DonPeffers Posted February 7, 2019 Posted February 7, 2019 https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/house-of-commons-adjourned-four-hours-early-at-327pm-mps-a8766471.html "House of Commons adjourned after four hours at 3.27pm Wed. 06 Feb 2019 because MPs have nothing to do." "With the country 51 days away from its biggest constitutional upheaval in a generation and a raft of replacement legislation yet to be agreed, MPs might be expected to have a rather full agenda. But MPs ended the session on Wednesday just four hours after sitting at 11.30am as there were no further debates or votes scheduled by the government." I thought there were about 600 treaties and other legislation to go through? Could it be that we're not really leaving EU after all, so no changes needed and hence why it was possible to contract a shipping company with no ships to step in regarding imports? British farce is always the best IMO. 1 Quote
Blatman Posted February 7, 2019 Posted February 7, 2019 Are members of parliament? Yes. Are they fit to govern? No. But I have discovered that no matter who you vote for, the government always wins... 1 1 Quote
DonPeffers Posted February 8, 2019 Author Posted February 8, 2019 That could be the big problem coming down the tracks when the electorate lose faith in Honourable Members and the current system. Who could have anticipated there were 650 types of Brexit? If someone is in your house and you tell then to LEAVE you had better hope you're not addressing an MP. 1 Quote
CL290005 Posted February 8, 2019 Posted February 8, 2019 On 07/02/2019 at 16:13, DonPeffers said: "House of Commons adjourned after four hours at 3.27pm Wed. 06 Feb 2019 because MPs have nothing to do." perhaps been a cynic they are getting ready for the UK to remain in the EU then we will be run by the un elected Bureaucrats in Brussels and there will be no role for the elected MP's who seem to think its their views that count Oh dear, there I've said it wheres my coat I'm off 1 Quote
Thrustyjust Posted February 8, 2019 Posted February 8, 2019 Sadly for our area of Berkshire, we have a lot of corruption amongst the elite , including tax avoidance and priority road repairs outside ones stately home, no transparency on where moneys actually go and poor financial decisions . So, this doesnt make you feel they are there for the people , but more for themselves. So, no, I dont believe they are fit to govern . Sadly they are 'mostly' the same whatever or whoever you consider to be the 'best of a bad bunch' Quote
Blatman Posted February 8, 2019 Posted February 8, 2019 1 hour ago, Thrustyjust said: including tax avoidance Tax avoidance isn't illegal. It may be morally questionable but that's a different court... To a vegetarian being a butcher could be morally questionable... If had real money I'd want to hang on to as much of it as I could as well. It'll find it's way out there via indirect taxation anyway, even when I'm caught dead with it... "Bribing" councils, whether by political influence or cold hard cash is illegal. My question is do we know the councils gave them priority "for free", because really there ain't nothin' for free. Somewhere somewhere got something, although that something may have been the option to keep their job in exchange for "prioritising their workflow". It's wrong of course but there is little we can do to influence that type of thing. Quote
jeff oakley Posted February 9, 2019 Posted February 9, 2019 There are several points in this thread in my opinion, the first question about MP's being fit for purpose? Well I would widen that and ask is our system of Government fit for purpose now? In the main I would split MP's into various groups, those who are career politicians, these are the worst, no experience of the real world caught in the Westminster buble from the day they left University. Labour has a lot of these ideology driven but with nothing else to offer. Then we have those who are there because they were expected to be, following on from parents who did the same, some bad some good. Then we have those who have wealth and want to put back into improving the country for the rest of us, they are are experienced and mean well but are caught up in the baffelling archaic methods they use, unable to do things as the system grinds them down. Then we have the stars who are ambitious, surround themselves with good people, capable leaders who other follow, few of these on both sides. Then we have the rest who are a mix of skills but really never do anything well enough but nothing wrong enough. People of quality can make a lot more money on the outside of parliament so getting top class people to do an MP's job is not attractive, ours was a junior manager at Lidl but no one expected him to win, yet he did and his lack of gravitas shows in every way but he will prosper and never be a minister but will find his loyalty rewarded longer term with directorships etc. It is the speed and system of government that is wrong, run by the civil service who are top educated, top intelligence who run rings around ministers. Watch "Yes Minister" now against the backdrop of Brexit and you will see it was a documentary not a comedy show, how delays and problems can be put in such a way until they get what they want. The system of committees is just time wasting, in any other walk of live prevarication on every task is not accepted yet it is expected. Examples like Heathrow expansion , HS2 where we haven't really done anything for years and yet blown millions in doing nothing. We need government to govern, tell us what they want to do, we vote and then they get on and do it. Examples of poor decisions abound, the latest this morning; they gave a contract to a company to provide shipping to clear backlogs in the event of a no deal Brexit to a company who has no ships and has no said they cannot provide ships, you could not make this up and those involved in that from ministers down should be sacked, but they will not. And changing government will not help as they still have to go via the same civil service as they all do. 1 Quote
Blatman Posted February 10, 2019 Posted February 10, 2019 On 09/02/2019 at 11:04, jeff oakley said: Well I would widen that and ask is our system of Government fit for purpose now? Wasn't it Churchill who said "Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others". The Civil Service is a necessary evil. Obviously it would be impractical to change every employee of [insert government department here] after an election so we elect a new manager in the democratic version of a "hostile takeover". For me the civil service does a great job of steering the new department head towards where they need to be. They don't always get it right of course but as the they are a-political (in theory) they are the folks who really deserve our support and thanks as I am sure much of the good they do actually goes largely un-noticed. Quote
DonPeffers Posted February 10, 2019 Author Posted February 10, 2019 Winston Churchill quote----"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter." I'm definitely of the view that the Yes Minister comedy was too near the truth for comfort. Quote
Blatman Posted February 10, 2019 Posted February 10, 2019 That's another one of his. It looks to me like he said it (sort of...) but he was quoting someone else. https://richardlangworth.com/worst-form-of-government Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.