Scottish Independence Referendum 18th September.

Status
Not open for further replies.
samh004 said:
Forgive my ignorance, I thought Cameron was a Tory? It says he's a member of the Conservative party on the internet, which has also been run by Thatcher, who was a Tory. So I'm confused?
Click to expand...

One and the same thing.
 
Warks said:
That story above about Tory MPs wanting Cameron to resign if Scotland secedes made me think it could be a masterstroke by the Conservatives to bolster their power. Scotland wouldn't have too many Tory seats (I can't imagine there are any) so losing all those Labor (and other) seats to another country would make it simpler for the Conservatives to gain a majority in the rest of the country. Or have I got it wrong?
Click to expand...

Of the 59 Scottish seats in the Commons Labour holds 41,SNP 17 and the Conservatives 1.
However the date for Scottish independence according to the referendum is about 9 months after the next General election.Several hypothetical scenarios of Labor winning a majority but 9 months later losing it to the Conservatives.
 
I was working with a Scot in NZ last week. I told him that David Cameron had emailed me and said if there was a Yes vote that I was to take the passports from any Scots I knew and burn them. I was then to instruct them to report to the nearest Scottish embassy for a replacement. He looked worried.
 
I am going to be outrageously politically incorrect, and say that I now think that this whole Scottish independence thing presents a great opportunity for comprehensive parliamentary review in the UK.

IMO there is no place for unelected Peers in a parliament of the 21st century, and the House of Lords should be abolished and replaced with a federalised "Senate" where representation is elected, but the allocation of seats within it skewed to the smaller populous entities in the UK: i.e. Scotland & Wales, then Northern Ireland, the Islands and any far flung dependencies' still part of the union. With the Commons remaining the seat of government, and proportionally representative of the population of the UK as a whole. (So while the very English feel in the House of Commons would remain, a new house of oversight would ensure more balance for the views of the other nations which make up the UK.)

What a squandered opportunity by the current Queen to make hers a truly democratic mark on the nation!
 
dk4 said:
I am going to be outrageously politically incorrect, and say that I now think that this whole Scottish independence thing presents a great opportunity for comprehensive parliamentary review in the UK.

IMO there is no place for unelected Peers in a parliament of the 21st century, and the House of Lords should be abolished and replaced with a federalised "Senate" where representation is elected, but the allocation of seats within it skewed to the smaller populous entities in the UK: i.e. Scotland & Wales, then Northern Ireland, the Islands and any far flung dependencies' still part of the union. With the Commons remaining the seat of government, and proportionally representative of the population of the UK as a whole. (So while the very English feel in the House of Commons would remain, a new house of oversight would ensure more balance for the views of the other nations which make up the UK.)

What a squandered opportunity by the current Queen to make hers a truly democratic mark on the nation!
Click to expand...

Very valid point with regards to the House of Lords reform that was started by Tony Blair & has yet to be completed by David Cameron.

Interesting point I would also point out is that Canada's Upper House - The senate is also an appointed Chamber, both countries have tried for at least 15 years to reform their upper house but have got nowhere due to disagreeing to method of election & the number of members to the respective upper houses.

I agree with your comments & hopefully one day both parliaments will have fully elected upper houses accountable to the people.

On a side note, I have really enjoyed reading the comments so far posted on this Thread on the Scottish Referendum & will make for interesting conversation In the weeks to come.
 
AMEX Velocity Platinum Card Benefits
Australia's highest-earning Velocity Frequent Flyer credit card: Offer expires: 30 Apr 2025
- Earn 100,000 bonus Velocity Points
- Get unlimited Virgin Australia Lounge access
- Enjoy a complimentary return Virgin Australia domestic flight each year

AFF Supporters can remove this and all advertisements

Cruiser Elite said:
... just look at the fabulous scenario we have in Canberra right now!
Click to expand...
I believe that the Australian Senate does act as a true house of review, and temperance on the two major political parties, which rule the swing in the house below them.

Consider the proposition that a two part political system is, in effect, quite similar to a communist one! :shock:

Both (communist and two party political system advocates) claim democratic validity by virtue of a binary choice -
Communism: a Yes or No vote
Two Party System: a Party A or Party B vote

While I may not necessarily personally agree with the views of the Greens, the Palmer United Party, or any other minors - I believe that they do ensure that our parliament does not become a binary farce, when our society is any thing but. (Although, there is always room for improvement, especially when you see the likes of Motor Enthusiasts elected with little practical primary support.)

The Australian Parliament is a place for negotiation and compromise, which I think is a fairly good place for such things to occur.
 
Right now I would call our system a binary farce.
With Palmer as the supreme decider of policy with his ideas changing from day to day surely is a great example of farce.
 
That is exactly what I was thinking DK4 although you put in a much more elegant from that I could. At least you are able to vote out the senators, unlike the unelected and previously inheritated seats that exist(ed) in the house of lords.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Cruiser Elite said:
Current Senate make up? Fabulous representation of the peoples choice! Give me a break:

[Muir's party fluked after polling just 0.51% of the vote last September. The Motoring Enthusiasts Party polled 17,122 first preference at an election where the quota for election was 483,076 votes./QUOTE]

Antony Green's Election Blog: Ricky Muir's Strange Path to the Senate
Click to expand...

It's not limited to the senate!

[TABLE="class: results, width: 100%"]
[TR]
[TH="bgcolor: #E6E6E6, align: left"]Candidate[/TH]
[TH="bgcolor: #E6E6E6, align: left"]Party[/TH]
[TH="bgcolor: #E6E6E6, align: right"]Votes[/TH]
[TH="bgcolor: #E6E6E6, align: right"]%[/TH]
[TH="bgcolor: #E6E6E6, align: right"]Swing (%)[/TH]
[/TR]
[TR="class: rownorm, bgcolor: #FFFFFF"]
[TD="align: left"]HOLT, Mike[/TD]
[TD="align: left"]One Nation[/TD]
[TD]709[/TD]
[TD]0.84[/TD]
[TD]+0.84[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: rownorm, bgcolor: #FFFFFF"]
[TD="align: left"]BYRNES, Trudy[/TD]
[TD="align: left"]Independent[/TD]
[TD]1,016[/TD]
[TD]1.20[/TD]
[TD]+1.20[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: rownorm, bgcolor: #FFFFFF"]
[TD="align: left"]PALMER, Clive Frederick
houseelected.gif
[/TD]
[TD="align: left"]Palmer United Party[/TD]
[TD]22,409[/TD]
[TD]26.49[/TD]
[TD]+26.49[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: rownorm, bgcolor: #FFFFFF"]
[TD="align: left"]O'BRIEN, Ted[/TD]
[TD="align: left"]Liberal National Party of Queensland[/TD]
[TD]34,959[/TD]
[TD]41.32[/TD]
[TD]-8.13[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: rownorm, bgcolor: #FFFFFF"]
[TD="align: left"]MEYER, Angela[/TD]
[TD="align: left"]Family First[/TD]
[TD]1,416[/TD]
[TD]1.67[/TD]
[TD]-3.57[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: rownorm, bgcolor: #FFFFFF"]
[TD="align: left"]HUGHES, Elaine Lexie[/TD]
[TD="align: left"]Australian Labor Party[/TD]
[TD]15,429[/TD]
[TD]18.24[/TD]
[TD]-9.07[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: rownorm, bgcolor: #FFFFFF"]
[TD="align: left"]KNOBEL, David[/TD]
[TD="align: left"]The Greens[/TD]
[TD]7,046[/TD]
[TD]8.33[/TD]
[TD]-9.67[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: rownorm, bgcolor: #FFFFFF"]
[TD="align: left"]SAWYER, Ray[/TD]
[TD="align: left"]Katter's Australian Party[/TD]
[TD]1,623[/TD]
[TD]1.92[/TD]
[TD]+1.92[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: rowtotal, bgcolor: #E6E6E6"]
[TD="align: left"]FORMAL[/TD]
[TD="align: left"][/TD]
[TD]84,607[/TD]
[TD]94.88[/TD]
[TD]-0.09[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: rowtotal, bgcolor: #E6E6E6"]
[TD="align: left"]INFORMAL[/TD]
[TD="align: left"][/TD]
[TD]4,569[/TD]
[TD]5.12[/TD]
[TD]+0.09[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: rowtotal, bgcolor: #E6E6E6"]
[TD="align: left"]TOTAL[/TD]
[TD="align: left"][/TD]
[TD]89,176[/TD]
[TD]93.39[/TD]
[TD]+0.61[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

[TABLE="class: results, width: 100%"]
[TR]
[TH="bgcolor: #E6E6E6, align: left"]Candidate[/TH]
[TH="bgcolor: #E6E6E6, align: left"]Party[/TH]
[TH="bgcolor: #E6E6E6, align: right"]Votes[/TH]
[TH="bgcolor: #E6E6E6, align: right"]Margin[/TH]
[TH="bgcolor: #E6E6E6, align: right"]This Election (%)[/TH]
[TH="bgcolor: #E6E6E6, align: right"]Last Election (%)[/TH]
[TH="bgcolor: #E6E6E6"]Swing (%)[/TH]
[/TR]
[TR="class: rownorm, bgcolor: #FFFFFF"]
[TD="align: left"]PALMER, Clive Frederick
houseelected.gif
[/TD]
[TD="align: left"]Palmer United Party[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]42,330[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]53[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]50.03[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]0.00[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]+50.03[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: rownorm, bgcolor: #FFFFFF"]
[TD="align: left"]O'BRIEN, Ted[/TD]
[TD="align: left"]Liberal National Party of Queensland[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]42,277[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]-53[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]49.97[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]0.00[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]+49.97[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
Click to expand...
 
amaroo said:
It's not limited to the senate!
Click to expand...
Moving from discussions about proportional representation in the Senate, to our preferential system in the House of Representatives - I think that we have a reasonable democratic approach there too, because it enables us to vote as much for who we don't want elected, as who we do.

In the example given, more than half (50.03%) of the electorate didn't want the LNP candidate elected, even though he won the most primary votes on absolute numbers, so he wasn't elected.
 
dk4 said:
Moving from discussions about proportional representation in the Senate, to our preferential system in the House of Representatives - I think that we have a reasonable democratic approach there too, because it enables us to vote as much for who we don't want elected, as who we do.

In the example given, more than half (50.03%) of the electorate didn't want the LNP candidate elected, even though he won the most primary votes on absolute numbers, so he wasn't elected.
Click to expand...

But we ALL ended up with Clive :(
 
I don't care who beats Palmer in the next election as he has too many business conflicts which is making a mockery of this parliament.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Become an AFF member!

Join Australian Frequent Flyer (AFF) for free and unlock insider tips, exclusive deals, and global meetups with 65,000+ frequent flyers.

AFF members can also access our Frequent Flyer Training courses, and upgrade to Fast-track your way to expert traveller status and unlock even more exclusive discounts!

AFF forum abbreviations

Wondering about Y, J or any of the other abbreviations used on our forum?

Check out our guide to common AFF acronyms & abbreviations.

Recent Posts

Currently Active Users

Total: 253 (members: 25, guests: 228)
Back
Top