Mrs May - whither (or wither) the Tory Party

Actually what you're describing is technically known as 'delegative' democracy*. A 'delegate' is someone who is 'delegated' to pass on a point of view, much like you'd delegate a task in the military. Not what our (admittedly unwritten) constitution is about at all.
Not at all, as a delegate is only intended to represent the views of those who put him/her in place, rather than the wishes of the majority of their constituents (not necessarily the same thing, especially regarding brexit).
 
No, the EU saw a negotiating team, and strategy, that was undermined from the outset by the PM and her SPAD Ollie Robins. This undermining resulted in the loss of Brexit Secretary's, and other ministers, because they were prevented from doing their job because the EU were being sold a pup by the PM and OR instead of them being open, honest and supportive.

The shenanigans going on in parliament are also a result of this. How can parliament discuss and agree on anything to do with Brexit when they know the PM and OR are not being honest with ministers so how can they believe anything they're told?
As my Granny would have said “It’s aright buggers muddle”
 

seaweed

LE
Book Reviewer
..We don't elect our MP's do do as they see fit: we elect them to express the views of their constituents....

Constitutionally, that's not true. MPs are representatives and not delegates. We send X to the HoC and HOPE he will represent 'our' views' ( of which there may be many contrary ones) but his job is to use his judgement. My own MP told the selection hustings he backed Brexit and as soon as he was in, backed Remain because that seemed to him best. Mind you I think keeping 'in' was uppermost in his mind. What that may have cost him the GE will reveal; I suspect very little as we shall be OUT (I hope) or OUTish (I dread) by then.
 
Astounded that the may creature seems happy being humiliated every time it sets foot in Brussels. Thatcher had her faults ( quite a few) but I do not think she would have accepted the treatment that may seems to get her rocks off on.
Time for this creature to step down and spend it's twilight years skipping through wheatfields.

hopefully the combine will get it.
 
Time for this creature to step down and spend it's twilight years skipping through wheatfields.

hopefully the combine will get it.
What about us that live near there, the risk we'll bump into TM out on walking holiday is going to increase somewhat

What have we done to suffer TM?
 
Astounded that the may creature seems happy being humiliated every time it sets foot in Brussels. Thatcher had her faults ( quite a few) but I do not think she would have accepted the treatment that may seems to get her rocks off on.
Time for this creature to step down and spend it's twilight years skipping through wheatfields.

hopefully the combine will get it.
Quite some while ago I joked on another forum that perhaps May has Asberger's syndrome. Gradually I'm realising that it may not have been that much of a joke.
 
Not at all, as a delegate is only intended to represent the views of those who put him/her in place, rather than the wishes of the majority of their constituents (not necessarily the same thing, especially regarding brexit).
You're sort of arguing against yourself there.

The first clause of your sentence agrees with my definition of a delegate.

The second clause is completely compatible with my earlier point about the tensions inherent in our 'representative' system.

Our MPs AREN'T delegates. They are representatives who are expected to use their own judgement. The issue is about how they prioritise:

Their party interests
Their constituency interests (including the people who didn't vote for them)
Their conscience
 
You're sort of arguing against yourself there.

The first clause of your sentence agrees with my definition of a delegate.

The second clause is completely compatible with my earlier point about the tensions inherent in our 'representative' system.

Our MPs AREN'T delegates. They are representatives who are expected to use their own judgement. The issue is about how they prioritise:

Their party interests
Their constituency interests (including the people who didn't vote for them)
Their conscience
Which goes a long way to explain why we are currently in the mess we're in now.

Whether you agree with them or not a single issue referendum is about as pure an exercise in measuring the democratic will as can be undertaken. In a FPTP election based on a multi-issue manifesto, there is ample room to vacillate, procrastinate and prevaricate. Not so with a referendum. Doing so has landed us in the current mess.

It's probably why parliamentarians and the establishment do not like referenda.
 

Auld-Yin

ADC
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
We do have a Representative Democracy whereby we send our MPs to Parliament in the belief that they will do the best for us, having listened to their constituents. How many times over the past two years have we heard MPs up on their hind legs talking about listening to their constituents. They may be listening, but are then ignoring.

Where Representative Democracy fails is when the MP stops listening to the people and goes off on their own bat. This is happening with Brexit and is one of the reasons for much of the problem. On top of this is the Party system has totally taken over parliamentary life and is usurping RD completely, that has to change.

If MPs don't return to the form of RD that we have been used to then politics in this country is in for a sea-change.

"A Very British Coup" anyone?
 

ancienturion

LE
Book Reviewer
Which goes a long way to explain why we are currently in the mess we're in now.

Whether you agree with them or not a single issue referendum is about as pure an exercise in measuring the democratic will as can be undertaken. In a FPTP election based on a multi-issue manifesto, there is ample room to vacillate, procrastinate and prevaricate. Not so with a referendum. Doing so has landed us in the current mess.

It's probably why parliamentarians and the establishment do not like referenda.
Completely agree.

The problem comes in distilling down complicated questions to binary form.

Should we leave the EU? This is such a question, as it then opened us up to two years or so of deciding what was meant by 'leave'. Lots of people who voted for Brexit don't want a 'no deal' arrangement, and it's clear just from the multiplicity of related threads on here that there are some that think the economic ramifications will be (delete where applicable): better/manageable in the long run/tolerable but worth it/irrelevant.

I think referenda risk making complex issues into a false dichotomy.
 
We do have a Representative Democracy whereby we send our MPs to Parliament in the belief that they will do the best for us, having listened to their constituents.

Where Representative Democracy fails is when the MP stops listening to the people and goes off on their own bat.

On top of this is the Party system has totally taken over parliamentary life and is usurping RD completely

If MPs don't return to the form of RD that we have been used to then politics in this country is in for a sea-change.
Para 1. Completely agree.

Para 2. No. The whole point of RD (as explained above) is that they're NOT delegates. They're fully entitled to 'go off on their own bat' if that's what their judgement tells them to do. You then have the option of not voting for them at the next election.

Para 3. Whilst you have a point here, we've had a party system pretty much since the Restoration, so it's hardly a new issue. Indeed part of the Brexit kerfuffle is because it's an issue that cuts across party lines. If JC had been able to overcome his own leanings in favour of party loyalty, the electoral landscape could look much different now.

4. I'm sorry but this is illogical reasoning. MPs aren't doing anything contrary to the established system of RD that's been in place since the Reform Acts. The question may be whether or not that system is able to cope with the current situation.
 

Auld-Yin

ADC
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
Para 1. Completely agree.

Para 2. No. The whole point of RD (as explained above) is that they're NOT delegates. They're fully entitled to 'go off on their own bat' if that's what their judgement tells them to do. You then have the option of not voting for them at the next election.

Para 3. Whilst you have a point here, we've had a party system pretty much since the Restoration, so it's hardly a new issue. Indeed part of the Brexit kerfuffle is because it's an issue that cuts across party lines. If JC had been able to overcome his own leanings in favour of party loyalty, the electoral landscape could look much different now.

4. I'm sorry but this is illogical reasoning. MPs aren't doing anything contrary to the established system of RD that's been in place since the Reform Acts. The question may be whether or not that system is able to cope with the current situation.
If you agree with what you say in point #4 then you agree that a sea change is needed.
 
The issue of Brexit is not one of representative democracy. It was delegated to the British people and is therefore direct democracy.

Too many PMs are deliberately refusing to respect that in their bid to overturn the result and prevent the UK leaving the EU.

Many of them say one thing but do the opposite. PMTM is a perfect example of this. First of all it was No Deal is better than a bad deal. As soon as her deal was voted down as a bad deal - twice - the No Deal option has been taken off the table. She maintained that we will definitely be leaving on the 29th March. Now we are leaving on the 12th April. Or 22nd May. Or some other date yet to be decided. She says the result of the referendum must be honoured and there should not be another one; Article 50 will not be overturned. Watch one or both of these things happen. She will allow herself into being forced to make it so.

The UK parliamentary expenses scandal emerged in 2009 and MPs woke up to the fact that the people had lost all respect and trust in politicians, becoming more and more disengaged with the democratic process. The politicians vowed to do something about it and regain the trust of the public.

Despite the 2016 referendum having a 72% voter turnout, the largest since 1992, MPs have once again closed their eyes to the voters and show their contempt for the ordinary people by ignoring their wishes.

John Bercow says that MPs are not traitors yet it is MPs' words and actions that are causing the public to form that opinion. Bercow can stop this farce by stopping any further amendments, amendments designed solely to stop Brexit happening. He should state that parliament voted to enact departure of the EU on 29th May and the only two ways of doing so are with the WA deal or on WTO terms. If MPs refuse to agree to the WA deal proposed then exiting on WTO terms is what must happen.
 
The issue of Brexit is not one of representative democracy. It was delegated to the British people and is therefore direct democracy.

Too many PMs are deliberately refusing to respect that in their bid to overturn the result and prevent the UK leaving the EU.

Many of them say one thing but do the opposite. PMTM is a perfect example of this. First of all it was No Deal is better than a bad deal. As soon as her deal was voted down as a bad deal - twice - the No Deal option has been taken off the table. She maintained that we will definitely be leaving on the 29th March. Now we are leaving on the 12th April. Or 22nd May. Or some other date yet to be decided. She says the result of the referendum must be honoured and there should not be another one; Article 50 will not be overturned. Watch one or both of these things happen. She will allow herself into being forced to make it so.

The UK parliamentary expenses scandal emerged in 2009 and MPs woke up to the fact that the people had lost all respect and trust in politicians, becoming more and more disengaged with the democratic process. The politicians vowed to do something about it and regain the trust of the public.

Despite the 2016 referendum having a 72% voter turnout, the largest since 1992, MPs have once again closed their eyes to the voters and show their contempt for the ordinary people by ignoring their wishes.

John Bercow says that MPs are not traitors yet it is MPs' words and actions that are causing the public to form that opinion. Bercow can stop this farce by stopping any further amendments, amendments designed solely to stop Brexit happening. He should state that parliament voted to enact departure of the EU on 29th May and the only two ways of doing so are with the WA deal or on WTO terms. If MPs refuse to agree to the WA deal proposed then exiting on WTO terms is what must happen.
You'll be lucky.
 

Latest Threads

Top