Turn on thread page Beta
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by CoffeeGeek)
    Mr Speaker,

    Does the Prime Minister intend to put the Queen's Speech to a vote, ensuring that the smallest government to form in years gets the confidence of the House? And if he does, how will he receive support from outside the government to allow the passage?
    Sorry for missing this one yesterday. The Queen's Speech is a difficult one. I will openly say that I do not expect it to pass as I expect Labour to oppose some of it and your own party to oppose some of it. What I do believe is that we'll be able to pass the legislation on an individual basis and that is our main focus.


    (Original post by Little Toy Gun)
    Mr Speaker,

    May I ask the Prime Minister what steps will Her Majesty's government take to avoid a coalition collapse?

    One might say the new prime minister is an expert on collapsed coalitions:

    2018 Tory-led coalition: Home Secretary / Deputy Leader and Acting Leader
    2015 Green-led coalition: Business Secretary / Party Chair and Acting Leader
    2015 Labour-led coalition: Work and Pensions, Business Secretary / Party Chair
    If only I truly was! The only one the Liberals can truly take all of the blame for is the 2015 Labour-led coalition which we pulled out of, when we really should have spoken to the Labour leadership in some depth before doing so. The other two had events which made our position or the position of our coalition partners untenable, which wasn't entirely or at all in the case of LUG, our fault.

    We we have a strong policy agreement, a good split of cabinet ministers and we are happy. If we keep it that way, the coalition will be fine.

    (Original post by RedLuxemburg)
    Mr Speak,

    I'd like to ask the Prime Minister, What his views on Britain leaving the European Union are?

    I'd also like to ask the Prime Minister, What action will he and the government will take if Russia is found responsible for Sailsbury incident?
    My personal views are that leaving the EU will have a detrimental effect on the United Kingdom. On a meta note though, we are tied to whatever the RL Government do due to an amendment introduced a few terms ago so don't expect Brexit policy from us.

    I've answered this previously, but we'll be cautious but robust in our response, mainly through diplomacy and sanctions.

    (Original post by Tommy1boy)
    Mr Speaker

    Will my right honourable friend divulge to the house what this Government's buzzword / phrase will be. In the past we have had 'an economy fit for the future' and 'strong and stable' to name a few. I am sure the whole house would welcome some much needed clarity on whaty ou would like your back bench MPs to bring out every time we open our mouths .
    Strong Economy, Liberal Society has a nice ring to it
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by cranbrook_aspie)
    Mr Speaker,

    I'd like to congratulate the Prime Minister PetrosAC on his appointment - I hope he enjoys experiencing government on the other side of the coin as leader of the senior partner for once.

    Does the right honourable gentleman agree with me that in order to stop the clear perception of us as a pushover, Britain must be proactive in responding to the act of Russian military aggression that took place recently on British soil, recognising that toothless condemnations have no effect and that we must now do what we can to hurt Russia, ranging from the seizure of the assets held in this country by Vladimir Putin's cronies to being prepared to return the attack in kind if necessary?
    Completely missed quoting your question

    This is the hot topic at the moment. As I've said previously, we need to be cautious but robust. All possibly responses will be considered.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Mr Speaker.,

    Now that I take my seat on the middle benches, I would like to congratulate PetrosAC and the Libertarian Leadership in bringing together a coalition I never could have dreamed of while I was leader. This is a unique opportunity to push through a truly Liberal agenda for the future of Britain. I wish to ask the prime minister how it feels to be part of a government that has dismantled Labour and Tory dominance in the house?
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Finally Mr Speaker, using my fourth question, can the Prime Minister assure this house that his first priority is the defence of the British citizens, as we cannot have a Strong Economy with a Liberal Society without the defence of our citizens.
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Afcwimbledon2)
    Mr Speaker.,

    Now that I take my seat on the middle benches, I would like to congratulate PetrosAC and the Libertarian Leadership in bringing together a coalition I never could have dreamed of while I was leader. This is a unique opportunity to push through a truly Liberal agenda for the future of Britain. I wish to ask the prime minister how it feels to be part of a government that has dismantled Labour and Tory dominance in the house?
    I thank my Right Honourable Friend for his comments and his question. I hope one day soon he'll join me on the front benches again. I'm pleased to be leading the way, along with my Libertarian colleagues, in breaking down the dominance of Labour and the Tories. Hopefully we can prove politics is so much more than just a constant swing between left and right.

    (Original post by Tommy1boy)
    Finally Mr Speaker, using my fourth question, can the Prime Minister assure this house that his first priority is the defence of the British citizens, as we cannot have a Strong Economy with a Liberal Society without the defence of our citizens.
    This Government has many priorities and I do not wish to put one above the rest. Leading a country is about making sure so many different departments are performing at their highest capacity, and Defence is certainly one of them. My Right Honourable friend is correct though - without security, we have no liberty.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PetrosAC)
    My personal views are that leaving the EU will have a detrimental effect on the United Kingdom. On a meta note though, we are tied to whatever the RL Government do due to an amendment introduced a few terms ago so don't expect Brexit policy from us.

    I've answered this previously, but we'll be cautious but robust in our response, mainly through diplomacy and sanctions.
    Thanks for your answers, it's a shame TSR Land can't go it's own way.

    Interesting, i look forward the governments statement on the response to Salisbury.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PetrosAC)
    Completely missed quoting your question

    This is the hot topic at the moment. As I've said previously, we need to be cautious but robust. All possibly responses will be considered.
    I thank the right honourable gentleman for his response - I hope that 'cautious but robust' is not a catchphrase and will actually result in some action. Does the government intend to make a statement, particularly given the death of another Putin critic in London today?


    I would like to pick a slightly controversial topic for my second question: what is the the Prime Minister's view on multiculturalism? Does he agree with me that while immigration has undoubtedly brought great benefits, it has also brought regressive cultural practices such as FGM and forced marriage, and that in order to prevent these as well as the spread of religious fundamentalism, a much more proactive approach should be taken towards promoting and enforcing liberal cultural values among communities with roots in parts of the world which have yet to adopt those values?
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by cranbrook_aspie)
    I thank the right honourable gentleman for his response - I hope that 'cautious but robust' is not a catchphrase and will actually result in some action. Does the government intend to make a statement, particularly given the death of another Putin critic in London today?


    I would like to pick a slightly controversial topic for my second question: what is the the Prime Minister's view on multiculturalism? Does he agree with me that while immigration has undoubtedly brought great benefits, it has also brought regressive cultural practices such as FGM and forced marriage, and that in order to prevent these as well as the spread of religious fundamentalism, a much more proactive approach should be taken towards promoting and enforcing liberal cultural values among communities with roots in parts of the world which have yet to adopt those values?
    The Government will be making a statement.

    I'm fully in favour of multiculturalism. What I am not in favour of is people using religion as an excuse for denying someone liberty, especially in the two cases the right honourable member has used as examples. Religious freedom should only extend to within the laws of the land and it should remain that way.

    That being said, I am not sure what the Right Honourable Gentleman means by a more proactive approach. If he has any ideas, I'm happy to discuss them and look into helping implement them.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PetrosAC)
    My personal views are that leaving the EU will have a detrimental effect on the United Kingdom. On a meta note though, we are tied to whatever the RL Government do due to an amendment introduced a few terms ago so don't expect Brexit policy from us.
    To clarify, the amendment is such that TSRland cannot be in the EU while the RL UK isn't and vice versa. It is perfectly legitimate for TSRland to pursue different Brexit policy (though I'd question the extent to which we can, for instance, simulate EU negotiating strategy).
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)
    To clarify, the amendment is such that TSRland cannot be in the EU while the RL UK isn't and vice versa. It is perfectly legitimate for TSRland to pursue different Brexit policy (though I'd question the extent to which we can, for instance, simulate EU negotiating strategy).
    It just wouldn't make sense for us to do anything different because we'd have to end up reverting to the RL UK's position in a few years time because we wouldn't know the implications of our different decisions
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PetrosAC)
    It just wouldn't make sense for us to do anything different because we'd have to end up reverting to the RL UK's position in a few years time because we wouldn't know the implications of our different decisions
    You could apply that to every policy area.
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)
    You could apply that to every policy area.
    You can get rough costings for some bills and a rough idea of how some policies will affect things. Brexit is an entirely different, hugely complex matter
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PetrosAC)
    You can get rough costings for some bills and a rough idea of how some policies will affect things. Brexit is an entirely different, hugely complex matter
    It's entirely reasonable to not wish to advance Brexit policy. Just don't pretend the reason is that the House is institutionally incapable of doing so. I think most of us are informed enough to understand what kind of involvement with the EU we would be seeking in the future.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PetrosAC)
    Sorry for missing this one yesterday. The Queen's Speech is a difficult one. I will openly say that I do not expect it to pass as I expect Labour to oppose some of it and your own party to oppose some of it. What I do believe is that we'll be able to pass the legislation on an individual basis and that is our main focus.
    Fair enough. I accept this response.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Mr Speaker,

    For my final question to the Prime Minister. Do you believe that the safety of the public is of utmost importance to your government? If you do, then why are you removing CCTVs? I feel the justification in the Queen's Speech is absolutely poor so hopefully you can give me confidence.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    Mr Speaker, for the sake of ease I shall ask both my questions at the same time:

    1) Which does the Prime Minister believe should be the greater priority for this government: increasing productivity at the probable cost of jobs, or getting unemployment back down at the cost of productivity and how does he intend to do this?

    2) The Queen's Speech seems big on tax cuts and spending increases, is a lack of fiscal discipline what we can expect from this government and if not why is this not being conveyed?
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PetrosAC)
    If only I truly was! The only one the Liberals can truly take all of the blame for is the 2015 Labour-led coalition which we pulled out of, when we really should have spoken to the Labour leadership in some depth before doing so. The other two had events which made our position or the position of our coalition partners untenable, which wasn't entirely or at all in the case of LUG, our fault.

    We we have a strong policy agreement, a good split of cabinet ministers and we are happy. If we keep it that way, the coalition will be fine.
    But Mr Prime Minister, I believe all of those collapsed coalitions you were a part of started out that way.

    So how exactly are you going to make sure it stays that way, and what would you do if there is inevitably strong disagreement within the coalition? It's not necessarily whether it's your or your party's fault that you were in all the collapsed coalitions, but the fact remains that you failed to save it, whether it's due to a lack of skills or will. As one of the smallest governments and a less-than-usual pairing, I think it's reasonable for me to ask if the Prime Minister has concrete plans and protocol to prevent another government collapse.

    Are there red lines your partners must not cross, or you would pull out and trigger a new election? Or are you never going to pull out no matter what? If things happen and the coalition is in danger, what would you do?
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Little Toy Gun)
    But Mr Prime Minister, I believe all of those collapsed coalitions you were a part of started out that way.

    So how exactly are you going to make sure it stays that way, and what would you do if there is inevitably strong disagreement within the coalition? It's not necessarily whether it's your or your party's fault that you were in all the collapsed coalitions, but the fact remains that you failed to save it, whether it's due to a lack of skills or will. As one of the smallest governments and a less-than-usual pairing, I think it's reasonable for me to ask if the Prime Minister has concrete plans and protocol to prevent another government collapse.

    Are there red lines your partners must not cross, or you would pull out and trigger a new election? Or are you never going to pull out no matter what? If things happen and the coalition is in danger, what would you do?
    I disagree that we are a "less-than-usual" pairing - I'd argue that this a completely logical coalition. I think the fact that we're very united on social policy and have fairly similar economic policies helps us a lot. I'd also say that myself and the Deputy Prime Minister already have a strong relationship which helps.

    Regardless of all of this, there is no set way of maintaining a coalition or guaranteeing it's survival. We'll just be sure to work hard to make sure it lasts.

    The last point is completely hypothetical. I will act if something happens, and make any decisions then.
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    Political Ambassador
    Didn't realise I'd missed these so apologies

    (Original post by CoffeeGeek)
    Mr Speaker,

    For my final question to the Prime Minister. Do you believe that the safety of the public is of utmost importance to your government? If you do, then why are you removing CCTVs? I feel the justification in the Queen's Speech is absolutely poor so hopefully you can give me confidence.
    I do not believe CCTVs are effective enough to provide adequate justification for their role in greatly reducing privacy and civil liberties. They should not be used as replacements for frontline police. London also had the second highest amount of CCTV cameras in the world (at approximately 500,000), and this is expected to rise to 642,000 by 2020. An example of excessive use of CCTV cameras is the 1,113 CCTV cameras operated by Wandsworth Council - more than the number of cameras operated by police departments in Boston, Johannesburg and Dublin combined.

    The point, in short, is that they are completely unnecessary.

    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Mr Speaker, for the sake of ease I shall ask both my questions at the same time:

    1) Which does the Prime Minister believe should be the greater priority for this government: increasing productivity at the probable cost of jobs, or getting unemployment back down at the cost of productivity and how does he intend to do this?

    2) The Queen's Speech seems big on tax cuts and spending increases, is a lack of fiscal discipline what we can expect from this government and if not why is this not being conveyed?
    1) In my opinion, I would opt to increase productivity over jobs. However, there is obviously a need to strike a balance between both. My Government will be investing in Infrastructure (one example would be research into Maglev) to encourage more movement of workers.

    2) The Government has a lot of money making policies as well, that you are perhaps overlooking. The Legalisation of Drugs will bring in several billions of pounds, for example. This Government believes it can be fiscally responsible whilst achieving the reforms it desires.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    My question was essentially asking if your government believe public safety is important and I see no answer to that question in this response - so I'll have to assume it's not important until you make yourself clear. The Queen's Speech contradicts itself several times and as I've already pointed out in the thread you cannot claim as a government you're removing CCTVs for the "safety of the public" because doing that does the opposite...

    (Original post by PetrosAC)
    I do not believe CCTVs are effective enough to provide adequate justification for their role in greatly reducing privacy and civil liberties.
    Why do you have an expectation of privacy in public spaces? If you're in public you have no right to privacy - the only places you have a right to privacy in public may be public toilets. If you want privacy, you go to your private property - your home.

    They should not be used as replacements for frontline police.
    They're not used as replacements for frontline police, they are used to help gather evidence in criminal cases - that's their primary purpose. It does have the effect of prevention - because people are less likely to commit a crime if they know they are being recorded. But I don't see what suggests they're being used as replacements for frontline police...

    London also had the second highest amount of CCTV cameras in the world (at approximately 500,000), and this is expected to rise to 642,000 by 2020. An example of excessive use of CCTV cameras is the 1,113 CCTV cameras operated by Wandsworth Council - more than the number of cameras operated by police departments in Boston, Johannesburg and Dublin combined.
    I see you're just throwing in statistics here as if it strengthens your argument when it doesn't, you've conveniently given me an example of a city where it's been quite useful against terrorism - Boston. If it wasn't for CCTV I don't think the terrorists in the Boston attack in 2013 would have been arrested quickly because CCTV cameras were able to track them.

    It's worrying to think that this government wants to remove CCTVs and possibly put people's lives at risk and leave many without justice because there's a lack of evidence to prove they were a victim of a crime.

    The point, in short, is that they are completely unnecessary.
    You have made no effort to explain why they are unnecessary - except for stating things that are false and throwing statistics at me... I'm quite disappointed that this is the response given to me. Since the answer you have provided me is absolutely poor, I will ask the same question again.

    Do you believe that the safety of the public is of utmost importance to your government? If you do, then why are you removing CCTVs?
 
 
 
Poll
Which accompaniment is best?

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.