MvdV>> Sometimes the simplistic aproach is the right one. If it walks MvdV>> like a duck, quacks like a duck and swims like a duck, chances MvdV>> are it is a duck.
DR> That sounds very clever but is completely inapplicable to this DR> situation.
So you say. I beg to differ.
MvdV>> Things ARE different in The Netherlands. I already mentioned MvdV>> that MPs are not associated with a geographical area. No MvdV>> gerrymandering here, no writing to your local MP. There is no MvdV>> such thing.
DR> That is unusual. So your MPs are not answerable to any constituents?
Formally they are not. The official term is "zonder last of ruggespraak". I do not know how to transalte that. Of course if they make bad decisions they will feel it in the next election.
MvdV>> An even more important difference is that here cabinet MvdV>> ministers and secretaries of state are not MPs. That is against MvdV>> the law. If they come into the position of cabinet minister MvdV>> from being an MP, they have to resign as MP.
DR> How do they get to become ministers? Can non-MPs become ministers? Or DR> are your ministers more like our Upper House (the House of Lords)?
Yes, non MPs can become minsters. Anyone can become minister. It is the party that decides who to push forward. It is not uncommon for a complete outsider to become minister. More often they are drawn from the pool of MPs. But then when they become minister, they have to resig n as MP and someone else takes their place in parliament.
The upper house, or "eerste kamer" is somethig else. It is also called the Senate. Its members are not Lords, they are elected by the province. Minsiters can not be senators either.
MvdV>> Third: a situation where the prime minister resigns but the MvdV>> rest of the government remains in place is impossible here. MvdV>> Individual cabinet ministers can resign and usually they are MvdV>> replaced without much ado within a couple of days, this is MvdV>> impossible for the prime minister. The resignation of the prime MvdV>> ministers equates to the resignation of the entire government MvdV>> and that triggers a general election.
DR> Parliament is not the same as the government, nor are all of the MPs DR> belonging to the party in government actually members of the DR> government. The prime minister chooses his or her government from DR> among the most talented MPs and, if he resigns, then the new prime DR> minister will then choose a new government.
There is another difference. The PM does not choose all the ministers. The largest party usually provides the MP, but not all the minsiters. No party ever gets an absolute majority here, so it is always a coalition. Each of the coalition parties provide ministers.
DR> However, if the prime minister resigns through losing a parliamentary DR> vote of confidence then he has to advise the Queen that the country DR> must have a general election.
Same here.
DR> The outcome of the referendum was not a parliamentary vote of DR> confidence.
OK...
DR>>> You haven't seen the last of Boris Johnson.
MvdV>> We will see.
DR> You have for the moment. But wait for a general election in about five DR> years' time.
Five years is a long time to look ahead, especially in politics.
MvdV>> And now Nigel Farrage has resigned as well. This side of the MvdV>> pond it is looked upon as the rats leaving the sinking ship. MvdV>> That Cameron resigned stands to reason. He lost. But Boris MvdV>> Johnson and Nigel Farage? They won. Here the winners don't MvdV>> resign, they grab the reigns.
DR> It's "reins" as in horses' reins.
OK...
DR> But no, no, no!!! You still don't understand. Boris and Nigel Farage DR> did NOT lead their respective parties into Brexit in order to become DR> prime minister. That is a totally different matter. They led a DR> campaign to secure a vote to leave the EU. That was all.
They led the campaign to get the UK out of the EU. One can not say "that is all". With actions come responsibility. One can not just walk away. When one sows, one has to reap. DR> The matter of leading the country's negotiations for Brexit is an DR> entirely different matter. They wouldn't automatically have become DR> prime minister. They, or at least Boris, would have to go through all DR> the business of getting elected.
If that is what it takes totake responsibility for their actions, then that is what it takes.
DR> Farage, even if still the leader of UKIP, would never have had any DR> opportunity of doing any more except to shout from the sidelines which DR> is what he has been doing all along.
With remarkable success I'd say...
DR> Boris withdrew because he didn't have enough support and, rather than DR> split the vote, he withdrew in order that a weak candidate got in by DR> default. Not only do you not understand the situation
A common mistake is that understanding equates aproval. i understand the situation. I disaprove of the system and the attitude of the players that make this situation posible.
DR> but, listening to reports from the EU parliament this lunchtime, DR> neither do they! They haven't a clue (and probably don't care either) DR> how British politics works.
So maybe they do not understand how Britisch politics works. Would it have helped if they did? If they had understood would they have been able to prevent or stop it? Was it their responsibility to prevent it? Or was thathe job and resposibility of those that DO understand how British politicss works?
You are justifying an air crash by saying to the people onmthe ground: you do not understand how an airplane works. That may or may not be true, but it is the responsibility of the crew and pilot to understand how it works.
That I or the members of the EU parliament do not understand how British politics work is irrelevant. The British politicians are supposed to understand it and it was their responsibility to prevent it and now that they have failed, it is their responsibility to clean up the mess.
DR> As far as I could understand, they were just letting off steam because DR> Brexit is going to cause problems for them as well as us.
Of course they are pissed off. It DOES affect allof us in a negative way.
DR> It's reported by MSN that Angela Merkel is moving towards trying to DR> remove Juncker as president.
Id that what the British pres reports?
DR> She seems to think that his inflexibility has caused this crisis - and DR> she's probably right.
I think it ios totally unfair to blame Juncker. Or anyone else outside the UK. It is the British and only the British that are the cause of this mess. No one else to blame.
DR> Inflexibility is the antithesis of politics. Why do you think it's DR> called politics?
Inflexibility on the part of the EU is not the cause of the problem. Rather the opposite I'd say. We - the rest of the EU - have been too flexible towards the UK. we should have told them "no more exeptions" a long time ago. Now we have a spoiled child that is out of control.
