mikem8634 Posted November 19, 2012 Posted November 19, 2012 its apples for oranges. the OP is saying that because some of the the new police commissioners were elected with a low turn out, that this contradicts unions requirement for a 51% yes vote for industrial action. its not as simple as saying one should mean the other as there are a number of differences between the who situations. The hypocrisy is in not criticising the questionable mandate the elected police commissioners have due to the low turn-out irrespective of the technical difference between the two systems. At least that's the way I see it. You, of course are entitled to disagree. But it still isn't about how the unions have the power to "effect us all and then project the UK in bad light to literally billions of people across the world" or that "no one tiny group should be allowed to hold a nation to ransom!".
WeX Posted November 19, 2012 Posted November 19, 2012 The hypocrisy is in not criticising the questionable mandate the elected police commissioners have due to the low turn-out irrespective of the technical difference between the two systems. At least that's the way I see it. You, of course are entitled to disagree. But it still isn't about how the unions have the power to "effect us all and then project the UK in bad light to literally billions of people across the world" or that "no one tiny group should be allowed to hold a nation to ransom!". You cant compare the two, that's obvious as neither situation fits one another. An election is not the same as a union vote. therefore there is no hypocrisy as the argument the grounds are incompatible.
truman Posted November 19, 2012 Posted November 19, 2012 The areas that had these elections are the areas that asked for them, so its only the voters fault and no one else's. REally? I don't remember being asked if I wanted a PCC..
mikem8634 Posted November 19, 2012 Posted November 19, 2012 You cant compare the two, that's obvious as neither situation fits one another. An election is not the same as a union vote. therefore there is no hypocrisy as the argument the grounds are incompatible. Fair enough, as I said you're perfectly entitled to disagree about where the hypocrisy lies.
Mr Prime Posted November 19, 2012 Posted November 19, 2012 No working person in the UK is forced to work. You can resign if you don't like the terms and get another job. That does mean workers should not have rights, but that's a far cry from slavery! The last election where one party received more than 51% of the vote was back in 27 October 1931! Are you saying that no election since then has been legitimate? When we have true questions that effect the entire population, we have referendums, and there has to be a 51% vote either way for it to be enacted. No one tiny group should be allowed to hold a nation to ransom! They could resign yes but unlike you they live in the 21st century and choose to use their hard won workers rights. No, I'm fine with the electoral system but find it hard to stomach hypocrites on non majorities or majorities on tiny turnouts wailing about low union turnouts. A fish rots from the head so the MP's are responsible for all voter apathy anyway, it's their problem in the first place.
WeX Posted November 19, 2012 Posted November 19, 2012 REally? I don't remember being asked if I wanted a PCC.. How did the idea come about? The idea of giving local people more of a say in how the police in their area are run has been championed for years by some Conservatives as a way of boosting local democracy - but it only became party policy at the 2010 election. The coalition agreement contained a pledge to make the police "more accountable through oversight by a directly elected individual". The proposal was fleshed out in the white paper "Policing in the 21st Century" and enacted in the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act, which became law in 2011. the country voted them in, so we got their policies.
truman Posted November 19, 2012 Posted November 19, 2012 the country voted them in, so we got their policies. That's not quite what you implied in post #5....
WeX Posted November 19, 2012 Posted November 19, 2012 They could resign yes but unlike you they live in the 21st century and choose to use their hard won workers rights. No, I'm fine with the electoral system but find it hard to stomach hypocrites on non majorities or majorities on tiny turnouts wailing about low union turnouts. A fish rots from the head so the MP's are responsible for all voter apathy anyway, it's their problem in the first place. you do know there hasn't been a majority popular vote share in the UK since 1931 don't you? and that most countries do not have a clear majority in government elections due to the wide and varied options available to voters when it comes to choosing which party to vote for. or do you think we should only have two parties and everyone be forced into voting?
WeX Posted November 19, 2012 Posted November 19, 2012 That's not quite what you implied in post #5.... its not what you assumed in post #13 you mean.
truman Posted November 19, 2012 Posted November 19, 2012 its not what you assumed in post #13 you mean. Nope..it's what your post came across as... The areas that had these elections are the areas that asked for them, so its only the voters fault and no one else's. How did all the people in Derbyshire or Yorkshire ask for PCCs? Some constituencies are Labour, some are Conservative....never mind..
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.