Jump to content

The 2024 General Election - July 4th

sadoldgit

By sadoldgit
in The Lounge

 Share

Recommended Posts

egg

egg

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, sadoldgit said:

As has been said, it has nothing to do with the EU. A Supreme Court based here could find itself compromised by a government. The European Court by its very nature  is completely  independent of possible internal state interference. If you are going to have an overseeing legislative body where total independence of any particular  state is crucial, then it makes perfect sense and is why it was formed in the first place. If the state is complying with basic human rights anyway, what does it have to fear from the ECHR? 

I've addressed the first point.

As to the balance, we'll agree to differ. I am quite satisfied that we do not need international judges overseeing our judges decision making. We have tribunals, appellate tribunals, the high court for judicial review, then onto the court of appeal, then the supreme court if necessary. Those courts and their judges are independent of each other and any duff decisions will get proper scrutiny and a fair outcome irrespective of politics or outside interference. I'm not persuaded that necessarily applies in the ECHR, particularly post Brexit.

I'll leave it there as this is a general election thread, and one thing we all seem to agree on, is this ain't happening anyway! 

  • Like 1
egg

egg

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, skintsaint said:

Has that ever happened? I don't know either way, just intrigued as thought the SC was independent of government. 

No. It's an absurd allegation. The SC is independent of the government. 

  • Like 1
sadoldgit

sadoldgit

Posted
  • Author
Posted

It is not for you or I to be satisfied about whether a higher court is needed. The reason is was formed on the first place still stands scrutiny but as you say, we aren’t leaving anyway and it is just another chunk of red meat thrown out to deflect from other matters.

No one here gave a stuff about the ECHR until Rwanda.

sadoldgit

sadoldgit

Posted
  • Author
Posted
7 minutes ago, egg said:

No. It's an absurd allegation. The SC is independent of the government. 

At the moment. Who knows what could happen in the future?

egg

egg

Posted
Posted
21 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

At the moment. Who knows what could happen in the future?

We need to deal with the reality, not the vague prospect of our independent judicial structure crumbling at some point in the future. 

Anyways, I promised to shut up so I will! 

  • Like 1
hypochondriac

hypochondriac

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, sadoldgit said:

As has been said, it has nothing to do with the EU. A Supreme Court based here could find itself compromised by a government. The European Court by its very nature  is completely  independent of possible internal state interference. If you are going to have an overseeing legislative body where total independence of any particular  state is crucial, then it makes perfect sense and is why it was formed in the first place. If the state is complying with basic human rights anyway, what does it have to fear from the ECHR? 
The only people who need to be concerned are those who are allegedly in breech of human rights. What is wrong with that?

Because many of the rulings are subjective and individual nation states may disagree with their interpretation of what human rights are and what they entail. It was also set up during a different time with very different circumstances. 

  • Like 1
whelk

whelk

Posted
Posted

Farage can’t even condemn fully those absolute vile racist homophobic scum campaigning for him. Absolute cunt of a party

  • Like 7
sadoldgit

sadoldgit

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, egg said:

We need to deal with the reality, not the vague prospect of our independent judicial structure crumbling at some point in the future. 

Anyways, I promised to shut up so I will! 

History tells a different story. And it is not a question of our system crumbling, more of a level of scrutiny from outside of our own system. The more complex the issue, the wider the level of experience to deal with it surely helps?

Anyway, another example of the sort of people who campaign for Farage.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c10l5qd8p60o.amp

Bless you hypo, you are confused. To help you out, would you trust the Tory Party to determine whether Rwanda is a safe country to deport people to or the ECHR? Actually don’t answer that. You would probably think it is ok to send them to Gaza.

Edited by sadoldgit
  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Gloucester Saint

Gloucester Saint

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, whelk said:

Farage can’t even condemn fully those absolute vile racist homophobic scum campaigning for him. Absolute cunt of a party

Reform aren’t racist, homophobic bigots and nothing remotely like the old National Front and BNP. Honest. 

And if you believe that after watching this appalling clip, you’ll believe anything

https://www.channel4.com/news/exclusive-undercover-inside-reforms-campaign-evidence-of-homophobia-and-canvassers-racism

  • Like 3
Gloucester Saint

Gloucester Saint

Posted
Posted (edited)

This is quite amusing though from Ed Davey (via Tim Montgomerie on X) https://x.com/montie/status/1806278644785873218?cxt=HBwWhIWwve-2mJEyAAAA&cn=ZmxleGlibGVfcmVjcw%3D%3D&refsrc=email

He’s like the Daily Star is Ed Davey - cheering us up amongst the dourness. You have my vote.

In other news, the Economist backs Labour for the first time since 2005.

Edited by Gloucester Saint
  • Haha 1
The Kraken

The Kraken

Posted
Posted
23 minutes ago, whelk said:

Farage can’t even condemn fully those absolute vile racist homophobic scum campaigning for him. Absolute cunt of a party

Be fair now. “Nigel” didn’t even have enough time to do the proper vetting on all of his candidates! How on earth do you think he’s got enough time to check on the complete merry band of utter fuckwits and reprehensible cunts that follow him?

  • Like 2
egg

egg

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

Ed taking one for the team!

Looks like he's giving one for the team! 

  • Like 2
east-stand-nic

east-stand-nic

Posted
Posted
11 hours ago, The Kraken said:

Be fair now. “Nigel” didn’t even have enough time to do the proper vetting on all of his candidates! How on earth do you think he’s got enough time to check on the complete merry band of utter fuckwits and reprehensible cunts that follow him?

Meanwhile, Labour have never had any racist members or followers. Jeez.

  • Haha 2
  • Sad 1
egg

egg

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, east-stand-nic said:

Meanwhile, Labour have never had any racist members or followers. Jeez.

Show me evidence of a campaigner from another party asking a voter to kill immigrants under his care, calling for junior soldiers to kill immigrants in the UK, in France, and in Bradford and I'll grant you equivalence. 

  • Like 3
sadoldgit

sadoldgit

Posted
  • Author
Posted
16 minutes ago, east-stand-nic said:

Meanwhile, Labour have never had any racist members or followers. Jeez.

He attracts these people like flies to a steaming turd. The issue here is about the politics of the current Reform Party and the kind of people it attracts. You might recall the Labour campaign under Corbyn and the constant claims of antisemitism? That was all over the media in the same way that these Reform people are now. What is your issue (apart from the fact that you support a party that is catnip to racists and fascists)?

  • Like 1
Turkish

Turkish

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

why are you so obsessed by a fringe party?

everyone of his posts on this thread today have been about Reform. Yesterday he managed not to mention Farage until the afternoon though :lol:🤡

  • Haha 1
a1ex2001

a1ex2001

Posted
Posted
20 hours ago, egg said:

No. It's an absurd allegation. The SC is independent of the government. 

Except when the government of the day passes legislation forcing the SC to accept a position that isn’t true say for example that a country in Africa is a safe place to send refugees….  Then the SC clearly isn’t independent and has been told by the government what to do.  Something not true of the ECHR.

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
sadoldgit

sadoldgit

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, AlexLaw76 said:

why are you so obsessed by a fringe party?

Why are you so obsessed with my posts? It is an election. We discuss what is going on.The Reform Party is having a massive effect on the Tory vote. It is also full of extremists. It would be odd to ignore what is going on wouldn’t it? Perhaps you would like to share your opinion about what these canvassers have been saying?

Edited by sadoldgit
AlexLaw76

AlexLaw76

Posted
Posted
Just now, sadoldgit said:

Why are you so obsessed with my posts? It is an election. We discuss what is going on.The Reform Party is having a massive effect on the Tory vote. It is also full of extremists. It would be odd to ignore what is going on wouldn’t it? 

I not obsessed with your posts. Just merely asking a question of why you seemingly only mention Farage/Reform.

 

Weston Super Saint

Weston Super Saint

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, a1ex2001 said:

Except when the government of the day passes legislation forcing the SC to accept a position that isn’t true say for example that a country in Africa is a safe place to send refugees….  Then the SC clearly isn’t independent and has been told by the government what to do.  Something not true of the ECHR.

Then there definitely wouldn't be any European countries who've sent refugees to Rwanda in that case.

AlexLaw76

AlexLaw76

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Then there definitely wouldn't be any European countries who've sent refugees to Rwanda in that case.

The EU lurches more to the "Far Right" every month. 

Quote

The EU bloc has paid Turkey billions of dollars to keep refugees from reaching Greece and has funded the Libyan Coast Guard, which pushes migrant boats bound for Europe back to North Africa. It is also helping to fund U.N.-run centres in Niger and Rwanda to process asylum seekers.

 

egg

egg

Posted
Posted
19 minutes ago, a1ex2001 said:

Except when the government of the day passes legislation forcing the SC to accept a position that isn’t true say for example that a country in Africa is a safe place to send refugees….  Then the SC clearly isn’t independent and has been told by the government what to do.  Something not true of the ECHR.

Nonsense. The SC overruled the government on Rwanda, ruling the policy illegal. That's not a court doing as a government wants is it. 

If and when a person impacted by the bill/act challenges the decision, our courts will determine it and in doing so must consider their human rights. Absolute nonsense to suggest that the courts will do anything other than that. 

sadoldgit

sadoldgit

Posted
  • Author
Posted
19 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

I not obsessed with your posts. Just merely asking a question of why you seemingly only mention Farage/Reform.

 

But I don’t. Reform/Farage are constantly all over the news. What would be odd is to ignore why. I know you don’t have a problem with Farage, his politics or the actions of many of his party activists, but many do. Are you voting for Reform?

AlexLaw76

AlexLaw76

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, sadoldgit said:

But I don’t. Reform/Farage are constantly all over the news. What would be odd is to ignore why. I know you don’t have a problem with Farage, his politics or the actions of many of his party activists, but many do. Are you voting for Reform?

I am voting for an independent - probably 

As for his party activists; they all have lunatics, more so those further ends of the spectrum you go. Look at the state of some of the Greens (not that you have much to say about them).

I doubt it would be too difficult to find a Momentum nutter wishing harm on a Jew. I mean, you verge on the edge of constant xenophobia with that particular group, I dread to think what you would say if set up for a spoof interview with a hidden camera.

egg

egg

Posted
Posted (edited)
29 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

Why are you so obsessed with my posts? It is an election. We discuss what is going on.The Reform Party is having a massive effect on the Tory vote. It is also full of extremists. It would be odd to ignore what is going on wouldn’t it? Perhaps you would like to share your opinion about what these canvassers have been saying?

With or without reform we're having a labour government with a huge majority. Sure, a bunch of racists and little englanders will waste their vote on them, but they will not have any impact on the outcome. The constant highlighting them is almost as annoying as the party itself. 

Edited by egg
  • Like 1
AlexLaw76

AlexLaw76

Posted
Posted
Just now, egg said:

With or without reform we're having a labour government with a huge majority. Sure, a bunch of racists and little englanders will waste their vote on them, but they will not any significant impact on the outcome. The constant highlighting them is almost as annoying as the party itself. 

Exactly. Galloways lot at least had an MP a few weeks back, and could get a few more (more than Reform?), yet they get little attention in comparison. Same with the Green Party (and their nut jobs)

sadoldgit

sadoldgit

Posted
  • Author
Posted
4 minutes ago, egg said:

Nonsense. The SC overruled the government on Rwanda, ruling the policy illegal. That's not a court doing as a government wants is it. 

If and when a person impacted by the bill/act challenges the decision, our courts will determine it and in doing so must consider their human rights. Absolute nonsense to suggest that the courts will do anything other than that. 

The Supreme Court agreed that Parliament could rule that Rwanda was a safe country to send asylum seekers to. Many agencies disagree which is why it is good that there is a higher court not based here who can look at the situation/legalities away from the UK.

sadoldgit

sadoldgit

Posted
  • Author
Posted
4 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

I am voting for an independent - probably 

As for his party activists; they all have lunatics, more so those further ends of the spectrum you go. Look at the state of some of the Greens (not that you have much to say about them).

I doubt it would be too difficult to find a Momentum nutter wishing harm on a Jew. I mean, you verge on the edge of constant xenophobia with that particular group, I dread to think what you would say if set up for a spoof interview with a hidden camera.

I have said something about the Greens. I said that Carla spoke well and I agreed with many of their policies.

Have I missed something? Are Momentum a political party with candidates standing at this election?

As for xenophobia, best not go there with your record Batman. This Independent you are going to vote for, how does he/she feel about Muslims?

AlexLaw76

AlexLaw76

Posted
Posted
Just now, sadoldgit said:

I have said something about the Greens. I said that Carla spoke well and I agreed with many of their policies.

Have I missed something? Are Momentum a political party with candidates standing at this election?

As for xenophobia, best not go there with your record Batman. This Independent you are going to vote for, how does he/she feel about Muslims?

I have no idea how they feel about Muslims, jews, Christians, Jedi's, or Rastas. 

I must have missed the endless tripe you posted about the nutters the Greens have standing.......

 

egg

egg

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, sadoldgit said:

The Supreme Court agreed that Parliament could rule that Rwanda was a safe country to send asylum seekers to. Many agencies disagree which is why it is good that there is a higher court not based here who can look at the situation/legalities away from the UK.

Here is a summary of the SC decision.

https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2023-0093-press-summary.pdf

Where in that did the SC as the government wants? 

Absolute bollox to suggest that the SC is the government patsy and we need intervention from above. Sure, states relatively fresh out of the eastern bloc and/or with political judges may need some guidance, but we ain't that state. 

a1ex2001

a1ex2001

Posted
Posted
28 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Then there definitely wouldn't be any European countries who've sent refugees to Rwanda in that case.

Which countries would these be?

a1ex2001

a1ex2001

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, egg said:

Here is a summary of the SC decision.

https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2023-0093-press-summary.pdf

Where in that did the SC as the government wants? 

Absolute bollox to suggest that the SC is the government patsy and we need intervention from above. Sure, states relatively fresh out of the eastern bloc and/or with political judges may need some guidance, but we ain't that state. 

The Supreme Court found that Rwanda was not a safe place to send refugees, the government then passed legislation telling the Supreme Court that Rwanda is a safe country to send refugees to.  How is that anything other than direct government  intervention in a SC finding?

egg

egg

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, a1ex2001 said:

The Supreme Court found that Rwanda was not a safe place to send refugees, the government then passed legislation telling the Supreme Court that Rwanda is a safe country to send refugees to.  How is that anything other than direct government  intervention in a SC finding?

It sounds like an explanation will be wasted.  

egg

egg

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, a1ex2001 said:

Explain away go on I’m listening and ready to be convinced!

Honestly mate, I'm sensing I'd be wasting my time. Frankly, it's a bit silly to accept that the SC told the government that they're acting illegally, then suggest government intervention. 

a1ex2001

a1ex2001

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, egg said:

Honestly mate, I'm sensing I'd be wasting my time. Frankly, it's a bit silly to accept that the SC told the government that they're acting illegally, then suggest government intervention. 

Come on explain it then honestly I’m happy to be convinced you are not wasting your time just explain it….

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...