Parliament is often accused of being old, antiquated, or out of touch; so it's wonderful to see that at least one member of the Commons is willing to modernise. Step forward, Bercow. Your new, prohibition era 'greaser' hairstyle is wonderfully fresh, coming straight from the 1920s.
My job is far more pressing than her flirting with Iain Dale on Sky News. Besides which, if your colleagues had been reasonable on the referendum bill, then I could have easily stayed and looked after the children.
Isn't that sort of thing deputies are for? Do try to avoid being too much of a control freak.
It is perfectly reasonable to request that at least 40% of the country actually turn up for the result of a referendum on major electoral reform to be considered valid. HM Govt. could do with being a little less stiff-necked about the whole business.
Ah well, where would we be if HM Loyal Opposition didn't properly oppose the government? It is part and parcel of our parliamentary system, I'm afraid. The only alternatives are tyranny or hegemony, something of which I'm sure not even a Conservative would approve.
We offered meaningful opposition, including a number of constructive amendments which had cross party support, but which were rejected by this coalition government. A government, incidentally, which seems to view a coalition as less 'working together in the public interest' and more 'shove through any policies we were too cowardly to include on our manifestos'.
It's clear that not all of the Lord's opposition to the Bill stemmed from the Labour Party, and indeed there were a number of progressive and forward thinking proposals offered from all sides. Discussion of prime numbers and holidays, however, does not fall within this purview.
No, that was just to piss Call-me-Dave off and it was hilarious to watch..
It is hardly surprising, given the relative lack of power of the Lords, that some members may resort to questionable tactics when debating a bill about which they are particularly passionate.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
(no subject)
Date: 2011-02-17 10:05 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-02-17 10:08 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-02-17 10:15 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-02-17 11:08 am (UTC)*wrinkles nose*
Does Sally know of these plans for a Bercownian diaspora?
(no subject)
Date: 2011-02-17 11:13 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-02-17 11:17 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-02-17 11:20 am (UTC)EightNone of your business.
(no subject)
Date: 2011-02-17 11:24 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-02-17 11:28 am (UTC)That's exactly what Sally suggested.No.
(no subject)
Date: 2011-02-17 11:36 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-02-17 11:48 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-02-17 11:58 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-02-17 12:06 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-02-17 12:16 pm (UTC)(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 2011-02-17 02:04 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-02-17 02:07 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-02-17 02:11 pm (UTC)It is perfectly reasonable to request that at least 40% of the country actually turn up for the result of a referendum on major electoral reform to be considered valid. HM Govt. could do with being a little less stiff-necked about the whole business.
(no subject)
Date: 2011-02-17 02:20 pm (UTC)There's a difference between legitimate, in depth scrutiny of a Bill and purposely stalling the legislative process for party political means.
(no subject)
Date: 2011-02-17 02:23 pm (UTC)The amendment had cross party support.
(no subject)
Date: 2011-02-17 02:25 pm (UTC)The amendment did, the stalling didn't.
(no subject)
Date: 2011-02-17 02:32 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-02-17 02:38 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-02-17 02:44 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-02-17 02:57 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-02-17 03:02 pm (UTC)No, that was just to piss Call-me-Dave off and it was hilarious to watch..It is hardly surprising, given the relative lack of power of the Lords, that some members may resort to questionable tactics when debating a bill about which they are particularly passionate.
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From: