Question Time: Kennedy, Howard, Blair...
- Thread starter ninebob
- Start date
Sponsored Links
D
david and julie
felix said:
I didn't only refer to BNP though I said all other political parties. In their actions the BBC and the press are manipulating the election coverage. Whilst I accept many people find the BNP or NF to be unacceptable what about the others? Why did they exclude the Greens? is it because the rich capitalists are concerned about green costs on production? likewise UKIP, are they depriving us of discussion on the EU aspect, in case we ask to much? Or even the socialist or communist parties, not seeing much of them are we? again, are the capitalists curtailing their coverage?
The media coverage is almost exclusively to the benefit of the main 3 parties, which is manipulative and undemocratic. More so when done by a publicly funded organisation like the BBC.
Incidently Felix, did the NF ever become the BNP? I thought they were different parties, although I must admit I don't support them so don't read that much about them. I do know they are legal though and have some ideas that are not as extreme as they sound. I feel it may only be the race aspect that stops people listening to them. Which again is a result of a biased media.
What makes you think the lib dems could not form a coalition with the tories? Hardly a leaf between tory and labour policies anyway. The main sticking point is that liberals want PR and neither lab or con want to give it to them, because it would be the end of the main parties chances to form an absolute majority in parliament.
If we now had proper PR or even just single transferrable vote the opinion poles would be showing something like lab 25 con 25 lib 25 other 25. It would very probably mean even two of the big parties could be hard pushed to make a majority. Fancy a lab-con coalition? Truth is, a lot of their mps are totally interchangeable. PR means rule by decision of the people instead of by party.
Why do you reckon you have to vote lab? If anything, the conservatives are doing better this time round. If you already have a sitting con mp he is very unlikely to loose to anyone unless he has been doing something really stupid. You might as well vote lib to register your support and give Blair a kick to remind him he needs to listen to the people.
There is a compromise reform. You could still elect mps by first past the post, but elect the house of lords by proper pr. That way all parties would get a voice. Blair is running scared of this one too. At the moment he can deride the house of lords because it is not elected. If it was he would have to justify ignoring a house which actually represented the wishes of the people better than his own. House of lords has a much better record of people voting for themselves instead of how the partys tell them.
If we now had proper PR or even just single transferrable vote the opinion poles would be showing something like lab 25 con 25 lib 25 other 25. It would very probably mean even two of the big parties could be hard pushed to make a majority. Fancy a lab-con coalition? Truth is, a lot of their mps are totally interchangeable. PR means rule by decision of the people instead of by party.
Why do you reckon you have to vote lab? If anything, the conservatives are doing better this time round. If you already have a sitting con mp he is very unlikely to loose to anyone unless he has been doing something really stupid. You might as well vote lib to register your support and give Blair a kick to remind him he needs to listen to the people.
There is a compromise reform. You could still elect mps by first past the post, but elect the house of lords by proper pr. That way all parties would get a voice. Blair is running scared of this one too. At the moment he can deride the house of lords because it is not elected. If it was he would have to justify ignoring a house which actually represented the wishes of the people better than his own. House of lords has a much better record of people voting for themselves instead of how the partys tell them.
Sponsored Links
I have seen broadcasts by BNP and by Greens, so they definitely do get media coverage.
I was thinking about this, and PR would have some distinct advantages. For instance, at the moment when Tony Blair comes up with some crazy idea he just gets all 400 of his mates to vote for it. But, with PR the more extreme ideas would not necessarily get through. If you only have 40% of the seats then policies would have to appeal to the majority of the House. This would prevent the situation we have had in the last couple of decades, where successive governments set about undoing everything the last government has done.
If we had PR, then a new government would not have the power to cause wild swings in policy. Also if a policy came in and turned out to be rubbish, the opposition can't complain so much as THEY would have voted for it too!
I was thinking about this, and PR would have some distinct advantages. For instance, at the moment when Tony Blair comes up with some crazy idea he just gets all 400 of his mates to vote for it. But, with PR the more extreme ideas would not necessarily get through. If you only have 40% of the seats then policies would have to appeal to the majority of the House. This would prevent the situation we have had in the last couple of decades, where successive governments set about undoing everything the last government has done.
If we had PR, then a new government would not have the power to cause wild swings in policy. Also if a policy came in and turned out to be rubbish, the opposition can't complain so much as THEY would have voted for it too!
D
david and julie
Yes I have too Adam, but only the normal party political broadcasts. I meant the type of debates like Question Time last night. The public questioning politicians like this gives a true insight into their thoughts, which you don't see with the stage managed affairs. Examples last night were the aggressive yob who questioned and offended MH, to the lady who had TB uneasy (some would say lying again) about doctors appointments. CK did indeed fair the best, but obviously it is much easier when it is unlikely you will get to power and be held to what you have said.
To me one of the most significant comments was at the end when David Dimbleby said, we wanted all three on the stage at the same time and whilst MH and CK said yes, TB wouldn't do it.
D
david and julie
Richard, having considered your comments and also the fact that it would be impossible for me to make you look any sillier than you manage yourself, I have decided not to take your bait.
Richardp said:never mind maybe you could get the Bnp to send you their news letter
Have you actually had a BNP newsletter or actually bothered to dig a little deeper than your Daily Star newspaper?
I guess you'll be a red or blue man, cos that's the ways it has always been and i'm sure they'll deliver there promises... this time
D
david and julie
Killemall said:Richardp said:never mind maybe you could get the Bnp to send you their news letter
Have you actually had a BNP newsletter or actually bothered to dig a little deeper than your Daily Star newspaper?
I guess you'll be a red or blue man, cos that's the ways it has always been and i'm sure they'll deliver there promises... this time
Actually Killemall, our mate Richard is,in his own words, a very rich man, travels to OZ business class at least once a year and as his own business and house in the country. however in answer to what you said, he is a leftwinger!!!!!!!!!
I am not sure Question Time would really do them any good, for the reason of public opinion. I will explain what I mean: those of us here do argue a bit about politics, but I am sure that most if not all of us would be well behaved at an event where we had to listen to politicians discuss issues. We might give House of Commons/General Melchard-style "Baaaaaaaa!" noises when someone says something we disagree with, but we would let them talk.
However, can you really imagine if they announced "BNP on question time next week"? How many Political Correctness Nazis would surround the studios? How many idiots would disrupt a perfectly good political debate by getting up and starting to shout? OK, so people who do such things generally make themselves look like irrational morons, but the fact is it would ruin what could be a very fruitful discussion that could appeal to a lot of people.
I agree with Dave that the BNP should be allowed to exist as its existence shows that there is something wrong here. If they are allowed to speak properly, some of their supporters might decide to change their minds, some who believe they are fascists may decide that they aren't so bad after all. I won't be voting for them, but it is your right to vote for them if you wish. The day that right is taken away is a sad day for British politics.
However, can you really imagine if they announced "BNP on question time next week"? How many Political Correctness Nazis would surround the studios? How many idiots would disrupt a perfectly good political debate by getting up and starting to shout? OK, so people who do such things generally make themselves look like irrational morons, but the fact is it would ruin what could be a very fruitful discussion that could appeal to a lot of people.
I agree with Dave that the BNP should be allowed to exist as its existence shows that there is something wrong here. If they are allowed to speak properly, some of their supporters might decide to change their minds, some who believe they are fascists may decide that they aren't so bad after all. I won't be voting for them, but it is your right to vote for them if you wish. The day that right is taken away is a sad day for British politics.
Sponsored Links
