Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I just noticed that in the bill which was handed by Facebook tothe conservative party for applying likes to articles for them they used a different name to the one they label themselves as - on the invoice they are not the "conservative party" they are actually the "conservative and unionist party"

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-31141547

 SirDonlad wrote:
I just noticed that in the bill which was handed by Facebook tothe conservative party for applying likes to articles for them they used a different name to the one they label themselves as - on the invoice they are not the "conservative party" they are actually the "conservative and unionist party"

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-31141547

Yes, they've been called that since 1912.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:
Except it is not just for white europeans, it is for all europeans.

You can't blame the EU for the actions of an idiotic Tory government. Remember, this is the same Tory government which wants to immediately send foreign university graduates home after they graduate, instead of giving them time to find a job in our country so they can contribute to our economy because of course we don't want highly educated, skilled people in our workforce. Their immigration ideas are absolutely awful, they will never be fair or make any sense.

What makes you think this Government will still exist in its current form after the Referendum? A Leave vote will end Cameron and Osborne.

And they'll be replaced with who?

People who are just as useless and unqualified.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:
Except it is not just for white europeans, it is for all europeans.

You can't blame the EU for the actions of an idiotic Tory government. Remember, this is the same Tory government which wants to immediately send foreign university graduates home after they graduate, instead of giving them time to find a job in our country so they can contribute to our economy because of course we don't want highly educated, skilled people in our workforce. Their immigration ideas are absolutely awful, they will never be fair or make any sense.

What makes you think this Government will still exist in its current form after the Referendum? A Leave vote will end Cameron and Osborne.

And they'll be replaced with who?

People who are just as useless and unqualified.

Right, but they'll be useless and unqualified people that we, the British electorate, chose. Can you say the same about Jean Claude Juncker, or the other Presidents of the EU?

Well, since we elect MEPs, yes.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:
Except it is not just for white europeans, it is for all europeans.

You can't blame the EU for the actions of an idiotic Tory government. Remember, this is the same Tory government which wants to immediately send foreign university graduates home after they graduate, instead of giving them time to find a job in our country so they can contribute to our economy because of course we don't want highly educated, skilled people in our workforce. Their immigration ideas are absolutely awful, they will never be fair or make any sense.

What makes you think this Government will still exist in its current form after the Referendum? A Leave vote will end Cameron and Osborne.

And they'll be replaced with who?

People who are just as useless and unqualified.

Eh. For every five governments or so, you tend to find one is an unmitigated disaster, one is effective and generally turns out to have been good for the country, and three are placeholders. The last effective one was probably Thatcher (and I'd argue she was the economic shot in the arm the country needed, despite the vast suffering it caused), and Broon was the disaster. By that logic, we're due a decent one in the next round or two.

Without wanting to get into the argument of ‘which is more democratic in general’ the fact is the EU is less democratic to the people of the UK.

If we don’t like Cameron we vote out all the conservative MPs and get a new leader, if we don’t like Junker what do we do? Even if we voted out all the MEPs (which would be unfair really as most voted against Junker in the first place) we’d still be stuck with him because other countries like him.

Is the EU less democratic that the UK? Maybe, there are arguments both ways. Is the EU less democratically accountable to the UK than the UK parliament? Definitely and I fail to see how you can argue it isn’t.

 Graphite wrote:
Well, since we elect MEPs, yes.

MEP's who are toothless and subordinate to the unelected Presidents. That is not good enough.

 Goliath wrote:

 SirDonlad wrote:
I just noticed that in the bill which was handed by Facebook tothe conservative party for applying likes to articles for them they used a different name to the one they label themselves as - on the invoice they are not the "conservative party" they are actually the "conservative and unionist party"

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-31141547

Yes, they've been called that since 1912.

I've never heared them called that or even refer to themselves as that in their own pamphlets - i thought that was odd and kinda funny given the new 'union' they're getting into.

But good for you that you know about that already. have a biscuit.

 SirDonlad wrote:

 Goliath wrote:

 SirDonlad wrote:
I just noticed that in the bill which was handed by Facebook tothe conservative party for applying likes to articles for them they used a different name to the one they label themselves as - on the invoice they are not the "conservative party" they are actually the "conservative and unionist party"

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-31141547

Yes, they've been called that since 1912.

I've never heared them called that or even refer to themselves as that in their own pamphlets - i thought that was odd and kinda funny given the new 'union' they're getting into.

But good for you that you know about that already. have a biscuit.

If you guys let your conservatives unionize over a century ago it's no wonder that your politics are crazy.

Prestor Jon wrote:

 SirDonlad wrote:

 Goliath wrote:

 SirDonlad wrote:
I just noticed that in the bill which was handed by Facebook tothe conservative party for applying likes to articles for them they used a different name to the one they label themselves as - on the invoice they are not the "conservative party" they are actually the "conservative and unionist party"

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-31141547

Yes, they've been called that since 1912.

I've never heared them called that or even refer to themselves as that in their own pamphlets - i thought that was odd and kinda funny given the new 'union' they're getting into.

But good for you that you know about that already. have a biscuit.

If you guys let your conservatives unionize over a century ago it's no wonder that your politics are crazy.

I'll have you know that naval hosepipe battle in front of Parliament is a perfectly respectable way to settle political differences.

... Be the one time people wanted a strike action to carry on ad infinitum

Stranger83 wrote:
Without wanting to get into the argument of ‘which is more democratic in general’ the fact is the EU is less democratic to the people of the UK.

If we don’t like Cameron we vote out all the conservative MPs and get a new leader, if we don’t like Junker what do we do? Even if we voted out all the MEPs (which would be unfair really as most voted against Junker in the first place) we’d still be stuck with him because other countries like him.

Is the EU less democratic that the UK? Maybe, there are arguments both ways. Is the EU less democratically accountable to the UK than the UK parliament? Definitely and I fail to see how you can argue it isn’t.

I'm originally from Belfast. None of the major UK parties even stand there, I find the arguments "If we don't like the current government, we can vote it out and get a new one!" and "Oh no, a much bigger group of politicians who we have no say over are in charge of us" peculiar on a variety of levels. They make me chuckle.

 Ketara wrote:
I'll have you know that naval hosepipe battle in front of Parliament is a perfectly respectable way to settle political differences.

THIS.

As a model for UK politics post-brexit i think it's bordering on fautless - i'd run as an MP if i knew i could settle the differences between points with a naval battle with hoses!!

 Graphite wrote:

Stranger83 wrote:
Without wanting to get into the argument of ‘which is more democratic in general’ the fact is the EU is less democratic to the people of the UK.

If we don’t like Cameron we vote out all the conservative MPs and get a new leader, if we don’t like Junker what do we do? Even if we voted out all the MEPs (which would be unfair really as most voted against Junker in the first place) we’d still be stuck with him because other countries like him.

Is the EU less democratic that the UK? Maybe, there are arguments both ways. Is the EU less democratically accountable to the UK than the UK parliament? Definitely and I fail to see how you can argue it isn’t.

I'm originally from Belfast. None of the major UK parties even stand there, I find the arguments "If we don't like the current government, we can vote it out and get a new one!" and "Oh no, a much bigger group of politicians who we have no say over are in charge of us" peculiar on a variety of levels. They make me chuckle.

You're right Northern Ireland gets out voted all the time - as does Scotland and Wales.

This is why they have spent years arguing for devolution and in Scotlands case even had a referendum trying to get out of the UK.

The UK in response has been gradually handing powers to the devolved parliaments (you can argue that these are the wrong powers or they are not going fast enough but it is happening). But your post seems to imply you would like more power – which is fair enough, I would too.

I find it odd however that given that you are used to a system that meant you are outvoted all the time, and having fought for years for limited say over who governs you, that you would vote for a system that removes all of that and gives it to someone even further removed from yourself. It’s a kind of logic I just don’t understand. Particularly when this entity is trying to take more powers for itself – not less.

We could turn the whole thing into a national tourist attraction. Set up water cannons on the bridges along the Thames, so bystanders can join in and hose the MP's battling own below on the Thames, just like those children's water cannon you get in theme parks along the routes of water rides.

BREAKING NEWS:

A Labour MP has been shot and stabbed

There might be a link to an extreme right-wing group, but it's too early to tell.

Thoughts and prayers with the MP and her family. Let's hope she makes it...

Yes. A fething despicable act no matter who was responsible.

Power should be devolved downwards, not sucked upwards, as is the case with the EU.

Right now, there are four layers of government (three if you live in England); local councils, local assemblies, Westminster, and the EU...parliament I guess I'll call it. And the one at the top, the EU, wants to suck all the power away from the lower three.

If we left the EU, that would remove a whole layer of government, which is always a good thing in my opinion.

In an ideal world (in my opinion), the UK would have a separate assembly for Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and England, with local councils beneath them, and Westminster at the top as the one for the UK as a whole. The councils deal with local issues, the assemblies deal with regional issues (and by that I mean police, prisons, schools etc) whilst Westminster deals with foreign policy, the currency, defense etc.

And Englands assembly would be somewhere in the north, to give somewhere else besides London a chance.

Unfortunately she didn't make it.


Very very sad, and extremely brutal by the sounds of it.

 Future War Cultist wrote:
Power should be devolved downwards, not sucked upwards, as is the case with the EU.

Right now, there are four layers of government (three if you live in England); local councils, local assemblies, Westminster, and the EU...parliament I guess I'll call it. And the one at the top, the EU, wants to suck all the power away from the lower three.

If we left the EU, that would remove a whole layer of government, which is always a good thing in my opinion.

In an ideal world (in my opinion), the UK would have a separate assembly for Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and England, with local councils beneath them, and Westminster at the top as the one for the UK as a whole. The councils deal with local issues, the assemblies deal with regional issues (and by that I mean police, prisons, schools etc) whilst Westminster deals with foreign policy, the currency, defense etc.

And Englands assembly would be somewhere in the north, to give somewhere else besides London a chance.

York perhaps?

Didn't we have some sort of vote or referendum on establishing a Northern England assembly? As I recall, it would have treated the North as a separate region from the south of England. I was too young to vote at the time, but I would have opposed it. I don't like the idea of splitting up England into different regional assemblies. However, I might support a future referendum that proposes a seperate assembly for the whole of England.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Her death has just been confirmed.

Stranger83 wrote:


You're right Northern Ireland gets out voted all the time - as does Scotland and Wales.

This is why they have spent years arguing for devolution and in Scotlands case even had a referendum trying to ge in response has been gradually handing powers to the devolved parliaments (you can argue that these are the wrong powers or they are not going fast enough but it is happening). But your post seems to imply you would like more power – which is fair enough, I would too.

I find it odd however that given that you are used to a system that meant you are outvoted all the time, and having fought for years for limited say over who governs you, that you would vote for a system that removes all of that and gives it to someone even further removed from yourself. It’s a kind of logic I just don’t understand. Particularly when this entity is trying to take more powers for itself – not less.

It's more that I find it amusing that the UK find that it's OK to ignore bits on the country, but as soon as it happens to the UK itself it's a hideous travesty against democracy.

But we're not ignoring them. They demanded devolution and they got it. Scotland demanded a referendum on independence, and they voted to stay.

My thoughts are with Jo Cox's family at this time. A horrific tragedy.

@ Shadow Captain Edithae

Yes, that idea was for regional assemblies, which would have effectively divided England up into less than one complete country. My idea would keep England as one unified country.

Also, in my system, because of the changed nature of the Westminster government, I would make it so that voters do directly elect the Prime Minister.

@ Graphite

You have a point there, which is why I would give the devolved governments even more powers. The power to raise taxes to spend on matters that fall under their jurisdiction, like the police, local NHS, schools, DVLA etc. Make it so that the UK is literally four different countries who share the one currency, military and foreign policy. A proper union to show up the EU.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
But we're not ignoring them. They demanded devolution and they got it. Scotland demanded a referendum on independence, and they voted to stay.

Except that doesn't help parts of England which get ignored so more money can be thrown at London and the South.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
But we're not ignoring them. They demanded devolution and they got it. Scotland demanded a referendum on independence, and they voted to stay.

Except that doesn't help parts of England which get ignored so more money can be thrown at London and the South.

We weren't talking about North England, we were talking about Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. Don't move the goalposts.

 Future War Cultist wrote:
Yes, that idea was for regional assemblies, which would have effectively divided England up into less than one complete country. My idea would keep England as one unified country.

Sooo... the special snowflakes in Wales, NI and Scotland all get local control of things, but England is all just lumped in together despite having a population many multiple times the size of the others put together, with massive differences in population makeup, geography, etc?

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
But we're not ignoring them. They demanded devolution and they got it. Scotland demanded a referendum on independence, and they voted to stay.

Except that doesn't help parts of England which get ignored so more money can be thrown at London and the South.

We weren't talking about North England, we were talking about Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. Don't move the goalposts.

Actually, you responded to someone who said parts of the UK. The North of England is still part of the UK. And it isn't really moving the goalposts to point out that representation in the UK government is not very equally weighted in a discussion where people are complaining that the UK doesn't get enough representation in the EU.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
But we're not ignoring them. They demanded devolution and they got it. Scotland demanded a referendum on independence, and they voted to stay.

This would be the vote where it was said over and over again how if Scotland left they'd not be in the EU and then they'd be in trouble right ?

.....


Of course that's opposed to this vote where the leader of the SNP is telling everyone how much stronger we/countries are when we all stick together....

..Politics eh ?

 SilverMK2 wrote:

 Future War Cultist wrote:
Yes, that idea was for regional assemblies, which would have effectively divided England up into less than one complete country. My idea would keep England as one unified country.

Sooo... the special snowflakes in Wales, NI and Scotland all get local control of things, but England is all just lumped in together despite having a population many multiple times the size of the others put together, with massive differences in population makeup, geography, etc?

What? No. The idea was to mollify Nationalists with increased devolution to stave off the threat of secession. There is no Nationalistic desire for the North of England to break away from the rest of England, so why do we need a seperate assembly?

And you're overlooking the fact that we had a referendum on a Northern assembly and the North East overwhelmingly voted against it (well, the 50% who could be bothered to vote). Are you saying we should have a Northern England assembly whether we want one or not?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 reds8n wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
But we're not ignoring them. They demanded devolution and they got it. Scotland demanded a referendum on independence, and they voted to stay.

This would be the vote where it was said over and over again how if Scotland left they'd not be in the EU and then they'd be in trouble right ?

.....


Of course that's opposed to this vote where the leader of the SNP is telling everyone how much stronger we/countries are when we all stick together....

..Politics eh ?

I just don't think Salmond likes England very much. He wants a Union with the rest of Europe, but not England. Clearly he didn't want actual independence for Scotland, he just wanted independence from England.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:
Actually, you responded to someone who said parts of the UK. The North of England is still part of the UK. And it isn't really moving the goalposts to point out that representation in the UK government is not very equally weighted in a discussion where people are complaining that the UK doesn't get enough representation in the EU.

No I didn't. Stranger83 did not specify England, neither did Graphite and neither did I. The current chain of discussion was about the Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish Devolution, not the rejected English devloution. You're conflating two separate discussions.

We had a referendum on English devolution, and English voters rejected it. I don't understand why you're complaining - do you think we should disregard the result of that referendum and have English devolution anyway?