Upskirting Bill blocked by errant MP.

He’s not objecting mindlessly.
He's objecting to a bill for reasons that he hasn't bothered to confirm apply to the bill in question. That's pretty mindless.
 
Also, he’s probably experienced enough to know that a significant proportion of what they attempt to wave through lazily is poorly written, so he doesn’t need to read them all.
I’m experienced enough to know that he’s the kind of chap 90% of ARRSE members would want to punch in throat within ten minutes of meeting him.
 
He's objecting to a bill for reasons that he hasn't bothered to confirm apply to the bill in question. That's pretty mindless.
No. He’s objecting to it because it hasn’t been discussed by the people we vote in to check that bills are worth the paper they’re written on. Which this one wasn’t.
I find it strange people don’t have an issue with legislation being written in back rooms by small groups and waved through on a Friday without scrutiny.
I am fairly happy that this guy and his colleagues are blocking such shoddy procedure and find it appalling he was vilified for doing what he’d done many times before just because the wimmins have a problem with it as it was a subject close to their hearts.
 
He’s objecting to it because it hasn’t been discussed by the people we vote in to check that bills are worth the paper they’re written on.
No, he wasn't. He had very specific reasoning behind his objection which he would only have known applied had he read the bill.

Which he admits he hadn't.
 
No, he wasn't. He had very specific reasoning behind his objection which he would only have known applied had he read the bill.

Which he admits he hadn't.
Wow. I didn’t realise you’d discussed this and his reasoning with him. I’d bow to your superior knowledge but I suspect you may be full of it and making assumptions cos nothing I read supports your contentions.
 
If he wasn’t trying to put 32 private member’s bills of his own through at he same time then his argument about parliamentary process may hold water.

Instead he just looks like a hypocritical dinosaur.
 
Wow. I didn’t realise you’d discussed this and his reasoning with him. I’d bow to your superior knowledge but I suspect you may be full of it and making assumptions cos nothing I read supports your contentions.
You may want to read up on the procedure for Private Members Bills, especially the bit about "Object!" and the second reading.

Together, it means he wasn't even present for the first reading, didn't bother reading it and shouted "Object!" without knowing the first thing about its contents.

Protesting badly worded legislation is usually a more convincing excuse if you can point to bits of the legislation that are actually badly worded.

Else you look a bit of a cock.
 
You may want to read up on the procedure for Private Members Bills, especially the bit about "Object!" and the second reading.

Together, it means he wasn't even present for the first reading, didn't bother reading it and shouted "Object!" without knowing the first thing about its contents.

Protesting badly worded legislation is usually a more convincing excuse if you can point to bits of the legislation that are actually badly worded.

Else you look a bit of a cock.
A politician who ends up looking like a bit of a cock? A first in British political history surely?
 
He's objecting to a bill for reasons that he hasn't bothered to confirm apply to the bill in question. That's pretty mindless.
No, he is objecting to the process used. The content of the bill is immaterial, it could have been about false teeth and given the same response.
 

chrisg46

LE
Book Reviewer
A politician who ends up looking like a bit of a cock? A first in British political history surely?
A british politician is a cock by default, never mind ending up to look like one. Cockishness is assumed until proven otherwise.
 
No, he is objecting to the process used. The content of the bill is immaterial, it could have been about false teeth and given the same response.
But is happy to use the process himself. Therefore a hypocrite and looking at his voting record, an unpleasant dinosaur.
 
No, he is objecting to the process used.
You mean the process he himself has used multiple times? The one he thinks gives scope for bills to pass that are badly worded and unworkable in practice but didn't actually bother to confirm was the case with the one he objected to? That requires the bill he never actually scrutinised to go through yet another reading, wasting MPs' time and using up even more of the limited amount set aside for PMBs?

That process?
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top