Chat & Social > The Bar - General Chat

Democracy in the UK

<< < (5/10) > >>

Yoshi:

--- Quote from: "Dr Strangeglove" ---Politicians should listen to their constituents rather than the party “whip”.  Surely being a member of a political party is detrimental to democracy.  With an MP that is part of a “party”, they are expected to vote in a certain way – the way of the “party” and not on behalf of their constituents – surely that is wrong.

If you ever meet a politician (if your unfortunate enough!) how many of you think they will actually listen to what you say!

This is the manifesto according to Dr Strangeglove!

No free rides:-
If you are on benefits you work for what you get (up to a reasonable amount for your circumstances).  This would not include taking jobs off employed people so it would have to be things that we don’t do at the moment (or haven’t the manpower to do well!).  Things as basic as cleaning public places, keeping things in a good state of order and helping those that need help.  Others would include pre-school sports (help the obesity problem, give parents that work a place to take their kids (or have their kids taken too! – another job!!)), helping the elderly, charities, etc. etc.

Immigration!
If you are illegal and it is decided that you are, you are out.  No appeals, no benefits and no welcome mat.
If you are a legal immigrant, then commit any significant crime and you are out.  No appeal unless you pay for it yourself!
Limited numbers (this would include refugees) that are sustainable.

Respect for the views of the people:-
Any vote going through parliament would be “pre-voted” by a panel of ordinary folk picked at random (a bit like jury service where you are given the facts before you vote - one panel per MP).  If the MP votes in a way against that of this panel then three strikes and they are out! and a by-election takes place.  (Sorry Skibum346, I had not read your part of the thread – I don’t want to steel your thunder!)

Stop banning things and pass a law giving all people the right to respect!

Give the Bobby’s more respect and let them do their job.  If it means a clip around the ear then fair play.  Take away the bureaucratic paperwork that keeps lawyers in a job and let them use a bit of common sense.  This would get rid of the “you can’t touch me, that’s assault” brigade.  It would have to be monitored and it would not be perfect (Bobby's are people and people make mistakes) but policing at the moment is a mistake as far as I can see (and not down to the Bobby’s).

If we need to be taxed then tax us on the level and stop doing it in an underhand way.  And stop the wealthy from avoiding tax by having a good accountant!

If we are going to go to war, tell us why (honestly), how much we expect it will cost, and how many lives will be lost and people injured!  When someone is killed or injured they are helped financially.  If we can’t afford this then we don’t go to war or we ask for volunteers that don’t mind the fact that we will treat them like second class citizens when they return (you won’t get many MP’s volunteering – what about their expenses??).

Stop giving MP’s the right to secrecy on expenses.  They managed to get that one out of the freedom of information act didn’t they!  How many of you would have voted for that one?

Start investing in our manufacturing industry.  The way it’s going at the moment we will all work in call centres or Tesco.

Stop the super markets taking over, and stop them taking the pee out of our farmers.

The list could go on and on, but let’s face it, we are not getting our moneys worth out of our current parliament!

To the people that say “if you don’t vote you don’t have the right to an opinion” I say this.  If you were asked “should theft be legal” and you were given the answers: a) yes, b) yes but only on Sundays or c) yes but only by people called David, how could you answer the question (unless you agreed with a, b, or c that is)?  Until you have a party where you feel you will be represented or listened too, how can you vote?  Every time you vote for one of the political parties they use it as a tool to say they are right!  If people must vote then their must be a “none of the above” box too.  Just because you have a choice does not mean you have a choice worth taking!

All this is just my opinion and I do not say I am right!

Just one point however!  I used to shoot pistols, and after the tragedy of Dunblane my sport was taken from me.  I can understand the outrage at what happened (I was outraged myself) but I was not involved and I believe it should have been prevented!  However, the media and the PC brigade turned a great deal of the public against me and my sport at that time and I believe that politicians used it as a vote winner.  What I am trying to say here is that hysteria/outrage can lead to bad decisions (whether you think this was a bad decision or not) and the next time it may be you (or the 4x4 owner) that is the brunt of their sales/vote winning tactics!  So giving everyone a say may not always produce the right decision.  It is very easy to alter someone’s rights if yours are not affected by the decision!

P.S. – Sorry to go on…….I get a bit wound up about politics……….Though you probably haven’t noticed!!
--- End quote ---



What about those with disabilities.  You are tarring a huge group with one brush when there is a hell of alot of differences in it.

Dr Strangeglove:
Badger!

Sorry if that’s the way it came across, it’s not how I wanted it to be read.

The disabled would be one of the groups that would be better off.  Those people that could work but can not find employment would be used to help the disabled.  Part of someone’s payback for receiving benefits could be as a helper for a disabled, elderly or just “needy” person.  That may be someone physically or mentally disabled.

For instance, I watched an episode of “life of grime” (I think), that had a couple with mental problems in that they just could not cope with life’s normal routine.  They could not look after themselves with simple things like cleaning the house etc.  This is a typical situation where people could be used to help others as repayment in kind for receiving their benefits.

If you are in full time employment but need benefits to cope then fair dinkum!  But at the same time if you are taking money from the system yet you do nothing (where you have the ability too) then why should you not payback.

If on the other hand you are disabled in a way that would still allow you to help others then why not?  If you have problems in mobility but could help a charity or good cause with computer based admin then why not.  I believe that it may help some claimants feel like they are putting something back.

But at the end of the day I could not guarantee it would work – but then again it might!

It would also make it harder for the benefit fraudsters – but I am certainly not saying everyone on benefits is a fraud!

Sorry if I caused offence!

Edge:

--- Quote from: "Dr Strangeglove" ---

If we need to be taxed then tax us on the level and stop doing it in an underhand way.  And stop the wealthy from avoiding tax by having a good accountant!



--- End quote ---


Couldn't agree more!
I have 1st hand experience of working for numerous multi-millionaires, yes they do get substantial tax reductions through loopholes/accountants etc & i'm not talking about a few hundred quid or a couple of grand.

Evilgoat:

--- Quote from: "Boddle" ---
--- Quote from: "Evilgoat" ---
Bad news, it is now illegal to spoil a paper and I'm not sure how anonymous your vote is, certainly changes are afoot so that your vote is no longer anonymous

--- End quote ---


That in it's own sense is non-Democratic don't see the that it would possible to do that as the voting system would infringe data protection act surely.

But there again you also don't have to put a mark on the paper to.
--- End quote ---


There have been numerous laws pushed through during this period of government that taken on their own dont seem like a lot. But when its all put in context it makes sense.

Blair wanted the ability to turn the army against his own people outside a state of emergency. the Public wouldnt buy this and it would have caused no end of headaches.

So after the fuel protests, while everyone was still grumbling a law was snuck through that allowed him to use the army to 'maintain supply lines'. Now if you read between the lines and what this legislation actually meant, you'll be shocked to find that it basically means the same thing as turning the army on the public.

Labour have repeatedly done this in all sorts of clandestine ways and a peicemeal fashion. The police will be familiar with these gradual changes and probobly resent them more than anyone else.

Again, the call goes out that we should not have the police looking after the roads and its shot down.

So one year the parking service is privatised, left to go quiet and then a little later the enforcement of speed limits by cameras gets turned over to 'saftey partnerships' and lo and hehold, last year, the DVLA/VOSA are enforcing the law on Motorways, see where its going? I thought you might.

Our Goverment may be a bit on the useless side but by no stretch of the imagination are they stupid, this is what is so damn dangerous. The house of Lords is already loosing power over them and after a few minor tweaks, the goverment can pretty much make up any law it likes and rest assured that it will pass.

graham:
Some interesting things being talked about here make you think

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page