BREXIT positives and negatives

1,355 posts in this topic

1 hour ago, murphaph said:

The small party gets a smaller say, typically. Ultimately the government has to govern for all, not just those that voted for them. In PR everyone is slightly unhappy. With FPTP half the people are really unhappy. 

As I said both sides are bad but FPTP is worse.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think PR is bad. I think it's correct and natural that a larger party with larger support gets most but not all of it's manifesto implemented and a smaller party gets some but not most of its manifesto implemented. 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The belief that PR leaves small parties holding the larger vote winners to ransom is understandable, but isn't reflected in practice. Over here the Chancellor won't be Green/FDP, nor will those parties block SPD's key policies. What they get is a seat at the table, and the chance to influence the agenda and introduce some of their own policies (which typically is broadly in proportion to the votes they received).

 

Even in the UK, small parties haven't been successful in holding larger coalition partners to ransom. Clegg didn't get to change austerity, or even get rid of university fees (one of his party's key pledges). More recently, when the Ulster Unionists looked to have scuppered May's Brexit deal Boris came back and sold them down the river anyway.

 

FPTP guarantees that a majority will always  be unhappy with the outcome (given that no post-war party has had over 50% of the vote).

Problems with FPTP in the UK are compounded by the constituency issues. Unless you live in a swing seat or vote for the winning party, your vote doesn't count.

PR is not only fairer, insofar as it more accurately represents the share of votes received, but also far more representative of the population as a whole, as far more votes count. 

 

 

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, murphaph said:

smaller party gets some but not most of its manifesto implemented.

But then what is with another party that got more votes than the minor party that is in the coalition and gets none of its manifesto implemented.

4 hours ago, dstanners said:

Clegg didn't get to change austerity, or even get rid of university fees (one of his party's key pledges).

From what I remember the only thing the Libs got out of that was that Clegg was I believe Deputy PM.I can´t remember them getting any of their policies introduced.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Keleth said:

 

From what I remember the only thing the Libs got out of that was that Clegg was I believe Deputy PM.I can´t remember them getting any of their policies introduced.

One thing they did do was to force the Tories to increase the personal Tax Allowance rather than give a tax cut to the highest tax payers.

 

I just found this on the internet, it's of course biased but it does give an idea of what the Lib Dems did.

 

https://www.markpack.org.uk/liberal-democrat-achievements-coalition-government/

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Keleth said:

From what I remember the only thing the Libs got out of that was that Clegg was I believe Deputy PM.I can´t remember them getting any of their policies introduced.

 

Looked it up, and although the Libdems got 23% of the vote to the Conservatives 36%, that only got them 57 seats to the Tories' 306. Based on the vote share the LibDems should have had a much greater influence, but again the voting system is the reason they were very much the junior partner.

 

If there had been PR in the UK for the last few decades its possible the LibDems would have been permanently in power - i.e. either Con-Lib or Lab-Lib coallitions. Is that good? Maybe.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, murphaph said:

They got a referendum on AV which the electorate really dropped the ball on and rejected in a low turnout

Yes, the Lib Dems bet the house on PR, insofar as they accepted the promise of a referendum on a rubbish form of PR in exchange for largely abandoning the rest of their manifesto and propping up austerity policies. 

However, I wouldn't say the electorate "dropped the ball". Instead, the electorate deliberately used the referendum as an opportunity to give Clegg a real kick for abandoning key parts of his manifesto and supporting the Tories.

This was most notably due to abandoning his promise on abolishing student fees. Cameron was too sly for Clegg by far: in making their first combined policy raising raising student fees, he completely undermined the Lib Dems. They still haven't recovered.

Not exactly an example of a minority party holding the larger partner ransom.

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Keleth said:

From what I remember the only thing the Libs got out of that was that Clegg was I believe Deputy PM.I can´t remember them getting any of their policies introduced.

 

Not only that but they were blamed for many of the unpopular policies that were implemented and lost most of their seats in the next general election, Same for the FDP in the German government coalition of 2009-2013. Getting a seat at the table can be a disaster for smaller parties!

FPTP is a straight forward form of election, you vote for the candidate not the party or its leader and the one that gets the most votes wins the seat! Please don't forget the UK has all those brexit voters who we are constantly reminded here are gormless idiots easily convinced by lies and throwaway premises, they need it to be simple! You would blow them away with 2nd and 3rd choices, though who knows with PR  the Raving Looney Party might get a seat at the table despite getting BA not a sausage.:lol:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, murphaph said:

Oh look, Jersey suddenly issues 162 fishing licences a day after the French threatened to squeeze the UK's balls from the 2nd of November:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-jersey-59077644

 

This is a quick climb down.

I don't believe you got that right! My understanding is that Jersey has issued only 13 additional licences today bringing the total up to 162 since the beginning of the year. The French have also continued taking further unilateral possibly illegal action and have impounded a British fishing vessel. I The Tories must be rubbing there hands in glee over such an opportunity to divert attention quickly away from the increased tax burden outlined in the budget announcement.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now that the UK is swimming in sewage post-EU, this one's dedicated to our Brexshit friends!

 

 

Screenshot 2021-10-29 at 08.52.09.jpg

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, keith2011 said:

I don't believe you got that right! My understanding is that Jersey has issued only 13 additional licences today bringing the total up to 162 since the beginning of the year. The French have also continued taking further unilateral possibly illegal action and have impounded a British fishing vessel. I The Tories must be rubbing there hands in glee over such an opportunity to divert attention quickly away from the increased tax burden outlined in the budget announcement.

 

15 hours ago, murphaph said:

They got a referendum on AV which the electorate really dropped the ball on and rejected in a low turnout.

 

Oh look, Jersey suddenly issues 162 fishing licences a day after the French threatened to squeeze the UK's balls from the 2nd of November:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-jersey-59077644

 

This is a quick climb down.

 

You both need to read the article in that link.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, keith2011 said:

I don't believe you got that right! My understanding is that Jersey has issued only 13 additional licences today bringing the total up to 162 since the beginning of the year. The French have also continued taking further unilateral possibly illegal action and have impounded a British fishing vessel. I The Tories must be rubbing there hands in glee over such an opportunity to divert attention quickly away from the increased tax burden outlined in the budget announcement.

We are only talking about very small numbers of licences being sought by the French anyway so 13 is significant, coming the day after the French started getting serious about the UK's dragging its feet over these licences. The Tories can save face by saying it was a matter for the Jersey government but I guarantee you there were some phone calls from London to St. Helier to get those licences approved.

 

The UK can't even perform checks on any EU goods entering because it would completely destroy the already stretched supply chains. I see rumours of a snap election mid 2022, BEFORE the UK starts to implement checks and thus revealing the full horror of Brexit to the public. Remember the Tories only care about the Tories, not about the national interest. The Empire itself was just a tool to make these wankers rich.

 

I support France and I couldn't care less if Macron is being more aggressive than he might be were it not for an upcoming election. The UK thinks it can throw its weight about and break international law (admitted to by the Rt Hon. Stephen Barclay MP in the HoC remember in relation to the NI Protocol) and then go crying to Brussels when France takes matters into its own hands. Well boo hoo. Time to suck it up and see what it's like out in the big bad world.

 

The talk has once again returned to the UK triggering (almost certainly in bad faith) A16. The EU should just retaliate swiftly with tariffs and "very thorough checks" at EU ports. The iron fist needs to come out of the velvet glove and punch these Tory bastards in the face.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, murphaph said:

We are only talking about very small numbers of licences being sought by the French anyway so 13 is significant, coming the day after the French started getting serious about the UK's dragging its feet over these licences. The Tories can save face by saying it was a matter for the Jersey government but I guarantee you there were some phone calls from London to St. Helier to get those licences approved.

 

The French claim they need 240 licences in Jersey waters (a very small area)  but the criteria for granting them is for proof of having fished those waters historically. Jersey claims that many boats have have applied for licences cannot prove that and their own fishermen believe 240 boats is well beyond anything seen in the past and would result in the area being rapidly fished out and totally destroy their plans to improve fish stocks for sustainable fishing.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this a game of who can be the bigger AH ? 

 

The UK sold half of its fishing quotas yet gets in a strop because French fishermen want to fish off their own coast. How about handing back the Channel Islands to France ? That would solve it.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, optimista said:

Is this a game of who can be the bigger AH ? 

 

The UK sold half of its fishing quotas yet gets in a strop because French fishermen want to fish off their own coast. How about handing back the Channel Islands to France ? That would solve it.

It sure would, as would the UK getting out of Ireland. Spot the common denominator.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What a lot of people don't seem to get, is that British trawlermen are very dependant on landing their catches speedily into European mainland markets. The British don't eat that much fish! Its obvious that the more the UK plays hardball, the more fishermen will be left with fish they can't sell.  Something else Nigel Farage forgot to point out. 

 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, AlexTr said:

 

Yes very funny, just a point of accuracy, though,  if the comedians neighbours had really lived in Spain for 10 years they would not have been able to vote for brexit!;) Also they would be fully entitled to claim residency!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now