Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris
I’m not sure which civil liberties you’re lamenting here? Perhaps you could be more specific. What is it you personally are worried you will no longer be able to do should this become law?
|
I was quite specific in my post above. Anyway, here's a brief video of the Liberty director explaining the threat to MPs:
https://twitter.com/i/status/1535271620738269186
---------- Post added at 16:26 ---------- Previous post was at 16:17 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman
Snipped as I know how the system works.
Regardless of how many words you choose to describe it it’s neither a mandate from the party membership (who indeed chose someone else when he was on the ballot) nor from the electorate itself.
If anything the Truss debacle undermines our democratic credentials rather than reinforces it. By your measure she had a mandate to deliver until she didn’t. Removing the right of a party membership to elect it’s leader is profoundly undemocratic. In turn when it picks a PM it evokes more images of Putin’s Russia than home of the self-styled mother of all Parliaments.
|
What is interesting is that, following Chris's logic on "we elect a Party, not a PM", if the markets had not been so spooked as they were, Liz Truss's jihadi libertarian crusade could have been allowed to play out for long enough to seriously damage the structural integrity of the economy. Under the rules, she was still a Tory PM and so allowed to depart from the 2019 manifesto and trash the place. Proof that the rules need changing. IMO, we no longer vote for a Party as much we vote for a specific person leading that party. Look at the Thatcher, Blair and Johnson elections ...
I think that if a PM is changed, we should mandate a GE.