M577 – Contempt of Parliament Motion 2020 Watch

This discussion is closed.
BosslyGaming
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#21
Report 4 weeks ago
#21
Contempt of parliament? Get over yourselves.

Would the proposers care to explain how not taking action on a non-binding motion is contempt of parliament since that isn't in this motion, instead it just states that it is contempt? Unless MHoC has different regulations on motions (if so, I would appreciate being directed to this) how about the many motions which have passed in the real parliament and not been acted upon at all? Was the goverment in contempt in those situations? This is yet another baseless item submitted by those who could simply submit a bill and be done with it.
1
Aph
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#22
Report 4 weeks ago
#22
(Original post by Saracen's Fez)
The moral argument is that if you're English you don't get a say.
And it has been ruled that due to the canon amendment the government can act as the devolved government, so this is the welsh government not listening to the welsh parliament. Unless you’re arguing that the votes of English members of this house don’t count?
0
Miss Maddie
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#23
Report 4 weeks ago
#23
(Original post by Aph)
And it has been ruled that due to the canon amendment the government can act as the devolved government, so this is the welsh government not listening to the welsh parliament. Unless you’re arguing that the votes of English members of this house don’t count?
The motion isn't acting as the Welsh Parliament. The motion specifically states it's acting as this Parliament calling upon this Parliament to pressure the Welsh Parliament.
0
Baron of Sealand
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#24
Report 4 weeks ago
#24
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
Which makes it incredibly presumptive and does not change the fact that it is far from guaranteed to pass, although I guess Connor will soon beg for some whipping on it

Nor does it change the fact that for all several members of your party seem to care about it none of you seem to be able to be bothered to write a bill to do it, which is after all the only way you can force it
Whether the petition passes doesn't change the fact that the government refuses to implement the content in a motion passed, and for the longest time, refused to even acknowledge it even when asked several times.

This is less about selling the Cardiff Airport itself but about the government's contempt of parliament.
0
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#25
Report 4 weeks ago
#25
(Original post by Saracen's Fez)
The moral argument is that if you're English you don't get a say.
Well if we're going to apply that how many MPs should not be MPs because they aren't even British?

And, once again, the Welsh Assembly voted on it, or are you suggesting that the Welsh Assembly is devoid of Welsh people?
0
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#26
Report 4 weeks ago
#26
(Original post by Baron of Sealand)
Whether the petition passes doesn't change the fact that the government refuses to implement the content in a motion passed, and for the longest time, refused to even acknowledge it even when asked several times.

This is less about selling the Cardiff Airport itself but about the government's contempt of parliament.
Except there is no obligation for the government to even acknowledge the motion, let alone implement it. If we go back through the histories there will be a hell of a lot of mud that could be thrown right back on that ground.
0
LiberOfLondon
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#27
Report 4 weeks ago
#27
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
Just legislate instead of being such big babies

Or better still, if you think the government is so bad why don't you try a monc?
If you took the time to write legislation instead of ****ging Rakas off because you hate Sovereign Wealth Funds (which is quite strange, given that they allow HM Gov't to make money without taxes and are the sort of thing Ayn Rand would have loved) then the Party would be in a better state.

I'm not leaving the Libers, partly because I'm essentialy the last person in the Party and partly because I still feel loyal to it after all the cockups we've been through. I'm not going to stage a VoNC either, because we need a leader, someone to post on the Other Place and someone to take a count of the votes, which I don't have the time to do. The reason I'm posting this is as a public statement that I believe you have failed us as a leader, and it is your petty minded bickering with Rakas and the Tories over the last time they governed and a defecit that you still harp on about (and try and drag newbies like me into harping on with you) that loses us votes and puts Loony Lefties in power.

Expel me from the Party if you want. Just remember that most Libertarian bills were written by me and that you seem to have done sweet bugger all in the subforum of late besides post ”aye”, ***** about the lack of notes and ask Andrew to send it to division. If you want to drive the last nail into our coffin, be my guest.

Rakas21 - please take this as an apology for my earlier remarks about your past government. I retract them and they were made in the heat of the moment and fuelled by misinformation from Jammy Duel.
(Original post by barnetlad)
Nay, given that I consider that Cardiff Airport is a devolved matter.
The House has the authority to act as any devolved body as per the Second Canon Amendment.
2
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#28
Report 4 weeks ago
#28
(Original post by Aph)
And it has been ruled that due to the canon amendment the government can act as the devolved government, so this is the welsh government not listening to the welsh parliament. Unless you’re arguing that the votes of English members of this house don’t count?
No, he's just arguing that the only Welsh AMs are those that oppose the ones who oppose the motion.
0
Aph
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#29
Report 4 weeks ago
#29
(Original post by Miss Maddie)
The motion isn't acting as the Welsh Parliament. The motion specifically states it's acting as this Parliament calling upon this Parliament to pressure the Welsh Parliament.
Are we reading the same motion? I literally cannot see that line in this motion...
0
Baron of Sealand
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#30
Report 4 weeks ago
#30
(Original post by BosslyGaming)
Contempt of parliament? Get over yourselves.

Would the proposers care to explain how not taking action on a non-binding motion is contempt of parliament since that isn't in this motion, instead it just states that it is contempt? Unless MHoC has different regulations on motions (if so, I would appreciate being directed to this) how about the many motions which have passed in the real parliament and not been acted upon at all? Was the goverment in contempt in those situations? This is yet another baseless item submitted by those who could simply submit a bill and be done with it.
Whataboutism?

Regardless, this motion is the motion to decide whether it is contempt. The issue wasn't just that it was not acted upon, but also that it was completely ignored even when asked about it several times.
0
Miss Maddie
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#31
Report 4 weeks ago
#31
(Original post by Aph)
Are we reading the same motion? I literally cannot see that line in this motion...
I was reading the original cardiff airport motion

https://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/sho....php?t=6288782
0
Baron of Sealand
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#32
Report 4 weeks ago
#32
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
Except there is no obligation for the government to even acknowledge the motion, let alone implement it. If we go back through the histories there will be a hell of a lot of mud that could be thrown right back on that ground.
And parliament has the right to begin holding the government in contempt for it. Do you believe a government should operate like this?
1
BosslyGaming
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#33
Report 4 weeks ago
#33
(Original post by Baron of Sealand)
Whataboutism?

Regardless, this motion is the motion to decide whether it is contempt. The issue wasn't just that it was not acted upon, but also that it was completely ignored even when asked about it several times.
That's not what the motion says though is it? It says you note disapproval of the lack of response but you state the actual inaction as the reason for contempt. I would think it's a fairly simple question to ask of the Leader of the Opposition - why do you personally think that inaction on a non-binding motion is contempt of parliament? If you don't have a reason, why have you submitted a motion which you can't support?
0
The Mogg
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#34
Report 4 weeks ago
#34
(Original post by LiberOfLondon)
If you took the time to write legislation instead of ****ging Rakas off because you hate Sovereign Wealth Funds (which is quite strange, given that they allow HM Gov't to make money without taxes and are the sort of thing Ayn Rand would have loved) then the Party would be in a better state.

I'm not leaving the Libers, partly because I'm essentialy the last person in the Party and partly because I still feel loyal to it after all the cockups we've been through. I'm not going to stage a VoNC either, because we need a leader, someone to post on the Other Place and someone to take a count of the votes, which I don't have the time to do. The reason I'm posting this is as a public statement that I believe you have failed us as a leader, and it is your petty minded bickering with Rakas and the Tories over the last time they governed and a defecit that you still harp on about (and try and drag newbies like me into harping on with you) that loses us votes and puts Loony Lefties in power.

Expel me from the Party if you want. Just remember that most Libertarian bills were written by me and that you seem to have done sweet bugger all in the subforum of late besides post ”aye”, ***** about the lack of notes and ask Andrew to send it to division. If you want to drive the last nail into our coffin, be my guest.

Rakas21 - please take this as an apology for my earlier remarks about your past government. I retract them and they were made in the heat of the moment and fuelled by misinformation from Jammy Duel.
Well, that was inspirational.
0
Aph
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#35
Report 4 weeks ago
#35
(Original post by Miss Maddie)
I was reading the original cardiff airport motion

https://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/sho....php?t=6288782
Ahhhh okay, you were using the wrong tense, fair enough. I’ll admit that I was wrong, I had thought the motion was a devolved motion but it appears not so I now back Fez and the government. They are upholding devolution, as long as the welsh aren’t bankrupting the country they have a right to budgetary independence.
0
Baron of Sealand
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#36
Report 4 weeks ago
#36
(Original post by BosslyGaming)
That's not what the motion says though is it? It says you note disapproval of the lack of response but you state the actual inaction as the reason for contempt. I would think it's a fairly simple question to ask of the Leader of the Opposition - why do you personally think that inaction on a non-binding motion is contempt of parliament? If you don't have a reason, why have you submitted a motion which you can't support?
Inaction includes not even acknowledging it, so I'm not sure what you are asking. The government's inaction had been complete inaction. No response, no acknowledge, and now no implementation.
0
SankaraInBloom
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#37
Report 4 weeks ago
#37
A government in contempt, a Labour Party trying to paint the opposition as anti-Welsh and other parties seemingly at loggerheads. Let's put aside the oppositional differences here for one minute, and recognise here is a government acting as if it is the opposition's job to act on motions, not theirs as a sitting government. That is contemptuous in itself - it warrants punishment. I'm aware that this is not binding, but the deep veiled shame of contempt ought to shock this government into doing the right thing. I hope it does that, in all honesty.
0
BosslyGaming
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#38
Report 4 weeks ago
#38
(Original post by Baron of Sealand)
Inaction includes not even acknowledging it, so I'm not sure what you are asking. The government's inaction had been complete inaction. No response, no acknowledge, and now no implementation.
So do you believe that it is compulsory for the government to act on motions? I'm struggling to see anything setting that ruling? My point is that you claim contempt for something that the government has not broken any rules or regulations by doing - not in the MHoC and not in real life. You can't just claim something is contempt because you don't like it. I would consider a loose definition for contempt of parliament to be something that obstructs a member, or the house, from carrying out their dutes, or generally something that interferes with house proceedings. The government's behaviour does neither of those things. So, ultimately, my question is why the government is in contempt of parliament? Do you believe that inaction on a motion is contempt? If so could you point out any scenarios in the past where a UK government (on TSR or otherwise) have been found in contempt of parliament for that reason, especially when plenty of motions have indeed not been acted upon.
0
Connor27
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#39
Report 4 weeks ago
#39
(Original post by BosslyGaming)
Contempt of parliament? Get over yourselves.

Would the proposers care to explain how not taking action on a non-binding motion is contempt of parliament since that isn't in this motion, instead it just states that it is contempt? Unless MHoC has different regulations on motions (if so, I would appreciate being directed to this) how about the many motions which have passed in the real parliament and not been acted upon at all? Was the goverment in contempt in those situations? This is yet another baseless item submitted by those who could simply submit a bill and be done with it.
It is contempt not just because of your refusal to do it; ministers have also dodged questions on the matter and showed nothing but apathy towards the will of this House, that is very much contempt.
0
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#40
Report 4 weeks ago
#40
(Original post by LiberOfLondon)
If you took the time to write legislation instead of ****ging Rakas off because you hate Sovereign Wealth Funds (which is quite strange, given that they allow HM Gov't to make money without taxes and are the sort of thing Ayn Rand would have loved) then the Party would be in a better state.

I'm not leaving the Libers, partly because I'm essentialy the last person in the Party and partly because I still feel loyal to it after all the cockups we've been through. I'm not going to stage a VoNC either, because we need a leader, someone to post on the Other Place and someone to take a count of the votes, which I don't have the time to do. The reason I'm posting this is as a public statement that I believe you have failed us as a leader, and it is your petty minded bickering with Rakas and the Tories over the last time they governed and a defecit that you still harp on about (and try and drag newbies like me into harping on with you) that loses us votes and puts Loony Lefties in power.

Expel me from the Party if you want. Just remember that most Libertarian bills were written by me and that you seem to have done sweet bugger all in the subforum of late besides post ”aye”, ***** about the lack of notes and ask Andrew to send it to division. If you want to drive the last nail into our coffin, be my guest.

Rakas21 - please take this as an apology for my earlier remarks about your past government. I retract them and they were made in the heat of the moment and fuelled by misinformation from Jammy Duel.

The House has the authority to act as any devolved body as per the Second Canon Amendment.
You honestly think Rand would have supported the government borrowing huge sums of money to act as an investment bank, I propose you read her works again; perhaps Smith too given his view that taxation to stimulate the economy is not a good idea given that taxation is just lost economic activity; hell, even Keynesian economics disagrees with it given Keynes only endorses deficit spending during contraction, times such as these should be times of surplus to pay off the debts accumulated during the contraction, not time to pile the debt higher at a rate of 5% of GDP per annum. And why stop there, let's go one step further and ask a simple question: if borrowing tens of billions of pounds a year is the way to grow a magic money tree then why is it that in the ~200 nations in the world, and all the different governments of different ideologies over the decades, nobody has implemented such a policy? It's almost as if it makes no sense to take out a loan to make an investment with that being solely to pay off the original loan, and in the meantime making any other borrowing you wish to engage in more expensive. The more you borrow the more expensive it becomes to borrow more, hence why governments don't so arbitrarily borrow

I am also intrigued as to how the "loony left" would not be in government if I did do a Connor and walk up to the Tories is coalition negotiations and say "we want nothing, we will let you drive the deficit up as much as you like, we will do anything demanded in exchange for nothing" given the numbers still would not work. Nobody forces you to follow suit, it is entirely your decision just as it is your decision now to believe whatever Connor and/or Rakas is telling you that somehow build
0
X
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

People at uni: do initiations (like heavy drinking) put you off joining sports societies?

Yes (479)
66.53%
No (241)
33.47%

Watched Threads

View All
Latest
My Feed