Who should be next UK PM?

In a Liberal Democracy, people are free to write almost whatever they like, even if the motivation for so doing is disingenuous. What I believe in is awareness and highlighting particular people or organisations that might have an ulterior motive. Their messages can then be seen in a more critical way. I am not making a critic of an opposite view simply asking what the relentless motivation behind it actually is?.

I find it sickening that people atttack the EU over democratic issues whilst holding up the UK as some sort of shining light.

The current EU antics as you call them need to be placed along the UK's where we are allowing .35% of the electorate to pick the next PM of the country and some of those people have received two ballot papers.  And.  Don't preach to me about parliamentary democracy where the candates in the race are considering every option to get around Parliament.

Shameful!

For what it’s worth, IMHO, to dismiss arguments out of hand  based purely on generalised political tribal allegiances.....”well he’s a Tory, or Liberal, or Labour, or Brexit party, or Green.....whatever,....... so what do you expect” ,attitude,  rather than employ good reasoned rational open minded thinking, with good supportive intellectual arguments, explains a great deal about what is wrong with politics these days.

Likewise, whenever criticism is made, and there is a knee jerk reaction to defend by inferring out of hand that there is bias, without even considering the intellectual arguments or firsthand experiences being put forward, or willingness to acknowledge that criticism that has been previously made from an alternative perspective HAS been taken into account in the ongoing debate and analysis,  appears as an attempt to close down debate and analysis. 

IMHO, closed minds with intransigent political allegiances, unprepared to discuss the detail, and just issue generalised rhetoric or soundbites , does little to enhance good debate and understanding of complex issues.

As for the reasons why people communicate in any debate, this can cover all manner of aspects, and one such reason could well be because it resonates with their own concerns or consciences. For instance it could be triggered by personal first hand experiences, or caring sufficiently for others when they see injustices, or from frustration at a lack of open minded research that allows others to make up their own minds having read detailed arguments from both sides of any debate.

How often have criticisms been made that when detail has been presented that it is classed as “ramblings”, or other such descriptions, when it has been frequently proven that the devil is in the detail! 

Its sad when people personalise however, in an attempt to bully and try and discredit, without willingness to listen or read alternative detail, and infer that they have underhand motives. Believe it or not but some people can care sufficiently to take timeout to research or highlight issues without any underhand political motivation or selfish intent.....they just care for others when they perceive injustice, or they might have witnessed injustice first hand. Both can be equally justified in voicing their opinions.

Likewise it’s sad when people suggest that putting forward alternative thoughts or suggestions or detail is classed as “ preaching”, rather than adding to debate. Use of aggressive language from any side of the debate can be very divisive and inciteful and does little to enhance good debate.

This message was last edited by ads on 06/07/2019.

Re duplicate voting papers....

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48890803

BBC Radio 4's Today Programme has learned that some members have received two ballot papers, in some cases because members live and work in different constituencies and may have joined local Conservative Associations in both areas.

People who have changed their name, after marriage for example, may also have been affected.

The BBC has also seen duplicate ballot papers which have been issued to the same person at the same address.

'I don't vote twice'

The Conservative Party and the independent body hired to scrutinise the running of the leadership election were both unable to say how many ballot papers had been sent in error.

"The ballot holds clear instructions that members voting more than once will be expelled," the party said.

Sir Patrick McLoughlin, who is chairing Mr Hunt's leadership campaign, admitted that he also gets two ballot papers as he is on two separate registers.

"It doesn't mean I vote twice, I don't," he told the Today programme.

Asked whether the duplicate ballots need to be more heavily policed, he said: "It's right there on the ballot paper saying you must only vote on one occasion and I expect people to do that."

Mr Johnson's campaign chairman Iain Duncan Smith said he believed the Conservative Party chairman had "already been asked to look carefully at how they sift" ballots.

In most elections, voting more than once would be illegal, but the leadership contest is only governed by the Conservative Party's internal rules.

The Electoral Commission, the independent body which oversees UK elections to ensure their integrity, has no role in the leadership contest.

Begs many questions going forward about self regulation!

Asked whether the duplicate ballots need to be more heavily policed, he said: "It's right there on the ballot paper saying you must only vote on one occasion and I expect people to do that."

We feel like that when we vote them in to do the job and them not doing what they said they will do to get in.

Perrypower,

Re EU Commission and Parliamentary elections.

https://fullfact.org/online/president-european-commission-democratically-elected/

The trouble that many have concerns about however, is that MEPs are too remote from their everyday lives and have failed to respond to citizens genuine concerns ( via www.writetothem.com) leaving them disillusioned and distrustful.

It would help to  focus on striving to make the EU more effective when it comes to protecting citizens from Banking abuse and recognise how this impacts justice systems and rule of law, to adhere to stability mechanisms intended to protect, to seek out realistic remedies to growing disillusionment from policies that have led to division and impacted cohesion., to establish easily accessible complaints procedures and monitoring and reporting mechanisms that are followed through rather than just give lip service to, and where required use infringement powers to ensure compliance., ensure that MEPs are accountable when they fail to listen and respond to citizens genuine concerns, or as has already been expressed impotent to effect change.

At present too much rhetoric and too little reform to address the real practical issues. The EU establishment appear far removed from real people and their first hand concerns. 

It has been argued that the UK is paying enormous sums for the privilege of what....to find themselves losing control and gaining little accountability in that process?

We could go on indefinitely, but please don’t forget many who express disillusionment were living in the UK and witnessed on live TV the EU Commission’s arrogance and demeaning manner in which we were treated by an EU elite that only alienated and remained intransigent to change. Sadly only themselves to blame as far as many were concerned, no matter how much you try to paint a pretty picture. It didn’t have to be like this....

 But having said all of that I sincerely hope that the new guard responsible for managing the EU make better than their predecessors in terms of responding to genuine concerns. Time will tell.

But it is fair and right to try and learn more of those who are soon to take up their positions of power and influence, (just as in the UK), including the head of the ECB, without instantly dismissing before having chance to research the individuals concerned. Worth debating on another thread perhaps?

https://www.politico.eu/article/meps-lash-out-at-eu-leaders-over-top-jobs-package-ursula-von-der-leyen-european-commission-president/

Meet the EU New Guard. 😂

https://order-order.com/2019/07/03/meet-new-eu-overlords/

Wow you don't really read that rag do you?

I am shocked.  

Hardly any different to any other news papers or information rags, who's believing anything they read now or is being spoken.

This program ( first shown October 2018)

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0bnb6vc

was shown this evening on BBC TV.

It featured Simon Reeve embarking on the first leg of an extraordinary four-part journey around the Mediterranean, travelling from Malta across the sea to southern Italy and on to Albania, 

It highlighted highly disturbing aspects in Malta and Italy... and only goes to demonstrate that there are many major problems underlying those EU economies who continue to struggle with corruption and money laundering on a vast scale, under a supposedly watchful eye of the EU establishment. 

Why you might ask has the EU establishment been so slow to recognise the scale of the problem? And why so slow to promote job growth and investment strategies in those regions so badly affected? How have they allowed this downward spiral of events to occur whilst on their watch?

By not recognising how lack of investment and the need to focus on jobs and growth in those nation states( rather than exacerbating the problems by stripping them of their workforces) they have in one foul swoop managed to not only further undermine economies but also leave citizens disillusioned in that process.

But the irony is, this is sadly not being recognised by those who still fail to appreciate why a large portion of UK citizens (who were impacted by the swift inbound movements), also  lost faith in an unaccountable EU elite who failed to recognise and respond to the warning signs of growing distrust and disillusionment brought about by mismanagement of free movement policies alongside lack of growth and investment strategies to assist. 

 But now it’s being further exacerbated by an EU establishment, who incredulously still fail to see the need on their part to ensure a swift mutually acceptable deal and orderly Brexit is achieved, with all that this entails. 

To talk of refusal and unwillingness to review negotiations and do all in their power to strive for swift workable solutions in light of these realities, continues  to do a grave disservice to all citizens.

Once again ads you blame the EU for not resolving the problems that national governments need to focus on.  Then, bizarrely you drift into your old rant that the UK's problems were down to EU migrants.

No not the migrants fault but the lack of adequate EU foreword planning and swift response required to compensate for the inevitable impact from their strategy failures. Once again citizens scapegoated in that process.

Again you fail to see how National Governments were left unsupported by EU refusals to respond with greater flexibility , controls and infringements on the one hand where required ( adherence to stability mechanisms, adherence to banking compliance, swifter controls on corruption and money laundering etc)) and extensions to timeframes re control of movements of people on the other hand, to allow Nations realistic timescales to adequately prepare.

It will be whatever it will be and the past is in the past where it belongs.

"Why you might ask has the EU establishment been so slow to recognise the scale of the problem? And why so slow to promote job growth and investment strategies in those regions so badly affected? How have they allowed this downward spiral of events to occur whilst on their watch?"

Because Ads they have their snouts that deep into the trough that they can't see what's going on around them....

Harsh, but possibly true.

One winders then, why do voters and people of the EU countries most affected permit them to rule their lives from their Ivory Towers in Brussels & Strasbourg.

UK voters have narrowly rejected the Bureaucracy, as they were st least given the chance and a a major contributor of funds, should rightly seek value for money.

UK voters did reject EU membership possibly on the propaganda they were fed. But what can you expect in times of austerity when bureaucrats only priority is nose in the trough.

When I voted to be in or out, which I voted out, I didn't know anything about the pro's and con's of leaving, spoke with many and all of us were in the same position, ignorant or what but being honest politics is low, very low on all our lists because we have all learnt over the years that what ever you say, or do, or vote for, next to...Well nothing gets done.

I believe if leaving had been explained more greatly and in greater depth then the vote to leave would have had a different outcome, but the powers to be couldn't explain what would happen if we left the EU due to the fact they really believed we wouldn't vote out, they had no exit plan, shocked Cameron proved that.

I now wish, for my part, we would stay in the EU, having seen some of what will happen when out, but to stay in the EU we need a proper PM who will stand up to whats good for the UK, and that wont ever happen.

To be honest Baz, I believe what actually persuaded many Brits to vote out was the poor return that Cameron came back with from his negotiations.

As Ads has previously commented, IF only the EU bureaucrats had listened to what is increasingly peeing off many individuals living in Europe then of course things may have been very different.

A classic example is in Greece where the electorate have lost faith in their Messiah who was going to stand up to the EU to now vote for a Centrist who is in favour of the EU.

I get the impression his popularity will last about as long as Macrons.

Electorates are looking for someone who listens to what they are asking for, everywhere.

This message was last edited by hugh_man on 09/07/2019.

Yes hugh_man fully agree, I liked Cameron in many ways, he looked like a person that commanded respect, he was aged enough to connect with younger and older people alike, I really hoped when he went to the EU he would put his foot down and come back with many good results, as you say what a let down, any respect I had for him after that went out the window, then he did a runner.

We the UK are a very strong country in every way, we have respect in what we do and how we are, if and this is a BIG IF we had / have the correct leader, Male or Female, who could dictate good terms for us then no doubt things would, and could have turned out better.

What we have now is no more then the biggest balls up any sane person could make, and I honestly believe if any one of the two get in (One will we know) then we ain't seen nothing yet in balls up.

The starting point for any civilised nation is to have effective regulatory structures in place to protect from harmful financial and political decision making and highlight inflexible systems that in reality undermine cohesion. Without such trusted mechanisms in place it’s inevitable that a downward spiral of corruption and citizen distrust and disillusionment will follow. 

And effective regulatory structures require good reporting and monitoring mechanisms as a means of listening and responding to concerns....so no wonder these “solutions”  are seen as obstacles by those who have selfish agendas far removed from citizens best interests. But it also depends upon citizens to be far more proactive in feeding back their concerns to assist the monitoring process.

This should be the wake up call for citizens to make politicians at all levels ( and both both sides of the channel) far more accountable. And the good news is that effective fair regulatory and reporting structures  have the potential to act as forewarnings, and ultimately heal divisions and better protect us all.

But this depends upon voting for leaders who remain willing to recognise the benefits from such essential compliance mechanisms to control abuse and build upon better ways for citizens to communicate with politicians as an ongoing process, and for them in turn to be given reassurances as to what is actually being done to address their concerns, to address mistakes and move forward in a far more positive and inclusive manner.