Reform UK’s manifesto pledges are “poisoning the public debate” in Britain by promising unrealistic spending plans which undermine other parties’ policies, the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) has said.
This is an election. Undermining other party’s promises is the very name of the game.
Blimey.
He said: “The way they suggest that they have radical ideas which can realistically make a positive difference, when in fact what they propose is wholly unattainable, helps to poison the entire political debate.
“It makes the other parties look feeble when you say, ‘We can do all this stuff. You can’t.’”
Only stuff PJ believes may be promosed apparently….
That was in the Telegraph. In The Times he lambasts both Conservatives and Labour for their dodgy promises as well.
https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/labour-and-tory-plans-are-unfunded-says-ifs-cq059fjdl
“It makes the other parties look feeble when you say, ‘We can do all this stuff. You can’t.’”
Never mind tax, the most important issues in this election are reducing immigration and reversing net zero commitments. The sentiment expressed above is to the forefront of voters minds when considering both of them although it’s more a case of “you won’t” rather than “you can’t”.
” they suggest that they have radical ideas which can realistically make a positive difference, when in fact what they propose is wholly unattainable”.
Net zero is doomed then eh?
The other parties were looking feeble long before Reform unveiled their plans.
“paid for by a £150bn package of measures that includes substantial and completely unspecified cuts in welfare and government waste.”
£150bn?
Cut universities back to just STEM courses. £15bn/annum.
Cut rail subsidies to zero. £8bn.
Eco spending? £11bn
Foreign aid? £15bn
Subsidy of housing benefit to London. £10bn.
Funding of the charity sector. £15bn.
Arts Council. £1bn
Off the top of my head, and without getting into the amount of nonsense done inside government departments, that’s half the money.
Demented by loathing for the Tories and their failures, Reform voters are about to elect – or, rather, be complicit in electing – an extreme left-wing government with vast majority – to punish the current one for…er… being too left-wing.
Highest taxes in 70 years? Take revenge by installing a regime that will raise taxes even higher….Epidemiologically futile Covid lockdowns? Elect a leader who lobbied for locking down harder and longer…..Brexit supporters devastated that the still passively Remainer Tory party has not capitalised on renewed sovereignty will elect an actively Remainer Labour party, whose leader plans to snuggle back in the bosom of the EU….And so on and on…
That’ll show ’em!!!
Unattainable only if you don’t try. You have to have at least an aspiration to do something. Alternative manifesto: Promise change wthout defining it, but keep doing the same things when in office.
Haven’t the IFS hear of Millei? You’d think they needed to follow that sort of things, like it was a …financial study.
The IFS is a govt funded QUANGO. It is dead set against a party that says it will remove govt funding of QUANGOs.
I’d be against my trough being removed too, if I had one, which I don’t.
@Theoprastus
A Labour win is a foregone conclusion.
The decision is:
a) tactical vote for Labour lite (Tories) hoping some might get in and present a centre left opposition to the hard left Labour govt;
b) a vote for the party that most closely matches one’s ideals in the hope some might get in and present a stark contrast in opposition to the hard left Labour govt.
Not much thinking required.
Theo, it’s not Reform’s fault that the tories are collapsing. It’s not down to Reform if Labour get in. It is down to the conservative party that didn’t have a clue of what it stands for and which stands against..absolutely nothing.
Western Bloke,
Abolishing Barnett would save another £10bn or so.
Interest saved as a result of not have to borrow to pay for HS2 would be a minimum of £5bn p.a. even before you consider the extra indebtedness – admittedly just a drop in the ocean in the grand scheme of things.
Damn, I better vote for that Indian midget’s lemon party then.
Oh wait, no I don’t.
@Theo – I get enough project fear hysteria from the Terriblegraph thanks.
There will be no progress for conservatism in the UK until the Conservative Party is destroyed. Ideally with pitchforks and bonfires and extra-judicial drowning, but at the ballot box will have to do.
A Labour government is baked in and it has been baked in by 14 years of Tory lies, incompetence and continuity Blairism.
@Swannypol – A quango you say? I seem to remember someone promising a bonfire of the quangos. I wonder what happened to that…..
Theo – don’t worry, I plan to vote Conservative as many times as William Hague plans to have heterosexual sex with his wife.
Tactically: There will be a Labour majority. So the presence of Tory MPs in the forthcoming Parliament is irrelevant. The Labour majority will be the result of the appalling performance of the outgoing Tory government. So the optimum solution it to utterly destroy the Tory party so there’s no chance of them ever being elected with a majority again & leave the field open for a new party. This election doesn’t matter as it’s already a foregone conclusion. This is now about the next election. If Reform’s going to be the replacement party of the right it’s necessary to get as many Reform MPs now as possible, so they can form a credible opposition or the next election’s in doubt.
So Theo, just FO old chap. You’re making a disastrous situation even worse. Tactically, one never reinforces failure. Retreat & prepare a counter attack
Theo,
We had this back in 2010. People like John Redwood complaining that voting for UKIP had meant a coalition, so we wouldn’t be so Eurosceptic. Apart from the bullshit that the Conservatives did sod all about Europe, it frightened them, so they had to promise a referendum.
Voting for the Conservatives is a slightly slower descent into socialism. You can’t keep running on two parties that both think a bigger state is a good idea forever. At some point, it’s going to break. At some point, you have to take the medium-term pain of Labour for the purpose of destroying the Tory wets. Either the Conservatives can come back from that being a more right-wing party that regains the votes lost to Reform, or Reform keep growing and put them out of business permanently.
Incidentally, it’s fascinating to see the same volume attacks on Farage & Reform coming from left circles as the Tories. In fact their even more hysterical. The BBC doesn’t know whether to attack Reform or try to pretend it doesn’t exist.
But of course, from the left’s perspective, it makes perfect sense. They wish to preserve the existence of the Tory party because it’s unlikely to provide a threat for a decade or more if ever.
Vote Tory. Do Labour’s work for them.
BIS,
“Tactically, one never reinforces failure. Retreat & prepare a counter attack”
Reminds me of the idea in WWII of reinforcing the battle damaged planes that had returned where they had bullet holes. When the question really was, where should the planes that didn’t return have been reinforced.
Anybody know what “public debate” these crotch sniffers are referring to?
Are we meant to believe there’s some sort of (mass) debate going on?
WB
Cut universities back to just STEM courses. £15bn/annum.
If only governing were that easy! In order to neutralise opposition from the Blob, any government hoping to implement that policy would need a comprehensive policy plan showing that they had identified the advantages, disadvantages, costs (including of unintended consequences) and savings. In itself, that is a major undertaking: the Blob would fight back – with leaks, stonewalling etc. Then the government would have to consult widely and thoroughly. Any mis-step, particularly in consultation, would lead to judicial review(s) – and long delays. And given redundancy payments, property costs, phasing costs, etc, the savings probably wouldn’t show until the 4th or 5th year of government, if then….
Your policy could be achieved; but it would take huge effort…and any government’s ‘bandwidth’ is limited – which is why the blessed Margaret (pbuh) was so cautious…
any government hoping to implement that policy would need a comprehensive policy plan showing that they had identified the advantages, disadvantages, costs (including of unintended consequences) and savings
Just like the Tories did before lockdowns.
Swannypol
Not much thinking required.
Er…the rational way to vote is tactically – to maximise the right of ‘centre’ vote and minimise Labour’s majority. In my constituency, a vote for Reform risks the creepier Labour candidate winning. If I were in a constituency were Reform stood a chance, I’d vote Reform…
Meanwhile, motor-mouth Farage has apparently shot himself in the foot by claiming that the West “provoked” Putin to invade Ukraine. Provocation is largely in the eye of the beholder; and provocation does not alone justify violent action. A woman may dress provocatively, but that doesn’t justify her rape! Putin is trying to alter international borders by force, not consent. And that is broadly unacceptable to the British sense of fairness.
it’s not Reform’s fault that the tories are collapsing. It’s not down to Reform if Labour get in.
Empirically, that’s simply not true. Reform is dividing the right-of-centre vote. Labour will get in; but Reform will ensure them a mega-majority. Vote tactically to minimise a Labour majority!
Theo
“Meanwhile, motor-mouth Farage has apparently shot himself in the foot by claiming that the West “provoked” Putin to invade Ukraine. Provocation is largely in the eye of the beholder; and provocation does not alone justify violent action.”
Farage is right to point out the provocation but he ALSO said it doesnt justify Putins actions and blames Putin for the war. Its not Farages fault the biased like to provide half the detail.
Reform is dividing the right-of-centre vote.
Wrong.
Reform is the only right of centre party standing in the election.
Vote tactically to minimise a Labour majority!
No.
Marius
There will be no progress for conservatism in the UK until the Conservative Party is destroyed.
Where is the evidence for your claim? If you want conservatism to prosper, you destroy the socialist party before you destroy the only (admitted very weak) bulwark against socialism. You don’t give socialism a free rein with a mega-majority!! You vote tactically – to maximise the right-of-centre vote!
PS The UK’s two major parties are unlikely to disappear soon. The Tories have huge resources; and they will recover.
PS The UK’s two major parties are unlikely to disappear soon. The Tories have huge resources; and they will recover.
No they won’t.
“HIV causes AIDS.”
Hey! Stop being an HIV apologist!
Theo: The Tories were destroyed in the 1830s, and regrouped to form the Conservative Party. It can happen again.
Don’t split the centre right vote by voting Conservative, vote reform.
Theophrastus (2066) said:
“the rational way to vote is … to minimise Labour’s majority”
Theo, that’s irrelevant in our Parliamentary system, and you know it is.
Once a party has a majority of more than a few dozen (to cover five years of deaths and a few floor-crossers), it makes no difference whether that majority is 50 or 350.
Since it’s clear that Labour are going to get a majority in that range, the only people who benefit from having a few more Conservative MPs are those Conservative MPs and their employees.
Theo,
“If only governing were that easy! In order to neutralise opposition from the Blob, any government hoping to implement that policy would need a comprehensive policy plan showing that they had identified the advantages, disadvantages, costs (including of unintended consequences) and savings. In itself, that is a major undertaking: the Blob would fight back – with leaks, stonewalling etc. Then the government would have to consult widely and thoroughly. Any mis-step, particularly in consultation, would lead to judicial review(s) – and long delays. And given redundancy payments, property costs, phasing costs, etc, the savings probably wouldn’t show until the 4th or 5th year of government, if then….”
Let’s start from the assumption of a parliamentary majority for Reform.
1) Leaks? The Guardian get upset? So what.
2) Stonewalling? Who is going to stop it? Not MPs. We have a majority. The Lords? You just use the parliament act, repeatedly.
3) Consultation? No. This is the Ineffecive Tory Coward Playbook. You figure out what is to be done, and you make it policy, pass bills, change spending. You do not treat the people who would destroy you as your pals. You destroy them.
4) Judicial Reviews? Firstly, you get some really good lawyers and figure out what would count as incompatibilities in the law. You figure that out, including ending those laws first, so you can proceed. Then you pass that law. Then if you make a mistake, you have a team of lawyers working the weekend and drafting a new bill. And you present that to parliament on Monday. You push it through the Lords. You have it on statute by Friday. And carry on.
“Your policy could be achieved; but it would take huge effort…and any government’s ‘bandwidth’ is limited – which is why the blessed Margaret (pbuh) was so cautious…”
The blessed Margaret, in 11 years, privatised the utilities, took on and beat the miners, beat the Argies in a war, deregulated financial markets, deregulated the opticians market, cut taxes from some bonkers level to 40%, brought in right to buy, created enterprise zones, negotiated the EU rebate, approved a (private) channel tunnel, got rid of Rover, introduced an internal market to the NHS.
What are the achievements of the Conservatives since 2010? It’s nothing, isn’t it? Or at least, nothing beyond things that the average Socialist Worker seller would be happy with. Raising taxes, throwing even more money at the NHS, increasing the size of the eco and diversity industries, increasing spending on trains, gay marriage, letting more immigrants in, increasing the cost of the BBC license fee.
What are the achievements of the Conservatives since 2010?
Well, they did get the Home Office to change its definition of grooming gangs, so they could pretend all those children were drugged, beaten, raped and pimped by Englishmen.
That’s an achievement, right?
BiS
There will be a Labour majority.
True, on the evidence available
So the presence of Tory MPs in the forthcoming Parliament is irrelevant.
Not true. Any government- particularly a socialist one – requires an effective opposition!
The Labour majority will be the result of the appalling performance of the outgoing Tory government.
True.
So the optimum solution it [sic] to utterly destroy the Tory party…
Non sequitur. It is wholly irrational to destroy the only (weak) bulwark to socialism we have when the result is likely to be socialist tyranny…Duh!!
… so there’s no chance of them ever being elected with a majority again…
Non sequitur
& leave the field open for a new party.
Yes, while the socialists rig the system in their favour with votes for 16yo and more lawfare, that sounds like a great plan!!
WB
A Reform government is pure fantasy. Consultation is a legal requirement – with detailed specifics. And fighting the Blob requires deep resources, which Reform wouldn’t have. I have worked in government, the private sector and the voluntary sector at senior levels, and I have seen how the Blob works….
Steve
Have you ever considered making a rational comment? Sneers wear thin…
Just sayin’
I refer you to what I just posted on the other thread ( we seem to have two running simultaneously!)
Yes, while the socialists rig the system in their favour with votes for 16yo and more lawfare, that sounds like a great plan!!
If you think the “system” is going to help you you’re cracked. The system was taken over years ago. Why play by somebody else’s rules, when those rules have been designed to defeat you?
As I said on the other thread, learn from the Left. Worth doing I would have thought since they’ve been so successful. The electoral process is not the only route to get what you want. An nor is the law. Fuck the law. The law isn’t & has never been about justice. It’s a tool to keep us in our place. To keep the powerful in power. These days it’s the enemy.
socialists rig the system in their favour with votes for 16yo
It’s so revealing that Tories embrace defeat like a long lost lover. Look across the Channel. I should think Macron’s wishing the electoral age was 26 or better 36. The biggest swing to the Right has been amongst the lowest age group. They’re your potential voters. If you had anything to offer them.
Theo – Have you ever considered making a rational comment?
Why, what good would that do?
BiS
Without evidence or logic, you cast about embarrassingly for anything to support your feeble case.
1. Handing over the system to socialists never, ever, works out well – we are still coping with the damage the Attlee government did! And advocating revolutionary change will get you nowhere electorally. No sane person recommends by-passing the rule of law. In a democracy, we change the laws…
2. 16yo are indoctrinated by a leftist education system. Why do you think Labour wants to give them the vote? Generosity? Ethics? Generally, the right can win converts among the young only when they begin to pay tax. And young women tend to see the state as Daddy…
“A Reform government is pure fantasy.”
I thought the point of your quote was what they would do if they got a government.
“Consultation is a legal requirement – with detailed specifics.”
Do you have a link to that? As far as I can tell there are consultation principles. Which isn’t the same as a law.
“And fighting the Blob requires deep resources, which Reform wouldn’t have. I have worked in government, the private sector and the voluntary sector at senior levels, and I have seen how the Blob works….”
Reform comes to power with a parliamentary majority. On day 1, they announce the introduction of 800 new members of the house of lords, they swear them in that week, giving a Reform majority in the Lords and Commons. Day 8, they announce the bill to end collection of the license fee, to take effect in 30 days. It goes in and out of the Lords by the end of Day 8. So by day 40, the license fee is dead. As far as I can tell, this can be done. What can the “blob” do to stop it?
And advocating revolutionary change will get you nowhere electorally.
Such as an 80 seat majority to Get Brexit Done.
Just not possible, chaps.
“As far as I can tell there are consultation principles. Which isn’t the same as a law.”
Case law, dear boy. Any number of judicial reviews have turned on consultation procedures.
“So by day 40, the license fee is dead. As far as I can tell, this can be done. What can the “blob” do to stop it?”
The implementation of the legislation would probably be blocked in the courts – not least because abolition would need to be phased, alternative funding arrangements might need to be put in place, pensions and redundancies would have to be paid for, and parts of the BBC might need to be privatised (with associated legislation)…. It would take up to 5 years for the BBC to move to a subscription model…
Theo – The implementation of the legislation would probably be blocked in the courts – not least because abolition would need to be phased, alternative funding arrangements might need to be put in place, pensions and redundancies would have to be paid for, and parts of the BBC might need to be privatised (with associated legislation)…. It would take up to 5 years for the BBC to move to a subscription model…
So Parliament is not sovereign?
Handing over the system to socialists never, ever, works out well –
It’s not supposed to work out well. It’s intended to be a disaster & cause as much harm as possible. Let the left discredit itself. It’s not even as if anything’s lost by it. The country will be ruined anyway. Just advances the schedule for the destruction of the Left so there’s something remaining to rebuild with.
16yo are indoctrinated by a leftist education system.
The French left though they’d done that. How’s that working out for them?
Jeez is it surprising that the Tories are in such a bad state when this is the best they can offer. They are utterly clueless. All they know how to do is surrender. Sooner they’re buried by history the better.
English Cheese Eating Surrender Monkeys. (Shame the cheese ain’t better)
Surprising who you find on your side:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/06/25/vauxhall-stellantis-threatens-stop-making-electric-vans-uk/
The car giant behind Vauxhall has threatened to mothball its UK factories amid a row over net zero targets for electric vehicle (EV) sales.
“Handing over the system to socialists never, ever, works out well …”
Correct. Which is why I refuse to vote Tory, Labour or LibDem.
Theo,
“The implementation of the legislation would probably be blocked in the courts – not least because abolition would need to be phased, alternative funding arrangements might need to be put in place, pensions and redundancies would have to be paid for, and parts of the BBC might need to be privatised (with associated legislation)…. It would take up to 5 years for the BBC to move to a subscription model…”
That’s not a matter for the course. Frankly, you’ve been swallowing the excuse-making of the Conservatives for too long. “Well, we’d have the immigrants in Rwanda if it wasn’t for these pesky lawyers”.
The idea that if only reform packed up and disappeared their vote would go to the Tories is verging on laughable. A few might, some will go to Labour but I’d bet good money the majority would sit on their hands.
Theo,
“Case law, dear boy. Any number of judicial reviews have turned on consultation procedures.”
Yes, and that’s about a law or rules of government defining that there should be a consultation procedure and then government not following it. Judicial review is about a law breaking a higher law. Like you can’t write a law that breaks the ECHR. You first have to leave the ECHR, then you can write the law.
If you don’t say there has to be a consultation procedure, you don’t have to follow one. But if you say there has to be one, then you do.
Perhaps you should go back to having the Lords as the court of last resort.
It always seemed reasonable that if a case progressed right to the top, the establishment which occupied the upper house would make the decision. In favour of their interests, of course.
“ Perhaps you should go back to having the Lords as the court of last resort.”
Until that happens Brexit won’t be complete because Parliament still isn’t supreme.
Steve: So Parliament is not sovereign?‘
Well done: you got there.
After Blair’s legal reforms, judges rule – not Parliament. After Starmer, the situation will be far, far worse – with judges, quangos and even charities ruling the ‘progressive’ roost. And voting Reform to ensure a Labour/LD victory over a Tory is like turkeys voting for Christmas…
I am sure you imagine that a future right-wing government will repeal all such pesky legislation. It won’t happen! Like Blair, Starmer will move the UK further left. And the “centrist” British electorate will tolerate it – unless events, dear boy, events…
WB
If you don’t say there has to be a consultation procedure, you don’t have to follow one.
Simply not true. Under Common Law, precedents matter. Which is why judges consider consultations in judicial reviews…. Duh!!
WTF is interested in Common Law? You do it under statute law. If Kneeler can get his pension by Act of Parliament…
Theo – Well done: you got there.
After Blair’s legal reforms, judges rule – not Parliament. After Starmer, the situation will be far, far worse – with judges, quangos and even charities ruling the ‘progressive’ roost. And voting Reform to ensure a Labour/LD victory over a Tory is like turkeys voting for Christmas…
But in cold legal truth, Parliament is sovereign. It can overrule, override or simply negate every single piece of yooman rights legislation and any one of those “binding” international agreements at any time it chooses, with a single line of legislation, passed by a single vote in the Commons. I’m surprised you don’t know that.
Even judges can be overruled by Parliament. There is no law that binds Parliament. This is basic British constitutional law that every first year law school student in the UK is taught, not my theory or opinion.
That’s why I’m voting for the Reform candidate, because I don’t trust the others with that kind of power.
I am sure you imagine that a future right-wing government will repeal all such pesky legislation. It won’t happen! Like Blair, Starmer will move the UK further left. And the “centrist” British electorate will tolerate it – unless events, dear boy, events…
But the UK hasn’t moved left, it’s moving right. That’s why we gave the Conservative Party a stonking 80 seat majority to Get Brexit Done (And Do Other Good Stuff Too). It’s the Tories who moved left.
Don’t piss on me and tell me I’m a secret lemonade drinker, Theo.
There’s no law that compelled the Tory-run Homo Office to issue over a million visas to migrants last year, after getting elected promising to cut immigration. And that’s just one example, we could name hundreds of others but there’s no point wasting the electrons on Pishi and the gang.
Your devotion to the Conservatives is admirable, in a way, but at this point it’s bordering on necrophilia. Didn’t you catch the whiff of death from the grinning Indian midget’s Serious Plan to bring back National Service?
You can’t be so dense as to not realise you’re being trolled, my good man, and not by your penpal Steve.
No flowers.
I don’t think you’ve twigged it yet, Theo. It’s not just Conservatism needs killing. It’s conservatism.
BiS
It’s not just Conservatism needs killing. It’s conservatism.
You are clueless. And all you have to offer is political nihilism – at a safe distance (like leftist trustafarians), of course! I suggest you stick to pimping and cowboy building….
Steve
Parliament has abrogated and delegated huge parts of its sovereignty to the judiciary and quangos. It can only recover that sovereignty by a very complex legislative process. And that is not going to happen soon – even if a Reform government were ever elected…
But the UK hasn’t moved left, it’s moving right. Er…and your evidence? Polling shows that the majority of the UK electorate favours left-wing economic policies (re-nationalisation, protectionism, etc) with a mild preference for social conservatism (eg against trannies, against mass immigration) but broadly liberal and tolerant (eg of genuine refugees, of gays, gay ‘marriage’)…
Conservatism (small C) is preserving the status quo. There’s no status quo worth preserving. What’s needed is a revolution.
you stick to pimping
At least it’s an honest profession. And never a subsidy magnet.
Parliament has abrogated and delegated huge parts of its sovereignty to the judiciary and quangos. It can only recover that sovereignty by a very complex legislative process.
Wrong, wrong, wrong.
Sovereign means sovereign and the law is as I told you. Parliament could not be sovereign if it needed permission to take back, cancel or annul any power it has delegated. Think, McFly, think.
If you don’t understand that, you’re too short for this ride. Seriously, don’t embarrass yourself by arguing this point, it’s established fact. I’d expect readers of Tim’s blog to be familiar with our own constitution.
Parliament’s authority
Parliamentary sovereignty is a principle of the UK constitution. It makes Parliament the supreme legal authority in the UK, which can create or end any law. Generally*, the courts cannot overrule its legislation and no Parliament can pass laws that future Parliaments cannot change. Parliamentary sovereignty is the most important part of the UK constitution.
(from the website of Parliament)
*The exception is judicial review of secondary legislation, and even that is severely limited to grounds of ultra vires, proportionality, or irrationality, with an extremely high bar set for successful challenges.
And here’s what the Supreme Court’s website says, in case you think those wacky japesters running the official UK Parliamentary website were having a larf:
Unlike some Supreme Courts in other parts of the world, the UK Supreme Court does not have the power to ‘strike down’ legislation passed by the UK Parliament. It is the Court’s role to interpret the law and develop it where necessary, rather than formulate public policy.
Theophrastus (2066) said;
“Yes, while the socialists rig the system in their favour with votes for 16yo and more lawfare”
We’re not arguing that those aren’t bad things. But what you *still* haven’t explained is how on earth you think having 150 Conservative Party MPs, rather than 50, is going to stop Labour doing that.
Say what it really is: votes for children.
Just occurred. Theo, for some inexplicable reason, must think I’m a natural Tory voter. I am the far right. I have always been far right. I favoured the BNP in the UK. & have a Iot of time for the EDL. I was involved with the Referendum Party back in the ’90s. A canvasser & scrutineer in the election they fought. I supported FN now RN in France & help Vox here recruit ex-pat voters. I would vote AfD in Germany.
I’ve never felt politically lonely. I know dozens of people with my politics in the UK. It’s the natural politics of the self employed, small business & the workers not shirkers. Because Labour’s never done anything for us & rarely the Tories. One thing we’re not in nihilists. Quite the opposite. We actually have values. We’re not libertarians. We believe rights are earned along with the obligations enable them. Not an entitlement. We’ve just never, or rarely, had anyone to vote for.
Would I vote Reform? Undoubtedly. It’s the only hope we’ve got. But with reservations.
Steve
Parliament has passed laws that limit the application of parliamentary sovereignty. The UK Parliament has abrogated major powers in the Human Rights Act 1998 and in the decision to establish a UK Supreme Court in 2009, Given that Parliament has abrogated and delegated huge parts of its sovereignty to the judiciary and quangos, it can only recover that sovereignty by a very complex legislative process. One-line Bills are a non-starter.
BiS
Yup, with your often expressed predilection for violence, I had you down as a fascist (like the unlamented Mr Ecks). As for the rest of your confused waffle, you come over as conservative.
Parliament being sovereign is parliament’s reading of ‘the constitution’. It is in conflict wih the Bill of Rights, which parliament has cherry-picked to reach its conclusion. The people are sovereign and parliament attains its powers by the will of the people.
Rhoda likes the bits of the US bill of rights which begin ‘Congress shall make no law…’ although it is under threat from..Congress and the rest of the beltway.
– The UK Parliament has abrogated major powers in the Human Rights Act 1998 and in the decision to establish a UK Supreme Court in 2009, Given that Parliament has abrogated and delegated huge parts of its sovereignty to the judiciary and quangos, it can only recover that sovereignty by a very complex legislative process.
This is like Richard North’s view of Brexit; oh, it’s all complicated and interwoven and it’ll take teams of bureaucrats (like him) to unravel. The reality was much simpler; a referendum forcing an Act of Parliament. Out.
The Human Rights Act and the UK Supreme Court could both be got rid of with one Act of Parliament. Put that proposal in a manifesto and get a whomping majority in support, and you won’t even need to worry about the Lords pissing about. Things can be unabrogated and undelegated.
That’s legally, of course. The real practical problem is getting the blob to go along with it. Any real attempt at change would most likely see the public sector come out on strike en masse and bring government to a stop. And after five years of the left with all the power backed with a massive mandate from the people, well, basically you can forget ever going back.
PJF
True, one Act would do the job; but it would have to be very carefully drafted, the Blob neutralised and the Parliamentary ground well prepared and whipped – the last not being easy with a new and so fissiparous party….
If Nige does sweep to power – he won’t, but if – then I’d be hammering at the door again for a job. My job being – which laws do we have to rescind? All the ones that create independent power centres that is. The Climate Change Act – the CCC – and whatever establishes the Victim’s Commissioner, and Natural England and so on.
Not that things being done are – necessarily – bad. But that the independent power centres have to go. Parliament is sovereign. And power *should* change hands at an election.
Of course, the BBC would get fucked too.
Oh, we can’t possibwy work with wacist twansphobic bigots who will call us all “cunts” evewy morning.