Don't like the adverts?  Click here to remove them

The people have spoken

I've been watching our parliament in action over the last few days. I thought they were resuming to sort out brexit, but no, they are shouting and showing off. Today they are debating about insulting behaviour. Our parliament has not been fit for purpose for some time now and it's got considerably worse. In these circumstances I would rather be governed by "Europe".
 
Does it amuse anyone else that the arrogant and out of touch are blindly ellevating Doris to hero status with each condemnation . Its worked well in America so far , i wonder who they will blame when Trump wins his second term :think: perhaps the media will be full of UFO stories to coincide with it :laughing-rolling:
 
It's not something that I've really mentioned but part of the training I provide is based around behavioural psychology. Watching these people debating in the chamber is professionally quite interesting. There's a thing called transactional analysis which is essentially the way we speak to each other. There are three basic states. Parent, Adult and Child. What works best is when the conversations are held in the state of adult to adult. What I am seeing is a lot of parent to child, child to child, parent to parent and child to parent, but the state of adult let alone adult to adult is almost entirely missing. That's why we're not progressing.

Another truth is that people don't really listen; they simply wait until you've stopped speaking so that they can have their turn. Watching now on BBC it's clear that there have been people with their hands raised wanting to speak but when they do it's something that either been said or the moment has really passed. Everyone has to begin with expressing their thanks to someone, or their moral outrage or indignation at some past comment before they can say anything. When they do it's largely rambling nonsense. Which, incidentally never seems to get a direct answer.

People need to understand the psychology of giving an apology. Unless it it given almost immediately it's meaningless. If an apology is forced "Chardonnay apologise to Tarquil this minute" then it's not sincere. If it's delayed then too it is meaningless. A day later people are still shouting that Boris must come and apologise for about 100 things now but need to realise that he's not going to. Bringing him forth before the headmaster to mumble 'sorry' whilst looking at his shoes is pointless. Let's also remember that as a person (yes he is a person) he's been off all over the globe and came back from the States yesterday to be in the house. The bloke probably needs a shit, a sandwich, cup of tea and five minutes in an arm chair with his eyes closed.

Aside from party politics, I do think that whilst indeed a venerable institution, the way that the house actually does things needs radical reform. The problem is that everyone has the right to be heard when in fact what they have to say has no value in the debate. Opposition is healthy, in fact it's essential but if you ran a company like this, you'd be closed.

Personally, I'd like to see us the voters, vote in MPs directly to a place in the government. It could be fun. You could pick anyone. There are some politicians out there whom I think would work well together despite any party alliance. Vince Cable, Ken Clarke, even Hillary Benn and even ....

Diane Abbott :laughing-rolling:
 
For me what this has demonstrated is that the idea of accountability is a myth.An u nelected PM can defy a vote in parliament & despite the ruling of the high court may still be able to suspend parliament at a moment's notice.The reality is , like the USA , that there is nothing preventing an authoritarian leader attempting to have his way.If Johnson defies parliament what next?
 
You could call it misconduct of public office i suppose but hey Bercow has been guilty of that several times a month for a full 3 years and its not a criminal offence anyway .
 
Don't like the adverts?  Click here to remove them
I've been asking the same thing which led me to research the difference between what is illegal and what is unlawful. The difference is genuinely minute - but exists nonetheless.
To be illegal, there must be statute law in effect. To break that law would be a criminal act. Laws are made by Parliament at the highest level as an Act from which regulations are then derived.

Now the slightly pedantic point is that there are also things called rules. These are not necessarily law and may not always be set by a recognised authority - ie Government but are widely accepted as being enforceable. In this case, a law was not broken because one doesn't exist. However, there are rules and what it seems has happened is that the supreme court has decided that on balance Messrs Johnson and co have in essence abused a rule for their own ends. Abuse, manipulate, interpret etc etc. But this is all in hindsight.

The long and short of it is in these cases that you have not acted unlawfully until someone judges that you have. Hey crazy English law. So, the question really is 'Can I do this?' the answer being 'Well try it and see, there's nothing to stop you but if someone complains, they might decide that you shouldn't have'

In effect therefore he didn't act unlawfully until the point that someone decided that he did. Looking at the judgement, suspending parliament itself wasn't unlawful; it's actually necessary. It was the reasoning behind it and the advantage that he was perceived to have been gaining.

If we imagined that it was a slow day (and no one had ever heard of Brexit) at the HOC and everyone fancied a holiday, could the PM have said, 'Ok folks, let's call it early and all sod off on our jollies' then it would have been fine. As with many cases, it's INTENT that is the deciding factor, not the act itself.
 
All this talk of lawful or unlawful is completely irrelevant now and yet another obstacle in the brexit path and the remainers are absolutely loving it so it’s obvious they’ll draw it out as long as possible.
 
I never tough I would say this, but right now any delay in Brexit will be poison to the EU . I would like to see some kind of agreement between them, but to keep UK in the EU or a compromise deal will be much more toxic in the log run than any kind of economic pain the EU will suffer.
 
All this talk of lawful or unlawful is completely irrelevant now and yet another obstacle in the brexit path and the remainers are absolutely loving it so it’s obvious they’ll draw it out as long as possible.

I reckon they have won an extension but in doing so have dropped the ball and they are very unlikely to recover it , headlines stating "Johnson is trying to turn it into a people V's parliament" is a desperate attempt to pass the blame for a situation they themselves created .

The people will win and Parliament knows what the people want hence they have for 3 years made every effort to block all avenues other than to remain in whatever circumstances .

They fought for no deal .
 
If Boris and his ERG mates (JR-M et al) had voted for the WA that was negotiated by their own government, we would be out of the EU now and the so-called "will of the people" would have been honoured. They only have themselves to blame.....the fact that they want a no-deal Brexit is plain to see and they are doing everything in their power to achieve that aim, regardless of the consequences to Joe public.

And for those of you complaining that the WA wasn't good enough - that's irrelevant; it would have fulfilled the referendum result.

A bit like if I was to ask my family whether they wanted to eat in or get a takeaway. The takeaway option wins narrowly. So I pop out and get fish and chips - which they then refuse to have! "We don't want fish and chips", they say. "Well you wanted takeaway and fish and chips is takeaway", I reply. The ones that wanted takeaway then proceed to argue about what they want - pizza, curry, Chinese, kebab and fish and chips are all options in their view but they can't agree on which one they all want - as they all have their own favourite "takeaway". Unfortunately I can't get individual meals and have to get something (the same) for the whole family.

Meanwhile the ones that wanted to eat in, are getting hungry and frustrated. They just want to eat something...so are eager to start cooking a meal as normal and to get on with life.
 
Last edited:
Was that the deal when you tied your family up and told them they can eat whatever shit you choose to feed them or starve ?
 
All it's highlighted for me, is aren't fit to govern ourselves anymore because the conservative party have gone so far right that they are a danger to this country. Boris seems to think he is a war with anyone that doesn't want to harm the country with a no-deal Brexit and the entirety of Europe.
Using language as he does is only widening the gaps between remainers and leavers and as he goes on about not wanting another referendum as that will do the same thing.
 
No one's going to change their minds or willing to compromise. Opinions are even more polarised than ever and people's views, on both sides, are getting entrenched.

You only need to see and hear the parliamentary debates in recent days, to see how far we have fallen.

The worst thing is, these are all self-inflicted wounds.
 
Last edited:
In effect therefore he didn't act unlawfully until the point that someone decided that he did. Looking at the judgement, suspending parliament itself wasn't unlawful; it's actually necessary. It was the reasoning behind it and the advantage that he was perceived to have been gaining.

Just to add, as I read it. The judiciary felt (unanimously, which is very unusual in supreme court rulings) that it was proper to declare the prorogation unlawful because the executive (the government) could not give a good reason to support prorogation for the duration they specified, and to allow this would prevent the legislature (the Commons and the Lords) from carrying out their duties. To allow the prorogation would have set a precedent that the executive can override the legislature (the sovereignty of parliament so many people voted to protect, apparently; and many others didn't think was under threat), and this is a precedent that underpins the UK constitution and has done since the 17th Century when we stopped the King making it up as he went along.

Some people will certainly celebrate this as a battle won over Brexit. But it should be remembered that the government consistently maintained prorogation was nothing to do with Brexit right up to the moment they lost the ruling.

So Johnson hasn't broken any law. He has tried to undermine British sovereignty. Hopefully the judicial ruling makes the position clear for any future government of any political persuasion who think about trying the same thing.
 
Aye its like farting on a plane , someone outa tell our impartial media that :lol:
 
There's a thing called transactional analysis which is essentially the way we speak to each other. There are three basic states. Parent, Adult and Child.

Oh Lord . . I remember 'Transactional Analysis' from a course I was on at Sunningdale College back in the '70s.

At the time I worked in the Civil Service (MOD Navy, then Registrar General's Office for Scotland). The Service was very keen on education and trying to instil common standards across a huge diversity of job types. The training we received was world class.

This course covered Personality Types, Motivational Factors, Conflict Resolution, Mind States . . It was emotionally draining involving group soul-searching in darkened rooms . . At least one person resigned from the Service as a result.

For those of us who carried on managing our staff it was very useful. Particularly for me when I left and joined a Scottish Bank. The Management style there was more akin to Atilla The Hun and the language used for staff like something from a Rangers - Celtic match.

As one of my staff said . . . "You're not like the other Managers, are you !".

Me - I'm a "Little Professor" (Chris will understand) :icon-wink:.

Yes, the current goings on and what passes for debate is very interesting.

Bob.
 
It's not something that I've really mentioned but part of the training I provide is based around behavioural psychology. Watching these people debating in the chamber is professionally quite interesting. There's a thing called transactional analysis which is essentially the way we speak to each other. There are three basic states. Parent, Adult and Child. What works best is when the conversations are held in the state of adult to adult. What I am seeing is a lot of parent to child, child to child, parent to parent and child to parent, but the state of adult let alone adult to adult is almost entirely missing. That's why we're not progressing.

Another truth is that people don't really listen; they simply wait until you've stopped speaking so that they can have their turn. Watching now on BBC it's clear that there have been people with their hands raised wanting to speak but when they do it's something that either been said or the moment has really passed. Everyone has to begin with expressing their thanks to someone, or their moral outrage or indignation at some past comment before they can say anything. When they do it's largely rambling nonsense. Which, incidentally never seems to get a direct answer.

People need to understand the psychology of giving an apology. Unless it it given almost immediately it's meaningless. If an apology is forced "Chardonnay apologise to Tarquil this minute" then it's not sincere. If it's delayed then too it is meaningless. A day later people are still shouting that Boris must come and apologise for about 100 things now but need to realise that he's not going to. Bringing him forth before the headmaster to mumble 'sorry' whilst looking at his shoes is pointless. Let's also remember that as a person (yes he is a person) he's been off all over the globe and came back from the States yesterday to be in the house. The bloke probably needs a shit, a sandwich, cup of tea and five minutes in an arm chair with his eyes closed.

Aside from party politics, I do think that whilst indeed a venerable institution, the way that the house actually does things needs radical reform. The problem is that everyone has the right to be heard when in fact what they have to say has no value in the debate. Opposition is healthy, in fact it's essential but if you ran a company like this, you'd be closed.

Personally, I'd like to see us the voters, vote in MPs directly to a place in the government. It could be fun. You could pick anyone. There are some politicians out there whom I think would work well together despite any party alliance. Vince Cable, Ken Clarke, even Hillary Benn and even ....

Diane Abbott :laughing-rolling:
Lot of common sense in there.Polis are even worse in NZ as with proportional
Representation you get useless people who have never accomplished things personally but who have fawned on power brokers for a taxpayer funded salary and perks.
 
This came through to me in an email today, I have no idea if it’s true/ correct etc, but thought I’d post it here!!

WHY IS NOBODY TALKING ABOUT THE LISBON TREATY, THE TREATY THAT WILL BE FULLY IMPLEMENTED IN 2020...‍♂️
“What will actually happen if we stay in the EU” is a question no remainer will ever answer but here it is warts and all.
1: The UK along with all existing members of the EU LOSE their abstention veto in 2020 as laid down in the Lisbon Treaty when the system changes to that of majority acceptance with NO abstentions or veto’s being allowed.
2: All member nations will become states of the new federal nation of the EU by 2022 as clearly laid out in the Lisbon treaty with NO exceptions or veto’s.
3: ALL member states MUST adopt the Euro by 2022 and any new member state must do so within 2 years of joining the EU as laid down in the Lisbon treaty.
4: The London stock exchange will move to Frankfurt in 2020 and be integrated into the EU stock exchange resulting in a loss of 200,000 plus jobs in the UK because of the relocation. (This has already been pre-agreed and is only on a holding pattern due to the Brexit negotiations, which if Brexit does happen, the move is fully cancelled - but if not and the UK remains a member it’s full steam ahead for the move.)
5: The EU Parliament and ECJ become supreme over all legislative bodies of the UK.
6: The UK will adopt 100% of whatever the EU Parliament and ECJ lays down without any means of abstention or veto, negating the need for the UK to have the Lords or even the Commons as we know it today.
7: The UK will NOT be able to make its own trade deals.
8: The UK will NOT be able to set its own trade tariffs.
9 The UK will NOT be able to set its own trade quotas.
10: The UK loses control of its fishing rights
11: The UK loses control of its oil and gas rights
12: The UK loses control of its borders and enters the Schengen region by 2022 - as clearly laid down in the Lisbon treaty
13: The UK loses control of its planning legislation
14: The UK loses control of its armed forces including its nuclear deterrent
15: The UK loses full control of its taxation policy
16: The UK loses the ability to create its own laws and to implement them
17: The UK loses its standing in the Commonwealths
18: The UK loses control of any provinces or affiliated nations e.g.: Falklands, Cayman Islands, Gibraltar etc
19: The UK loses control of its judicial system
20: The UK loses control of its international policy
21: The UK loses full control of its national policy
22: The UK loses its right to call itself a nation in its own right.
23: The UK loses control of its space exploration program
24: The UK loses control of its Aviation and Sea lane jurisdiction
25: The UK loses its rebate in 2020 as laid down in the Lisbon treaty
26: The UK’s contribution to the EU is set to increase by an average of 1.2bn pa and by 2.3bn pa by 2020...
This is the future that the youths of today THINK WE stole from them?
They should be on their knees thanking us for saving them from being turned into Orwellian automatons!

This is the whole reason they are dragging brexit out. So we can get to 2020 then we have no choice OTHER THAN COMPLETE & TOTAL ACCEPTANCE......
 
:lol: that will excite those who want to see London burn in riots for the good of the EU :lol:
 
Back
Top