Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Social > Jet Blast
Reload this Page >

UK Politics Hamsterwheel MkII

Jet Blast Topics that don't fit the other forums. Rules of Engagement apply.

UK Politics Hamsterwheel MkII

Old 24th Sep 2019, 21:00
  #10561 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Wolverhampton
Posts: 1
Originally Posted by Sallyann1234 View Post
Must say I love her beautiful spider broach.
Yes - a lovely, ironic choice. Quite deliberate, I'd say. Good on her.
sixchannel is offline  
Old 24th Sep 2019, 21:02
  #10562 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Wolverhampton
Posts: 1
Originally Posted by charliegolf View Post
I see that the AG has gone under the bus in order that the Cummings Crew can say Boris, 'acted in good faith, and on legal advice'. Shirley could only have come from Downing Street?

CG
Always felt Cummins became PM. Johnson merely Popo The Puppet.

Last edited by sixchannel; 24th Sep 2019 at 21:33.
sixchannel is offline  
Old 25th Sep 2019, 06:44
  #10563 (permalink)  
Thought police antagonist
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Where I always have been...firmly in the real world
Posts: 64
It was always going to be interesting as to how certain rags reported yesterdays ( unanimous.....just thought I'd mention that rather salient word ) decision.

The Mail is in third place here....followed by the Sun. Who would have guessed so many of the readership were capable of dialling a phone number !....but, the undisputed winner ?....step forward the Excess with headlines that will shurely resonate with so many on here......whilst happily ignoring the fact Boris hasn't exactly come out of this smelling of roses, only the substance that, ostensibly, sticks to shovels and comes in useful for growing roses

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-the-papers-49820055
Krystal n chips is offline  
Old 25th Sep 2019, 06:46
  #10564 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Hampshire
Age: 73
Posts: 820
charliegolf: It is ironic you should use the Boris and buses metaphor. The company in N. Ireland that builds the so-called "Boris bus" is about to go bust.
Orac: This "Supreme Court interfering in politics" mantra is totally bogus. Are you suggesting that Parliament and its members should be immune to the law? That sounds awfully like dictatorships past and present around the world. And you know, as we all do, that the Supreme Court ruled not on the politics but on the legality of the government's actions. I hope that soon we may see another court ruling on the legality of Boris's actions vis a vis a bit of American crumpet.
KelvinD is offline  
Old 25th Sep 2019, 07:01
  #10565 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: The Winchester
Posts: 5,936
I see this quote is doing the rounds this AM..

What now? We have been used to freedom for a long time. You know we can't have freedom without a rule of law. This is a thing I'm always saying to countries who come out of tyranny. You can't have unconstrained freedom, you have to have a rule of law. And you know, my friends, the most difficult thing is to explain what a rule of law is, as distinct from just an oppressive law. They say, well we've got a lot of regulations, the government makes them, the government dictates to us. That's not what a rule of law is, I say. It's having wise judges who decide fairly and whose decisions are taken and honoured. It's having your laws made in a parliament which is accountable to the people and which you know are going to be honourably administered. That's why we don't just call it law, we call it a rule of law. You cannot have freedom without a rule of law, and that is the most difficult thing, I think, to get into countries that have never known it. And if you don't have it, what you tend to get is corruption and that is death to freedom, it's death to truth, it's death to honour, it's death to democracy. We need to bring over to the West people from countries who have not known a rule of law, who have not known independent judges, who have not known the free debate that we have, we should bring them over so that they can, in fact, see what happens in this country.
It's part of this speech..........

https://www.margaretthatcher.org/document/108365
wiggy is offline  
Old 25th Sep 2019, 07:54
  #10566 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,935
So, Parliament recalled. For what? To spend another three years telling each other what they donít want? With a collective uselessness crossing all political boundaries. Lets send every last one of them to cleaning duties in the nearby hospital.
ShotOne is offline  
Old 25th Sep 2019, 08:09
  #10567 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Southwold
Age: 68
Posts: 58
That is typical of those who don't understand the workings of parliament. But if you send people a riddle wrapped in mystery inside an enigma don't be surprised if you don't get a sensible answer. And don't forget that if you do get an answer it is now very likely to be the one in response to the question asked by Theresa May and not answered then by Boris, JRM and the political amoeba such as Francois and Bridgen.
Effluent Man is offline  
Old 25th Sep 2019, 09:06
  #10568 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 10,984
Orac: This "Supreme Court interfering in politics" mantra is totally bogus.
Charles Day (the pseudonym for their legal commentator, a QC,) in the Spectator, doesnít agree. And there is fevered discussion on many legal and constitutional blogs.

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/0...ional-outrage/
ORAC is offline  
Old 25th Sep 2019, 09:15
  #10569 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 2,471
An unwritten constitution has many advantages - such as flexibility - but it depends on people agreeing the unwritten ground rules

when someone comes in who is determined to do what they want whatever the cost the wheels come off
Asturias56 is offline  
Old 25th Sep 2019, 09:22
  #10570 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: England
Posts: 31
There's always the favourite leavers phrase to fall back on....'you lost, get over it.'
Grayfly is offline  
Old 25th Sep 2019, 09:25
  #10571 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: Vantaa, Finland
Posts: 0
From an engineering viewpoint an unwritten constitution does not exist.
Aihkio is offline  
Old 25th Sep 2019, 09:25
  #10572 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: French Alps
Posts: 326
Supreme Court interfering in politics : pity this objection wasn't raised before the case was brought before the Supreme Court, and not after the judgment.

Had the ruling be different, would have the Court "interfered" ?
Fly Aiprt is offline  
Old 25th Sep 2019, 09:27
  #10573 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 141
Originally Posted by ShotOne View Post
So, Parliament recalled. For what? To spend another three years telling each other what they donít want? With a collective uselessness crossing all political boundaries. Lets send every last one of them to cleaning duties in the nearby hospital.
They are funded by us, the taxpayers.

A very, very large number of MPs could be seen as "Benefit Scroungers" who are simply attempting to delay the day that they loose their 'benefits'.

Cleaning duties in the nearby hospital would be seen by many as far more productive work than they are doing now for their existing huge remuneration that is paid by us, the taxpayers. And they would have to do a lot of cleaning to 'pay back' their existing MP's salary (which is about five times a hospital cleaner's pay).
NoelEvans is offline  
Old 25th Sep 2019, 09:30
  #10574 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Hampshire
Age: 73
Posts: 820
Much as I don't like Corbyn as Labour party leader, I have to say, in his defence, he is the only politician thus far to have come up with a sensible proposal re the Brexit/Referendum conundrum. He is proposing his party would negotiate with the EU, then return to the UK and have a referendum with 2 choices; 1) Exit the EU under the terms tentatively agreed with the EU (and ensuring the terms are spelled out to the electorate) and 2) Cancel the whole thing, remain within the UE (and ensuring the consequences of remaining are spelled out to the electorate).
Media savages and party hacks refer to this as being uncommitted or unable to make up his mind. These people are crying that Labour should adopt a Go/Leave stance and fight a General Election on that basis. At least Corbyn's proposal will have the electorate telling the politicians what to do, rather than the other option which will have the politicians telling us what to do. And, it seems to me, was the political mindset that got us into the current chaos.
KelvinD is offline  
Old 25th Sep 2019, 09:33
  #10575 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Hampshire
Age: 73
Posts: 820
Charles Day QC may not agree. He reminds me of my days in basic training in the Army. "Look Serge, I am the only one in step, the rest of the squad is out of step"
KelvinD is offline  
Old 25th Sep 2019, 09:38
  #10576 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: Vantaa, Finland
Posts: 0
If a system needs a precedent for everything there can't be a first case. So how does it work? Or is as it looks just now it does not?
Aihkio is offline  
Old 25th Sep 2019, 09:50
  #10577 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Isle of Man
Posts: 0
Originally Posted by KelvinD View Post
Much as I don't like Corbyn as Labour party leader, I have to say, in his defence, he is the only politician thus far to have come up with a sensible proposal re the Brexit/Referendum conundrum. He is proposing his party would negotiate with the EU, then return to the UK and have a referendum with 2 choices; 1) Exit the EU under the terms tentatively agreed with the EU (and ensuring the terms are spelled out to the electorate) and 2) Cancel the whole thing, remain within the UE (and ensuring the consequences of remaining are spelled out to the electorate).
Media savages and party hacks refer to this as being uncommitted or unable to make up his mind. These people are crying that Labour should adopt a Go/Leave stance and fight a General Election on that basis. At least Corbyn's proposal will have the electorate telling the politicians what to do, rather than the other option which will have the politicians telling us what to do. And, it seems to me, was the political mindset that got us into the current chaos.
Jo and the Libs have a plan. I guess you don't like it so you ignore it.

It is the job of politicians to tell us what to do. They are the experts. They guide us. They do the graft we don't have the time to look at. Bit like pilots. We know where we want to go. They do the taking. Also do the diverting if the destination looks shit.

If we don't like what happened last time we fly with another airline. Dont let the pax try the flying. It ends in disaster. Simples
Islandlad is offline  
Old 25th Sep 2019, 09:56
  #10578 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 10,984
All precedents start out by a judge, or judges, inferring a right or based upon basic principles or combining other precedents. Which ia what, as they are entitled to do, the SC has done on this occasion.

The Attorney General, the NI court judges and English High Court judges were not wrong, they were working within the limits of the law as then written and understood. Which is why they are not to be castigated, nor should they be required to resign.

In creating a new legal principle the SC has placed the courts in the position where, in future disputes in parliament between parties, one or more parties may now decide to appeal to the courts, rather than the people. Some may find that good, some bad, others be indifferent.

However, it does mean that, inevitably, the appointment of SC judges will now always be seen, as in the USA, with an eye on their political affiliation and views.

As I said previously, perhaps it was inevitable once the SC was founded that it would become subject to political scrutiny, thie cases around Brexit have just accelerated the process.
ORAC is offline  
Old 25th Sep 2019, 10:00
  #10579 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: England
Posts: 180
Supreme Court interfering in politics : pity this objection wasn't raised before the case was brought before the Supreme Court, and not after the judgment.

Had the ruling be different, would have the Court "interfered" ?
The central question the Supreme Court was determining was whether prorogation was a matter for the courts. The whole point is that the court could (and many legal commentators say should) have refused to intervene on the grounds this was a political and non-justiciable matter.
akindofmagic is offline  
Old 25th Sep 2019, 10:04
  #10580 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Lost, but often Indonesia
Posts: 615
Radio Coverage

Hello all,

I'm on the beach in Bali rehydrating as you do. For entertainment I thought I'd listen to the antics in the House of Commons this afternoon, promises to be fascinating. But the parliament link I found doesn't work. Can anyone recommend a link to listen to this upcoming comedy show?
Thanks!
Edit: While I'm at it, this will be perhaps controversial, what is a reasonable online English newspaper not using a paywall that is worth reading? If it exists ☺️!

Last edited by Octane; 25th Sep 2019 at 10:58.
Octane is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.