The Brexit referendum thread: potential consequences for GB, EU and the Brits in CH

[Ato]

	Quote:	keyboardandmouse
	Yes I second this. It winds me up when people label an entire nation as a bunch of racists in effect when the vast, vast majority are absolutely nothing of the sort.

You think the vast, vast majority are not something, that racist!
I've always found the majority of generalisations are terrible...

I've friends who are obviously foreign in the UK, they've not had an increase in racist comments even though 2 of them work in coffee shops/bakers facing customers on a daily basis. They're in the East midlands so who knows. Then again this is anecdotal.

[Sky]

This doesn’t mean everybody is racist, it means that racism can exist.
It’s just so surprising when you are on the receiving end.
I felt I should have apologized for being there.

Lets not bring it out of context, it does exist and it is no better in other countries.
Nevertheless there seems to be a correlation between it being more evident than before.
Perhaps that is the difference.

[Blueangel]

	Quote:	TonyClifton
	I think it’s very sad that in this day and age there are still people like you who still feel they need to have MPs to represent them. If Brexit has shown us anything is that if the UK political system isn’t broken (I believe it is), then it certainly isn’t equipped to deal with a referendum of this type where MPs are able to block the result. We live in an age of information (and misinformation), there is the internet, everyone is more informed now than they have ever been. I’m sure you believe very strongly in the system, but people need to wake up and realise it’s no good any more.

Bollocks!
I've represented the rights of literally hundreds of people, and also represented myself in court twice in non-criminal proceedings. I only sought the assistance of my MP on one occasion when it was the only fitting and proper course of action, and confirmed as such by CAD and a solicitor. Whilst the internet gives knowledge, and knowledge is power, it doesn't replace the chain of power.

	Quote:	Fish Paste
	In my frequent travels to the NW, Liverpool and the working towns in Lancs, I've never seen nor heard anything that you describe, and to the locals I'm a foreigner. So yes, I'm also calling BS.

That's your experience.
As a native of one of those 'working towns in Lancs', my experience is markedly different to yours and I've witnessed first hand the kind of incidents that Raffles has referred to many times over the years, but a hell of a lot more over the last 3yrs. I've even had two individual tradesmen come round to assess work on my house, then when I called back the same day for the quote and a start date, been told "I don't work for foreigners". I've even thrown a third tradesman out of my house for being bigoted towards my OH. I think my 48yrs of living exclusively in a 'working town in Lancs' stands for something. No doubt, you will beg to differ.

[keyboardandmouse]

	Quote:	Blueangel
	Bollocks! I've even had two individual tradesmen come round to assess work on my house, then when I called back the same day for the quote and a start date, been told "I don't work for foreigners".

This has happened to me, here in switzerland. Its a small proportion of the population.

Looking for some studies, I think Xenophobic attacks / racism has increased over the last 3 years, but overall racism I think is down over like a 20 year period. certainly nothing like the 80's...

[Sky]

As said above, it happens in all countries.
I think what may disconcert British people is the fact that the UK is so well-known for tolerance, freedom of speech, diversity and openness, so when comments do happen, there’s general surprise and consternation.

British people are rightfully proud of their country, so they want things to be nice.

[3Wishes]

	Quote:	TonyClifton
	I think it’s very sad that in this day and age there are still people like you who still feel they need to have MPs to represent them... We live in an age of information (and misinformation), there is the internet, everyone is more informed now than they have ever been...

What else do you want, direct elections for every little decision to be made? A parliamentary system isn't perfect but it does serve a purpose. Maybe the UK system needs an overhaul, but I don't know what that would be.

I'd argue many people are less informed than before, because they can easily seek out information that confirms their own bias and disregard everything else. And they do. Even here on EF when we want to make an argument we search for a source that confirms out belief, not that disproves it.

[Blueangel]

	Quote:	keyboardandmouse
	Looking for some studies, I think Xenophobic attacks / racism has increased over the last 3 years, but overall racism I think is down over like a 20 year period. certainly nothing like the 80's...

Agreed. Fighting racism is like playing Whac-A-Mole, and for quite a while we were pretty good at it. But when people in positions of power and influence who espouse bigoted are given an inordinate amount of air time, it's like playing Whac-A-Mole with one hand tied behind your back. The minority who do hold bigoted views are emboldened. Then you also get the paycheque rent-a-gobs, like the pathetic spectacle of Julia Hartley-Brewer striving to fill the void of Katie Hopkins.

	Quote:	3Wishes
	What else do you want, direct elections for every little decision to be made? A parliamentary system isn't perfect but it does serve a purpose. Maybe the UK system needs an overhaul, but I don't know what that would be. I'd argue many people are less informed than before, because they can easily seek out information that confirms their own bias and disregard everything else. And they do. Even here on EF when we want to make an argument we search for a source that confirms out belief, not that disproves it.

Yes, but you can also ask yourself the question how many members of parliament exactly understand what they vote for. Most of them have to follow the party guideline anyway.

[TonyClifton]

	Quote:	3Wishes
	What else do you want, direct elections for every little decision to be made? A parliamentary system isn't perfect but it does serve a purpose. Maybe the UK system needs an overhaul, but I don't know what that would be. I'd argue many people are less informed than before, because they can easily seek out information that confirms their own bias and disregard everything else. And they do. Even here on EF when we want to make an argument we search for a source that confirms out belief, not that disproves it.

Changes I would like to see? For starters:

Slash the number of MPs. 650 is far too many.
An elected upper house to replace the House of Lords.
More Swiss style Referendums whereby the result is legally binding.
Forced by-elections if MPs choose to switch of leave the party they were elected to represent.
An elimination of First Past the Post voting system.
Make every Political Party manifesto legally binding. Either stand by what you were elected to do or face the consequences.

[Blueangel]

	Quote:	k_and_e
	Most of them have to follow the party guideline anyway.

Not in the British system. It's far from unusual to rebel, and few MPs have rebelled more frequently than Corbyn.

	Quote:	Blueangel
	Not in the British system. It's far from unusual to rebel, and few MPs have rebelled more frequently than Corbyn.

Sorry, I mean in general, not UK specific.

[Urs Max]

	Quote:	TonyClifton
	Changes I would like to see? For starters: More Swiss style Referendums whereby the result is legally binding.

That requires the change to a representative monarchy (seems it's happening already, but slowly, and probably with tons of loopholes) or some version of democracy, and it requires transfer of the Sovereign and all respective powers from the Royals to the government.Anything but a small feat.

	Quote:	TonyClifton
	An elimination of First Past the Post voting system.

As long as a single candidate wins it's by necessity "winner takes all", and that makes FPTP the logical modus operandi. Otherwise you'd need to switch to some kind of proportional representation of the various groups, for which you'd need to have some kind of pool to elect from as a consequence, for instance by kingdom.

	Quote:	TonyClifton
	Make every Political Party manifesto legally binding. Either stand by what you were elected to do or face the consequences.

Sorry but that doesn't make sense, you can't make declarations of intentions binding. It's like demanding that saying "I will kill you!" is equivalent to, and to be punished like, the actual crime.

Since you refer to them, please note that Swiss politicians (including federal parlamentarians) are not bound to anyone, nor does the party have a say in how they vote or what propositions they must support or refuse. That makes a UK-style system where the parliamentarians must vote as ordered by the party impossible.

[autopoiesis]

	Quote:	fatmanfilms
	Only the electorate who bother to express an opinion count. Residence in the UK does not give entitlement to vote & neither is residence a requirement to vote so your no's are meaningless. More people voted at the referendum than at any previous vote in the UK, turnout was higher than normal.

Eh? I wasn't allowed to vote, as >15 years out of UK (here in CH).


My EU citizenship is to be stripped from me against my will, as the result of a vote I was excluded from. Hearing people bang on about how fantastically 'democratic' that exercise was gets on my t!ts, frankly.

	Quote:	Urs Max
	As long as a single candidate wins it's by necessity "winner takes all", and that makes FPTP the logical modus operandi. Otherwise you'd need to switch to some kind of proportional representation of the various groups, for which you'd need to have some kind of pool to elect from as a consequence, for instance by kingdom.

Actually I think PR was the point and long overdue in the UK imo. Elected replacement for the House of Lords is also essential, on a different rhythm and preferebly a different methodology to the commons votes.

But (talking about the post you quoted) more referendums in the UK - forget it. The population are not ready for it and by and large don't seem to want it - they already complain bitterly if general elections turn up more frequently than every 3 or 4 years.

[autopoiesis]

My understanding is that - as a generality - older voters were more likely to have voted leave.


Logically, then: if we were to wait 'x' years, recount the 2016 votes but exclude those who have died of old age, then the decision would be reversed.



Beyond my meagre maths capabilities, unfortunately (always hated stats!).



Any clever EF statisticians care to calculate 'x'?

[marton]

	Quote:	Urs Max
	That requires the change to a representative monarchy (seems it's happening already, but slowly, and probably with tons of loopholes) or some version of democracy, and it requires transfer of the Sovereign and all respective powers from the Royals to the government.Anything but a small feat. As long as a single candidate wins it's by necessity "winner takes all", and that makes FPTP the logical modus operandi. Otherwise you'd need to switch to some kind of proportional representation of the various groups, for which you'd need to have some kind of pool to elect from as a consequence, for instance by kingdom. Sorry but that doesn't make sense, you can't make declarations of intentions binding. It's like demanding that saying "I will kill you!" is equivalent to, and to be punished like, the actual crime. Since you refer to them, please note that Swiss politicians (including federal parlamentarians) are not bound to anyone, nor does the party have a say in how they vote or what propositions they must support or refuse. That makes a UK-style system where the parliamentarians must vote as ordered by the party impossible.

To make UK referendums binding requires the transfer of the Sovereign and all respective powers to the people; if Sovereign power is with the government then they can overrule anything.

[Urs Max]

	Quote:	autopoiesis
	Logically, then: if we were to wait 'x' years, recount the 2016 votes but exclude those who have died of old age, then the decision would be reversed.

For as many as have died and old-age years "lost", roughly the same number have been gained by the younger people. In fact with an ageing population (assuming that the average age does increase each year, as happens virtually everywhere in the western world) the longer you wait the bigger the weight of the elderly.

	Quote:
	Actually I think PR was the point and long overdue in the UK imo. Elected replacement for the House of Lords is also essential, on a different rhythm and preferebly a different methodology to the commons votes.

It seems to me the Commons needs to fulfil two things at the same time, and fails at both to some extent because they're incompatible:
Minimum representation of an area or unit, the constituencies in this case, and simultaneously proportional representation of the voters by party strength. If the the HoL members changed to being elected, it would be a nice opportunity to move one of the two tasks there.

	Quote:	marton
	To make UK referendums binding requires the transfer of the Sovereign and all respective powers to the people; if Sovereign power is with the government then they can overrule anything.

If it became a democracy then yes, but I'm not sure if that's also the case in a representative monarchy, which is probably what the UK would become.

[TonyClifton]

	Quote:	Urs Max
	Sorry but that doesn't make sense, you can't make declarations of intentions binding. It's like demanding that saying "I will kill you!" is equivalent to, and to be punished like, the actual crime. Since you refer to them, please note that Swiss politicians (including federal parlamentarians) are not bound to anyone, nor does the party have a say in how they vote or what propositions they must support or refuse. That makes a UK-style system where the parliamentarians must vote as ordered by the party impossible.

You’re right, legally binding is the wrong wording. What I would like to see however is an expansion of the Recall of MPs Act, so that constituents may recall their MP if they believe they are not acting upon the mandate they were elected. This way they really would be answerable to the consituentes they represent, and we would avoid the intolerable situation there is now whereby 36% of Lib Dem MPs were not elected to that Party.

[bigblue2]

	Quote:	TonyClifton
	You’re right, legally binding is the wrong wording. What I would like to see however is an expansion of the Recall of MPs Act, so that constituents may recall their MP if they believe they are not acting upon the mandate they were elected. This way they really would be answerable to the consituentes they represent, and we would avoid the intolerable situation there is now whereby 36% of Lib Dem MPs were not elected to that Party.

?? well if you're stupid enough to elect your local mp based on the party they serve then you deserve all you get. You are not voting for a party, you are voting for the person.

[bowlie]

I'd like to see "None of the Above" added to every ballot. If NOTA wins then the election is declared invalid to be rerun in 90 days without the original candidates.

All Referendum to require a majority of the electorate in favour.