• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

A Political Thread pt. 2

I realise it won't happen but I would really like to see stats produced annually (by the ONS or some independent body) that measure how successful Brexit has been. It can't be that difficult given that businesses have to disclose sales and purchases to the EU on VAT returns. I'm sure there is lots of data available that could be used. The Tories will no doubt spin it to make it look like a success and blame every crisis on Putin but I think the public would be interested in seeing some key stats so they can make their own minds up.
 
I realise it won't happen but I would really like to see stats produced annually (by the ONS or some independent body) that measure how successful Brexit has been. It can't be that difficult given that businesses have to disclose sales and purchases to the EU on VAT returns. I'm sure there is lots of data available that could be used. The Tories will no doubt spin it to make it look like a success and blame every crisis on Putin but I think the public would be interested in seeing some key stats so they can make their own minds up.
I'm sure someone will do it and the tories will say this is fake news.

The imf, world bank, and other sources publish so much economic data such a simple study would be a walk in the park. Tories would cry outside factors even though they were controlled for.
 
If he does it simply must be a proportional representation body and not a duplicate of the Commons. Also a lot of the rules about the relationship between the 2 houses would need revising. The Commons is able to override the Lords because of the claim of a mandate due to being the elected body. If the lords replacement is elected, that argument ceases to make any sense, as does any argument arguing for supremacy of the Commons.

In terms of overall vote count, the UK has voted for left wing parties over right wing for the last 2 decades. That does not translate to the seats. With a PR 2nd chamber, hopefully it would put a blocker on the trend of batshit idiotic right wing ideologues pushing through stupid, knee jerk and illegal laws forcing the Tories to come back to a more rational position, ditching the populists and crazies like Johnson and Truss.
 
Would love to see a country do an "experts chamber". Have seats reserved for people with knowledge in different subjects.

That's been my proposal.
A single, but lengthy term, elected by members of professions from within their profession.
 
If he does it simply must be a proportional representation body and not a duplicate of the Commons. Also a lot of the rules about the relationship between the 2 houses would need revising. The Commons is able to override the Lords because of the claim of a mandate due to being the elected body. If the lords replacement is elected, that argument ceases to make any sense, as does any argument arguing for supremacy of the Commons.

In terms of overall vote count, the UK has voted for left wing parties over right wing for the last 2 decades. That does not translate to the seats. With a PR 2nd chamber, hopefully it would put a blocker on the trend of batshit idiotic right wing ideologues pushing through stupid, knee jerk and illegal laws forcing the Tories to come back to a more rational position, ditching the populists and crazies like Johnson and Truss.
I agree with most of what you said (the election part is long overdue) but the whole point of an upper chamber is to scrutinise and hold the HOC to account. A major problem with our and most parliamentary democracies is the executive branch sits and dominates the lower house.

No HOC is going to vote for a chamber whose authority is going to be stepped on and avoid deadlock like what happens in US when Congress don't agree.

Although Starmer says he will abolish it - what role it will play and powers (limited) to compliment HOC. And that boils down to proper scrutiny of legislation and hence I agree with Die Mole's "professional expertise" chamber. If you have a PR system for upper chamber it'll most likely suit a list system IMO.

Still, the larger question in all this is really the reform of the HOC which is the big turkey in the room.
 
Last edited:
As we're talking about overhauls - I have my ideas; though absolutely not fully thought through...
I'd Federalise England into 4 regions, with their own devolved parliaments, in Wessex (Bristol / Winchester), Mercia + E.Anglia (Birmingham / Tamworth), Northumbria (Manchester / Durham) and London (bound by M25).
Those 4 plus the 3 Celtic parliaments all to have the same powers as each other (notably more than Hollyrood currently has).
NZ-style compromise of constituent and PR voting for the devolved parliaments.
Those devolved parliaments nominate from within themselves (proportionately) to Westminster and a smaller, national HoC; government explicitly not made up from 1 party.
Revamp the HoL to be the elite / sinecure for the highest representatives of their trade - to serve 1 lengthy term. HoL acts as advisors, as well as check and balance on the government of the day. For tradition's sake, I'm happy enough to call them all Lords and Ladies (and to keep the ***le after their term is up - but no longer sit there, and not to hand it down to their kids). So yes, HoL will still have the odd politician, bishop and celebrity, but an equal number of top barristers, accountants, generals, teachers and medics etc.
The explicit purpose of the HoL would be their collection of expertise covering every field, and they should mostly be there to advise the HoC; and only to shoot down unconstitutional* legislation.
*Yes, I'd have a written constitution; explicitly to be revised every 100 years or so; and explicitly requiring national referenda on any changes - dealt with much more like the Good Friday Agreement, than the Brexit "debate".
 
Laughable that anyone wants to make out GB News isn't just British Fox news. The presentation, the bias, the complete disregard for any sense of impartiality, the "personality" based broadcasting and even the petty name calling, it's just a Fox clone and every bit as awful.
 
Last edited:
The head of the CBI was saying that growth is only possible by filling job vacancies with migrant workers as Brits can't/won't fill them. The Govt are essentially blocking this as it's not in the spirit of Brexit. If that's not economic self harm then I don't know what is.

I voted for growth at the general election and why should that get trumped by a bunch of extreme nationalists who voted for Brexit just because they don't want any foreigners coming to the UK? It now seems that a vote for Brexit was an anti growth vote. Madness.
 
Last edited:
I think the reality is though for the Conservatives is that if they went back on Brexit now it would be political suicide. They have already lost huge amounts of support across the country and the remaining support is almost entirely older, white, nationalist Brexiteers. If they ditched Brexit, who would they have left?

I understand why Starmer won't touch it yet, he's trying to win a majority and that means taking seats of the Conservatives. Labour are less likely to do that by saying they'd ditch Brexit. However, they may then miss out on those who would like to see Brexit reversed, so we'll see if it works.
 

Latest posts

Top