Democracy???

[nooddsocksforme]

It seems unbelievable to me that either Hunt or Boris could be our next pm. For all those people who say a second referendum is undemocratic , what about the fact that who is the next Pm, and will potentially allow us to leave with no deal, will be decided by a group of entitled and self interested Tory voters. There is no democracy in evidence there.
The backstop is a huge issue but everyone seems to have forgotten about Scotland. The current debacle , which shows Tory politicians more interested in their own agendas than the future of this country, and a non existent opposition party , will inevitably lead to Scottish independence in my opinion. Scotland voted to remain, and has no time for this self serving , entitled attitude to government.
Will there then be a hard border between England and Scotland. Where will Ireland’s loyalty’s lie. Will England become increasing isolated and xenophobic

Democracy has many shades and nuances. A General Election decides which party is in government. It is up to that party how they choose their leader. All the parties have different ways of doing this, but I don't think any of them involves going back to the public.

No party asks the public to vote for the party leader.
Of course only party members can vote.

Johnson carping at Brown for not having a general election once he became leader springs to mind. As does TM's decision to have a general election to validate her premiership, which is kind of why we are in the mess we are currently in.

Upon her resignation, May will make a recommendation to the Queen to send for the winner of the Tory poll.

The Queen will then in all probability summon said person and ask them the usual question, "Mr Hunt/Johnson, Can you form a government?" They will in all likelihood say they can.

This is where it starts to get fun. Vernon Bogdanor will be on speed-dial at the Palace.

The Queen then has the right to ask additional questions should she choose. She might ask, "And can you command a majority in the House of Commons?"

The answer to this is No, or, Maybe, perhaps, if the DUP let me.

It is at this point that QE2 faces the greatest constitutional crisis in her reign. Does she say, Oh go on then, have a go? Or does she say, No, I'm not having this, I'm the bloody Queen. Mrs May, you stay PM until you can send me someone who has demonstrated the confdence of the House. Otherwise I shall dissolve parliament and we shall have another election. Sorry, Brenda.

I think Ann Widdicombe actually had a sensible idea - let the MPs say they want to try for the leadership, then put that to the vote of party members. They could then vote by ranking them, and then let the final two be elected by the party MPs in Parliament. They can then chose the one they have most confidence it. They are at least elected to represent their constituents and to use their judgement, so this doesn't seem too undemocratic to me.

However, I think a hung Parliament which is the situation May got herself into does add extra complexity. A party with a clear majority has a mandate. One without doesn't really, and in May's case especially not, since she is propped up by the DUP which something like 95% of the country either can't or won't vote for.

@nooddsocksforme - Where will Ireland’s loyalty’s lie.

Ireland's loyalty will obviously lie with Ireland. We are an independent country. Why would you even be wondering about where our loyalty lie, any more than you would wonder where France's loyalty lies? We certainly don't owe the UK any "loyalty".

@Isthisafreename I'm
Not 100% sure on this but I believe she refers to the Ireland/ Northern Ireland border? If there is no deal, this could be tricky. I may be wrong though and that's not what she means x

Sorry typos - selected not elected and confidence in, not it.

It gets round the problem that Labour also has of having a Leader elected by the membership, but who doesn't enjoy the confidence of his Parliamentary party, which hasn't helped resolve issues over the last 3 years.

@Firstimemam - Will there then be a hard border between England and Scotland. Where will Ireland’s loyalty’s lie. Will England become increasing isolated and xenophobic

This is the paragraph I'm referring to. Even if she is referring to the border, Ireland's loyalty will obviously still be to Ireland (and the EU as we are members).

Just the irony of people who cite democracy as a motive for pushing ahead with a no deal Brexit at any cost.These are also largely the same people who support Boris Johnson who's crowning as PM will be decided by a tiny minority unrepresentative of the population and who has said he will prorogue parliament to deliver a no deal Brexit. How is that democratic

Especially since we have had so many postings from Leavers about Democracy and what don't we understand.

Preserving democracy is the duty of Government. If there is a vote it has to be honored otherwise there is no democracy.

If voters think they have made a mistake they can vote differently in a future General Election.

{If voters think they have made a mistake they can vote differently in a future General Election.}
A parliamentary term is only a few years. Getting in or out of the EU (and in fact trade dealings in general) are 10 years or more in preparation. Claiming a hardly conclusive referendum and not being able to examine and re confirm the result is not democracy.

Claiming a hardly conclusive referendum and not being able to examine and re confirm the result is not democracy

The 500+ MP's who voted to trigger Article 50 must have thought it was conclusive. Likewise the two major parties, Conservative and Labour, who in the 2017 GE committed to honor the 2016 referendum must have thought it conclusive.

In a horse race first past the post wins. That the losing horses were 1 millimetre or 1 kilometre behind makes no difference. Some horse races have to be settled by examination of photo taken at the winning post. However, there is always a definitive verdict.

Can't remember any horse race being ran a second time as the winning horse did not win by a big enough margin.

How may times have we seen in UK Parties gaining the majority of seats even though they did not receive the majority of votes?

The 2016 referendum was a majority to Leave, all be it 4%.

Democracy often means not getting what you want, especially where there are significant regional differences. Would you rather there was no referendum and Westminster had simply said ‘we are leaving’?

Democracy often means not getting what you want

Exactly and not being a bad loser and wanting to play;

Best of 3
Best of 3
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Best of 33,200,001 (about half of UK population)

Until the result you want to hear appears.

Since some Leavers need a refresher course in Democracy, MPs are elected to represent all their constituents, not just the one's who they think will vote for them.

I will give Theresa May her due: I believe she did have a good reputation as a constituency MP.

I know. Let's cancel all General and Local Elections then. Why should people have to keep voting?

I agree that democracy means not always getting exactly what you want. Which is what the WA was - a route to Brexit that accommodated all the red lines. But our sovereign parliament, which was elected AFTER the referendum, didn't go for it. Primarily the ERG stopped it. Because it didn't give them EVERYTHING they wanted. We would be out by now if it wasn't for them. And getting stuck into trade negotiations with our biggest market.
We have a parliamentary democracy, @LifeContinues . Don't you like it?

ERG has 90 members. WA was voted down by 230 first time and 149 second time. So rejection can’t have been solely attributable to ERG.

So, LifeContinues
Now that you have 'won' would you please explain how your choice is going to improve the lives of the average UK citizen please.
You have had 3 years to come up with a decent list, so where is it?
Sovereignty and Immigration have already been covered, the UK governments had both all the time, as well as the funding to sort out the NHS and even the 'Northern Powerhouse' if it had put it's mind top it. So, when over the last 3 years has the UK gov done ANYTHING to address these?
As a supplementary question, what is going to make them start?

3 years have been wasted as current PM T May is a remainer who was given a leavers job. Never going to work. Bit like asking a Muslim to preach Christianity. If they don’t believe in it they will never want it to happen.

So the next PM has to be a leaver. Two options at the moment. BoJo or Hunt. I think BoJo will win that contest.

UK leaving EU on 31st October will restore some faith in UK government as it will demonstrate that UK government has preserved democracy in that a majority vote will be honoured. Any party that promotes rule based on a minority view will never be elected again. Hence new PM will have to start to address the issues of NHS and Northern Powerhouse (don’t remember hearing that phrase before) immediately.

A good deal is better than no deal. EU have said that the WA can’t be revisited, but that was when T May the remainer was at the helm and took no deal off table. Nobody enters any negotiation without being prepared to walk away. Bit like selling your house for a bad price because nothing better came along. So there is still an opening for the WA to be improved. If not then it is WTO deal by default.

Will a WTO deal be easy in the short term? I think not. Will be a while before things stabilise.

How will the average person be better off? That requires government to realise that the Brexit dividend in itself is not sufficient to improve living standards in the UK.

Government can borrow more, but that is passing debt onto future generations.

Government can rise taxes, but UK is already at a high level. More efficient collection from the large companies who seem to be evading taxes would be a better choice.

Another option is to make better use of funds that are currently available. This is where opinion will be divided. Ask 10 people what should be UK first priority and you will likely hear 10 different answers.

Scrap HS2 would be my first choice. Almost 100 Billion to be saved. Savings to be spent on housing so that more people can buy instead of being forced into high rent accommodation.

Reduced foreign aid. Let’s say from the current 13 Billion to 11 Billion. Still a good contribution, but frees up 2 Billion which is the figure banded about that NHS needs.

Science and engineering to be promoted and receive increased investment. However, trying to reverse a downward trend that started in the 80s is a huge uphill task, but all eggs in the same basket, which is services in the UK, is not a good idea. A diverse economy would be better.

Pensions need looking at too. UK state pension is poor in comparison to other developed countries.

LifeContinues
You really are struggling chuck.
{So there is still an opening for the WA to be improved.}
The WA is a 'procedure' as much as anything, not a 'deal'.
Theresa wanted the job to take the UK out, she didn't have to.
There isn't a 'Brexit dividend' you have been hoodwinked. The £39 Billion is owed and the 0.7% GDP that the UK pays into the EU is pitiful considering the costs of everything else.

Scrapping HS2 is about the only sensible thing you have mentioned.
Most other things are activities the UK could have been doing over the last 30+ years, but hasn't.

The Brexit Dividend is what UK will longer need to pay to the EU in the future after it has left which is currently £50 million per day gross before rebate adjustments. Separate to the £39 Billion one off payment to cover commitments made by UK prior to the referendum.

UK could have done many things over the last 30 years along the lines suggested for the future, but they did not.

North Sea Oil revenue never seemed to make a difference to the UK. A fortune spent on the Falklands War in 1982. Another fortune spent on the Miners Strike in 1984/1985.

Council houses sold off cheap. Companies like British Telecom and BP sold off cheap to make people feel good in the short term as there was a quick overnight profit to be had.

Spending money on wars playing follow the leader with USA cost another fortune.

But that is now history. World has moved on a lot in the last 30 years and the Economies that are growing the fastest are outside the EU.

In short, @LifeContinues , it is all about "feelz". That's fine, you feel what you want as long as you don't trash the economy.