Liz Truss

[SilverFox2]

I’m glad you put that out which confirms that it’s not only the PM who has fucked everything up, it’s the Conservative Party as a whole.

Time for the electorate to put that right and get rid of these grubby cunts.

The way the Conservative Party allowed the PM to be appointed via the process indicates that extremists within that Party have taken control of said process.

Was Liz Truss really the best material for the top post?

 

[SkyBlueFlux]

If I was making the decision I would require all MP’s to be independent. The current system is a complete lie. MPs are supposed to represent the best interests of their constituents, but they don’t. This is absolute bullshit. They almost exclusively vote along party lines, irrespective of the best interests of their constituents. This new system would lead to a dramatic increase in the standard and character of MPs who would be elected to represent their constituents based on those qualities, not which party they were affiliated to - and would mean that MP’s would have a much greater sense of public duty than is presently the case.

There is absolutely no point in tinkering around the edges with our political system. It is fucked and plainly unfit for purpose. It requires huge, decisive and structural reform to start working again. It requires a revolutionary approach if it it to start serving the people of this country, which it plainly presently is not.

How can anyone watch the fucking farce that is PMQs and not think that the whole thing needs breaking down and rebuilding?

I agree it’s totally broken. The only problem I foresee with your proposed model is that it would likely result in a lot of NIMBY-style protectionism. I can’t imagine national infrastructure projects ever getting off the ground if they need the tacit agreement of a bunch of independents who don’t want new train lines ruining their constituencies. Who would design a national strategy if everybody were independent?

As much as I’m all for syndication and decentralisation of power, some centralised power is required to actually build the country towards a greater “vision”.

I think we need parties, but we need PR and we also need a second chamber of unelected technocrats who are in the top fraction of a percent of their field. No hereditary Lords. We also need to find ways at every turn to remove private interests and lobbying from politics. I’d start there. That’s already a lot to achieve, but if you manage it we’re in a far better place than we are now.

 

[blueparrot]

Non starter practically speaking. Look at the way Theresa May had to give the Unionists about a billion quid to keep them onside because she had a tiny majority. Coalition governments would be the result and they never go well, though in theory they should

There are many coalition governments aroud Europe and the world, they all seem to run better than ours.

 

[SkyBlueFlux]

The Fragile States Index (which has its flaws but is broadly useful) is dominated at the good end (most stable) by countries that use PR and often have coalitions running the country. I'm sure after a bit of practice we could join significant swathes of the world in behaving like grown ups when it comes to our politics.

While PR does give more extreme parties a voice, it only ever gives them the voice their support deserves and no more. You don’t get right wing christo-fascistic parties with 15% of the vote in charge because they don’t have enough support alone and they don’t know how to compromise. That’s the beauty of it, to actually make any headway it requires parties with differing views to compromise. And so those who won’t (extremists) are left for the birds.

Look at the Netherlands as a prime example. Old Geert has already had to abandon a bunch of his inflammatory rhetoric and pointless positions like banning religious headwear just to get around the table and he’s still struggling.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

I agree it’s totally broken. The only problem I foresee with your proposed model is that it would likely result in a lot of NIMBY-style protectionism. I can’t imagine national infrastructure projects ever getting off the ground if they need the tacit agreement of a bunch of independents who don’t want new train lines ruining their constituencies. Who would design a national strategy if everybody were independent?

As much as I’m all for syndication and decentralisation of power, some centralised power is required to actually build the country towards a greater “vision”.

I think we need parties, but we need PR and we also need a second chamber of unelected technocrats who are in the top fraction of a percent of their field. No hereditary Lords. We also need to find ways at every turn to remove private interests and lobbying from politics. I’d start there. That’s already a lot to achieve, but if you manage it we’re in a far better place than we are now.

That NIMBY-ism would only (and arguably quite properly) be restricted to those particular constituencies though, so the overall vote would reflect the nation’s best interests.

I’m not saying it’s the only solution, and there would need to be a second (or possibly first) house which was based on PR, and from where the executive was possibly drawn, but this revised house, as part of the legislature would draw from the best parts of the current system, exclude the worst parts, and mean that MPs were truly there to look after the people who voted them into power.

 

[Vic]

If I was making the decision I would require all MP’s to be independent. The current system is a complete lie. MPs are supposed to represent the best interests of their constituents, but they don’t. This is absolute bullshit. They almost exclusively vote along party lines, irrespective of the best interests of their constituents. This new system would lead to a dramatic increase in the standard and character of MPs who would be elected to represent their constituents based on those qualities, not which party they were affiliated to - and would mean that MP’s would have a much greater sense of public duty than is presently the case.

There is absolutely no point in tinkering around the edges with our political system. It is fucked and plainly unfit for purpose. It requires huge, decisive and structural reform to start working again. It requires a revolutionary approach if it it to start serving the people of this country, which it plainly presently is not.

How can anyone watch the fucking farce that is PMQs and not think that the whole thing needs breaking down and rebuilding?

If most areas are affluent, why wouldn't their MPs vote to keep it that way?

If most are English, why would they do anything for Wales and Scotland and NI?

 

[MCFC Wirral]

The way the Conservative Party allowed the PM to be appointed via the process indicates that extremists within that Party have taken control of said process.

Was Liz Truss really the best material for the top post?

Wasn’t that how Corbyn seized control of Labour? Through the unions.

I suspect Sunak was seen as the resignation that brought Boris down so his supporters went for Truss instead.

 

[threespires]

We are probably on a par with the US and Israel for having fundamentally flawed political systems.

One of the most disturbing developments of recent years has been mimicry of some aspects of the highly damaging Newt Gingrich approach of highly partisan politics. The degree to which we can row back from that current direction of travel post the next GE remains to be seen.

 

[Mr Kobayashi]

Wasn’t that how Corbyn seized control of Labour? Through the unions.

Obsessed?

Corbyn wasn't PM. He was also elected by an overwhelming majority of voters both times.

He won because ran on an anti austerity ticket you fruitloop.

 

[MCFC Wirral]

Obsessed?

Corbyn wasn't PM. He was also elected by an overwhelming majority of voters both times.

He won because ran on an anti austerity ticket you fruitloop.

Don’t go down the name calling route. It shows how woefully out of your depth you really are.

Ask someone to tell you how badly he did in two general elections and why he won’t be a Labour MP after the next one.