Brexit, for once some facts.

Zlatan

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 26, 2016
8,086
4,290

Anybody arguing PR is a panacea for good government really should study Italy's route to their current system.
To sum up. They initially had full PR but after countless weak, unstable governments chose to introduce 75% FPTWP and 25% PR. This led to widespread condemnation so they went back to PR. That produced more untable governence. So they now have PR but award bonus seats to ensure doninant party has a majority.
Since which they have had more stability.
PR is by no means a solution and could quite easily produce instability for years. No EU countries use full PR for these very reasons. Arguing it would some how put Labour in power with a cooperative HoC is ridiculous. There isnt a shred of evidence to suggest it would give us any stability at all, quite the reverse.
Yes, we need electoral reform to give representation to all those losing mp's voters, and some mixed system is obviously way to go but full PR would make matters far far worse.
A country needs its government of day to have a majority. The evidence for this is shown throughout democracies world wide.
A system that produces hung parliaments (ie even this government only got 45% of vote) would be catastrophic for us.
 
Last edited:
  • Disagree
Reactions: flecc

Zlatan

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 26, 2016
8,086
4,290
we have zillions of cars on our roads.
If roads have the same number of cars like rails with trains then we wouldn't have so much congestion on our roads.
in another generation, driverless car will be a reality, we should be able to double the density of traffic on our roads, then in the generation after next, we'll have pilotless small aerial transports.
We dont want driver less cars though Woosh. I like driving and not running over pedastrians.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: flecc

flecc

Member
Oct 25, 2006
53,191
30,598
we have zillions of cars on our roads.
If roads have the same number of cars like rails with trains then we wouldn't have so much congestion on our roads.
in another generation, driverless car will be a reality, we should be able to double the density of traffic on our roads, then in the generation after next, we'll have pilotless small aerial transports.
You forgot to mention the flying pigs in your portrayal of an imaginary UK. ;)

But this is the real UK where we haven't reached the 21st century and still cling onto much of the 19th.

In your imaginary future railways will still be a vital part of transport in most successful countries, possibly much more so than now. After all, rails for trams are a vital part of road systems today and have long been taking over roads to the detriment of cars.
.
 

flecc

Member
Oct 25, 2006
53,191
30,598
We, ll have to agree to disagree Flecc. Subject closed from me.
That's fine. I'd just like to remark though that you couldn't have chosen a worst example than Italy.

Italy is always chaotic because that is what they do best. As one of a half Italian family I know that only too well.
.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zlatan

Danidl

Esteemed Pedelecer
Sep 29, 2016
8,611
12,256
73
Ireland
All the systems in Europe are designed to not give unstable (no majority) governments in one waybor another. As long as the basic problem of PR is taken into account I, d agree. Going to absolute PR, as far as, I, m aware, is not case in any of EU cases. Some are split with half using FPTWP and half PR... I agree we are about last to not use some form of PR. (apart from France? think they are FPTWP)
Cant be complete PR, which adds complications.. But it needs to change. Agreed.
All those second places for Labour this time were wasted votes really...
The system in Ireland is full PR. There are multiple seat constituencies , with 3, 4 or 5 places. The geographic boundaries are set by civil servants ..not politicans ..so are not corrupt.
After the election the Quota for election is set at (number of valid votes cast / no of seats )+1 . Rarely is someone elected on the first count, so the lowest person is eliminated from the count and all the second preferences counted for that candidate ,this continues until a person is elected.
Sometimes there are no second or third preferences and such votes are discarded.
Once a candidate exceeds a quota, the votes in excess can be redistributed .and this causes fun and games. The theory is that a random selection of votes from different areas are taken .. which is why the results from a recount never tally
 

Zlatan

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 26, 2016
8,086
4,290
The system in Ireland is full PR. There are multiple seat constituencies , with 3, 4 or 5 places. The geographic boundaries are set by civil servants ..not politicans ..so are not corrupt.
After the election the Quota for election is set at (number of valid votes cast / no of seats )+1 . Rarely is someone elected on the first count, so the lowest person is eliminated from the count and all the second preferences counted for that candidate ,this continues until a person is elected.
Sometimes there are no second or third preferences and such votes are discarded.
Once a candidate exceeds a quota, the votes in excess can be redistributed .and this causes fun and games. The theory is that a random selection of votes from different areas are taken .. which is why the results from a recount never tally
Hang on a minute Danidl. Your system is not quite full PR, where number of seats correlates to number of votes.
Yours is a system of first past the quota mark. (quota is number of votes/ number of seats)
So, if I understand it, lets say 2,000,000 votes are cast. The quota id 2,000,000 divided by 160. So as soon as a candidate achieves 12,500 votes they are appointed. Any spare are then given to next favourite candidate.
Yes, its a form of PR but not pure PR. (In pure PR the number of a parties serving candidates divided by total number of seats will give same percentage as %age of votes receieved. Yours can and does vary.
Your system should give a majority, yes I know it doesnt always but neither does ours. (I might be reading yours wrong)
In a true only PR system a 45% vote of populace voting would give 45% of seats. It doesnt with your Irish system. In example quoted in Wiki your leader (2011) achieved 36% of vote. That would give 56 seats in PR only system. He had 76...???
 
Last edited:

50Hertz

Esteemed Pedelecer
Jan 2, 2019
2,199
2,403
You're quoting Boris Johnson, but he's not saying what will really happen, which is this:

Leave and Remain are from 31/1/2019 replaced with Remain and Rejoin.

The Leavers of old will now be the Remainers, for staying UK alone.

The Remainers of old will now be the Rejoiners, for returning to the EU.

This will be a very slow movement at first, but it will grow over time and eventually become every bit as disruptive and divisive as Brexit has been.

The mistake of having the 2016 referendum will be haunting us for decades.
.
I actually think that is spot on.

I was quoting Boris Johnson. Not sure if those were his exact words, I was just trying to imagine how he would phrase it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: flecc

oldgroaner

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 15, 2015
23,461
32,613
80
Lord Nigel has these pearls of non wisdom to offer
"
Writing in The Daily Telegraph, the architect of Brexit said: “Questions over the future shape of Brexit and Britain’s place in the world are now entirely in the hands of Johnson.

“With half of his cabinet having voted Remain, and substantial global pressures on him, it will be tempting for him to pursue the easy option of a soft Brexit.

And if the proverbial hits the fan, his flock of sheep will remember they didn't think Brexit a good idea in the first place
 
  • Like
Reactions: flecc

OxygenJames

Esteemed Pedelecer
Jan 8, 2012
2,593
1,041
All along I've wanted to have proportional representation to avoid that need for that alternation and consequent destabilisation,
No - what you will get is stagnation - as in many parts of the EU where the democratic will of the people is being ignored due to proportional representation. Nobody gets a big enough majority to actually rule - so its always coalitions. Who stick to the establishment. The establishment never changes. Its a stalemate all the time as in there are not many fundamental changes. Here with our electoral system you get some actual change.

Nobody is trying to tell me this election changes nothing are they?

Do they think Corbyn or Boris it made no difference? Only the most hard-line conspiracy adherents think that surely. No. Here we got one version of two.

And now the Torys - or rather Boris - has a chance to do something half-decent. He has a mandate. He can be bolder than he dreamt now. Will he just throw money at the north to placate the problem of keeping his newly found voters? - or will he try out some real free-market conservative values instead? And if the latter what would that look like?

We're now allowed to have such thoughts.

Of course some people find this idea horrifying. For obvious reasons. It makes some people scared. And not surprisingly. It's not offering a 'catch-all' philosophy. It's saying at some level yes you might sink. But not if you're willing to do any kind of paid work. Or be available to if you could. If you can at least do that - you're in. But no - no complete drifters. Unless they win the charity of other people with their own money. We're not paying for those people. But so long as you work then you're OK. Its how come the conservative policy of hightening the level at which you start paying tax (ie that level going up) has been such a boon to the low paid. They love it it means more money for the same effort. Its socialist like that except you do have to do at least some work.

Who knows.

Corbyn didn't look too happy walking next to Boris did he? We're still having to put up with him at the despatch box preening away in his boring predictable way. He should be banned from public speaking for at least 6 months during which time he can do some serious introspection about the extent to which he has failed the people he was supposed to represent.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: Zlatan and 50Hertz

oldgroaner

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 15, 2015
23,461
32,613
80
What's this in the Telegraph?
"
Why Boris's Brexit bill makes EU tariffs almost inevitable
Boris Johnson’s revised Withdrawal Act Bill will make EU tariffs on Britain after Brexit almost inevitable.

The EU leadership is still repeating its new mantra of “no quotas, no tariffs, no dumping” but, hopes that the prime minister would use his large majority to pivot to a softer break from Brussels have dimmed.

The bill enshrines the end of 2020 deadline for trade talks between London and Brussels into UK law and will stiffen EU resolve to demand fair competition guarantees in the talks that will begin after Brexit on Jan 31.


What was it OJ said about a "penny dropping?"
 
  • Like
Reactions: flecc

Zlatan

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 26, 2016
8,086
4,290
Boris won his Withdrawal Bill with more than his majority.?? Wonder who the extra supporters were. Corbyn??
 
  • Informative
Reactions: 50Hertz

OxygenJames

Esteemed Pedelecer
Jan 8, 2012
2,593
1,041
OK Flecc - so you think socialism is needed every-so-often to balance out the Tory rule. Yes? That seems to be one of your main points. Yes?

To me socialism always ends up with the system broke. It always always always is inefficient around the allocation of resources - ie it over-allocates and into the wrong areas. ie it is wasteful. Which is why it keeps going bust. There have been example and example all over the world throughout history of this. What did the last Labour chancellor write on that note - 'sorry we spent all the money there's none left'. He was not joking. All socialist systems end up like that - broke.
 
  • Disagree
  • Agree
Reactions: flecc and 50Hertz

OxygenJames

Esteemed Pedelecer
Jan 8, 2012
2,593
1,041
Boris won his Withdrawal Bill with more than his majority.?? Wonder who the extra supporters were. Corbyn??
There were at least 20 Labour MPs who voted for it. Those MPs who have to go back to their leave-voting constituency and look those people in the eye. Old fashioned ideas like keeping your promises and being a person of your word. They are the heart of the Labour party is you ask me.
 

OxygenJames

Esteemed Pedelecer
Jan 8, 2012
2,593
1,041
What's this in the Telegraph?
"
Why Boris's Brexit bill makes EU tariffs almost inevitable
Boris Johnson’s revised Withdrawal Act Bill will make EU tariffs on Britain after Brexit almost inevitable.

The EU leadership is still repeating its new mantra of “no quotas, no tariffs, no dumping” but, hopes that the prime minister would use his large majority to pivot to a softer break from Brussels have dimmed.

The bill enshrines the end of 2020 deadline for trade talks between London and Brussels into UK law and will stiffen EU resolve to demand fair competition guarantees in the talks that will begin after Brexit on Jan 31.


What was it OJ said about a "penny dropping?"
Who knows how this will play out. These are the opening gambits on both sides.

But now we know our side has some solidity behind it - we have some metal. We got bitten the first time - we've retreated and come back stronger. And they know it.

It's a completely different negotiation now. We can go all out for broke if we want. We have the power in parliament now. We have parliament behind us now. Ha. How much better that is than it was. Oh sure all your poor people who think it would be an unmitigated disaster and are peeing your pants at the remote possibility will not like hearing this - but all you have to do is hang on tight and watch. It's not like your area is suddenly going to drop into abject poverty - regardless of the scare stories you've been told.
 

flecc

Member
Oct 25, 2006
53,191
30,598
No - what you will get is stagnation - as in many parts of the EU where the democratic will of the people is being ignored due to proportional representation. Nobody gets a big enough majority to actually rule - so its always coalitions. Who stick to the establishment. The establishment never changes.
You really couldn't be more hopelessly wrong if you tried to be.

Just look at how much more advanced the long standing EU countries are than us. Their roads, their railways, their airports coverage, their pensions and benefits systems and scales, their shorter working weeks, the speed of response and quality of their medical systems. All brought about with changes by their coalition governments.

Now look at the poor state of those in the UK and wake up to the fact that is we who have stagnated due to our first post the post system making for political confict and almost nothing being achieved. One party gains power and brings something in, then the other gets its turn and reverses that. It's already started with Johnson promising to undo many earlier social changes.

It's the changes brought about by agreement in coalition governments that become permanent change.

And all this without mentioning how hugely successful many of those EU countries are at exporting to all countries worldwide while being in the EU, something our politicians say isn't possible!
.
 
Last edited:

oldgroaner

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 15, 2015
23,461
32,613
80
No - what you will get is stagnation - as in many parts of the EU where the democratic will of the people is being ignored due to proportional representation. Nobody gets a big enough majority to actually rule - so its always coalitions. Who stick to the establishment. The establishment never changes. Its a stalemate all the time as in there are not many fundamental changes. Here with our electoral system you get some actual change.

Nobody is trying to tell me this election changes nothing are they?

Do they think Corbyn or Boris it made no difference? Only the most hard-line conspiracy adherents think that surely. No. Here we got one version of two.

And now the Torys - or rather Boris - has a chance to do something half-decent. He has a mandate. He can be bolder than he dreamt now. Will he just throw money at the north to placate the problem of keeping his newly found voters? - or will he try out some real free-market conservative values instead? And if the latter what would that look like?

We're now allowed to have such thoughts.

Of course some people find this idea horrifying. For obvious reasons. It makes some people scared. And not surprisingly. It's not offering a 'catch-all' philosophy. It's saying at some level yes you might sink. But not if you're willing to do any kind of paid work. Or be available to if you could. If you can at least do that - you're in. But no - no complete drifters. Unless they win the charity of other people with their own money. We're not paying for those people. But so long as you work then you're OK. Its how come the conservative policy of hightening the level at which you start paying tax (ie that level going up) has been such a boon to the low paid. They love it it means more money for the same effort. Its socialist like that except you do have to do at least some work.

Who knows.

Corbyn didn't look too happy walking next to Boris did he? We're still having to put up with him at the despatch box preening away in his boring predictable way. He should be banned from public speaking for at least 6 months during which time he can do some serious introspection about the extent to which he has failed the people he was supposed to represent.
Some people are doing some "serious introspection" and very wise too
"
Get Brexit done’: Wealthy Tory donors buying EU citizenship for themselves, documents reveal

Cyprus ‘golden passport’ scheme can secure EU nationality for just €2m

An investigation by Reuters found that past donors to the ruling party have applied for citizenship of the EU member state of Cyprus since the UK voted to Leave in 2016.


Cyprus offers a so-called “golden passport” scheme that allows investors to effectively buy EU citizenship if they spend around €2m (£1.7m) on property in the country – a trifling amount for Britain’s wealthiest.
Applicants for citizenship do not have to live in – or even visit – Cyprus to get the passport. Once secured a Cypriot passport gives the freedom to live, work and study in all 28, soon to be 27, EU member states – just as a British passport currently does ahead of Brexit.
Reuters said Cypriot government documents show Tory donors including Alan Howard, a top hedge-fund manager, and Jeremy Isaacs, a former Lehman Brothers chief, applied for citizenship – and that Cyprus’s interior ministry recommended the applications be approved.
Electoral Commission figures show Mr Howard donated at least £129,000 to the Tories personally and through his company between 2005 and 2009.
Guy Verhofstadt, the European parliament’s Brexit coordinator, commented: “Conservative party donors, backing Brexit but at the same time seeking EU citizenship via Cyprus. Pardon my French but ordinary British citizens are being screwed over by their elite.”
As usual Tory voters have been mugged by their "betters" and even some Labour supporters too!
 
  • Agree
Reactions: oyster and flecc

oldgroaner

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 15, 2015
23,461
32,613
80
Who knows how this will play out. These are the opening gambits on both sides.

But now we know our side has some solidity behind it - we have some metal. We got bitten the first time - we've retreated and come back stronger. And they know it.

It's a completely different negotiation now. We can go all out for broke if we want. We have the power in parliament now. We have parliament behind us now. Ha. How much better that is than it was. Oh sure all your poor people who think it would be an unmitigated disaster and are peeing your pants at the remote possibility will not like hearing this - but all you have to do is hang on tight and watch. It's not like your area is suddenly going to drop into abject poverty - regardless of the scare stories you've been told.
You really do get more deluded, Boris is going to let you down isn't he? he doesn't give a damn for you , me or anyone else but himself
 
  • Agree
Reactions: flecc

flecc

Member
Oct 25, 2006
53,191
30,598
What did the last Labour chancellor write on that note - 'sorry we spent all the money there's none left'. He was not joking.
It actually was a joke and he said as much.

More importantly though Blair's government who it was who ran up that huge debt was not a true socialist labour government but a con trick, having the public enjoying living off borrowed money rather than investing it for improvement. Blair even borrowed from the future by inventing PFI. Once his policies reached the end he handed over to Gordon Brown to carry the can. He'd planned to let down Brown from the start, having promised him an earlier handover of power but then clinging onto it long term to Brown's obvious annoyance.
.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: oldgroaner

Advertisers