SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Boris Johnson loses Parliamentary majority, faces Brexit showdown
Britain's Parliament returns from its summer recess and is facing a titanic showdown over Prime Minister Boris Johnson's plans to leave the European Union. Here's what we know:
● Johnson has lost his majority in Parliament, with the defection of Conservative Phillip Lee to the Liberal Democrats.
● The opposition, including members of Johnson's party, is seeking to pass legislation to delay Brexit.
● Johnson has said that if his foes succeed he will call early elections.
List of prime ministers of the United Kingdom by length of tenure
#54: George Canning, 119 days (1827)
#55: Boris Johnson, 40 days (Incumbent) (2019)
See also: Brexit: Tory MP defects ahead of crucial no-deal vote
How Brexit Blew Up Britain's Constitution
(Score: 2) by PiMuNu on Wednesday September 04 2019, @12:00PM (5 children)
> what the purported benefits of Brexit will be.
A directly elected legislature.
The EU lower house is filled with nominated place-men and women and the elective upper house has no power. The EU president is nominated.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by theluggage on Wednesday September 04 2019, @01:17PM (4 children)
What, like the one we already have in the House of Commons that the (currently unelected) PM is desperately trying to circumvent to force through the most extreme possible interpretation of an advisory referendum held by a previous government - that lost any majority it might have had for "no deal" (if not Brexit) in the 2017 election?
This is now less about Brexit and more about getting Beloved Leader Bo-Jo-Il to look up "elected legislature" in his dictionary... because if he gets his way on no deal Brexit (even if that might be for the best, long-term) then he surely isn't going to let any pesky "elected legislature" scrutinise a future trade deal with his good friend Donald (although he won't get that if he has to build a wall across Ireland - a thorny issue that the status quo solves, but a no-deal brexit turns up to 11).
(Score: 2) by PiMuNu on Wednesday September 04 2019, @02:57PM (3 children)
> like the one we already have in the House of Commons
The EU has power to overrule the House of Commons, so actually no, not like the one we already have.
(Score: 4, Informative) by theluggage on Wednesday September 04 2019, @04:11PM (2 children)
Well, first, any EU directive has to be proposed by the EU executive (on which our democratically elected government is represented) then passed by the directly-elected EU parliament (if we squander our allotted seats by electing far-right zealots who just jeer at the foreign Johnnies while being sure to claim their full expenses that's our democratic right to be stupid) then passed into law by the House of Commons who at least get the chance to debate and amend the legislation.
Meanwhile, or PM seems to think that he has the power to overrule the House of Commons - or at least use every trick in the book to avoid respecting the decision that the House made back in the spring to rule out "no deal". Do you really think he's going to open up his sweetheart deal with Trump to scrutiny by parliament if he can get away without? TTIP (you know, that US/EU trade deal that would have let US companies sue our government) will be a picnic compared to that. True - the EU executive tried to sneak that one through (executives do as executives will) but the democratic elements of the EU managed to fight it off - no thanks to our wonderful UK government which always seems to think that what is good for General Motors is good for the UK).
NB: If Boris wants to talk about losing bargaining clout (which he seems to think means 'do what I want or I'll shoot myself in the foot - then you'll be sorry!') then he should think about the wisdom of entering into negotiations with the US and others after burning his bridges with our current trading partners.
(Score: 2) by PiMuNu on Thursday September 05 2019, @08:57AM (1 child)
> proposed by the EU executive (on which our democratically elected government is represented)
But these are placemen nominated by Boris Johnson, Corbyn et al. That is simply not good enough in the modern era.
> then passed by the directly-elected EU parliament
the directly-elected parliament has the power to block legislation but not to propose legislation. This is not good enough.
> then passed into law by the House of Commons
But it is illegal for the UK legislature (commons, lords and queen) to not pass the law so this is a bit of a false argument.
My argument is that the EU has powers very much like the US federal government. The EU does not, yet, have the power to raise direct taxes; and (consequently) the EU does not maintain a standing army. But they do have the power to raise legislation and they have judicial supremacy (i.e. one can appeal a criminal case to the EU courts). In a proper democracy, there would be a directly, democratically elected government and lower house to manage these powers.
--
This sounds like a somewhat theoretical distinction, but the absence of such a body has direct consequences: no one has ever proposed a meaningful *manifesto* for how Europe should be run that folks can vote on. I voted in European elections for the last 20 years, but if I am honest I have no idea what I am voting for, because the people I am electing have no meaningful manifesto. This is because they are not in charge.
Let me give an example. Amount of money going to EU from member states was a controversial topic that came up in the Brexit referendum. If I think that too little, or too much, money is going to the EU from Britain, who should I vote for that can actually change it?
My MEP can't. My MP can't and has lots of other distractions. Who can I vote for who can make a meaningful change?
Compare that with, say, the Foreign Aid budget (about 1 % of UK GDP IIRC, and something which I note no one is complaining about). If I have a strong opinion, I can write to my MP and look at different party manifestos and vote for the party that says they will increase it or decrease it. My vote counts for something. That simply is not the case in the EU.
There is another fundamental problem with the EU, as a consequence of the lack of democracy. No one is in charge. There is no meaningful "president". Sure, someone gets nominated every year or whatever (crazy!) But there is no equivalent to POTUS, or the UK PM, who can actually make stuff happen. This, I believe, leads to an organisation that lacks goals and tends to exist for existence sake. That is okay for a trade federation, or a military alliance. But because EU has legislative primacy, it is not good enough for the EU. Someone needs to be running the show.
What has shocked me the most, and made me switch to a Brexiter (I am very pro-union, just not this union) is that the EU has totally failed to address what I regard as massive, structural flaws.
(Score: 2) by theluggage on Thursday September 05 2019, @04:31PM
...as are the UK cabinet ministers who are the only ones who are practically able to propose UK laws. (Private member's bills have little chance of being passed without the tacit support of the executive).
...so when the UK Parliament is able to take control of proceedings and propose and pass a bit of legislation, that's a good thing, right? To be fair, I don't recall whether you, personally, have questioned that process, but you only have to turn on the TV and listen to any Brexiteer (from the Prime Minister down) flatly refusing to accept Parliament's decision and supporting every technique short of actually winning the argument to overturn the result.
I certainly haven't heard any Brexiteers suggest anything about governmental reform after the glorious day (beyond changing the House of Lords which is a whole other argument...) - you know, like introducing proportional representation (something the EU parliament does have), requiring more "direct democracy", getting rid of unelected "special advisors", stripping the PM of prerogative powers, executive orders and other Parliament-bypassing tricks...
Sorry to disillusion you, but your MP isn't going to vote down the Budget because of a few letters. Many MPs are brilliant if you write to them regarding some personal matter that they can actually fix or a question they can actually answer, but if you send them your thoughts on Big Politics there's little they can do beyond sending a memo to the Minister which may be recorded in some dusty ledger... and if its an EU matter they can just as easily send it to the appropriate person at the EU....
...as for changing your vote, if you live in a safe seat for one of the major parties, forget it because you're effectively disenfranchised by our electoral system. You're actually more likely to get a MEP that supports your causes thanks to the PR system used in the EU elections. Consequence: we elect UKIPpers/Brexit party members who only turn up to turn their backs on 'Ode to Joy' and fiddle their expenses.
...and that problem is firmly and squarely the fault of UK politicians and press for basically treating the EU elections as an opinion poll for the next general election, so the manifestos are packed with domestic issues and attacks on the rival parties. If you stay up until 3AM watching the BBC you might - if there's a 2 minute dead spot between soundbites from the more entertaining domestic politicians and infographics of what the House of Commons would look like if the numbers were repeated at the next GE - catch a brief discussion of the various multinational party groupings in the EU parliament and which ones our MEPs would... no, hang on, we're just getting an exit poll from Little Banging-on-the-Wall which was a key marginal battle ground in the last general election!!!
Seriously, for all the decades we've been in the EU the debate has been dominated by if/when we were going to leave and fake news stories about straight bananas and kipper bans. We take the EU elections less seriously than the Eurovision Song Contest (and half the population probably thinks that's something to do with the EU despite Israel and Australia taking part...).
Then we complain that we don't know who or what we're voting for in the EU.
No, I don't particularly like the fact that the EU used "the Common Market" as a trojan horse - but on the other hand, that was decades ago without that we'd probably not have any union, and I rather like the fact we've had all those decades without any of those pesky wars with France and Germany that used to happen every few years.