« Abolition of Parliament Bill | Main | Power to the people - (the right sort of people only of course). »

Yet more on the Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill

rightlinks.co.uk - Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill asks some questions that need answering about this bill...

Why does the Bill change the current procedures for the enactment into our law of EU legislation?

What guarantees are there that the Bill could not be used to bring in the EU Constitution by the back door?

If the Bill is just a simplifying measure for deregulation, why does it contain no requirement for any orders to actually reduce the amounts of red tape and regulation?

Why does the Bill give the power to create new law, including new criminal offences, to the Law Commissions, which are unelected quangos appointed by Ministers?

If the Law Commissions are supposed to be staffed by impartial technical experts, why are Ministers taking the power to amend the recommendations of the Law Commissions before they are fast-tracked into legislation?

Why do protections in the Bill against new laws to permit forcible entry, search, seizure or compelling people to give evidence not apply to reforms recommended by the unelected Law Commissions appointed by Ministers?

If the Bill allows Ministers to "amend, repeal or replace legislation in any way that an Act might", does this not give them an unlimited power to ignore a democratic Parliament and legislate by decree?

If the Bill is so sensible, why has Parliament used a different way of making laws for 700 years?

If the Bill is meant to retain Parliament’s ability to scrutinise regulations and regulators, why does it not contain a provision for automatic sunset clauses in orders issued under the Bill?

If the Bill gives Ministers powers to charge fees by decree, is that not a charter to bring in unlimited stealth taxes?

As the Bill permits an order to be made by a Minister under the Bill provided its effect is “proportionate” to his “policy objective”, since when in our history as a democratic country has a Government Minister’s “policy objective” directly received the force of law?

What guarantees are there that the Bill could not be used to bring in ID Cards by the back door?

Why does the Bill give the Scottish Parliament and the Welsh Assembly a veto over Ministers’ power to change the law which it denies to English MPs?


There's one simple answer to all the above questions:

The Labour government is composed of a bunch of spoilt-brats; champagne socialists from cosy middle-class backgrounds who hate their country, the society that raised them and very freedoms that allow them to spout their particular brand of lunacy. They will not be happy until they have reduced the United Kingdom, and particularly the English part, to the same condition as the third world cesspits they so admire.

It's amazing how quickly these bastards can cause one's post-range euphoria to evaporate.


What can prevent this Bill from being passed as it stands? Does this ultimately depend on House of Commons opposition? (and Labour opposition at that?)

Read here about how the Select Commitee on Regulatory Reform was hampered on all sides in it's attempt to respond appropriately to what they reconised to be "one of the most constitutionally significant Bills that has come before the House for some time", and effectively prevented from addressing the wider implications of the bill by a refusal of their request for " a less restrictive remit to allow us to consider all aspects of the Bill."

The report was restricted to consideration of matters relating to "Regulatory Reform".


Post a comment