@joshuaselig.bsky.social
...would probably want to do that due to sheer frustration at both houses being incapable to enact proper change but then quickly realising we would run out of power before you could convince them to apply what you are suggesting.
December 18, 2024 at 10:45 PM
...would probably want to do that due to sheer frustration at both houses being incapable to enact proper change but then quickly realising we would run out of power before you could convince them to apply what you are suggesting.
And considering the HoC only brought in their register due to the expenses scandal, getting either house to do anything remotely close to what you are suggesting would likely require the political equivalent of a taser being applied repeatedly, which of course there have been times either of us....
December 18, 2024 at 10:45 PM
And considering the HoC only brought in their register due to the expenses scandal, getting either house to do anything remotely close to what you are suggesting would likely require the political equivalent of a taser being applied repeatedly, which of course there have been times either of us....
It is both practicality and defining what is considered a serious financial conflict of interest. And I agree, will has to do something with it as well, you have to remember that there are about 800 odd Lords and you would have to get the majority to agree to any change.
December 18, 2024 at 10:45 PM
It is both practicality and defining what is considered a serious financial conflict of interest. And I agree, will has to do something with it as well, you have to remember that there are about 800 odd Lords and you would have to get the majority to agree to any change.
Also it runs the risk of bringing the same clauses that FIFA and UEFA had issues with about Political interference. Notwithstanding, at least in this country you are innocent until you are proven guilty.
December 18, 2024 at 10:37 PM
Also it runs the risk of bringing the same clauses that FIFA and UEFA had issues with about Political interference. Notwithstanding, at least in this country you are innocent until you are proven guilty.
He is a Barrister to be specific someone who specialises in the Courtroom and representing clients in the Higher courts. He is also subject to the Cab rank system so has to represent anyone if he is fairly compensated and available. He is also talking sense, this is the IFR not Interpol.
December 18, 2024 at 10:35 PM
He is a Barrister to be specific someone who specialises in the Courtroom and representing clients in the Higher courts. He is also subject to the Cab rank system so has to represent anyone if he is fairly compensated and available. He is also talking sense, this is the IFR not Interpol.
If they were to apply the rule as you have suggested, would that mean that anyone who is classified as a trade unionist would not be able to discuss Trade Union legislation or vote on it?
I understand the sentiment but it would not work.
I understand the sentiment but it would not work.
December 18, 2024 at 10:31 PM
If they were to apply the rule as you have suggested, would that mean that anyone who is classified as a trade unionist would not be able to discuss Trade Union legislation or vote on it?
I understand the sentiment but it would not work.
I understand the sentiment but it would not work.
Not sure what you mean by liking when I say they have an interest I mean as someone who might be on the board of Brighton or have an affiliation with York City in some capacity which I think the Bishop of York mentioned.
December 18, 2024 at 10:28 PM
Not sure what you mean by liking when I say they have an interest I mean as someone who might be on the board of Brighton or have an affiliation with York City in some capacity which I think the Bishop of York mentioned.
It is not how Parliament operates, everyone is allowed to speak and we may dislike it, but he openly declared his interest, if they banned everyone who had even the slightest interest or were involved in Football at any point, there wouldn't be anyone debating the bill.
December 18, 2024 at 10:20 PM
It is not how Parliament operates, everyone is allowed to speak and we may dislike it, but he openly declared his interest, if they banned everyone who had even the slightest interest or were involved in Football at any point, there wouldn't be anyone debating the bill.
He would have, as this is how barristers in the Uk operate and have done so for hundreds of years, they have to represent their client if they are fairly compensated and available. There are exceptions, however I doubt these would apply.
If they refuse they are likely to be fined and disciplined.
If they refuse they are likely to be fined and disciplined.
December 18, 2024 at 10:17 PM
He would have, as this is how barristers in the Uk operate and have done so for hundreds of years, they have to represent their client if they are fairly compensated and available. There are exceptions, however I doubt these would apply.
If they refuse they are likely to be fined and disciplined.
If they refuse they are likely to be fined and disciplined.
He is a KC and are subject to the cab rank rule, which means they cannot refuse a case if they are available and fairly compensated.
So it is entirely possible that he may not even like Manchester City but as per the rule he is not allowed to refuse or provide defective representation.
So it is entirely possible that he may not even like Manchester City but as per the rule he is not allowed to refuse or provide defective representation.
December 18, 2024 at 10:10 PM
He is a KC and are subject to the cab rank rule, which means they cannot refuse a case if they are available and fairly compensated.
So it is entirely possible that he may not even like Manchester City but as per the rule he is not allowed to refuse or provide defective representation.
So it is entirely possible that he may not even like Manchester City but as per the rule he is not allowed to refuse or provide defective representation.
Until the HoL change the rules, anyone who has an interest whether they are paid a large amount or not, he is entitled whether we like it or not to speak on the bill.
If we adopt the position that anyone has an interest should not speak, then a certain Brady being one shouldn't speak either.
If we adopt the position that anyone has an interest should not speak, then a certain Brady being one shouldn't speak either.
December 18, 2024 at 9:59 PM
Until the HoL change the rules, anyone who has an interest whether they are paid a large amount or not, he is entitled whether we like it or not to speak on the bill.
If we adopt the position that anyone has an interest should not speak, then a certain Brady being one shouldn't speak either.
If we adopt the position that anyone has an interest should not speak, then a certain Brady being one shouldn't speak either.
I wouldn't mind that, however, I get the feeling they will go down the Tzenkethi/Dominion/Hurq route before that happens...
November 17, 2024 at 11:52 PM
I wouldn't mind that, however, I get the feeling they will go down the Tzenkethi/Dominion/Hurq route before that happens...
Thanks, I just wonder where they go from here though, I suppose they could resolve the Tzenkethi, move the Dominion/Hurq side of things unless they are going to go down the route that the Aetherians are not as good as they appear?
November 17, 2024 at 11:32 PM
Thanks, I just wonder where they go from here though, I suppose they could resolve the Tzenkethi, move the Dominion/Hurq side of things unless they are going to go down the route that the Aetherians are not as good as they appear?
No, and I am aware some are part of an anti-zionist group, so I am aware they exist.
I just don't tend to trust anything that Al-Jazeera says as they are often the mouthpiece of Hamas and other terrorist groups in the region.
I just don't tend to trust anything that Al-Jazeera says as they are often the mouthpiece of Hamas and other terrorist groups in the region.
November 17, 2024 at 9:26 PM
No, and I am aware some are part of an anti-zionist group, so I am aware they exist.
I just don't tend to trust anything that Al-Jazeera says as they are often the mouthpiece of Hamas and other terrorist groups in the region.
I just don't tend to trust anything that Al-Jazeera says as they are often the mouthpiece of Hamas and other terrorist groups in the region.
It was brilliant, hope they bring you back on again soon. Hopefully, when things are a little calmer ( I know wishful thinking) :P
November 17, 2024 at 8:55 PM
It was brilliant, hope they bring you back on again soon. Hopefully, when things are a little calmer ( I know wishful thinking) :P
Not all Muslims and Israel does under international law have a right to defend itself.
November 17, 2024 at 8:53 PM
Not all Muslims and Israel does under international law have a right to defend itself.
Says a communist gnome 😂🤣
I am a Zionist though, but not a bot 😛
I am a Zionist though, but not a bot 😛
November 17, 2024 at 8:53 PM
Says a communist gnome 😂🤣
I am a Zionist though, but not a bot 😛
I am a Zionist though, but not a bot 😛
No, I am not, as Al Jazeera are owned by the Qatari government which in turn has been known to fund Hamas and other groups round the region, so I am within my rights to question the validity of anything that they produce.
November 17, 2024 at 8:52 PM
No, I am not, as Al Jazeera are owned by the Qatari government which in turn has been known to fund Hamas and other groups round the region, so I am within my rights to question the validity of anything that they produce.
I know wishful thinking.
November 17, 2024 at 8:51 PM
I know wishful thinking.
I think that is basically what I said?
November 17, 2024 at 7:37 PM
I think that is basically what I said?
From a legal standpoint, it is not Genocide, as Israel does not have the Mens Rea or the actual deliberate intent to wipe them out either.
As an apparent professor of Genocide studies they should be aware of this and this seems to scream more of an Anti-Netanyahu protest.
As an apparent professor of Genocide studies they should be aware of this and this seems to scream more of an Anti-Netanyahu protest.
November 17, 2024 at 7:31 PM
From a legal standpoint, it is not Genocide, as Israel does not have the Mens Rea or the actual deliberate intent to wipe them out either.
As an apparent professor of Genocide studies they should be aware of this and this seems to scream more of an Anti-Netanyahu protest.
As an apparent professor of Genocide studies they should be aware of this and this seems to scream more of an Anti-Netanyahu protest.
Isn't the decision of the ICJ advisory which can be ignored? Also, the Palestinians have never owned the territory it was either owned by Jordan/Egypt, Israel, British Empire or Ottoman Empire, as such how can they have sovereignty over the natural resources?
November 17, 2024 at 7:27 PM
Isn't the decision of the ICJ advisory which can be ignored? Also, the Palestinians have never owned the territory it was either owned by Jordan/Egypt, Israel, British Empire or Ottoman Empire, as such how can they have sovereignty over the natural resources?
How about no
November 17, 2024 at 7:24 PM
How about no
I really wish that Ben and Jerry's would just concentrate on Ice cream rather than political activism.
November 17, 2024 at 7:23 PM
I really wish that Ben and Jerry's would just concentrate on Ice cream rather than political activism.