We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
PCS boss urges unions to 'fight like never before'
Comments
-
why don't you think that retention of DNA samples should be decided by UK parliament?
why shouldn't there be a DNA database of all people in the UK?
Has that ever been put to the British public?
All I am doing is providing you with an example of where the European Court has decided that what the UK is doing is contravention of the ECHR that we have signed up to.
Your view is presumably that the UK Parliament should be free to legislate in contravention of the ECHR? If so why do we not withdraw from it?Few people are capable of expressing with equanimity opinions which differ from the prejudices of their social environment. Most people are incapable of forming such opinions.0 -
Has that ever been put to the British public?
That's a bit of a non-argument really, laws on double yellow lines, rape, maternity leave and public nudity have never been directly put to the British public either.
The British system, for better or worse, is what Badgehot (sp?) called a five year dictatorship.0 -
That's a bit of a non-argument really, laws on double yellow lines, rape, maternity leave and public nudity have never been directly put to the British public either.....
As far as I'm aware, outside of constitutional issues, the only question that has ever been directly put to the British public is whether or not the pubs should open on Sunday. And that was only in Wales.The British system, for better or worse, is what Badgehot (sp?) called a five year dictatorship.
I think the phrase is 'elective dictatorship', and the author was Quintin Hogg.0 -
Has that ever been put to the British public?
All I am doing is providing you with an example of where the European Court has decided that what the UK is doing is contravention of the ECHR that we have signed up to.
Your view is presumably that the UK Parliament should be free to legislate in contravention of the ECHR? If so why do we not withdraw from it?
Thank you for your examples, even if I see little merit in them to counteract the harm the ECHR has done.
I have no doubt that the European court affects UK law : if fact one might consider that is the point of the debate
Yes I think that UK law ought to be decided in the UK Parliament.0 -
That's a bit of a non-argument really, laws on double yellow lines, rape, maternity leave and public nudity have never been directly put to the British public either.
The British system, for better or worse, is what Badgehot (sp?) called a five year dictatorship.
True there are many issues (about 80% of legislation) that has cross party agreement, but that proves nothing.
On issues where there is no cross party agreement, such as the one cited the issue should be put to the electorate (not necessarily at a referendum).
I may be wrong but I do not recall an elected government including in its manifesto a policy that "there should be a DNA database of all people in the UK."Few people are capable of expressing with equanimity opinions which differ from the prejudices of their social environment. Most people are incapable of forming such opinions.0 -
As far as I'm aware, outside of constitutional issues, the only question that has ever been directly put to the British public is whether or not the pubs should open on Sunday. And that was only in Wales.
I think the phrase is 'elective dictatorship', and the author was Quintin Hogg.
No the book I mean is The English Constitution by Walter Bagehot.
https://ia902604.us.archive.org/14/items/englishconstitu00bagegoog/englishconstitu00bagegoog.pdf
WB was the editor of The Economist for many years and, I think, was the bloke that came up with the idea that Central Banks should be active repo market participants.0 -
No the book I mean is The English Constitution by Walter Bagehot.
https://ia902604.us.archive.org/14/items/englishconstitu00bagegoog/englishconstitu00bagegoog.pdf
....
I know who Bagehot is. I just don't think he ever deployed the phrase 'five year dictatorship'. For one thing, The English Constitution was published in 1867, at a time when we had seven year parliaments, and for another, I was always under the impression that Bagehot thought that the English (sic) constitution was a wonderful thing and most certainly not a dictatorship....WB was the editor of The Economist for many years and, ...
He married the owner's daughter.:)...I think, was the bloke that came up with the idea that Central Banks should be active repo market participants.
Bagehot's Dictum0 -
I know who Bagehot is. I just don't think he ever deployed the phrase 'five year dictatorship'. For one thing, The English Constitution was published in 1867, at a time when we had seven year parliaments, and for another, I was always under the impression that Bagehot thought that the English (sic) constitution was a wonderful thing and most certainly not a dictatorship.
He married the owner's daughter.:)
Bagehot's Dictum
I should know better than to argue the toss about history with you!:T0 -
I can see an attempt being made to end national pay rates and instead look to pay local market rates - I think much fairer given how much housing costs diverge around the country.
That idea was allegedly the Government's intention until they discovered that in many areas of the UK public sector pay is actually lower than equivalent jobs in the private sector. Strangely, their enthusiasm for the idea quickly disappeared.
The pay rate / housing cost argument is a chicken and egg one. It could be argued that keeping wages down actually supresses house price rises because if people can't afford the housing at the current price there is no point in increasing house prices. On the other hand, if house sellers believe that wages will increase to compensate for house price increases there is no braking mechanism.0 -
That idea was allegedly the Government's intention until they discovered that in many areas of the UK public sector pay is actually lower than equivalent jobs in the private sector. Strangely, their enthusiasm for the idea quickly disappeared.
Although according to reports yesterday, the Government`s 'enthusiasm' to limit public sector pay doesn`t extend to the political class.
Oh for an IPSA style pay review body in my area of the public sector!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-32981549“Britain- A friend to all, beholden to none”. 🇬🇧0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 351.3K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.8K Spending & Discounts
- 244.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 599.5K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.1K Life & Family
- 257.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards