Off Topic Political Debate

What matters is policies devised by politicians that actually work for the general benefit of the whole of society.

All posters on this forum speak from their own personal political position including you. There will always be disagreement on views, quite naturally.
Would you like to abolish parliament and replace with a 'big brother' type show?

 

I am interested in political philosophy for want of a better concept..... not the to's and fro's of a dualistic parliamentary system which is quite frankly outdated.... and divisive

if we were to design one today it would not look the present one... so why on earth do we abide by it? Anyone must surely see that?

 

Our parliamentary system remains because the majority do not want to change it. It may have its roots in the past but it is not outdated, it works well. It certainly will not change in our lifetimes. You cannot have politics without divergent views, it is part of democracy.

 

No - policies should come from the people ! How can politicians actually work for the benefit of the whole of society when they themselves only come from a small privileged part of that society. If you doubt that then look at how our parliament in Westminster is put together. Nearly all of our parliament (from all parties) are graduates of Oxbridge - and the majority came from private schools. All of our Prime Ministers have been from Oxbridge, and all but one were at private elite schools. How can an organization which is so 'remote' from the population work for the benefit of the whole of society ?

 

There was an interesting programme on UK TV this week about the demise of the grammar schools. It did suggest that rather than bring standards up for those who didn't go to one, it took the standard of those who went to one down. Although the system that existed at the time was unfair, with grammar schools getting better funding, it was the MPs who had done well out of the system who voted to change it. It showed that the parents who wished to have their children continue with the higher standard of education had little choice but to pay for it. As usual it came down to how do the people get what they want out of limited resources.

 

'All of our Prime Ministers have been from Oxbridge'

Not true, John Major for one did not.

Please supply evidence to back up your claims regarding MPs being graduates of Oxbridge and private schools.

I agree MPs should be from a wider social background with hopefully real life experiences behind them, just like my local Tory MP, Mike Penning who was in the forces, then a fireman now a government minister.

Perhaps those people whinging about MP's salaries should reflect that by keeping their remuneration relatively low it may exclude poorer applicants from taking up the positions.

We currently have politicians that go from uni to being 'special political advisers' (tea boys and girls) then onto the MP selection lists. They have zero life experience.

In my opinion we need more quality MPs such as the likes of Frank Field and David Davis.

 

No sooner said than done. I admit to partly forgetting about John Major - but, as they say, it is the exception which proves the rule. Altogether in the new parliament there are 20 Etonians (number increasing) - 10% of all MPs come from only 12 fee paying Schools and altogether 35% come from fee paying schools (number increasing - and compared to 7% of the population as a whole). The figure for Conservatives is 54%, Lib Dems 40% and only 15% of Labour MPs went to fee paying Schools. 90% of all MPs are University graduates with 30% coming from Oxford or Cambridge. Compare these figures to the population as a whole and you will find that they are highly unrepresentative of the country as a whole - almost a private club, particularly when it comes to the composition of the cabinet. If you add to this the fact that only 1% of the entire population of the UK. are even members of a political party then the entire political system of the UK has a problem of legitimacy.

 

Your own figures do not back up your statements.

'Nearly all of our parliament are from Oxbridge'- no its 30%
'The majority come from private schools' - err no its 35%

Do you have a tendency to exaggerate or comment before you research the facts?

You have been advised numerous times, by several posters, that party political membership in the UK is not a representative guide of any substance.

 

Who the hell do you think you are with your tone here ! Posts like this which have no other motive than trying to belittle other people do not belong here in a political discussion. You know as well as I do that the numbers of people who are actually members of political parties is an important indicator as to active involvement in politics - otherwise, unless people are members of pressure groups etc. then their relationship to politics is only passive. A population which only votes once every 5 years, yet plays no part in actually forming policies or ideas is not active in any real sense.

 

2015 general election.

The Tories won with 11,334,576 votes. Membership of the tory party was 134,000.

It is only the election votes that matter, party membership is totally meaningless but I can see why you are clutching desperately at straws.!!

 

It's like having a debate with a brick wall here ! I fully appreciate that your side of the political spectrum profits immensely from the apolitical nature of the English people and so you would have no wish to change it, or even see it as problematic.

 

Yes, I and the majority of the UK have no wish to change the political system or see it as a problem.

The only likely parliamentary changes foreseeable will be the upcoming electoral boundary changes and the loss of Scottish MPs, both of these will strengthen 'my political spectrum'.

 

When you say that 'the majority do not see it as a problem`are you not forgetting the 75% of the electorate who either did not vote or voted for other parties yet who are, nonetheless, condemned to having to live with a Conservative majority - who are you to be taking it upon yourself to say what the majority of the UK. thinks ?

 

The majority of the public in the UK do not wish to change our voting system. Under the preferred system the Conservatives had most votes, they will govern for 5 years, maybe much longer.

The recent alternative vote referendum clearly rejected any change whatsoever, people are simply not interested in moving to a different system.

 

The alternative vote referendum was a sham in as much as what was offered as an option was too complicated and was not proportional representation.

 

Whatever, the UK, like the great lady, are not for turning.

 

Heaven forbid for the75% of us if certain posters on this site are representative of the so called 'majority'

 

I very much hope this man is wrong...

Views?

 

I think that the situation has moved on a bit since that interview. Ed Balls was still hoping to be in power by now. The Greek government looks as though they want the best deal they can get for their people, rightly, but it shows up how no country can fly in the face of world economic policies, especially when you are in such a weak position.

 

Worrying comment on it about savings..... I do hope he is wrong...I put my little stash in the stock market as the return on more secure places was so paltry....