly redistribute political power in the United Kingdom. By redistributing power you redefine government. They are the result of 'discourteous government'
Nah they are about throwing rocks.
Thank you for that most insightful intelligent intervention. I don't know what we'd do without it.
talk me through a single thing that Ukip MEPs have achieved apart from filling the party coffers and claiming allowances.
Well they have managed to keep their party afloat long enough to become a thorn in the side of yours! Now talk me through the thing of how you have managed to reduce net immigration to 10's of thousands?
So nothing for those mugs that voted for them - party before voters and country - how very very different.
'There will be no referendum because there should not be one. We are Europeans as we are part of the world.'
How lefties hate democracy, you just can't trust those stupid voters.
We have had precisely one referendum on Europe, and that was under Labour. It was the Tories who took us in without a referendum; the Tories who hated democracy; the Tories who did not trust those stupid voters.
Except even when they had the referendum Wilson didn't trust people with the truth. Instead he created a total charade to con them into voting the way he wanted. Deception is the greatest subversion of democracy there is and Labour are masters of it. They are just as guilty of subverting democracy (and lets not forget the Lisbon Treaty debacle either).
Of course for right or wrong what Heath (and parliament) took us into was the 6 member EEC, a 'common market' not an 'EC' or 'EU'. It was according to Labour at the time all a capitalist plot.
I believe Heath repeatedly denied in public that the long term aim was 'ever closer Union' whilst of course knowing that the intention was always there. He was no better than Wilson
We joined a customs union which is the salient point about reference to referendums. As for taking part in 'ever closer union' - the 'long term' has now arrived and it is the stated policy of the Tory Party not to take part. It campaigned against the Euro and voted against Lisbon. It put in place the triple lock and proposes renegotiation followed by a referendum.
Pro-Europeans most of all should realise that the renewal of consent that a referendum would confer would greatly strengthen our position in Europe. The sooner that happens the better. Determined obstruction from the likes of Clegg will only boost the antis
Would you prefer a discourteous government?
Discourteous Government?
We've had that for 40 years or more.
The stench of arrogant condescending bullshit in the air is suffocating
Invent something better.
Indeed and that's what parties such as the SNP, UKIP, Greens, Plaid, SF are in large part about. All aspire to significantly redistribute political power in the United Kingdom. By redistributing power you redefine government. They are the result of 'discourteous government'
Nah they are about throwing rocks.
Thank you for that most insightful intelligent intervention. I don't know what we'd do without it.
talk me through a single thing that Ukip MEPs have achieved apart from filling the party coffers and claiming allowances.
Well they have managed to keep their party afloat long enough to become a thorn in the side of yours! Now talk me through the thing of how you have managed to reduce net immigration to 10's of thousands?
So nothing for those mugs that voted for them - party before voters and country - how very very different.
I think that's for those voters to judge. If they are not satisfied with them they won't vote for them anymore. Given their vote has increased significantly in recent years clearly their voters do not see your observations as issues of concern. Perhaps they think its a better use of their taxes than wasting it on an EU vanity project? Perhaps UKIPs continued existence is compensation enough!
Pro-Europeans most of all should realise that the renewal of consent that a referendum would confer would greatly strengthen our position in Europe. The sooner that happens the better. Determined obstruction from the likes of Clegg will only boost the antis
One of the few arguments for a referendum that I actually agree with is simply that it is the right thing to do. It shouldn't be considered as a pro- or anti-European thing, but simply as a courtesy to the governed to know their will, and an opportunity for them, after deliberation, to work out what that will is
Indeed it will be comforting to know that the political ruling classes are being 'courteous' to us mere voters! Frankly such attitudes explain why the political class is so despised.
Would you prefer a discourteous government?
Discourteous Government?
We've had that for 40 years or more.
The stench of arrogant condescending bullshit in the air is suffocating
Invent something better.
Indeed and that's what parties such as the SNP, UKIP, Greens, Plaid, SF are in large part about. All aspire to significantly redistribute political power in the United Kingdom. By redistributing power you redefine government. They are the result of 'discourteous government'
Nah they are about throwing rocks.
Thank you for that most insightful intelligent intervention. I don't know what we'd do without it.
talk me through a single thing that Ukip MEPs have achieved apart from filling the party coffers and claiming allowances.
Well they have managed to keep their party afloat long enough to become a thorn in the side of yours! Now talk me through the thing of how you have managed to reduce net immigration to 10's of thousands?
If you had just typed "I can't" it would have saved you a lot of effort.
The state is the state. It is the biggest bully in the schoolyard, it is that entity with the monopoly of violence. It enforces its will with laws and backs it up with imprisonment, and takes its authority from a Crown appointed and anointed by God Himself. It is in everybody's interest that it represents the will of the people being governed, and it recognizes that that will is contradictory, conflicted, illogical and transitory. Until human nature changes and the answers to all questions known, the Westminster System is the best form of government yet invented. You want a better government? Make better humans.
Discourteous Government?
We've had that for 40 years or more.
The stench of arrogant condescending bullshit in the air is suffocating
Invent something better.
Indeed and that's what parties such as the SNP, UKIP, Greens, Plaid, SF are in large part about. All aspire to significantly redistribute political power in the United Kingdom. By redistributing power you redefine government. They are the result of 'discourteous government'
PS And perhaps those who vote for them are voting for 'better humans'
You might be right with SF - Ireland has an elected head of state and a written constitution. But UKIP and SNP? No. They don't want to overthrow the Westminster System, they just want to take power within it or a duplicate of it. That's not a subversion of the system, that's a continuation of it - meet the new boss, just the same as the old boss.
As for the 'better humans'? God, no. They are as prone to violence, casual cruelty, addiction, short-sightedness, tribalism, and general fuckwittedness as anybody else.
The interesting point is that we are starting to see Tory percentages in the mid 30s. 34-35% is much what (36.1%) they got in the 2010 erection and the campaign proper has not started yet.
...If Navalny who's a small fish can be under house arrest, why not Nemtsov?
His murder is very unusual, nobody had got murdered that close to the Kremlin before, though there was an attempt on Brezhnev in 1969...
Speedy, Navalny really isn't a 'small fish' - he's very respected and admired as one of the most courageous and vocal opponents of Putin. His blog is an extraordinary catalogue of injustice, but also has a dark sense of humour about the Kafkaesque moments he has experienced himself, with photos, films, etc. I've followed it for years.
Nemtsov and Navalny - they are remarkable men.
I think the murder last night was planned so that the Kremlin would loom large in all the news stories. It was an act of propoganda as well as a murder.
Navalny is popular as he is a nationalist, although he has little support outside Moscow. Nemtsov was a nobody, symptomatic of the liberal opposition, who has no support.
Putin is a cautious pragmatist and it really isn't his style. Certainly nothing to gain.
...If Navalny who's a small fish can be under house arrest, why not Nemtsov?
His murder is very unusual, nobody had got murdered that close to the Kremlin before, though there was an attempt on Brezhnev in 1969...
Speedy, Navalny really isn't a 'small fish' - he's very respected and admired as one of the most courageous and vocal opponents of Putin. His blog is an extraordinary catalogue of injustice, but also has a dark sense of humour about the Kafkaesque moments he has experienced himself, with photos, films, etc. I've followed it for years.
Nemtsov and Navalny - they are remarkable men.
I think the murder last night was planned so that the Kremlin would loom large in all the news stories. It was an act of propoganda as well as a murder.
Navalny is popular as he is a nationalist, although he has little support outside Moscow. Nemtsov was a nobody, symptomatic of the liberal opposition, who has no support.
Putin is a cautious pragmatist and it really isn't his style. Certainly nothing to gain.
Last line haha.
Putin is an expansionist Nationalist dictator.
So why are so many nationalists imprisoned then? I have many nationalist Russian friends, none fans of Putin.
The state is the state. It is the biggest bully in the schoolyard, it is that entity with the monopoly of violence. It enforces its will with laws and backs it up with imprisonment, and takes its authority from a Crown appointed and anointed by God Himself. It is in everybody's interest that it represents the will of the people being governed, and it recognizes that that will is contradictory, conflicted, illogical and transitory. Until human nature changes and the answers to all questions known, the Westminster System is the best form of government yet invented. You want a better government? Make better humans.
Discourteous Government?
We've had that for 40 years or more.
The stench of arrogant condescending bullshit in the air is suffocating
Invent something better.
Indeed and that's what parties such as the SNP, UKIP, Greens, Plaid, SF are in large part about. All aspire to significantly redistribute political power in the United Kingdom. By redistributing power you redefine government. They are the result of 'discourteous government'
PS And perhaps those who vote for them are voting for 'better humans'
You might be right with SF - Ireland has an elected head of state and a written constitution. But UKIP and SNP? No. They don't want to overthrow the Westminster System, they just want to take power within it or a duplicate of it. That's not a subversion of the system, that's a continuation of it - meet the new boss, just the same as the old boss.
As for the 'better humans'? God, no. They are as prone to violence, casual cruelty, addiction, short-sightedness, tribalism, and general fuckwittedness as anybody else.
Well if you are going to be totally absurd then there is no point attempting to debate with you. However I can recommend a good surgeon who will be able to surgically remove your head from your lower bowel if you so wish.......
...If Navalny who's a small fish can be under house arrest, why not Nemtsov?
His murder is very unusual, nobody had got murdered that close to the Kremlin before, though there was an attempt on Brezhnev in 1969...
Speedy, Navalny really isn't a 'small fish' - he's very respected and admired as one of the most courageous and vocal opponents of Putin. His blog is an extraordinary catalogue of injustice, but also has a dark sense of humour about the Kafkaesque moments he has experienced himself, with photos, films, etc. I've followed it for years.
Nemtsov and Navalny - they are remarkable men.
I think the murder last night was planned so that the Kremlin would loom large in all the news stories. It was an act of propoganda as well as a murder.
Navalny is popular as he is a nationalist, although he has little support outside Moscow. Nemtsov was a nobody, symptomatic of the liberal opposition, who has no support.
Putin is a cautious pragmatist and it really isn't his style. Certainly nothing to gain.
Last line haha.
Putin is an expansionist Nationalist dictator.
So why are so many nationalists imprisoned then? I have many nationalist Russian friends, none fans of Putin.
Putin's version of nationalism has opponents who are also nationalists.
...If Navalny who's a small fish can be under house arrest, why not Nemtsov?
His murder is very unusual, nobody had got murdered that close to the Kremlin before, though there was an attempt on Brezhnev in 1969...
Speedy, Navalny really isn't a 'small fish' - he's very respected and admired as one of the most courageous and vocal opponents of Putin. His blog is an extraordinary catalogue of injustice, but also has a dark sense of humour about the Kafkaesque moments he has experienced himself, with photos, films, etc. I've followed it for years.
Nemtsov and Navalny - they are remarkable men.
I think the murder last night was planned so that the Kremlin would loom large in all the news stories. It was an act of propoganda as well as a murder.
Navalny is popular as he is a nationalist, although he has little support outside Moscow. Nemtsov was a nobody, symptomatic of the liberal opposition, who has no support.
Putin is a cautious pragmatist and it really isn't his style. Certainly nothing to gain.
Last line haha.
Putin is an expansionist Nationalist dictator.
Putin's tactics clearly aren't expansionist. Transnistria, Abkazhia and South Ossetia are not being incorporated into the Russian Federation. The only territory actually incorporated to date is Crimea which is historically part of Russia and was until the 1960s. The likelihood is that the Donetsk and Marioupol regions will end up with the same quasi-independent governments already found in the first three examples.
His clear goal is to create a ring of unstable countries around him, probably based on the theory that unstable governments will have difficulty joining or co-operating with NATO and would be less acceptable allies to NATO.
And of course he is a Nationalist. Can you find a single world leader that is not?
Comments
The only questions really are when will we leave?, how many domestic political parties and institutions will it destroy in the meantime and how many referendums will it take for people to vote to leave?
Will England vote for a Miliband SNP government.
The Government consists of the Cabinet (who are in charge) and the Civil Service (who do the heavy lifting). It is headquartered in Whitehall. It spends money allocated to it, wields the power of the Crown via statutory instruments, orders-in-council etc. The Prime Minister chairs the Cabinet, and the Cabinet is appointed/fired by the Prime Minister using the powers of the Crown. It always obeys the law. If it wants to change the law it proposes such a change to Parliament.
The Parliament consists of the Commons and Lords. It is headquartered in Westminster. It considers requests for new laws and to change old ones. Sometimes it can initiate such requests itself but mostly it gets them from the Government. It inspects those requests and if it agrees, it sends them to the Crown for consent: after consent those requests become law. It also allocates money to the Government: this is known as supply.
General Elections choose those who make up Parliament, not those who make up Government. However if Parliament changes so drastically as to significantly impede the Government then a new Prime Minister is appointed, a new Cabinet appointed, and we go round again No. See above. Already done. See the Cabinet Manual
'There will be no referendum because there should not be one. We are Europeans as we are part of the world.'
How lefties hate democracy, you just can't trust those stupid voters.
The developed world has a crisis: it's not to do with debt levels, but with the share of world resources it gobbles up. We - in the UK - are less than 1% of world population, but we use more than 3% of world oil consumption. Technology and global supply chains and improving education in other parts of the world are narrowing the advantages we had.
You can choose to make immigration the major determinant of falling wage levels if you like - and I'm sure it hasn't helped - but you you need to accept that in Japan and the US (the latter of which has basically no immigration, of course) incomes have fallen too. And you also need to accept that the value of someone's labour does not suddenly increase because competition has lessened. That's would be like claiming Coke would make a better soft drink if Pepsi didn't exist.
The Times' David Smith's economic commentary points out -
''The OBR has no good data for overall government spending before 1948 so has extrapolated this from a narrower and different measure produced by the Bank of England''
And -
''A better measure of spending on public services is public sector current expenditure, not least because during the past half century - when more of industry was in the public sector - public sector gross investment often reached 10% or more of GDP, three times its current level.
On this measure, public spending will fall to its lowest level in relation to GDP since 1972-3 to deliver a 1% budget surplus, and its lowest since 1973-4 to eliminate the budget deficit.''
and -
''In cash terms, total managed expenditure will rise by 8.3%, to £779.9 billion, in 2019-20 compared with last year, 2013-14.''
None of this should in truth inhibit the LDs. Personally I would prefer that they were never put in the quandary.
https://twitter.com/JamieRoss7/status/571759532948496385
The world has a crisis, not just the developed part, basic maths tell you that.
Ignorance and prejudice stop people seeing it.
Not read it, do you have a link, or do you mean just in general terms?
I would be interested to see your source for that claim.
For example, the idea that Parliament say had a independence referendum in Scotland and then targetted the next for 35 years time and then the year after the independence referendum repealed the 1998 devolution act for example would be an outrage.
If we are talking about an inverse relationship, I probably agree with you.
1) If there is a significant change in the arrangements for that particular issue
2) If there is significant public demand for it
3) Once every 25 years as validation
Actually, it is a direct relationship in quantity terms.
*oops*
TGOHF Sounds fair
On the basis of that, we could still support slavery.
Surbiton's warped views have nothing to do with him being a 'leftie' any more than Ken Clarke's are because he is a 'rightie'.
Name them, TSE! Name them and shame them.
The state is the state. It is the biggest bully in the schoolyard, it is that entity with the monopoly of violence. It enforces its will with laws and backs it up with imprisonment, and takes its authority from a Crown appointed and anointed by God Himself. It is in everybody's interest that it represents the will of the people being governed, and it recognizes that that will is contradictory, conflicted, illogical and transitory. Until human nature changes and the answers to all questions known, the Westminster System is the best form of government yet invented. You want a better government? Make better humans.
We've had that for 40 years or more.
The stench of arrogant condescending bullshit in the air is suffocating
PS And perhaps those who vote for them are voting for 'better humans'
Putin is a cautious pragmatist and it really isn't his style. Certainly nothing to gain.
Sure. I'll be dictator, and tell everyone what to do. I'm sure I can cut through all the red tape and make the country a better place. And make better decisions then anyone in parliament.
Up until the point I go power-mad* of course.
* Some say this has already happened.
CON 34% LAB 34% LDEM 8% UKIP 14% GRN 5%
https://twitter.com/olgatokariuk/status/571459685217394688
At least UKIP is consistent in its outlook and not a contradiction in terms.......
Labour going nowhere even though they're the main opposition.
UKIP almost double the LibDems.
And we think meh?
If I'd predicted this poll in 2010, no-one would have believed me...
Since the last GE, Con -3, UKIP +11.
Now that would have got you certified
As for the 'better humans'? God, no. They are as prone to violence, casual cruelty, addiction, short-sightedness, tribalism, and general fuckwittedness as anybody else.
Putin is an expansionist Nationalist dictator.
https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/571779127663071232
https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/571779782012227584
When a Dominatrix does it, the client enjoys it.
Allegedly.
Stick Buttler in at five would be my idea, then again we should have Hales opening and Stokes at four.
England win the toss and bat, unchanged side.
Now YouGov is a tie so surely final position must be a Lab lead below 0.8%?
His clear goal is to create a ring of unstable countries around him, probably based on the theory that unstable governments will have difficulty joining or co-operating with NATO and would be less acceptable allies to NATO.
And of course he is a Nationalist. Can you find a single world leader that is not?