If you were Queen for a day...

greg66_tri_v2.0

jashburnham wrote:

Eau Rouge wrote:

I don't like this idea of amateurs running the country, I'll stick with the career politicians please. It was a bad idea 100 years ago, it's a bad idea now. You'll be stuck with the ones who can't actually hack it in their profession in charge. I know the pro's are slimy and untrustworthy, but I'd still rather have them.

My first act as soverign would be to declare a Republic and put the country in the hands of the people who live in it, rather than the aformentioned slimy pro's. I want a constitution damn it, and I want it now.

Mmmm well having a constituion (along the lines you are thinking of) has done wonders for the US hasn't it. No sign of the establishment running things there is there? Oh hang on...

Also I think you are missing the key point which is that they would have had "successful" careers.

Also I think you're getting pro and amateur the wrong way round in this case

Quite.

It seems to me that career politics means that right now, we have "the ones who can't actually hack it in their profession in charge". :roll:

Sewinman

ChrisInBicester wrote:

I'd repeal the law that repealed the law requiring all fit men to practice archery on a Sunday in case Jonny Frog came marching over the horizon - as much a threat now in the guise of the EU as it was 600 years ago. Get yer quivers at the ready chaps...

One new law that I'd like would be to force the prosecution to prove that damage may be caused by an individual believing in something that patently isn't true, rather than the current method where we effectively have thought crimes, viz Holocaust deniers, <lots of examples that would probably bring me to the attention of the law>, the world is flat believers, anything of that nature. If someone has an opinion that doesn't tie in with the government of the day's opinion, tough. Let them prove that it's an actual problem, not some theoretical jumped-up 'threat to society'. grumble grumble cont p94...

Since when has either Holocaust denial or flat earthism been a crime? What are all the other 'lots of examples' of thought crime?

georgee

I think i'd order the deaths of all other royals and then do the decent thing and put a shotgun in my mouth.

boy on bike

I suppose I'd better chuck in my own ideas...

Repeal: the smoking ban - or part of it. Much as I like coming out of a pub not sticking of other people's smoke, I do feel sorry for the people huddled on the pavement, and I quite understand how a fag & a pint go together. So, allow smoking in pubs again. But not anywhere else. (am I being a bit too precocious? No! after all, I am Queen)

Enact: a law enforcing a personal carbon allowance. I think this could be a great idea to actually get people thinking and acting about climate change. Trouble is, it would be so unpopular for a government to introduce I doubt any would ever have the b@lls to do so - until it's too late. This would actually work best if done on a worldwide basis, so I think I'd better become world dictator for a day instead 8)

il_principe

boy on bike wrote:

I suppose I'd better chuck in my own ideas...

Repeal: the smoking ban - or part of it. Much as I like coming out of a pub not sticking of other people's smoke, I do feel sorry for the people huddled on the pavement, and I quite understand how a fag & a pint go together. So, allow smoking in pubs again. But not anywhere else. (am I being a bit too precocious? No! after all, I am Queen)

Enact: a law enforcing a personal carbon allowance. I think this could be a great idea to actually get people thinking and acting about climate change. Trouble is, it would be so unpopular for a government to introduce I doubt any would ever have the b@lls to do so - until it's too late. This would actually work best if done on a worldwide basis, so I think I'd better become world dictator for a day instead 8)

Can this carbon allowance be spent on Carbon fibre?

I'm in a bad mood this arvo. Just worked out that the money my RBS shares have lost me could have bought another rather lovely Italian bike, like this for instance:



GRRRRRRRRRRRRR.

Christophe3967

jashburnham wrote:

boy on bike wrote:

I suppose I'd better chuck in my own ideas...

Repeal: the smoking ban - or part of it. Much as I like coming out of a pub not sticking of other people's smoke, I do feel sorry for the people huddled on the pavement, and I quite understand how a fag & a pint go together. So, allow smoking in pubs again. But not anywhere else. (am I being a bit too precocious? No! after all, I am Queen)

Enact: a law enforcing a personal carbon allowance. I think this could be a great idea to actually get people thinking and acting about climate change. Trouble is, it would be so unpopular for a government to introduce I doubt any would ever have the b@lls to do so - until it's too late. This would actually work best if done on a worldwide basis, so I think I'd better become world dictator for a day instead 8)

Can this carbon allowance be spent on Carbon fibre?

I'm in a bad mood this arvo. Just worked out that the money my RBS shares have lost me could have bought another rather lovely Italian bike, like this for instance:



GRRRRRRRRRRRRR.

So, going back to yesterday's thread about dinner party guests, perhaps we might change these to:

Fred Goodwin (btw I've passed a law to repeal the knighthood)
Paul Myners (similarly disenobled)
Alistair Darling

They could have their own special menu.

il_principe

Yeah, called baseball bat in the mouth (wielded by me)

Inept F*ckers.

Eau Rouge

jashburnham wrote:

Mmmm well having a constituion (along the lines you are thinking of) has done wonders for the US hasn't it. No sign of the establishment running things there is there? Oh hang on...

Their "constitution" is about as worthless as the UK's current one. It's only alterable by Congress, which kinda defeats the whole point of it. My UK Constitution would only be alterable by referendum of the people. Our country, our laws. Just like my UK President would be about as far from the concept of the US's President as you could get.

jashburnham wrote:

Also I think you are missing the key point which is that they would have had "successful" careers.

In who's judgement? Two years ago the bosses of the UK's banks had "successful" careers. I really don't want some business leader running anything. Major companies are run to awful sets of objectives, shareholders, analysts, etc etc. Anyway, why would anyone want to leave a career they are apparently good at to go do something they aren't going to be good at, namely helping people with boring constituency work and the boring mundane laws that are needed but are still boring and mundane.

jashburnham wrote:

Also I think you're getting pro and amateur the wrong way round in this case

It's from "The Remains of the Day" (he says after looking it up quickly)
"You are, all of you, amateurs. And international affairs should never be run by gentlemen amateurs. Do you have any idea of what sort of place the world is becoming all around you? The days when you could just act out of your noble instincts, are over. Europe has become the arena of realpolitik, the politics of reality. If you like: real politics. What you need is not gentlemen politicians, but real ones. You need professionals to run your affairs, or you're headed for disaster! "

nwallace

hm, duff question really as the monarch can't now do much more politically than instruct someone to form a government and rubber stamp that governments stuff.

So:
Enact: Federal Republic
Repeal: Act of Settlement (well why not? it doesn't matter after the previous enactment but you know it would still be brought up that the UK never allowed Catholic succession before becoming a republic)



Career politicians are essential to politics.
Without them people who can debate a position they don't necessarily believe in, listen to people talking pish at them in "surgery" and appear like they care, etc. would have to have worked in the only other career where that happens, Law. Do you really want a load of ex-Lawyers running the country?

For a decent example, see 2 filmings of Scottish First Ministers questions, one with ex-economist Salmond responding to questions and one with ex-lawyer Sturgeon responding to questions.

Christophe3967

Eau Rouge wrote:

"You are, all of you, amateurs. And international affairs should never be run by gentlemen amateurs. Do you have any idea of what sort of place the world is becoming all around you? The days when you could just act out of your noble instincts, are over. Europe has become the arena of realpolitik, the politics of reality. If you like: real politics. What you need is not gentlemen politicians, but real ones. You need professionals to run your affairs, or you're headed for disaster! "

Phew. Just think of the mess we'd be in without professional policitians running the country.

pneumatic

Repeal: law of gravity (well, it would be a laugh wouldn't it?)

Enact: law to install wisdom (and no other substance, not metal, not power, not gender, not race, just wisdom) as the global currency. If you want something, you have to trade it for a good idea.

:idea:

Eau Rouge

Christophe3967 wrote:

Phew. Just think of the mess we'd be in without professional policitians running the country.

Ahm, the two World wars...
The amateurs were kicked out in the 1945 revolution.