Here there be rants. There will be Freeman stuff, Lawful Rebellion stuff and Random stuff. I am rebelling because I want my country back. My lawful obligations are as follows: “together with the community of the whole realm, distrain and distress us in all possible ways, namely, by seizing our castles, lands, possessions, and in any other way they can, until redress has been obtained as they see fit…”
Article 61 Magna Carta 1215
I sometimes think that Gillard, Roxon, and Conroy should be given the Clockwork Orange treatment with replays of their own violent attacks on free speech replayed to them until they develop an aversion, although in reality this would probably reinforce their belief that the public cannot be trusted not to cause offence.
They should though be exposed to Atkinson until they remember this one word for word.
Okay, other Anon, let me rephrase: if 62% of MPs think it is bad legislation, how the fuck did it get past the Commons vote?!!!!
(Or am I now mistaken by the impression that these statutes have to be discussed and approved by MPs debating and voting in Parliament, and rubber-stamped by Lords?)
Assuming this is the correct division, only 45% of MPs voted YAY on the Public Order Bill back in '86.
Due to the number that didn't turn up, this 45% became 59% of those taking part, and thus it passed.
292 yes, 201 no; out of 650 MPs in the 1983-87 parliament this means 157 weren't there.
(There may have been another reading, as it didn't get signed off until late in the year.)
This sort of thing happens with most corporate policy cockwaffle that floats its way through the House of Commons, so was in no way a rare or isolated occurrence.
One of the more notable examples would be Mandelscum's Digital Economy Bill - forced through in wash-up at quarter past eleven at night following a "debate" attended by a scant few MPs, where (supposedly) most of rest that voted on it were those who happened to be in the Commons bar at the time. 189 ayes to 47 noes, thus 410 "absent".
Okay. Slapped down again. And so much for our much-vaunted democracy; and further evidence that so many MPs could be considered a waste of space. However, I am sure I read (or heard) somewhere that no government is beholden to legislature passed by previous governments, or something along those lines. Could that argument be of use in this instance?
Damn good find.
ReplyDeleteI sometimes think that Gillard, Roxon, and Conroy should be given the Clockwork Orange treatment with replays of their own violent attacks on free speech replayed to them until they develop an aversion, although in reality this would probably reinforce their belief that the public cannot be trusted not to cause offence.
They should though be exposed to Atkinson until they remember this one word for word.
Top man.
ReplyDeleteFor free speech to flourish we must tolerate intolerance, and not simply have people arrested for expressing their prejudices.
ReplyDeleteAssholes can be dealt with informally using sarcasm and ridicule.
Governments do NOT make laws, they make legislation.
ReplyDeletethere is a vast difference between LAWFUL, AND LEGAL
if you don't know the difference it is in your interest to find out !
http://parker-joseph.com/pjcjournal/common-law-vs-statutes/
http://www.yourstrawman.com/
Okay, other Anon, let me rephrase: if 62% of MPs think it is bad legislation, how the fuck did it get past the Commons vote?!!!!
ReplyDelete(Or am I now mistaken by the impression that these statutes have to be discussed and approved by MPs debating and voting in Parliament, and rubber-stamped by Lords?)
Radical Rodent
Assuming this is the correct division, only 45% of MPs voted YAY on the Public Order Bill back in '86.
ReplyDeleteDue to the number that didn't turn up, this 45% became 59% of those taking part, and thus it passed.
292 yes, 201 no; out of 650 MPs in the 1983-87 parliament this means 157 weren't there.
(There may have been another reading, as it didn't get signed off until late in the year.)
This sort of thing happens with most corporate policy cockwaffle that floats its way through the House of Commons, so was in no way a rare or isolated occurrence.
One of the more notable examples would be Mandelscum's Digital Economy Bill - forced through in wash-up at quarter past eleven at night following a "debate" attended by a scant few MPs, where (supposedly) most of rest that voted on it were those who happened to be in the Commons bar at the time. 189 ayes to 47 noes, thus 410 "absent".
Brenda signed it the next day.
Regards
TSL
Okay. Slapped down again. And so much for our much-vaunted democracy; and further evidence that so many MPs could be considered a waste of space. However, I am sure I read (or heard) somewhere that no government is beholden to legislature passed by previous governments, or something along those lines. Could that argument be of use in this instance?
ReplyDeleteRadical Rodent