|
|
Post by thylacine on Apr 16, 2024 17:11:32 GMT
A question about deleting your account. Is it gone forever in terms of your posts and count or can you pick it up again later? Colin has taken a break before. I can remember the jubilation and cheers last time when he came back .
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,612
Member is Online
|
Post by steve on Apr 16, 2024 17:35:20 GMT
The house of lords yet to cave to the regime and continues its constitutional function as a reviewing and revising chamber.
The illegal Rwanda forced rendition farce isn't in the manifesto it's not a finance bill and the Lords are under no obligation to pass it, this week or ever.
I wonder how long they can retain this position.
"Government suffers two more defeats in Lords on Rwanda bill, losing by majorities of 39 and 17
The government lost the second vote in the House of Lords on the Rwanda bill by 266 votes to 227 – a majority of 39. Peers backed the motion saying only be considered a safe country if an independent monitoring committee confirms that. (See 5.51pm.)
And peers have just finished voting on motion C1, that would allow courts to continue to decide Rwanda is not safe in individual cases. The government lost a third time, by 253 votes to 236 – a majority of 17."
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,612
Member is Online
|
Post by steve on Apr 16, 2024 17:38:56 GMT
domjg"I wasn't able to comment on the old ukpr as Anthony had given up approving new members" I wasn't able to comment either as Anthony banned me for life for being "too political" until he apparently forgot and my account randomly reactivated.
|
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,566
|
Post by pjw1961 on Apr 16, 2024 17:39:39 GMT
The house of lords yet to cave to the regime and continues its constitutional function as a reviewing and revising chamber. The illegal Rwanda forced rendition farce isn't in the manifesto it's not a finance bill and the Lords are under no obligation to pass it, this week or ever. I wonder how long they can retain this position. "Government suffers two more defeats in Lords on Rwanda bill, losing by majorities of 39 and 17 The government lost the second vote in the House of Lords on the Rwanda bill by 266 votes to 227 – a majority of 39. Peers backed the motion saying only be considered a safe country if an independent monitoring committee confirms that. (See 5.51pm.) And peers have just finished voting on motion C1, that would allow courts to continue to decide Rwanda is not safe in individual cases. The government lost a third time, by 253 votes to 236 – a majority of 17." Its the last round. There is no doubt that the Commons will get its way the bill will be law soon. Whether any planes take off any time soon is a different matter entirely. There will be legal challenges and practical ones (which airline wants the stigma of being associated with this?) |
|
neilj
Member
Posts: 6,356
|
Post by neilj on Apr 16, 2024 17:43:33 GMT
In the latest Government defeat peers voted by 275 to 218, majority of 57, to press a demand for those who worked with the UK military or government overseas, such as Afghan interpreters, to be exempted from removal to Rwanda
This was the largest defeat for the Government and it may be the hill where the Lords are prepared to make their stand
|
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,566
|
Post by pjw1961 on Apr 16, 2024 17:55:21 GMT
In the latest Government defeat peers voted by 275 to 218, majority of 57, to press a demand for those who worked with the UK military or government overseas, such as Afghan interpreters, to be exempted from removal to Rwanda This was the largest defeat for the Government and it may be the hill where the Lords are prepared to make their stand 7th March: "Speaking for the Opposition, Labour's Lord Coaker criticised the Government for its intention to ignore and reject the Lords' amendments, but he restated Labour's clear and consistent position that it will not use the Lords to stop the Bill passing. "I think the constitutional proprieties of this place needs restating again. As much as we accept that, as His Majesty's Opposition, we will not block the Bill, the constitutional quid pro quo is that the Government in the House of Commons, through their elected mandate, accept that we have a right to demand that they think again and revise legislation in view of what is said here," Lord Coaker said." Without Labour peers it can't be blocked. The reason is they don't want to set a precedent for Tory peers blocking Labour legislation. |
|
|
|
Post by graham on Apr 16, 2024 18:01:40 GMT
In the latest Government defeat peers voted by 275 to 218, majority of 57, to press a demand for those who worked with the UK military or government overseas, such as Afghan interpreters, to be exempted from removal to Rwanda This was the largest defeat for the Government and it may be the hill where the Lords are prepared to make their stand 7th March: "Speaking for the Opposition, Labour's Lord Coaker criticised the Government for its intention to ignore and reject the Lords' amendments, but he restated Labour's clear and consistent position that it will not use the Lords to stop the Bill passing. "I think the constitutional proprieties of this place needs restating again. As much as we accept that, as His Majesty's Opposition, we will not block the Bill, the constitutional quid pro quo is that the Government in the House of Commons, through their elected mandate, accept that we have a right to demand that they think again and revise legislation in view of what is said here," Lord Coaker said." Without Labour peers it can't be blocked. The reason is they don't want to set a precedent for Tory peers blocking Labour legislation. But the precedents already exist! It would be good to see a substantial number of Labour peers break ranks on this by continuing to reject the Bill.
Why not let the 'ping pong' continue up to the Summer Recess in late July?
|
|
|
|
Post by graham on Apr 16, 2024 18:18:02 GMT
The Parliament Act 1949 has been ised in respect of -
War Crimes Act 1991, which extended jurisdiction of UK courts to acts committed on behalf of Nazi Germany during the Second World War (the only time – to date – that the Parliament Acts have been used by a Conservative government).
European Parliamentary Elections Act 1999, which changed the system of elections to the European Parliament from first past the post to a form of proportional representation.
Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 2000, which equalised the age of consent for male homosexual sexual activities with that for heterosexual and female homosexual sexual activities at 16.
Hunting Act 2004, which prohibited hare coursing and (subject to some exceptions) all hunting of wild mammals (particularly foxes) with dogs after early 2005.
|
|
neilj
Member
Posts: 6,356
|
Post by neilj on Apr 16, 2024 18:19:42 GMT
In the latest Government defeat peers voted by 275 to 218, majority of 57, to press a demand for those who worked with the UK military or government overseas, such as Afghan interpreters, to be exempted from removal to Rwanda This was the largest defeat for the Government and it may be the hill where the Lords are prepared to make their stand 7th March: "Speaking for the Opposition, Labour's Lord Coaker criticised the Government for its intention to ignore and reject the Lords' amendments, but he restated Labour's clear and consistent position that it will not use the Lords to stop the Bill passing. "I think the constitutional proprieties of this place needs restating again. As much as we accept that, as His Majesty's Opposition, we will not block the Bill, the constitutional quid pro quo is that the Government in the House of Commons, through their elected mandate, accept that we have a right to demand that they think again and revise legislation in view of what is said here," Lord Coaker said." Without Labour peers it can't be blocked. The reason is they don't want to set a precedent for Tory peers blocking Labour legislation. Maybe semantics, but I see nothing inconsistent with Labour not blocking the Bill, but rather improving it by putting forward ammendments. In fact he appears to suggest just that. I also noticed one of the ammendments was put forward by Coaker himself |
|
|
|
Post by lululemonmustdobetter on Apr 16, 2024 18:31:21 GMT
Colin and I a while back agreed not to directly interact with each other. But I still read his posts, and he did provide a valuable counter balance. I can empathise (  ) with his rather lonely role on the site, and I do hope he does come back.
|
|
neilj
Member
Posts: 6,356
|
Post by neilj on Apr 16, 2024 18:37:38 GMT
A total of 383 MPs voted in favour of the smoking Bill, while 67 opposed it.
One assumes most of the opposition supported the Bill, so it suggests a lot of tory abstentions
Edit
57 Tory MPs voted No and 106 abstained
|
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,315
|
Post by Danny on Apr 16, 2024 18:40:42 GMT
It really isnt incredible, what did you expect? After being threatened with losing a contract if they didnt perform better, performance improved but then went back to normal as soon they got that contract. Its standard practice to do this if you can get away with it, and its standard practice for the conservative government to allow them to get away with it. Thats because it has ideological reasons for having a privatised service, however much more it costs the nation or passengers. So thats not surprising either. The only incredible thing is if voters still believe privatising railways improved them. "Since privatisation, the number of national rail journeys had increased by 128% in 2019-20 and the number of passenger-km had increased by 126%, after a period of mostly decline during nationalization." Passengers voting with their feet. There was obviously a decline during lockdown but numbers are nearly back to where they were. If you remember, british railways were nationalised because they were bankrupt. Then we had the famous Beching axe to slash the least profitable part of the network. The reason for this was the rise of the private car. Wikipedia has a graph of passenger numbers from 1830 to 2020. The peak was about 1915, and fell steadily from then to approximately 1985. Privatisations were around 1995, so ten years after numbers started increasing again. I'd suggest the reason privatisations were possible was because numbers were already rising steadily, and private companies could see potential for profits. Its rather similar to the sale of the telephone network, which was on the brink of becoming immensely profitable. More recent events have shown a number of the privatisation companies unable to make the profits they had anticipated and failing service standards.
A big chunk of those increasing numbers was commuters into London and other cities. This partly reflected the reversing of national strategy plans to shrink cites after ww2, particularly London. But in particular it reflected soaring property prices in london, so that more and more people working there could not live there, and were forced to commute. So the recovery of the railways reflected national policy to expand London industry but restrict housing supply. And of course, the increasing numbers of cars eventually let to slow traffic and no parking, making this option less attractive again.
As to lockdown, remote working was made possible by another invention, the internet. Which isnt going to go away again. Its also obvious that if we are serious about cutting co2 emissions, then commuting must end. Its daft creating a city so big without enough housing to sustain itself. I came across a government report which stated from 1995 to 2014 commuting fell 15% and total trips fell 5%, despite rising population by 10% and rising number of workers by 15%. assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5e832f7286650c743af495f5/commuting-in-england-1988-2015.pdf Which doesnt sound like a resounding success.
What has been growing of late is off peak travel. Again, this seems to have begun with a drive to boost use of railways off peak, and the invention of discount railcards in the mid 1970s. But prices for rail journeys since privatisation have been allowed to rise way ahead of inflation. It seems likely this is choking off demand!
|
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,566
|
Post by pjw1961 on Apr 16, 2024 18:46:41 GMT
7th March: "Speaking for the Opposition, Labour's Lord Coaker criticised the Government for its intention to ignore and reject the Lords' amendments, but he restated Labour's clear and consistent position that it will not use the Lords to stop the Bill passing. "I think the constitutional proprieties of this place needs restating again. As much as we accept that, as His Majesty's Opposition, we will not block the Bill, the constitutional quid pro quo is that the Government in the House of Commons, through their elected mandate, accept that we have a right to demand that they think again and revise legislation in view of what is said here," Lord Coaker said." Without Labour peers it can't be blocked. The reason is they don't want to set a precedent for Tory peers blocking Labour legislation. Maybe semantics, but I see nothing inconsistent with Labour not blocking the Bill, but rather improving it by putting forward ammendments. In fact he appears to suggest just that. I also noticed one of the ammendments was put forward by Coaker himself That's what they have been doing, but the Conservative majority in the Commons overturns them. Labour have been entirely transparent that they will not ultimately block the bill. Its understandable why. Labour has nothing like a majority in the Lords and essentially legislation of a future Labour government that was not in the manifesto could be held to ransom by the Lords. When the government complained of about this, the Tory response would be "but you blocked the Rwanda bill". They don't fancy falling in that trap. What it all really shows is the general uselessness of the HoL as check on a domineering government. |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,315
|
Post by Danny on Apr 16, 2024 18:49:13 GMT
Little deep for me, I am more concerned to be able to eat my great British banger sandwich in an environment not stinking of smoke or getting lung cancer I can only think you don't care about the great British sausage... Do people remember the recent attempt to ban sugar in foods, by imposing a punitive tax on its use? This has indeed reduced sugar in certain foods. Only...if you care to look at recent research on sugar in foods, it has been found that if you remove the sugar people just eat more. Made no difference to calories consumed. Furthermore, the sugars are being replaced by artificial sweetners, which are starting to be reported as having detrimental side effects. So basically, the sugar tax is making the nation's health worse. Similarly, the ban on smoking and growing cannabis means we have a whole criminal industry in importing it for users, and another industry synthesising artificial chemicals to achieve the same effects as cannabis, but which are a lot more dangerous. And lets not forget that smokers have always been cost effective in dying faster than non smokers, paid lots of tax and generally cut pension payouts by dying early. Sure its bad for your health, but never claim this was a cost to society as a whole in terms of care, because it never was. The nation ceasing smoking is one of the reasons NHS costs have risen so much. |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,315
|
Post by Danny on Apr 16, 2024 18:53:42 GMT
Could people rally behind the governent in a time of crisis? We saw this uring WWII, the Falklands war and in more recent times, in the early days of covid / the 'vaccine bounce'. Government seems likely to intervene on the side of Israel if anyone, which could give it a distinct loss of support if the nation believes israel brought all this on itself by attempted ethnic cleansing of the Gaza strip. One of the ways Russia is no doubt pleased about this is exactly because the US (and its sycophants) feels obliged to intervene on the side of Israel, just as general voter support is rooting for the Gazans. |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,315
|
Post by Danny on Apr 16, 2024 19:03:51 GMT
Having said that, I ask Danny if the link he is referring to is the one in the quoted text from Johntel. The links I refer to begin 'viglink'. Wikipedia says "VigLink is a San Francisco-based, outbound-traffic monetization service for publishers, forums, and bloggers. VigLink specializes in in-text advertising and marketing.[1][2][3][4] VigLink CEO Oliver Roup founded the company in March 2009." en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VigLinkIf you put the cursor over the link, the the full URL appears at the bottom of the page starting viglink (at least if your browser is set up that way). Some pages show direct links to websites, some show redirects via viglink. While these do seem to come and go, I dont see an obvious pattern such as when browsing on one of various computers or phones. Cant say I have noticed them on any other website than this one. |
|
|
|
Post by graham on Apr 16, 2024 19:07:00 GMT
A comment grom politicalbetting.com -
' Derek Underwood anecdote. When I was a little kid, I spent all my summers at Headingley collecting autographs. I still have them - Sobers (my prize one), Pollock, Boycott (yes, even Geoffrey), Graveney, Dexter, Cowdrey and loads more of the greats. But not Derek Underwood's. He was obnoxious, and told us to go away in the rudest terms. He went from hero to zero in seconds, and I've never forgotten or forgiven. '
|
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,315
|
Post by Danny on Apr 16, 2024 19:07:19 GMT
I have read that puberty blockers can have lifetime effects on fertility, sexual function and ... Simply, we don't know and that is the worst crime that GIDS committed. There are now thousands of people out there who were treated by GIDS whom we have no way of finding and we have no way of linking individuals to the treatment they received apart from a small number who have begun taking legal action. Had they simply kept proper medical records and run basic tests on their patients, it would be possible to go back and do a retrospective observational study of the effects. Er, if you are switching from male to female anatomy and thats the goal, its hardly surprising if this has effects on fertility and sexuality? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 16, 2024 19:35:19 GMT
Re colin - Firstly I think it is entirely wrong to blame his departure on jen as a couple of posts have done. We have no idea what the final straw was and it was unlikely to be a single post by anyone. Call me Hercule Poirot if you like but, in my opinion, the fact that he deleted his account immediately after Jen’s response, and the numerous “likes” that that attracted, suggests cause and effect - albeit a while in coming to a head. Since I assume he got some pleasure from posting here I hope he comes back at some point. |
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,566
|
Post by pjw1961 on Apr 16, 2024 19:49:50 GMT
A comment grom politicalbetting.com - ' Derek Underwood anecdote. When I was a little kid, I spent all my summers at Headingley collecting autographs. I still have them - Sobers (my prize one), Pollock, Boycott (yes, even Geoffrey), Graveney, Dexter, Cowdrey and loads more of the greats. But not Derek Underwood's. He was obnoxious, and told us to go away in the rudest terms. He went from hero to zero in seconds, and I've never forgotten or forgiven. ' It wasn't you by any chance ... |
|
|
|
Post by mercian on Apr 16, 2024 19:50:56 GMT
Is this the sort of police state we're heading for under Labour? The Tories are bad enough, but the left can get very authoritarian if we're not careful. The treatment of the meeting in Brussels is a good reason to justify Brexit. The smoking ban is the 'will of the people'  "The treatment of the meeting in Brussels is a good reason to justify Brexit" - What a daft, non sequitur comment. The smoking ban is not the will of the people because it wasn't in the Conservative manifesto. It's been plucked out of thin air. My second sentence was not a non sequitur because it was illustrating my first point, as the meeting was wrecked by the socialist mayor. You know, it should be possible to debate points without resorting to insults. Insults just entrench the recipient's position whereas a rational discussion might enable us to understand each other's point of view. |
|
|
|
Post by mercian on Apr 16, 2024 20:02:39 GMT
Is this the sort of police state we're heading for under Labour? The Tories are bad enough, but the left can get very authoritarian if we're not careful. The treatment of the meeting in Brussels is a good reason to justify Brexit. Because if we hadn’t left the EU what?  ?? We would be part of an organisation that espouses closing down moderate political meetings for political reasons and we couldn't do anything about it. The same thing could happen in this country of course now that we've left, but we could kick the people out who did it. |
|
|
|
Post by mercian on Apr 16, 2024 20:04:46 GMT
Little deep for me, I am more concerned to be able to eat my great British banger sandwich in an environment not stinking of smoke or getting lung cancer I can only think you don't care about the great British sausage... Probably eats that foreign(German) smoked sausage muck, that you get in our Great British (aka Italian) chip shops I wouldn't know as I don't frequent chip shops. However I bow to your expertise as a Scotsman. I've heard that you all live on battered Mars bars. Is that correct? |
|
|
|
Post by mercian on Apr 16, 2024 20:07:12 GMT
Thinking aloud... The tories are clinging on hoping that something - anything - will save them from a hiding at the next GE. Could the crisis in the middle east be that thing? The world is currently holding it's breath, waitin to see what Israel will do in response to the Iranian attack at the weekend. What happens next could potentially have profound consequences, not ust for the region, but, the world. Could people rally behind the governent in a time of crisis? We saw this uring WWII, the Falklands war and in more recent times, in the early days of covid / the 'vaccine bounce'. Personally, I do not, at least yet, see it moving the dial, but, could it? Yes. Let's all just pray that the Tories' desperation doesn't cause them to lead us to war. |
|
|
|
Post by mercian on Apr 16, 2024 20:18:52 GMT
Underwood was pretty good on anything. For example he held the record for the highest number of wickets in India by a visiting spinner (54) for about 40 years until Nathan Lyon overtook it recently. Not many wet pitches there. He did his reputation a great deal of harm by joining the rebel tour of Apartheid South Africa. Amongst some people perhaps. Personally I don't hold it against him or any of the others trying to get a big (for the time) payday towards the end of their careers. He was 36 or 37 at the time. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 16, 2024 20:21:41 GMT
Because if we hadn’t left the EU what? ?? We would be part of an organisation that espouses closing down moderate political meetings for political reasons and we couldn't do anything about it. The same thing could happen in this country of course now that we've left, but we could kick the people out who did it. You’ve done a thorough investigation into local by-laws, EU dictats that enforce this and so on - I take it? We would definitely be obliged to ban such nefarious meetings would we? |
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,566
|
Post by pjw1961 on Apr 16, 2024 20:26:05 GMT
Because if we hadn’t left the EU what? ?? We would be part of an organisation that espouses closing down moderate political meetings for political reasons and we couldn't do anything about it. The same thing could happen in this country of course now that we've left, but we could kick the people out who did it. The EU had nothing to do with a decision made by the mayor of a part of the Brussels region - a local government official within the highly federal state of Belgium. Altogether a mystifying comment. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 16, 2024 20:29:21 GMT
We would be part of an organisation that espouses closing down moderate political meetings for political reasons and we couldn't do anything about it. The same thing could happen in this country of course now that we've left, but we could kick the people out who did it. The EU had nothing to do with a decision made by the mayor of a part of the Brussels region - a local government official within the highly federal state of Belgium. Altogether a mystifying comment. Pete is about to explain and clarify the relevant EU rules. Just be patient. |
|
johntel
Member
Posts: 1,669
Member is Online
|
Post by johntel on Apr 16, 2024 20:29:43 GMT
He won't get any thanks for it from his own side, but well done to Rishi Sunak for pushing through the smoking ban bill. He will have the satisfaction of knowing he did the right thing and will leave a real legacy that will save thousands of lives.
|
|
|
|
Post by mercian on Apr 16, 2024 20:44:03 GMT
Danny"As to lockdown, remote working was made possible by another invention, the internet. Which isnt going to go away again. Its also obvious that if we are serious about cutting co2 emissions, then commuting must end. Its daft creating a city so big without enough housing to sustain itself. I came across a government report which stated from 1995 to 2014 commuting fell 15% and total trips fell 5%, despite rising population by 10% and rising number of workers by 15%." That's interesting. If commuting into cities, particularly London but also many others, reduces a lot it makes me wonder what city centres will look like in the future. Presumably attractions such as theatres, clubs and so on will remain but there will be many empty offices and closed-down shops. The obvious solution to me would be to convert a lot of it into accommodation but that's probably too sensible.
|
|
) with his rather lonely role on the site, and I do hope he does come back.
??
