Re: Impeach Blair now says limp-wristed do-gooder leftie, er, former SAS General
 

True. Generally, I am in favour of PR, but having said that, in the thirty-odd years that I lived in a PR country, I have never spoken to a politician. In 5 years in the UK, my local MP rang my doorbell twice.

Proportional Representation does imo carry the risk of widening the gulf between politicians and the general public. But then again, so does not having a hope in hell of having your voice heard in parliament.

A mix between the two may well be the best option.

Re: Impeach Blair now says limp-wristed do-gooder leftie, er, former SAS General
 

Ok, now you've scared me!
Recently the lords have appeared more in touch with the people than the goverment or parliment.
They've done their job and kept the goverment in check, hence why Tony Bliar has tried so hard to change them into a house of his cronies so he can get anything he likes through.

As for impeaching him, I'm all for it, if it will get him out of westminster any quicker

Re: Impeach Blair now says limp-wristed do-gooder leftie, er, former SAS General
 

Agreed, I missed that bit earlier. Under any political system, there is a need for an elected chamber that keeps the government in check.

Re: Impeach Blair now says limp-wristed do-gooder leftie, er, former SAS General
 

Problem with the upper house being elected is that you risk people putting their re-election prospects above their job (like in the commons)

While we're impeaching Bliar, can we do Blears too?

Re: Impeach Blair now says limp-wristed do-gooder leftie, er, former SAS General
 

I never thought you'd be one to be scared so easily. lol.
And within the present system of government they are essential to ensure that Parliament is kept in check.

But IF we had a PR system, then they'd be no longer required, or indeed desired.
Government isn't a popularity contest - this is one of those things that makes me despair of politics (and sport too, as it happens) in the UK. At the first sign of any trouble the call goes out for the 'manager' to get the sack.

Blair is not solely responsible - the rest of the government is just as much to blame, as is the apathetic electorate.

Re: Impeach Blair now says limp-wristed do-gooder leftie, er, former SAS General
 

I'll be sending you the dry cleaning bill!

How would PR prevent the goverment doing something that the people don't want? Israel has PR, and it has done many things that the Israeli people do not support.

Exactly, get rid of Blears too :D
Blair is responsible for appointing his cabinet, and ensuring that they are competent enough to appoint compentent people below them etc, that is why the responsibility lies with him.
He's also a slimy toad, but that's a simplified and censored personal opinion of him.


Doesn't make it wrong though ;)


We're also way beyond the first sign of trouble....

Re: Impeach Blair now says limp-wristed do-gooder leftie, er, former SAS General
 

I'll park the shredder under the postbox...;)
First of all, if the Israeli government can do things that the majority of Israelis disagree with, then maybe something went wrong during the election.

And it is perfectly normal for governments to do things that most people dislike. Like raising taxes etc.
Then let's have a vote of no confidence in the government in Parliament, because being an incompetent PM is NOT an impeachable offence.
I wouldn't dream of suggesting otherwise...
We're also way beyond the first call for his head. I think the previous time was........ oh yes. Just before the last General Election...

Re: Impeach Blair now says limp-wristed do-gooder leftie, er, former SAS General
 

Surely, though, if the PM were legally impeachable, no-one in their right minds would vote for him - which would have made the elcetion a single issue one.

And the fact that no-one has taken their words any further would suggest that he is not impeachable - however much we might like him to be, or that there is much conjecture but little in the way of a black and white position.

This is backed up by the fact that Labour was re-elected. People who vote had a difference of opinion and those that didn't couldn't give a hoot whether we go round invading other countries without permission or not.

That sounds like a scary proposition to me. If you cast your mind back to the 97 election where New Labour had a huge majority, PR would have ensured that every vote would have gone their way and that there could be no check and balance for new policy and laws. As it is, Labour used a shaky (at best) draconian bit of statute to force though its opinions on hunting with hounds. Now, I don't support the concept of fox hunting, but it's clear there is a roughly 50/50 split on opinions in this country, and we have a system of making laws that ensures it is ratified by our "elders". This process, which has served us quite well for many centuries was overridden - and that to me is more worrying than laws that offend a lot of people.

We have to have procedures to attempt to keep some sort of normality in this country, no matter how hard the present government might want otherwise.

I'm assuming you mean that government should not be a popularity contest? Because that's exactly what it is right now, that and an exercise in marketing. One thing is for sure, it's not government as we knew it - and when you scratch under the spun surface, what you find starts to scare you.

Re: Impeach Blair now says limp-wristed do-gooder leftie, er, former SAS General
 

I'll also be sending you the winning euro millions jackpot ticket (honest)

If there was only the house of commons, there would have been nothing to prevent the goverment bringing in laws which would have been detremental to the nation and not what people wanted. I just can't see how PR would prevent a goverment doing what they want.

I know, it's such a shame... can we still get rid of Blears though?