View Single Post
  #17539  
Old 11.02.2019, 15:09
StirB's Avatar
StirB StirB is offline
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Zurich
Posts: 3,675
Groaned at 155 Times in 137 Posts
Thanked 6,868 Times in 2,953 Posts
StirB has a reputation beyond reputeStirB has a reputation beyond reputeStirB has a reputation beyond reputeStirB has a reputation beyond reputeStirB has a reputation beyond reputeStirB has a reputation beyond repute
Re: The Brexit referendum thread: potential consequences for GB, EU and the Brits in

Quote:
View Post
Who would you think would provide a policy of better preventative healthcare for your children, a representative democracy advised by a panel of healthcare professionals and scientists, or your neighbours?

Who would better understand a country's future energy requirements and the pros and cons of each time of fuel source - a representative democracy advised by a panel of engineers and scientists, or your neighbours?

It works both ways.
It would work if your scenarios were true. There is no guarantee that governments follow their own advisors on any of these things, they often just see which way the wind is blowing. Since we're in the Brexit thread (think Loz and I will fall out again now, after some mutual loving!), how many MPs are deriding their own advisors' findings, as they present an inconvenient truth for them?

If we have a representative government, then yes, they should be forced to follow official advice, especially on matters of science. Since that doesn't happen, I think you'll be hard pressed to convince anyone that MPs will just vote on "conscience" (read as "expedience") in a rep dem.
Reply With Quote