Discussing UK law. Links: swarb.co.uk | law-index | Acts | Members Image galleries

Votes of No Confidence.

Votes of No Confidence.

Postby Hairyloon » Wed Jul 06, 2016 1:47 pm

Parliament appears to be in a complete shambles. Some might argue that it has been a shambles for a long time, but they have, up to recently maintained at least some semblance of a pretence. The referendum campaign and aftermath has shown us clearly what an outstanding setup it is that we have got.

Speaking for myself, I have no confidence in the government's ability to steer us through the troubled waters ahead. I have no confidence in the opposition's ability to keep them to a fair course and I have no confidence in the system that we have to select the team to replace them. Many people seem to agree with me, although I would not claim to have taken a statistically significant survey.

I have in the past suggested that we (the electorate) should call a vote of no confidence in the governance of our country, and the usual responses are that there is no mechanism to do it, and to ask what happens if the vote is carried.
The Labour Party have demonstrated that the lack of a constitutional mechanism for a vote of no confidence is no bar to holding one, and the EU referendum shows that there is no need to have a plan before you take a vote...
Take me to your lizard...
User avatar
Hairyloon
 
Posts: 9883
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 3:12 pm
Location: From there to here and here to there... Funny things are everywhere.

Re: Votes of No Confidence.

Postby shootist » Wed Jul 06, 2016 2:09 pm

So, suicide would seem to be the only option.
"I do not agree with what you say, but I'll defend to the death my right to be offended by it."
User avatar
shootist
 
Posts: 3459
Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2013 9:40 pm

Re: Votes of No Confidence.

Postby atticus » Wed Jul 06, 2016 2:17 pm

This is one of the things for which we elected Members of Parliament. The UK is a representative democracy. The important question is whether the government has the confidence of a majority of the House of Commons.

You will have the opportunity to demonstrate your confidence in the government (or want of confidence) at the next General Election.
User avatar
atticus
 
Posts: 19410
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 2:27 pm
Location: E&W

Re: Votes of No Confidence.

Postby Hairyloon » Wed Jul 06, 2016 3:36 pm

atticus wrote:This is one of the things for which we elected Members of Parliament.

No it isn't. They are elected to take important decisions for the good of the country. They are not elected to determine whether the collective of themselves has the capability to decide whether they are capable of making effective decisions. That is like opening a box with the key that is locked inside the box.
The important question is whether the government has the confidence of a majority of the House of Commons.

That may be an important question, but it is not the question being asked here.
Take me to your lizard...
User avatar
Hairyloon
 
Posts: 9883
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 3:12 pm
Location: From there to here and here to there... Funny things are everywhere.

Re: Votes of No Confidence.

Postby atticus » Wed Jul 06, 2016 3:48 pm

As you wish.
User avatar
atticus
 
Posts: 19410
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 2:27 pm
Location: E&W

Re: Votes of No Confidence.

Postby Smouldering Stoat » Wed Jul 06, 2016 4:48 pm

My hirsute friend draws some very odd conclusions. The vote of no confidence in Mr Corbyn demonstrates that there is no point in holding a vote of no confidence if there is no mechanism for enforcing the outcome. Mr Corbyn has ignored the vote and remains Leader of the Labour Party; is Hairy seriously proposing a similar vote for the Government?

Further, I submit that recent events demonstrate the strength of representative democracy and the weakness of plebiscitary forms. Parliament and Government are faced with implementing a decision they did not make and did not agree with; meanwhile the actual decision was made by people who were in no position to properly scrutinise it. It is rarely a wise move to separate power and responsibility.

The OP is allowing his prejudice to cloud his judgment.
Smouldering Stoat
 
Posts: 6278
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 6:31 pm
Location: Near the Creek.

Re: Votes of No Confidence.

Postby Hairyloon » Wed Jul 06, 2016 7:27 pm

Smouldering Stoat wrote:My hirsute friend draws some very odd conclusions. The vote of no confidence in Mr Corbyn demonstrates that there is no point in holding a vote of no confidence if there is no mechanism for enforcing the outcome. Mr Corbyn has ignored the vote and remains Leader of the Labour Party; is Hairy seriously proposing a similar vote for the Government?

No, I am suggesting a substantially dissimilar vote: last I checked the United Kingdom is not exactly the same as the Labour Party, and the vote should be against the Administration, not simply the Government.

Further, I submit that recent events demonstrate the strength of representative democracy and the weakness of plebiscitary forms. Parliament and Government are faced with implementing a decision they did not make and did not agree with; meanwhile the actual decision was made by people who were in no position to properly scrutinise it. It is rarely a wise move to separate power and responsibility.


Firstly consider why our representative democracy needed to consult with a plebiscitary one. And it is a curious display of strength by the representative democracy: it has run away screaming and is now flapping around like a gaggle of headless chickens.

The OP is allowing his prejudice to cloud his judgment.

Which prejudice do you refer to?
Take me to your lizard...
User avatar
Hairyloon
 
Posts: 9883
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 3:12 pm
Location: From there to here and here to there... Funny things are everywhere.

Re: Votes of No Confidence.

Postby Smouldering Stoat » Wed Jul 06, 2016 7:48 pm

(1) You drew the analogy with the Labour Party. Either the analogy is apposite, or it is not. Kindly make your mind up.

(2) What do you mean by "Administration"? What is going to happen once this vote of no confidence is passed? What form of government do you propose as a replacement?

(3) Our representative democracy did not need to hold a referendum. The Prime Minister chose to do offer for the purposes of internal party management, partly because he thought he would never have to hold it, and partly because he never imagined he would lose. I did not say it was a display of strength, it demonstrates that representative democracy works better because this exercise in plebiscitary democracy has been an unmitigated disaster.

(4) Are you kidding? I challenge you to find anything you have ever written about our political system on this board in which you have not alleged that it is corrupt, incompetent or both.
Smouldering Stoat
 
Posts: 6278
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 6:31 pm
Location: Near the Creek.

Re: Votes of No Confidence.

Postby Hairyloon » Wed Jul 06, 2016 8:32 pm

Smouldering Stoat wrote:(1) You drew the analogy with the Labour Party. Either the analogy is apposite, or it is not. Kindly make your mind up.

It was not an analogy, it was a demonstration.
For an analogy, imagine that your golf club has no rules about doing the long jump. While out playing golf, someone attempts a long jump wearing high heels, they fall and break their arm. Do you conclude that the long jump is impossible at the golf club?

(2) What do you mean by "Administration"?

How was it that you defined "state" the other day? Whatever it is that administrates that.
What is going to happen once this vote of no confidence is passed? What form of government do you propose as a replacement?

Did you not get that lesson from the EU referendum? It is fine to hold a vote with no plan for the consequences.
But what I suggest it that we should take the vote as a cue to make a plan, have a look at what has gone wrong and why, and how things might be improved.
(3) Our representative democracy did not need to hold a referendum. The Prime Minister chose to do offer for the purposes of internal party management...

If our electoral system is so perfect, then why did he need to do that? If it had worked remotely well,then it would probably have prevented us from getting into such a mess that we needed to do that.
I did not say it was a display of strength, it demonstrates that representative democracy works better because this exercise in plebiscitary democracy has been an unmitigated disaster.

Except that this exercise in plebiscitary democracy was set up by a thoroughly incompetent representative democracy, a predictable and almost inevitable consequence of the flaws in our selection processes.
(4) Are you kidding? I challenge you to find anything you have ever written about our political system on this board in which you have not alleged that it is corrupt, incompetent or both.

Oh, sorry I thought you'd said "prejudice". you appear to refer to observations.
Take me to your lizard...
User avatar
Hairyloon
 
Posts: 9883
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 3:12 pm
Location: From there to here and here to there... Funny things are everywhere.

Re: Votes of No Confidence.

Postby Smouldering Stoat » Wed Jul 06, 2016 8:42 pm

And on that point, m'lud, the prosecution rests.
Smouldering Stoat
 
Posts: 6278
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 6:31 pm
Location: Near the Creek.

Next

Return to Constitutional Law

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest