Nick Clegg chimes in on the Guardian with a well crafted piece demonstrating his complete lack of understanding of what the real problem is. I was going to entitle this post ‘Foxes call for chicken coop redesign’. But thought better of it.
Nick Clegg: Bar the gates. No summer holiday before the overhaul
Warm words and rhetoric are easy. We must seize the mood and enact a radical programme of reform within 100 days
Why the rush nick? The British Form of Government®, whatever your opinion of it, took ONE THOUSAND YEARS to get to this state. Do you really think that you have not only the right, but the capability to redesign it in ONE HUNDRED DAYS. That is the very definition of conceit. You people are so full of FAIL, so terrible, so spineless, murderous, rudderless and worthless that you could not be trusted to design a new milk bottle, let alone a form of government that is ancient.
Furthermore, if everything is to be torn up, why should YOUR voice be louder than anyone else’s? Just who the hell do you think you are?
Finally the dam has broken, and everyone is talking about changing Britain’s political system. For decades reformers have been thwarted by Westminster inertia. But the MPs’ expenses scandal has overturned old certainties and made change possible.
As bad as it may seem this ‘crisis’ is not enough of a reason to destroy something that is 1000 years old, wether you agree with it or not, and certainly the insane people who sit there should not be the ones who ‘reimagine’ it.
This moment must be seized by all who want a different kind of politics. Warm words, rhetoric and consideration are not enough; indeed, they are a guarantee that little will happen. So let us bar the gates of Westminster and stop MPs leaving for their summer holidays until this crisis has been sorted out, and every nook and cranny of our political system has been reformed.
This is so ridiculous that I laughed out loud.
You want to reform Parliament, while all of the electorate in the country are away on THEIR holidays, sunning themselves in Dubai, while you make everything WORSE without anyone watching…..ROTFL!
Today I’m setting out a plan of action to get all the changes we need delivered in just 100 days
What’s the rush? The evil that has been emanating from that house has been going on for years; why the need to act quickly? If you want to do something quickly, why not remove all laws from the statute books that are the cause of everyones anger? The expenses scandal is merely the pin that has popped the boil. It is the final straw. How is it that you cannot see this?!
– making it possible for MPs to be sacked by constituents,
Irrelevant; if your MP sits and votes your rights away, and then you sack her, what does that do to the legislation she voted for? NOTHING. Nick Clegg and his party of FAIL are sour grape class warriors, interested in punishing everyone and not in the real things that matter
abolishing the House of Lords,
See what I mean? 70’s style class war that is the hallmark of the sour graper. No one cares that there is an unelected upper house; in fact, they have been useful in resisting the excesses of the lower house. This obsession with abolishing the lords is like journalists interviewing journalists about journalism. The only thing that matters in this, the real crisis, is the killing of the British people by the incredible burden of laws and the police state. A house of lords in a country where everyone’s rights are respected is completely tolerable; after all, someone has to organize the street sweepers. As long as that is all they are doing, who cares how they got there?
getting corrupt money out of politics and changing the electoral system to give everyone a voice.
Proportional representation; this will benefit only Nick Clegg’s party. It is a non issue when put against the core problem; power itself. A proportionally represented parliament that votes for illegal wars, ID Cards and ContactPoint is just as bad as one that is elected the old way.
People will say it isn’t possible – parliament can’t act that quickly.
‘Some people say‘? Actually, we say that it doesn’t matter wether or not it is possible. But you read that.
I say the innate conservatism that marks out our political establishment is part of the problem. Let’s stop all this self-congratulatory hype about the mother of parliaments and get on with improving it.
No one cares. Dismantle the police state and the 3000+ police state laws of Tony Bliar and everything else, using the old system, before you start tearing down parliament and replacing it with Parliament 2.0.
Momentum will ebb away unless we act quickly.
Its always best to act after careful thought and never in haste. This demonstrates that you are not fit to lead a donkey.
Delay would be a victory for those who want to confine change to the bare minimum – the two establishment parties who will talk up reform long enough for the storm to pass, then kick it into the long grass for good.
The whole thing is over…. that is what you DO NOT UNDERSTAND Mr FAIL!
<a href="http://irdial.com/blogdial/?p=1786" title="Cameron’s Speech in Milton Keynes: FAIL. | BLOGDIAL”>David Cameron’s proposals set out in the Guardian on Tuesday were a masterful example of well-judged rhetoric free of substance and conviction. Open-source software, new select committee chairs and legislative text messages will not rescue British democracy. They are designed, I fear, to provide verbal cover for maintaining the status quo.
You and he are both full of FAIL, and your proposal fails in the same way that his fails; you are both FAILING to address the core problem; the police state, the absurd burdens, and a hog wild murder inclined system of government.
Real political change is about taking power from those who have hoarded it for themselves, and distributing it to others.
Thats what YOU think.
I wonder why you did not go to your constituents and ask them what it is that THEY want.
So change will only be possible if the vested interests that have benefited from the way things are accept that they can no longer preside over an institutional stitch-up. For generations the Labour and Conservative parties have colluded to keep out competition. They are like a corporate duopoly, setting the rules of the game to maintain dominance. And just like in economics, it’s ordinary people who suffer: taken for granted, and deprived of the ability to make different choices to those imposed upon them.
No, it is the third party you lead that suffers. If you had some policies that were worthwhile, then you would deserve some support, but you are so awful that there is no appetite and no point in supporting you. This piece is a perfect example of how you only care about proportional representation and settling old scores rather than the volcanic rage that has swept the country. FAIL.
That is why what Cameron did not say is more revealing than what he did. No mention of the murky business of party funding. No mention of the scandal of an unelected second chamber. The rejection of any change to an electoral system that hands power to governments on a fraction of the vote. Without these changes, British politics will continue to be a game of pass the parcel between two old parties, while the rest of the country switches off,
They are going to do more than switch off methinks.
So instead of long-term consideration of the possibility of tinkering, let us have 100 days of real action: swift, decisive and confident.
Anyone who is confident that they ca successfully re design a 1000 year old form of government is… over confident. And once again, the action everyone wants is the immediate dismantling of the nanny state, the database state, and the warfare state.
It really is possible.
So what? ID Cards are ‘really possible’ and REALLY BAD. Just because something is possible it does not follow that it should be done. Especially if it will not solve the problem.
The details of a reformed system of party funding have already been thrashed out between the parties, months ago.
Once again; if the only thing the parties are organizing is street sweeping, then it doesn’t matter who funds them. The problem is that whoever is in there, they have too much power. Take away that power and issues like funding become less important. In any case, this is not an emergency issue in any way. You are just making noise Clegg, and its not the right kind. In fact, this is a symptom of a larger problem that MPs suffered from; they only care about their own issues. The MPs that took the expenses cared only about clawing back their money. Nick Clegg only cares about what is of concern to him; Proportional Representation and gaining more power. He couldn’t give a damn about what people are really angry about. Cameron, for all is many failures, at least produced a list of things that he wants to change in favor of the people. It was a bad list, but at least he partially feels the heat of the hatred. Clegg doesn’t feel anything at all; its all about shoehorning his pathetic party into greater power. What a loser. And again, if they had anything to offer, like Ron Paul in the USA offered, they would find their fortunes turned around very quickly. The problem with these people is that they have no ideas, no empathy and no sense.
Sir Hayden Phillips secured outline agreement to ban donations of more than £50,000, limit spending to £100m over a parliament and shake up union contributions. The reason it wasn’t adopted was because the Conservatives walked out, keen to protect donations from tax exiles such as Lord Ashcroft. But there is no reason not to return to what was all but agreed, and enforce it. The political parties and elections bill, now before parliament, could be amended and adopted within weeks.
And what will that do to stop anything that is driving the people insane with rage? Its like demanding immediate action on garbage collection when there is a burst water main in the street. ‘Bonkers’ is what they call people like Clegg.
Similarly, on House of Lords reform, the principles of a fully elected chamber have already been exhaustively debated and adopted by MPs. As in any bicameral system, peers should be elected on a different constituency basis and electoral cycle to MPs. Details could be decided on and introduced in the constitutional renewal bill being promoted in the House of Lords by Paul Tyler.
How they are elected is irrelevant. The only thing that matters are the liberty corroding laws that come out of Parliament.
And then there’s electoral reform. The ideal solution would be an Irish-style single transferable vote system in which voters elect the person, not the party. But even alternative vote plus – as first advocated by Roy Jenkins in 1998 and now backed by Alan Johnson – would ensure most MPs have a personal constituency link with their voters, as already occurs in Germany and Scotland. Labour made a promise more than a decade ago to hold a referendum on the Jenkins proposals. If the government won’t call a general election, let us have this referendum in early September, as the culmination of 100 days of reform.
The same people will run, keep passing bad laws and making Britain worse… what good is this idea? FAIL.
Together, over the next 100 days, we could achieve nothing less than the total reinvention of British politics. These months could become a great moment in British political history, rather than a shabby footnote to a shameful month of scandal. Let us seize, not squander, the opportunity for change.
Who is the ‘We’ in this? In this case, it means the foxes who want to design a streamlined chicken coop with racing lines on the outside.
No thanks Nick Clegg… 100% FAIL.