Archive

Posts Tagged ‘Supreme Court’

This Parliament is a joke that would be funny if the actions of our MPs were not so serious. They are doing nothing less than opening the safety doors that enclosed our democracy and inviting a revolution in

September 26, 2019 Leave a comment

images (16)Observing the chaos that has been caused in Parliament by the exquisite mixture of self interest, ignorance and lack of moral standing on the part of so many of our existing MPs has become frightening. Frightening for the real people outside of politics, who until these past three years have relied upon our system of government to be reliably always there when it comes to doing what it is that MPs, Ministers and PMs should do.

But our MPs are drunk on what they perceive as their own power. They lost all sense of reality when they sold their souls to this establishment’s system.

They have left real people outside of Westminster with literally no idea where this is all heading nor where it will actually end.

Yet they genuinely believe that they are in control of everything that they do.

For years that number centuries, British people have been able to rely upon a system of checks and balances, that without need for anything more than the gentlemanly handshake that was representative of the trustworthy Britain of old, has kept our system of government moving – albeit through transfer of power to complete opposites as well as long-waiting successors, at any time that momentum has been lost, mistakes have been made or the incumbent in No10 has simply become too old.

But the days when MPs and this Country’s leaders were self aware enough and had the moral fortitude to simply ‘do the right thing’ when their time was done have now long since gone.

The stupidity of MPs who are either being deliberately obtuse or simply too stupid to know and understand why they were elected, has driven our system of governance to the point of destruction.

Not content with barricading themselves within our Parliament and seeing themselves as the squatters that they are, or accepting that they have overstayed their welcome and that they should leave; these pretenders to the principles of democracy have now gone even further, not only seeking but securing the dubious intervention of the Courts to endorse their unscrupulousness.

Together, they have underlined the reality that power in this Country is no longer in the hands of the people that Parliament and our Courts are supposed to serve.

The British People have the right to be frightened. Because in the General Election that is soon to come we are not being offered anything different or anything that is good.

In this General Election we will only have the choice of electing MPs who will be motivated by their own set of self-serving values. Whether new candidates or those who will plan on returning, everything will continue to be just the same.

The reason we have got to where we are is because the whole system has become about keeping itself going. It has reached the stage where it just perpetuates pain.

Without fundamental change to the way that political parties operate and the pool of candidates that it offers us is selected, all forms of government in this country are now destined to remain institutionally corrupt.

The British People are awakening to this. Deep down and viscerally we know and understand that the more these people in power today tell us that things are changing and have changed, the more they actually stay the same.

We have now reached a time when so many of these very same MPs blow off steam by projecting the guilt they carry for their own actions onto others that question them by branding them with names they themselves don’t understand such as ‘fascists’ and many other derogatory things.

But they do not realise that it is they themselves who through their dismissal and disrespect of the very system that gave them their opening and opportunity, are now opening the very door to a new form of governance that could very well end up encapsulating all that they suggest they are afraid of and more.

Many will scoff at such sentiment. But what the use of power without thought on this level invites is nothing less than a revolution.

Because it is now becoming clear to the silent majority of the People in this Country that the apparatus has been removed or rendered meaningless that would in other hands have provided us, the Electorate with the choice of a real political alternative that can be trusted to democratically win.

 

image thanks to unknown

 

 

 

 

 

A General Election is the only thing that any responsible Parliament would now do. But Opposition MPs know they are going backwards on their road to No10

September 25, 2019 Leave a comment

One of the defining faults within our political culture today is the misapprehension that power is all about being in control.

The democracy-breaking steps that have been taken by Remainer MPs ranging from former PM Theresa May to Hilary Benn and the politicians that have supported them since the 2016 European Referendum have been breathtaking in their arrogance, heavy-handedness and self-aggrandisement.

The behaviour of these Opposition MPs standing against democracy and against Brexit demonstrates that they are fundamentally the same.

What they have done and what they are doing is founded on the mistaken belief that they can and will thwart Brexit simply by continuing to keep taking and then maintain what they understand to be control.

But all actions have consequences.

The blindness with which these MPs have all worked towards the aim of defying the principles that underpin our once envied Democracy, have led them to believe that they can now do anything unhindered. Even using the Courts to cover their actions will a veil of faux legitimacy. Confidant that the tried-and-tested political act of blurring the view of the public will lead us all to overlook and then forget what they do.

The reality is that these Remain-obsessed MPs have been too clever, too many times over too long a period of time.

After more than three years of this since we voted to Leave the EU, even the most disinterested and disenfranchised members of the public are aware of what is actually going on.

Yes, there are certainly some people who voted Remain in 2016 who still support them.

Brexit has led to such a level of emotional entrenchment that for some, any action or any cost that will disadvantage the choice of the many to Leave the EU is not only acceptable but right, if it ultimately benefits the position of very few.

Very few of us now fail to see, feel or understand that the morality required of all legitimate public representatives has left the Palace of Westminster en masse.

We know, we accept and we demand that politics can and never will now be the same.

When our MPs returned after the Summer recess, there is no doubt that significant choices were made.

Faced with a Remain-led Parliament, Boris chose Prorogation as the his only way when he should have committed himself and the Conservative Party to doing everything right and necessary to fight and win a General Election this Autumn, if not when he was confirmed as Leader, then certainly when he became Prime Minister the next day.

Yet Remainer MPs, aided by a highly controversial Speaker, to stop the Prime Minister achieving his promise of a no deal Brexit on 31st October at any cost, have hardly covered themselves in any glory too.

What this dubious collective form of opposition do no realise is that their actions have already removed the tenuous ground upon which they were planning that the Prime Minister would slip.

And for all the attempts they have made to demonstrate that Boris is a Prime Minister who cannot be trusted ever to keep his word, they have instead created a bed of rock underpinning the foundations of his position – by now using the Law itself against democracy – as opposed to Boris, who at this point appears like the only one amongst a rotten barrel of political pathways prepared to actually do what it takes to lead.

If this opposition were so sure of the legitimacy of the position that they hold in the wider public eye, there is no doubt that they would go for a General Election. History has shown that any Party can win a majority when they are truly connected to and have the public on their side.

But the truth is this opposition does not have the public on its side. And what is more, they damn well know it too.

The best they can still do even now, is to return to manipulating and abusing the very system that gave them their roles by attempting yet another fudge.

In fact this Remain-addicted opposition is willing to do anything to try and prevent the public from getting the result that we actually voted for.

These non-mandated MPs truly believe that if they can get whatever conclusion it is they want – even if that is the complete cancellation of Brexit – that the problem that exists between them and the electorate today will simply vanish into thin air and go away.

It will not.

Again, and it must be repeated. The public can all see everything that these abusers of truth now do.

We can only conclude that the politicians responsible for this complete and utter mess really believe that nothing has already or will change in the future.

That with the Party-political system apparently stitched up in their favour, thwarting Brexit and consolidating their position once they have power by changing the electoral system from First Past The Post to Proportional Representation is all that they really now need do, to make the thickos they think we all are shut up and go away.

A General Election will sadly not remove the majority of politicians who should never have been given the privilege and responsibility of elected office. For that is what these broken self-serving Political Parties do.

But a General Election is precisely the step that a majority of responsible MPs in our Parliament would take in these circumstances – no matter how extreme they may seem.

Simply because in these circumstances the outcome might be well out of their control. But in a democracy where politicians take their responsibility to the electorate as seriously as it can and should be, a General Election is now without any doubt, the right and proper thing to do.

The Supreme Court has lit the fuse on a time bomb sitting under our democracy and whole system of government too

September 24, 2019 Leave a comment

stream_img

The legal profession in the UK has been its own worst enemy for a long time.

Whilst reform has been long overdue in probably every area of Law, like most devices linked to the rule of Government in this Country, the breaks have been plastered over again and again and the system has repeatedly failed all of us.

Like politics itself, the people with responsibility have either forgotten or overlooked what’s right for everyone and replaced it with whats right for them in some or other mitigated form.

Perfect judgement of anything is rarely possible, because it is impossible to be aware of or understand all of the facts. And by facts we must not exclude non-material evidence, because thinking itself would also be taken into consideration if the perfect judgement were genuinely the aimed-for thing.

For practical reasons that include the functioning of what we consider to be a ‘normal‘ or civilised society, it is necessary for the Law to work set against a framework of Laws, precedents and past Judgements as a guide to identify the milestones and benchmarks of legal circumstances and know that a decision is being made against the ‘right’ things.

When it comes to matters that sit outside precedent or the Law making of our Government, it stands to reason that the highest Court in the Land which is now the Supreme Court, should be consulted and be asked to consider what precedent to set upon  those things.

Yet the dynamics of the relationship between primary Law makers (Government, ultimately representing the People) and the administrators of the Law (The Judiciary, ultimately representing the Government) is one that should never be impinged.

To do so brings into question where the power of our democracy ultimately falls.

The ruling by the Supreme Court today against the Government that the current Prorogation of Parliament was unlawful has stepped over a fundamental fault line in the way that our system of Democracy has previously been successful and worked.

Laws have been created under the power of the electorate via the ballot box, through the election of representatives of the people.

Until today, we have not been a Country that has been under the rule of the Courts.

As I outlined in a recent blog, there can be no suggestion that Boris Johnson’s prorogation of Parliament was absolutely right. But the circumstances which led him to the place where he made that decision were simply unprecedented too.

There should have been acknowledgement from the Supreme Court that the nature of the circumstances that have led to the Prorogation have themselves led to the experience for both the Government and the Courts.

Regrettably, the Judges of the Supreme Court have not done this. And our concern should now be what impression this will leave in people’s minds when we know that the way that politics works is broken and that change is an inevitable thing.

We have a Parliament that has refused to obey the will of the people by enacting the instruction of a democratic vote; refused to go back to the people when a confirmatory vote in the form of a General Election was offered – not just once, but twice, and has now encouraged the highest Court in the land to intervene in support of what at best can only be called their very questionable actions. All without the people being allowed to become involved in the process and being allowed democratically give their view on whats been happening, without Parliament first taking every step it believes that it can, to stack the deck in its favour of being returned en masse in order to frustrate once again the meaning of that original 2016 European Referendum Vote.

As those who have taken the time to study the steps and pathways that dictators take to power will already know, one of the first things they look to destroy or take control of is the system of Law and the Judiciary.

With the state of our so-called democracy being in the condition that it is and the self-serving behaviour of our MPs wrecking the whole concept of a working democracy in the way that it is, it is arguably the case that the combined efforts of all the people who should know better at the top of our establishment may have just combined to give any would-be dictator just cause.

 

image thanks to itv.com 

 

Using money to thwart democracy is dictatorship wearing different clothes

January 26, 2017 1 comment

gina-millerInequality is a current and far reaching issue in the UK today. The difference between rich and poor, the educated elite and those with ‘poor education’ or the 1% and the rest are topics which are never far from the news, even if they are presented in an indirect but nonetheless similar way.

Whilst it would now be easy to challenge any portrayal of imbalance within ‘normal’ life across in the media, the fact remains that wealth, education, housing, employment, healthcare and the opportunities to access just about every method of support which can make a difference to any one persons quality or experience of life is not available to each and every one of us in exactly the same way. The same opportunities are not given to everyone, and however unacceptable or unpalatable this may seem, it remains an almost universal fact.

The social disparity which people experience today is sadly just an evolution of a problem which has been consistent throughout history, albeit at varying levels and presented in terms which have been contemporary for the times.

Beyond birth and death, our shared reality offers no genuine equality between any two people.

Whilst the rights lobby and so-called ‘progressives’ are unlikely to agree, human experience and free will render the possibility of true equality obsolete.

Democracy and the process of giving everyone within a community the same choices – even within the framework of restrictions which is imposed, is likely to be one of the most equal of opportunities which are the same for everyone. Whatever somebody’s background, address, bank balance or work status, they equate to the very same thing when it comes to placing a voting slip in the ballot box. We are conditioned to expect the same of the Law in this Country too.

The relationship between democracy and Law is all too easily overlooked. This has been alarmingly well illustrated by the decision on triggering Article 50 by the Supreme Court.

In the UK today, democracy franchises the Law. Yet the Law has now inadvertently been used to franchise an alternative to democracy; one which is being facilitated by money, which has been supplied by just a few people who have the financial means to manipulate a process which places emphasis upon technical truths, in order to promote and deliver upon their own view.

Dress it up in whichever way you like, by challenging the instruction which the result of the European Referendum provided, those who funded the Court action against the Government have used independent means to frustrate democratic process. They have successfully played the process of Law against the very people it is there to consider, to support and intended to represent above any private interest.

In this light, we can clearly observe the relationship between wealth and influence. Money is power and the injustice that befalls far too many everyday people, simply because the views of the few who have sufficient wealth to facilitate a decision which frustrates the will of the many is very frightening indeed.

At best, it appears that money can now be openly used to manipulate the result of a democratic process which will effect the lives and future of everyone in the Country.

If such ignorance of the majority view were to be as blatantly replicated by a handful of politicians or the prime minister who leads our Government by misusing their power – no matter how valid they believe their own argument to be, we would be justified in using terms to describe such behaviour as being akin to dictatorship.

The question we should all perhaps now be asking is what is the difference here and perhaps where else is this approach being used?

image thanks to telegraph.co.uk

Brexit and the Supreme Court: What will be the price of ‘objective’ judgement if no new precedents are set?

December 13, 2016 1 comment

technical-truths

Dipping into the proceedings of the Supreme Court last week was hardly the emotionally charged experience that Leavers and Remainers had been conditioned by the media to expect. But should we really be surprised when case law is being used to define arguments that have never previously been made and do in fact need our Judges to make a judgement in the purest sense?

As with all too many arguments in the political sphere these days, there is no small amount of semantics in play. Labelling of one kind or another has progressed to a level where the very act of simplifying language has progressed beyond the point of being intelligent and really given the lie to the idea that one word really can and does mean the same thing to all people.

Never mind ‘hard Brexit’ this or ‘soft Brexit’ that. Judicial process is itself hiding the truth that case law did at one point or another have itself to be created. It was at these very moments that it was the objectivity of the Judiciary or other high-level-offices of responsibility upon which we have relied and trusted to make the decisions which would today become the precedents that the debate over parliamentary interest in the triggering of Article 50 has rested.

At a time when the level of public confidence in politicians can be generalised as being the core issue that brought Brexit about, we all need to see leadership within the system of law which reaches beyond the scope of sticking to what is considered safe, or fundamentally right, simply because it’s the way that it is expected to be done.

So when we look to the Judiciary for the impartial type of leadership which is sadly lacking from government, why have the Courts not focused on the chronology of events, and above all what cannot reasonably be disputed as the democratic will of the people?

The easy response would be to suggest that the Judges concerned are expressing views which have been informed by bias. Indeed many of our media outlets have gone to great lengths to explore the backgrounds and links of the Judges who sat on the case previously, as well as the 11 who have sat in the past week at the Supreme Court.

The upshot of this approach which is inherently linked to the Brexit camp, being the inference that a decision which goes against the perogative of the Prime Minister to trigger Article 50 directly and without further reference to Parliament is pro-Remain.

Be it right or wrong in terms of principle, the hardest pill to swallow for anyone looking in from the outside who supports Brexit is that the Judges have not done anything wrong by ruling the way that they already have. Nor will those sitting in the Supreme Court do so if they then uphold the previous ruling.

Yes, the Judiciary may well be hiding behind process and this could indeed give legitimised cover to the less objective members of a bench who might put personal or subjective views before what Brexiteers would see post 23rd June as being clearly right. But that is their gift and we are unlikely to ever know the truth to this question and the fact is that the system does – as its stands – both allow and facilitate an intelligent form of responsibility-ducking which sadly permeates all forms of government today.

Technical truths are the harsh and uncompromising reality of a protectionist and self-serving age where taking responsibility is considered dangerous and actions are legitimately excused by reference to the precedents set by others rather than what experience tells us exists in front of our own eyes.

The objective view would recognise the democratic decision and therefore the mandate of the people above all else. Equally it would reference the fact that Parliament has already had its say when it passed the legislation for the Referendum in the first place and then made that choice directly subject to the will of the people. Ironically, it would also reproach the significant transfer of legislative power which has been undemocratically transferred to the EU beyond the previous mandate given by the British people for a common trading relationship, respectful of national sovereignty, which people on all sides of the argument still actually want.

It is possible that the Supreme Court will support the Government view and allow the triggering of Article 50 without any further debate. But it is unlikely.

Like it or not, we simply do not exist within a time of true leadership. If we had, we would not be anywhere near the constant two and fro of discussions surrounding our exit from Europe and the rise of a new American President whose arrival together in 2016 are being heralded as the turn of a populist tide.

We certainly wouldn’t find ourselves questioning what constitutes good judgement.

%d bloggers like this: