Freedom of Information Act defeated in the Lords

#1
#2
Jest265

I'm afraid to say that the house of commons are likely to repeal this decision, it could infringe on their human rights!! I'm sure Cherie Blurrrrrgh and the rest of the Justice Department are already on the case.

Wasn't it Phoney Tony and the rest of his pocket lining to$$ers who brought the FOI in in the first place. The more @rseholes like Jack Straw look at reforming/dissolving the House of Lords, the more they alienate themselves from the general public. It's no wonder they appear to out-sleaze the former Conservative government. In fact they don't appear to be, they are!!.

As far as i'm concerned they are all a bunch of quad bike buying, MP3 player procuring, postage stamp wasters. Show me a politician and i'll show you a former public (biscuit eating) school boy who doesn't know his @rrse from his elbow.
 
#4
Hurrah!


The Lords, spiritual and temporal, prove their worth once again.



And we wonder why Neue-Arbeit are so keen to reform the HOL?
 
#5
Now we know why they wanted to get rid of some people in the House of Lords.Those who are anti New Labour will continue to refuse to be brow beaten by New Labour in everything that goes through the H-of-L no matter what.Why should MP's be exempt from revealing what money they have wasted on junkets around the world and buying property with their allowances and reaping the rewards of selling their houses when they retire from politics.Surely those houses are public property and should be handed over to the new MP's who come into office.
 
#6
who would have thought that the only defence the common man has from the lunacies of a Labour government are the aristocracy! Shurely shume mishtake!
 
#7
rabid_hamster,

Shorry, but it would appear that the shome former members of the arishtocracy shtill contain full control of all mental facultiesh. Thank god they do!!
 
#8
Here is a little taster from the Right Honourable Scumbags website.
In bold below, says it all really.

I have no wish to have to use a quad bike, nor walking sticks for that matter, but I will not be forced into a wheelchair prematurely just because some in the national media dislike my views on the Freedom of Information (Amendment) Bill. Without that bike I cannot do my full job as an MP. I would love to walk round the Cumberland Show or Lowther once again, but I cannot. Without thequad bike I could not have led the march to save the hospitals. Everybody knows about my quad bike which is not a secret and was approved by the House of Commons authorities. If I could get new legs on MPs expenses then I would apply for them also.
 
#9
Quite ironic really that the Lords have protected the interests of the British Electorate over the Commons MPs elected to represent our interests.

Not quite defeated yet:

Although technically it is still possible that the measure could be revived, opponents are hopeful that with parliamentary time before the summer recess running out, the Bill will now be abandoned.

David Winnick, the Labour MP, said he was “absolutely delighted” that the Bill had failed to find a sponsor.

“It is unfortunate that it has been left to the second chamber to hopefully bury this nasty Bill,” he said. “I only hope that no further attempt will be made to revive the measure”.

Under parliamentary rules, a sponsor has to come forward within 12 sitting days of a Bill being introduced in the Lords if it is to proceed. That period expired last night.

The measure could now be taken up again, but a sponsor would have to give eight days’ notice of his or her intention to back the measure. Lord McNally, the Liberal Democrat leader in the Lords, said the Government would have to make “extraordinary arrangements” to keep the Bill alive.


The Lords have proved to be the Great British conscience in upholding and maintaining fundamental moral values.

Under Bliars radical plans to reform the Lords, the second chamber would be radically overhauled. Occupancy would be electorally led as opposed to appointed. This change was quoted as improving the assertiveness of the Lords.

I somehow think the Lords would be Labour dominated acting merely as a rubber stamp for all the self serving, draconian, ill thought out legislation this government seeks to impose on the electorate.

This argument has fallen somewhat flat in light of the lack of sponsorship through the second chamber.

My glass is raised to the the Lords for preserving what little bit of democracy is left and representing the viewpoint of the majority of electorate.
 
#12
The irony here is that the recurring theme in support of unpopular legislation (ID cards, "anti-terror" clampdown, increased police powers, CCTV etc) is "if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear"

NL MPs please note.

Or maybe Orwell was right: all animals are equal...
 
#14
"if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear" hm, didn't the Nazis use that one?

How many restrictive new laws have been brought in supposedly targeted at a particular group (terrorism, serious organised crime to name a few) just to get a foot in the door, then quietly extended to apply to the rest of us?
 
#15
The Government, consistent with it's antecedents of deception sought to acquiese in a fiction articulated by a not very bright member of it's own party; the reality of which was quickly and thoroughly exposed for what it was, residing within the Trojan Horse of form it was presented under. It would have been difficult, if not impossible to have maintained it in debate in their Lordships house, the quality and depth of debate being of a far higher standard in the Lords than it is in the Commons.

There is very little 'ya boo' exchanges in the Lords of the kind that we are used to seeing in the Commons, the effect of which is that their arguments are delivered with far more withering and devastating effect!
 
#16
rabid_hamster said:
who would have thought that the only defence the common man has from the lunacies of a Labour government are the aristocracy! Shurely shume mishtake!
I don't think you've been paying attention. Practically all the aristocracy were booted out of the Lords in favour of more government appointees some years ago.

House of Lords act 1999
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top