Off Topic UK / EU Future

It did nothing of the sort. MPs simply voted to validate the referendum. It showed a respect for our democracy and little else. Many MPs who supported it did so against their better judgement in order to not appear "undemocratic" as the press would have labelled them preceding a witch-hunt. The size of the majority simply reflected the number of Tory and Labour MPs who obeyed their party whip - if you believe otherwise good luck to you. Parliament was emasculated for those votes as well you know. A free vote would have produced a very different result - rejecting brexit totally.

 

There is no economic exploitation so I deny everything you say. Democracy enable the likes of you and me to cast a ballot that carries equal weight with Lord Snooty and Comrade Joe.
I have just had a very strong gin and tonic courtesy of my daughter on father's day and am in no mood to debate your extreme views tonight.

 

The vehicle used to determine the UK's future with the EU can only described as democratic. The elected members of parliament chosen by the electorate had a free vote after months of lively debate. They chose to let the people decide using a referendum. There was ample opportunity for all to lobby their representative. I cannot think of a more democratic system to decide such an important issue.

 

Correct.

 

If you choose to describe my views as extreme then that is your concern - I think that there are many others who, for one reason or another, would cast doubt on Britain's democratic credentials - and if you think one day of token democracy in 4 years is enough to satisfy describing a whole society in that way then I will leave you to your illusion - enjoy your gin.

 

Cologne - you know I enjoy debating with you but surely even you would not describe your views as remotely middle of the road. Extreme does not mean bad (necessarily). I believe we live in a full democracy day by day - where does your 1 day of token democracy in 4 years emanate from - apart from some extreme viewpoint.
My gin was excellent - an Artisan product - Sir Robin of Locksley (from my Nottingham based daughter )

 

Because you only vote from a limited range of possibilities once every 4 years - I would have thought that was obvious. The source of that range of possibilities also does not originate amongst the populous but rather from the 1% or so of party members in the UK. Other people may come up with other things such as the lack of PR. or the apparant lack of a real separation of the powers of church, crown and the state, or even the role of the media at election times, or perhaps the role of sponsorship at UK. elections (who gives out the most normally wins), or possibly the lack of real information (abuse of data protection) - how many people in the UK. know about the private priviliges of the City of London (own mayor, own taxes, own laws, own police) ? The list could go on and on. Maybe even the lack of a real constitution between people and the state. Things like Royal Prerogatives etc. You do not have to be a radical to pick up on things like this and say 'hold on, surely democracy means something different from this'. Maybe my views on democracy are a minority in the UK. but the numbers concerned about the other things on my list is less so.

 

While tucking in to my light meal, washed down with a cheap Merlot, I was wondering if our democracy has been corrupted, or is it a lack of understanding just what it is and is not. Strangely enough a number of things that Cologne mention also went through my mind. If you contribute enough to a party, that will give you access to ministers. Give enough and you can actually sit down to a meal with the PM. It seems that there is a set scale of donations to determine how high up the chain you can go. Or give enough financial support from your trades union and you can even help to set party policy.
Moving on to individual MPs and it would seem that the lure of a government post described by a whip can sway a vote. Read a few political diaries and you will see it goes on with all parties. MPs are not delegates, and I get angry when I see the press calling them out as traitors because they see things differently. They are elected to serve the country, then their constituency, then their party in that order. A good example of how one sticks to her principles is the member for Broxtowe, Despite going against the current government on the Brexit issue, despite having an area where people voted to leave the EU by a large margin, she told them she would not support their wishes as she believed it against the good of the country. So we had a general election, and her share of the vote increased in a marginal seat. Maybe we need more members with a mind of their own rather than a bunch of sheep who are herded into the right lobby .
So has the system been corrupted? Probably, as it has been in other countries.

 

The member for Broxtowe is in trouble with her constituency members for going against those that voted locally and nationally, she is an oddball that has ignored others views. Thankfully she is amongst a very small minority. If the MP's priority is to serve the nation then most respect their own collective decision to be led by the referendum result.

 

Leo I disagree with your assertion of the MPs motives. I'm sure their overriding thought was to respect the decision they made to follow the original method of using a referendum. How could they abdicate decision making then intervene if the result was not to their liking? Not respecting the result would have led to a massive loss of confidence in our democratic system. I'm not surprised they would not want to appear 'undemocratic'.

 

Incorrect. A democratic process, certainly. An unmitigated disaster which renders the nation a laughing stock. Really need Parliament to save us from ourselves, irony of ironies. All this crap to save the Tory party. It's a shambles and a national disgrace.

 

Yes the whole thing is a badly thought shambles which yes makes us really a laughing stock and will further marginalise our influence with our neighbours..

And actually i dont think it is democracy as i would consider it to be....
A referendum with no basis in the constitution, as we dont have one!, put into operation because of a Tory power struggle. with no proper consideration prior as to its boundaries, legality etc.... just ridiculous... and British citizens overseas not being allowed to vote .

Then 'validated' by a parliament paralysed by a result which splits the country and the major parties right down the middle.

Even after a general election which some how was supposed to legitimize the Govt... the country is more swift than ever....

It shows the complete mess our democratic system operates in...... and if any individual in either chamber has a different opinion than that of the Brexiteering minority in Parliament they are castigated and rebuked...

If all this is democracy , then it needs to be changed at the roots

 

There is more chance of Watford winning the European Cup than any changes to the UK political system. It is here to stay.

 

Indeed. I was merely pointing out that what has been held as a democratic process has yielded an undemocratic outcome.

 

Don't worry, when we leave the EU the democratic process would have been completed.

 

Are we not saying the same? The MPs felt bound to respect the referendum whatever their personal views. As it should be.

 

Whilst it seems (almost) obvious what those voting Brexit wanted to achieve,and this has been articulated clearly on this forum, nowhere in the last 2 years have I seen ANY description of the benefits that the people of the UK will get from these achievements. Could someone enlighten me please? So far the negotiations have not once mentioned what benefits leaving will bring us-and no professional body has suggested any benefits either yet. For this reason alone, it seems ludicrous not to have the chance , through Parliament or referendum,(however undermining of parliamentary authority a referendum is) for a (democratic) decision to be taken on the final outcome of the negotiations.
By way of comparison, suppose when Chamberlain returned from Munich we had a referendum which voted not to declare war on Germany. Did that mean that 12 months later the government or parliament would have been prevented from declaring war because the referendum said we shouldn’t? What would it take to overturn the result-German tanks in Whitehall ?

 

1) Depends what you consider democracy to be. In this country we operate a representative democracy which entitles people to stand for Parliament and to vote whoever they are subject to age 18. There is nothing in that about what it produces but that is how it is
2) We have an unwritten constitution based on legal precedents and previous laws. The referendum was held according to that. You can state you own thoughts as to why the referendum was called and millions may agree or disagree - that is called democracy and free speech too.
3) Brexit is being enacted by Parliament not validated, a process that is simply legally necessary. The splits were obviously there - the result simply showed them.
4) The government was already legitimised so the GE was not called for that purpose. It was called to enable TM to carry out the brexit she wanted with minimum opposition - and it failed spectacularly.
5) Our Parliament is operating as it has for centuries - with agreements and disagreements and conflicts ongoing as part of the natural process. If you do not like this "mess" you, alongside every other citizen, are entitled to campaign for change.
6) It is of course democracy and if you do not like it then campaign for change.

 

With an undemocratic outcome. One that's already seeing us all worse off. One that's given undue credence to the uglier side of human nature. One that threatens peace in Ulster. One that has already cost thousands of jobs. One that will quite probably cost tens of thousands more. One that removes our influence from within the scientific community. One that may yet dissolve the Union.

But blue passports!