Blair's War

[Simon]

This whole political system needs overthrowing

I'd be fascinated to hear what you would replace it with. Just a brief outline would be ample.

[teamsaint]

Nor probably mine, Amsy. This whole political system needs overthrowing, it has nothing to offer humanity any more other than the rich getting ever richer presiding over no future until they're swept aside, something only younger generations can sort out once they've woken from the collective slumber; we'll all probably have to go through an unpleasant unnecessary learning process yet again in the meantime.

Wise words, S_A.
we could start something new with a system based on need rather than greed.

[amateur51]

I'd be fascinated to hear what you would replace it with. Just a brief outline would be ample.

For MPs, what about:

a) a limit on the number of lawyers and PR people chosen as candidates for a constituency/party;

b) a limit on the number of public school educated people chosen as candidates for a constituency/party;

c) a limit of three years before a civil servant of a certain grade and above could move to the private sector post related to the civil service post held previously;

d) constituency committees to draw up & publish the skills and experience specification for each candidate before candidates are chosen, tailored for each constituency but building on skills/experience criteria set by the national party offices;

Lunch calls - I hope that's short enough :biggrin:

[vinteuil]

And there is still so much much that we don't know or understand about how/why we went to war. It saddens me that these issues may not be resolved in my lifetime.

... I'm sure a quick discreet PM to Simon will solve any outstanding questions you may have on this matter.

[Simon]

... I'm sure a quick discreet PM to Simon will solve any outstanding questions you may have on this matter.

I'm afraid that anyone who hasn't sussed this out by now is beyond my help.

[mangerton]

For MPs, what about:

a) a limit on the number of lawyers and PR people chosen as candidates for a constituency/party;

b) a limit on the number of public school educated people chosen as candidates for a constituency/party;

c) a limit of three years before a civil servant of a certain grade and above could move to the private sector post related to the civil service post held previously;

d) constituency committees to draw up & publish the skills and experience specification for each candidate before candidates are chosen, tailored for each constituency but building on skills/experience criteria set by the national party offices;

Lunch calls - I hope that's short enough :biggrin:

I absolutely agree, apart from c). I'd make it ten years minimum.

I'm bound by the Civil Service Code, but those at the top, who make the rules, break them with impunity.

[Simon]

For MPs, what about:

a) a limit on the number of lawyers and PR people chosen as candidates for a constituency/party;

b) a limit on the number of public school educated people chosen as candidates for a constituency/party;

c) a limit of three years before a civil servant of a certain grade and above could move to the private sector post related to the civil service post held previously;

d) constituency committees to draw up & publish the skills and experience specification for each candidate before candidates are chosen, tailored for each constituency but building on skills/experience criteria set by the national party offices;

I wasn't aware that I had asked you, Amateur51. It was S-A's original post, so I hope for a reply from him.

However, as you've troubled to post, I admit that I find that the thinking behind your third and fourth points has merit. I don't want to get involved with the detail for those, or for the others yet, if you don't mind, but rather to wait for S-A's blueprint for what he'd replace "the whole" of the political system with, once it had been "overthrown".

We might even get some idea as to how that would come about, too...

[teamsaint]

nothing is forever .

Remember the fall of the Soviet union?
Hands up who had THAT on their ITV seven.

[Nick Armstrong]

I find that the thinking behind your third and fourth points has merit.

:star:

:ok: :biggrin:

[Simon]

It was S-A's original post, so I hope for a reply from him.

Still hoping!

[amateur51]

Still hoping!

Sometimes you have to work with what you get, rather than sit waiting for what you want :winkeye:

[Richard Barrett]

Sometimes you have to work with what you get, rather than sit waiting for what you want :winkeye:

I expect that S_A was taking the principle "from each according to their abilities, to each according to their needs" and applying it to Simon. :winkeye:

[Serial_Apologist]

I expect that S_A was taking the principle "from each according to their abilities, to each according to their needs" and applying it to Simon. :winkeye:

We had all this out about a year ago, Richard; it was a waste of time then, and it would be now.

[Simon]

We had all this out about a year ago

No we didn't.

But I'll take it, as no doubt will every other unbiased observer, as a "sorry - I have no answer."

In future, try not to make wild comments that you can't back up.

And clever interventions from fellow-travellers like Mr. Barrett to try to get you off the hook don't hold water, either. (Though credit due to him for the shot - it was a good one. :ok: )

[DavidP]

No we didn't.

But I'll take it, as no doubt will every other unbiased observer, as a "sorry - I have no answer."

In future, try not to make wild comments that you can't back up.

And clever interventions from fellow-travellers like Mr. Barrett to try to get you off the hook don't hold water, either. (Though credit due to him for the shot - it was a good one. :ok: )

Intellectual bullying again are we, Simon? You have some nerve too when some of us are still waiting for your definition of "anarchism" and "extreme" leftists which you bottled out of on the Boston thread.