Jump to content

Another Broken Promise


Recommended Posts

what would be the point of a referendum ,now that the treaty has been ratified by all 27 countries. It would be pointless . Its just like ferguson making a cast iron promise to play rooney in the cup final then getting knocked out in the semi and everyone saying but you promised to play rooney in the final ! Its over and it was LABOUR who signed us up . . Not the tories. Im not a great believer in vox populi anyway , labours 36% majority amounts to 22% of the electorate , no one votes only on x factor, strictly etc , and no one fully understands the lisbon treaty , who can name 1 , 2 , 3 or even 10 of the 64 areas where the lisbon treaty removes the british veto ? I know i cant. How many of the c.a. Marchers voted labour or didnt even vote. As a people we are politically clueless ,

Cynic!

 

 

Swampy

 

 

ninginginagreementtoadegree

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 42
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Even if the Conservatives did gain power and on the off chance that they did make noises that sounded like a change in the hunting with dogs laws was a possibility it certainly would be a low priority and understandably so.

 

Any newly elected party that did'nt put Middle-Eastern war ,financial defecits and a host of social ills before discussions on whether or not dogs should be allowed to legally chase foxes and hares could'nt be taken seriously .

 

Just a non-commital little hint of carrot dangled by a Tory party led by a slimey limp- lettuce of a man who really should be spending his time promoting positive reconstructive policies rather than simply pointing out the glaringly obvious faults of the present moronic bankrupters that call themselves government .

 

 

Somehow the voters and non-voters of this country have been inept enough to allow a situation to develop where they are forced to vote for the party they dislike least instead of the party they truly believe in .

Link to post
Share on other sites

They could use the parliament act to push through a bill to revoke the Hunting Bill. But, i cannot see that ever happening. That is the only way things would change for the better. In all other cases you can bet that any changes to the present law will just make things worse. I don t want to sound pessemistic about this but sometimes you are better off as you are.....JD

Link to post
Share on other sites

Somehow the voters and non-voters of this country have been inept enough to allow a situation to develop where they are forced to vote for the party they dislike least instead of the party they truly believe in .

 

 

Yup Its our fault.

Apathy a terrible Sin

 

Swampy

 

Ninging just befor home time

Link to post
Share on other sites
Even if the Conservatives did gain power and on the off chance that they did make noises that sounded like a change in the hunting with dogs laws was a possibility it certainly would be a low priority and understandably so.

 

Any newly elected party that did'nt put Middle-Eastern war ,financial defecits and a host of social ills before discussions on whether or not dogs should be allowed to legally chase foxes and hares could'nt be taken seriously .

 

Just a non-commital little hint of carrot dangled by a Tory party led by a slimey limp- lettuce of a man who really should be spending his time promoting positive reconstructive policies rather than simply pointing out the glaringly obvious faults of the present moronic bankrupters that call themselves government .

 

 

Somehow the voters and non-voters of this country have been inept enough to allow a situation to develop where they are forced to vote for the party they dislike least instead of the party they truly believe in .

:clapper::notworthy:

 

They could use the parliament act to push through a bill to revoke the Hunting Bill. But, i cannot see that ever happening. That is the only way things would change for the better. In all other cases you can bet that any changes to the present law will just make things worse. I don t want to sound pessemistic about this but sometimes you are better off as you are.....JD

The act was forced through using the parliament act in the first place. :yes: The parliament act allows the House of commons to make a law without the approval of the house of lords. The lords were pro hunting and in favour of regulated hunting as recommended by the burns report, and would have blocked the total banning of hunting if it had been put to them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

as wrong as the hunting act is , and i am totally totally opposed to the ban. . .the parliament act was the right thing to do democratically , we simply cannot tollerate the UNELECTED house overturning the legislation of the ELECTED house just because they happened to agree with us , we want a democratically elected government , thats what weve got. I think JD is right if we have to have a ban on hunting with dogs what more can we ask for than one which is badly written , universally accepted as unenforcable and unpolicable and has yielded very few convictions

Edited by flint67
Link to post
Share on other sites

And these fuckers wonder why idiots like the BNP get votes!...........I heard Hague on R4 this morning saying "No vote now........", if the referendum turns into a vote on our membership of Europe then so be it........but Cameron, at least do what you said you were going to do

 

It wont mean we have to pull out or anything like that, we may be a small country and not as powerful as we used to be but the sqaure mile still generates billions of pounds more than than most of these European exchanges.........I would like to think the UK still counts for more than most of these other piss ant ex-eastern block countries.........

 

They need us just as much as we need them.........have some balls Cameron and call their bluff :yes:

 

And say we did pull out, a trade agreement with the US would be just as good and cost us less.

Link to post
Share on other sites
as wrong as the hunting act is , and i am totally totally opposed to the ban. . .the parliament act was the right thing to do democratically , we simply cannot tollerate the UNELECTED house overturning the legislation of the ELECTED house just because they happened to agree with us , we want a democratically elected government , thats what weve got. I think JD is right if we have to have a ban on hunting with dogs what more can we ask for than one which is badly written , universally accepted as unenforcable and unpolicable and has yielded very few convictions

You forget one major detail, we are subjects under a sovereign, we are not a democratic republic. :no:

 

And these fuckers wonder why idiots like the BNP get votes!...........I heard Hague on R4 this morning saying "No vote now........", if the referendum turns into a vote on our membership of Europe then so be it........but Cameron, at least do what you said you were going to do

 

It wont mean we have to pull out or anything like that, we may be a small country and not as powerful as we used to be but the sqaure mile still generates billions of pounds more than than most of these European exchanges.........I would like to think the UK still counts for more than most of these other piss ant ex-eastern block countries.........

 

They need us just as much as we need them.........have some balls Cameron and call their bluff :yes:

 

And say we did pull out, a trade agreement with the US would be just as good and cost us less.

:yes:

 

We're still pretty powerful mate, still got the second largest navy in the world! :D

Link to post
Share on other sites
as wrong as the hunting act is , and i am totally totally opposed to the ban. . .the parliament act was the right thing to do democratically , we simply cannot tollerate the UNELECTED house overturning the legislation of the ELECTED house just because they happened to agree with us , we want a democratically elected government , thats what weve got. I think JD is right if we have to have a ban on hunting with dogs what more can we ask for than one which is badly written , universally accepted as unenforcable and unpolicable and has yielded very few convictions

You forget one major detail, we are subjects under a sovereign, we are not a democratic republic. :no:

 

 

So what's the point of having a Parliament at all ? And why not appeal to the Crown ?

 

 

So much about the UK that is ...well....foreign , to me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
as wrong as the hunting act is , and i am totally totally opposed to the ban. . .the parliament act was the right thing to do democratically , we simply cannot tollerate the UNELECTED house overturning the legislation of the ELECTED house just because they happened to agree with us , we want a democratically elected government , thats what weve got. I think JD is right if we have to have a ban on hunting with dogs what more can we ask for than one which is badly written , universally accepted as unenforcable and unpolicable and has yielded very few convictions

You forget one major detail, we are subjects under a sovereign, we are not a democratic republic. :no:

 

 

So what's the point of having a Parliament at all ? And why not appeal to the Crown ?

 

 

So much about the UK that is ...well....foreign , to me.

Simple answer is that the the Queen doesn't exercise her legal powers. I'm not 100% sure why, maybe she's constitutionally bound from doing so.

 

In pure legal terms she's possibly the most powerful person on the planet due to her being head of state of the following countries:

 

Canada

Australia

New Zealand

Jamaica

Barbados

the Bahamas

Grenada

Papua New Guinea

the Solomon Islands

Tuvalu, Saint Lucia

Saint Vincent and the Grenadines

Antigua and Barbuda

Belize

Saint Kitts and Nevis

 

A bit useless her having all that power if she's not allowed to exercise it though! :laugh:

Link to post
Share on other sites
the sovereign is just a symbolic figurehead , we are governed by a democratically elected government , to all intents and purposes we are a democratic republic as far as legislation goes

Is that so? How come new laws have to gain Royal Assent before they become law, and where do the lords come in to it? Figurehead she may be, but in real legal terms she is a sovereign and we are her subjects. That's about as far away from a democratic republic as you can get...

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes hypothetically we are a sovereign state , but in real terms the sovereign does not legislate . .end of story , in 57 years of reign the monarch has introduced no laws of her own nor overturned any of parlhaments. The job is purely symbolic , our legislation is set by a democratically elected government and has been since cromwell . The parliament act is a good piece of legislation preventing the unelected house from blocking the will of the elected government. .

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...