Abolition of Parliament

[The Alcotroll]

No, really.

Read this

That's an article in the Times Online (for those that don't want to follow the link), and here's an excerpt that sums up what the bill is about.

The boring title of the Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill hides an astonishing proposal. It gives ministers power to alter any law passed by Parliament. The only limitations are that new crimes cannot be created if the penalty is greater than two years in prison and that it cannot increase taxation. But any other law can be changed, no matter how important. All ministers will have to do is propose an order, wait a few weeks and, voilà, the law is changed.

Here is the Bill itself, and here is an explanation of the Bill.

Here is what six Cambridge professers of Law thought about it.

Here are a number of burdensome regulations the bill would allow ministers to get rid of:

Magna Carta (1297), c. 29: "No freeman shall be taken or imprisoned, or be disseised of his freehold, or liberties, or free customs, or be outlawed, or exiled, or any other wise destroyed, nor will we not pass upon him, nor condemn him, but by lawful judgment of his peers, or by the law of the land. We will sell to no man, we will not deny or defer to any man either justice or right."

Habeas Corpus Act 1679, s. 1: "Whensoever any person or persons shall bring any habeas corpus directed unto any sheriffe or sheriffes gaoler minister or other person whatsoever for any person in his or their custody and the said writt shall be served upon the said officer or left at the gaole or prison with any of the under officers underkeepers or deputy of the said officers or keepers that the said officer or officers his or their under officers under-keepers or deputyes shall within three dayes after the service thereof as aforesaid...make returne of such writt or bring or cause to be brought the body of the partie soe committed or restrained unto or before the lord chauncelior or lord keeper of the great seale of England for the time being or the judges or barons of the said court from whence the said writt shall issue or unto and before such other person and persons before whome the said writt is made returnable according to the command thereof, and shall likewise then certifie the true causes of his detainer or imprisonment ..."

Parliament Act 1911, s. 7: "Five years shall be substituted for seven years as the time fixed for the maximum duration of Parliament under the Septennial Act 1715."

Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, s. 58(1): "A person arrested and held in custody in a police station or other premises shall be entitled, if he so requests, to consult a solicitor privately at any time."

Now this is by no means an overt step to sieze power, nor is it quite as much a big deal as the actions of a certain Herr Hitler circa 1933. But it is another step on the slippery slope to totalitarianism.

We've seen a request for 90 days detention without charge or trial (at the 'discretion' of the Police). We've seen the governments desparation to introduce ID cards. We've seen the growing proliferation of CCTV cameras, so much that the average Briton spends at least half of his or her day on screen. We've seen increasing use of ASBOS (a piece of flawed, knee-jerk legislation if ever there was one). Now we have this.

I think perhaps we have a right, even a duty, to be worried.

[Sétanta]

I knew the British Government was totalitarian

[Perikles]

This thread and the thread I created earlier 'The State of Britain' totally sum up our country at the moment. It is run by a 'dictator' in all but name that says he will do one thing but does another. Britain needs saving!

[MoROmeTe]

It is part of the trend tocreate more effective government in all countries and it is probably also a partycratic move signaling that parties that arrive in power want to be ale to pass measures without having to worry about getting parlament to agree on every issue.

In fact Parlament was originally all about not creating more taxation. It is reverting to this goal now.

[the Black Prince]

what the bloody hell???

there is no way that act is getting passed by parliament

the only thing about it thats good is that it allows law commission recommendations to be added to the criminal code without legislative session, which is major problem at the moment. the Commission make loads of recommendations and create draft bills for the reform of areas of law, but very few of them ever get implemented (The Theft Act 1968 is a good example of one that did). this would speed the process up, for sure, but at a major cost to parliamentary power

you forgot one major thing this act destroys

it destroys the doctrine of Parliamentary Sovereignty, the key core principle of our constitutuion


i have to say, i'm rather concerned by this bill, to the extent that i've just written to my local MP, Mark Lancaster (Con, MK North East) to find out both his and his parties position on the bill, i'm hoping the tories are opposing it.

i suggest you write to your MPs as well, you can send a message via www.writetothem.com so long as you know your post code

[internationalist]

Wow. GB. You guys are always several steps behind the U.S. I suppose. We've had the Patriot act for several years now!

[bdh]

Wow. GB. You guys are always several steps behind the U.S. I suppose. We've had the Patriot act for several years now!

Actually, this sort of stuff makes the Patriot Act look at a funny joke. The Act is always under legal fire and its only applied against an incredibly small subset of the population (who should also have their constitutional rights protected), even then, the Act at the very least had to have been approved by Congress. This new Legislation is much broader and gives seemingly unlimited power to certain individuals. Who knows, maybe they will even modify this bill if it passes so that they can create punishments that last longer than 2 years.

[Erik]

what the bloody hell???

there is no way that act is getting passed by parliament

I agree:
Bloody hell and no way is parliament going to allow this.

I wonder why they even try.
And why they don't see the danger of this bill being abused in the future.

Maybe they want a government like the EU: a parliament with no power, and comissions making laws behind closed doors.

[Tom Paine]

I think this calls for all men to take up the pen and write to their MPs. A vote for this bill from them is a vote against democracy.

[Denny Crane!]

This is about as serious as it gets. I resolutly oppose this bill, the scary thing is people pay so little attention to politics they won't even know if it has been passed.

Peter

[Kanaric]

LOL, i guess the UK would REALLY be able to do anything the US says if this ever passes.

[Yorkshireman]

LOL, i guess the UK would REALLY be able to do anything the US says if this ever passes.

#
It's got nothing to do with the United States.

[Kanaric]

#
It's got nothing to do with the United States.

I wasn't serious when i posted that. Just thought of some propoganda in which people say Blair and others are puppets of the US and put it into context.

and Kanaric is right, I suppose, Ministers can almost act on whim with this legislation.

This is an obviously flawed idea and should never pass. Something like this will DEFINATELY be tossed out, lol.

[imb39]

That is true... But we do seem to be following a similar trend. In this case, we're clearly heading along a very dangerous path and Kanaric is right, I suppose, Ministers can almost act on whim with this legislation.

[Tom Paine]

That is true... But we do seem to be following a similar trend. In this case, we're clearly heading along a very dangerous path and Kanaric is right, I suppose, Ministers can almost act on whim with this legislation.

They can, and there is no regulatory body that can stop them. Usually the Lords and Crown get the chance to say "no", but this goes over both. The only regulation would be international traties if this passed.

[Tom Paine]

If the Whips whip the Labour MPs into submission, and the Tories agree to it, then there is every possibility of it passing... Though hopefully the Queen wouldn't sign it making it not law.

[Denny Crane!]

Unfortunatley though who would protest if it went through.

I can honestly say apart from this board there isn't another person I know who even knows this has been suggested.

Peter

[Perikles]

Unfortunatley though who would protest if it went through.

I can honestly say apart from this board there isn't another person I know who even knows this has been suggested.

Peter

No-one does seem to know. The government wouldn't want it to be public knowledge though, would they?
All hail King Blair...

[The Alcotroll]

I can honestly say apart from this board there isn't another person I know who even knows this has been suggested.

Peter

Actually, I got the links from the Army Rumour Service website, and judging from the reaction to it there there'll be fireworks in the streets if the bill is ever passed.

What worries me is the lack of media coverage though. This should have every journalist in the country gibbering like a mad chimp, but there's no mention of it anywhere on respected sources like the BBC or Guardian. What's gone wrong?

[Tom Paine]

BBC has it and I found an article on it... about half a month old. That's when it seems it was proposed.