Tag Archives: humble address

Are we heading for the UK’s own ‘Watergate’-scale scandal over Brexit and prorogation?

Liar, liar: Did Boris Johnson look like this, in this now-infamous photo, because his pants were on fire?

Boris Johnson tells us that he did not lie to the Queen about his reasons for wanting Parliament prorogued. Do you believe this habitual liar?

I don’t.

I’m far more likely to believe Joanna Cherry MP, one of the 75 Parliamentarians who took the Tory government to court in Scotland over the decision to prorogue.

She thinks BoJob lied to our monarch, and she thinks that the government’s refusal to release communications on the subject by Downing Street aides – who were using their personal equipment to do so, is intended to hide the evidence. She says we could be heading for a scandal of Watergate-sized proportions.

And let’s be honest – the fact that the government is refusing to hand over the messages is extremely suspicious. If there was nothing incriminating on those devices, what’s the problem?

There is also a double-standard going on here.

Parliament has been prorogued because the Queen ordered it – on the advice of Mr Johnson, relayed by Jacob Rees-Mogg.

But it is also the Queen who ordered the release of information on these aides’ mobile devices – on the urging of a “humble address” to her by Parliament.

Boris Johnson’s government does not have the option to choose which of Her Majesty’s orders it chooses to obey. She wants the information out in the open so out is where it should be.

Looking at the government’s reasons for refusing the order – representatives like Michael Gove have said it is unreasonable to demand aides’ personal devices in order to see the messages on them.

But according to the law, aides are not permitted use their personal devices to discuss government business and the order was made because of concerns that this is exactly what they have been doing – in order to hide the facts from the public.

So the situation is clear: if these aides didn’t want us to see the contents of their mobile phones (or whatever devices they used), they should not have broken the law and used them. The evidence – the refusal to provide these devices – suggests that they did. They only way to vindicate themselves is to hand over the gear.

Otherwise we’re going to go forward – into a general election, as we understand it – in the belief that the leader of a party of government misled Queen and country for his own selfish reasons. That’s not a good platform on which to campaign.

I mean, nobody’s going to believe the word of a proven liar, are they?

Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/mike-sivier-libel-fight/


Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.


The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

Government to publish full legal advice on Brexit deal after MPs find it in contempt of Parliament

As one commentator noted, there really isn’t enough popcorn in the world for the festivities taking place in the House of Commons today (December 4) – starting with the government’s humiliation at being found in contempt of Parliament.

MPs voted to find the government in contempt by a margin of 311 votes to 293.

Theresa May and her advisers must now deliver all legal advice they received before agreeing their Brexit deal with the EU to Parliament – or face the possibility of further sanction.

The Tory government had been in turmoil, desperately trying to defend against the motion that Attorney-General Geoffrey Cox committed the contempt by refusing to provide MPs with the information as demanded by the Commons in a Humble Motion that was approved unanimously on November 13.

Satirists had a field day –

– but the serious issue behind it is that Mrs May and her cronies have defied the rule of law. Parliament has supremacy over the government and the government may not ignore Parliament’s will.

Here’s a quick summary of the issue:

Sir Keir Starmer, Labour’s Shadow Brexit Secretary, opened the debate by demanding that Parliament rule the government to be in contempt.

He said the issue was whether the government had complied with a binding order of the House to release the Attorney-General’s legal advice.

The government is wilfully refusing to comply with a binding motion of the House and is therefore in contempt, he said.

The House of Commons is a higher authority than the government, he said. Parliament is sovereign, not the executive.

He pointed out that the government was making “a plea of mitigation”, not a defence.

And he pointed out that “for months the government has ignored opposition day motions and now that tactic has got them in very deep water indeed”.

Then Andrea Leadsom, Leader of the Commons, presented a government amendment – that the matter should be referred to the Commons’ privileges committee. This is normal procedure, but Opposition parties and the DUP have demanded that the matter be handled by Parliament because it refers to a vote that is happening next week.

In his speech, Sir Keir Starmer had addressed this claim: “The short point is this: there is nothing to refer. A binding order was made and the government is refusing to comply with it. The government is simply playing for time, hoping this is in the long grass until the vote has gone.”

Ms Leadsom called on MPs to “act with caution” in the contempt vote. She said the government had put up the A-G for two hours of “frank” questions and published a 48-page legal position paper in lieu of full advice.

That is exactly the point – the government put forward what it wanted to provide, rather than what it was ordered to provide. She was as good as admitting the contempt Sir Keir Starmer had alleged.

Then she made a point that became a subject for humour:

https://twitter.com/owenjbennett/status/1069941739291586560

After that, the debate got bogged down in technicalities and nit-picking.

Notable in the midst of this was Jacob Rees-Mogg’s magnificent attempt to face in both directions at once. He said the government could not refuse to honour a Humble Address, claiming the national interest, because “the government interest and the national interest are different things”. Therefore the demand for the full legal advice on the Brexit deal must be honoured. But he said he would be supporting the government’s amendment – because he did not think the motion went far enough and should have identified the culprit and suggested a punishment.

More seriously: One MP after another stood up to suggest that publishing the papers would not be in the national interest because it may prejudice future relationships with others. This was misleading Parliament – and the country.

The Humble Address did not demand publication of the legal papers; it did not suggest that they should be made available to the general public – it called for them to be “laid before Parliament”. The only people who would see them would be MPs, and only in order to inform their opinions and debate on the Brexit agreement. So arguments about harming the national interest were nonsense.

The government’s amendment was first to be tested – and fell by just four votes, with 307 in favour and 311 against.

The government must now publish the Attorney-General’s final legal advice in full – and has committed to do so tomorrow (December 5).

Tory crocodile tears: MP who wept at Universal Credit stories helped block publication of reports on its effect

Remember this?

I have already poured doubt on Heidi Allen’s sincerity; her record is against her.

Now it has emerged that she voted against a move to clarify what the Conservative government understood Universal Credit would do, before it was put into operation.

Labour had tabled a motion in Parliament for a “humble Address” to the Queen, directing that any briefing papers or analysis provided to the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions since 8 January 2018 on the impact of the roll-out of universal credit on recipients’ and household income and on benefits debts be presented to MPs.

That motion was defeated by a margin of 20 votes – 279 for; 299 against.

Ms Allen voted against it.

So much for her claim that “By God, we’ll work together and make it better.”

Her actions speak for themselves; she likes Universal Credit just the way it is.

Source: Tory MP who CRIED at Universal Credit horror stories votes to BLOCK Universal Credit Impact Assessment publication | Evolve Politics

Visit our JustGiving page to help Vox Political’s Mike Sivier fight anti-Semitism libels in court


Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.


The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

Labour to call for all private government briefings on harmful effects of Universal Credit to be published

We’re hearing more and more horror stories about the effect of Universal Credit on the people who are forced to claim it, now.

The latest accounts seem to have done some good, prompting the Conservatives to delay completion of the flawed benefit’s rollout across the UK while they consider ways of minimising hardship caused to people being transferred onto it.

Joy at the decision has been dampened by the revelation that the options being considered won’t do much good – and the fact that the benefit would still target families with children, women, and minority groups with disproportionate cuts in income.

We have been led to believe that even Conservative backbenchers have been considering rebelling against their own government, in the belief that a show of defiance over a matter that has outraged the public might save them from losing their Parliamentary seats at the next general election, which might not be far away.

Perhaps the decision to delay completing the rollout of UC across the whole of the UK was made to pacify these potential rebels.

Their opportunity to make a stand would have come in an Opposition Day debate on Universal Credit today (October 17). Whether that happens or not, the Labour Party has almost certainly outflanked both them and the government itself, with its plan for a “humble address”, in which the Queen is asked to direct that certain documents be released.

In this case, the documents would be private briefing papers on the impact of the roll-out of Universal Credit on recipients, household income and on claimants’ debts:

It seems certain that any papers released in this manner would show that the Conservatives were well aware of the harm their Universal Credit would do – but went ahead with it anyway.

That would include the potentially-rebellious Tory backbenchers; they would have been perfectly aware of the drawbacks to claimants of the benefit as it had been designed.

So Labour’s move – if successful – would expose the Conservatives on multiple levels.

The resulting scandal could be catastrophic for the Tories.

Visit our JustGiving page to help Vox Political’s Mike Sivier fight anti-Semitism libels in court


Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.


The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

Desperate Theresa May whips MPs to hide her involvement in Windrush scandal

Secret smirk: Theresa May thinks she has got away with imposing the racist ‘hostile environment’ policy that deported UK citizens, by letting Amber Rudd take the blame. Shouldn’t she resign too?

She’s between a rock and a hard place.

Tories have been abstaining from voting on Opposition Day debates since the general election last year, so we may conclude from today’s three-line whip to block Labour’s ‘humble address’ that the information being requested is hugely damaging to Mrs May.

Of course, if the Tories continued to abstain – as I stated in a previous article – we would know what that information is.

Either way, the current prime minister’s guilt, her collusion in the targeting of the so-called Windrush Generation and their families, and her determination to continue attacking these people even after being told UK citizens were suffering as a result of her policies, seems clear.

If the Tories succeed in blocking Labour’s motion, do we – the public – accept it?

If not, there’s an obvious answer.

There are local and mayoral elections tomorrow (May 3). If people aren’t satisfied with Mrs May’s behaviour, they can make it clear by voting against Conservative candidates.

A large anti-Conservative vote cannot be seen as anything other than a response to Mrs May and her government. They may try to spin it as something else, but they won’t succeed.

This is an opportunity to rid ourselves of the worst prime minister in living memory. Let’s not throw it away.

Conservative MPs are under a three-line whip to vote against the so-called humble address motion, the same procedure used last year by Labour to force ministers to hand over their Brexit economic impact assessments.

In an opposition day debate later on Wednesday, Labour is to use the motion to ask for all papers, correspondence and advice on between ministers, senior officials and advisers from May 2010 until now.

This would be handed to the Commons home affairs committee and would include information about any detentions or deportations, the setting of deportation targets, and how the policies were seen as affecting people’s lives.

If successful, the tactic could undermine the government’s attempts to insulate May from the crisis over how some citizens of Caribbean origin who arrived in the UK from the 1950s onwards were wrongly targeted amid the “hostile environment” immigration policy, which placed the onus on individuals to actively prove their status.

Source: Windrush row: Theresa May promises ‘full review’ of decisions | UK news | The Guardian


Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.


The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

Crisis point: May’s government risks being in contempt of Parliament over refusal to release Brexit papers

Theresa May’s minority Conservative government was in crisis after Parliament ordered her to release 58 secret studies into the economic effects of Brexit – and her ministers refused to say whether they would agree to the demand.

Labour’s Shadow Secretary for Exiting the EU, Keir Starmer, used an antiquated procedure called a “humble address”, in which the Queen is asked to direct that the documents – “sectoral impact assessments” – must be released.

As this was an Opposition motion, the government refused to allow Conservatives to vote on it. Several prominent Tories including Anna Soubry and Sarah Wollaston had spoken in favour of releasing the documents, prompting accusations that Mrs May knew she would lose the vote – and has lost control of the Parliamentary process of exiting the EU.

It meant the motion, for the assessments to be released to the Commons’ Brexit select committee for scrutiny, passed unanimously.

Independent Parliamentary clerks delivered a bombshell: The decision is binding on the government. That is to say that the governent must now deliver the documents or face the possibility of being found in contempt of Parliament.

And the Commons’ Speaker, John Bercow, said he would consider “carefully” any representations alleging contempt if the documents were not delivered promptly.

“I would consider that matter most carefully,” he said. “The question of time, in both the context of the decision taken by the House tonight and the wider context of public policy, is an important question, and yes, it does form part of the equation that the Chair would have to address.”

 

So, what happens now? Twitter has been a flurry of activity:

If Tom Newton Dunn’s tweet is accurate, then there could be more angry scenes as redacting the documents would be denying the will of Parliament and the government could still be facing allegations of contempt.

Last word – for now – should go to Dennis Skinner, who ended the debate by asking the Speaker: “I know that Mr Speaker likes to reply to points of order, so I will just throw him one. He and I have been here a long time, so, like me, does he feel that the Government are dying on their feet?”

Mr Bercow did not answer – perhaps because the answer is obvious.


Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.


The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook