People in The UK Call For David Cameron Out and an Early General Election

page: 3
12
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 30 2013 @ 02:44 PM
link   

Biigs
Think of the UK PM like the USA President - only we are *moderately more* truthful about who makes the decisions.

Its the party that makes it up and the man at the front just says it.
Same in the states, only they like to pretend the president has the final say.


The difference is in how that man at the front gets there. The US President is elected directly and is the head of state. The British PM is neither of those things. As has been proven by historical events the party forming the government can change the PM without recourse to an election. Although its unpopular when it happens.




posted on Sep, 30 2013 @ 03:19 PM
link   
Other than Revolution only the Queen can call for an election by making a "SHOW OF NO CONFIDENCE" but she won't and this will add to the growing unpopularity of the Monarchy anywhere North of London.
edit on 30-9-2013 by DreamerOracle because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 30 2013 @ 03:44 PM
link   

justwokeup
As has been proven by historical events the party forming the government can change the PM without recourse to an election. Although its unpopular when it happens.


So what? The Prime Minister is merely the leader of the party in power and it is essentially up to the party in power to decide who leads them. No election is needed. If the party in power makes a pigs ear of it all then it will be thrown out an election. It happens.


DreamerOracle
Other than Revolution only the Queen can call for an election by making a "SHOW OF NO CONFIDENCE" but ...


No, that's not actually correct. Parliament can vote that they have no confidence in the government. If within 14 days Parliament has not voted confidence following a successful no confidence vote then the Prime Minister has to ask the Queen to dissolve Parliament. This one trigger for a General Election. Another trigger is the five year life of the government has been reached.

In theory the reigning monarch can dissolve Parliament at any time and can refuse to dissolve Parliament. These are appropriate checks and balances.

Regards



posted on Sep, 30 2013 @ 03:49 PM
link   
reply to post by DreamerOracle
 


Its true that only the queen may dissolve parliament but in practice parliament can raise a motion of no confidence which if lost would by convention oblige the government to call an election.

It doesn't happen that often because a majority government practically cannot lose unless riven by internal splits to the point that some of its own MPs want it to fall. It has however happened.

The executive must hold the confidence of the house at all times since that is where its legitimacy arises from.

The fixed term parliament act of 2011 removes the right of the monarch to unilaterally dissolve parliament, although it was unlikely to have been exercised in any event.



posted on Sep, 30 2013 @ 03:59 PM
link   
reply to post by DreamerOracle
 




Other than Revolution only the Queen can call for an election by making a "SHOW OF NO CONFIDENCE"...


The last monarch who tried that got his head chopped off!

The Queen has no moral right to summarily dissolve a 'democratically' elected parliament and as much as I despise Cameron / Clegg / Miliband and the system they represent and which they support etc I'd still prefer them over an unelected monarch.

No government could survive a Vote Of No Confidence - but that's not going to happen in the foreseeable future, Clegg neither has the balls nor the strength of conviction to prompt it and is so desperate to retain what small vestiges of power he and his party has that he is willing to compromise all that his party has ever stood for.



....but she won't and this will add to the growing unpopularity of the Monarchy anywhere North of London.


Good - because make no mistake about it, if she ever did so it would be to further her own ends and agenda and could quite easily spark another civil war.



posted on Sep, 30 2013 @ 04:06 PM
link   
reply to post by paraphi
 


Exactly what is your 'so what?' asking?

Nothing in my text was other than an explanation of the system and a clarification. In particular responding to the previous suggestion the PM and President may be considered the same.

Regards
edit on 30-9-2013 by justwokeup because: corrected.



posted on Sep, 30 2013 @ 09:49 PM
link   
I'm sure Cameron will have some spokesman or woman issue a statement about the petition being the work of "Anarchists and Fanatics" meaning any one who signed it is a danger to the UK.



posted on Oct, 1 2013 @ 05:06 PM
link   
Was in the papers today Cameron didn't even know the price of a value sliced bread, instead he uses a £100 bread maker! Those clowns haven't a clue how the other half live!



posted on Oct, 1 2013 @ 06:07 PM
link   
reply to post by scotsdavy1
 


I would love to see that fool Cameron forced to shop at Aldi or Liddle for a few weeks. The muppet could do with losing a few pounds!
LoL



posted on Oct, 13 2013 @ 01:12 AM
link   

lifttheveil

David Cameron is, as stated in the petition, an unelected Prime Minister. He does not have a mandate from the people to do anything. And, moreover, what he IS doing is in direct opposition to most of his election promises. In particular his and his party's shocking, brutal attacks on the poor and the disabled, while continuing to grant tax breaks to themselves and their rich corporate cronies, supporters, and funders. Never has political corruption and contempt for the populace been so shameless and barefaced. They need to go. NOW.


I completely agree with above feeling, surely what cameron is doing is criminal and there must be something the people can do?

There is a petition here that already has 4,632 supporters and climbing here:
www.change.org...

We have an unelected prime minister who is below the opposition in the polls and clearly attacking the poor and lower working class while at the same time hoarding the countries wealth for himself and his rich buddies and associates. There are protests up and down the country against the NHS cuts and bedroom tax etc.

I was wondering, why do they need 100,000 signers, if they get this number will that force an early election? What more does cameron have to do for the average Joe to protest against him, and does a forced early election under the circumstances seem a possibility as myself and many other brits are hoping?


When I hear "attacking the poor and working class" all I hear is the filth of communist puss oozing out of your indoctrinated mouth.

Get out of the UK for once and realize what a backward fascist dump it is.

Your conservatives and labor party fight over control of the same socialist-fascist garbage heap. Whoever controls the government controls where the government spends its money and who gets that money. You should abandon government, and adopt sane sound principles of free market capitalism.

Let's face it if your country were good at getting rid of the poor you wouldn't have any after 60years of nearly uninterrupted Labour rule.
edit on 13-10-2013 by FreeMason because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 13 2013 @ 01:18 AM
link   

scotsdavy1
Was in the papers today Cameron didn't even know the price of a value sliced bread, instead he uses a £100 bread maker! Those clowns haven't a clue how the other half live!


But if Bread were 2 Pound(?) (I don't know the price of bread because I don't eat the stuff, it's horrible for your health), and you ate a loaf of bread every week, wouldn't a 100 Pound Bread Maker pay for itself in a single year?

With math and consumption habits like you blokes no wonder UK is a dump. Attacking a guy who saves money by spending more up front, rather than doing the same yourself and complaining you're too poor.



posted on Oct, 13 2013 @ 01:32 AM
link   

TheDemonUK

Wrabbit2000

Flavian
reply to post by lifttheveil
 


Completely flawed petition, i am afraid. He is the leader of the Conservative Party, who won most votes at the last election. Admittedly not enough to win an outright majority but enough to put them in a position to form a coalition government. That makes him Prime Minister whether people like it or not.

This isn't the USA - we do not have Presidential elections!

It seems we're in an age where everyone expects and demands a "Do-Over" whenever it doesn't go their way. It does seem from my American perspective, Cameron won. I think he's a jerk and a fool. Playing the warmonger to Obama as a sidekick for Syria ...while Obama looks upon England with utter contempt that goes back a lifetime for that man. It's a fools game played by a fool.

Still... How would it be if replacing a leader were that easy? Lets say you work and work tirelessly to finally get YOUR ideal man into office ....and the opposition rigs a vote up to get him removed because he pissed them off. I imagine the system that looks so dandy now would suddenly infuriate a good many people, eh?


Cameron didn't win, the Conservative party won, put labour back in and watch this country breath its last breath. At least the Tories and there partners are trying to put right all the crud left by labour.

IMO they are doing the best they can at the moment, and I am happy to let them try and rescue this country.

"People in the UK....." not me, so SOME people in the UK....and they are..........oh yes supporters of the opposition parties
edit on 30/9/13 by TheDemonUK because: suggested change to thread title


Bingo, UK needs to wake up and realize just how far from freedom it really is.


JAK

posted on Oct, 13 2013 @ 05:56 AM
link   
edit on 13/10/13 by JAK because: Pointless.





top topics
 
12
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join