Things Noticeable this week

[otokonomidori]

Originally Posted by CARLTON BROWN

Regarding the forthcoming election, I'm really quite annoyed about Saint Theresa being unwilling to take part in a TV debate. Who does she think pays her salary and aren't we still supposed to live in a democracy? Just how arrogant can she get? This should be her duty, not optional.

She gets paid her salary to run the Queen's Government - not to take part in undignified squabbles on TV which change nothing .

[Rogerbh]

US Anti-Fascists groups are selling credit card sized concealed knives. http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017...tives-website/

They were throwing M80s (quarter stick of dynamite) at Trump supporters last week.

[Rogerbh]

The Anti-Fa woman who got punched in the face last week is in porn. One of her screen names is Emily Rose Nauert


One of the many videos commenting on it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bKOuThfmHBU
I added this to the above knife comment because she is quoted in social media as saying she will take 100 conservative scalps at the next fight. (read an article where she says her "100 Nazi scalps" was a quote from Tarantino's "Inglorious Bastards" move.)

[rewbear]

Originally Posted by CARLTON BROWN

It seems to me that voters are literally being instructed to vote for the parties, not the politicians who are supposed be looking after their local interests.

In my case, our Tory MP is completely useless. I won't mention a name, but this individual has avoided all difficult local issues, always supports significant council decisions, has a nice, presumably well-paid job with a government department and pretty much lives at Dolphin Square in London, with occasions visits to the constituency.

Thanks CARLTON for raising this point, that refers back to recent discussion on the UK's lack of a written constitution.

Members of Parliament are generally understood to represent the constituencies from which they are elected and to act on behalf of local residents in matters that involve national, as opposed to local legislative bodies. However, as CARLTON mentions, some, if not most, MP's are quite content to 'toe the party line' in parliament (that is, follow the whips), stay on the back benches, work towards the pension and avoid any issues that might prove contentious. This is a direct result of the 'two- (or three- or four-) party system of government we have here, where prospective MP's are selected by local branches of a national political party and are elected under their banner. De-selection is a constant worry for these time-servers.

In theory, you or I could stump up the registration fee, obtain the necessary seconders and go on to the ballot, even eventually get ourselves elected on an Independent ticket and go off to Westminster, and in practice many have been elected as Independents, only to get swallowed up in the bureaucratic mire that is parliamentary politics.

But what do we do once we get there? How do we vote on, say, the Finance Bill? Do we take a referendum of our local constituency each time there's a vote on anything, or do we follow our own conscience? Who are we representing then?

A constitution would set out the duties and responsibilities of a Member of Parliament such that anyone elected, no matter which party they are supported by, or none, would know them and know the consequences of ignoring them, and we, the voters, would be able to hold them to account. I don't suppose it has occurred to CARLTON, and it wouldn't occur to me either, to write to your MP and tell them to "Buck your ideas up sonny and start doing something for your local constituency instead of warming the backbenches or else.", and unless you are a member of a local constituency party there is no way to hold your MP to account.

Ah me, how I drone on sometimes! But I read the recent posts on the constitution with interest as much of intelligence was written, and it got me to thinking that a 'Constitution of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland' is long overdue. Come on ERII, how about taking the lead on this one?

[otokonomidori]

Originally Posted by rewbear

Members of Parliament are generally understood to represent the constituencies from which they are elected

But what do we do once we get there? How do we vote on, say, the Finance Bill? Do we take a referendum of our local constituency each time there's a vote on anything, or do we follow our own conscience? Who are we representing then?

Burke's Speech to the Electors at Bristol at the Conclusion of the Poll was noted for its defence of the principles of representative government against the notion that elected officials should merely be delegates:

'... it ought to be the happiness and glory of a representative to live in the strictest union, the closest correspondence, and the most unreserved communication with his constituents. Their wishes ought to have great weight with him; their opinion, high respect; their business, unremitted attention. .....But his unbiased opinion, his mature judgment, his enlightened conscience, he ought not to sacrifice to you, to any man, or to any set of men living. These he does not derive from your pleasure; no, nor from the law and the constitution. ....Your representative owes you, not his industry only, but his judgment; and he betrays, instead of serving you, if he sacrifices it to your opinion.."

[bloke57]

Glad to see that the proposed changes to probate "fees" has been quietly side-lined in the pre-election wash up. The so-called fees looked more like a stealth tax - the old limit of £155 to £215 rising to up to £20,000. Even fairly modest estates in my neck of the woods would have attracted costs of thousands owing to the link to property values.

The measure had led to some chaos with executors resigning or refusing to act when they were merely being asked to do the right thing.

Needs a complete rethink as flawed from the start.

[old alal]

Agree bloke57. I object totally to paying tax on death of any sort. let's not forget that tax has already been paid on the earnings that paid for the property and other items in an "estate" and possibly several times over.

Let those of us who have something to leave to our loved ones when we pass, do so without worry that those we do love have to pay for it.

The Coalition Government that inherited a financial disaster, missed the opportunity to completely rewrite the Tax Code. Perhaps some other major constitutional change might allow for this to happen. I'd love to be Chancellor Of The Exchequer

[Puhbear69]

Tax of death of a loved one could be right ! On ground, on a house(-s) a company and so on.

At first this has to be free for a married husband of wife .

But not for the second generation or other people. They never have worked for this "income".

If it's a company, and the second generation is starting to apply this company for so and so much of years, this tax could be charged to the account of this company. So the second generation could have to pay nothing (or reducing) after so and so much years to this tax, when they apply.

Of course not for private house(-s) and private ground.

[Arturo2nd]

Originally Posted by Rogerbh

US Anti-Fascists groups are selling credit card sized concealed knives. http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017...tives-website/

They were throwing M80s (quarter stick of dynamite) at Trump supporters last week.

Political polarization brings out the violent crazies from both sides. Lots of innocent bystanders get hurt.

Hard core Trumpies are a minority. So are the desperate dregs of the urban poor and the violent anarchists embedded among them.

As for Ms. Nauert, you didn't think these porno chicks were all normal girls working their way through college, did you?

[haroldeye]

Most of the violent anarchists I have met were from middle class backgrounds.