bussnapperwm
Established Member
- Joined
- 18 May 2014
- Messages
- 1,509
We all know that at the moment, political manifestos are bigger works of fiction than a JK Rowling novel, politicians promising the earth during campaign season, and delivering peanuts when push comes to shove.
Do You think it's about time that the party (or coalition) that gets a majority should be legally obliged to fulfil all of their manifesto promises after an election should they get in government.
As has been seen by the latest government, the Tories put the following key highlights in their 2017 manifesto:
On the other had a legal case from 2008 shows why none of the parties have any legal obligation to fulfil these pledges – and why judges will never force them to do so.
Helpfully highlighted by legal blogger Jack of Kent, the case of R (Wheeler) v Office of the Prime Minister will cast those manifesto bungs in a slightly different light.
Way back in 2004, Tony Blair had promised Parliament a referendum on whether Britain should ratify the new EU constitution.
That document died after “no” votes in France and the Netherlands, and by the time it reached Britain in late 2007, it had transmogrified into the Lisbon Treaty.
This time, both Blair and Gordon Brown made clear there would be no referendum – so a member of the public decided to sue the government for the breach of a promise.
There have been petitions made to the government about this, however they were closed as failing to get enough signatures.
But the question is, who would enforce these "promises" happening, as the courts and politics don't add up well, as seen in the Prorogation scandal earlier this year.
So do you think party manifesto promises should be legally binding for the winners, meaning potentially more realistic manifestos, or do you think it should be left well alone
Sources:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/election-2017-39960311
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ge...ans-for-breaking-their-election-promises.html
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/231586
Do You think it's about time that the party (or coalition) that gets a majority should be legally obliged to fulfil all of their manifesto promises after an election should they get in government.
As has been seen by the latest government, the Tories put the following key highlights in their 2017 manifesto:
- Real terms increases in NHS spending reaching £8bn extra per year by 2022/23
- Scrapping the triple-lock on the state pension after 2020, replacing it with a "double lock", rising with earnings or inflation
- Means test winter fuel payments, taking away £300 from wealthier pensioners
- Raising cost of care threshold from £23,000 to £100,000 - but include value of home in calculation of assets for home care as well as residential care
- Scrap free school lunches for infants in England, but offer free breakfasts across the primary years
- Pump an extra £4bn into schools by 2022
- Net migration cut to below 100,000
- Increase the amount levied on firms employing non-EU migrant workers
On the other had a legal case from 2008 shows why none of the parties have any legal obligation to fulfil these pledges – and why judges will never force them to do so.
Helpfully highlighted by legal blogger Jack of Kent, the case of R (Wheeler) v Office of the Prime Minister will cast those manifesto bungs in a slightly different light.
Way back in 2004, Tony Blair had promised Parliament a referendum on whether Britain should ratify the new EU constitution.
That document died after “no” votes in France and the Netherlands, and by the time it reached Britain in late 2007, it had transmogrified into the Lisbon Treaty.
This time, both Blair and Gordon Brown made clear there would be no referendum – so a member of the public decided to sue the government for the breach of a promise.
There have been petitions made to the government about this, however they were closed as failing to get enough signatures.
But the question is, who would enforce these "promises" happening, as the courts and politics don't add up well, as seen in the Prorogation scandal earlier this year.
So do you think party manifesto promises should be legally binding for the winners, meaning potentially more realistic manifestos, or do you think it should be left well alone
Sources:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/election-2017-39960311
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ge...ans-for-breaking-their-election-promises.html
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/231586