Comments on: The Omnibus Henry VIII Bill? http://www.owen.org/blog/457 Thoughts from Owen in Africa Tue, 16 Mar 2010 21:07:46 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Murky.org http://www.owen.org/blog/457/comment-page-1#comment-1989 Murky.org Sat, 25 Feb 2006 17:40:33 +0000 http://www.owen.org/blog/457#comment-1989 <strong>Letter to Michael Gove MP regarding the Totalitarianism Bill...</strong> Adapted from the letter to various Lords, this is the letter sent to my MP, Michael Gove (Tory), see also these previous articles....... Letter to Michael Gove MP regarding the Totalitarianism Bill…

Adapted from the letter to various Lords, this is the letter sent to my MP, Michael Gove (Tory), see also these previous articles…….

]]> By: Murky.org http://www.owen.org/blog/457/comment-page-1#comment-1988 Murky.org Sat, 25 Feb 2006 15:11:01 +0000 http://www.owen.org/blog/457#comment-1988 <strong>Serious question on the Totalitarianism Bill deflected...</strong> In a shameful display, Geoff Hoon (Labour) deflected a perfectly reasonably question upon the 'Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill' from David Howarth (Lib Dem). David Howarth said: I hope that the Leader of the House has had a chance to...... Serious question on the Totalitarianism Bill deflected…

In a shameful display, Geoff Hoon (Labour) deflected a perfectly reasonably question upon the ‘Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill’ from David Howarth (Lib Dem). David Howarth said: I hope that the Leader of the House has had a chance to……

]]> By: Murky.org http://www.owen.org/blog/457/comment-page-1#comment-1978 Murky.org Sat, 25 Feb 2006 12:40:49 +0000 http://www.owen.org/blog/457#comment-1978 <strong>Letters to the Lords regarding the Totalitarianism Bill...</strong> As regular readers of this website will know, I have become concerned with the Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill, as seen in these previous articles. Therefore it's time for another letter writing campaign. This time I'm sending letters to...... Letters to the Lords regarding the Totalitarianism Bill…

As regular readers of this website will know, I have become concerned with the Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill, as seen in these previous articles. Therefore it’s time for another letter writing campaign. This time I’m sending letters to……

]]> By: EU Serf http://www.owen.org/blog/457/comment-page-1#comment-1987 EU Serf Wed, 22 Feb 2006 15:37:55 +0000 http://www.owen.org/blog/457#comment-1987 I guess you were the first with this. Now we have jumped on the bandwagon and prepared a list of questions for MPs regarding the bill. http://rightlinks.co.uk/linked/modules/AMS/index.php It certainly doesn't look like a storm in a teacup to me. I guess you were the first with this. Now we have jumped on the bandwagon and prepared a list of questions for MPs regarding the bill.
http://rightlinks.co.uk/linked/modules/AMS/index.php

It certainly doesn’t look like a storm in a teacup to me.

]]> By: Ephems of BLB http://www.owen.org/blog/457/comment-page-1#comment-1986 Ephems of BLB Thu, 16 Feb 2006 11:44:44 +0000 http://www.owen.org/blog/457#comment-1986 <strong>By-passing parliament: the blogs got there first...</strong> An open e-mail to Daniel Finkelstein for being the first to air nationally the scandal of a Bill empowering ministers to make new laws without troubling parliament [more >>>]...... By-passing parliament: the blogs got there first…

An open e-mail to Daniel Finkelstein for being the first to air nationally the scandal of a Bill empowering ministers to make new laws without troubling parliament [more >>>]……

]]> By: Brian B. http://www.owen.org/blog/457/comment-page-1#comment-1985 Brian B. Wed, 15 Feb 2006 23:39:19 +0000 http://www.owen.org/blog/457#comment-1985 <em>The Times</em> has now <a href="http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,6-2040625,00.html" title="Times article on Henry VIII Bill" rel="nofollow">entered the lists</a> on this -- as helpfully pointed out to us in <a href="http://www.barder.com/ephems/2006/02/15/contact-facility-disabled/#comment-1024" title="Matt comment on Ephems post" rel="nofollow">another place</a> by Matt.  Perhaps this will get the issue out of the rarefied air of the blogosphere and into the general consciousness. <strong>Brian        </strong><strong></strong><a href="http://www.barder.com/ephems/" title="Brian's Ephems" rel="nofollow">http://www.barder.com/ephems/</a>  The Times has now entered the lists on this — as helpfully pointed out to us in another place by Matt.  Perhaps this will get the issue out of the rarefied air of the blogosphere and into the general consciousness. Brian        http://www.barder.com/ephems/ 

]]> By: Tony Hatfield's Retired Ramblings http://www.owen.org/blog/457/comment-page-1#comment-1984 Tony Hatfield's Retired Ramblings Mon, 13 Feb 2006 14:54:04 +0000 http://www.owen.org/blog/457#comment-1984 <strong>Wrong Target?...</strong> Owen here and Talk Politics here are getting all of lathered up by Henry VIII clause in the Legislative and... Wrong Target?…

Owen here and Talk Politics here are getting all of lathered up by Henry VIII clause in the Legislative and…

]]> By: Tony Hatfield's Retired Ramblings http://www.owen.org/blog/457/comment-page-1#comment-2551 Tony Hatfield's Retired Ramblings Mon, 13 Feb 2006 14:54:04 +0000 http://www.owen.org/blog/457#comment-2551 <strong>Wrong Target?...</strong> Owen here and Talk Politics here are getting all of lathered up by Henry VIII clause in the Legislative and... Wrong Target?…

Owen here and Talk Politics here are getting all of lathered up by Henry VIII clause in the Legislative and…

]]> By: Bishop Hill http://www.owen.org/blog/457/comment-page-1#comment-1983 Bishop Hill Fri, 10 Feb 2006 19:37:30 +0000 http://www.owen.org/blog/457#comment-1983 <a href="http://considerphlebas.blogspot.com/2006/02/reichstag-fire-postponed.html#comments"Consider Phebas</a> reckons that it's a storm in a teacup too.  I hope he's right.  The consultation processes look like a farce to me. The minister is only required to "have regard" to their outcome. Besides that, how can Parliament be expected to scrutinise these orders when they don't get to examine them in detail. One assumes that Parliamentary time is not going to be set aside to scrutinise their contents?  <a href="http://considerphlebas.blogspot.com/2006/02/reichstag-fire-postponed.html#comments"Consider Phebas</a> reckons that it’s a storm in a teacup too.  I hope he’s right.  The consultation processes look like a farce to me. The minister is only required to "have regard" to their outcome. Besides that, how can Parliament be expected to scrutinise these orders when they don’t get to examine them in detail. One assumes that Parliamentary time is not going to be set aside to scrutinise their contents? 

]]> By: Brian B http://www.owen.org/blog/457/comment-page-1#comment-1982 Brian B Fri, 10 Feb 2006 18:13:57 +0000 http://www.owen.org/blog/457#comment-1982 <p> It's perhaps not <em>quite</em> as outrageous as it looks at first sight, given the provision in Section 10 (and the sections immediately following s. 10 which flesh it out) for a degree of parliamentary scrutiny of Orders made under the Act (Bill): </p><blockquote><p><strong>10  Procedure: introductory</strong></p><p>(1)  An order under section 1 must be made by statutory instrument.</p><p>(2)  A Minister may not make an order under section 1 unless—</p><p>    (a)  he has consulted in accordance with section 11;   </p><p>    (b)  following that consultation, he has laid a draft order and explanatory document before Parliament in accordance with section 12; and</p><p>(c)  the order is made, as determined under section 13, in accordance with—</p><p>    (i)   the negative resolution procedure (see section 14); </p><p>    (ii)  the affirmative resolution procedure (see section 15); or </p><p>    (iii) the super-affirmative resolution procedure (see section 16). </p></blockquote><p>What do the usual suspects -- Bob Marshall Andrews and co. -- and the civil liberties watchdogs like Liberty make of the Bill?  Do we know? (I hope the paragraphing of this will be preserved!) <strong></strong></p><p><strong>Brian<br /><a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.barder.com/ephems/">http://www.barder.com/ephems/</a></strong>    </p> It’s perhaps not quite as outrageous as it looks at first sight, given the provision in Section 10 (and the sections immediately following s. 10 which flesh it out) for a degree of parliamentary scrutiny of Orders made under the Act (Bill):

10  Procedure: introductory

(1)  An order under section 1 must be made by statutory instrument.

(2)  A Minister may not make an order under section 1 unless—

    (a)  he has consulted in accordance with section 11;  

    (b)  following that consultation, he has laid a draft order and explanatory document before Parliament in accordance with section 12; and

(c)  the order is made, as determined under section 13, in accordance with—

    (i)   the negative resolution procedure (see section 14);

    (ii)  the affirmative resolution procedure (see section 15); or

    (iii) the super-affirmative resolution procedure (see section 16).

What do the usual suspects — Bob Marshall Andrews and co. — and the civil liberties watchdogs like Liberty make of the Bill?  Do we know?
(I hope the paragraphing of this will be preserved!)

Brian
http://www.barder.com/ephems/
 
 

]]> By: Paul Leake: absit invidia verbo » Blog Archive » Parliament-lite http://www.owen.org/blog/457/comment-page-1#comment-1981 Paul Leake: absit invidia verbo » Blog Archive » Parliament-lite Fri, 10 Feb 2006 12:38:59 +0000 http://www.owen.org/blog/457#comment-1981 [...] Maybe I’m sentimentally attached to the idea that MPs and peers make laws by receiving a bill, considering the principle, considering amendments and then giving approval to the final form before sending it to HM to sign. Maybe it’s just me who thinks Parliament’s most important input on Government proposed legislation is actually making sure the detail is right (through amendments)- given that the principle of the Bill is often derived from a manifesto. Maybe its just me who finds the Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill which increases Minister’s powers to amend primary legislation law by order (with MPs generally able only to approve or reject in whole) rather worrying. Just because something has been recommended by a Law Commission doesn’t mean that its uncontroversial or that the legislation based on those recommendations is well drafted. Oh, it’s not just me   [link] [...] [...] Maybe I’m sentimentally attached to the idea that MPs and peers make laws by receiving a bill, considering the principle, considering amendments and then giving approval to the final form before sending it to HM to sign. Maybe it’s just me who thinks Parliament’s most important input on Government proposed legislation is actually making sure the detail is right (through amendments)- given that the principle of the Bill is often derived from a manifesto. Maybe its just me who finds the Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill which increases Minister’s powers to amend primary legislation law by order (with MPs generally able only to approve or reject in whole) rather worrying. Just because something has been recommended by a Law Commission doesn’t mean that its uncontroversial or that the legislation based on those recommendations is well drafted. Oh, it’s not just me   [link] [...]

]]> By: Watching Them, Watching Us http://www.owen.org/blog/457/comment-page-1#comment-1980 Watching Them, Watching Us Fri, 10 Feb 2006 12:33:30 +0000 http://www.owen.org/blog/457#comment-1980 Aaargh ! What happened to the paragraph breaks ? Aaargh ! What happened to the paragraph breaks ?

]]> By: Watching Them, Watching Us http://www.owen.org/blog/457/comment-page-1#comment-1979 Watching Them, Watching Us Fri, 10 Feb 2006 12:31:43 +0000 http://www.owen.org/blog/457#comment-1979 <p> Have you forgotten the dreadful Henry VIII powers already on the Statute Book in the Civil Contingencies Act 2000 Part 2 Emergency Powers ?This neither the Civil Contingecies Act nor Bill have any  exemptions for "constitutional Acts of Parliament" like Mahgna Carta, the Bill of Rights, European Community Acts  etc.Under this Bill, it is not just Statutes, but also Orders and Regulations and the Common Law which can be repealed, amended or replaced.</p><p>At least the Civil Contingencies Act ended up being constrained from amending the Human Rights Act (not much of a concession given the number of loopholes in that Act for "national security" or for "public health"). Unlike the Civil Contingencies Act, the Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill could be used to modify itself.</p><p>This Bill could easily be used for example, to arbitrarily broaden the definition of terrorism, by Order, for offences carrying a life sentence. It is noticable that the section on "consultations", manages to avoid the simple requirement for a full public consultation, under the 12 week Cabinet Office Code of Practice. Instead only selected organisations or individuals who might be affected by any changes may perhaps be consulted, at the whim of a Minister.Why are NuLabour so scared of fully informed public consultations and detailed Parliamentary scrutiny ?</p> Have you forgotten the dreadful Henry VIII powers already on the Statute Book in the Civil Contingencies Act 2000 Part 2 Emergency Powers ?This neither the Civil Contingecies Act nor Bill have any  exemptions for "constitutional Acts of Parliament" like Mahgna Carta, the Bill of Rights, European Community Acts  etc.Under this Bill, it is not just Statutes, but also Orders and Regulations and the Common Law which can be repealed, amended or replaced.

At least the Civil Contingencies Act ended up being constrained from amending the Human Rights Act (not much of a concession given the number of loopholes in that Act for "national security" or for "public health"). Unlike the Civil Contingencies Act, the Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill could be used to modify itself.

This Bill could easily be used for example, to arbitrarily broaden the definition of terrorism, by Order, for offences carrying a life sentence. It is noticable that the section on "consultations", manages to avoid the simple requirement for a full public consultation, under the 12 week Cabinet Office Code of Practice. Instead only selected organisations or individuals who might be affected by any changes may perhaps be consulted, at the whim of a Minister.Why are NuLabour so scared of fully informed public consultations and detailed Parliamentary scrutiny ?

]]> By: Tim Worstall http://www.owen.org/blog/457/comment-page-1#comment-1977 Tim Worstall Fri, 10 Feb 2006 11:29:54 +0000 http://www.owen.org/blog/457#comment-1977 <strong>Timmy Elsewhere....</strong> Shortie at the ASI. I have to admit, when I first saw something about this Bill currently before Parliament my blood rather ran cold. Since I actually sent that piece in I’ve seen that Owen has more on the background... Timmy Elsewhere….

Shortie at the ASI. I have to admit, when I first saw something about this Bill currently before Parliament my blood rather ran cold. Since I actually sent that piece in I’ve seen that Owen has more on the background…

]]> By: dearieme http://www.owen.org/blog/457/comment-page-1#comment-1976 dearieme Fri, 10 Feb 2006 04:15:49 +0000 http://www.owen.org/blog/457#comment-1976 Look for the silver lining.  Maybe he'll behead Ms Greedie Boot. Look for the silver lining.  Maybe he’ll behead Ms Greedie Boot.

]]> By: Owen http://www.owen.org/blog/457/comment-page-1#comment-1975 Owen Fri, 10 Feb 2006 03:52:58 +0000 http://www.owen.org/blog/457#comment-1975 <p>Flitcraft  - Thanks.  That is absolutely fascinating.  It is a chilling pre-cursor of the language and arguments we hear today:</p><blockquote><p>considering also that sudden causes and occasions fortune many times which do require speedy remedies, and that by abiding for a parliament in the meantime might happen great prejudice to ensue to the realm ... the king for the time being, with the advice of his honourable council, whose names hereafter followeth, or with the advice of the more part of them, may set forth at all times by authority of this act his proclamations, under such penalties and pains and of such sort as to his highness and his said honourable council or the more part of them shall see[m] necessary and requisite; and that those same shall be obeyed, observed, and kept as though they were made by act of parliament for the time in them limited ... </p></blockquote><p>The King is Dead, Long Live the King!</p> Flitcraft  – Thanks.  That is absolutely fascinating.  It is a chilling pre-cursor of the language and arguments we hear today:

considering also that sudden causes and occasions fortune many times which do require speedy remedies, and that by abiding for a parliament in the meantime might happen great prejudice to ensue to the realm …
the king for the time being, with the advice of his honourable council, whose names hereafter followeth, or with the advice of the more part of them, may set forth at all times by authority of this act his proclamations, under such penalties and pains and of such sort as to his highness and his said honourable council or the more part of them shall see[m] necessary and requisite; and that those same shall be obeyed, observed, and kept as though they were made by act of parliament for the time in them limited …

The King is Dead, Long Live the King!

]]> By: Flitcraft http://www.owen.org/blog/457/comment-page-1#comment-1974 Flitcraft Fri, 10 Feb 2006 01:07:50 +0000 http://www.owen.org/blog/457#comment-1974 It's after the 1539 Statute of Proclamations which gave the King's proclamations the force of Law. It was repealed after Henry's death in 1547. Text is here  <a href="http://www.constitution.org/sech/sech_074.txt" rel="nofollow">http://www.constitution.org/sech/sech_074.txt</a> (scroll down for it) It’s after the 1539 Statute of Proclamations which gave the King’s proclamations the force of Law. It was repealed after Henry’s death in 1547. Text is here  http://www.constitution.org/sech/sech_074.txt (scroll down for it)

]]> By: qwghlm.co.uk : Fuck me, you’ve got to be joking http://www.owen.org/blog/457/comment-page-1#comment-1973 qwghlm.co.uk : Fuck me, you’ve got to be joking Thu, 09 Feb 2006 22:30:04 +0000 http://www.owen.org/blog/457#comment-1973 [...] (via Murky; more commentary from Talk Politics and Owen). [...] [...] (via Murky; more commentary from Talk Politics and Owen). [...]

]]>