Off Topic Political Debate

Thatcher was a rabid lunatic. I would've rather danced with him.

 

An impressive lady. The trouble with Scottish separation is we would all be deprived of someone like this as a serious PM candidate.

 

Thanks to EVEL that will never happen anyway.

 

Knievel?

 

F'kin evel

 

Maggie was the impressive lady, I was surprised she only made 16th in the greatest ever Briton list but her legacy strongly lives on.

One of her best achievements was stopping the anarchy caused by Kremlin sponsored union barons. We passed the 'sick man of Europe' tag onto others. Germany have had the least strikers per thousand employees between 2009-2013 (12), UK (24), France (171) Cyprus (514). None of her labour relations reforms have been watered down since, if anything they have been strengthened.

Junior doctors have quietly given up their future strike threats and vow to follow the advice of their own union leaders and negotiate their gripe re w/e working sensibly. There is just not the support from the public for industrial action. Even in France the public's attitude against industrial action has changed significantly since I lived there in the early 2000's.

 

The reason why Germany has had less strikes than other countries since the war is because they have had less of a class based society than Britain. The previous 'owners' of industry had been blemished by their involvement with the Nazi regime and did not survive the war with any credit as such. That being the case the so called 'Stunde Null`' = Zero hour, was such that there was no inherent difference between workers and the new management (Germany replaced almost its complete managerial class after the war). The pre war class differences did not survive the war in the same way as in Britain.

 

Clever people these Tories - spouting off before doing basic research...

 

I don't think that the French have exactly lost their thirst for a battle. We saw it earlier in the year when people took to the streets to protest about Hollande trying to use ancient laws to bypass parliament. All very similar to what May has been trying to do, but the people of the UK do not stand up to the politicians in the same way.

 

The reason the french took to the streets was not the apparatus of change but the fact the government were trying to amend the ridicules employment laws which have down so much damage to the French economy. I recently read that up to 76% of the French population objected to these very modest changes which is why I fear for the long term economic future of France.

Having excessively generous employment protection may seem a good idea to the majority that are likely to benefit but they are not considering the wealth creators who will chose the most business friendly locations. Was it just coincidence that France's economic decline coincided with the introduction of the 35 hour week?

 

You are constantly telling us that the government should follow the will of the people and create major change, even if it is only a marginal decision, then tell us 76% were rightly ignored because of minor changes to the law. If all the MPs acted as representatives of the people, and not as delegates that some think they are, then we know that it would not have happened that the government would be dragged through the courts.

 

Parliament chose overwhelmingly to give the British people the decision over the EU in the form of a referendum. Respect of the result is vital to retain authority of parliament. The UK governments's view is challenged by groups not really interested in procedure but in blocking a result they simply do not like.

If the general French public cannot understand basic economics and believe their very generous and effective benefits will continue regardless they are in for disappointment. The far right in France is gaining popularity all the time with Le Pen's election odds reduced to 2/1 from 6/1 in the last few days.

 

There is a clear constitutional precedent that Parliament has to approve ..... I just think that just a Remainers are really twitchy about what May is planning to to do.... thus Brexiters are twitchy about what Parliament may do.

In any case Parliament has a right to discuss and approve the nature of Brexit. No PM has a carte blanche....... and they should not have.... This is what our 'great' parliamentary democracy is founded on

 

Quite right Yorkie. At the time of the debate about giving the referendum vote, MPs were told that it would be advisory, therefore it would be down to them to decide what to do once the country had given it's view. It is not good enough for a MP such as the current PM to get elected on the promise she gave in her constituency to stay in the EU, to see those electors agree for a second time with her, to then turn around and say she didn't mean it. Many other MPs are in the same situation with pro EU views that were known when they were elected, so just because others thought differently doesn't mean that they should be expected to keep quiet. If MPs simply followed popular views gathered on one day, then the whole system of government would fail.

 

I know! Cohen is dead! ****ing shock!

 

Completely wrong, The MP's voted in parliament to give the people the choice, NOT to then overrule the decision if they disliked the result. It was made very clear by both the remain and leave camps that a leave vote would result in leaving the single market. Fortunately the overwhelmingly number of MP's will respect the will of the people and will vote for enacting article 50, they might huff, puff and whinge but will ultimately follow the chosen democratic path.

 

I still think the terms democracy and democratic are used loosely and yet in contexts where the speaker expects their mere presence to prove or disprove the rightness of an action. The word does not mean government by referendum. It should cover: guarantee of human rights; separation of executive, legislative and judicial powers; freedom of opinion and speech; religious liberty; equal voting rights; good governance. A referendum may fail to deliver any of these things.

 

The referendum was empowered by months of discussion and scrutiny in both houses of parliament followed by overwhelming support of the MP's. It may have been legally labelled advisory but everyone understood and accepted, prior to the result, that the answer would be definitive. The attempts to hold up democracy may be annoying but will be insignificant in the long run.

Even if the government loses the appeal in the Supreme Court, it can introduce a simple bill to introduce article 50 without giving any scope for the remainers to cause any further delaying tactics.

It is in the interest of everybody to get on with Brexit a.s.a.p.

 

Maybe Gove was right when he said he didn't want, or expect Article 50 to be invoked before 2018.

 

Gove now has about as much influence as we all do. I'm sure our PM has reason to confirm it will still be activate by end March 2017.