Election 2019 - Week 4

[jfman]

Originally Posted by nomadking

Because of the blocking of Brexit by Parliament. What specific measures in that Speech have been implemented or turned down? Approval of the Queen's speech is usually a formality. Absolutely nothing is brought into law as a result of it.

Just completely ludicrous to suggest that Labour or the Lib Dems would be harder on criminals, especially terrorists.

A monitoring tag is only really useful after any crime. It might deter burglars or somebody hoping to get away with a crime, but it would hardly be a deterrent to a suicide bomber/attacker.

What specifically did he refer to?

It’s ludicrous to suggest that because Parliament didn’t back Boris and his Brexit deal they “blocked” the rest of his legislative agenda. He was free to introduce it as and when he pleased.

Are you suggesting we simply have elections every five years for a de-facto dictatorship? Accept one proposed bill, you must accept them all?

It sounds right wing enough for most of this forum to get behind, I’ll give it that.

What is ludicrous is to suggest that the current Government after nearly a decade aren’t responsible for law and order, nor the state of the economy. Convenient that.

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by jfman

It’s ludicrous to suggest that because Parliament didn’t back Boris and his Brexit deal they “blocked” the rest of his legislative agenda. He was free to introduce it as and when he pleased.

Are you suggesting we simply have elections every five years for a de-facto dictatorship? Accept one proposed bill, you must accept them all?

It sounds right wing enough for most of this forum to get behind, I’ll give it that.

What is ludicrous is to suggest that the current Government after nearly a decade aren’t responsible for law and order, nor the state of the economy. Convenient that.

You are the one suggesting that approval of the Queen's speech is the same as approving each and every proposal within it, which are fairly general at that point.


You claim that the proposal wasn't blocked.

"including a bill to prevent automatic early release of prisoners, had been "blocked by Parliament" - it passed by 16 votes...

At the end of the debate there is a vote. It's normally seen as symbolic, as it is extremely rare for a government to lose it.
...
Mr Johnson has already lost seven consecutive House of Commons votes since becoming prime minister. At the moment, if every opposition MP voted against the government, it would lose by 45 votes.

Not every MP voted on the Queen's Speech.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by nomadking

You are the one suggesting that approval of the Queen's speech is the same as approving each and every proposal within it, which are fairly general at that point.

You claim that the proposal wasn't blocked.

And indeed it wasn't. The government decided to abandon it's legislative agenda over a single piece of legislation.

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by jfman

And indeed it wasn't. The government decided to abandon it's legislative agenda over a single piece of legislation.

Mr Johnson has already lost seven consecutive House of Commons votes since becoming prime minister. At the moment, if every opposition MP voted against the government, it would lose by 45 votes.

And that wouldn't have made a difference? Only 604 of the 650 MPs voted, so any further proposals might have been at risk.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by nomadking

And that wouldn't have made a difference? Only 604 of the 650 MPs voted, so any further proposals might have been at risk.

So the Government didn't pursue it's agenda out if fear of losing. That's fine as long as it's phrased like that.

Some matters of course transcend party politics - so we will never know how that Parliament would have voted on crime any more than it would vote on the Telecommunications Infrastructure (Leasehold Properties) Bill.

So say Parliament blocked is an out and out lie.

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by jfman

So the Government didn't pursue it's agenda out if fear of losing. That's fine as long as it's phrased like that.

Some matters of course transcend party politics - so we will never know how that Parliament would have voted on crime any more than it would vote on the Telecommunications Infrastructure (Leasehold Properties) Bill.

So say Parliament blocked is an out and out lie.

Exactly, yet you say Parliament approved it, they didn't. Nothing can be determined either way on the basis of the Queen's speech vote as it is merely symbolic.

It is the persistent blocking of the democratic vote and Brexit that led to the need for an election. If that blocking hadn't taken place, instead the proposals would've been in hand. Although it is unlikely it would've have changed anything. Too many of them swanning about as it is. There will never be an end to it, so get used to more attacks of various sorts.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by nomadking

Exactly, yet you say Parliament approved it, they didn't. Nothing can be determined either way on the basis of the Queen's speech vote as it is merely symbolic.

It is the persistent blocking of the democratic vote and Brexit that led to the need for an election. If that blocking hadn't taken place, instead the proposals would've been in hand. Although it is unlikely it would've have changed anything. Too many of them swanning about as it is. There will never be an end to it, so get used to more attacks of various sorts.

Boris used the term blocked. That’s a lie on his part. You persist with it, knowing it’s incorrect.

His Government chose not to pursue his legislative agenda and vote for an election.

We really are through the looking glass here in attempts to defend the Conservatives at all costs.

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by jfman

Boris used the term blocked. That’s a lie on his part. You persist with it, knowing it’s incorrect.

His Government chose not to pursue his legislative agenda and vote for an election.

We really are through the looking glass here in attempts to defend the Conservatives at all costs.

They didn't block anything, but on the other hand they DIDN'T approve anything either, when you said they did approve it. The legislative agenda is to implement Brexit.
He said "amongst other things, not least, Brexit, and we need to get it done, so that we can move forward." Realistically nothing can happen with the Benn bill in the way.


The need for an election is indirectly blocking the contents of the Queen's speech.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by nomadking

They didn't block anything, but on the other hand they DIDN'T approve anything either, when you said they did approve it. The legislative agenda is to implement Brexit.
He said "amongst other things, not least, Brexit, and we need to get it done, so that we can move forward." Realistically nothing can happen with the Benn bill in the way.

Boris said blocked the legislation. That wasn’t true.

I didn’t say they approved anything. You are fighting your own straw man out of desperation to stick up for the Conservatives.

The need for an election is indirectly blocking the contents of the Queen's speech.

Under FTPA no such requirement exists. Please cease from misleading the forum.

[pip08456]

Originally Posted by jfman

Boris said blocked the legislation. That wasn’t true.

I didn’t say they approved anything. You are fighting your own straw man out of desperation to stick up for the Conservatives.



Under FTPA no such requirement exists. Please cease from misleading the forum.

You been made a moderator?

[jfman]

Originally Posted by pip08456

You been made a moderator?

No, and moderator instructions are in bold.

However if people continue to lie there's a high chance the discussion will continue needlessly, and go around circular points. Are you advocating forum members misleading the forum?

An astonishing stance to take, frankly.

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by jfman

Boris said blocked the legislation. That wasn’t true.

I didn’t say they approved anything. You are fighting your own straw man out of desperation to stick up for the Conservatives.

Under FTPA no such requirement exists. Please cease from misleading the forum.

Ok, looking back it wasn't you, it was Hugh. It was his post I initially replied to. But you agreed with his post.

Originally Posted by Hugh

BJ telling fibs on Andrew Marr this morning, saying the Queen's Speech, which set out his plans for government, including a bill to prevent automatic early release of prisoners, had been "blocked by Parliament" - it passed by 16 votes...

Linky - 24th October 2019

Nothing of substance can be done until Brexit is finally sorted out. Apart form anything else, the Remain crowd will tack on various Remain inspired amendments to anything brought
forward.

Eg

MPs also rejected the SNP's amendment which included demands for the retention of freedom of movement between the UK and Europe and a net-zero greenhouse gas emissions target by 2045.
Speaker John Bercow did not pick a Liberal Democrat amendment calling for a second referendum on the EU membership.

They will hijack and block anything they can.

[jfman]

I agreed that Boris was making a misleading statement. That's an observable fact to any user of this forum with any semblance of objectivity left.

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by jfman

I agreed that Boris was making a misleading statement. That's an observable fact to any user of this forum with any semblance of objectivity left.

He added ",amongst other things, not least, Brexit, and we need to get it done, so that we can move forward.". That was the rest of the statement. That is why there have been references to a "zombie government".

Whatever legislative agenda had been in place, has been blocked by the Brexit blockage. Until that is properly resolved, nothing of substance can be implemented. It really cannot be denied that Remainers have effectively blocked anything and everything of substance being able to take place.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by nomadking

He added ",amongst other things, not least, Brexit, and we need to get it done, so that we can move forward.". That was the rest of the statement. That is why there have been references to a "zombie government".

Whatever legislative agenda had been in place, has been blocked by the Brexit blockage. Until that is properly resolved, nothing of substance can be implemented. It really cannot be denied that Remainers have effectively blocked anything and everything of substance being able to take place.

I don't care for his caveats or other add-ons. Boris chose to push for an election - indeed despite the Withdrawal Agreement Bill passing second reading.

It was a choice of this Government, and this alone, to push for an election. It introduced, and voted for, the legislation to facilitate it.