Turn on thread page Beta
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Would a pluralistic Government work? So that people stood for Cabinet posts such as Chancellor/Treasury Secretary, Foreign Secretary, Home Secretary, Defence Secretary etc... and were elected by a nationwide ballot instead of being appointed.

    The rest of the Ministers in their department could be half appointed by them and the other half by the Prime Minister/President and Parliament could have a vote to confirm them.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Elected head of state first. :ninja:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Attlee_party)
    Elected head of state first. :ninja:
    what would be the point of that?
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 122025278)
    Would a pluralistic Government work? So that people stood for Cabinet posts such as Chancellor/Treasury Secretary, Foreign Secretary, Home Secretary, Defence Secretary etc... and were elected by a nationwide ballot instead of being appointed.

    The rest of the Ministers in their department could be half appointed by them and the other half by the Prime Minister/President and Parliament could have a vote to confirm them.
    Yes.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Procerus)
    what would be the point of that?
    What would be the point in an elected cabinet?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Attlee_party)
    What would be the point in an elected cabinet?
    there is no point in either
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Procerus)
    there is no point in either
    With the current way our system works, perhaps not. But an elected head of state would certainly make me feel better. :cool:
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Procerus)
    there is no point in either
    why?
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Attlee_party)
    Elected head of state first. :ninja:
    Yeah, because the role of the Queen is comparable in terms of the day-to-day running of the country and what affects the lives of people to the Home Secretary, for example.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Attlee_party)
    With the current way our system works, perhaps not. But an elected head of state would certainly make me feel better. :cool:
    And what is the job of the Head of State and why would some random person be the best person for the job?

    (Original post by ANARCHY__)
    why?
    Because the public elects **** people to parliament as MPs already which we unfortunately limit our cabinet choices to. If we allowed the public to elect any random person to cabinet on top of the idiots we elect as MPs the government wouldn't function.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Procerus)
    And what is the job of the Head of State and why would some random person be the best person for the job?
    Arguably they wouldn't be better at the job. It would just be nice to have at least somewhat of a choice which at the moment we have absolutely no say what so ever. At least with the cabinet you elected the govt/pm that elects the cabinet. With the monarch you get whoever is next in line whether the majority like it or not.

    Because the public elects **** people to parliament as MPs already which we unfortunately limit our cabinet choices to. If we allowed the public to elect any random person to cabinet on top of the idiots we elect as MPs the government wouldn't function.
    I agree with this. We already elect the govt, electing the cabinet would make electing a govt obsolete.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chav Princess)
    Yeah, because the role of the Queen is comparable in terms of the day-to-day running of the country and what affects the lives of people to the Home Secretary, for example.
    I never said it was. I just said we should be able to choose who is the head of state.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Attlee_party)
    Arguably they wouldn't be better at the job. It would just be nice to have at least somewhat of a choice which at the moment we have absolutely no say what so ever. At least with the cabinet you elected the govt/pm that elects the cabinet. With the monarch you get whoever is next in line whether the majority like it or not.
    I just dont see the point, the head of state just represents our country and doesn't have any power that effects my life so I am ok with a monarchy.

    On state visits to Canada for example would you really be happy with some random man/woman who changes every 4/5 years or someone who represents a English tradition for 1000 years?

    If we suddenly became like France/USA where the head of state is the president and has actual power of policy then I would be ok with electing a head of state but we arguably have a superior system to those countries apart from cabinet selection (which should be more like the US) so i wouldn't like to see a president of the UK.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Nationwide election for the positions... At least then people choose who run their country.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Attlee_party)
    I never said it was. I just said we should be able to choose who is the head of state.
    To fulfil your subjective ideological desires, even though the current system is successful on a pragmatic basis?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mevidek)
    Nationwide election for the positions... At least then people choose who run their country.
    MPs are unelected in your world?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chav Princess)
    To fulfil your subjective ideological desires, even though the current system is successful on a pragmatic basis?
    No op said asked if we should have an elected cabinet. I said we should have an elected monarch first because we have no say on the matter where as with the cabinet we do have a say. We elect the government that chooses the cabinet. I'm not actually saying we should change anything. I'm making a point about the fact that there is no need for an elected cabinet as, in your words, "the current system is successful". However if there is going to be a push for change in the system then electing a head of state which we have absolutely no say in out ranks electing a cabinet which arguably we have quite a big say in. And also given the fact that the whole point of keeping a constitutional monarch is supposed counterbalance the govt/pm in reality the system we get is one where the PM arguably has more authority than a president. So if you consider electing a cabinet to be more democratic then you could argue we need to get rid of hereditary head of states in order to elect a presidential head of state and reduce the privileges of the PM. Again I do not agree with this, but like I said if electing a cabinet is a pressing issue then so is electing a head of state.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Procerus)
    MPs are unelected in your world?
    We elect MP's to make laws and represent their constituents. One of the main problems with appointing an MP is a Minister is that they were elected by a few thousand people in some part of the UK to do a different job, not to for example conduct foriegn policy on behalf of the whole UK as they would do if they became Foreign Secretary. An elected parish councillor has about as much legitimacy as an MP to become a Minister, as they too are elected.

    However if people are electing MP's on the basis they they will support a party to form a Government, then that party surely has a democratic mandate, so just let the leaders of that party choose who they want to serve as a Minister regardless of whether they're elected or not, an MP is has no more mandate to serve in an office of state than I have.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Not only do I think this would work, but I think it's almost necessary as a step towards true democracy. Politics in the uk has become too party-dominated and not enough policy-dominated. Rather than people voting for who has the best policies, the majority of people will be swayed by other factors such as the PR image of the politicians and stories released in the media. All Labour have to do is make the Tories look bad to get into office, and they know it. We need elections to individual cabinet posts and we need more independent politicians standing and making it more than a 2 horse race
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Procerus)
    Because the public elects **** people to parliament as MPs already which we unfortunately limit our cabinet choices to. If we allowed the public to elect any random person to cabinet on top of the idiots we elect as MPs the government wouldn't function.
    Don't know if party leaders make better choices tbh. George Osborne? wtf is this lol
 
 
 
Poll
Black Friday: Yay or Nay?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.