News   Sep 20, 2019
 895     3 
News   Sep 20, 2019
 664     2 
News   Sep 20, 2019
 1.6K     2 

Boris Johnson's United (?) Kingdom

Northern Light

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
May 20, 2007
Messages
4,261
Reaction score
3,854
Location
Toronto/EY
Thousands protest Boris Johnson's move to suspend Parliament

Protesters assembled outside PM's office chanting: 'Liar Johnson, shame on you!'

The Associated Press · Posted: Aug 31, 2019 3:31 PM ET

I dislike this move as much as anyone. Though, so far as I can discern, its perfectly legal.

The concept of proroguing is one with which I vehemently disagree; and I would like to see it removed from the Canadian context completely as well.

Its almost always a vehicle for getting rid of legislation a government had no desire or intent to pass in the first place, but felt it had to appear otherwise, for one reason or another.

This vehicle allows the "but we tried" defense, which I don't find serves the public interest.

I would prefer to see the sitting dates of parliament enshrined in law, with some minor allowances to be flexible either in the event of emergencies or to accommodate statutory holidays that shift around or the like.

Something, like, "Parliament shall generally sit no later than the third week of January, and from then until no sooner than the fourth week of July each year; it shall resume sitting no later than the first full week of September following Labour Day and remaining sitting till the last day of the third week of December of each year."

"This shall generally comprise no less than 220 sitting days per annum. "

"The term of each parliament shall be fixed to be, from the first sitting day following an election, to the last sitting day prior to the writ being dropped for a subsequent election."

Or some such similar wording.

The system should be less gamable.

Likewise we need to tighten rules on omnibus bills.

We need to specifically restrict any non-financial matter from being directly tied to the budget bill.

We also need to address how votes work in legislatures. I'm not keen on majority passage when the House barely meets quorum.

I think every bill should require an absolute majority of the seats in the house to actively vote for it.

ie. in a 338 seat parliament, where 170 is a majority; I don't believe it should be legal to pass a bill with fewer than 170 votes in favour.

We can't allow politicians in any country to game the system easily, the temptation, at least for some, is too great.
 

DSC

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Jan 13, 2008
Messages
10,282
Reaction score
5,020
Location
St Lawrence Market Area
Perhaps the thread title should be edited to Boris Johnson' United (?) Kingdom since Scotkand, Wales and Northern Ireland all voted against Brexit and it got only 52% overall.
 

lenaitch

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Sep 5, 2017
Messages
1,029
Reaction score
697
I dislike this move as much as anyone. Though, so far as I can discern, its perfectly legal.

The concept of proroguing is one with which I vehemently disagree; and I would like to see it removed from the Canadian context completely as well.

Its almost always a vehicle for getting rid of legislation a government had no desire or intent to pass in the first place, but felt it had to appear otherwise, for one reason or another.

This vehicle allows the "but we tried" defense, which I don't find serves the public interest.

I would prefer to see the sitting dates of parliament enshrined in law, with some minor allowances to be flexible either in the event of emergencies or to accommodate statutory holidays that shift around or the like.

Something, like, "Parliament shall generally sit no later than the third week of January, and from then until no sooner than the fourth week of July each year; it shall resume sitting no later than the first full week of September following Labour Day and remaining sitting till the last day of the third week of December of each year."

"This shall generally comprise no less than 220 sitting days per annum. "

"The term of each parliament shall be fixed to be, from the first sitting day following an election, to the last sitting day prior to the writ being dropped for a subsequent election."

Or some such similar wording.

The system should be less gamable.

Likewise we need to tighten rules on omnibus bills.

We need to specifically restrict any non-financial matter from being directly tied to the budget bill.

We also need to address how votes work in legislatures. I'm not keen on majority passage when the House barely meets quorum.

I think every bill should require an absolute majority of the seats in the house to actively vote for it.

ie. in a 338 seat parliament, where 170 is a majority; I don't believe it should be legal to pass a bill with fewer than 170 votes in favour.

We can't allow politicians in any country to game the system easily, the temptation, at least for some, is too great.
It does seem the creators of the Westminster parliamentary system replaced the 'tyranny of the monarch' with the 'tryanny of the first minister'. Constitutionally, there is little control over the prime minister in a majority parliament. Most parliamentary and government procedures are based on convention and tradition which can, and often are, exploited, bent or ignored, at will. To encode them would be quite the undertaking. The US system prides itself on the 'checks and balances' of its system but they often result in gridlock.
Should the Head of State exercise its reserve power (beyond "listen, advise and warn"), it runs the risk of creating a crisis for ignoring the elected will of the people. Events like this are often assessed to be more of a crisis for the government than the state; this time I'm not so sure.

I don't think he will be a long term PM.
The UK is starting to look like Australia, or Italy!
 

AlbertC

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
4,502
Reaction score
2,590
Location
Davenport
U.K. Prime Minister Boris Johnson suffers embarrassing defeat in parliament over Brexit bill

By Gregory Katz And Danica KirkaThe Associated Press
Tues., Sept. 3, 2019

LONDON - On a day of humiliating setbacks, British Prime Minister Boris Johnson suffered a major defeat in Parliament on Tuesday night as rebellious lawmakers voted to seize control of the Brexit agenda, prompting the embattled prime minister to say he would call for a new general election.

The 328 to 301 vote, made possible by fellow Conservatives who turned their back on Johnson’s pleas, cleared the way for his opponents to introduce a bill Wednesday that would seek to prevent Britain from leaving the European Union without a deal Oct. 31. It was a momentous day in Britain’s centuries-old Parliament as the legislature rose up to successfully challenge the power of the prime minister and his government over vital Brexit policy.

Even if they can force Johnson to seek a delay to that deadline, any extension would have to be approved by each of the other 27 EU nations.
 

Richard White

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 7, 2015
Messages
1,603
Reaction score
765
Location
Scarborough, Ontario
U.K. Prime Minister Boris Johnson suffers embarrassing defeat in parliament over Brexit bill

By Gregory Katz And Danica KirkaThe Associated Press
Tues., Sept. 3, 2019



I liken this to our own 1990s PC Party wherein the governing party and its newly minted PM think they can call an election and win a majority only to lose badly.. very badly. For those who are not familiar I am referring to 1993 and Kim Campbell.

I can see Boris calling for an election, getting it and then being massacred at the Ballot Box.

The problem he fails to realize is that the British people are growing tired of the Brexit drama and the desire of the UK Tories to inflict harm on the country based solely on extreme idealism. The Tories have tried to ram No-Deal Brexit down peoples throat while Parliament has voted against no-deal and the people have staged regular (and sometimes large) protests across the UK.

He will lose sorely and be turfed quickly.
 

DSC

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Jan 13, 2008
Messages
10,282
Reaction score
5,020
Location
St Lawrence Market Area
BoJo literally kicked Churchill's grandson out of the party, plus the "Father Of The House"
What is 'interesting' about these expulsions is that BoJo himself and many of his cabinet all voted against his predecessor's government and their attempts to leave UK. Were they expelled?
 

AlbertC

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
4,502
Reaction score
2,590
Location
Davenport
Top