Tory / DUP deal to be debated in parliament.

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

Tory / DUP deal to be debated in parliament.

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Page 2 of 2 << First < 1 2

jamiemartin721 Reading 05 Dec 17 10.43am
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger More w***ers trying to circumvent democracy by throwing money at it. Totally disgusting. Only if you dismiss the idea of democracy as including the right to challenge government policy and decisions on the basis of how lawful it is. Democracy returned a hung parliament, he's challenging what essentially is a unestablished method of forming a majority government, in which a party provides tax fund revenue to obtain sufficient support to form a government. That's exactly how democracy works. The law is a part of that system, which includes the right of individuals and groups, to challenge the authority and legality of government. "One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721

Reading 05 Dec 17 10.43am

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

More w***ers trying to circumvent democracy by throwing money at it.

Totally disgusting.

Only if you dismiss the idea of democracy as including the right to challenge government policy and decisions on the basis of how lawful it is.

Democracy returned a hung parliament, he's challenging what essentially is a unestablished method of forming a majority government, in which a party provides tax fund revenue to obtain sufficient support to form a government.

That's exactly how democracy works. The law is a part of that system, which includes the right of individuals and groups, to challenge the authority and legality of government.

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721 Reading 05 Dec 17 10.51am
Originally posted by elgrande f*ing amazing makes me laugh, democracy when it suits people. Is what the government did illegal**.Is it no more than anyone else would do. Corbyn would have formed an alliance with the monster raving looney party given a chance. Its never been established whether its legal, which is why a legal challenge is reasonable. The UK legal system largely works on precedent, as we've only ever had three hung parliments - and the resolution of this one, effectively sits on a deal that the DUP would support certain motions, and in return Northern Ireland got additional funds - There is no precident. The usual expectation of a political deal in a coalition government is negotiated policy - The provision of additional funding for Northern Ireland, to return a conservative government, is questionable on that very basis (as without the support of the DUP the Conservatives would not be able to pay that money etc). Its useful, because this is the kind of thing that the courts decide - Because there isn't any real precident. "One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721

Reading 05 Dec 17 10.51am

Originally posted by elgrande

f***ing amazing makes me laugh, democracy when it suits people.
Is what the government did illegal.Is it no more than anyone else would do.
Corbyn would have formed an alliance with the monster raving looney party given a chance.

Its never been established whether its legal, which is why a legal challenge is reasonable. The UK legal system largely works on precedent, as we've only ever had three hung parliments - and the resolution of this one, effectively sits on a deal that the DUP would support certain motions, and in return Northern Ireland got additional funds - There is no precident.

The usual expectation of a political deal in a coalition government is negotiated policy - The provision of additional funding for Northern Ireland, to return a conservative government, is questionable on that very basis (as without the support of the DUP the Conservatives would not be able to pay that money etc).

Its useful, because this is the kind of thing that the courts decide - Because there isn't any real precident.

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

Badger11 Beckenham 05 Dec 17 1.32pm
I don't understand why the deal with the DUP is any different from previous deals. The party with the largest number of seats will be asked to form a government. If they do not have an absolute majority they will negotiate with other parties. The Tories did this with the Lib Dems under Cameron and Labour did this with the Liberals back in the 1970's. Go back further to the war and pre war years and there were all sorts of coalitions. I am not a lover of coalitions because it often means that the tail wags the dog. Fortunately we do not have proportional representation which would mean more deal making with smaller possibly radical parties. Those opposed to a conservative - DUP deal just don't like either party. If Corbyn had been in a similar position he would have talked to the Scot Nats and the Lib Dems and I wouldn't blame him. As for the DUP I am not a fan as they and the other parties in Northern Ireland are about as flexible and reasonable as a plank of wood. Roll on the next general election and when it comes I will be rooting for the largest party to have a majority even if that means it is Labour. We have to have strong government. One more point
Alert a moderator to this post

Badger11

Beckenham 05 Dec 17 1.32pm

I don't understand why the deal with the DUP is any different from previous deals. The party with the largest number of seats will be asked to form a government. If they do not have an absolute majority they will negotiate with other parties. The Tories did this with the Lib Dems under Cameron and Labour did this with the Liberals back in the 1970's. Go back further to the war and pre war years and there were all sorts of coalitions.

I am not a lover of coalitions because it often means that the tail wags the dog. Fortunately we do not have proportional representation which would mean more deal making with smaller possibly radical parties.

Those opposed to a conservative - DUP deal just don't like either party. If Corbyn had been in a similar position he would have talked to the Scot Nats and the Lib Dems and I wouldn't blame him.

As for the DUP I am not a fan as they and the other parties in Northern Ireland are about as flexible and reasonable as a plank of wood.

Roll on the next general election and when it comes I will be rooting for the largest party to have a majority even if that means it is Labour. We have to have strong government.

One more point

Alert a moderator to this post

npn Crowborough 05 Dec 17 1.50pm
Originally posted by jamiemartin721 Its never been established whether its legal, which is why a legal challenge is reasonable. The UK legal system largely works on precedent, as we've only ever had three hung parliments - and the resolution of this one, effectively sits on a deal that the DUP would support certain motions, and in return Northern Ireland got additional funds - There is no precident. The usual expectation of a political deal in a coalition government is negotiated policy - The provision of additional funding for Northern Ireland, to return a conservative government, is questionable on that very basis (as without the support of the DUP the Conservatives would not be able to pay that money etc). Its useful, because this is the kind of thing that the courts decide - Because there isn't any real precident. Is it any different from any other coalition though? When the bigger party approaches you and says "join us in a coalition government" aren't you always going to negotiate for what you can get out of it? Clegg got his PR referendum (although he totally messed up by allowing it to be watered down to the totally cr@p AV). That referendum cost the country a lot of money. All the Tories did with the DUP was promise them increased spending (sounds very much like a cash bung but, by definition, once they have a majority, they can vote through whatever the hell they want). They could, of course, have said nothing and just tabled a motion to increase spending in NI and, surprise surprise, won the vote in parliament. It doesn't smell right, but I'm not sure it's really any different.
Alert a moderator to this post

npn

Crowborough 05 Dec 17 1.50pm

Originally posted by jamiemartin721

Its useful, because this is the kind of thing that the courts decide - Because there isn't any real precident.

Is it any different from any other coalition though? When the bigger party approaches you and says "join us in a coalition government" aren't you always going to negotiate for what you can get out of it? Clegg got his PR referendum (although he totally messed up by allowing it to be watered down to the totally cr@p AV). That referendum cost the country a lot of money. All the Tories did with the DUP was promise them increased spending (sounds very much like a cash bung but, by definition, once they have a majority, they can vote through whatever the hell they want). They could, of course, have said nothing and just tabled a motion to increase spending in NI and, surprise surprise, won the vote in parliament.

It doesn't smell right, but I'm not sure it's really any different.

Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721 Reading 05 Dec 17 3.06pm
Originally posted by npn Is it any different from any other coalition though? When the bigger party approaches you and says "join us in a coalition government" aren't you always going to negotiate for what you can get out of it? Clegg got his PR referendum (although he totally messed up by allowing it to be watered down to the totally cr@p AV). That referendum cost the country a lot of money. All the Tories did with the DUP was promise them increased spending (sounds very much like a cash bung but, by definition, once they have a majority, they can vote through whatever the hell they want). They could, of course, have said nothing and just tabled a motion to increase spending in NI and, surprise surprise, won the vote in parliament. It doesn't smell right, but I'm not sure it's really any different. I think there is a reasonable difference between support for democratic policy and what could be argued as amounting to a financial payment for support. Buying votes of MPs with financial incentives is illegal - but increasing spending in response to DUP support, is somewhere between the two. "One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721

Reading 05 Dec 17 3.06pm

Originally posted by npn

It doesn't smell right, but I'm not sure it's really any different.

I think there is a reasonable difference between support for democratic policy and what could be argued as amounting to a financial payment for support. Buying votes of MPs with financial incentives is illegal - but increasing spending in response to DUP support, is somewhere between the two.

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721 Reading 05 Dec 17 3.08pm
Originally posted by Badger11 I don't understand why the deal with the DUP is any different from previous deals. The party with the largest number of seats will be asked to form a government. If they do not have an absolute majority they will negotiate with other parties. The Tories did this with the Lib Dems under Cameron and Labour did this with the Liberals back in the 1970's. Go back further to the war and pre war years and there were all sorts of coalitions. I am not a lover of coalitions because it often means that the tail wags the dog. Fortunately we do not have proportional representation which would mean more deal making with smaller possibly radical parties. Those opposed to a conservative - DUP deal just don't like either party. If Corbyn had been in a similar position he would have talked to the Scot Nats and the Lib Dems and I wouldn't blame him. As for the DUP I am not a fan as they and the other parties in Northern Ireland are about as flexible and reasonable as a plank of wood. Roll on the next general election and when it comes I will be rooting for the largest party to have a majority even if that means it is Labour. We have to have strong government. I think its more because the support of the DUP came in return for increased funding in NI, which is falls between the buying of votes (illegal) and supporting policy in a compromise solution (legal). I suspect we will rarely have outright majorities akin to those of the past. "One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721

Reading 05 Dec 17 3.08pm

Originally posted by Badger11

Those opposed to a conservative - DUP deal just don't like either party. If Corbyn had been in a similar position he would have talked to the Scot Nats and the Lib Dems and I wouldn't blame him.

As for the DUP I am not a fan as they and the other parties in Northern Ireland are about as flexible and reasonable as a plank of wood.

Roll on the next general election and when it comes I will be rooting for the largest party to have a majority even if that means it is Labour. We have to have strong government.

I think its more because the support of the DUP came in return for increased funding in NI, which is falls between the buying of votes (illegal) and supporting policy in a compromise solution (legal).

I suspect we will rarely have outright majorities akin to those of the past.

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

Hrolf The Ganger 05 Dec 17 4.16pm
Originally posted by jamiemartin721 Only if you dismiss the idea of democracy as including the right to challenge government policy and decisions on the basis of how lawful it is. Democracy returned a hung parliament, he's challenging what essentially is a unestablished method of forming a majority government, in which a party provides tax fund revenue to obtain sufficient support to form a government. That's exactly how democracy works. The law is a part of that system, which includes the right of individuals and groups, to challenge the authority and legality of government. Come off it. This is a purely political move using the law as an excuse. Principle has little to do with it. Edited by Hrolf The Ganger (05 Dec 2017 4.25pm)
Alert a moderator to this post

Hrolf The Ganger

05 Dec 17 4.16pm

Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger

Originally posted by jamiemartin721

Only if you dismiss the idea of democracy as including the right to challenge government policy and decisions on the basis of how lawful it is.

That's exactly how democracy works. The law is a part of that system, which includes the right of individuals and groups, to challenge the authority and legality of government.

Come off it. This is a purely political move using the law as an excuse. Principle has little to do with it.

Edited by Hrolf The Ganger (05 Dec 2017 4.25pm)

Alert a moderator to this post

elgrande bedford 05 Dec 17 4.19pm
Originally posted by nickgusset Why are you bringing Corbyn into it? It's nothing to do with him. It's Tory voters what have #fukdup by buying the media narrative of St Theresa being a safe pair of hands in the Tory leadership election, and run up to the GE she calamitously called after invoking article 50. Brexit isn't going tits up because of Corbyn. What do you make of the DUP not bowing to Theresas wishes despite being showered in cash? Well it is really,because the t* who crowd funded and the recent..knocking of democracy has all come from the lovers of corbyn. we did not have this sort of s* before....now all of a sudden we the public can,t be trusted and uncle jeremey will see us ok. you had your chance to vote him in, and you feel short. always a Norwood boy, where ever I live.
Alert a moderator to this post

elgrande

bedford 05 Dec 17 4.19pm

Originally posted by nickgusset

Why are you bringing Corbyn into it? It's nothing to do with him. It's Tory voters what have #fukdup by buying the media narrative of St Theresa being a safe pair of hands in the Tory leadership election, and run up to the GE she calamitously called after invoking article 50.

Brexit isn't going tits up because of Corbyn.

What do you make of the DUP not bowing to Theresas wishes despite being showered in cash?

Well it is really,because the t*** who crowd funded and the recent..knocking of democracy has all come from the lovers of corbyn.
we did not have this sort of s*** before....now all of a sudden we the public can,t be trusted and uncle jeremey will see us ok.
you had your chance to vote him in, and you feel short.

always a Norwood boy, where ever I live.

Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721 Reading 05 Dec 17 4.46pm
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger Come off it. This is a purely political move using the law as an excuse. Principle has little to do with it. Edited by Hrolf The Ganger (05 Dec 2017 4.25pm) That's for a judge to decide. Whilst it might be entirely politically motivated, that doesn't mean that the actions of the Conservatives are lawful. If there is no basis for the case, then it will be thrown out. I agree principle has nothing to do with it, its how the democratic system works - People have the legal right and mechanism to challenge government in a court of law to ascertain whether their actions are lawful or not. "One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721

Reading 05 Dec 17 4.46pm

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

Come off it. This is a purely political move using the law as an excuse. Principle has little to do with it.

Edited by Hrolf The Ganger (05 Dec 2017 4.25pm)

That's for a judge to decide. Whilst it might be entirely politically motivated, that doesn't mean that the actions of the Conservatives are lawful. If there is no basis for the case, then it will be thrown out.

I agree principle has nothing to do with it, its how the democratic system works - People have the legal right and mechanism to challenge government in a court of law to ascertain whether their actions are lawful or not.

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721 Reading 05 Dec 17 4.49pm
Originally posted by elgrande Well it is really,because the t* who crowd funded and the recent..knocking of democracy has all come from the lovers of corbyn. we did not have this sort of s* before....now all of a sudden we the public can,t be trusted and uncle jeremey will see us ok. you had your chance to vote him in, and you feel short. No we've got a long history of legal challenges to government decisions, through the judicial system. The entire point of a government and separate judiciary is to allow for the democratic challenge of state by members of society. Again it doesn't matter why someone challenges the government in court, only that they can, and whether or not the case is lawful. "One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721

Reading 05 Dec 17 4.49pm

Originally posted by elgrande

No we've got a long history of legal challenges to government decisions, through the judicial system. The entire point of a government and separate judiciary is to allow for the democratic challenge of state by members of society.

Again it doesn't matter why someone challenges the government in court, only that they can, and whether or not the case is lawful.

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

nickgusset Shizzlehurst 05 Dec 17 4.50pm
Originally posted by elgrande Well it is really,because the t* who crowd funded and the recent..knocking of democracy has all come from the lovers of corbyn. we did not have this sort of s* before....now all of a sudden we the public can,t be trusted and uncle jeremey will see us ok. you had your chance to vote him in, and you feel short. But Jeremy Corbyn is ineffective. Loads of people have said so, especially if you read through the Corbyn thread. Making sure we are not completely f***ed over by Brexit is not anti democratic. Back on topic, what were your thoughts on the complexities of the Irish border situation before you voted? Do you feel you were well enough informed about it by the media in the run up, Is Theresa May getting good value for the sweetener she tried to bribe the DUP with? How wrong was David Davis here?http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-eu-david-davis-hard-border-ireland-ridiculous-peter-sutherland-former-commissioner-a7221881.html It must be hard for those who voted to leave on the basis of twaddle from politicians who have shown themselves post referendum to be incompetent, have no idea what they are doing and are in over their necks to reconcile themselves with the fact they might have been wrong but won't admit it to save face. I'm sure there are quite a few that fit that description.
Alert a moderator to this post

nickgusset

Shizzlehurst 05 Dec 17 4.50pm

Originally posted by elgrande

But Jeremy Corbyn is ineffective. Loads of people have said so, especially if you read through the Corbyn thread.

Making sure we are not completely f***ed over by Brexit is not anti democratic.

Back on topic, what were your thoughts on the complexities of the Irish border situation before you voted? Do you feel you were well enough informed about it by the media in the run up, Is Theresa May getting good value for the sweetener she tried to bribe the DUP with?

How wrong was David Davis here?http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-eu-david-davis-hard-border-ireland-ridiculous-peter-sutherland-former-commissioner-a7221881.html

It must be hard for those who voted to leave on the basis of twaddle from politicians who have shown themselves post referendum to be incompetent, have no idea what they are doing and are in over their necks to reconcile themselves with the fact they might have been wrong but won't admit it to save face. I'm sure there are quite a few that fit that description.

Alert a moderator to this post

Mr_Gristle In the land of Whelk Eaters 05 Dec 17 5.54pm
I don't see what all the fuss is about. The DUP are putting narrow interests and dogma ahead of the national interest. Just like the Tories in government and the media barons supporting them. It's hardly surprising, is it? Well I think Simon's head is large; always involved in espionage. (Name that tune)
Alert a moderator to this post

Mr_Gristle

In the land of Whelk Eaters 05 Dec 17 5.54pm

I don't see what all the fuss is about.

The DUP are putting narrow interests and dogma ahead of the national interest.

Just like the Tories in government and the media barons supporting them.

It's hardly surprising, is it?

Well I think Simon's head is large; always involved in espionage. (Name that tune)

Alert a moderator to this post

Page 2 of 2 << First < 1 2

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

Tory / DUP deal to be debated in parliament.

Site Map

New users

Existing users

Sponsors