BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Jun 23 - 06:02 PM

Well perhaps it's a conversation for another day, but the Lords is a massively over-inflated place, populated in part by a rather large number of very elderly people who tend to turn up for a snooze and their three hundred quid daily allowance. I was in the audience of Question Time in 2002 and Bumblebee picked me out to make my comment. I said, in front of three million people, that I thought that an elected Lords was a bad idea, and I still think that now. We have enough trouble getting a decent turnout for general elections, even worse for by-elections and council elections. I think that elections for the Lords would attract low turnouts, and low turnouts are absolutely terrible for democracy. We need a national conversation about the Lords. How many members (I'd suggest 200 maximum), what the party balance should be, what the balance between party and crossbenchers should be, how we fix it after general elections so that the balance remains fair, etc. We need experts in there but we also need people who are not part of the establishment. We don't need political appointees and we definitely don't need clerics unless they are proven experts in other fields. I suppose we need an independent panel of very wise people to vet suggested members and to keep that balance. I also suppose that I'm in cloud cuckoo land.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 10 Jun 23 - 12:32 PM

Sorry, that should have been “Self-pitying, discredited, disgraced”…etc., etc., etc.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 10 Jun 23 - 12:30 PM

They should have ALL been blocked, Steve. What possible value can such awards have, made as they are by a discredited, disgraced serial cheat and liar who was driven from office in shame by his own party colleagues? Zero, I would say.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Rain Dog
Date: 10 Jun 23 - 11:36 AM

From The Times

"Nadine Dorries has quit as a Conservative MP with “immediate effect” after being told she would not be elevated to the House of Lords in Boris Johnson’s resignation honours list.

The former cabinet minister described her decision as a “relief” and said she had stayed on in the House of Commons after Johnson’s resignation as prime minister only because she hoped to be ennobled.

But her name was not on Johnson’s list of peers after it was vetoed, along with three other serving Tory MPs, by the independent House of Lords appointments commission (Holac).

The commission is understood to have made clear it could not approve serving MPs as it did not know when they would stand down to take up their seats in the Lords and any vetting could be out of date. As a result the commission struck their names from the list."

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Jun 23 - 11:18 AM

You could be right, but there is no constitutional basis for these honours lists, and Sunak could have stopped all or any of these appointments. We may never know who they were blocked by, John.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 10 Jun 23 - 10:46 AM

I read that yesterday too, on the BBC News App I believe, RD. But I also read that Dorries and Stanley Johnson were on the list but had been ‘blocked’. By whom (button it Steve), if not Fishy Rishi, one wonders? Possibly HM The King?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Rain Dog
Date: 10 Jun 23 - 09:17 AM

That does not seem to be the case. From the BBC

"Rishi Sunak has approved Mr Johnson's resignation honours list and "forwarded it unamended" to King Charles, the prime minister's press secretary said.

"He had no involvement or input into the approved list," the press secretary said.

By convention, a former prime minister's resignation list of new peers is forwarded to the House of Lords Appointments Commission (HOLAC), which vets appointments."

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Jun 23 - 08:48 AM

I think Sunak forbade Dorries and Stanley, actually. He should have dumped the whole lot.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 10 Jun 23 - 08:11 AM

LOL! :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 10 Jun 23 - 07:54 AM

Dozy Doris probably got a knighthood but didn't understand the invitation

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 10 Jun 23 - 07:15 AM

I’m not surprised he’s given The Haunted Pencil a knighthood, but Wiggy Fabricunt? FFS!
Strange that he didn’t give Dorries anything though?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Jun 23 - 06:17 AM

He's already removed himself...?

Amusing in a black-comedic way to see two entitled fat wreckers, one on each side of the Atlantic, whingeing about being witch-hunted. You could almost wish for bringing back burning, or, at the very minimum, the ducking stool...

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: SPB-Cooperator
Date: 10 Jun 23 - 04:52 AM

johns is spouting his sense of self-entitlement to the end , ranting that the Privileges Committee should be all about ensuring that its rooe is to protect elitism and privilege, rather than scrutinise the privileges that MPs have and ensure that they are not abused in the pursuit of personal interests

That fact that he has resigned should not get in the way of there being a recall petition so that a local referendum can be held to remove him from his seat.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Jun 23 - 04:50 AM

I have this vague feeling that he's less than keen on Sue Gray and Harriet Harman... :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 10 Jun 23 - 01:38 AM

Johnson’s full resignation statement - nothing more than a spoilt posh-boy’s diatribe of self-pity. Pass me the sick-bowl please…

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Jun 23 - 06:15 PM

Labour needs to step back and let these entitled morons get on with the self-immolation. Wheeling out Emily Thornberry to have a go is useless. She's crowing, and, despite her political skills, which I admire, she has as much charm as a week-old dog turd.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: MaJoC the Filk
Date: 09 Jun 23 - 05:25 PM

Short version: de Pfeffel's resigned as an MP. At least the English news channels only did two hoursworth of "we don't know but we'll tell you anyway" talking-heads coverage: I thought I'd be camping out in the kitchen for days.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Jun 23 - 05:25 PM

Sir Mogg! Dame Patel! Woo bloody hoo!

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 09 Jun 23 - 05:15 PM

Johnson ‘resigned with immediate effect’ after being receiving the report of the Partygate Inquiry. Not before time, IMHO, but he managed to get his arse-kisser cronies their knighthoods and peerages before buggering off.

And, just like his hero Trump, he’s trying to make himself the victim, claiming that it’s part of a Remainers’ plot to overturn the result of the 2016 Referendum and reverse Brexit. What a dick.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 16 May 23 - 08:52 PM

The Tory shit-rags are in full-on, spittle-flecked outrage mode over Starmer’s suggestion that the voting age could be lowered to 16, and that non-UK nationals who have settled-status here might also be permitted to vote. I had to smile wryly at the Daily Heil’s headline yesterday, screaming that it’s an attempt at ‘vote-rigging’!

Strangely, they weren’t similarly exercised by the Tories’ own adventures in ‘vote-rigging’ by moving constituency boundaries to benefit their election prospects, and introducing voter photo-ID regulations - officially to solve the (non-existent) problem of voter-fraud, but actually designed to deter young voters, who are more likely to vote for opposition parties, from taking part in elections.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: SPB-Cooperator
Date: 16 May 23 - 06:02 PM

and mogg whining that the voter ID was gerrymandering but didn't work in the tories favour....

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: DMcG
Date: 16 May 23 - 05:17 PM

Surely the biggest news of the last day or two that is not recorded here is Farage saying "Brexit has failed.'
My suspixion is it will be hard to find any Leave supporters who say Nigel Farage played any part in their decision making.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: SPB-Cooperator
Date: 16 May 23 - 01:29 PM

what a day.... so much happening and not really sure where the start, still... Not in any particular order of importance.

Gove whining that allowing settled EU nationals and 16-18 year olds to vote would be rigging the election.   Surely if those in that segment decide that they do not want to vote for tory garbage, it is the tory parties own problem, or do they consider that they should just shut up and allow the tory party to continue to **** up their lives without a murmer?

Braverman whining on that British workers are not doing their -patriotic duty to quit their jobs and work in the fields instead so they can justify their xenoph0bic policies of stopping people who are prepared to do seasonal work to put food on our shelves. Not a word about.

(1) Where people relocating from inner city areas will be rehoused. Have locations for housing estates in rural villages and hamlets been earmarked? If village NIMBYs complain, will they be told to **** *** to the inner cities, to provide housing work agricultural workers.
(2) Wil their be adequate schools, health services, retail parks built in villages?
(3) Will agricultural land be seized by the government to provide career pathways for agricultural workers?
(4) Will agricultural workers be abe to take annual leave in the summer?
(5) will agricultural workers be entitled to all year permanent employment?
(6) if not, will employers be required to give workers who are employed in existing jobs absence of leave on top of thier annual leave entitlement, and topping up the wages of the agricultural work in line with their existing employment.
(7) Will agricultural workers who chose not to move permanently to the new housing estates but work seasonally have their housing costs for their main home paid for by their local authority?
(8) Will it be made a criminal offence to not allow workers time off t0 attend agricultural work even if it leads to acute labour shortages elsewhere.
(9) Will school lessons be aligned 100% between children; existing and new/temporary schools so there is no interruption to their studies. Will the teachers in the rural schools be forced to teach every subject covered in the existing schools?

I have probably missed out a few more questions on issues that would be needed to make this a good idea, rather than breaking a system that has worked to everyone's advantage (except for racists) for decades.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 11 May 23 - 07:02 PM

Quite so, Nigel. I blame muck on my reading glasses. However, I feel that my misreading error didn't really change the sense of what I was trying to say. See what you think!

"But it's not a rule, Nigel. How can you have an exemption to not-a-rule?"

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 11 May 23 - 04:17 PM

Steve: I didn't mention exceptions!

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 May 23 - 01:31 PM

But it's not a rule, Nigel. How can you have an exception to not-a-rule?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 10 May 23 - 12:03 PM

Steve: I had to check the lyrics, I always remembered it with a double-negative "ain't no place I'm going to". Glad to now get it right.

Exemptions to most English rules are often made for poetry and song writing in order to facilitate rhyme and scansion.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 10 May 23 - 11:49 AM

Nit-picking is something up with which we should not put. ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 May 23 - 10:20 AM

How about this one, Nigel?

"Hey, Mr. Tambourine Man, play a song for me
I'm not sleepy and there is no place I'm going to"

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 May 23 - 07:06 AM

There has never been a rule about not ending sentences with prepositions, except ones proposed by po-faced grammar police. But get a load of this beauty:

What did you bring me the magazine I didn’t want to be read to out of about “‘Over Under Sideways Down’ up from Down Under” up around for?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 10 May 23 - 06:34 AM

It has always been about crown ownership and the connotations behind that, Nigel. Sorry I didn't make that clear.

Maybe make the default owner something like the British museum?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 10 May 23 - 06:30 AM

Dave,
That seems to be the first time you've suggested putting something in place of 'the crown' in this matter. But replace it with 'the state'? Would governments of all colours have the same 'veneration' for our history? Would some governments see the finding of a massive treasure as a way to help their funds, rather than paying the finders?

Until a good alternative is suggested, and thought through, the current system works. Hence the prosecutions.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 10 May 23 - 06:21 AM

I'm happy with all that, Nigel, but object to the central ownership being "the crown". The State or the people, fine, but the crown is a different entity and needs to be removed as the default owner. The sooner we stop harking back to feudalism, the sooner we can begin to demolish the class structure.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 10 May 23 - 05:54 AM

Doug:
To argue semantics is the nit-picking that others are so often accused of.

'of which others are so often accused'
A preposition is not something to end a sentence with!

Sorry, couldn't resist.

;)

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 10 May 23 - 05:51 AM

Dave:
That, again, is the whole point, Nigel. Why should the treasure belong to the crown? A remnant of feudalism.

I believe I answered that by implication. If the ownership of 'treasure' was not vested in the crown then it must lie elsewhere. That would be with one of: Original Owners, Finders, Landowner (there could be other possibilities).
It then means that there is nothing to stop the finder from taking and disposing of the treasure as they wish. This would lead to great losses for landowners and the archaeological purists, and our knowledge of British history.
Having a central ownership of found treasure allows the government/crown to insist on rules on how finds must be handled. The crown's ownership, as I showed, does not mean that the crown owns the value of the treasure (this is available to the finder/landowner) but can restrict how the treasure is distributed/disposed of.

If it was not vested in the crown we would have to find another interim owner to provide the same safeguards.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 08 May 23 - 06:12 AM

...yet :-D

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 08 May 23 - 06:11 AM

BTW - "The king can't look at a piece of treasure and think "Ooh, that would look nice on my mantlepiece. I think I'll have that"

That is not the crown. That is the person. The crown and personal wealth are two different things but neither are owned by the state.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 08 May 23 - 06:08 AM

In modern terms, the crown does not mean the king/royal family. It is synonymous with the State.

Sorry Doug but that is still not quite true. And it is not nit-picking. If it was the same, why not abolish the term "the crown" altogether and move towards a state where we are not constantly reminded of our place in society? Well below our feudal lords and masters!

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 08 May 23 - 05:45 AM

The royal family do not prosecute anyone but the law states that the treasure belongs to the crown. The crown and state are two seperate entitities. Agreements were drawn up when William and Mary were offered the throne. The declaration of rights limited the monarchs powers but they retained the rights to summon and dissolve Parliament, appoint and dismiss Ministers, veto legislation and declare war. It is the veto that ranckles. Why do you think the tenants on Charlies land were not given the right to buy or, back to the point, why the crown retains the right to keep found treasue?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Doug Chadwick
Date: 08 May 23 - 05:43 AM

Why should the treasure belong to the crown? A remnant of feudalism.

The king can't look at a piece of treasure and think "Ooh, that would look nice on my mantlepiece. I think I'll have that". It stays in a museum or other place of safekeeping until it is decided what to do with it

In modern terms, the crown does not mean the king/royal family. It is synonymous with the State. To argue semantics is the nit-picking that others are so often accused of.

DC

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Rain Dog
Date: 08 May 23 - 05:06 AM

The Crown as in tbe state. I am not aware of the Royal Family having a claim on any treasure unless it is found on their land.

The people were prosecuted by the CPS. Was that by the state or the Royal Family?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 08 May 23 - 03:24 AM

That, again, is the whole point, Nigel. Why should the treasure belong to the crown? A remnant of feudalism.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 07 May 23 - 02:58 PM

While the treasure may 'belong to The Crown', the finders/landowners will be paid a fair market value if it is retained for a museum etc.
If the museums don't want it it is returned to the finders/landowners to keep or sell on.
The finders mentioned in the report appear to have been trying to circumvent these rules. Hence not reporting the find, and possibly denying archaeologists the chance to follow-up on the find. Also (more likely the intent) not advising the landowner on whose property it was found and so not having to pay out a share of the proceeds.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 06 May 23 - 12:43 PM

So you are a Republican, so what? Not particulary Stanron. Just someone that doesn't like the idea that someone who did sweet FA to earn something gets it by default!

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 May 23 - 08:45 AM

Oops, that belongs in the c*ra*ati*n thread!

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 May 23 - 08:43 AM

By the way, Morrisons was bloody heaving and the sun has been beaming warmly down on Bude since 11!

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Stanron
Date: 06 May 23 - 07:59 AM

But the finders/land owners are given the value of their finds. So you are a Republican, so what?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 06 May 23 - 07:52 AM

The crown, Stanron, not the state. An anachronistic law rooted in feudalism which should have been updated by the 1996 act. But who has to approve all new laws? The sovereign.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 06 May 23 - 07:48 AM

Treasure act 1996
4Ownership of treasure which is found.
(1)When treasure is found, it vests, subject to prior interests and rights—
(a)in the franchisee, if there is one;
(b)otherwise, in the Crown.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit & other UK political topics - 2
From: Stanron
Date: 06 May 23 - 07:30 AM

From the link provided by Rain Dog The treasure belongs to the state, in other terms, us.

The value goes to the finder and owner of the property. This way the treasure has a chance of staying in the country. I see this as being better than the treasure being smuggled out of the country and stashed away in the vaults of some anonymous rich guy.