This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
Tim Gypsy Hill '64 Stoke sub normal 28 Feb 23 12.55am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
I found that very strange so looked it up. The definition that I found given by Collins is "A filibuster is a long slow speech made to use up time so that a vote cannot be taken and a law cannot be passed." See:-https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/filibuster This matches my own understanding perfectly and was not done by any MP in the run up to the 2019 election. Can you post a link please. You expect me to explain what it is that I cannot understand? Not logical! I wasn't angry with those brave MPs who argued for a confirmatory second vote. I was proud of them and so too was everyone else I spoke to, other than the hard-line Eurosceptics who were afraid they would lose the prize they thought their tactics was about to deliver. It was Brexit weariness and the failure of the HoC to grasp the nettle and oust Johnson after he was slapped down by the Supreme Court that led to the debacle that we are now witnessing. The "oven ready deal" whose ingredients are half rotten and have little nutrition. So bad that we are still trying to repair it. I don't expect MPs to behave dishonestly. Should they do so they ought be shown the door immediately. Coalitions can work well. It just requires goodwill and honesty. In the system I am suggesting, one where the MPs are the Kings and privacy protected, that ought to be attainable. MPs from both sides often get along much better than appears to be the case. They have to put on the theatrics in our current system which demands confrontation. I would rather have intelligent debate and cooperation than theatrical confrontation. But isn't that obstructing legislation with delaying tactics?
Systematically dragged down by the lawmakers |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Forest Hillbilly in a hidey-hole 28 Feb 23 5.40am | |
---|---|
A confirmatory second vote ? hilarious. Why not just keep people voting until you get the result you want ? I'm tingling with excitement just waiting for the words to come ,..."Britannia,..Nil Points" Edited by Forest Hillbilly (28 Feb 2023 5.41am)
I disengage, I turn the page. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Matov 28 Feb 23 7.34am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Forest Hillbilly
Edited by Forest Hillbilly (28 Feb 2023 5.41am)
"The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." - 1984 - George Orwell. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 28 Feb 23 8.19am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Tim Gypsy Hill '64
But isn't that obstructing legislation with delaying tactics? No. It's a very specific delaying tactic.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
georgenorman 28 Feb 23 8.25am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
I found that very strange so looked it up. The definition that I found given by Collins is "A filibuster is a long slow speech made to use up time so that a vote cannot be taken and a law cannot be passed." See:-https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/filibuster This matches my own understanding perfectly and was not done by any MP in the run up to the 2019 election. Can you post a link please. You expect me to explain what it is that I cannot understand? Not logical! I wasn't angry with those brave MPs who argued for a confirmatory second vote. I was proud of them and so too was everyone else I spoke to, other than the hard-line Eurosceptics who were afraid they would lose the prize they thought their tactics was about to deliver. It was Brexit weariness and the failure of the HoC to grasp the nettle and oust Johnson after he was slapped down by the Supreme Court that led to the debacle that we are now witnessing. The "oven ready deal" whose ingredients are half rotten and have little nutrition. So bad that we are still trying to repair it. I don't expect MPs to behave dishonestly. Should they do so they ought be shown the door immediately. Coalitions can work well. It just requires goodwill and honesty. In the system I am suggesting, one where the MPs are the Kings and privacy protected, that ought to be attainable. MPs from both sides often get along much better than appears to be the case. They have to put on the theatrics in our current system which demands confrontation. I would rather have intelligent debate and cooperation than theatrical confrontation. Using the same link, if you scroll down, they give the ‘British English’ usage – you are quoting the US usage. As we live in Britain, one should use the British usage. I hope you can understand that as you say you have difficulty in understanding things. You may well have been proud of the filibusterers, the electorate thought otherwise. It is utter, tedious nonsense for you to keep saying that Johnson’s landslide victory was because of what you laughingly call ‘Brexit weariness’ and is an insult to the electorate that you hold in so little regard. Some MPs throughout parliamentary history have behaved dishonestly – it is disingenuous or naïve to say otherwise, but of course you are no stranger to disingenuousness when you pretend to not understand straightforward arguments. Just look around the world at where coalitions are the norm and you will that very few work well. We should have as much transparency in parliament that is practicable and certainly we should know how our MPs have voted. Edited by georgenorman (28 Feb 2023 8.44am)
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 28 Feb 23 8.34am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Teddy Eagle
One Every 16 years, and counting, represents a major threat? OK. Of course, it would! That's their job! Holding a consultative referendum to gauge current public opinion would be a useful negotiating tactic when dealing with matters as important as membership of the EU. This is what ought to have happened in 2016. The result used to tell the EU that they need to take the concerns seriously and negotiate a deal that would avoid the next GE returning a Parliament which would decide to leave the EU. Parliament being the place where such decisions are taken. Instead, the Tory Party, under Cameron, being fearful of losing power and convinced they would get a yes vote, made a commitment to respect the result. That was a disastrous miscalculation which has set us back for generations and for which I will never forgive the party.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 28 Feb 23 8.40am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Forest Hillbilly
A confirmatory second vote ? hilarious. Why not just keep people voting until you get the result you want ? I'm tingling with excitement just waiting for the words to come ,..."Britannia,..Nil Points" Edited by Forest Hillbilly (28 Feb 2023 5.41am) Of course not! That's both Parliament's right, and their duty. It was, and is, their responsibility to decide such things on our behalf. Brexit didn't happen because of the referendum. It happened because of Article 50. If Parliament wanted to consult the people to determine if in the intervening years, with all the knowledge that had been acquired, their opinion had shifted, then they could. In my view they should have done.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Teddy Eagle 28 Feb 23 9.17am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
Of course not! That's both Parliament's right, and their duty. It was, and is, their responsibility to decide such things on our behalf. Brexit didn't happen because of the referendum. It happened because of Article 50. If Parliament wanted to consult the people to determine if in the intervening years, with all the knowledge that had been acquired, their opinion had shifted, then they could. In my view they should have done. One referendum bad, two good.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
HKOwen Hong Kong 28 Feb 23 10.16am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Forest Hillbilly
A confirmatory second vote ? hilarious. Why not just keep people voting until you get the result you want ? I'm tingling with excitement just waiting for the words to come ,..."Britannia,..Nil Points" Edited by Forest Hillbilly (28 Feb 2023 5.41am) I cannot believe the Govt is directly funding a song contest. The BBC presumably also pays something so the public will be taxed twice Edited by HKOwen (28 Feb 2023 10.16am)
Responsibility Deficit Disorder is a medical condition. Symptoms include inability to be corrected when wrong, false sense of superiority, desire to share personal info no else cares about, general hubris. It's a medical issue rather than pure arrogance. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
steeleye20 Croydon 28 Feb 23 11.01am | |
---|---|
Its good that the mood music has changed with the EU, despite all the grandstanding though this is not much more than an easing of the border rules. If any country has a democratic deficit it must be Northern Ireland. All these tory knobs from Westminster, even King Charles and Queen Van Leyden of the EU decide their fate without them even being there. Now probably a minority, the DUP will though have a chance to reject it, the rest of NI citizens not at all, but its a sort of 'well we had better consult you' basis. The DUP will be ground down and there will be economic sweeteners no doubt. A big plus the side-lining of the odious Johnson. Northern Ireland voted to stay in the EU of course. But then that's what they actually voted for.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
cryrst The garden of England 28 Feb 23 11.06am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by steeleye20
Its good that the mood music has changed with the EU, despite all the grandstanding though this is not much more than an easing of the border rules. If any country has a democratic deficit it must be Northern Ireland. All these tory knobs from Westminster, even King Charles and Queen Van Leyden of the EU decide their fate without them even being there. Now probably a minority, the DUP will though have a chance to reject it, the rest of NI citizens not at all, but its a sort of 'well we had better consult you' basis. The DUP will be ground down and there will be economic sweeteners no doubt. A big plus the side-lining of the odious Johnson. Northern Ireland voted to stay in the EU of course. But then that's what they actually voted for.
Did they have a referendum which the MPs honoured?
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 28 Feb 23 12.12pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by georgenorman
Using the same link, if you scroll down, they give the ‘British English’ usage – you are quoting the US usage. As we live in Britain, one should use the British usage. I hope you can understand that as you say you have difficulty in understanding things. You may well have been proud of the filibusterers, the electorate thought otherwise. It is utter, tedious nonsense for you to keep saying that Johnson’s landslide victory was because of what you laughingly call ‘Brexit weariness’ and is an insult to the electorate that you hold in so little regard. Some MPs throughout parliamentary history have behaved dishonestly – it is disingenuous or naïve to say otherwise, but of course you are no stranger to disingenuousness when you pretend to not understand straightforward arguments. Just look around the world at where coalitions are the norm and you will that very few work well. We should have as much transparency in parliament that is practicable and certainly we should know how our MPs have voted. Edited by georgenorman (28 Feb 2023 8.44am) What it actually says is "the process or an instance of obstructing legislation by means of long speeches and other delaying tactics". I don't think you will find any other dictionary that includes "other" tactics, and it's not what I, or I suspect too many others, understand by the term. Despite your pedantic attitude you are wrong in any event. The MPs in question weren't delaying anything. They voted, just as every other MP voted. Just not the way the whips wanted them to. That's their right. What was disgusting was Johnson's bullying reaction, and the attempt to treat our elected representatives as sheep to be herded into his lobby. We need to free ourselves of such behaviour. You obviously don't like the truth. Some staunch remainers I know voted Tory in 2019. Firstly, because of loyalty to their party and support for a local MP they admire. Secondly, because they too were tired of the delays. If you are going to get some pain best get it now, so you can start to recover quicker. Why more delay was their thinking. Thirdly, and most importantly, there was no alternative that they could possibly support that had any chance of success. They didn't support us leaving but were prepared to give it a chance. Your interpretation of what happened is simplistic and simply wrong. It's a view I have heard many times, usually from UKIP types, and sits alongside their other irrational ideas. They seem to think everyone thinks like them. They don't. I have re-read your earlier post and it remains incoherent. Regrettably, it's not the first that appears muddled and difficult to follow. Sorry if you think that is disingenuous, but it isn't. Coalitions do work. Both are major parties are effectively coalitions, just undeclared ones in which the compromises and negotiations happen in secret rather than in the open. I would rather the electorate be able to judge a candidate on their true beliefs than ones they are required to defend. It's when we vote that we need transparency. After that our representatives must be free to do their jobs.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Registration is now on our new message board
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.