Brexit and the UK’s relationship with the United States of America There is a massive paradox in the middle of Liz Truss’ foreign policy agenda. On one hand, she wants the west to unite in order to do whatever it can to stop the Russian invasion of Ukraine; for a united west to stand tall and help the Ukrainians win a war they must win, for them and for us too. It seems clear that Truss, whatever her other faults, understands the importance of the war in Ukraine and is fully on the right side of history.
"However, I will say this: I think it would be beautifully ironic if the deepest change we end up with out of leaving the European Union is a more continental way of doing politics."
Another possible reform vector into that direction could be a more federal form of union.
Also quite ironic if that were to happen given how much Brexiters detest the concept of balanced power sharing
Also remember that in thr USA it isn't the president that has say over trade deals, they are approved by congress. So even if trump wins (pause for shudder) he still wouldn't be able to magically approve a deal.
On a separate note the UK trade deal with Canada is the one agreed to with the EU, so happened so fast BECAUSE of us in Canada wanting a deal with thr EU, no matter what Brexiteers think in terms of the Anglosohere.
The point about the AV referendum is that AV is easily argued against for a Parliamentary election. The Tories portrayed referendum as being about PR and argue that as it was lost PR is a dead issue for a generation.
The false argument used, that second place wins, was specious but hard to counter. Proportionality, whichever system is used, is much less easy to put a false argument against since it is self evidently fair.
Thus I don't think the failure of that rather pointless referendum, a choice between a bad system and a potentially worse system, works against the idea of a referendum on adopting the principle of PR for elections.
Have a look at the Australian arrangements.
Preferential voting for single member electorates in the lower house, nearly always producies stable governments.
The Senate has multi member, proportional voting in State electorates.
Both allow new political parties to emerge and sometimes grow, e.g. the Greens.
Governments rarely have an absolute majority in the Senate. They must negotiate to get legislation passed, deterring Winner Takes All politics.
"However, I will say this: I think it would be beautifully ironic if the deepest change we end up with out of leaving the European Union is a more continental way of doing politics."
Another possible reform vector into that direction could be a more federal form of union.
Also quite ironic if that were to happen given how much Brexiters detest the concept of balanced power sharing
Great post as always Nick.
Also remember that in thr USA it isn't the president that has say over trade deals, they are approved by congress. So even if trump wins (pause for shudder) he still wouldn't be able to magically approve a deal.
On a separate note the UK trade deal with Canada is the one agreed to with the EU, so happened so fast BECAUSE of us in Canada wanting a deal with thr EU, no matter what Brexiteers think in terms of the Anglosohere.
Jake Davis
The point about the AV referendum is that AV is easily argued against for a Parliamentary election. The Tories portrayed referendum as being about PR and argue that as it was lost PR is a dead issue for a generation.
The false argument used, that second place wins, was specious but hard to counter. Proportionality, whichever system is used, is much less easy to put a false argument against since it is self evidently fair.
Thus I don't think the failure of that rather pointless referendum, a choice between a bad system and a potentially worse system, works against the idea of a referendum on adopting the principle of PR for elections.