I am convinced Britain’s most important priority is to reform itself. This would in time sort out most if not all of the grievances of those who votes leave.
Right now, it seems any initiative for reform is planned on a single proposition. So for instance we had the 2011 alternative vote referendum, which got rejected essentially because voters didn’t understand it. In any case, that would have been another patch up on an already patched up system even if had been approved.
I feel what we need is a package of reforms designed by constitutional experts. Voters cannot be expected to understand all the details. It would then be forward by referendum for approval with all the massive benefits explained.
The idea would be to have a completely transparent process in order to get as much trust as possible.
we have a parliament that cannot agree on anything concerning Brexit, whether it is Theresa May’s deal, no deal or a second referendum. Most people agree that our parliament is a laughing stock. This agreement is independent of whether people support leave or remain.
Why can they not agree on anything? The answer is because a large number of our MPs have opinions and are making decisions based on fancies and lies, not facts.
Facts are only in one place, lies are everywhere, in all directions.
We need a fact based parliament.
Even outside the scope of Brexit, let us look at the astonishing incompetence of this current government, whether it is reforming the benefit system or apprenticeships: unmitigated disasters!
We have a housing crisis, austerity, excessive immigration. Note: I am saying immigration is beneficial. It is the sheer volume we have seen in recent years that is a bit of a problem.
I also find it disturbing the number of British companies that have been sold off to foreign firms: Financial Times, ARM most recently that I am aware of. These companies are jewels to our country so it is sad to see these go into foreign hands. If the reverse was true, that is British companies buying foreign ones, this comment would be irrelevant and silly.
Our armed forces are in a mess. We cannot adequately protect our petrol tankers in the Persian Gulf. We have just built two huge aircraft carriers – only the American class Nimitz are bigger. Yet, we do not have the means to adequately protect these.
A fact based parliament would over a time lapse sort out these issues.
I started to write petitions to change rules, but I have wasted my time as there are so many things wrong.
I have put a few thoughts below. These are all very open to debate.
For democracy, you need honesty.
Part of the problem is people think as democracy being the ultimate objective. I disagree: good governance is the ultimate objective and democracy offers the best means of achieving this. Currently, the leaders of the 2 mains parties in UK are pretty extreme. As Lord Andrew Adonis pointed out: it is because leaders are elected by party members not representative of UK population. One could not say that is undemocratic: anyone can join a party. If you are a member of a party, surely you have a right to vote for leader, whereas if you are not a member, why should you have that right? That is democracy, but appealing governance. If the 2011 alternative referendum had been successful, the current situation would be less of an issue.
I see the future of Great-Britain as a federal state, with Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland each having their own parliaments. The problem with England is that it is much more populated than the other nations. In fact, more than twice as populated as all others combined. This is always going to give them the feeling they are being bullied. There is however something where the British are unequivocal, English included: we don’t like bullies. A solution would be to break England up into several states each with own parliament. This should be possible since England is anything but homogenous. We could have a city state of London and a North of England state each with their own distinctive characters.
Scotland and to a lesser extent Wales keep threatening to become independent. However, independence would just be Brexit mark II for these nations and would also cause huge problems to England.
I have looked at the code of conduct MPs are supposed to adhere to. It is a joke! I am shocked and stunned that someone with a criminal record can stand as an MP. An MP can lie with complete impunity. Boris Johnson is proof of that. Someone tried to sue him and failed because the rules are wrong. We need to change the rules. If a candidate overspends in an election and wins, he is just fined when in fact a new election should be held and in worst cases, candidate banned from standing. Home Secretary Priti Patel is being paid £1,000 an hour as adviser to an American firm supplying MoD. What a disgrace! It should not be possible for any MP let alone a minister to be a paid advisor.
We need to have facts based MPs. A private individual should be able to have whatever beliefs he/she wants. However, being an MP has certain obligations and responsibilities. We cannot have MPs that deny global warming. As Greta Thunberg has stated: global warming is not an opinion, it is a fact. Similarly, the Shoah is a fact. Its denial is not acceptable. Some people will argue we cannot have such restrictions. However, I would like to point out that individuals will spend huge amounts of money on bogus research trying to tell us there is no global warming, tobacco and excessive alcohol is harmless and regular drinking of sweet fizzy drinks has no health hazards. The issue is not that they don’t believe the obvious. Of course, they do. They just have malicious intents and put money first amongst their priorities.
Capital punishment has been abolished. An individual who believes in its reinstatement should not be able to stand as MP. The more you know about capital punishment, the more you are against it.
Similarly, right of abortion for women is a fundamental right and cannot be abolished.
The Liberal Democrats are proposing limiting political donation to a maximum of £10000 per person per calendar year. That is a good idea. As Joseph E Stiglitz points out: the best way for the extremely wealthy to pay less tax is for them to make big political donations. That rule needs consolidating: for instance, the practice of paying huge amounts of money for a dinner given by a political party needs to be outlawed.
There has been a referendum for alternative vote, instead of first past the post. That would be an improvement, but that by no means the only solution. Constitutional experts should be able to think out best option.
I think the monarchy is a dated institution and should be abolished. We are spending stupid amounts of money just for its upkeep – see the campaign group Republic. However, in recognition for the Queen’s immaculate service as head of state, I would be in favour of keeping her until her death and then Britain becoming a federal republic. I understand most British people would be against abolishing the monarchy, so maybe this point should be put on hold?