1. Things you need to know about the new ‘Conversations’ PM system:

    a) DO NOT REPLY TO THE NOTIFICATION EMAIL! I get them, not the intended recipient. I get a lot of them and I do not want them! It is just a notification, log into the site and reply from there.

    b) To delete old conversations use the ‘Leave conversation’ option. This is just delete by another name.
    Dismiss Notice

'democracy v2.0' - what would we like to see?

Discussion in 'off topic' started by Sue Pertwee-Tyr, Jun 29, 2020.

  1. hifinutt

    hifinutt hifinutt

    Having spent the last 3 months campaigning on a local issue it would be nice to have a good MP . Our MP does not respond to anything and is known for this on FB too as others complain

    that would be a good start !
     
  2. mansr

    mansr Objectionist

    Here's a crazy idea. Change votes in Parliament from simple majority wins to a probabilistic system. After the vote, a random number in the range 0–1 is produced. If this is no greater than the fraction of yes votes, the proposal passes. Thus, if you want your thing to pass, you should secure as much support as possible, not stopping at 50%. There would probably need to be cut-offs at, say, 10% and 90% outside of which the random step is skipped and the proposal is simply rejected or accepted.
     
  3. JensenHealey

    JensenHealey pfm Member

    Like, anyone in the population or media would understand any of that!
     
  4. mansr

    mansr Objectionist

    Less crazy idea: get rid of the whip and let MPs vote as they please.
     
  5. Seeker_UK

    Seeker_UK Waiting for the streetcar..

    How about let the MPs vote as their constituents want?
     
  6. mansr

    mansr Objectionist

    That would be even better, but let's take this one step at a time.
     
  7. Joe Hutch

    Joe Hutch Mate of the bloke

    Don't they do that already, for the most part? What if their constituents divide almost equally between two groups wanting diametrically opposed things (eg on Brexit)?

    I'd much prefer MPs who have minds of their own, and who vote according to what they believe will be best for (all) their constituents, and for the country as a whole.
     
  8. KrisW

    KrisW pfm Member

    We elect politicians to do the work of government for us, not to constantly bug us with questions. As long as we're able to get rid of them if we're unhappy with their work, I have no problem with politicians using their own judgement, or relying on that of their party. But again, only if it's easy to get rid of them if they prove incompetent.

    I live in a multi-seat constituency, so I have four elected representatives - two centre-left (Fianna Fáil), one centre-right (Fine Gael), one left-wing nationalist (Sinn Féin). Normally, that means I get four chances to have my voice heard in parliament, but in my particular case, one is the prime minister and another the foreign minister, so the amount of time they have for constituency matters is reduced. However, that still leaves me with two representatives that I could approach.

    Note that I have two members from the same party in my constituency - that happens a lot with the bigger parties, and it indirectly tends to weed out the sort of lazy MP that you've evidently got. The big parties run one candidate per seat in elections, so if I supported the party, but thought the sitting candidate wasn't doing their job, I just put them further down my list, and prefer the party's other candidates instead. In that way, I don't have to vote against my own political wishes to get rid of someone who's not working for their constituents.
     
  9. mansr

    mansr Objectionist

    Another wild idea. Replace the single Parliament with several (smaller) assemblies for specific domains. There is no reason I should agree with any one person/party on matters of, for instance, foreign policy and transport infrastructure, so electing the people to run these functions separately would make sense.
     
  10. Seeker_UK

    Seeker_UK Waiting for the streetcar..

    Difficult to put into practice, I know, but if it's a clear majority go with that. IMHO, democracy means the freedom for the population to make decisions, good or bad. If it's less clear-cut, then I'd expect to go for the best for the country / constituency.
     
  11. Dougie2404

    Dougie2404 cranky old git

    You certainly don't have one at the moment..

    Sniping, possibly but correct, especially between the regions, as far as I can see and we're all the same, it's all for me and bugger you.
     
  12. hifinutt

    hifinutt hifinutt

    thats sounds good , we only have one MP who is useless !!!!
     
  13. KrisW

    KrisW pfm Member

    It's not perfect. The Irish system is very local, and that means there's a lot of "parish pump" politics, where politicians retain power by pandering to high-profile local causes even when those are against the needs of the country as a whole. But it's better than the alternative, I suppose, where elected officials come nowhere near their constituencies.

    The Irish Constitution requires that each "MP" cannot represent more than 30,000 people, nor can they represent fewer than 20,000. As well as that, there's also a requirement that every constituency has the same number of seats per voter, within reason: that means electoral boundaries are regularly re-drawn.

    The UK average constituency is about 70,000, which isn't so much of a problem (the UK has about thirteen times the population of Ireland, and if the Irish rules were applied, it would result in a wholly unworkable 2000-seat parliament). However, the problem with the Westminster constituencies is that their size varies hugely: the smallest is 21,000 and the largest is 115,000.
     
  14. mansr

    mansr Objectionist

    Ready for another radical idea? Scrap geographical constituencies. Instead, let people freely choose a group meeting reasonable size constraints (see above). In practice, this would probably work out similarly to a party system and proportional representation. However, any larger groupings would be informal and a "constituency" could break away at any time. The number of Parliament seats would not necessarily be constant. To shake things up even more, these constituencies could be allowed to replace their MP at any time, and if membership were to drop below the limit, they'd immediately lose their seat.
     
  15. Arkless Electronics

    Arkless Electronics Trade: Amp design and repairs.

    Yep this is the crux of what I would like to see. As I said in a thread the other day I'm so pissed off with the present situation I'd happily accept a benevolent socialist dictatorship.

    I would go further than Si though and ban MP's from ever becoming a director, ban all donations and have the state pay electioneering fees etc. Anyone who wants to gain power and wealth from politics is exactly the sort that should be barred from it!
    We have got to the stage where the gov is as corrupt as the mafia and hardly even bothers to hide it anymore.. no consequences exist for criminal behaviour... apparently when MP's break the law all that has to happen is doris says "time to move on now" and it never happened!

    Obviously the far right must be completely disenfranchised.
     
    herb likes this.
  16. Kirk

    Kirk pfm Member

    Great idea - an ASA for politicians.
     
  17. Sue Pertwee-Tyr

    Sue Pertwee-Tyr Staying alert

    With the power to issue the death penalty for the most severe offences.
     
  18. Kirk

    Kirk pfm Member

    No more Mark Francois.
     
  19. tuga

    tuga European

    In Portugal there is a President with promulgation / veto powers (he scrutinises laws, the budget, international agreements, etc.) as well as the ability to dissolve Parliament / call a General Election, supported by a Constitutional Court and a modern written Constitution. He also decides on the viability of referendums.

    Constitutional Court (from the Wiki):

    The court is composed by thirteen Justices, ten of them are elected by Parliament, the main legislative branch of the country, and they must be elected by two thirds majority of MPs.
    The remaining three are elected by the already elected Justices.
    Of the thirteen Justices, six must be chosen among the General Court's judges, the remaining must have at least a degree in law.
    The Justices serve a nine year mandate and cannot be re-elected.
    The Constitutional Court elects its own president and vice-president and approves its own rules, schedule and budget.
    The President of the Constitutional Court (together with the President of the Supreme Court) is the fourth person in the Portuguese state hierarchy (after the President of the Republic, the President of Parliament, and the Prime Minister, in that order) and has several competences, such as conducting the relations between the court and the other authorities, receiving the candidatures for President of the Republic and presiding the court's sessions.

    To date all presidents post-revolution came from one of the two main parties (often a former PM) but candidates must stand as independent.

    There's no such foolishness as a First Past The Post system...
     
  20. tuga

    tuga European

    I forgot to mention that there is a written Code of Civil Law accessible to any citizen (though sometimes overly criptic in its language for a layman).

    According to the wiki:

    This Code adopted the German classification of areas of Civil Law, following the BGB, and is divided into 5 different books:

    General Law
    Law of Obligations
    Property Law
    Family Law
    Inheritance Law
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice