Who will succeed Cameron?

[the_bloke]

You do realise that you are demonstrating a complete lack of understanding of the very fundamentals of the democracy you operate in, don't you?

 

In what way? Please explain how we vote for 650 individuals in the HOC and not the political parties they are members of please, and how the current system is different to voting for 650 independents.

[tzijlstra]

In what way? Please explain how we vote for 650 individuals in the HOC and not the political parties they are members of please, and how the current system is different to voting for 650 independents.

 

Wow, really? It seriously isn't difficult. When you go to the polling station you put a cross behind the name of the person you want to represent you.

 

Yes, that person might be a member of a party and yes that might be why you vote for them. But no, you do not vote for a party. You vote for a person who is a representative of a party.

[Radan]

He!! He !! That is a very sexist remark to be coming from a member of the European elite .

Teresa May is strong favourite to be our next leader according to many experts in the press.

No sauce.

 

Your SOURCE is wrong. Boris will be next PM.

[the_bloke]

Wow, really? It seriously isn't difficult. When you go to the polling station you put a cross behind the name of the person you want to represent you.

 

Yes, that person might be a member of a party and yes that might be why you vote for them. But no, you do not vote for a party. You vote for a person who is a representative of a party.

 

I vote for a person who is a representative of a party; I vote for the party. We don't vote for a Prime Minister, which is my original point. We also didn't vote for Donald Tusk. The difference being here is I can vote for an alternative party every five years and get a different Prime Minister, I can't vote for an alternative Donald Tusk.

[Mister M]

Your SOURCE is wrong. Boris will be next PM.

 

I was watching the Politics Show today, and apparently there is a great deal of anger in the Tory ranks with Boris Johnson.

Nobody has seen or heard from George Osborne since the referendum result.

Michael Gove has ruled himself out, as has Iain Duncan Smith. His successor at the Department for Work & Pensions Stephen Crab hasn't though. Neither has Sajid Javid, or Nicky Morgan.

Edited June 26, 2016 by Mister M

[tzijlstra]

I vote for a person who is a representative of a party; I vote for the party. We don't vote for a Prime Minister, which is my original point. We also didn't vote for Donald Tusk. The difference being here is I can vote for an alternative party every five years and get a different Prime Minister, I can't vote for an alternative Donald Tusk.

 

Your original point was that people here vote for a party. They don't, they vote for a person. You didn't vote for Donald Tusk, but you did (presumably) vote for an MEP (a person...) who is part of a party in the EU Parliament which then decided who became the leader of the Commission, in other words, just like it happens here. Due to the EU being a supranational organisation it also has representation in the form of a Council, which is led by Donald Tusk after he was appointed by the democratically elected heads of all the European states.

You voted 'for a prime minister' who, in his role, helped decide who became the Council President. You voted for MEPs who, in their role, helped decide who got on the Commission. All European affairs are checked, democratically by the European Parliament and have to be approved by both the Parliament and the Council. Consisting of entirely democratically elected people.

 

You know who checks things here in the UK, don't you?

[Radan]

I was watching the Politics Show today, and apparently there is a great deal of anger in the Tory ranks with Boris Johnson.

Nobody has seen or heard from George Osborne since the referendum result.

Michael Gove has ruled himself out, as has Iain Duncan Smith. His successor at the Department for Work & Pensions Stephen Crab hasn't though. Neither has Sajid Javid, or Nicky Morgan.

 

Osborne apparently has been gauging support for his own bid. Which I doubt will succeed.

[the_bloke]

Your original point was that people here vote for a party. They don't, they vote for a person. You didn't vote for Donald Tusk, but you did (presumably) vote for an MEP (a person...) who is part of a party in the EU Parliament which then decided who became the leader of the Commission, in other words, just like it happens here.

 

MEPs don't get to vote for the President of the European Council, only the leaders of the member states of the EU do. It's only those people that get to put forward the names of the President as well. I thought you knew that, after all you seem to be trying to be as condescending as possible so I assume you knew everything.

 

So you call the fact that a party can vote internally for a PM as being undemocratic, yet a secret meeting (not dissimilar to selecting a new Pope) for electing an individual with far more power in the EU is fine? Apparently Tusks' appointment was unanimous between all the leaders but a quick Google provides no voting records or who put him forward for election.

[tzijlstra]

MEPs don't get to vote for the President of the European Council, only the leaders of the member states of the EU do. It's only those people that get to put forward the names of the President as well. I thought you knew that, after all you seem to be trying to be as condescending as possible so I assume you knew everything.

 

I just pointed out you were wrong. The fact that you think that is condescending means you don't deal with criticism very well.

 

So you call the fact that a party can vote internally for a PM as being undemocratic, yet a secret meeting (not dissimilar to selecting a new Pope) for electing an individual with far more power in the EU is fine? Apparently Tusks' appointment was unanimous between all the leaders but a quick Google provides no voting records or who put him forward for election.

 

Can you explain to me where I, in this tete a tete, I stated that the way a PM was elected here was undemocratic? Can you then explain to me what the difference is between elected officials of the EU member states choosing a president for their council is (not dissimilar to selecting a new pope)?

 

The only political power Tusk has is in organising and facilitating meetings between the various member states of the EU in the council. He (nor by the way Juncker as head of the Commission, who DOES get appointed by the MEPs) does NOT have a vote. He is like the Speaker of the House. Ceremonial. Yes, he can speak for the Council, but equally the Council can overrule him if he steps out of line. The Council President can be deposed with a vote of no confidence, just like the PM here can be.

 

So lecture me all you like, the more you do, the more you make it abundantly clear you haven't got a clue what you are talking about. You just demonstrated not even knowing the difference between the Council and the Commission.

[the_bloke]

I just pointed out you were wrong. The fact that you think that is condescending means you don't deal with criticism very well.

 

I've just pointed out you were wrong too.

 

Can you explain to me where I, in this tete a tete, I stated that the way a PM was elected here was undemocratic?

 

'but euhmmm how is this democratic?' - not your words, no?

 

The only political power Tusk has is in organising and facilitating meetings between the various member states of the EU in the council. He (nor by the way Juncker as head of the Commission, who DOES get appointed by the MEPs) does NOT have a vote. He is like the Speaker of the House. Ceremonial.

 

http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/european-council/president/role/

 

He does a lot more than that. I don't know many ceremonial roles that acts as the external representation of 500 million people when it comes to dealing with issues of security and policy?

 

From Wikipedia (with sources)

 

The European Council is an official institution of the EU, mentioned by the Lisbon Treaty as a body which "shall provide the Union with the necessary impetus for its development". Essentially it defines the EU's policy agenda and has thus been considered to be the motor of European integration.[1] Beyond the need to provide "impetus", the Council has developed further roles: to "settle issues outstanding from discussions at a lower level", to lead in foreign policy — acting externally as a "collective Head of State", "formal ratification of important documents" and "involvement in the negotiation of the treaty changes".[5][7]

 

Since the institution is composed of national leaders, it gathers the executive power of the member states and has thus a great influence in high profile policy areas as for example foreign policy. It also exercises powers of appointment, such as appointment of its own President, the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, and the President of the European Central Bank. It proposes, to the European Parliament, a candidate for President of the European Commission. Moreover, the European Council influences police and justice planning, the composition of the Commission, matters relating to the organisation of the rotating Council presidency, the suspension of membership rights, and changing the voting systems through the Passerelle Clause. Although the European Council has no direct legislative power, under the "emergency brake" procedure, a state outvoted in the Council of Ministers may refer contentious legislation to the European Council. However, the state may still be outvoted in the European Council.[10][12][13] Hence with powers over the supranational executive of the EU, in addition to its other powers, the European Council has been described by some as the Union's "supreme political authority"

 

The President of the EU's 'supreme political authority' is a ceremonial role?

 

So lecture me all you like, the more you do, the more you make it abundantly clear you haven't got a clue what you are talking about. You just demonstrated not even knowing the difference between the Council and the Commission.

 

I didn't even mention the commission. It was you that suggested Tusk was voted for by MEPs not me, so it seems you got confused between the two.

 

Moot point now anyway.