Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
Forums
Other Stuff
The Clubhouse Bar
New Prime Minister
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Prestwick" data-source="post: 125321"><p>Its because of the half-arsed way in which the constitutional settlement was implemented.</p><p></p><p>The original plan was:</p><p></p><p>1. Scotland to have its own Parliament</p><p>2. Wales to have an Assembly</p><p>3. Northern Ireland to have an Assembly which is like a Parliament.</p><p>4. England to be divided up into regions (which cunningly follow the same boundaries as the European Parliament constituencies in the UK) with each to have its own Assembly.</p><p>5. Most cities and district towns to have their own elected mayors and authorities.</p><p></p><p>Steps four and five were a complete disaster because the people of England didn't want to be divvied up and divided and wanted an English Parliament. Also they didn't like the idea of Mayors either so in referendums for both ideas, both were rejected wholeheartedly.</p><p></p><p>This meant that the final stage of reform (that of Parliament) was put on hold. permanently. Although this is actually a big of a god send as if you thought having a fully elected House of Commons packed full of luvvies was bad enough, think of the chaos that would happen is the Lords (who, ironically have been the most sane lawmakers in this land) were forced to be re badged as a "Senate" and made to swallow the bitter pill of democratisation. I appreciate that somehow making the Lords all electable is a noble goal, but with respect to Canada and Australia, simply bending over and wrecking one of the oldest upper chambers in the world by slapping on a "Senate" badge and cutting what power it has left to the bone is sheer cultural vandalism.</p><p></p><p>Now, I am a pragmatic Unionist, not an <em>Ulster</em> Unionist (no, I don't believe in rounding up Catholics and burning them) but a <em>British</em> Unionist. I understand that in order to save the Union, you need to modify it somewhat, you need to compromise in order to get everyone on board. Love it or hate it, we are all in this together and the more we squabble and bicker about who pays the most tax or who owns the dwindling oil supplies, our rivals in Europe, America and the Far East steal yet another days march on us. </p><p></p><p>Thus, the best compromise is to continue on with creating a federal Britain with each nation of the Union having a Parliament with a Westminster Parliament kept in line with strict rules on who can vote on what, where and when.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Prestwick, post: 125321"] Its because of the half-arsed way in which the constitutional settlement was implemented. The original plan was: 1. Scotland to have its own Parliament 2. Wales to have an Assembly 3. Northern Ireland to have an Assembly which is like a Parliament. 4. England to be divided up into regions (which cunningly follow the same boundaries as the European Parliament constituencies in the UK) with each to have its own Assembly. 5. Most cities and district towns to have their own elected mayors and authorities. Steps four and five were a complete disaster because the people of England didn't want to be divvied up and divided and wanted an English Parliament. Also they didn't like the idea of Mayors either so in referendums for both ideas, both were rejected wholeheartedly. This meant that the final stage of reform (that of Parliament) was put on hold. permanently. Although this is actually a big of a god send as if you thought having a fully elected House of Commons packed full of luvvies was bad enough, think of the chaos that would happen is the Lords (who, ironically have been the most sane lawmakers in this land) were forced to be re badged as a "Senate" and made to swallow the bitter pill of democratisation. I appreciate that somehow making the Lords all electable is a noble goal, but with respect to Canada and Australia, simply bending over and wrecking one of the oldest upper chambers in the world by slapping on a "Senate" badge and cutting what power it has left to the bone is sheer cultural vandalism. Now, I am a pragmatic Unionist, not an [i]Ulster[/i] Unionist (no, I don't believe in rounding up Catholics and burning them) but a [i]British[/i] Unionist. I understand that in order to save the Union, you need to modify it somewhat, you need to compromise in order to get everyone on board. Love it or hate it, we are all in this together and the more we squabble and bicker about who pays the most tax or who owns the dwindling oil supplies, our rivals in Europe, America and the Far East steal yet another days march on us. Thus, the best compromise is to continue on with creating a federal Britain with each nation of the Union having a Parliament with a Westminster Parliament kept in line with strict rules on who can vote on what, where and when. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Other Stuff
The Clubhouse Bar
New Prime Minister
Top