Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Press Cycle #20 - Supreme Court
#1
"What do you think of the government's Supreme Court bill?"

This press cycle will be closed at 23:59 on 30/03/18

Remember to bolden the "tagline" of your statement.
Idk
Reply
Thanks given by:
#2
Whilst the Conservative Party supports the creation of the Supreme Court in principle, the Government is proposing draconian new powers that would not enhance the separation of powers, but leave it open to abuse. First, they want the nomination of the judiciary to be at the sole discretion of the Prime Minister. This bill should not be an opportunity to strengthen the powers of the Executive, but an opportunity to empower Parliament. Second, and more disturbingly, they propose to empower Parliament to remove members of the judiciary who do not show “good behaviour” – we cannot support the introduction of such arbitrary power and it is of great concern that the Prime Minister thinks this appropriate. We call on the government to accept the reasonable Conservative amendments proposed to the legislation to bring balance to the bill.
Member of the Conservative and Unionist Party
Deputy Leader of the Conservative Party (2001 - Present)
Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer (2001 - Present)
Member of Parliament for Beverley and Holderness (1997 - Present)
Reply
Thanks given by:
#3
This Supreme court bill in the house in its current form would give us a new system that could be abused, the Government just have not thought this through. I am extremely concerned that this weak Prime Minister is content to remove members of the judiciary if they don't show good behaviour, we of course have no idea what constitutes good behaviour and the government has failed to explain this

The Conservatives have offered amendments to put right what the Government have got so wrong. I call on the Prime Minister and the Government to rethink their strategy here and accept the amendments put forward by the Conservatives.
James Allen

MP for Leeds Central

Reply
Thanks given by:
#4
The former Leader of the House of Commons, the honourable member for Ipswich, has also raised concerns about the power-grab the government is seeking to force through in this Bill. There are clearly concerns on Labour's own benches about the way this bill has been introduced and the current powers it conveys on the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister tells us this is about the separation of powers - but he has repeatedly refused to support reasonable amendments - from both Labour and Conservative benches - to ensure there are appropriate checks and balances on the constitution. He has, at least, retreated from his position that Parliament should be able to remove judges for "bad behaviour".
Member of the Conservative and Unionist Party
Deputy Leader of the Conservative Party (2001 - Present)
Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer (2001 - Present)
Member of Parliament for Beverley and Holderness (1997 - Present)
Reply
Thanks given by:
#5
It must be a desperate time for the Conservative Party when its Deputy Leader seeks to find any kind of political spin or benefit with the simple introduction of an amendment to conciliate differences between both parties. In no way has there been "concerns" between "Labour's own benches" on the development of parliamentary debate regarding the creation of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom. The Opposition should be grateful that all efforts pursued to the improvement of considered legislation are held within the very public walls of Parliament and not in the private office of some party leader.

I'm proud and very confident with the work the Prime Minister has completed and the challenges that are still ahead of us. He can be certain that his party will always stand with him.
Thomasina Eldred
Secretary of State for Communities, Devolved Government and the Constitution (2001 - )
Member of Parliament for Ipswich (1992 - )
Leader of the House of Commons (1997 - 2000)
Reply
Thanks given by:
#6
Press Cycle closed.
Idk
Reply
Thanks given by:
#7
Labour: 20
 
I mean, I’m not sure you did too bad – you just didn’t contribute much amongst Tory onslaught. Your one contribution, from Thomasina, was very solid. But “we’re mature and are improving it and you're immature” didn’t deflect from the Tory Party’s wider critiques.
 
Conservatives: 30
 
You needed to own an issue after saying nothing on railtrack and the teacher’s strike stuff – and you did just that. Too bad it wasn’t quite as much as a vote winner as education and transport can be, but it was still solid with a few attacks rallied. Just a thought but the way you stoked up fears here would’ve been really, really, really effective should you have used it against Labour when the House of Lords debate was on the agenda…
 
Influence Points Awarded to:
 
Thomasina Eldred – “The Opposition should be grateful that all efforts pursued to the improvement of considered legislation are held within the public walls of Parliament and not in the private office of some party leader.” By virtue of contributing, but a good point made.
 
Elizabeth Atwood – “There are clearly concerns on Labour’s own benches about the way this bill has been introduced and the current powers it conveys on the Prime Minister.” By virtue of contributing, but multiple good points made.
 
Sir Harold Saxon – “I call on the Prime Minister and government to rethink their strategy here and accept the amendments put forward by the Conservatives.” By virtue of contributing.
Idk
Reply
Thanks given by:


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)