David Cameron has resigned again

[GT49er]

Whether I was in favour of remain or leave is not relevant to the point I was making. I entirely accept that, having had the referendum, and there being a majority to leave the EU, we have to live with that outcome, whether or not we voted for it ourselves. My point was about Cameron's judgement and gamesmanship.

I meant unnecessary in the sense that we have a parliamentary democracy not a plebiscitary democracy, and the appropriate way (in my view, and that of many constitutional experts who know a lot more about it than me) of putting a policy like this to the people (if Cameron believed in it, which he clearly didn't), would have been to include a concrete promise to withdraw from the EU within the broader context of a general election manifesto, alongside a range of other policies (including hopefully, a coherent set of economic, trade, taxation, migration and social policies which would be needed to manage all of the other implications of Brexit), and allow the electorate to vote on that in a general election. The only reason he did it was for internal Tory party reasons, to appease Tory members and MPs who might otherwise defect to UKIP - there was nothing pushing him to do it, and if he thought it would have ended up as a leave outcome, he probably wouldn't have done it - it was a daft gamble that he lost.

Fine, except that Parliamentary Democracy was/is at odds with the general public. All three traditional main parties are pro EU - the only difference between them as far as he EU is concerned is how far they want to crawl up the EU's rectum, so whatever the result of the general election they would all maintain they had no mandate to leave the EU. On this issue, a referendum was the only democratic way to reflect the will of the people.
I suppose we should be grateful for Cameron giving us this chance, but any such gratitude is tempered by the fact that he didn't mean it to end like this, so we'll all (remainers and leavers) remember him now as a loser.

 

[soistes]

Fine, except that Parliamentary Democracy was/is at odds with the general public. All three traditional main parties are pro EU - the only difference between them as far as he EU is concerned is how far they want to crawl up the EU's rectum, so whatever the result of the general election they would all maintain they had no mandate to leave the EU. On this issue, a referendum was the only democratic way to reflect the will of the people..

No, not the only way - there is a political party that has always supported leaving the EU, and has a range of other policies, most of which can also be found in the manifestos of one or other of the main parties. So the main way in which that party stands out (indeed its main rationale for existence) is through its policy to leave the EU. That party, according to you, ought to be pretty much in line with the wishes of the general public, but despite that it only does well in elections that don't matter.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[GT49er]

No, not the only way - there is a political party that has always supported leaving the EU, and has a range of other policies, most of which can also be found in the manifestos of one or other of the main parties. So the main way in which that party stands out (indeed its main rationale for existence) is through its policy to leave the EU. That party, according to you, ought to be pretty much in line with the wishes of the general public, but despite that it only does well in elections that don't matter.

Not so. With the party system you will always have to vote for a package of measures, some of which you will support, and some which you will not. If you're one of the voters who considers the relevant manifestoes (as opposed to just voting for the party you've always voted for, regardless) it is inevitably a case of voting for the party which promises to do the fewest things you don't want. Package deal politics.
The parties know this too - and it is a given that not everything that is in their manifesto will come to pass.

 

[Guy Fawkes]

Whether I was in favour of remain or leave is not relevant to the point I was making. I entirely accept that, having had the referendum, and there being a majority to leave the EU, we have to live with that outcome, whether or not we voted for it ourselves. My point was about Cameron's judgement and gamesmanship.

I meant unnecessary in the sense that we have a parliamentary democracy not a plebiscitary democracy, and the appropriate way (in my view, and that of many constitutional experts who know a lot more about it than me) of putting a policy like this to the people (if Cameron believed in it, which he clearly didn't), would have been to include a concrete promise to withdraw from the EU within the broader context of a general election manifesto, alongside a range of other policies (including hopefully, a coherent set of economic, trade, taxation, migration and social policies which would be needed to manage all of the other implications of Brexit), and allow the electorate to vote on that in a general election. The only reason he did it was for internal Tory party reasons, to appease Tory members and MPs who might otherwise defect to UKIP - there was nothing pushing him to do it, and if he thought it would have ended up as a leave outcome, he probably wouldn't have done it - it was a daft gamble that he lost.

There was a breakdown of who voted for Brexit and Who voted remain by Political party allegiance and this showed that the way someone voted wasn't along party lines but was spit within all of the major political parties. For example only 63% of Labour supporters voted remain. This showed that this issue wasn't one that was along the traditional Left / Right political divide but one that had many other driving factors as to why it made people decide how to vote the way they did.

For example, 29% of multi-culturalists voted to leave, as did 32% of social liberalists, 40% of feminists, 38% of environmentalists and 38% of those who consider themselves pro-globalisation. Even 21% of those who are pro-immigration voted to leave. A tiny percentage compared to other categories, but still a fifth (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...ain-how-brexit-won-eu-explained-a7101676.html)

It's wrong to put it down to a purely Right wing political policy & ideals rather than to acknowledge that it was a truly complex issue that affected people from all backgrounds (regardless of their political leanings) and divided the nation in a different way to the usual methods which are covered by our traditional political parties (hence over-simplifying)

The Tories have been known to be split on this issue for years, but it turns out it was a truer reflection of the nation as a whole and that even all the other parties supporters were divided too

 

[soistes]

Not so. With the party system you will always have to vote for a package of measures, some of which you will support, and some which you will not. If you're one of the voters who considers the relevant manifestoes (as opposed to just voting for the party you've always voted for, regardless) it is inevitably a case of voting for the party which promises to do the fewest things you don't want. Package deal politics.
The parties know this too - and it is a given that not everything that is in their manifesto will come to pass.

Correct - that's pretty much what I'm saying. Given that it's a package, and given that most of the other things in the UKIP package were not hugely controversial (and most of them overlapped with one or other of the main parties), but the main stand-out policy they had was EU-leaving, if leaving the EU was so important to so many people, then you'd think that would have persuaded a lot more people to plump for their overall package in general elections than actually happens. Actually, despite the referendum result, most opinion polls, both before and after the referendum, have shown that Europe and leaving or remaining in the EU is a long way down the list of things that people care most about - (compared with NHS, economy, employment etc). So if asked directly in a referendum, they say "leave", but if presented with leave in a package which includes a bunch of other stuff, they don't necessarily care enough about it to vote for the party with that as part of the package. Again it seems to me, given the importance of coherent integrated packages of policies, that this is an argument for representative (parliamentary) democracy, rather than decisions being made in a series of one-off plebiscites, resulting in an incoherent patchwork quilt of policies, or (as in the current case of Brexit) a policy (leave) with no worked-out plan of complementary policies which you need to deliver it effectively

 

[GT49er]

The Tories have been known to be split on this issue for years, but it turns out it was a truer reflection of the nation as a whole and that even all the other parties supporters were divided too

Good post, spot on. What is particularly significant is that the other parties' supporters were divided too - but their parties weren't. Out of touch with their grass-roots, then, and one of the instances where Parliamentary Democracy, good system though it generally is most of the time, can't always be trusted.

 

[soistes]

There was a breakdown of who voted for Brexit and Who voted remain by Political party allegiance and this showed that the way someone voted wasn't along party lines but was spit within all of the major political parties. For example only 63% of Labour supporters voted remain. This showed that this issue wasn't one that was along the traditional Left / Right political divide but one that had many other driving factors as to why it made people decide how to vote the way they did.

For example, 29% of multi-culturalists voted to leave, as did 32% of social liberalists, 40% of feminists, 38% of environmentalists and 38% of those who consider themselves pro-globalisation. Even 21% of those who are pro-immigration voted to leave. A tiny percentage compared to other categories, but still a fifth (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...ain-how-brexit-won-eu-explained-a7101676.html)

It's wrong to put it down to a purely Right wing political policy & ideals rather than to acknowledge that it was a truly complex issue that affected people from all backgrounds (regardless of their political leanings) and divided the nation in a different way to the usual methods which are covered by our traditional political parties (hence over-simplifying)

The Tories have been known to be split on this issue for years, but it turns out it was a truer reflection of the nation as a whole and that even all the other parties supporters were divided too

This is (nearly) all true, but I don't see how it's an argument for government through referenda rather than through representative parliamentary democracy. All it means is that the political parties haven't yet caught up with the way the views of different groups in the population are evolving. The party (or parties) that manages to catch up first should clean up at future elections (and that might involve a greater willingness to form alliances with other parties). I still prefer a system that eschews referenda in favour of parliamentary elections, and the Brexit result reinforces my view (not because I opposed Brexit, which I did, but because I think having the Brexit decision alone without all the other policies needed to implement it in the best interests of the UK, and having all these ministers making it up on the hoof, is an unholy mess).

 

[markw]

Harsh. His tenure can be separated into two distinct eras:

2. Tory Government - lost the plot completely, calling the EU Referendum was arguably the worst political decision ever taken by a British PM.

It was a good decision for the majority of the country.

 

[sir albion]

I would thank him very much for the referendum and he will go down as one of my favourites thanks to brexit

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

Correct - that's pretty much what I'm saying. Given that it's a package, and given that most of the other things in the UKIP package were not hugely controversial (and most of them overlapped with one or other of the main parties), but the main stand-out policy they had was EU-leaving, if leaving the EU was so important to so many people, then you'd think that would have persuaded a lot more people to plump for their overall package in general elections than actually happens. Actually, despite the referendum result, most opinion polls, both before and after the referendum, have shown that Europe and leaving or remaining in the EU is a long way down the list of things that people care most about - (compared with NHS, economy, employment etc). So if asked directly in a referendum, they say "leave", but if presented with leave in a package which includes a bunch of other stuff, they don't necessarily care enough about it to vote for the party with that as part of the package. Again it seems to me, given the importance of coherent integrated packages of policies, that this is an argument for representative (parliamentary) democracy, rather than decisions being made in a series of one-off plebiscites, resulting in an incoherent patchwork quilt of policies, or (as in the current case of Brexit) a policy (leave) with no worked-out plan of complementary policies which you need to deliver it effectively

I would argue that UKIP's platform is hugely controversial to many Leave voters as are the characters involved in that party. I certainly wouldnt ever vote for them despite voting Leave. You argue that UKIP was the option to vote for at a GE if one wishes to leave the EU but it is not that simple. I and many others wished for a choice in a referendum on an issue where the political establishment are out of step with the people. Once concluded I want to be able to vote for a party on a progressive political platform and certainly not UKIP. Just because I will not vote UKIP that does not mean that I don't want to Leave the EU and similarly the fact that the EU is not my most important political issue does not dilute that desire either.

 

[Albumen]

Ruined the country, allowed the far right to get a stranglehold on the weak minded, sold the future of everyone's health down the river. Criminal.

 

[Lord Bracknell]

I'll never forgive a West Ham fan.

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

Ruined the country, allowed the far right to get a stranglehold on the weak minded, sold the future of everyone's health down the river. Criminal.

Superior references to the 'weak minded' and contemptuous previous posts about the elderly are actually hallmarks of the Far Right......

 

[Guy Fawkes]

This is (nearly) all true, but I don't see how it's an argument for government through referenda rather than through representative parliamentary democracy. All it means is that the political parties haven't yet caught up with the way the views of different groups in the population are evolving. The party (or parties) that manages to catch up first should clean up at future elections (and that might involve a greater willingness to form alliances with other parties). I still prefer a system that eschews referenda in favour of parliamentary elections, and the Brexit result reinforces my view (not because I opposed Brexit, which I did, but because I think having the Brexit decision alone without all the other policies needed to implement it in the best interests of the UK, and having all these ministers making it up on the hoof, is an unholy mess).

Have you ever voted for a party that 100% represents your views and values or do you pick the party that is closest to them but could have policies that are the opposite views to your belief - if so, how does it represent your preference?

A political party is elected upon a raft of different policies in their manifesto so how do you get a true reflection of public opinion from all walks of life in the UK from this general election on a key issue that effects everyone?

 

[LlcoolJ]

I'll never forgive a West Ham fan.

Anyone can forget which club they pretended to support in a pathetic attempt to pander to the plebs.

 

[Triggaaar]

Will probably follow other ex Prime Ministers into after dinner speaking for an extortinate amount of money.

I'm going to book him.

 

[Gwylan]

Good post, spot on. What is particularly significant is that the other parties' supporters were divided too - but their parties weren't. Out of touch with their grass-roots, then, and one of the instances where Parliamentary Democracy, good system though it generally is most of the time, can't always be trusted.

I'm not sure they are out of touch with the grass roots: it's just that (as soistes says) the EU wasn't a major issue for them. To take another example, there have been a range of polls showing that the majority of people are in favour of rail nationalisation (even among Tories): should there be a referendum on that?

And is being in touch with their grass roots a good idea. There's another thread on NSC about Jeremy Corbyn and how he's hopeless as a leader because he's supported by the grass roots of the party but not by the MPs. I'm not sure how MPs thinking differently from the people is bad when it comes to the EU and good when it comes to Corbyn.

I'm a bit disturbed by the referendum. As a Leaver, I'm happy with the result but I don't think it's good for democracy as a whole. I'm glad we're the leaving EU but not too happy about the method

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

I'm not sure they are out of touch with the grass roots: it's just that (as soistes says) the EU wasn't a major issue for them. To take another example, there have been a range of polls showing that the majority of people are in favour of rail nationalisation (even among Tories): should there be a referendum on that?

And is being in touch with their grass roots a good idea. There's another thread on NSC about Jeremy Corbyn and how he's hopeless as a leader because he's supported by the grass roots of the party but not by the MPs. I'm not sure how MPs thinking differently from the people is bad when it comes to the EU and good when it comes to Corbyn.

I'm a bit disturbed by the referendum. As a Leaver, I'm happy with the result but I don't think it's good for democracy as a whole. I'm glad we're the leaving EU but not too happy about the method

I think it's the distinction between grass roots voters re the EU and grass roots momentum activists re JC. Two sets of people who couldn't be more different.

 

[Gwylan]

I think it's the distinction between grass roots voters re the EU and grass roots momentum activists re JC. Two sets of people who couldn't be more different.

Well of course they're different. JC's supporters are left of centre and the Leavers are (mainly) right of centre but the point is that both are at odds with their MPs. Yet, somehow that's a good thing when it comes to the EU and a bad thing when it comes to the EU. Whose opinion counts for more: MPs or the voters? Same question, two different answers

 

[Simster]

Whether he was truly terrible or just mediocre, I'm not really sure. However this shows what an absolute bottler he is - now truly washing his hands of any of it. Fck off you pig shagging podgy faced tool, and take your pet fag, Gideon, with you.