INFORMATION

This website uses cookies to store information on your computer. Some of these cookies are essential to make our site work and others help us to improve by giving us some insight into how the site is being used. For further information, see our Privacy Policy. Continuing to use this website is acceptance of these cookies.

The future of Government (if any)

...on serious topics that don't fit anywhere else at present.
Message
Author
User avatar
Dave B
Posts: 17809
Joined: May 17th, 2010, 9:15 pm

Re: The future of Government (if any)

#2401 Postby Dave B » October 30th, 2015, 1:48 pm

Latest post of the previous page:

That page not available to us non Fb inflicted people, thundril.
"Look forward; yesterday was a lesson, if you did not learn from it you wasted it."
Me, 2015

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24031
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: The future of Government (if any)

#2402 Postby Alan H » October 30th, 2015, 2:38 pm

Dave B wrote:That page not available to us non Fb inflicted people, thundril.


Screenshot from 2015-10-30 3.png
Screenshot from 2015-10-30 3.png (295.72 KiB) Viewed 1743 times
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Altfish
Posts: 1821
Joined: March 26th, 2012, 8:46 am

Re: The future of Government (if any)

#2403 Postby Altfish » October 30th, 2015, 7:10 pm

Tories cement their nasty party reputation...

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 15641.html

User avatar
Dave B
Posts: 17809
Joined: May 17th, 2010, 9:15 pm

Re: The future of Government (if any)

#2404 Postby Dave B » October 30th, 2015, 8:54 pm

Thanks, Alan. It has long been a concern of mine that once the cheap imports from China have ruined our industries and made us dependant the price will rocket!

Not just steel and power stations - by the time xmas comes along we will have imported several cubic kilometers of containers worth of toys, electronics, clothes etc., etc...
"Look forward; yesterday was a lesson, if you did not learn from it you wasted it."
Me, 2015

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24031
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: The future of Government (if any)

#2405 Postby Alan H » November 8th, 2015, 2:12 am

So sweet: A Freedom of Information request for UK Home Secretary Theresa May's metadata
Dear Home Office,

Under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 I hereby request the following information from and regarding the Rt Hon Theresa May MP (Con), Secretary of State for the Home Department (the "Home Secretary"):

1) The date, time, and recipient of every email sent by the Home Secretary during October 2015.

2) The date, time, and sender of every email received by the Home Secretary during October 2015.

3) The date, time, and recipient of every internet telephony call (e.g. "Skype" call) made by the Home Secretary during October 2015.

4) The date, time, and sender of every internet telephony call (e.g. "Skype" call) received by the Home Secretary during October 2015.

5) The date, time, and domain address of every website visited by the Home Secretary during October 2015.
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Dave B
Posts: 17809
Joined: May 17th, 2010, 9:15 pm

Re: The future of Government (if any)

#2406 Postby Dave B » November 8th, 2015, 9:27 am

Fair do's!
"Look forward; yesterday was a lesson, if you did not learn from it you wasted it."
Me, 2015

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24031
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: The future of Government (if any)

#2407 Postby Alan H » November 8th, 2015, 11:15 am

Dave B wrote:Fair do's!

They will find a 'clever' excuse not to provide it (but why if they've nothing to hide...), but it'll be interesting to see them squirm in the process.
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Dave B
Posts: 17809
Joined: May 17th, 2010, 9:15 pm

Re: The future of Government (if any)

#2408 Postby Dave B » November 8th, 2015, 12:27 pm

I was actually thinking, "They will try to ignore it..." but, hopefully publicity will prevent that.

:popcorn:
"Look forward; yesterday was a lesson, if you did not learn from it you wasted it."
Me, 2015

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24031
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: The future of Government (if any)

#2409 Postby Alan H » November 8th, 2015, 12:48 pm

Dave B wrote:I was actually thinking, "They will try to ignore it..." but, hopefully publicity will prevent that.

:popcorn:

They can't ignore it, but they will use one of the various exemptions available to them. But whichever on they use, it can only be embarrassing for them.
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24031
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: The future of Government (if any)

#2410 Postby Alan H » November 8th, 2015, 10:50 pm

Michael Gove to tell judges they can ignore European Court of Human Rights rulingsSecretary of State for Justice will unveil British bill of rights to replace the Human Rights Act before Christmas

Judges will be told they can ignore some rulings from the European Court of Human Rights, and look to Australian or Canadian law instead, under plans to introduce a British bill of rights.

Michael Gove is set to unveil the Government’s long-awaited replacement for the Human Rights Act before Christmas. Government sources suggest the proposals will include a weakening of European law, with domestic courts encouraged to turn to the common law, or even law in Commonwealth countries, in forming judgments.
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24031
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: The future of Government (if any)

#2411 Postby Alan H » November 8th, 2015, 11:57 pm

Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24031
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: The future of Government (if any)

#2412 Postby Alan H » November 10th, 2015, 2:04 pm

The Misguided Direction of Public Disdain
These narratives all paint a picture in our heads that, whilst many in work are struggling to make ends meet, there are many who get even more than they do for doing absolutely nothing. In a survey conducted by YouGov 42% of people said that they thought the welfare bill is too high. Similarly, people believe that, 41% of the total benefit bill is spent on unemployment benefit; 27% of unemployment benefit is claimed fraudulently; the welfare system has created a culture of dependency (52%). In reality, according to the Trade Union Centre only 3% of total welfare spending goes on unemployment benefit (the vast majority is spent on pensions, the disabled and benefits accessible to working families), a meagre 0.8% is claimed fraudulently (this is not only through claimants filling paperwork out incorrectly, but also systematic error from the Department of Work and Pensions) and only 10% of claimants continue to claim for over a year.

This demonstrates how misguided the British population are on these issues and the level of disdain directed towards the unemployed is vastly unwarranted. The actual figures suggest that only a tiny percentage of people could ever be said to be receiving ‘something for nothing’. Secondly, there are even fewer people attempting to get money illegitimately. And thirdly, considering the vast majority of people are on unemployment benefit for under a year, it stands to reason that most see the ‘dole’ as a temporary solution and hence are not part of a ‘culture of dependency’. Yet with these erroneous ideas dominating mainstream thought, it is no wonder that cuts to the benefit system have been met with support.
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24031
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: The future of Government (if any)

#2413 Postby Alan H » November 10th, 2015, 7:07 pm

Your access to Freedom of Information is under threat – here’s what to do
Proposed changes, currently under discussion by a cross-party government commission, could make it much harder for you to access information.

This is what the proposed restrictions would mean for you:

You’d be charged for making a request
Your request could be turned down on the grounds of cost, even more easily than it can be now
You’d find it more difficult (or even impossible) to obtain details of public authorities’ internal discussions
The release of government information could be easily blocked by ministers
You have until 20 November if you’d like to voice your opposition to these restraints.

Here are four easy ways you can take action right now—you’ll find more details about all of them on the Campaign For Freedom of Information’s website.
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Dave B
Posts: 17809
Joined: May 17th, 2010, 9:15 pm

Re: The future of Government (if any)

#2414 Postby Dave B » November 10th, 2015, 7:25 pm

Petition signed.

Wanting to scrap the FoI act would indicate the government has domething to hide...
"Look forward; yesterday was a lesson, if you did not learn from it you wasted it."
Me, 2015

User avatar
Nick
Posts: 11027
Joined: July 4th, 2007, 10:10 am

Re: The future of Government (if any)

#2415 Postby Nick » November 10th, 2015, 7:51 pm

Alan H wrote:
Michael Gove to tell judges they can ignore European Court of Human Rights rulingsSecretary of State for Justice will unveil British bill of rights to replace the Human Rights Act before Christmas

Judges will be told they can ignore some rulings from the European Court of Human Rights, and look to Australian or Canadian law instead, under plans to introduce a British bill of rights.

Michael Gove is set to unveil the Government’s long-awaited replacement for the Human Rights Act before Christmas. Government sources suggest the proposals will include a weakening of European law, with domestic courts encouraged to turn to the common law, or even law in Commonwealth countries, in forming judgments.
I am not in favour of the changes, not because I fear for British justice, but because it is one way of attempting to influence other parts of the world.

Having said that, justice, in British courts at least, is based on precedent, rather than codified law. So all judgements are therefore a choice of precedents, with developments where appropriate. So it is not so much that Gove wants European law to be "ignored", but that judges are not necessarily obliged to follow European law in preference to other judgements where there is conflict. To imply that turning to common law is something of a departure, shows how far our ages-old justice system has been over-ruled by statute originating from the EU, over which we have so much less influence. And given the source of much of the law in Commonwealth countries, to look to Commonwealth countries for precedent in forming judgements is logical, and should not be the surprise it appears to be to the Indie.

User avatar
Nick
Posts: 11027
Joined: July 4th, 2007, 10:10 am

Re: The future of Government (if any)

#2416 Postby Nick » November 10th, 2015, 7:53 pm

Dave B wrote:Petition signed.

Wanting to scrap the FoI act would indicate the government has domething to hide...
Apparently, Tony Blair regards the FoI Act as his biggest blunder....

User avatar
Dave B
Posts: 17809
Joined: May 17th, 2010, 9:15 pm

Re: The future of Government (if any)

#2417 Postby Dave B » November 10th, 2015, 8:09 pm

Nick wrote:
Dave B wrote:Petition signed.

Wanting to scrap the FoI act would indicate the government has domething to hide...
Apparently, Tony Blair regards the FoI Act as his biggest blunder....

I know that, Nick, why is it relevant? Just another of your attempted digs at the left?

The colour of the politician, IMO, has no relevance - never trust any of them!
"Look forward; yesterday was a lesson, if you did not learn from it you wasted it."
Me, 2015

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24031
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: The future of Government (if any)

#2418 Postby Alan H » November 10th, 2015, 8:25 pm

If Michael Gove listens to Daniel Hannan’s honeyed polemic on Human Rights he really will get into a muddle
Let’s start with the “Sovereignty problem.” Mr Hannan’s premise is that the Human Rights Act gives “direct effect” to the rulings of the European Court of Human Rights. That might indeed be a problem if it were true; but it isn’t. The Human Rights Act does not give direct effect to the rulings of the European Court of Human Rights. If your premise is wrong, then no matter how beautifully expressed the rest of your argument may be, it won’t hold water.

The relevant part of the Human Rights Act is Section 2, and all that that does is require British courts to “take into account any:
judgment, decision, declaration or advisory opinion of the European Court of Human Rights;"

Taking something “into account” does not mean agreeing with it, or necessarily obeying it. And as the English courts have made quite clear it certainly does not mean “giving direct effect to it.” For example, in the case ofVinter[/url] the European Court of Human Rights found in July 2013 that a whole-life term of imprisonment was incompatible with Article 3 of the Convention (which prohibits torture and inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment). It was a conclusion which the England and Wales Court of Appeal Criminal Division took into account, and then expressly disagreed with when, on the Attorney General’s application, it imposed a whole-life term on a double murderer in February 2014. It was a clash between the European Court of Human Rights and the Court of Appeal: and the Court of Appeal won. This was not a unique case: in 2009 the Supreme Court, had declined to follow the European Court of Human Rights in Horncastle, a case about the admissibility in evidence of the statement of a deceased witness.
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24031
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: The future of Government (if any)

#2419 Postby Alan H » November 11th, 2015, 12:45 am

If only all towns and businesses did this... Crickhowell: Welsh town moves 'offshore' to avoid tax on local business
When independent traders in a small Welsh town discovered the loopholes used by multinational giants to avoid paying UK tax, they didn’t just get mad.

Now local businesses in Crickhowell are turning the tables on the likes of Google and Starbucks by employing the same accountancy practices used by the world’s biggest companies, to move their entire town “offshore”.
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24031
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: The future of Government (if any)

#2420 Postby Alan H » November 11th, 2015, 12:53 am

Tsk, tsk. David Cameron reported to statistics watchdog over questionable EU migrant benefit statistics
The website Full Fact, an independent organisation that verifies claims made by politicians of all parties, said there was “nothing” backing up the figures in any official publication.

Full Fact said it was launching a full complaint to the UK Statistics Authority.

“There is nothing backing these up on the Department for Work and Pensions’ ad hoc statistics page—where non-regular analysis is placed when it is used in public, for example in speeches or the press,” wrote Phobe Arnold, a researcher at Full Fact.
Jonathan Portes, director of the National Institute for Economic and Social Research (NIESR) and a former chief economist at the Cabinet Office, was among those treating the 43 per cent figure with incredulity.

“They appear to have taken the number of EU/EEA migrants claiming benefits from DWP data, made some ‘adjustments’, and divided by the number of EU/EEA migrants here for less than four years according to the LFS,” the Times newspaper quoted him as saying.

Mr Portes described some aspects of the figures as “very suspicious” and contrary to statistical “common sense”.
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Nick
Posts: 11027
Joined: July 4th, 2007, 10:10 am

Re: The future of Government (if any)

#2421 Postby Nick » November 11th, 2015, 2:03 am

Dave B wrote:[quote="NickApparently, Tony Blair regards the FoI Act as his biggest blunder....

I know that, Nick, why is it relevant?[/quote]Because it was hid government that introduced it. I would have thought that that was extremely relevant.

Just another of your attempted digs at the left?
No, a devastating critique. :wink:

The colour of the politician, IMO, has no relevance - never trust any of them!
I'll bear that in mind. :D

In the light of which I await your disparaging comments on any who make "attempted digs" at "the right"...... :wink:


Return to “Miscellaneous Discussions...”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests