Subscribe to RSS feed
With surprisingly little fanfare, the BBC today launches a new online service – Democracy Live. The site offers live and on demand video coverage of the UK’s national political institutions and the European Parliament. Alongside the video, there are guides to how the different institutions work and a pretty comprehensive glossary.
The site has a “historic moments” section, with clips of 100 memorable political events – one of which is below:
What do you think (of the clip and the site)?
Tags: leanne wood, Llywodraeth Cynulliad Cymru, mrs windsor, welsh assembly
November 2nd, 2009 at 2:04 pm
She should never of been told to withdraw, she is a republican now I wonder….
November 2nd, 2009 at 2:36 pm
Good job, i am no fan of the devolved governments but atleast they maintain some standards. To call the Queen “Mrs Windsor” is indeed offensive and out of line for an assembly member or MP. What a surprise she is a separatist as well as a republican, the two things go hand in hand it seems.
Nice new features by the BBC. Its media like this that ensures democracy continues in this country, not the need for a written constitution or an “elected” head of state.
November 2nd, 2009 at 3:24 pm
Simon
How on Earth is referring to someone as Mrs Windsor to be regarded as offensive? Surely, this can only be the case in monarchist cloud-cuckoo land.
November 2nd, 2009 at 3:38 pm
Dave,
She is Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II. That is her title and those who have given an oath to be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth can atleast show some respect when in parliament or the assembly. They can disrespect her elsewhere if thats their wish, but our assemblies and parliaments have rules. Those who disobey the rules must be punished. Besides it was hardly a harsh punishment, looking at her previous rant the assembly was not losing much by her not taking part in the rest of the days debate. It appears she has even been arrested for causing trouble at a British naval base. What is it with these radicals?
November 2nd, 2009 at 3:50 pm
Simon
“She is Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II. That is her title …”
That is one of her titles, and one that I am disinclined to recognise. Mrs Windsor is also a title, and is no less respectful to the lady as a person.
As for Leanne Wood, she is clearly a person of ideals which you can agree or disagree with as you wish. I think we really need more people to stand up for their principles in Parliament rather than more people who are there just to toe the line.
November 2nd, 2009 at 3:52 pm
@Simon
You really are extraordinary.
Yes, “Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II” is a title she has been given. She is also Mrs Windsor. Her name is Elizabeth Windsor. She is just another woman, just another person, like you, me and all the other 60m in this country.
The one difference is that she behaves with a degree of contempt for democratic values and for the British people by taking for granted her office as head of state. Any decent person would seek a mandate and make herself accountable.
November 2nd, 2009 at 3:55 pm
Simon, you reveal yourself for what you truly are, an intellectual sycophantic twit. What possible offence can be caused by calling someone by their name? The member who raised the subject in the first place needs to get a life, and the presiding officer’s job-title should be changed on this evidence to Mr Jobsworth. What an absolute laughing stock we must appear to other nations if they view that footage.
November 2nd, 2009 at 5:19 pm
“Simon, you reveal yourself for what you truly are, an intellectual sycophantic twit.” Bob Wiggin
Sorry Bob, I am going to have to ask you to withdraw the term ‘intellectural’ as its use here is offensive to clever people….
November 2nd, 2009 at 5:42 pm
I was not aware of this Leanne Wood episode five years ago so the BBC have already done a good job of downplaying it.
I expect that the BBC’s new multiscreen website will be typically bland and unchallenging about UK democracy (in contrast to their saturated coverage of other countries’ internal affairs.)
November 2nd, 2009 at 6:12 pm
Andrew
Actually because she was the first AM needing to be ordered out of the Welsh assembly they did cover it with an article. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/4060043.stm I do not know if it got UK wide attention, it is just a devolved assembly after all but im sure it got covered well in Wales.
It seems this woman has a long history of being a trouble maker and only interested in pushing her separatist agenda.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/4700953.stm
What a wonderful woman, perhaps an elected head of state will operate in the same way for their own party’s gain? This is one of the reason i cant stand the additional list crap, no control of who gets sent to the assembly to represent you, people simply end up with any person at the top of the party list, even if they are not suitable for the job.
I hate to think what Neil would think of this woman, dishonouring the Welsh assembly and Wales in such a way.
November 2nd, 2009 at 6:39 pm
Dave,
Whilst we commoners in public may refuse to show respect for our Queen, there are rules in parliament and assemblies. Such a lack of respect by using “Ms windsor” in an attempt to degrade and dishonour Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II is shocking and quite frankly i find it sick that the labour party go into bed with separatists like PC, although thats a different matter.
Her party is obviously anti monarchy so its not that she stepped out of line on that. She stepped out of line by not showing respect for her Queen, even if she opposes the monarchy. You consider direspecting someone because you dont like them a good principle? Many Americans did not vote for Obama and cant stand the guy, he is still President Obama. When you hold such an high office, a certain amount of respect is required by those in government or parliament or assemblies etc.
Its not like she stood up and said we should become a republic, she was bashing labour and went onto insult the Queen. She was rightly removed for a day, that may help ensure she never shows such disrespect in the assembly again.
Graham,
She does have many titles, but she is not just an ordinary person like you or me. She is Queen Elizabeth II and whilst people may want to change the system, she should be treated with respect and addressed correctly by every British citizen, she is our Queen.
Bob Wiggin,
I am no fan of the devolved assemblies and parliament so i can understand some laughing at us for it, i know i laugh and cry at the joke that is the London Assembly. We have rules, Ms Wood broke the rules and she was dealt with. Its not like we had to have her dragged out, it was done in a calm manner. I thought the AM who raised it did a very good job and the presiding officer dealt with the trouble maker well. As ive said before she has form, arrested at a Royal Naval base, saying regional assembly members should only attend an event if it will benefit the party. Shocking and it was no surprise to learn she was a separatist after watching this video.
November 2nd, 2009 at 7:02 pm
SIMON – So you class Leanne Wood who refuses to acknowledge YOUR queen, (not hers, not mine, not ours, but YOUR queen), as a trouble maker. What a sad individual you really are. Until this country can escape the cloying embrace of the crawling classes with their blind sycophancy, their blinkered vision and their sickening deference to everything windsoresque, this country will continue to appear like a Ruritanian post imperial joke, steadily declining with meaningful reform permanently on the back-burner for fear of threatening the position of SIMON’S qUEEN and the people becoming ever more disenfranchised. You, Simon, I’m very much afraid, epitomize what I am talking about. And if the people ever do wake up from their collective apathetic slumber and catch on to how undemocratic we really are, and if civil unrest ensues, then it will be people like you Simon who will be to blame. Get a life man for your own sake!
November 2nd, 2009 at 7:30 pm
Bob:
And if the people ever do wake up from their collective apathetic slumber and catch on to how undemocratic we really are, and if civil unrest ensues, then it will be people like you Simon who will be to blame. Get a life man for your own sake!
Absolutely, jolly well said Bob! And Simon, as I keep telling you, in that nightmare scenario not only will people like you be to blame for the horror of widespread civil unrest, you will also be responsible for the image of the Queen and/or the monarchy being permanently tarnished. Can you really live with that? If you respect the monarchy as much as you claim to, surely you’d rather it was honourably consigned to the history books than dishonourably dumped on the rubbish-heap of humanity’s dark past?
November 2nd, 2009 at 7:32 pm
Bob Wiggin,
Queen Elizabeth II is not just my Queen, she is our Queen. She is Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Ms Wood is a trouble maker for stepping out of line in the assembly, she is a trouble maker for needing to be arrested outside a British naval base. She clearly only interested in advancing her separatist agenda, not the needs of the people of Wales.
lmao civil unrest will simply lead to failure. Her Majesty’s security forces will rightly keep the Queens peace and put down any violence. Civil unrest is unacceptable on British streets, i hope the next government understands that.
This is how they deal with Republicans in Northern Ireland.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sY5pciaZgOM
Thankfully in Great Britain we do not need to see scenes like this, but if civil unrest takes place then it will happen. Peaceful transition through the ballot box is the only way you will win. Violence or threats of violence can be dealth with.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ipfi59jpHhA
Also ofcourse there are plenty who will take to the streets to defend their Queen against a left wing take over. I am not a fan of EDL, but they dont seem to have a problem singing God save the Queen with passion.
God save our Queen.
November 2nd, 2009 at 7:51 pm
Matt,
If the monarchy is to come to an end i want that to happen in a dignified way. However the monarchy will not come to end whilst Queen Elizabeth II is on the throne. Whilst she is alive, i can not imagine this country becoming a republic or even seriously considering it. Its just unthinkable that we would reject our Queen after almost 60 years of her reign. There is also no way it will happen because of civil unrest.
As the Queen becomes too old or sick and unable to attend events, then will be the time to start thinking about these matters. Then will be the time to decide if following her death there should be a referendum on the monarchy in the other commonwealth realms like Australia and Canada. It will be their choice but i do expect them to become Republics and that will be a peaceful transition fully ending the legacy of Empire.
What we do here will have to depend on the mood of the people at the time. Id be ok with seeing a referendum on the continuation of the monarchy following the death of the monarch become part of our constitutional setup. That will give the democratic mandate for the monarchy to continue and give our future King the confidence he has the support of the people. But it wont make republicans any more happy and i do not see the real need for it in this country.
Queen Elizabeth II will be remembered as one of our greatest monarchs. Even if theres a constitutional crisis following her death it will not destroy her image, it will simply make losing her even more painful.
November 2nd, 2009 at 9:04 pm
SIMON – “Also of course there are plenty who will take to the streets to defend their Queen against a left wing take over.”
There you go again making assumptions. I, for your information, am not some sort of left-wing zealot. Indeed my particular political persuasion doesn’t seem to be completely accommodated by any of our political parties. I therefore vote after studying the manifestos on an election by election basis, judging which party’s policies go most of the way to meet my personal aspirations for my country and then deciding which way to cast my vote. You on the other hand have absolutely no aspiration at all for your country other than to maintain the status quo which has dismally failed the people thus far and probably gone some way in causing some of the ‘many difficult problems’ you keep banging on about and which you think David Cameron will miraculously cure. Well dream on Simon you poor deluded drone.
November 2nd, 2009 at 9:16 pm
I like the BBC’s Democracy Live website. I wonder what all the Xs mean – maybe its a sign of how some people have lost their trust in it!
November 2nd, 2009 at 9:55 pm
Bob ,
I dont think cameron will solve all our problems, i think out of the options his party will be the best choice. They will address some of the problems, they wont go far enough for my liking, and infact they will do some things i disagree.. i worry about their views on localism.
I care about this country, i see huge problems facing it that i want dealt with. The Queen being head of state is not a problem, its a benefit as far as im concerned. I accept there are republicans from all sides but the MPs signed up to support this campaign make it clear where the disloyalty lies. Its the left thats obsessed with things like proportional representation and war on the class system.
Fred,
Surely the Xs are meant to be crosses like on a ballot paper. I like the features of their site, i think the design could be improved though
November 2nd, 2009 at 11:08 pm
The Class System in our country represents extremism and embodies un-necessary division and social injustice. Surely it is not beyond the Wit of Man,( or Woman ) , to understand that fact. Therefore the Class System should be changed. It is not a matter of “War”, but of Necessity.
November 3rd, 2009 at 12:11 am
21.07.05
Ms Wood said: “I have absolutely nothing to hide, so I welcome any inquiry into the expenses system.
“However, such an inquiry shouldn’t be confined to regional assembly members. All AMs, MPs and MEPs’ expense accounts should be examined.”
November 3rd, 2009 at 12:38 am
@ Simon
“Its the left thats obsessed with things like proportional representation and war on the class system.
People from all walks of life believe in fairness and equality.
I Don’t understand Why you keep posting videos of Football louts singing the current National Anthem.
Surely you must recognise how off putting it is to anyone else who may try to sympathise with your views? The same goes for those goofy fox news clips of Obama songs.
November 3rd, 2009 at 12:56 am
Ash Walsh,
I try to make my comments as interesting as possible by including videos of certain things when suitable. As i said i am no fan of EDL, but it was in response to the possibility of civil unrest against the monarchy, i just wanted to show theres some willing to take to the streets to defend Britain and our Queen.
People from all walks of life do care about equality and fairness, but it doesnt stop most of them from supporting the monarchy
November 3rd, 2009 at 1:18 am
@ Simon,
At the outset, I challenged your credibility. Now you are starting to worry me. Firstly:-
“(The Queen) is not just an ordinary person like you or me.”
Yes she is. Or do you agree with David Icke’s view that the Royals are all lizards from Planet Zog.
Now, rather chllingly, your tone changes:-
“This is how they deal with Republicans in Northern Ireland……”
and later on “Violence or threats of violence can be dealth with”
You need to be well acquainted with the history of Britain and Ireland before you consider making highly sensitive political comments like that. I would imagine that the Queen would not like one of her subjects associating themselves with such remarks.
Thirdly:-
“People from all walks of life do care about equality and fairness, but it doesnt stop most of them from supporting the monarchy”
A contradiction in one sentence! There’s nothing fair nor equal about a monarchy – Whatever your statistical sample of monarchy supporting people believe it ain’t fairness and equality!
November 3rd, 2009 at 1:53 am
Martin,
She is Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, she is in no way an ordinary person, but i accept she is human
Yes i am well aware of the situation in Ireland. Northern Ireland is part of my country and i do not expect anyone to be trying to cause trouble against our armed forces on our own soil. Interesting to note that there was also an incident on that day in Scotland, with some Republicans there sparking trouble. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YnHYEOfZ7I8
I do not see what i said which was wrong. I certainly threatened no violence, i am against all forms of violence. Whilst i oppose becoming republic i respect republicans rights to free speech and to oppose the monarchy.
My comment was in response to someone saying there may be civil unrest. I just wanted to highlight that unrest can, is and will be dealt with by the police who will ensure the Queen’s peace is preserved.
People want equality and fairness for the british people and other citizens in the world. I am sure there are so many great campaigners for equality and human rights out there who support the monarchy, the idea its just a contradiction is unfair.
Just one final point as we were talking about Ireland. i was wondering if you would explain what impact the UK becoming a republic would have in Northern Ireland? I think it would greatly complicate things. We know the enemy in Northern Ireland are the Republicans, if we are all republicans i suppose we will just have to call them separatists? I cant help but think those people would see us becoming a republic as a huge victory although it wouldnt stop them wanting to carry on with their silly one ireland dream.
Thats another reason for supporting the monarchy i guess. We shouldnt give Irish republicans who are traitors to this country and want to see it destroyed the satisifaction of a partial victory. Hell im prepared to support the Queen on that reason alone
November 3rd, 2009 at 10:49 am
SIMON – Maybe you should study the history of Ireland before you go blathering on about the enemy within and how republicans should be treated. Whilst I do not for one minute condone terrorism, have you ever given any consideration to the indignities Irish people may have suffered under the English cosh over centuries past, and the effects that had on their society over those centuries, and how the divisions in that society arose, what were the primary causes, and who may have been to blame, and how those inequalities were entrenched, and how that entrenchment of social division possibly exacerbated the tension between those communities, and how the inability of successive British governments to address those problems may have contributed to thirty years of terror/violence where people from both sides of the social divide suffered horrendously ? No I don’t think it has ever entered your head. You have a closed mind Simon. Very sad.
November 3rd, 2009 at 11:26 am
Perhaps you can elaborate on this point. In what way is Liz Windsor not an ‘ordinary person’?
November 3rd, 2009 at 11:39 am
Simon, I hope your taking your pills – you certainly need them!
“I try to make my comments as interesting as possible by including videos of certain things when suitable. As i said i am no fan of EDL, but it was in response to the possibility of civil unrest against the monarchy, i just wanted to show theres some willing to take to the streets to defend Britain and our Queen.”
I hope you realise that whilst the EDL has no formal relationship with the BNP, members of the EDL do have links with the BNP.
See below:
http://www.hopenothate.org.uk/features/Businessman-bankrolls-street-army.php
If the EDL is the best you can come up with to support your ‘argument’, then your argument is completely void!
November 3rd, 2009 at 12:37 pm
Simon,What is an “ordinary ” person ?
November 3rd, 2009 at 12:47 pm
i think that the start up of democracy live is truly fantastic! It definately helps with the scrutiny of ministers and specifically the executive and it also helps to bring govt into the houses of anyone with the internet!
November 3rd, 2009 at 1:13 pm
Bob Wiggin,
Ireland was under English and later British rule for many centuries. I understand that many irish people suffered in that time, although in truth its not like the British people were living a life of luxury either. Its all very well saying we denied the people of Ireland democracy in the past, but did the British people have democracy themselves back then? no.
Her Majesty’s Government has clearly stated it respects the right of the Northern Irish people to decide their own future. If a united Ireland is what the people want, that is what they shall have. However as the majority currently do not want that and wish to remain part of the United Kingdom, they will be defended. I would suggest the catholic faith in Ireland has been just as much responsible for the conflict as Britain. We have also made up for our past deeds, Billions of pounds of extra British tax payers money has flooded into improving Northern Ireland at the same time as we have pumped billions into the European Union, which the Republic of Ireland has benefited from greatly.
Those who seek to remove Northern Ireland from the United Kingdom are traitors, they have a right to express their separatist views in a peaceful way as they separatists in Scotland and other Republicans in the UK do.
One final point, It was Ireland that raided Britains shores many centuries ago until the English and later British people fought back. They raided our western coast, raping and pillaging, good lord, they celebrate St Patricks day every year.. he was a slave taken from Great Britain by Irish raiders.
Imatt,
Yes i am aware of the links between the BNP and EDL, although some EDL members have tried hard to claim otherwise. As i said before i do not support EDL, i simply wanted to show if there was civil unrest it wouldnt just be those who support becoming a republic that might take to the streets.
Barry,
Common folk.
Ben,
I agree.
November 3rd, 2009 at 1:22 pm
I support the whole concept of government in Scotland and Wales, Simmon.
Because it is the right thing for those countries.
November 3rd, 2009 at 1:25 pm
And the Irish raided the western coast of whom? England or Wales?
Irish colonials went to Scotland. Just what history of Ireland is there of the invasion of Britain and for what?
Monarchy anywhere in the world is inherently evil. Remember that.
November 3rd, 2009 at 1:31 pm
Richard,
I support the devolved administrations in Scotland and Wales although i disagree with their implementation. When you say you support the whole concept of government in Scotland and Wales, are you saying you support the separatists? Those who would destroy this country? If thats the case its not a shock, i have come across many separatists on here.
The west coast of this island, all of which is now part of my country and has been for centuries. There is evidence of them raiding the west coast, like i say.. St Patrick was a taken by Irish raiders as a slave from Great Britain.
And yes the history of the Irish in Scotland is very clear. We only need look at Celtic football club and many of their supporters. Its not the Scottish flag they are waving, its the Irish tricolour
November 3rd, 2009 at 2:16 pm
@ Simon
Firstly I will apologise to Blogmaster that I am going off topic but I cannot let Simon get away with some of the most bigoted, uninformed and offensive claptrap I’ve ever come across.
In Simon’s previous contribution we get highly imflammatory and ignorant comments like:-
“I just wanted to highlight that unrest can, is and will be dealt with by the police who will ensure the Queen’s peace is preserved.”
Which again, chllingly informs us that, regardless of what he says he is not, Simon is obviously pro-fascist when it comes to denying freedom of expression. I suppose that civil unrest in his books is holding a placard, wearing a tee-shirt or talking to someone on a bus.
He then continues with this barmy, aggressive stance on the circumstances of Ireland:-
“We know the enemy in Northern Ireland are the Republicans”
What?!
“…to carry on with their silly one ireland dream…”
What?!!
“Irish republicans who are traitors to this country”
What??!!!
“However as the majority currently do not want that and wish to remain part of the United Kingdom”
…so says whom? The people in the WHOLE of Ireland? I think not.
“Those who seek to remove Northern Ireland from the United Kingdom are traitors”
I guess you are including all the parties who signed the Good Friday Agreement, including the British Government, then?
“It was Ireland that raided Britains shores many centuries ago”
I think that the last raids from Ireland were probably in the eighth century and then they were probably Vikings raiding the old Pro-Roman Briton territories. From the 11th century onwards, Ireland has been systematically raided and attacked by armies founded in Normandy, England or Britain. I am not being judgemental here, merely stating the facts.
I might suggest that in the interests of free speech and furthering his education that Simon would benefit from a trip to Ireland where in between visits to the Post Office in Dublin, (where he can examine the shrapnel marks on the building), Beale na Balth (the eerie roadside shrine where Michael Collins was shot dead) and Dublin Gaol (where the Irish prisoners were kept) he can openly discuss such comments with “traitorous” local people in any public house in Derry, Cork, Limerick or Tipperary.
Simon, old fruit. Your views are not only insulting to many of the people of these islands but are crass, ill-informed and dangerous. If you cannot add anything constructive to the debate by reasoned argument based on facts and not prejudice, please do not continue to post.
Simon is like a one of those one-man, cringing, politically-incorrect sitcoms from the 1960s and 1970s. A really bad dream. Whilst he espouses his views on these pages and is regularly outwitted by everyone who replies, I am very concerned to learn that the seedier of these narrow-minded and prejudicial views still exist.
November 3rd, 2009 at 7:27 pm
Simon,unfortunately,is rather prone to making sweeping statements, and repeating himself ad infinitum. He has a number of blind spots. He also complains that often republicans reject some of his ideas,( which is not surprising), but he is not prepared to do likewise when some stated republican or general truths are posited to him.They are not as bad as Neil Weldon’s remarks,however. Neil is a “wind up merchant”. I think Simon is sincere,and he does a lot of research, and has a lot of knowledge.He has a lot of time available for the blog, which some of us do not.Perhaps it is good to have Simon around so that we can sharpen our wits against his “arguments “. ? How would we get on without him? We would be just blogging amongst ourselves. However there are a number of ways we could react. We could get cross,of course,( I know the feeling), or we could try to ignore his comments. Finally, we should perhaps all chorus “GOD SAVE THE BRITISH REPUBLIC!” after each post !
November 4th, 2009 at 12:31 am
Simon,
Ireland was only truely part of Britian from the early 1800’s until 1921, and it was not from a desire that the Irish became part of the kingdom. Your views pregarding seperatists are based upon an autocratic model of governance. The central power, in this case Westminster based upon the monarchy are entitled to force and supress those who would see equality and free will prevail. The reason many on this blog would not oppose separation is not because they necessarily agree with it but because we recognise the right of each constitutent nation to determine is own path. While I think that separation would be a disaster for both Wales and Scotland, as a republican, and therefore someone who has the principles of political equality as part of their ethos, I would accept separation. You on the otherhand expect that the government can use violence to prevent any dissension and you justify it by forcing your views upon eveyrone while relying on some delusion view of the nation. Those in Northern Ireland who want to become part of the republic are not traitors because they we never given a choice whether to become or remain part of the UK. They are Irish and see no reason they should accept the monarchy and governance of a conqueror.
Everyone is entitled to determine their for of state and not to be forced to accept something that has not claim other than violence. Have you never considered that civil unrest is a result of an unrepsonive and unrepresentative system of government?
The BBC have done a good job with this but they should have advertised it more. People should know that they have the right to know what is going on withint the institutuions that govern our nation.
November 4th, 2009 at 12:39 am
I am not pro fascist, all i have said is civil unrest on the British streets is totally unacceptable and the Queens peace will preserved. None of the things you mention is what i would describe as civil unrest, i was associating that term with some form of violence to property or against the police.
You asked Whats about :
I was not trying to be rude there or associating Republicans here in Great Britain who just want the end of monarchy with Republicans in Ireland who use violence. I was Just pointing out the fact Republicanism is how we basically (rightly or wrongly) define those who want Northern Ireland to leave the UK and join the Republic of Ireland. Which is why if we all suddenly became Republicans it would complicate matters. Those who would seek to remove part of the United Kingdom be it Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland or sadly in Labours Britain even some in England are traitors to this country. The idea of a United Ireland is a dream of some people but its not a nice thought that part of our country would leave to join another state.
The whole of Ireland is just an island. The island is shared between two sovereign states the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland. It is for the people of Northern Ireland to decide their own future, both sovereign states respect this right so it is actually the wish of the WHOLE Ireland for the people of Northern Ireland to decide, and at the moment the majority in the North choose to remain part of the United Kingdom. If that changes in the future so be it.
Some do view the British government as betraying the people of Northern Ireland by agreeing to such terms, but they did the right thing as far as im concerned, although we could have got a few things sorted out before such an agreement and powersharing took place.
The fact remains Northern Ireland is still part of the United Kingdom the union flag is flown above certain government buildings. The British Army holds parades through the streets and the British Armed Forces day flag was raised above Belfast city hall. The separatists have been divided, the former IRA commander now says those people who use violence against the police are “traitors to the island of Ireland”.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yh0l1jA95Mk A classic clip that i shall never forget.
lol the worrying thing is i am a moderate! Young Nationalists be they Irish, British, Scottish, Welsh or even English today are pretty scary i must admit and many have strong views from a very young age. I get called all sorts of names by British nationalists because im reasonable on certain issues. I have even been called a traitor by certain British and English nationalists because of my moderate views so i do know how it feels.
November 4th, 2009 at 1:06 am
Sam,
I respect the right for each part of the United Kingdom to decide its own future. If the majority of Scottish people want independence, their wish will be respected, the same goes for Northern Ireland. I do not support the use of force to keep people part of the United Kingdom, although i expect any violence British streets to be dealt with by the security forces, with more extreme force if needed.
Im all for human rights and self determination, one thing i have never understood is where it will all end. The people of Scotland have a right to decide their own future, but what about the people of Cornwall? If the people of Cornwall can decide they no longer want to be part of England, then what next? A large city? a town? a street? Could Republic of Plinthland http://www.republic.org.uk/blog/?p=383 be given legal recognition?
Whilst i do not support the use of violence, i want the country i was born in to be the same one i live in for the rest of my life. I expect Her Majesty’s Government along with all other arms of the state to do everything within the law to ensure the continuation of this United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. I am not politically correct on this matter, Scotland is part of my country and if people think unionists are going to sit back and let a bunch of separatists destroy a union that has lasted over 300 years they have another thing coming.
Anyway i agree with you the BBC should have advertised it more, i dont know if they mentioned it on BBC news, i only heard it mentioned once on the daily politics show monday. I hope they make those 8 live feeds available via the red button on sky digital at some point.
November 4th, 2009 at 1:58 am
Simon,
Again you demonstrate that you only hold the views you because of what you want. You want to live in the United Kingdom, so all separatists and republicans have to put up with it. You do not nations to self determining so you support an electoral system and view of the world that maintians the stagnation. You have decided that separation will lead to many independent nations, which you don’t want, so no one is allowed to decide otherwise.
You do not provide any reason why others should agree with you, you only state your views and expect everyone else to accept them, whether they agree with them or not. People like you are the reason our nation is dying on it feet. You seek to maintain your own delusional vew of the world at everyone else’s expsense.
November 4th, 2009 at 3:02 am
I’ve noticed that whenever Simon posts his personal views, he is met with a barrage of juvinile, playground insults – especially by you, Bob. Just because you completely disagree with what he has to say, does not entitle you to attack him on a personal level and spew around a bunch of fallacious ad hominems.
How it does not surprise me that Republic protects its supportive members from abuse, yet does not provide the same treatment to dissenters and individuals who are not here to defend themselves (like the Queen). Let’s hope that your utopian vision of a British republic does not emulate the rather unbalanced, skewed governance within this message board.
November 4th, 2009 at 4:57 am
Me,
I think you will find that criticising Simon for only ever expressing personal views without an rational argument to support those views, and to counter the argument presented, is valid. Simon has made a number of contributions but recently they have become repetitive and unsupported expression of his personal desires.
If you or Simon would like to set out an ethical model of principles that supports the monarchy that would be great. If however you are to simply criticise without providing anything of substance, then you are wasting everyones time.
November 4th, 2009 at 5:04 am
Me,
Also you make a common error. Republic is not under the delusion that becoming a republic would create a utopia. But it would create a more principled and equal society than we currently have. No one has ever said that we would build a utopia. I suggest to check the accuracy of what you say first.
November 4th, 2009 at 9:06 am
@Me
As Sam has pointed out, our vision is not utopian. It is a very practical plan for a more democratic Britain.
If you have a complaint to make about a comment on this blog, please just get in touch – our contact details are easy to find. Just tell us the thread, the comment author and the comment number. We’ll then take a look and see if it contravenes our moderation policy.
The blog is post-moderated, which means that comments are always posted (unless they contain certain key words blocked by our spam filter). It may surprise you to learn that we don’t spend all day looking at the blog, so we rely on users to point out any comments that are abusive.
I should point out however that we very rarely delete comments. The blog’s been going for well over a year, and I personally have only deleted two in that time.
November 4th, 2009 at 10:27 am
@ Me and @ Simon – Yes, I apologize for making personal remarks about Simon, it’s not normally in my nature but he is so exasperating. So Simon, I hope you will accept my apology in the spirit it is intended.
November 4th, 2009 at 11:12 am
lol dont worry, i understand things can sometimes get heated. I am very thankful that James and Graham allow me to continue to post on this site, whilst i always show respect to others here i do sometimes go very off topic. This is because responding to blogs is fairly new to me, most of my time on the internet in the past has been on chat rooms and lobbies where there is instant conversation with no fixed subject.
I would like to question this one point though…
I think i mentioned this once before, but the same thing would apply to those with a belief in God. For those of us who have no faith in God or religion, we sometimes look on at religious people with bemusement because in the 21st century knowing all we do about science and our history we can not see any rational argument for the existence of some supreme power.
Now im not comparing Queen Elizabeth II to God but rational arguments do not stop the majority of this planets population having such faith, that faith is unshakable for many even as more and more of their religious claims are questioned by science. Even if there was no good arguments at all for keeping the monarchy, i would still see Queen Elizabeth II as my Queen, and never just “Ms Windsor”. Its just the way things are.
November 4th, 2009 at 11:26 am
Simon,
I accept your point regarding the irrational nature of religious faith, but a system of government should not be irrational or reliant upon emotional responses. Government should be the most well thought out and balanced system we can acheive. For this reason neither the monarchy nor religion have any place in social governance.
November 4th, 2009 at 12:12 pm
So then ‘ME’, did you have a comment to make about the BBC launching ‘Democracy Live’ or, since you are on a republican website, would you like to present a cogent argument in favour of the monarchy, or indeed republicanism?
‘Simon’ is responsible for nearly one third of the 46 posts on this thread. As a consequence you might conclude that he is perfectly able to answer for himself. Do you appear on any other websites, commenting only on format and the standards of other bloggers, presumably decided by you?
November 4th, 2009 at 12:53 pm
Simon, I’m sorry, but you’re nothing more than a fascist.
If you wish to be a monarchist, then that’s up to you. But what you seem to want is compulsory monarchy worship from everyone.
You need to understand that this is a FREE country, and if people wish to ignore the monarchy or openly attack the institution then this is perfectly acceptable.
Doesn’t it speak volumes about the state of our country’s democracy when a democratically elected politician can get thrown out of a democratic institution for the crime of referring to somebody as “Mrs. Windsor”.
November 4th, 2009 at 1:16 pm
Sam,
Ive offered suggestions on how we could address such concerns whilst keeping the monarchy.
NorthernMonkey,
I am not a fascist, although i do believe in the Rule of Law and that the Queens peace must be maintained. This is a free country, but you do not have a right to yell “fire” in a cinema without being kicked out. This lady was not thrown out of the Welsh assembly because she opposed the monarchy, she was thrown out because she was disrespectful to her Queen. This would not be restricted to calling the Queen something though, there are protocols in all parliaments and assemblies. My goodness in the house of commons you get told off if you refer to anyone by their name. They have to use terms like Honourable member or state the persons constituency.
I have never said it should be compulsory for people to support the monarchy, let alone that monarchy worship should be compulsory lol.
I do not think it speaks volumes about the state of our democracy, i think it speaks volumes about the state of some politicians and political parties. I mentioned it before but this woman has form, she was arrested for causing trouble outside a British military base and shes clearly more interested at advancing her separatist views and own party than Wales and helping the Welsh people.
November 4th, 2009 at 2:25 pm
@ Simon
Take a break from your baseless rantings and let’s look at some facts….. The OED Concise says:-
Fascist – “extreme right-wing, authoritarian, or intolerant views or practice”.
That description fits you to a tee. Here’s just one example to support that from your earlier blog:-
“It is for the people of Northern Ireland to decide their own future” which is factually wrong, by the way but never mind. and then you say:-
“Those who would seek to remove part of the United Kingdom be it Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland or sadly in Labours Britain even some in England are traitors to this country.
Quite clearly you are saying let’s have a “free vote” but if I don’t like the outcome, you’re all traitors (and no doubt subject to the punishment and veiled threats that you’ve espoused elsewhere in these blogs).
You just saying you are not a fascist doesn’t mean that you are not a fascist. If it talks like fascist, thinks like a fascist and would deny a free opinion elsewhere like a fascist, it’s probably a fascist.
The word comes from the Latin fasces which are the bundles of sticks that were originally used to beat people who dared step out of line. This symbol was adopted by the Italian fascists of the 1930s, including Mussolini.
So, Simon, you are in good company there. But I bet if the Queen really “came to power” on your watch, at least the trains would no doubt run on time.
November 4th, 2009 at 2:58 pm
We’re thinking we’ll call her the hereditary experiment from now on.
November 4th, 2009 at 3:50 pm
Martin
Umm sorry but i would not fit into a category of extreme right wing in this country. Right wing yes, but extreme? I dont think so but thats open to ones own understanding of the term, the same with the other things you said. If i was extreme right wing, maybe id support the BNP? but i hate their radical policies.
I mean it is their choice if they want to remain part of the United Kingdom or leave and join the Republic of Ireland.
No what im saying is the people of England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland will have the right to decide their own future, if they want “independence” they can vote for parties at general elections who support that. Such people are traitors, but i am not saying they should be punished, im just not going to be politically correct when describing what they are. They aint nationalists, they are separatists and traitors to the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. I have never threated anyone, nor suggested violence should be used in any way. All i have said is if violence is used by any group, be it a far right group or separatists or republicans or environmental extremists, they must be dealt with by the security forces. The Queen’s Peace must be maintained.
true, just the way you saying i am a fascist doesnt make me a fascist.
Thanks i never knew that, although to point out how i am not extreme far right, i do not support the death penalty and i do not advocate the reintroduction of corporal punishment. Many would consider me too soft.
Lmao of course. It would certainly make solving alot of our problems alot easier. Your comment made me think of an article from a few weeks ago that i read.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/caribbean/news/story/2009/08/090814_tci_direct_rule.shtml
I am sure the Governor who represents the Queen will do a good job in cleaning up the mess for the good of the people. It sort of saves time doesnt it lol? Not that i would support such a step happening here without the people voting for it before i get called all sorts of things
.
November 4th, 2009 at 4:07 pm
Marjory
I think you need to expand on your last comment.
It doesn’t seem to have any relevance to the subject of BBc Democracy Live. Perhaps you’re just trolling.
Paul
November 4th, 2009 at 10:53 pm
Simon,
My point was that as a matter of principle the monarchy cannot be the basis of a system of government, because of the irrational and illogical way the system operates, never mind the anti-democratic and elitist system it positively represents. That is why the monarchy must be removed and why reform without abolition fails to achieve the aims of a new foundation for the nation.
Paul,
Yet again you do not make point. You only ever seem to make comments of other people’s posts. If anything you are the one who is trolling.
November 4th, 2009 at 11:36 pm
@ Simon
I give up.
You are as mad as a frog but I’m not sure if that’s by accident or intent.
November 5th, 2009 at 2:05 am
SIMON – ” But I bet if the Queen really ‘came to power’ on your watch, at least the trains would no doubt run on time.
Lmao of course. It would certainly make solving alot of our problems alot easier. ”
Hello Simon, it’s me again, I’m trying to remain calm mate, so can you please elaborate on how, if the queen comes to power on your watch, it would certainly make solving a lot of our problems a lot easier? Or are you just gaming about as usual?
November 5th, 2009 at 10:57 am
“People from all walks of life do care about equality and fairness, but it doesnt stop most of them from supporting the monarchy” – Simon
Did anyone else spot the contradiction?
November 5th, 2009 at 11:00 am
Haven’t we had enough now of Simon’s personal reverie in his land of knights, queens, castles and fabulous realms?
This guy is actually prepared to discuss degrees of right-wing ‘extremeness’ in the cause of defending himself for heaven’s sake. Even a cursory reading suggests that THIS is all about Simon and little else.
November 5th, 2009 at 12:08 pm
Very well, let us then get back to James’s original question of what we think of the clip.
It was easier for her opponents to ask her to withdraw her comments than reply to what came earlier. You could argue it was a Red Herring fallacy. It definitely was a disgrace.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/democracylive/hi/historic_moments/newsid_8194000/8194152.stm
November 5th, 2009 at 2:19 pm
“You could argue it was a Red Herring fallacy.” Ash
Absolutely. One plucked from the armoury of chicanery and obfuscation some of these people resort to.
November 5th, 2009 at 3:49 pm
Sam ,
There is logic to having an neutral non political head of state rather than an elected head of state who divides people far more and one we do not have to vote on every few years. Although even if it was illogical i would still think the monarchy is something we should keep for the sake of tradition. As Tim put it in his response to me. I want to live in a..”land of knights, queens, castles and fabulous realms ”
Martin
I addressed all your points in a serious way although i couldnt resist having a little fun on the final point about the trains running on time.
Bob
His comment was made in jest as was my response. However whilst i do not advocate or support “absolute monarchy”, there clearly would be some benefits. Im a fan of politics and government matters. The trouble with government is theres too much politics involved it makes progress so slow. Take the incident i mentioned about one of the British Overseas Territories having direct rule restored and its constitution partly suspended. That is not some evil act by Her Majesty’s Government and the Governor representing the Queen. It is to clean up the mess swiftly, to sort out the problems without too much politics getting in the way.
The bit about the trains running on time was a joke, we can not expect mircales, but we could take action and solve many of our problems.
Tim
I have reasons why i support the monarchy, others have their reasons. The bottom line of course is the majority do support it for one reason or another. Ive mentioned why i support it, ive gone into great detail on certain points.
As for defending myself, when i see something incorrect i will defend myself yes. I am not extreme far right, under no normal definition in this country would i be fitted into such a political group. I am very moderate although i do swing to the right on quite a few issues, but not the far right
Ash
Her speech just highlights what sort of radical she is, it was such a silly rant.
November 5th, 2009 at 4:25 pm
Simon’s last post about himself. Note the 22 instances of ‘I’, ‘me’ or ‘my[self]‘…
November 5th, 2009 at 5:27 pm
Tim,
I speak for myself, not the majority of the British people who support the monarchy. Also of course when im being called a fascist or as mad as a frog, i tend to have to defend myself more than i expected.
November 5th, 2009 at 7:48 pm
Absolutely. One plucked from the armoury of chicanery and obfuscation some of these people resort to. – Tim
It also partially debunks the myth that Labour are Anti-monarch.
November 5th, 2009 at 9:16 pm
“It also partially debunks the myth that Labour are Anti-monarch.” Ash
Yes, and it also calls into question the vestiges of Labour’s left-wing agenda, which lies in tatters. Any seriously socialist government claiming to be capable of reforming the House of Lords would have done so by now. Twelve years after campaigning on this issue, amongst others, they have made virtually no meaningful progress. What does this tell you about the pressures from the current ‘establishment’?
Increasingly it seems to matter less and less who is in government and what manifestos they run with. Nothing will be done, in the name of equality and popular democratic empowerment, by any of these people. With one or two notable exceptions they are ALL plugged in to the concept of monarchy and the ring of steel that keeps it firmly in place.
You might be forgiven for thinking that some socialist MPs would seriously oppose the honours system. Not a bit of it, as one by one they are seduced by privilege, awards and ermine, carefully utilised to magnify their own notions of importance. It allows them influence and
access and although unelected to feel relevant. At least Leanne Wood is not afraid to speak her mind. We need root and branch reforms, beginning with the removal of the top of the undeserving pyramid and working downwards. A republic is the first step.
November 5th, 2009 at 10:27 pm
Sorry tim but its this same bunch of people that you are going to have us elect to head of state if we become a republic.
November 6th, 2009 at 12:40 am
@Mr.Cooper and all posters:
“With one or two notable exceptions they are ALL plugged in to the concept of monarchy and the ring of steel that keeps it firmly in place.
You might be forgiven for thinking that some socialist MPs would seriously oppose the honours system. Not a bit of it, as one by one they are seduced by privilege, awards and ermine, carefully utilised to magnify their own notions of importance. It allows them influence and
access and although unelected to feel relevant. At least Leanne Wood is not afraid to speak her mind. We need root and branch reforms, beginning with the removal of the top of the undeserving pyramid and working downwards. A republic is the first step.”
If the Bible were to be written today, and the Apostle John was to put it together, the above will be one of the Gospels in it.
November 6th, 2009 at 12:58 am
Yes, and it also calls into question the vestiges of Labour’s left-wing agenda, which lies in tatters.
Who would you say represents the left the best, or is it about picking the best of a worst bunch?
The Conservatives are the party at the moment that are apparently adamant that the people should have a say in how we’re governed.
I sent a request today asking them if they really meant it and asked them for a Referendum on the Head of state.
http://www.conservatives.com/Information/Contact_Us.aspx
November 6th, 2009 at 1:37 am
Ash
There is a big difference between keeping the status quo, and transfering British sovereignty to a foreign entity. The two things do not even compare.
November 6th, 2009 at 10:28 am
Why refer to Mrs. Mountbatten simply as “H.M. the Queen”? She has much grander titles at her disposal. I think we go with this one:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paramount_Chief_of_Fiji
November 6th, 2009 at 11:41 am
“Sorry tim but its this same bunch of people that you are going to have us elect to head of state if we become a republic.” Simon
This is nonsense.
November 6th, 2009 at 12:42 pm
David,
I think her greatest title is Lord of Man
Tim,
You were the one talking down the MPs we elect. These people would decide who they want to be our president, even if we had the elected head of state by national vote.. theyd need parties to support them and give them a green light. The candidate that wins would most likely be more in line with the popular party of the day. So between 1997 – 2001 when we were for some reason all loving labour, wed of elected someone blair wanted to be president, if he didnt want the job himself.
November 6th, 2009 at 2:44 pm
“These people would decide who they want to be our president..[etc etc] Simon
Not listening any more Simon. You are a troll.
November 7th, 2009 at 11:43 pm
Forget any of those titles, Mrs Windsor will do.
I love it how the Monarchists get their knickers in a twist when they hear her called by her proper title, yet the same camp, in order to boost their own low self esteem give one of her grandchildren’s partner the babyish nickname “Waity Katie”.
Do you think the Feudal camp would dare give Her such a sickly and babyish nickname if she actually marries into this family?
Let’s hear it for Wizzy Lizze, Andy Pandy & Steady Eddie? I think not!