« Newport Vorticism | Main | 'Rules are rules' - Newport Tory »

June 28, 2009

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Kay Tie

"it is rarely possible to vote against statutory instruments unless one is one of the 30 or so that are one the SI committee."

It's why these enabling bills are so dangerous. One of the ways Parliament has been emasculated.

I presume there's always a chance at tabling a wrecking amendment on some other bill. What about the finance bill? Part of the 10% tax amendment (to find the money to pay for the compensation)?

Paul Flynn

KayTie, it is rarely possible to vote against statutory instruments unless one is one of the 30 or so that are one the SI committee. As far as I know I am not at the moment. But I am against ID cards.

George Laird

Dear Paul

Sir Paul Beresford MP moonlights as a dentist.

Is it little surprise that the public hold MPs in such contempt when their role is a full time position and they singely fail to honour that?

Beresford is standing in the way of the people getting proper representation.

He should resign.

Yours sincerely

George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University

Kay Tie

"It is going to be grim HuwOs but I do not believe that benefits for the disabled and unemployed will be cut. Not when Trident and ID cards are begging to cut."

With particular reference to ID cards, will you be voting against the Statutory Instruments that give effect to the regulations for these cards? The specific regulations are:

* The Identity Cards Act 2006 (Application and Issue of ID Card and Notification of Changes) Regulations 2009

* The Identity Cards Act 2006 (Prescribed Information) Regulations 2009

* The Identity Cards Act 2006 (Provision of Information without Consent) Regulations 2009

These regulations are, in essence, the ID scheme itself (the 2006 Act merely being an enabling act). If you vote these down, the ID card scheme falls.

Since Alan Johnson himself has cold feet, I cannot believe that the Government is up for a fight to head off a rebellion on this. Quite why they aren't kicking in into the long grass, like they are with the Post Office plans, I don't know. But one can never underestimate Gordon Brown's capability for self-harm. Perhaps he believes the crooked Home Office surveys and thinks this is a popular measure that will undermine the Tories' law-n-order credentials. He got it terribly wrong on 42 days detention. He's wrong on this, too.

Paul Flynn

It is going to be grim HuwOs but I do not believe that benefits for the disabled and unemployed will be cut. Not when Trident and ID cards are begging to cut.

Paul Flynn

Frank Field is proposing this amendment Tony. I have said I will support it.

Tony

Paul, were you thinking of voting in the amenedment to the Finance Bill for the 500,000 people still left worse off by the 10 tax change?

Seems to me that would be worth doing if possible

And you're right Huw - I personally think it will be both (tax increase and spending cuts) and that the government that wins the next election will be the most unpopular ever within 6 months.

But if you and I can see it then hopefully others will too and 'won't get fooled again'

HuwOS

"either we get real spendng cuts or taxes are going to have to rise"

I doubt it is an either or situation.
Both will have to happen, all we can do is hope the electorate vote people in who will do everything they can to protect the needs of the least well off when the cuts come and have the sense to raise the necessary taxes for those who can best cope with them.

Ah who am I kidding, people will vote for the ones who promise to cut taxes and cut benefits to those terrible people on the dole and on disability benefit, blaming immigration will be optional.

Paul Flynn

Fair points Tony. I was generous to Paul Beresford on the World this weekend. I did not mention the atrocious voting record of the moonlighting dentist MP.

Tony

I think it you want to be an MP you should be full time - end of ..
I was interested to see Ed Balls still denying that there would have to be spending cuts after the election - this spinning is really quite insulting - the figures show that something will HAVE to give - either we get real spendng cuts or taxes are going to have to rise - a lot !
Be nice if politicians who claim to 'get it' would understand that and perhaps be a little more truthful.
Balls is just talking balls in my opinion

The comments to this entry are closed.