To think it’s time for reform to government

[familycourtq]

Listening to Prime Ministers Questions on the radio. The braying, jeering mobs (on all sides) are a fucking embarrassment.
We need modernisation- now, as well as a proper voting system.

I couldn't agree more.

We need modernisation- now, as well as a proper voting system.

We had a vote on that in 2011 and rejected it.

We had a vote on that in 2011 and rejected it.

A lot of water has passed under various bridges since then.

Wasn't the vote in 2011 for a particular form of proportional representation which many didn't agree to be true PR?

It would be great if someone could come up with a way of determining the electorate's views on many important subjects. We then get to vote for someone who will represent our views rather than us picking someone based on what their views are.

Difficult in practice but a simple idea.

A lot of water has passed under various bridges since then.

UK referendums don't work that way though. Another vote would be profoundly undemocratic. Or so I'm told.

Wasn't the vote in 2011 for a particular form of proportional representation which many didn't agree to be true PR?

True - which led to a wonderful coalition of cretins resulting in it's failure. For my money regardless of what the exact system proposed was, winning the referendum would have given electoral reform much more legitimacy - you can argue about the finer details after that.

Too late now. We had our chance, and fucked it up.

Braying and jeering, especially at the govt, is very important. In many countries, you get shot for give those in power a disapproving look.

It's absolutely vital that the PM and his/her front bench getting a weekly dose of huge disrespect. It may sound childish, but it's crucial.

We've been doing this for hundreds of years, and whilst many of our neighbours have had revolutions or fascist / communist dictators, we've avoided it.

We've been doing this for hundreds of years, and whilst many of our neighbours have had revolutions or fascist / communist dictators, we've avoided it.

I know - hardly worth mentioning the Civil War and executing a King really ...

I've watched a few Scottish Parliament debates and it's like a breath of fresh air compared to Westminster.

There is no braying, no name calling, no jeers, no filibustering and they just sit down and debate and discuss in a civilised manner.

I do believe PR is a good thing too, allowed parties like the tories and Greens have a voice based on votes cast rather than FPP where they would do very badly.

@Lifecraft I agree we should hold government to account. There is precious little of that going on, just pointless childish name-calling and point scoring.

@Gingerkittykat I agree about the Scottish Parliament.

The grass isn't so green re Scottish Parliament ..... polite enough in the chamber perhaps ...., but across traditional and social media today, everyone's arguing about the drugs problem / death rate.

SNP government reckon it's the nasty Tories' problem because prohibited drugs legislation is a reserved (Westminster) matter so they can't do much about anything until westminister give them that power.

Ignoring completely that the level of drugs deaths (and therefore addiction beforehand) may have links with education, justice system, health & social care ..... which are all devolved to Edinburgh.

There's always a bad boy over there to blame ......

We may elect differently from Westminster and maybe there's less braying ...... but still not perfect.

I've watched a few Scottish Parliament debates and it's like a breath of fresh air compared to Westminster.

You are joking? I think you might have mistaken one of the televised committee meetings for the parliament. The committees have a chairperson, order of debate and selected members. Constitutionally speaking however, the Scottish Government is a unicameral system without an independent revisionary chamber (the House of Lords is indeed useful), unlike any other modern westernised democratic system, because it is only a limited form of government. It also has a fairly weak division of powers because of the lack of a revisionary chamber. Nevertheless, there have been debacles in Scottish Government. If you google the "dark, dusky maiden" comments debacle, or the committee meeting where professor of Constitutional Law Adam Tompkins got into an argument with the somewhat poorer quality committee chairperson who tried to silence him speaking with regards to independence, and you may not have such a rosy view...

The problem is that we've not had the kind of revolutions, invasions etc that usually result in constitutional change. So everything is very old.

I'd like major change but I can't see it happening any time soon. You need a civil war or revolution then the victors set out how they want the new system to work. The current shitshow of politicians don't have the authority to do it.

While we're at it we should codify laws do there's eg a single volume with criminal law in, not a heap of statutes that are inaccessible to normal people.

While we're at it we should codify laws do there's eg a single volume with criminal law in, not a heap of statutes that are inaccessible to normal people.

But how else will lawyers make money ?

I agree with you op

While we're at it we should codify laws do there's eg a single volume with criminal law in, not a heap of statutes that are inaccessible to normal people.

A single, clear, written constitutional document would certainly be useful. I think we are now at the stage as a country where we need one.

Imagine how useful it would have been if we had a written constitution which stated that any change to the constitution (such as leaving the EU) must be done by majority vote of e.g. 60% or 75% or whatever, and that such vote must not be repeated for at least 15 years (or whatever).