Gordon Brown has launched his leadership campaign with the slogan “Gordon Brown for Britain” and based on two policies – health and education.
When Gordon Brown was elected in Kirkcaldy & Cowdenbeath, did his constituents elect him because of his policies on health and education? No, they didn’t. That’s because he doesn’t have a say in health or education policy in Scotland where he was elected – the Scottish Parliament does. He wasn’t elected to deal with agriculture, forestry, fishing, education, training, environment, health, housing, local government, natural and built heritage, planning, police and fire services, social work, transport, sport, the arts, statistics and public records, tourism and economic development. Over these matters in England, Gordon Brown has no mandate.
Brown isn’t running to be an English PM, he is running to be a British PM, he therefore has such a mandate.
Well to be precise no PM has a mandate par se. His/Her mandate is derived from our severign parliament.
Meet Brown today, he was talking at a college near me and i managed to get to go along. Seemed nice. Spoke to people then did an ‘unplanned’ ‘off the cuff’ speech, yea right. Was good. Best of luck to him. He will be a good BRITISH PM. He could laud over you ruddy English. 😉
Brown has as much a mandate as any PM. As PM his constituency encompases the whole nation, he has a mandate from them as leader of the party they elected.
He has no say over devolved matters.
You’re deliberatelt provocating English people Calum. If I ever meet you – you will end up having a bloody nose at least.
This Calum fella is having a laugh, he is what they call now a “troll” someone who “trolls” the boards arguing the toss with anybody who is up for it.
Got summat to tell yer Calum, you are wasting your time trying to “educate” us with your one world socialist dogma.
That party of warmongering, lying, theiving, fornicating, adulterous, English hating scoundrels of yours is finished, especially in England.
The last person we want as PM is the one eyed gobblin king from Kirkcaldy, you can in fact stick him up your jacksay.
How’s that for you !
He has no mandate from me, I was never given the choice. If he wants to claim a mandate then he should go to the people PDQ & call a general election.
Hey Scaffold, you know what else Churchill said? Here is a Speech by Churchill where he expresses his liking of the Scots – http://www.ibiblio.org/pha/policy/1942/421012b.html – So don’t try to usurp this great man, a man of empire and a man of the Unity of the UK to back up your perverted English Nationalism.
“You’re deliberatelt provocating English people Calum. If I ever meet you – you will end up having a bloody nose at least.”
May I just point out what a plesant bloke you are. You say i am deliberatelt provocating English people, what about that shit on your site, “I hate Scotland” “i’m a wanker” bla bla bla. Looks to me like you are being provocative to me.
Sean, Brown does have a mandate, as a soon to be leader of the biggest party in Westminster, a party which gained a majority of seats in England, Scotland and in Wales, a truly national party, Brown and the Labour party do have a mandate for governance. Oh, yes, even from England Labour have more seats than the Tories, blows your thesis out of the water.
Dave, I don’t care. You were given a choice at the last General election. You obviously didn’t vote Labour, but you still expressed a preference for a candate in your constituency, your action of voting has validited the political process, therefore the Labour government is legitmate as is Brown. We live in a representative democracy. You elected a representative to the Commons, he/she is a member of a party. Whichever party gains most seats wins, end of. We don’t vote for a PM, we vote for our MP. So you are talking rubbish, as we never realy have a choice of PM, merely a choice of MP. Maybe an elected head of state would be a good idea, but that is another issue. Were the PM directley elected then fair enough with your point, but he aint, so tuff luck.
Go back to my website you Calum the little scotlander and read why I hate Scotland — “I hate Scoland” banner is cickable. And by the way it is not even Scotland – it is North Britain.
You what? I have clicked on it before. It goes to a page where you rant about a load of rubbish about hating Scotland. You are just a bigot. End of. By the way, if i were you i’d get a hair cut, because you look like a complete F-ing d**k. Also if i were you i’d get a new t-shirt and new jeans because they look too small.
I see why you hate scotland, but what sort of fool reciprocates the bigotry of a bigot? Well? humm…?
Scaffold. Sorry for being a bit rude there. Got a bit personal, i apologize. Sorry.
Like I said, i don’t think it was right for Gill to do his article, but why should you reciprocate bigotry with bigotary?
One question. Are you russian by origin? Just i was thinking of going to russia and other former soviet republics, along with former Warsaw pact eastern bloc nations in my gap year. Just wondered if you could say anywhere that i should try to go to in Russia, as in any realy interesting places other than the obvious, Moscow, St Petersburg (would it annoy you if i calle it Leningrad? 😉 ) and Volvograd. Is it worth going much further east?
Calum, Brown wasn’t elected on the basis of any policies that are devolved in Scotland. This is because his manifesto only contains reserved policies. Nobody has elected him to interfere in any policies that don’t apply to Scotland – how can his Scottish constituents elect him on his policies on health or education when his policies on those subjects are an irrelevance to them? He may as well be elected in Outer Mongolia when it comes to matters that are devolved in Scotland because he’d still have the same mandate – no mandate.
If you can’t see the problem Calum, you need to lay off the Little Labour Book of Lies because you’re actually starting to believe it.
Look at it like this – if MP was elected in Paris and was told that he could form policy on health and education for any of the UK’s constituent nations because, even though he wasn’t elected in the UK, he was elected in the European Union, would you consider that to be acceptable? You wouldn’t would you because he was elected by French people on French policies. To me it’s exactly the same principle, just a different constituency in a different country.
Fair enough wonko, my viewes differ greatley to yours. Were i in government i would seek to bring things such as the NHS back under westminster control. I beleive that we should have a referendum on scottish independence, which the SNP would loose. Thus discrediting them. This could set a chain of events cumulating in the reversal of Devolution, as the return of proper mandates to Westminster.
Also can i say on the issue of the EU. Is isn’t a bunch of unelected europeans sitting on the European commision who dictate policy. It is the council of Ministers, who represent the democratically elected governments of the member states who have the final say on policy. They act in their states national interest, not the EU’s interest as they seek to preserve national sovereignty as far as possible. Therefore the EU is accountable to the public, it is so at a general election, where we choose the party whoes ministers will sit on the European power body the council of ministers. Furthermore, any powers given to the European commision are given by the council of ministers, who only give it decisions that they don’t want to make themselves. Decisions that will be unpopular in the polls, that way they can fob responsibility and accountability. Most decisions of the EU commision are made by the council of ministers, which is accountable in the form of national general elections, just the decisions of the EU commission are ones already made by the Council of ministers, just dictated to the commission. Now as the commission has so few powers, the second it gets any power it milks it.
Calum, the only way the SNP would lose an independence referendum is if they weren’t given an equal amount of resources to the Liebour-backed unionist mob and if the unionist BBC did their usual biased broadcasting. So yes, you’re probably right because there is no way the SNP would be allowed a fair crack of the whip.
On the issue of the EU, you’re deluded I’m afraid. I talk to an MEP quite regularly and he attends – as far as I know – every vote. At one vote recently they were voting on something like one issue every 40 seconds. They also wrap lots of different votes up into one so yu either reject lots of things or accept lots of things. That’s not democratic.
I beg to differ on Scotland. Only 35% of scots, from 50% turnout, so 15% of scots voted SNP, if my maths is right, which it is, that would leave them well short of a majority. Furthermore, not all the 15% of Scots how voted SNP voted for independence, many voted for their other policies, such as replacing council tax etc… along with voting for a referendum, many voted SNP as they wanted a referendum on independence, not because they supported independince, but because they wanted the chance to air their view by direct democracy.
Furthermore, what is your beef with the BBC? Just because they all arent euro sceptic right wing english nationalists doesnt mean they are raving commies. The BBC give a balanced view, airing numerous different view points. The BBC is of a great quality, and offerers as good as impartial reporting.
The European P’ment is a nothing body. I never said it did anything. The real power in the EU resides in the Council of Ministers. This is where ministers of member states meet and make key EU decisions. It is this body, where the ministers look to maximise their own national interest, not the overal EU national interest. It is this body which has most control in the EU. And it is made up of our deomcratically elected ministers form Westminster. MEP’s do jack shit. Government ministers who sit in the Council of Ministers are the one with power. They superceed the EU P’ment, and also are the ones who control all power that the European Commission has. The Council of Ministers hold the real power, it it they who are elected by us at general elections. Therefore the top of the EU has accountability to the electorate, as we can change the ministers who go there by choosing a different Government.
The majority of the electorate are eurosceptic but they didn’t vote for a eurosceptic party. The majority of the electorate support an English Parliament but they didn’t vote for an English nationalist party. That doesn’t mean that if there was a referendum on an English Parliament or pulling out of Federal Europe tomorrow the results wouldn’t be overwhelmingly in favour.
The BBC are biased, plain and simple. The other day I was looking at my comments on the “Have your say” thing. Over half of them have never been published and they are all contrary to UK government policy. The BBC deliberately stifles debate about key issues and they also refuse to acknowledge England as a nation. That’s why there is a BBC English Regions and why they never mention the discrimination against English people when it comes to things like cancer drugs. In fact, they go out of their way to talk around it. The BBC also gets a hell of a lot of money from the EU to promote Federal Europe.
The Council of Ministers doesn’t run the EU. The directives and other dictats from the EU come from unelected commissioners and other quangocrats.
The council of ministers has the final say in all matters, in so far as that it retains real sovereignty of the nations. Additionally, all powers of the europen commission are given to it by the council of ministers.
The council of ministers is where real power lays in the EU. All powers of the unelected european commission are given to it by the council of ministers, thus all its powers are ones that the ministers dont want to have to make, decisions which will be unpopular, thus being able to fob of accountability.
The council of ministers acts in conjunction with the parliament and with the commission. it is wherer real power lies, as they can block almost anything having near veto powers. Nothing can be done in the EU without the concent of the council of ministers. It is ill informed europ sceptics such as yourself who are wrong in this respect about the EU.
An economic union is a good thing, however a politicial one is debatable.
The coucnil of ministers hold real power in the EU. This is where national sovereignty is preserved, without it the commission would dominate and enforce an agenda of a political union. The council of minister has final say, it is which preserved soverignty, adn thus stagnates the EU project. We need either to throw our lot fully in with the EU and pool our soverignty, alternativley we should stop the move to the political union, preserving the great economic union.