|
HortonNash posted:What does that mean? To appeal against a specific order means you have to argue against the principles and context of the order being issued rather than relying on direct evidence relating to the order. Basically be prepared to have to pay very expensive barristers. 1986: The International Year of Peace.
|
# ? Oct 31, 2014 23:00 |
|
|
# ? Mar 28, 2024 11:41 |
|
baka kaba posted:Right, but it still allows the horrors of AV like PEOPLE GET MORE THAN ONE VOTE!! and TEH PERSON IN SECNOD PLACE WINS! and ITS TOO COMPLCATED, and PCC elections came after all those dynamic arguments had already been made! I just wondered if they bothered to justify it with some handwaving AV primarily lost because they forgot to actually run a pro AV campaign.
|
# ? Oct 31, 2014 23:07 |
|
It'd also get struck down as breaking the ECHR faster than you can count UKIP MPs after next year.
|
# ? Oct 31, 2014 23:09 |
|
Labour to replace the Lords with an elected 'senate'? Hmm. Seems like an actual ballsy move from Miliband (of course he's lying and will never do this). http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29857849
|
# ? Oct 31, 2014 23:44 |
|
Yeah, it cannot be right that London has more peers than most of the rest of the country combined... So appoint more peers from outside loving London. They could do that right now if they wanted to. I'm a bit leery of an elected second chamber if all it will do is mirror all the political bickering and back room dealing of the commons. The only thing the Lords has going for it is that they can tell the political parties to go gently caress themselves and vote on their conscience. Just making it elected isn't going to magically improve anything, it'll probably make things worse.
|
# ? Oct 31, 2014 23:57 |
|
JFairfax posted:But George Osborne, the Chancellor, has made clear in a letter to constituents that the aim of the orders would be to “eliminate extremism in all its forms” and that they would be used to curtail the activities of those who “spread hate but do not break laws”.
|
# ? Nov 1, 2014 00:06 |
|
tooterfish posted:Yeah, it cannot be right that London has more peers than most of the rest of the country combined... So appoint more peers from outside loving London. They could do that right now if they wanted to. Yeah, ideally I'd like to see a wholly elected Lords but members are elected for life (with strict rules on regional/party representation) and replaced as they die or resign (though I'd like to see them able to be recalled if the situation demands it). So just a load of by-elections really. You make it democratic but you retain that useful long term isolation from the mainstream political process/concerns about re-election. In completely unrelated news, I've been tossing around the idea of my perfect utopian electoral system. Hit upon the strange idea of returning to a form of wealth franchise, but inverted. Only those who fall below a certain level are eligible to stand for parliament. It's kind of undemocratic, but it enforces a system that would be governed in the interests of the most vulnerable and needy. You choose between economic success and political power, effectively - which is more important to you? You're not barred from wealth, it just comes at a cost. Actually seems like a half decent (if impossible to implement) system.
|
# ? Nov 1, 2014 00:08 |
|
^^^Only if being a politician is something you can't ever lose or get rid of. Someone gets voted out; what stops them going to be a rich lobbyist like we have now? The Lords is something like the third largest legislative body in the world behind some Indian and Chinese houses because everyone keeps appointing Lords to it and not enough of them are loving dying off. It's not particularly effective as a body of experts because they only know about the things they care about, it's not representative demographically and it's generally a stupid idea where its saving graces lie in the aristocratic memory of peasants murdering them if things change too much for the worse in a short period of time. namesake fucked around with this message at 00:12 on Nov 1, 2014 |
# ? Nov 1, 2014 00:09 |
|
ThomasPaine posted:In completely unrelated news, I've been tossing around the idea of my perfect utopian electoral system. Hit upon the strange idea of returning to a form of wealth franchise, but inverted. Only those who fall below a certain level are eligible to stand for parliament. It's kind of undemocratic, but it enforces a system that would be governed in the interests of the most vulnerable and needy. You choose between economic success and political power, effectively - which is more important to you? You're not barred from wealth, it just comes at a cost. Actually seems like a half decent (if impossible to implement) system. More immediately, it would have to be made by a system where those with immense wealth didn't have disproportionate power in the first place.
|
# ? Nov 1, 2014 00:13 |
|
JFairfax posted:This sounds sensible. It seems like the tories are getting all their really insane stuff into the public now knowing that nobody will pay attention because either they lose the election so it doesn't matter or its a bit too early and UKIP are dominating the headlines instead
|
# ? Nov 1, 2014 00:15 |
|
Jose posted:or its a bit too early and UKIP are dominating the headlines instead This is more likely to me. Like last time they'll probably campaign on somewhat centrist, compassionate grounds, and if they're elected (either as a majority or in a coalition with UKIP) they'll enact all of that insane shite and more.
|
# ? Nov 1, 2014 00:25 |
|
Jose posted:It seems like the tories are getting all their really insane stuff into the public now knowing that nobody will pay attention because either they lose the election so it doesn't matter or its a bit too early and UKIP are dominating the headlines instead Sounds like the case doesn't it.
|
# ? Nov 1, 2014 00:31 |
|
|
# ? Mar 28, 2024 11:41 |
|
Its been a barnstorming October everyone. See you all in the November thread http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3677921
|
# ? Nov 1, 2014 01:03 |