New petition please...
Anyone care to start the one asknig all our current MPs to resign, so we can clear out the arrogant mindset which seems so prevalent there? Time for a clean sweep, I think.
Shocking news from the home of 10 Downing Street's e-petitions site, Prime Minister Gordon Brown is not going to resign. Reg reader Kalvis posted a petition calling for Gordy to go back in April, when to be fair it was looking quite likely. Well over 72,000 people agreed with this sentiment and added their support to the …
Anyone care to start the one asknig all our current MPs to resign, so we can clear out the arrogant mindset which seems so prevalent there? Time for a clean sweep, I think.
Merely an excuse to spend money to give the outward appearance that it makes the slightest bit of difference what you and I think - until they come knocking on our doors at election time...
Perhaps the public would be better served by bringing back the concept of Guy Fawkes. After all, if there's ever a day to do it, it's today!
AC, once again, for fear of government terror powers...
10/10 for creative English. "well over" makes such a big figure out of... <drum roll> 0.12% of the country's population.
..and in classic politician style, he's managed to avoid actually ANSWERING the poll and just published a few words saying what he is trying to do...
It didn't say that he refused to resign anywhere there. T'was one of his usual wishy-washy non-committal answers.
Anyone hear about his interview with mumsnet last month? He couldn't even decide on his favourite biscuit! (try http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/gordon-brown/6353129/Gordon-Brown-keeps-silent-on-favourite-biscuit.html)
Apparently 12 days after the interview he sent mumsnet a set of biscuits and a hand written note saying these were *definitely* his favourites - 12 DAYS! This guy is running our country FFS! If it takes him 12 days to decide on a biscuit no wonder we're going to the dogs!
Rant over, sorry =P
robert peston. read it. then, re-read brown's comments re: a fairer britain. lies, etc.
They are professional liars all of them.
72000 isn't 0.12% of the population. It doesn't take into account.
Foreigners and non engish speaking people who only care where the next benefit comes from.
The great unclean who would rather be watching Emmerdale or Corry and letting their kids trawl for porn or facebook than actually thinking about politics.
The majority if ignorrant people that don't care how much is wasted, that actually believe anything about the NHS being okay (Trust me, it isn't) or that our armed forces are getting enough cash, guns, helicopters.
Also it doesn't take into account the % that doesn't go online for anything other than an occasional bill, simply because it costs more for paper billing now.
Nor does it take into account the HUGE % of people that really don't care for politics, because even if Stalin Brown goes, the replacements are just as stained.
AC because the Government is watching.
though I'd prefer a Harder, Better, Faster, Stronger Britain.
Having discovered on the old braindrain box yesterday that Irish unionists managed to get half a million signatures back in the early years of last century without the aid of things like phones and the internet, it really makes you realise how crap these things are. oooo 72,000 people what an impressive number!! -.-
I signed it and got that blathering drivel by email. I would have preferred it if he's just replied "No." It would have been much more honest and informative.
If you get a million people to protest against the government, they will be a vocal minority who don't represent the views of the whole population.
If you get 10,000 people to stand up and agree with the government, it will be a clear display of the strong support present among the general public.
i put in a petition for the UK to invest in flying cars once and got a decent amount of votes and the bloody politicans gave me a wishy washy reponse. That site is useless! USELESS!
... perhaps because many people dont waste their time adding their name to the government's trouble maker list.
Having signed for the sacking of Jaqui Smith among other petitions and all of them being totally ignored (as the government does with ALL information it is given and does not pull from it's collecive a*rsehole), I spend my time plotting my escape from this undemocratic farce of a country rather than writing things on the internet with the mis-belief that someone cares...
(oh wait.. thats what this is .. .)
that would not get past my spam filter
Seems he was never asked, Mumsnet fed questions to him, but not the frivolous ones. If you read his chat ( I just did), it's boring political posturing, which is why the news became the lack of an answer to their biscuit meme.
But it's a crap petition arranged by some braindead posturing moron
Pure meaningless gestures by the self-abusers who brought you Clarkson for PM
At least the No10 office answer to the later was funny mind
---> 72000 isn't 0.12% of the population. It doesn't take into account.
---> Foreigners and non engish speaking people who only care where the next benefit comes from.
---> The great unclean who would rather be watching Emmerdale or Corry and letting their kids trawl for porn or facebook than actually thinking about politics.
---> The majority if ignorrant people....
You might not be a foreigner but you could do with some benefit money... could be your chance to go to school and learn how to spell.
I would say that 72k is a pathetically low number considering that no-one was checking if you were actually a british citizen and therefore it's 72k out of 6 billion... (if 6G people cared about the british government - which of course they don't)
Finally: I don't like the Register's endorsement of the tories.
That's just a daft, punk idea.
Gordon's vision is about as far reaching as his sight and quite why we tolerate the arrogant idiot pontificating to the media crowd as if he was some sort of oracle rather than being decried and summarily dismissed as an oafish ogre is down to a failed Intelligence Service and a Round Table of Jessies.
If it didn't have such politically incorrect connotations, I'd be calling them all Frightened Fairies.
6 billion would mean your asking for the global population, for the british population I think you need millions ;)
I personally think GBrown has just been VERY unlucky with the situation hes been dropped in.
The world recession was not his fault and to be fair I think hes doing a pretty good job of keeping things completely out of the sh1t.
I dont imagine that putting Cameron in GBrown's position would have resulted in a better situation everything else being equal, in fact I fear it would probably be a lot worse.
Quite frankly when the election comes I honestly don't know if people will vote him out. So far things have remained stable since everything went out of his control, and they do look as if they are slightly improving now.
More often than not you will find that situations like this don't come about because of one single person but as the result of idiots collaboratively cocking things up.. think about your own work lives and you will probably see that its generally down to miscommunication or crappy leadership somewhere along the chain of command.
You might just get what you want.
One of the things that's come out of the expenses whitewash^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hreview is that they're ending the system where an MP standing down gets a huge payoff, but they're postponing this change 'til after the election.
So any MP who resigns this time round will get a big fat bung and any who decide to try for another term, er, won't. Will the last one out please turn off the lights......?
Wow - I think I can see your method here. You pointed out a word misspelt by the target of your attack. Clever. You really have him in the grip of reason there. Astounding skill in dismantling his argument, I'd say.
As for "Finally: I don't like the Register's endorsement of the tories." You are kidding. El Reg hates everyone equally. The fact that this pathetic shambles of a so-called government is a total failure means that all coverage is likely to look negativ.
PS I misspelt "negative" so you'd have a chance to point it out.
PPS It's "Tories" not "tories"
PPPS It's "The Register" not "the Register"
PPPPS etc, etc
...you'll be accused of ``bein a dirty furriner'' by, er, spelling correctly.
It's the one with the resident alien barcode sewn on and the biscuits in the pocket.
Introduce the lot of them to the likes of Madam Guillotine I say!
Brown is a traitor in my eyes for promising a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty then going ahead and signing it anyway.
I hope there is a circle of hell reserved just for him.
(And breath in and relax)
"The Prime Minister is completely focused on restoring the economy, getting people back to work and improving standards in public services."
Like some politician in an office with the money press his only asset could actually do that.
"...that actually believe anything about the NHS being okay..."
Actually there is far more right with it than wrong.
Before you talk bull*it about the NHS, you should try ANY of the ones in other countries. It would shock you out of your complacency.
Since when was the UK population 6 billion people?
Maybe the global population is around that number but last time I looked Mr Brown wasn't running the world.
...for a PM who was actually democratically elected. That an outgoing PM can simply hand the office over to his mate to have a play with is fucking obscene.
And no, I didn't agree with it when John Major got in on a similar ticket, but he did at least get his own mandate at the next election, which is more than the fat gawping chancer we've got at the moment is going to manage.
"As the Prime Minister has consistently said, he is determined to build a stronger, fairer, better Britain for all."
So he IS going? I'm confused.
You defend Brown with: "More often than not you will find that situations like this don't come about because of one single person but as the result of idiots collaboratively cocking things up.. think about your own work lives and you will probably see that its generally down to miscommunication or crappy leadership somewhere along the chain of command."
Surely some mistake here? Gordon is the one giving "crappy leadership".
And, as for the global problem, he was on the ropes before that hit. Remember his pathetic vacillation about an election when he ... er.... wasn't influenced by the polls? Don't rewrite history.
I can't understand why anyone would make the assumption that a petition site operated by the government would act in support of people opposed to the government.
As Kryten once said: "That's a bit of a barmy notion, sir, if you don't mind me saying so."
As I understand it, the petitions are only 'official' in the sense that some poor flunky in some office somewhere is tasked with reading the latest whinges from everyone with a gripe, a net connection and an awareness that the site exists.
Bear in mind that most people probably *don't* know it exists, so are unlikely to add their names to it. Of those who do, many won't care, assuming - rightly - that it will have no bearing on anything. Some will assume - as jeremy 3 pointed out - that a petition such as this is nothing more than a way to declare yourself hostile to the Government. Which is no problem until 'They' find some excuse (war, terrorism, financial crisis, plague, whatever) to suspend elections and institute further 'security' legislation.
Online government petitions mean nothing, affect nothing, do nothing. They're a sop to the concept of public consultation. They're just time-sinks. Get people to sign one of these and they *feel* as though they've aired their grievance, even though they might just as well have gone into the forest (if they can find one) and shouted it at the trees. It's a bit like the BBC website's constant invitations for us to 'have our say': it's a way of making the reader feel involved without actually having to pay any attention to them.
(And the Reg is a similar case (sorry, Onionman, you'll just have to live with it): we legions of commentards post endless opinion, assertion, accusation and insult, apparently confident in the knowledge that the authors of Reg articles hang on our every word. Barring the illustrious Sarah, of course, who appears to be paid, at least in part, to wade through all our drivel and make sure we're not saying anything that'd actually get the Reg sued, I'd be surprised if anyone at Vulture Central gives half a monkey's what we think about anything. Comments, I'm sure, are read predominantly by other commenters in a sort of free-access Usenet substitute.)
But an online petition isn't useless *only* because the people who invite the petitions - in this case the government - aren't actually bothered about what 70-odd thousand people think; it's useless because of the fundamental nature of online petitions: anyone can be anyone online. You could sign the petition as many times as you like under as many names as you see fit. You don't have to give your correct details. There's no checking involved. So an online petition signed by half the population can, by definition, carry no more weight than a single badly-spelt anonymised email sent to 10 Downing Street in green text. It can't - otherwise there's the potential for one sufficiently determined person to have a direct influence on national policy. Even pen-and-paper petitions have this problem to an extent, but it's far greater online.
Incidentally, to all those ripping into AC 16:07:
Putting aside the crowing about how criticising spelling means you've lost the argument (which is true only if you have nothing to offer besides), a couple of people have picked 16:07 up on the point that there aren't six billion people in Britain. This is true, but 16:07 knew that perfectly well, and that was the point:
"72k is a pathetically low number considering that no-one was checking if you were actually a british citizen and therefore it's 72k out of 6 billion"
To put it another way, since there was no nationality checking, anyone in the world - current population somewhat over six billion - could potentially have signed that petition. From that point of view, the petition represents the views of (at an absolute maximum) 72,000 people out of six billion.
"I personally think GBrown has just been VERY unlucky with the situation hes been dropped in.
The world recession was not his fault......."
I think youre probably right, but he was very quick to claim credit when it was all going so well.
"No more boom and bust...." "Britain is well placed to weather a recession..."
" and to be fair I think hes doing a pretty good job of keeping things completely out of the sh1t."
That is just demonstrably not true. US, France and Germany are out of recession. We are not. How can you possibly support him or even believe anything he has ever said?
"I dont imagine that putting Cameron in GBrown's position would have resulted in a better situation everything else being equal, in fact I fear it would probably be a lot worse."
Probably not. But the key is the words "putting Cameron in Gbrowns position". You have hinted at democracy there. No-one ever put brown in his position, not even his own party. He was elected as MP for Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath, then annointed himself leader of the labour party and by extension prime minister. There was no internal election. And thats his problem. He has no mandate to govern. You, and others like you are supporting government without the will of the people. History shows us that that is almost never a good thing. The only thing that keeps GB in charge is his own resolve and thirst for power. As Plato taught us, "He who does not desire power is fit to hold it." In any form of meaningful government, the converse also holds true.
We need something like the following but for the UK
"Foreigners and non engish speaking people who only care where the next benefit comes from."
Yeah, all foreigners in this country are squeezing every last benefit out of this country that they can aren't they? Must tell my wife that, because we've been missing out on our claim.
Let's be honest, you're one of the ignorrant [sic] people.
Two comments on the fact that I should haven't used 6 billion when I explained why! ... and this site is supposed to be for people working in IT!!!
IF (poll checks your nationality)
THEN potential poll entrants == 60 million (give or take)
ELSE potential poll entrants == 6 billion (give or take)
Since there was no check on nationality a David Cameron's fan from Australia could easily be in that list of 72k signatures.
Do all 6 billion people have an internet connection?
Do all 6 billion people speak English? (yes they could use a translator... but WHY would they bother)
and last but definitely not least: Does anyone outside the UK care who our prime minister is? No, no they don't.
The total number of people who could have signed the petition is several billion less than 6 billion, I would say. Honestly did you guys leave your common sense at the door when you came in?
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2017