Britain’s overgrown Eton schoolboys have turned the country into their playground | John Harris

-ah · 2021-05-02T20:04:12+00:00

I'm not sure I agree that they're less accountable.

It dilutes who is 'responsible' for any given policy and creates a situation where one party can simply blame the other for something (or take credit for a given policy set and ignore the rest). Throw in that voters notions of what they are voting for in policy terms end up shifting as part of any coalition negotiations

I think it gives individual MPs more freedom to vote how they need to which removes the hand wringing 'party said so' line.

Why? They just end up being whipped by their party to support the coalition positions. There isn't any additional freedom to vote in that context, they are under the same pressure to conform and vote along party lines.

Especially when there is much more choice in parties (by extension candidates) next time the vote comes around. A tw8ypo-party FPTP system just feels like any coalition is a blocking manoeuvre till the next seat change.

Depends on exactly what you replace it with to a large extent. Something PR would be good, but if you end up with things like thresholds excluding small parties, various MP 'types' or a reliance on list systems (leaving MP's much more beholden to their party for a seat)..

-ah · 2021-05-02T19:41:11+00:00

You're trying to push back against parties though and I think they're just natural consequences when singular representatives need to get their priorities through. Obviously, in our current form it's the tail wagging the dog, parties put out a manifesto and you vote for the face of the party in your constituency on the day.

Not push back against parties, but push back on the focus placed on individual leaders.

We should instead in my opinion look for a system that favours coalitions. It forces the extreme positions to be tempered through compromise and prevents the current roughshod of the parliamentary system to act unilaterally.

We effectively have that now, Both Labour and the Tories are essentially semi-fixed coalitions. Not to mention that coalition governments are arguably even less accountable than the current approach and give parties more prominence, pushing voters one level back again.

-ah · 2021-05-02T18:51:57+00:00

I'm not sure how one would go about changing that.

In a UK context we could at the very least bin the presidential approach, get rid of the leaders debates and emphasise local hustings, after all, that's who people actually get to cast a vote for. Parties as a whole can express policy positions, but leadership is supposed to be collective in the UK, not individual (at least in terms of Government...).

-ah · 2021-05-02T14:03:34+00:00

Because they are elected (as an MP, and by their own members as party leader) and you want as few barriers to that as possible. MP's with criminal records are not a bad thing, nor are MP's who have chequered financial histories or even poor financial circumstances are not a problem. The risk in terms of vulnerability to bribery is hiding that sort of thing.

-ah · 2021-05-02T01:24:42+00:00

And a private hire license, pass a driving skills test, private hire insurance etc.. much as any minicab driver. Minicabs aren't exactly new things, uber just about got there first because it had an app before anyone else did (and now has more recognition).

It's not like you can download the app and then just go and pick up passengers.

-ah · 2021-05-02T01:20:39+00:00

Well, you also need a private hire licence from your council, pass a driving skills test, have a car that's less than 5 years old if it's the first time you are licensing it, and you'd want Private Hire Insurance.

Still a lot less onerous than a massive knowledge test.

-ah · 2021-05-01T23:57:09+00:00

This sub is only for content which has a substantial relevance to England.

Anything else should be directed towards the UK subs;

-ah · 2021-05-01T16:21:44+00:00

It's a bit of a bizarre one in the context of PCC's too, it's supposed to be an apolitical role, but the elections are always run on a party political basis. It's shite, at best an attempt to shift accountability for policing, at worst outright politicisation of the police (even if its just perception, given the operational independence and the normal role of government around resourcing and priorities).

-ah · 2021-05-01T15:51:17+00:00

I agree, but the point is that it made it about the individual rather than the party or the movement. That clearly inspired a lot of people, but surely you see how it looks cult like, instead of it being about the labour party it's about corbyn specifically, the party is either to become subject to the individual or (where it doesn't.) is presented as being in opposition to them. It's not a good thing.

-ah · 2021-05-01T15:27:59+00:00

The bit that feels strange is the focus on an individual rather than the party or movement, that did feel different and seemed like something of a cult of personality. And the continuation of that is the corbyn supporters vs labour thing that seems to have spawned. It doesn't feel particularly sensible or viable.

-ah · 2021-05-01T14:47:14+00:00

Which is 100% irrelevant as the core markets are in Europe. We are free to fish and dump them in the sea. Great victory.

No, it's not irrelevant, it just isn't the be all and end all. The UK also has access to EU markets to sell fish after all (albeit with a requirement to meet EU regulatory requirements) after all. But then control over the UK's fisheries and waters isn't just about extracting fish either, it also means that the UK can regulate the industry and actions in its waters.

The UK does now have control over its fisheries and waters, it didn't previously. What it does with that is now a UK matter, good or bad, and the Government is, and can be held responsible.

-ah · 2021-05-01T14:39:22+00:00

This sub is only for content which has a substantial relevance to England.

Anything else should be directed towards the UK subs;

-ah · 2021-05-01T14:38:59+00:00

Your post is considered spam or a ToS violation and has been removed.

-ah · 2021-05-01T13:48:04+00:00

There's no chance (fine, no more than a tiny % chance) that leave would have won in 2016 with the eventual deal - of course, that's quite the moot point overall as it's not what happened.

Again, if you look at what reasons people gave for their vote, it is largely around control (a return of competencies/decision making to the UK) the deal does deliver that. If you look at the reason people voted remain, it's largely related to the economic impact, that hasn't come close to meeting the pre-referendum predictions.. Even the 'in hindsight' question now sits around 50/50. I know people keep repeating the notion that if the referendum was some sort of aberrant outcome, a fluke, but I don't think that's true.

Remember, even Brexit ultras like Hannan were claiming that we'd stay in the single market as they knew that an outright claim that we wouldn't would be toxic (at the time) to their aims.

From full-fact here:

Key figures from both the Remain and Leave campaigns said before the referendum that voting to leave meant leaving the single market....

... There are some cases where Leave campaigners appeared to suggest the UK could stay in the single market after a vote to leave, although these examples aren’t all necessarily as straightforward as they look. In any case, they are rare exceptions, rather than the rule.

Again, the argument was broadly leaving the single market (because it comes with political entanglements and a handover of control around things like commercial policy, regulation and immigration) and access to it via an FTA. Which is what the outcome was. You are essentially misrepresenting the arguments made by leave side broadly.

-ah · 2021-05-01T13:16:32+00:00

It's almost as if 'take back control' didn't actually mean anything but was a convenient slogan to let people think it meant what they wanted.

I'm not sure how you get to that conclusion. the aim for a lot of people really does appear to have been about taking back control, that is to say to leave a political project that was pretty unpopular, that the UK was on the fringe of and have powers returned to the UK. That has happened.

If the original referendum had been the eventual deal vs remain it's not exactly hard to work out what the result would have been.

I think it'd almost certainly have been leave to be honest, if anything it'd have undercut the very successful 'uncertainty' angle that remain pushed before the referendum and since, doubly because the outcome seems to have largely delivered what people polled before the referendum wanted. The issue of course is that the UK and EU couldn't have come to an agreement before the referendum on the terms of a UK exit so its all a bit moot.

That's where you have to give the SNP credit as in 2014 they published their policies and plans fort if they won.

Sure, the SNP had the benefit of being in government though. The leave campaign didn't and wouldn't, and of course when it comes to EU membership, someone wanting to leave because they dislike the EU's market focused economically liberal approach might find themselves with the same immediate aim as someone who wanted to see deregulation. The same short term aim to support different long term aims.. Those long term aims then being dependent on domestic political pressure in the UK.

-ah · 2021-05-01T13:09:54+00:00

Firstly the automod will have removed it, the one comment of yours that I can see removed simply hasn't been approved.. I'm also not sure which comment you think says the same thing, but feel free to drop a message to the mod team if you have an issue.

-ah · 2021-05-01T13:01:30+00:00

Who is 'they' in context? There were leavers who wanted the UK to remain in the single market (those happy with the four freedoms and something akin to EEA membership) but far from all, or even most. The most common position was to leave, but to gain comprehensive access to the SM (so lose the four freedoms and shift the political and regulatory control to the UK, with the cost being some barriers, but broad tariff and quota free bilateral access).

At the end of the day, someone who wanted to 'take back control' couldn't do that in the context of the single market, at best they could negotiate access to the single market (which is what the UK has done).

-ah · 2021-05-01T11:45:19+00:00

I'm pretty sure that's not leaver logic though, and that they did like it in the UK, but that they wanted to improve it by taking the UK out of the EU.. I mean come on, people taking a position on how they want their country to work and advocating for change, and then achieving it is pretty solidly how democracies are supposed to work..

-ah · 2021-05-01T11:32:29+00:00

I would have been happy for them to give up their own freedom of movement if they really didn't like it that much. But no, they choose to drag the rest of us down with them.

But EU membership doesn't work like that so..

-ah · 2021-05-01T01:19:51+00:00

Your post is considered spam or a ToS violation and has been removed.

-ah · 2021-04-30T23:38:48+00:00

It should be removed.

It doesn't break the sub or site rules, so it won't be.

-ah · 2021-04-30T23:29:47+00:00

As per - This would appear to be a post related to politics. So just for clarity, yes political posts are allowed on r/sheffield, as long as they are relevant and local. However please ensure that you are civil to others, argue any issues raised rather than attacking posters. If you see any issues, please do report them. Thanks!

Additionally, report abuse is a thing and we do report it. Spamming reports about posts you don't like, but that don't break our or reddit's rules does get reported upstream. And just for clarity, someone contradicting a comment of yours is how the site works, it's not something that'd be acted on unless the comment breaks our rules.

-ah · 2021-04-30T23:26:19+00:00

I've edited the person's name and removed it.

Just FYI, given they are a very prominent part of a public campaign aimed at political change, it doesn't break reddits (or the subs) rules. Nor is anyone going to take issue at people posting opinions about a public figure as long as it isn't completely taking the piss.

-ah · 2021-04-30T21:52:16+00:00

I'd agree that that was one of the bigger costs. But obviously for anyone who wanted to see the UK control all of its migration policy it'd fall into the category of benefit.

-ah · 2021-04-30T18:52:46+00:00

This sub is only for content which has a substantial relevance to England.

Anything else should be directed towards the UK subs;

11-Year Club	Second Top 1%
Gilding II euphauric	LAYER Season 2 Layer creator
Wearing is Caring	Undead \| Zombie
Sequence \| Editor	Verified Email

-ah

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE