Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Democracy? What Democracy?
OLD American Century / White Rose Society message boards > Political Discussion forums > Politics In General
bob.appleyard
Hi, I've been away for a while. I'd just like to tell people about something very ominous happening in my own country, the UK. A bill is being proposed that will allow the government to enact laws without any effective oversight by Parliament, effectively shortcircuiting the only elected body in the country. British parliamentary democracy is legislating itself out of existence.

A bill, called the "Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill" (you already know to be suspicious, because it has "Reform" in it) has had its second reading, where the government refused to apply any suggested ammendments to it, and where it passed. While it has to go to the Lords, who may well strike it down, the Parliament Act means that if the Commons vote it through enough times it becomes law. Many MPs are behind the bill -- ironically because they think it will lessen their workload!

The bill is hailed as a wonderful device for "cutting red tape", and is being sold to the business community as such. The idea is that certain pieces of regulation are simplified or repealed on a "fast track" system: a government minister proposes a "Reform Order" which then gets voted on in the house, in a take-it-or-leave-it kind of way. This system already exists: it is part of the Regulatory Reform Act. However, in that act the system for approval was based on the "Super Affirmative" principle: it must be voted on by the house, in a limited time, and it must be approved or it doesn't get in. Note that under this regime most of the orders have passed.

This bill proposes to switch to the "Negative" principle: the house has a limited time to oppose the bill, after which point it automatically becomes law. Naturally, this time is shorter than under Super Affirmative. Furthermore, the range of legislation which the ministers have the power to change is truly disturbing:

QUOTE

(1) An order under section 1 may for either purpose specified in subsection (1) of that section make provision amending, repealing or replacing any legislation.

(2) Provision under subsection (1) may amend, repeal or replace legislation in any way that an Act might, and in particular may amend, repeal or replace legislation so as to—
(a) confer functions on any person (including functions of legislating or functions relating to the charging of fees);
(b) modify the functions conferred on any person by legislation;
© transfer, or provide for the transfer or delegation of, the functions conferred on any person by legislation.

This is subject to sections 4 to 7.

(3) An order under section 1 may for the purpose specified in subsection (1)(b) of that section also make—
(a) provision amending or abolishing any rule of law;
(b) provision codifying rules of law.

(4) An order under section 1 may make such consequential, supplementary, incidental or transitional provision (including provision amending, repealing or replacing any legislation or other provision) as the Minister making it considers appropriate.

(5) An order under section 1 may bind the Crown.


This confers nearly all the powers of Parliament into Whitehall, and completely away from any democratic oversight. There are only two limitations. An order may not create a new tax, nor may it create a crime with more than two year's gaol sentence. However, under the provisions of the bill, those limitations can be removed.

The Ministry at Whitehall, egged on by corporate financiers and business moguls who couldn't give a damn about democracy, are sleepwalking into a totalitarian state. I am very, very scared.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/c.../06111.1-4.html
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/comment/sto...1723807,00.html
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,1072-2049791,00.html
sky of mind
So, whatchu gonna do?
Max-1
Hi bob,

We have the same problem. It is commonly referred to as the Patriot Act.

It is meant to maintain civilians as Patriots to the State. In it's body, it has provisions that allow for lawlessness, if the Government see fit, and absolution from oversight in extreme cases, yet to be defined.

Scary no???

Similar, yet your's seems extreme in that it allows the PM and his agents design the laws as they see fit to meet their needs. Ours is defined by vagueness yet to be determined.

It's all sad so sad.
Knee jerk reactions to FEAR.

Democracy-0
Terrorists-1
bob.appleyard
QUOTE(sky of mind @ Sunday, 12 March 2006, 7:54 am) [snapback]46891[/snapback]

So, whatchu gonna do?


Not a great deal I can do, other than lobby my MP. Anything that ordinary people could have done to prevent this law going through has been made illegal.

And Max-1, they are not exactly knee-jerk reactions to fear, at least not on the part of the ministers. They're going for a power grab. And it's not fear, but idleness (and business inspired corruption) which is leading to MPs supporting it. This bill has nothing to do with terror, ostensibly -- it is being sold as a way to streamline regulatory changes.
sky of mind
QUOTE(bob.appleyard @ Sunday, 12 March 2006, 9:33 am) [snapback]46916[/snapback]

Not a great deal I can do, other than lobby my MP. Anything that ordinary people could have done to prevent this law going through has been made illegal.

And Max-1, they are not exactly knee-jerk reactions to fear, at least not on the part of the ministers. They're going for a power grab. And it's not fear, but idleness (and business inspired corruption) which is leading to MPs supporting it. This bill has nothing to do with terror, ostensibly -- it is being sold as a way to streamline regulatory changes.




Unless it is the will of the people, they will ultimately fail.
These are people who are used to and expect their freedoms.
If the people allow it, then it's the will of the people.
bob.appleyard
QUOTE(sky of mind @ Sunday, 12 March 2006, 6:49 pm) [snapback]46918[/snapback]

Unless it is the will of the people, they will ultimately fail.
These are people who are used to and expect their freedoms.
If the people allow it, then it's the will of the people.


That's the sort of logic dictatorial regimes use to justify their existence.

While they will very probably fail in the long run, that failure could get messy.
sky of mind
QUOTE(bob.appleyard @ Sunday, 12 March 2006, 9:56 am) [snapback]46921[/snapback]

That's the sort of logic dictatorial regimes use to justify their existence.

While they will very probably fail in the long run, that failure could get messy.




True enough, but short of using the system in the way it's intended
or failing that, out right revolution, not much choice eh?
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2009 Invision Power Services, Inc.