Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Starver]

I love how thanks to its courageous vote to not have unelected officials decide its law, Britain will now be led by a woman that wasn't elected for the job.

35,453 people voted for her.  And some of them might (<- swerving to avoid what might have looked like a pun) have wanted her to become PM and stop caring about her local representational duties, too..

(In certain formal committees that I'm involved in (not political, or at least only political in an amateur power-hungry way) when the delegates of sub-organisational units get elected into the committee structure, the elected chairman(/person) is expected to be neutral and, as compensation, the sub-unit gets to send a replacement delegate to make up their number.  It would be nice to know what .../Thatcher/Major/Blair/Brown/Cameron did for their elective constituencies whilst also doing duty as Premier.  Well, apparently Cameron complained about his local council's cuts to services, but is it essentially like a movable Washington DC situation, for all intents and purposes?)

Yep. Our system works by voting for a party, not the leader.

No we don't, we vote for a candidate, who may or may not represent a party and may or may not be totally in line with that party's stated goals, the party leader's stated goals, both of these and or neither.

[evilcherry]

I love how thanks to its courageous vote to not have unelected officials decide its law, Britain will now be led by a woman that wasn't elected for the job.

Yep. Our system works by voting for a party, not the leader. It's why I was always confused about the whole 'OMG EU so undemocratic!' complaint. It's another layer on top of the British system. We vote for the party, the party votes for a leader, the leader votes for the whadyacallit (I remember the position, not the name) of the EU.

The Undemocraticness of EU stems from Council, which is basically a representative from the local government of each state. Having a parliamentary system in which Europarl is sovereign will stop these complaints, but at the same time turns EU into an actual federation.

FPTP skew things horrendously if they can be used to empower another FPTP, which most legislatures uses internally as a voting system, or to elect one representative to another body.

[Loud Whispers]

Ah, Rupert, how I hate you.

Honestly I'm surprised that no country has gone and attempted to break up his monopoly. I wonder if politicians are too worried about a smear campaign.

Ay nah, Rupert didn't do this, and he doesn't have monopoly, most importantly he's bit stuffed when it comes to Putin news, GMG, Barclay Bros and BBC - with him holding onto papers when papers are forecasted to go caput (if he doesn't die of old age before then).
Calls to break up Rupert's nonexistent monopoly are a bit outdated, when now it is far more important on who controls social media and search engines
Forget controlling the news, it is far more valuable for politicians to control news people don't believe is news

I love how thanks to its courageous vote to not have unelected officials decide its law, Britain will now be led by a woman that wasn't elected for the job.

What are you on about, she was elected to the job. Learn British parliamentary politics m8, you can't become Prime Minister without being an elected MP
On that note, what is more serious is whether the mandate the Tory party was elected on is sufficient for their leadership election, as lots of libdem/surviving labour and UKIP are arguing that May should not in good faith lead negotiations as the mandate was given under Cameron, not May. Quite so, May argued for a new mandate to be given with Brown in 07, but will likely herself argue that the mandate was given through election on the basis of giving the referendum and the referendum itself giving a mandate to carry out the Brexit negotiations.
Essentially Theresa May wants to hold EU negotiations now to minimize instability to the EU and UK, as to hold a general election whilst she is conducting negotiations could lead to situations where the Tory lose their majority and thus their cabinet, or more hilariously, Theresa May could lose her seat, rendering negotiations pointless and having to start all over again
Oh, also UKIP want proportional representation in addition to a general election, that way their millions of votes would translate into MPs
top bants
All in all, Theresa May is gonna hold this stuff together since the only real opposition she has in Parliament are the Libdems, who are the Libdems lol (weak as all hell from Nick Clegg's mistake). This is why I go on about how shit it is when Labour cannot mount an opposition, effectively May can argue the party still has their mandate as a result of the referendum, but de facto the reason is probably more to do with her being the last man standing willing to do the job

I do quite like the fact that May will have to deliver on the referendum negotiations or she'll lose her job though, that's a good motivating sword of Damocles

[Starver]

Oh, also UKIP want proportional representation in addition to a general election, that way their millions of votes would translate into MPs
top bants

My problem with PR is who would be my MP?

Right now, I know that the Right Honourable Polly Tishen (Mauve Party candidate and successful electee for the constituency of Starverville within the unitary authority of North Central Hamshiresex) is my MP, because I live in that place, whether or not I even voted for her (or even voted!), and my pleasure or displeasure at her ability to deal with my issue of the local dog-mess mountain threatening to spill over into my back garden, or the threat of an HS4 station being built over the top of my grandkids' school (on massive concrete stilts, no less!) translates into my willingness or otherwise to vote for her (not her party) in the next election cycle.

With simple list-based PR, an individual Mauve Party candidate has a position on the party list and likely is either is assured their place, so long as some very low proportion of the public of the whole country contributes enough votes to qualify enough of the list, or an effective reserve candidate will be so low in tne party's own favoured rankings that it would take an unprecedented swing in popularity towards their political faction to get them anywhere, and perhaps change the minds of their party leadership about minor, but off-message, differences in non-core party policies that the public would actually like their (broadly supported) platform to adopt as a nuance in their representation in parliament.

And who do I see about my dog-mess mountain or stilted HS4? Perhaps a minister (or shadow-minister) for the Department Of Righting Those Particular Wrongs? But then they've got to deal with a whole nation's-worth of complaints. My party's 'Gateway' team? But what if I don't have a party, and of course I can't (and shouldn't be able to) prove which way I voted? Maybe each party takes its elected list members and assigns them a subset of the country (whole, or just the bits they feel confident they have enough grassroots in) and creates an unofficial constituency not necessarily contiguous with any competing party, and treat the person assigned as 'local MP' for the region, for those that contributed to the party power-base? But same issue regarding proving a vote, or else the non-democracy of party subscrptions earning access to the representational process, even if this means that smaller parties have to deal with fewer requests, averaging out the workload.

Dual geographic voting (current system, perhaps double-sized zones) and list-based topups (biased to 'rectify' FPTP failings, to approximate 'lost' MPs from distributing non-supermajority votes 'wasted' by coming close-second/third/etc and thin but consistent minority views f

[Grim Portent]

My preference for maintaining the local MP thing would be to have one parliamentary house be elected by proportional representation, the other by constituencies (particular voting method to appoint them could vary between a few systems.) Any legislation would need both houses approval to pass, both houses would be able to draft legislation for the perusal and approval/rejection of the houses.

That way (in theory) you get constituency MPs proposing legislation and overseeing affairs that are important to their constituency, and PR MPs who propose legislation important to their voting block as a whole. That way regional areas get their interests represented in one house, and geographically disparate demographics are represented in the other, but the approval of both is needed to pass legislation.

[sluissa]

Oh, also UKIP want proportional representation in addition to a general election, that way their millions of votes would translate into MPs
top bants

My problem with PR is who would be my MP?

Right now, I know that the Right Honourable Polly Tishen (Mauve Party candidate and successful electee for the constituency of Starverville within the unitary authority of North Central Hamshiresex) is my MP, because I live in that place, whether or not I even voted for her (or even voted!), and my pleasure or displeasure at her ability to deal with my issue of the local dog-mess mountain threatening to spill over into my back garden, or the threat of an HS4 station being built over the top of my grandkids' school (on massive concrete stilts, no less!) translates into my willingness or otherwise to vote for her (not her party) in the next election cycle.

With simple list-based PR, an individual Mauve Party candidate has a position on the party list and likely is either is assured their place, so long as some very low proportion of the public of the whole country contributes enough votes to qualify enough of the list, or an effective reserve candidate will be so low in tne party's own favoured rankings that it would take an unprecedented swing in popularity towards their political faction to get them anywhere, and perhaps change the minds of their party leadership about minor, but off-message, differences in non-core party policies that the public would actually like their (broadly supported) platform to adopt as a nuance in their representation in parliament.

And who do I see about my dog-mess mountain or stilted HS4? Perhaps a minister (or shadow-minister) for the Department Of Righting Those Particular Wrongs? But then they've got to deal with a whole nation's-worth of complaints. My party's 'Gateway' team? But what if I don't have a party, and of course I can't (and shouldn't be able to) prove which way I voted? Maybe each party takes its elected list members and assigns them a subset of the country (whole, or just the bits they feel confident they have enough grassroots in) and creates an unofficial constituency not necessarily contiguous with any competing party, and treat the person assigned as 'local MP' for the region, for those that contributed to the party power-base? But same issue regarding proving a vote, or else the non-democracy of party subscrptions earning access to the representational process, even if this means that smaller parties have to deal with fewer requests, averaging out the workload.

Dual geographic voting (current system, perhaps double-sized zones) and list-based topups (biased to 'rectify' FPTP failings, to approximate 'lost' MPs from distributing non-supermajority votes 'wasted' by coming close-second/third/etc and thin but consistent minority views f

Do you not have more local governments, like city or county, for those sorts of issues? I mean, this is a legit question, I have very little idea how the UK works underneath the parliament levels (and even then I'm sketchy on the details.) In the US we wouldn't usually consider bothering the federal government with something like a dog mess pile in my back garden. That would fall under the lowest level local government which never even directly interacts with the federal government. Above that is a state government which tends to be the intermediary government between federal and local.

There are things that we can contact our federal representative for, but it's usually in relation to national level decisions and how we feel those decisions would affect us in their area. There's not much they can do to change their local areas outside of maybe just making friendly phone calls or calling in favors.

[Loud Whispers]

German industrial giant Siemens has said it will continue to invest in the UK, despite earlier warnings that a vote to leave the EU could affect its future activities in the country.
At an event at the House of Commons, Mr Kaeser said the UK continued to matter and be a "good place to do business" whether it was inside or outside the EU.

Cheeki: 1
Not breeki: 0

Momementum kiddos throwing bricks at MPs they don't like
Absolutely haram

[Starver]

ETA: Ummm...  Apparently this already got posted, mid-edit... This is the full thing. It's horri ly long, either way. Sorry.

Oh, also UKIP want proportional representation in addition to a general election, that way their millions of votes would translate into MPs
top bants

My problem with PR is who would be my MP?

Right now, I know that the Right Honourable Polly Tishen (Mauve Party candidate and successful electee for the constituency of Starverville within the unitary authority of North Central Hamshiresex) is my MP, because I live in that place, whether or not I even voted for her (or even voted!), and my pleasure or displeasure at her ability to deal with my issue of the local dog-mess mountain threatening to spill over into my back garden, or the threat of an HS4 station being built over the top of my grandkids' school (on massive concrete stilts, no less!) translates into my willingness or otherwise to vote for her (not her party) in the next election cycle.

With simple list-based PR, an individual Mauve Party candidate has a position on the party list and likely is either is assured their place, so long as some very low proportion of the public of the whole country contributes enough votes to qualify enough of the list, or an effective reserve candidate will be so low in tne party's own favoured rankings that it would take an unprecedented swing in popularity towards their political faction to get them anywhere, and perhaps change the minds of their party leadership about minor, but off-message, differences in non-core party policies that the public would actually like their (broadly supported) platform to adopt as a nuance in their representation in parliament.

And who do I see about my dog-mess mountain or stilted HS4? Perhaps a minister (or shadow-minister) for the Department Of Righting Those Particular Wrongs? But then they've got to deal with a whole nation's-worth of complaints. My party's 'Gateway' team? But what if I don't have a party, and of course I can't (and shouldn't be able to) prove which way I voted? Maybe each party takes its elected list members and assigns them a subset of the country (whole, or just the bits they feel confident they have enough grassroots in) and creates an unofficial constituency not necessarily contiguous with any competing party, and treat the person assigned as 'local MP' for the region, for those that contributed to the party power-base? But same issue regarding proving a vote, or else the non-democracy of party subscrptions earning access to the representational process, even if this means that smaller parties have to deal with fewer requests, averaging out the workload.

Perhaps we need a hybrid dual geographic voting (current system, perhaps double-sized zones) and list-based topups (biased to 'rectify' FPTP failings, to approximate 'lost' MPs from distributing non-supermajority votes 'wasted' by coming close-second/third/etc; and thin but consistent minority views, from across all areas, vs. localised standout parties. Give a choice of approaching localised MPs (whatever party, but your area) or else non-local 'freelancers' of a party that represents your viewpoint most accurately.

But how complicated is that??

(This message started at one side of the Pennines on one train, finished now on the other side of the Pennines on another.  Not surprising that four new messages appeared in the meantime.  Expected more.)

[Starver]

My preference for maintaining the local MP thing would be to have one parliamentary house be elected by proportional representation, the other by constituencies (particular voting method to appoint them could vary between a few systems.) Any legislation would need both houses approval to pass, both houses would be able to draft legislation for the perusal and approval/rejection of the houses.

My preference would be for one House to be appointed, not elected, in a way that excludes short-term popularism.   You know, like the way the House Of Lords sort of worked already.  No thanks, regarding direct elections for both.  Sortition (for life!) maybe. But then there's no room for both Constituency and PR membership across two Houses unless we also add an extra House.

Not that what I want, or would prefer, is going to be influential.

Adding: As to levels of government, there's councils (town councils, county councils, etc) which perform Local Government things, but 'top guy' as a goto for an area could well be the MP, if you perceive it as a local problem wirh national consequences, or don't have faith in your council (as a whole) or councillors (all those that cover your particular area).  Makes work for the MP,  but often can be just the MP noting to the respective councillors that the issue has been escalated, for the council-level dealings to be elevated or further ignored, according to perceived triviality or enhancement of observed importance.  Probably the same the world over, in equivalent systems.

[Leafsnail]

Oh, also UKIP want proportional representation in addition to a general election, that way their millions of votes would translate into MPs

They probably want a lot of other things that are never going to happen

[Loud Whispers]

Hey guys, what does it mean if you only reply to UKIP
Is that what you're most interested in or what, I dunno

[MarcAFK]

United Kingdom Insanity Party is the best party.

[Loud Whispers]

That's just Rowan Atkinson with pencils in his nose

[MarcAFK]

That's just Rowan Atkinson with pencils in his nose

At least he has a plan.

[Loud Whispers]

That's just Rowan Atkinson with pencils in his nose

At least he has a plan.

It's just nose pencils, we've been executing the plan for quite some time now