Last 40 Messages
Last 100 Messages
Last 250 Messages
Last 400 Messages
Days prior to yesterday:
Melon Farmers (Dave) [30536. Posted 17-Dec-2014 Wed 16:56]
Here is the Hansard proceedings. I wonder if `negative` means that it didn`t get voted on. A positive one did have a resolution.
phantom [30535. Posted 17-Dec-2014 Wed 15:59]
Well, the way I see it, even if a regulation doesn`t go through parliament, the coalition parties who form the government bear joint responsibility.
After all, if one of the two coalition partners refuses to back it, it cannot go ahead.
In this case, we saw it get rushed through parliament.
So they cannot even claim it to be a mere cabinet stitch up.
they forced it through the parliamentary process as though it were an emergency law. Everyone waving it through.
But I did not hear a single protesting LibDem voice.
Where were those LibDems if they were so opposed to this?
Now that it`s passed, one or two of the morons are asking for it to be repealed. (Fat chance!)
and now Clegg comes out announcing his opposition to a law the government he`s a part of has just passed!
It`s absolutely risible.
What is the man claiming?
`I didn`t know. I`m only Deputy Prime Minister.`
Is that it?
I may misunderstand this, but I believe parliament voted on this. However, it simply did not debate it.
If that is so, I`d love to know which way Clegg voted.
If anyone knows how to find out, please let me know.
I`ve tried `they work for you`, but can`t make sense of it.
Melon Farmers (Dave) [30534. Posted 17-Dec-2014 Wed 10:51]
It would be interesting to know what level of parliamentary interaction there is for these ministerial decrees. It would also be interesting to know which minster has been pushing through this undemocractic censorship. How can these people pass a new law that kills an entire industry without even the decency to give it a decent mention it in parliament.
This is the sort of democracy you get in the likes of China, Burma and Thailand
phantom [30533. Posted 17-Dec-2014 Wed 10:21]
Well, I just tried finding out, but frankly don`t understand how `they work for you` works on that front.
But I`d still like to know:
Which way did Clegg vote then?
Are we saying he voted for something (I`d assume he voted for it as a cabinet member) which he did not properly understand?
If that`s the case, isn`t he a moron?
I see Clegg`s move as pure electioneering.
This is the man who gave up on the Great Repeal Act - a policy to which his coalition partners had agreed in the coalition talks.
So this is the politician who most likely should have been overseeing the repeal of the DPA, instead he`s part of a government which extends it.
And now he comes out and declares he`s against this extension?
Come on! The man is taking us for mugs.
Melon Farmers (Dave) [30532. Posted 17-Dec-2014 Wed 03:10]
There is a chance that Clegg did not realise what it meant. It was not debated in parliament, just nodded through.
Before the Face-Sitting protest then it was probably justified as applying BBFC rules to online video. And before the protest I bet few realised that the BBFC/CPS rules were so naff and impinging on people`s sexuality.