Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"
|    alt.books.george-orwell    |    Discussing 1984, sadly coming true...    |    4,149 messages    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
|    Message 3,051 of 4,149    |
|    ROBBIE to All    |
|    Wake up, England    |
|    16 Feb 06 17:56:47    |
      From: word_chemist@hotmail.com              Letters to the Editor              The TimesFebruary 16, 2006                     Legislative reform                     Sir, Clause one of the Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill (Comment, Feb       15) provides that: "A Minister of the Crown may by order make provision for       either or both of the following purposes - a) reforming legislation; b)       implementing recommendations of any one or more of the United Kingdom Law       Commissions, with or without changes."       This has been presented as a simple measure "streamlining" the Regulatory       Reform Act 2001, by which, to help industry, the Government can reduce red       tape by amending the Acts of Parliament that wove it. But it goes much       further: if passed, the Government could rewrite almost any Act and, in some       cases, enact new laws that at present only Parliament can make.                     The Bill subjects this drastic power to limits, but these are few and weak.       If enacted as it stands, we believe the Bill would make it possible for the       Government, by delegated legislation, to do (inter alia) the following:       create a new offence of incitement to religious hatred, punishable with two       years' imprisonment;       curtail or abolish jury trial;       permit the Home Secretary to place citizens under house arrest;       allow the Prime Minister to sack judges;       rewrite the law on nationality and immigration;       "reform" Magna Carta (or what remains of it).       It would, in short, create a major shift of power within the state, which in       other countries would require an amendment to the constitution; and one in       which the winner would be the executive, and the loser Parliament.       David Howarth, MP for Cambridge, made this point at the Second Reading of       the Bill last week. We hope that other MPs, on all sides of the House, will       recognise the dangers of what is being proposed before it is too late.       PROFESSOR J. R. SPENCER, QC       PROFESSOR SIR JOHN BAKER, QC       PROFESSOR DAVID FELDMAN       PROFESSOR CHRISTOPHER FORSYTH       PROFESSOR DAVID IBBETSON       PROFESSOR SIR DAVID WILLIAMS, QC       Law Faculty,       University of Cambridge              http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,59-2042165,00.html              ROBBIE       A lefty says: 'huh?'              --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05        * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca