Brexit Benefits Log

[hstripes]

Nonsense. The Executive is derived from the Party/parties who wins the most seats in the House of Commons. Seats in The House of Commons are democratically elected through elections where the citizens vote for candidates largely based on what party they represent i.e. which party they would like to see in power i.e. in government i.e. in the executive.

No the public don't vote for which individual MPs are appointed to cabinet if that's what you mean but it's a thin argument against the ability through the ballot box to decide the politics of the executive - clearly stated in manifestos and campaigning. As opposed to the EU Commission which is wholly unelected.

Are you seriously suggesting that in 2019 the public did not vote in a Tory Government or in 1997 did not vote in a Labour Government for instance.

Anyone can make a mistake. You clearly did with the assertion in your first sentence.

[Glyn_Wigley]

Just because some members of the Executive sit in the Legislature doesn't turn the Legislature into the Executive. Parliament is the LEGISLATURE NOT THE EXECUTiVE.

So, in your long-winded essays about how the EU is diferent to the UK, not once are you directly comparing arms of government like-for-like.

And NOBODY is elected to the Executive, they are elected to the LEGISLATURE. If you think otherwise, please tell me when you last elected anyone to be a Minister in the Executive.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_powers_in_the_United_Kingdom

"The executive comprises all official and public authorities (including local authorities) that govern the UK, from initiating and implementing legislation to the running of local and national services, such as rubbish collections and the police. The civil service remains non-partisan (having little in common with the Cabinet and Prime Minister in that respect). The executive also exercises a number of powers under the Royal Prerogative, including foreign relations; many other actions are taken in the sovereign's name, from whom executive power is derived."

[hstripes]

Er I refer the honourable gentleman to my previous answer which clearly covers off all the points you have raised.

Are you suggesting that if the public in a General Election vote in the majority of parliamentary seats for Labour the Executive would somehow not be under the control of the Labour Party and Labour would therefore be prevented from carrying out the program it outlined in it's manifesto voted on by said public?

PS my latest 'long-winded' essay refers to law makers. i.e. EU Commission v UK Government quite clearly.

[Glyn_Wigley]

Are you seriously suggesting that in 2019 the public did not vote in a Tory Government or in 1997 did not vote in a Labour Government for instance.

They voted in a Legislature that would enact the policies of an Executive that would put legislaton they agreed with in front of said Legislature. The programme of legislation to be voted on is decided by the Executive, just as it is in every other parliamentary democracy I can think of. Just like in the EU too.

[Glyn_Wigley]

Er I refer the honourable gentleman to my previous answer which clearly covers off all the points you have raised.

Are you suggesting that if the public in a General Election vote in the majority of parliamentary seats for Labour the Executive would somehow not be under the control of the Labour Party and Labour would therefore be prevented from carrying out the program it outlined in it's manifesto voted on by said public?

Yes, but the important point is that the Executive would be APPOINTED by the Labour party throught their majority in the Legislature, not the electorate.

Just as the EU executive is APPOINTED by elected representatives in the EU Parliament.

Even then, Parliament only appoints the very top layer of  the executive. The vast majority of the Executive is the Civil Service. Who votes them in?

[hstripes]

"The Government runs the country and has responsibility for developing and implementing policy and for drafting laws. It is also known as the Executive.

The Government is usually formed by the party that gains the most seats in the House of Commons at a general election."

https://www.parliament.uk/site-information/glossary/government/

[hstripes]

Yes, but the important point is that the Executive would be APPOINTED by the Labour party throught their majority in the Legislature, not the electorate.

Just as the EU executive is APPOINTED by elected representatives in the EU Parliament.

Even then, Parliament only appoints the very top layer of  the executive. The vast majority of the Executive is the Civil Service. Who votes them in?
[/quote]

The Labour Party would have a majority in the Commons due to the democratic decision of the electorate and would use this majority to control policy 'the executive' as the electorate voted for them to do.

At a UK General Election the electorate respond to manifestos and campaigning to decide who they want to run the country. This is democracy

There is no direct EU election to decide on the political direction taken by the EU Commission. The elected European Parliament cannot appoint Commissioners except the President of the Commission on whom they have no choice and a 'take it or leave it' option. This is fundamentally undemocratic. (The highlighted bit above is therefore plain wrong)

[Glyn_Wigley]

"The Government runs the country and has responsibility for developing and implementing policy and for drafting laws. It is also known as the Executive.

The Government is usually formed by the party that gains the most seats in the House of Commons at a general election."

https://www.parliament.uk/site-information/glossary/government/

Yes, the Government is the Executive, as it is pretty much everywhere else. It just happens to be a UK anomaly that some of the Government are also members of the Legislature - which still doesn't make the Legislature part of the Executive. And also that most of the governing party's MPs aren't in the Government. The Legislature isn't the Government, most of the governing party's MPs aren't in the Government either. So, your point is?

[hstripes]

Just pointing out to you that the politics of the UK Government in place is decided (ok indirectly via the Legislature) at the ballot box.

This is not the case in the EU with the EU Commission

[Glyn_Wigley]

Yes, but the important point is that the Executive would be APPOINTED by the Labour party throught their majority in the Legislature, not the electorate.

Just as the EU executive is APPOINTED by elected representatives in the EU Parliament.

Even then, Parliament only appoints the very top layer of  the executive. The vast majority of the Executive is the Civil Service. Who votes them in?

The Labour Party would have a majority in the Commons due to the democratic decision of the electorate and would use this majority to control policy 'the executive' as the electorate voted for them to do.

At a UK General Election the electorate respond to manifestos and campaigning to decide who they want to run the country. This is democracy

There is no direct EU election to decide on the political direction taken by the EU Commission. The elected European Parliament cannot appoint Commissioners except the President of the Commission on whom they have no choice and a 'take it or leave it' option. This is fundamentally undemocratic. (The highlighted bit above is therefore plain wrong)
[/quote]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Commission

The Council of the European Union then nominates the other members of the Commission in agreement with the nominated President, and the 27 members as a single body are then subject to a vote of approval by the European Parliament

That's more democratic that the UK, unless you can tell me when the democratically elected UK Legislature will get to have a say on yesterday's reshuffle appointments or any other appointments to the UK executive.

[Glyn_Wigley]

Just pointing out to you that the politics of the UK Government in place is decided (ok indirectly via the Legislature) at the ballot box.

This is not the case in the EU with the EU Commission

In BOTH cases any proposed policy CANNOT be enacted without being passed by a democratically elected Parliament.

Even the ability to have delegated legislation has be enabled by Parliament.

Oh, and I was pointing out to you that comparing the UK Legislature to the EU Executive and vice versa doesn't show you in a good light as you're not comparing like-for-like. And the House Of Commons is not the Executive as you claimed and never has been.

[hstripes]

There is no direct EU election to decide on the political direction taken by the EU Commission unlike in the UK re the UK Government, and neither instead can the elected EU Parliament decide which individuals are in the Commission (it does get a take it or leave it vote on the Commission President). Unlike the UK Government there is therefore no democratic legitimacy to the EU Commission or the laws it proposes.

[Glyn_Wigley]

There is no direct EU election to decide on the political direction taken by the EU Commission unlike in the UK re the UK Government, and neither instead can the elected EU Parliament decide which individuals are in the Commission (it does get a take it or leave it vote on the Commission President). Unlike the UK Government there is therefore no democratic legitimacy to the EU Commission or the laws it proposes.

It makes no difference to how the Executive operates whether they were appointed by a Legislature or not if a democratically elected Legislature votes down what they propose. They then have to go away and come back with something the Legislature will vote through. The UK system just makes it more likely that the Legislature will vote for their proposals.

The UK Parliament has NO SAY whatsoever on which individuals are in the Government and never has. It is the convention that the leader of the majority party is given the chance to form a Government, nothing more than that. At least the EU Parliament is a little more democratic than us in that respect.

Did the 2010-2015 Government have democratic legitimacy given that no-one in the electorate voted for the Government they got?

[hstripes]

"The UK Parliament has NO SAY whatsoever on which individuals are in the Government"

But the UK electorate do have a say as to the politics of the Executive/Government by voting for candidates from the party they would prefer to be in office because as you say "the leader of the majority party is given the chance to form a Government". So the political direction taken by the UK Government does have democratic legitimacy. This is my point.

So you're claiming it's ok that there is no direct EU election to decide on the political direction taken by the EU Commission (and hence no democratic legitimacy for the Commission as there is for the UK Government see paragraph above) as all their proposed laws can be voted down anyway??

In addition within the UK constitution individual MPs can propose legislation through Private Members Bills there is no such possibility open to MEPs.

[hstripes]

Here is the reaction of our current Prime Minister to the exit pool predicting the results of the last General Election.

I do hope somebody was in the room to calm him down and point out that the election was not held to confirm (or not) his party in Government for the next 5 years allowing them to carry out their program of government. But was in fact an election of the Legislature.

PS I haven't managed to find a photo of Ursula von der Leyen's reaction to the result of the democratic electoral event that confirmed her position of legislative power in the European Union. Funny that.

[Glyn_Wigley]

A General Election is an election of MPs, not the members of the Executive. Some MPs become members due to their election to Parliament but neither the electorate nor Parliament itself has any part of the decision as to which MOPs get which job in the Executive except the indirect appointment of the Prime Minister, and even then not always do they get that. When did the Electorate have a say in James Callaghan, John Major, Gordon Brown, Teresa May or indeed Boris Johnson getting the job as Prime Minister when they first became PM?

Or are you still saying the House of Commons is the Executive?

[BillyStubbsTears]

Latest benefit. Looks like we are going back to imperial measurements.

That'll do wonders for our Global Britain theme. But it will be great news for the Little England Society for the Abolition of the Second Half of the Twentieth Century.

[Filo]

Latest benefit. Looks like we are going back to imperial measurements.

That'll do wonders for our Global Britain theme. But it will be great news for the Little England Society for the Abolition of the Second Half of the Twentieth Century.

Does that mean when I take a measurement of say an inch and a couple of millimetres it will be acceptable? Or do I need to still say an inch and a gnats cock?

[belton rover]

Latest benefit. Looks like we are going back to imperial measurements.

That'll do wonders for our Global Britain theme. But it will be great news for the Little England Society for the Abolition of the Second Half of the Twentieth Century.

Where did you learn this, Billy?
Everyone else - if Billy’s still behaving like a school boy, could someone ask him on my behalf and answer on his behalf.
Then tell him his mam smells, no backchat.

[selby]

  Makes you wonder how the USA manage with feet and inches doesn't it?

[BillyStubbsTears]

Are you seriously suggesting that in 2019 the public did not vote in a Tory Government or in 1997 did not vote in a Labour Government for instance.

We given that in both years, around 57% of those who voted chose candidates from parties other than the one that ended up forming a virtually unchallenged executive, I think you've just opened up a whole new aspect of the "democracy" argument.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Meanwhile, some of the more democratically equitable voting systems that we do have, have just been quietly abolished and replaced by the indefensible first past the post.

https://mobile.twitter.com/josiahmortimer/status/1438429071499747329

[SydneyRover]

  Makes you wonder how the USA manage with feet and inches doesn't it?

90% of the world uses the metric system.

[BillyStubbsTears]

  Makes you wonder how the USA manage with feet and inches doesn't it?

90% of the world uses the metric system.

2 countries use the Imperial system as standard.

USA and Myanmar.

Source: This from  a UK Inspector of Weights and Measures.
https://mobile.twitter.com/PippaMusgrave1/status/1438560618580168712

[selby]

  It' handy to know both, 25.4 millimetre's to an inch don't forget, not 25.

[Yargo]

  Makes you wonder how the USA manage with feet and inches doesn't it?

90% of the world uses the metric system.

2 countries use the Imperial system as standard.

USA and Myanmar.

Source: This from  a UK Inspector of Weights and Measures.
https://mobile.twitter.com/PippaMusgrave1/status/1438560618580168712

Rename the match day thread the Lucky 568 millilitre.

[hstripes]

Are you seriously suggesting that in 2019 the public did not vote in a Tory Government or in 1997 did not vote in a Labour Government for instance.

We given that in both years, around 57% of those who voted chose candidates from parties other than the one that ended up forming a virtually unchallenged executive, I think you've just opened up a whole new aspect of the "democracy" argument.

I wholly agree with your point. I'm not claiming the UK's democracy is perfect far from it.  Like you I'd much prefer we had a Proportional Representation system and thereby a truer democracy *. The majority of constituencies voted for said parties in a free and fair vote. There is no such semblance of democratic legitimacy to the virtually wholly unchallengeable executive of the EU.

* There is a way through our democratic system that a PR system could be brought into being. If a single issue party stood on implementing PR and either won a majority in Parliament or won enough support to encourage Labour or the Tories to adopt this policy (as UKIP did on Brexit through the Tories). The fact we haven't had such a party (or one of prominence) suggests that sadly there is no groundswell of opinion within the public for PR. Therefore by default our (IMO and yours somewhat flawed) current electoral system does have democratic legitimacy.

[hstripes]

Glyn your argument is as repetitive as it is spurious.

As well as legalistically voting for a parliamentary candidate we also vote for the party they're standing for. The party that wins the most seats (a democratic majority) under our constitution forms the government. Therefore which party forms the government is wholly dependent on the votes cast. Therefore through this mechanism we de facto elect our party of Government. Therefore the UK government is democratically elected.

This mechanism, which seems to have passed you by, is understood by society. Consider how a General Election is pitched in the media and by politicians, including local candidates, as a choice of who runs the country. Ask a sample of people 'who did they vote for in the last election?' and (other than 'mind your own business' or 'I didn't bother') the majority will name the party they voted for not the individual candidate.

We vote for said parties based on their political principles and their plans for government from their manifestos. The winning party's implementation of these give the UK governments actions democratic legitimacy.

In the following General election the public judge the party of government against how it performed against it's political principles and manifesto promises plus how it dealt with other issues arising (from pandemics and recessions to a shortage of lorry drivers). Therefore the UK government is democratically accountable

None of the highlighted points above can be reasonably applied to the wholly appointed EU Commission which is not selected by any kind of similar democratic mechanism through an electoral vote.

[drfchound]

Of course our government is decided by a democratic vote.
I suppose our FPTP system is ok if your preferred Party wins but it is deemed to be flawed or outdated if they lose.
Unless there are only two Parties involved there are always going to be votes cast for those that have no chance of an overall victory, which could obviously lead to a government being elected but getting less than 50% of the total votes cast.
To suggest our system is undemocratic is just being unrealistic.

[SydneyRover]

If there is one thing this interesting debate on sovereignty and democracy across various threads on the off topic has shown is that those declaring that brexit was going to give britain glorious freedoms didn't really have a clue what they were voting for and why.

The debate has not been convincing by those declaring the above and it appears that those in power would rather not discuss it further and blame for the many problems is being directed at anyone and everything except of course themselves.

Certainly not worth the loss in growth/gdp it has and is costing as shown by the BOE.

A loss of wealth by those that can least afford it will mean in the end a loss of democracy to them as Austerity has shown they be reduced to serfdom.

https://www.omnicalculator.com/finance/brexit

Austerity & Brexit will bring you us freedom

Vote tory.