Forum menu
Nickc - look at the hybrid system used in Scotland. It covers some of the criticisms you have. there are many forms of PR
Personally I believe parliamentary reform is one of the most pressing things we have. We do not have a representative parliament and this leads to such stupidity as brexit and austerity. Neither would have happened with a truely representative parliament
As above tho - I am not in favour of a second chamber at all and electing it makes little to no difference. In some way an appointed second chamber might make more sense - you can reserve seats for various organisations that way like TUC, CBI, Charity sector, Healthcare sector etc
I think we’re overdue some parliamentary reform, but as @Northwind points out, it’s quite far down the list of things to do
I disagree, IMO parliamentary reform would/should strengthen democracy, and then create a legislative agenda for the many instead of the few. Personally I don't see any kind of movement to a progressive agenda, especially in terms of financial equality and working conditions etc without overhauling our democratic institution and making it fit for purpose.
In addition to the reserved seats for the organisations above there could also be delegates from the various devolved bodies, councils etc
He has been overwhelmingly successful in his relentless battle with the left and his determination to pack the PLP with compliant and pointless blairite clones like himself
You say that like it’s a bad thing?
It is. It means you get tories like Streeting in positions of power within the PLP and also it means they move the labour party further and further away from what many folk want
this is why in Scotland labour and the Tories are seen as "two cheeks of the same arse" and as a result don't get scottish seats anymore.
why in Scotland labour and the Tories are seen as “two cheeks of the same arse”
SNP occupying the place between these?
tories like Streeting
He's not a tory.
Streeting is a tory in outlook. Just in the wrong party. He is well right of centre politically
SNP stand for rejoining the EU and redistribution of wealth. Well to the left of labour on most issues
Streeting is a tory in outlook. Just in the wrong party.
Streeting, like Starmer and Reeves, is a career politician. He'll say and do whatever he thinks will further his political career. Ideology doesn't really come into it. I'm sure if he was starting from scratch in his political career he could join either labour or the tories. Given the current political outlook and his career ambitions it seems he is in exactly the right party.
I don't think PR is necessarily the panacea that many think it is, it is I agree - to an extent, that it's more representative that than FPTP, but that isn't always "a better way of governing" just by default; it shares most if not all of the problems of any large State's governing process.
1. Most western democracies are so wildly complex, with huge amount of policy decisions to be made that all compete for limited time and attention. to the point of the idea that a small group of people can mange it is daft, so they don't, consequently;
2.Elected politicians can only really pay attention to a tiny number of very high priority issues for which they are responsible. So, they largely ignore the rest. They delegate policymaking responsibility to other non elected bodies such as civil servants, often at quite low levels of government.
3.At this level, non-specialist in government rely on specialist bodies for advice and direction of policy, and they trade in access/influence.
Any reforms need to target he actual place where policy decisions are made, (lower levels of government) not, IMO, they way that elected representatives are chosen, as that's mostly window dressing.
It really doesn't share those problems nickc
You cannot get majorities on a minority of the vote
coalitions or minority governments become the norm leading to less extreme governments
Every vote counts
I live where there is PR for Holyrood and councils and I can assure you that representative government from PR leads to better governance by and large. If holyrood was elected FPTP the SNP would have all bar half a dozen seats - that would not lead to good governance. As it is they are kept on their toes by having to take other parties into consideration and to find consensus
Any reforms need to target he actual place where policy decisions are made, (lower levels of government) not, IMO, they way that elected representatives are chosen, as that’s mostly window dressing.
This. PR isn't the solution, devolution is. The UK has one of the most centralised governments in the world, and one of the most unequal economies. I grew up on a Newcastle council estate, and Mrs Daz in a leafy suburb near Seveonoaks. The two places might as well be on different planets, but they're largely governed by the same politicians, institutions and policies based in London. PR won't fix this problem.
TBH in 2022 it feels bizarre that so much of the world is still in indirect democracy, like the only way we can run a country is to elect a government and just say "have at it, we now have no opinions and we don't care if you instantly bin every election commitment, just do what you want". The capacity for smaller decisions, for direct voting on big ones, for real devolution and localisation has existed for years.
And the side effect of that is that every time we do have a referendum, we suck at it. Because this is a system that's designed to make those occasional, incredibly important decisions the only ones we ever really make. People say that the brexit and PR referendums show that "we can't be trusted" but you can't be surprised when someone fluffs their first attempt at something.
...it feels bizarre that so much of the world is still in indirect democracy, like the only way we can run a country is to elect a government and just say “have at it, we now have no opinions and we don’t care if you instantly bin every election commitment, just do what you want”.
It's about balancing things though. There is no individual policy decision that can be made in isolation.
"Do you want to pay more tax... yes/no?"
"It depends. Yes, if it means we do X, no if we do Y."
etc.
I agree with you about the increasingly huge gaps between election manifestos and what UK governments actually do once elected, but that doesn't mean direct democracy is the only answer to that. In fact, it is partly to blame for it in recent years.
Bringing this back around on topic... I consider this to be one of the reasons people see Starmer's approach as too timid... he is trying not to over promise. Not just to make Labour's platform look more deliverable to voters that have been wary of the party, at the next election, but to ensure that we don't get a one term Labour government that is defeated quickly due to failing to deliver on its word. We all know Labour is held to higher standards in office compared to the Conservatives. Promises that fail to materialise will be hung around Starmer's neck in a way that whoever is currently leading the Conservatives doesn't have to worry about. That double standard applies to the allies of Labour, not just their opponents.
More utter bollox from Starmer on brexshit. He is really bugging me on this one. Its clear public opinion is changing and he is supposed to be a leader. How about some leadership here not pandering to a few racists in england.
There is no chance that Starmer will let the Tories fight another election on Brexit and immigration from Europe. Annoying as that is, it is obvious why. “Brexit isn’t working” is an increasingly common view. “Labour want to reverse Brexit” would still be a winning ticket for the Tories if they can play it that way. I know it sounds contradictory, and logically it is, but logic isn’t the motivation for “saving Brexit”. Might sound condescending towards those who that sentiment works with, but hey, that’s how I see it.
he is supposed to be a leader.
You're assuming that he's personally in favour of rolling back Brexit.
I get the logic but its only true in a few north England constituencies. Southern england / home counties constituencies he is not going to win whatever he does. London and Scotland rejoining the EU would be a big vote winner as it would in other places.
he also needs to LEAD! The public sentiment is moving towards the EU. He should be nurturing that and leading people back to the EU not fighting against public sentiment . He is not even following the public here
Its an appalling misjudgement
im with Kelvin on this. I'd love nothing more for the labour party to stand up and shout about how crap Brexit is but its just not in their interest at the moment. they'd be gifting the Tories attack lines, better keep quiet and let the tory party destroy itself from the inside. the need to get into power and then they can start fixing this shit show
I'm pretty sure he is Scotroutes. What he is doing is running scared of a few racists in northern england and the tory press.
London and Scotland rejoining the EU would be a big vote winner as it would in other places.
True. But bigger majorities in London won’t defeat the Tories. And Labour are dead in Scotland at the next election already, in my opinion, the seats aren’t there for winning within 2 years, no matter what Starmer does. Labour need to take seats off the Tories. That means heightened awareness of the attitudes of English voters in certain regions. You and I may hate that TJ, but that doesn’t change the FPTP election demographics.
then they can start fixing this shit show
labour cannot fix this shitshow without rejoining the SM at least. Its just not possible to be fixed without. To pretend that brexit can be made to work better is mendacious. That will cost him far more votes that the extra votes he will get from those northern england constituencies by pandering to racists
That debate would be interesting. What would the Tories suggest have been the benefits of brexit apart from 'vox populi' and deregulating European labour and tax laws?
And Labour are dead in Scotland at the next election already, in my opinion, the seats aren’t there for winning within 2 years, no matter what Starmer does.
I'm not so sure. the SNP are looking tired and out of ideas. A proper convention or some other big idea on the constitution and going back into the EU would be big vote winners in Scotland and could easily gain significant seats
A proper convention or some other big idea on the constitution
Putting that in place could bring Scotland back towards Labour. Promising it at an election will make no difference. Voters north of the border won’t listen to promises from Labour at this stage, only action will hold any sway.
exactly Bill - buy giving real opposition to brexit he could far more effectively tie the tories in knots. "What are the benefits of brexit?" Etc etc while explaining the benefits of the SM and CU.
Make the tories explain. all he is doing here is letting them off the hook. It would stop the " we got brexit done" being all the tories need to say. There is loads of data out there showing what a disaster brexit has been. Use it. there is no brexit benefits at all. Even David Davies has admitted that.
Kelvin - IMO the SNP government are past their sell by date and overripe. Easy targets if and only if labour actually have some coherent policies for Scotland to attract the votes. At the moment all labour policies are vote losers in Scotland
To a great deal of the electorate, there didn't ever need to be a benefit to Brexit, In fact, that it has damaged the people who they see as directly benefitting from membership of the EU is a welcome result. Lots of those people voted Tory for the first time in 2019 because of "Get Brexit Done" and lots of those folks are still happy with that choice.
For any political leader there's a balance between "I'm listening to what you want and are saying" and "Follow me, I know the way" and with Brexit in particular, lots of Labour supporters voted for it precisely because they felt there was too much of the "I know the way", an not enough of the "listen to us" going on.
We haven't seen any leadership from labour since before Blair. He turned it into a party of weathervane followers via "focus groups"
The country is crying out for leadership.
The difference is, many/most people have felt the impact of Brexit from eg queues at airports, decling exports, shutting down the fishing industry, ending the booze cruise and a predictable increase in asylum seekers (if that's what bothers them).
I also think rejoining the EU would be a vote winner in trad tory areas
The country is crying out for leadership.
Starmer's position on brexit is the main thing he's got right. I reckon he understands brexit and the immigration issue far more than many give him credit for. He's a London based football fan who spends lots of time on the terraces and styles himself with football hooligan chic. It's not a massive stretch of the imagination to guess what his views on these issues are, and they almost certainly aren't aligned with the liberal metropolitan lefty bedwetters. When he says there should be fewer foreigners in the NHS, he really believes it.
The election is still 2 years away, what's being said by politicians now, and then may change if the mood changes sufficiently towards an anti brexit position (let alone a re-join position) especially those folks who voted for it. only recently (in the last couple of months) has the percentage of Leave voters thinking that the leave result was the wrong one, started to rise
When he says there should be fewer foreigners in the NHS, he really believes it.
Yes but not for the reasons you suggest. His reasons are 1) we should be training and attracting staff from inside the UK and 2) we should not be stripping staff from developing countries. That was clear from his statements on that
Public opinion is now 2:1 that leaving the EU was a mistake. He should be using that
By doing this is is completely blunting his best attack lines. Its weak and counterproductive. By saying labour would take us back towards the EU he would be able to make the tories attempt to explain what the advantages of brexit are. By saying he could do brexit better he is letting the tories of the hook.
I agree with @dazh, there may be things that we don't know about that are yet to shape the election debate in 2025, i don't think brexit will be high on people's list if they still can't pay for the gas, and the mortgage has gone up
Kirsten Oswald, the SNP’s deputy leader at Westminster, said:
It was depressing to watch the Labour leader try to out-Tory the Tories – again – on Brexit and migration, and essentially tell CBI that they are wrong …
The CBI has raised legitimate and very real concerns over Brexit and its impact on immigration and our workforce. Instead of heeding the warnings, both the Tory and Labour leaders have chosen to double down on the delusion of Brexit, when it is obvious it isn’t working.
With both Labour and the Tories committed to the damage of Brexit, the only route to escape its long-term harm and rejoin the largest single market in the world – a market seven times greater than the UK – is for Scotland to become an independent country.
the election debate in 2025, i don’t think brexit will be high on people’s list
It is not even high on my list and I am very anti Brexit. It was a massive mistake from the day of the referendum result onwards and it was also going to be shit, which it clearly has been, but fixing it to try and reverse some of that shit is not going to really make much difference to the majority of people.
Here is a question for those of you who think Starmer is right on this issue
Why is Scotland so pro EU and pro immigration and why does no one not even the tory party ramp up the anti eu anti immigration rhetoric here?
for me the answer lies in the fact the political leadership has been consistently leading on this issue. showing the absurdities of the anti immigration nonsense and anti EU nonsense with consistent firm fact based leadership
Because theres double the % migrant population in England?
Kerley - without fixing the mess of brexit then improving anything else is almost impossible. Its the first thing that needs to be done that would then lead on to all other stuff being easier to fix
No point in putting new windows in a house with collapsing foundations
Im sure that plays a part thestabiliser but can you imagine any Uk wide party coming out with pro EU and pro immigration statements like that? Its been consistent from the SNP / Greens and labour / tories do not even bother with the anti immigrant / anti EU rhetoric here that they use in England because the SNP / Greens have set the agenda and that agenda is pro EU pro immigration
Starmer is allowing the tories to set the agenda. He should be heaping the whole disaster on the tories and making them justify brexit. Instead he is letting them off the hook
Here is a question for those of you who think Starmer is right on this issue
I don't think he's right, but I can recognise pragmatism when I see it.
I think the answer is that the SNP are speaking to an audience who are receptive to the idea of Brexit being another "English issue" that has been thrust upon them. That message from the SNP deputy is (like Starmer's message about Brexit) aimed at a very specific group of folks.
He should be heaping the whole disaster on the tories and making them justify brexit
Because the people that Starmer is talking to don't need to have Brexit "justified" a good deal of them still think it's a good idea. The list of winning politicians telling voters that they were stupid (to vote tory) is probably a very very short one.
the point is Nickc that the audience is receptive because of the leadership. When I first came to Scotland in the 70s it was very parochial and inward looking and anti immigrant prejudice was high ( anti english). Over the decades this has changed remarkably especially over the last 20 years.
Even the tories do not try the anti immigrant nonsense here
So Starmer needs to be explaining why EU membership is a boon with plenty of obvious examples and needs to constantly take it back to the tories fault for all this mess. By saying he can do brexit better he is letting them off the hook because then he cannot pin the structural ill effects of brexit on the tories. He ends up owning them as well
again leadership