Login or Join Now

Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more

Username:
Password:
Remember Me

Can't Access your Account?

New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!

Like 0

Well said Boris

Join Now

Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!

monstersnowman
12 Sep 2012 - 8:27 PM


Quote: Nobody is asking for referendum after referenda,
Not directly. You are wanting a referendum on something you feel strongly about, so why not have one on things other people feel equally strongly about: capital punishment, GM foods, animal experimentation, IVF, free higher education, same-sex marriages, foreign policy etc etc

I agree with you entirely and if you remember this government stated clearly, that if 100,000 names were to be added to a petition, a referendum could follow. with the EU, more than 100,000 were sent but this didn't even get to the discussion stage. cameron vetoed it IS THAT DEMOCRACY MY FRIEND?

2 things ... You used the word 'could', rather than 'would' so that may be key. I personally don't know what he promised so I am assuming he actually did say 'could' ....

Secondly - I find it staggering that any prime minister would guarantee a referendum on anything on the basis of a 100,000 signature e-petition being achieved ... The moronic general public will put their names to any old cr@p. I wouldn't trust the public to pick my Lucky Dip lottery numbers let alone make key government decisions on our future ;0) if he did make this promise he is a fool. More people pay hard cash to vote on talent show acts in one night FGS !!!! Lol ...

Last Modified By monstersnowman at 12 Sep 2012 - 8:28 PM
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links 
12 Sep 2012 - 8:27 PM

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

triumphv8
triumphv8  7450 forum posts United Kingdom
12 Sep 2012 - 8:34 PM


Quote: if you remember this government stated clearly, that if 100,000 names were to be added to a petition, a referendum could follow.

Can you provide a source for this statement , I believe the rule is that if 100,000 people sign an e-petition then it will be 'considered for debate' - no more.

Is 100,000 a majority - I don't think so - is that democracy my friend ?

Ewanneil
Ewanneil  41118 forum posts Scotland2 Constructive Critique Points
12 Sep 2012 - 9:12 PM

Referenda don't always provide a clear cut (or democratic) outcome.

When agreement was reached to hold a referendum on Scottish Independence back in 1974 (?) certain (mostly non-Scottish) Tory MP's insisted that the rules be changed. Instead of the usual rule whereby the winning outcome is that which gains a majority of votes cast the rules were changed. In the 1974 referendum it was decided that a "majority" should be a majority of those entitled to vote, i.e. a majority of the electorate whether they voted in the referendum or not. Given that about 30% of the population were unlikely to vote the outcome was pre-determined before a vote was cast. There was no way that those who actually voted "Yes" would amount to more than 50% of the electorate. Those Tory MP's knew that so got the outcome they wanted through political manipulation and not democracy.

This blatant political engineering caused considerable resentment in Scotland and may even have acted as a recruiting sergeant for the SNP. The clamour for another referendum never really went away.

spaceman
spaceman  105167 forum posts Wales3 Constructive Critique Points
12 Sep 2012 - 9:34 PM

Boris Johnson, who described his 250k fee for writing a weekly newspaper column as "chicken-feed".

Tory to the core.

mdpontin
mdpontin  106016 forum posts Scotland
12 Sep 2012 - 9:37 PM

The problem is that it can be surprisingly difficult to get a truly level playing field for a referendum. So many things can influence the outcome, be it the rules on what constitutes a particular result, what the question(s) should be, how the question(s) should be worded, etc., etc. It's a veritable minefield.

From my own personal perspective, whether or not the rules for the '74 referendum were manipulated with the intention of securing a 'No' vote, I'm inclined to feel that with a decision as momentous as whether to leave the Union, it's especially important to ensure that a clear majority supports the move. I'm not saying that what was done in 1974 was necessarily correct - it was before my time anyway Wink - just that it's not something to be done without due care.

Of course we could also raise such questions as whether the dissolution of the Union should be a decision for all parties who are part of the Union, how the Union came about in the first place (I think it was a lot less democratic - at least as far as the ordinary man and woman in the street were concerned - than any modern-day referendum, manipulated or otherwise) and a host of other subjects which could keep the debate raging for decades more! Wink



Quote: Boris Johnson, who described his 250k fee for writing a weekly newspaper column as "chicken-feed".

Tory to the core.

Hmm...and what are we to say of Tony Blair, earning millions through consultancies and after-dinner speaking, and still making sure he claims his full ex-Prime Minister's index-linked pension, the likes of which most of the rest of us can only dream about? Seriously - greed is greed. Don't try to make it a matter of party affiliation. There's plenty of working-class Tories (yes, Tories aren't all wealthy landowners!) who I'm sure would resent that strongly.

Last Modified By mdpontin at 12 Sep 2012 - 9:40 PM
Eastlands
Eastlands e2 Member 3653 forum postsEastlands vcard Northern Ireland3 Constructive Critique Points
12 Sep 2012 - 9:40 PM


Quote: Boris Johnson, who described his 250k fee for writing a weekly newspaper column as "chicken-feed".

Tory to the core.

250k. Boris is worth every penny.

monstersnowman
12 Sep 2012 - 10:48 PM


Quote: Boris Johnson, who described his 250k fee for writing a weekly newspaper column as "chicken-feed".

Tory to the core.

Never a shortage of political bias ..... Labourites are just as capable of greed, if that is what you are suggesting.

Seriously tho, I have seen the interview and it may serve your purpose to take his remark seriously but I saw it as nothing more than a remark made with a mix of humour, dismissiveness and a slight touch of contempt for a political journalist hunting for a weakness to attack. He could have been a true politician and responded for 5 mins to waste interview time without giving an actual answer at all. 'chicken-feed', lol .. God bless him :0)

mikehit
mikehit  56682 forum posts United Kingdom11 Constructive Critique Points
13 Sep 2012 - 8:44 AM


Quote:
I agree with you entirely and if you remember this government stated clearly, that if 100,000 names were to be added to a petition, a referendum could follow. with the EU, more than 100,000 were sent but this didn't even get to the discussion stage. cameron vetoed it IS THAT DEMOCRACY MY FRIEND?

The 'People's pledge' said that any petition that got more than 100,000 signatures would be debated in parliament.


Quote: the EU running and controlling our law making, immigration, education and health care, this bears no relation to the original whatever.

As has repeatedly been made discussed, the issue is rarely the EU but is the bureaucrats in UK Parliament that add all sorts of excessive detail into the EU Directives that make them ludicrous. And I am not aware of the EU 'running' our healthcare and education systems - in fact I wish they would because the French and Germans seem to be doing a damned good job of theirs Wink.

Last Modified By mikehit at 13 Sep 2012 - 8:45 AM
Focus_Man
Focus_Man  4481 forum posts United Kingdom631 Constructive Critique Points
13 Sep 2012 - 8:49 AM


Quote: Secondly - I find it staggering that any prime minister would guarantee a referendum on anything on the basis of a 100,000 signature e-petition being achieved ... The moronic general public will put their names to any old cr@p. I wouldn't trust the public to pick my Lucky Dip lottery numbers let alone make key government decisions on our future ;0) if he did make this promise he is a fool. More people pay hard cash to vote on talent show acts in one night FGS !!!! Lol ...

Well then be staggered it just shows your lack of acumen where politics are concerned.

Well so you have decided that as a member of the public you are moronic. I need say no more.

Focus_Man
Focus_Man  4481 forum posts United Kingdom631 Constructive Critique Points
13 Sep 2012 - 8:53 AM


Quote: if you remember this government stated clearly, that if 100,000 names were to be added to a petition, a referendum could follow.

Can you provide a source for this statement , I believe the rule is that if 100,000 people sign an e-petition then it will be 'considered for debate' - no more.

Is 100,000 a majority - I don't think so - is that democracy my friend ?

Not being aware of the election promise shows you lack of politcal acumen as well. Better keep your quiet counsel rather than tell the world how you feel about yourself and the rest of the electorate.

Like monster snowman before you you are a self confessed moron, you being a member of the electorate.
No more need be said you are not capable. by your own word of such educated discussion.

Focus_Man
Focus_Man  4481 forum posts United Kingdom631 Constructive Critique Points
13 Sep 2012 - 9:02 AM


Quote: And I am not aware of the EU 'running' our healthcare and education systems - in fact I wish they would because the French and Germans seem to be doing a damned good job of theirs Wink.

They are running the NHS by telling us that as a member of the EU we must treat anybody, free of charge, from any other member state. This when we clearly cannot afford it and furthermore, do not want to.

Education, we are now suffering from immigrants flooding our southern schools to the extent that a lot of them have more non English speaking students that English. We cannot do anything about this other than employ translators and foreign teachers when we would rather insist on English speaking as a right of entry to the Uk school system.

The same thing is happening in local authorities who have been told that all EU member immigrants MUST be given housing as a priority. Some as you SHOULD KNOW are living in mansions and we pick up the rent, in one case over 500,000 pa.

We are jailing immigrants for serious crimes like rape and murder but we are not able to deport them at the end of their sentences because the EU Human Rights Act says so. The same applies to terrorists who have committed murder. As you should be aware many of these people who we have been told cannot be deported have gone on to commite more serious crimes and still they cannot be deported.

If you are politically astute you too can add to this list, but who knows.

In both cases by 'us' I mean our government and also the opposition.

Last Modified By Focus_Man at 13 Sep 2012 - 9:04 AM
lobsterboy
lobsterboy Site Moderator 1014170 forum postslobsterboy vcard United Kingdom13 Constructive Critique Points
13 Sep 2012 - 9:15 AM


Quote: report them at the end of their sentences because the EU Human Rights Act says so

Errm it's the UK human rights Act, which is an adoption of The European convention on Human rights.
This is art of the council of Europe (of which the UK was a founding member) which is an entirely separate body from The European Union.
So if you want to leave Europe , you should first be clear on which bits you actually want to leave.

Last Modified By lobsterboy at 13 Sep 2012 - 9:26 AM
keith selmes
13 Sep 2012 - 9:45 AM


Quote: The 'People's pledge' said that any petition that got more than 100,000 signatures would be debated in parliament.

I never saw a pledge, but the background information on e- petitions says tht if they get 100,000 votes, they will be considered by a committee and if found suitable would be passed onward for debate. I think even then whether they get any time depends on other ongoing debates.

The simple version is here http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/how-it-works

"If you collect 100,000 signatures, your e-petition could be debated in the House of Commons"
(my italics)

mikehit
mikehit  56682 forum posts United Kingdom11 Constructive Critique Points
13 Sep 2012 - 9:53 AM


Quote: Secondly - I find it staggering that any prime minister would guarantee a referendum on anything on the basis of a 100,000 signature e-petition being achieved ... The moronic general public will put their names to any old cr@p. I wouldn't trust the public to pick my Lucky Dip lottery numbers let alone make key government decisions on our future ;0) if he did make this promise he is a fool. More people pay hard cash to vote on talent show acts in one night FGS !!!! Lol ...

Well then be staggered it just shows your lack of acumen where politics are concerned.

Well so you have decided that as a member of the public you are moronic. I need say no more.

So, Focus man can you point us in the direction of a statement that a petition of 100,000 signatures will result in a referendum because I have googled it and cannot find any reference whatsoever.
Unless, of course, it is your own 'political acumen' that is failing....?

triumphv8
triumphv8  7450 forum posts United Kingdom
13 Sep 2012 - 9:59 AM

Thanks Keith for dealing with the 100K thing.

The promises on referendums at the election were :-

1) No joining the Euro without a referendum.

2) No further transfer of 'areas of power or competances'. (nice and woolly)

So no promise of a referendum on Eu membership itself in the election.

Add a Comment

You must be a member to leave a comment

Username:
Password:
Remember me:
Un-tick this box if you want to login each time you visit.