Every Laugh Is The Energy

Tinyshoes

Goodnight Elite. :A

Planning to go up in the loft tomorrow to reclaim some more space in DD2's room as before I know it end of july will be here.

Thanks to M4TIN for the walnut box, have one sat outside my bathroom with my dirty washing in much nicer than those pop up bins I had before.

Only trouble is I had thought about having another small wardrobe there to free up space that I should not be using in DD2's, I had forgotten about that. :eek:

Will have to have a rethink. :cool:

fairclaire

Behind_The_Sofa wrote: »

If I talk differently to how I used to its because it's something I'm passionate about. I'm still at a loss that people have clearly voted Tory without even knowing what the party stands for. This makes me angry. Their stupidity has put the worst party ever in to power.

I class myself as Scottish and I get sick of the people in England calling us all and Sundry. You don't see the scots doing likewise to England. All we want to do is rid ourselves of the Westminster elite and have a chance at going our own way and all of a sudden were nasty for genuinely wanting change because London politics is no longer serving us (or Wales/N.I.) anymore.

I know many SNP supporters as I have a specific Twitter account for politics and not one them has any animosity towards the English.....but the other way around, it disgusts me and disgusts the rest of us on Twitter to the point where it does get you down.

Ive not for one minute said people can't vote for who they like. It's a democracy after all, just like over 50% of Scots voted SNP. But yet the elitist press is calling us everything under the sun. And one point during the election campaign David Cameron said that if Labour shacked up with "that lot" he would look in to it to see if it was "unconstitutional" and you wonder why us Scots get more and more dissillusioned with Westminster? Scotland was traditionally a Labour stronghold but unlike the rest of the U.K we weren't afraid to stand up on poling day and give them a right bloody nose to let them know what we think of them.

So yeah, apologies if I've been a bit different compared to what I used to be. I've been trying to get away from the political tweets and trying to change to humour.

I speak as a truly Scottish person who lives in England and has done for many years. I feel passionate about my roots but circumstances are what they are.

I have no allegiance to any party. I make my mind up based on circumstances at the time. Yes, my own circumstances mainly because we all look after ourselves first....no matter how socially conscious we pretend to be.

I vote based on that and what I see as the best option for me and my family and their future. No one has been duped or co-erced. Quite the opposite. Technology has made it clearer than ever to allow people to make informed choices. I welcome it.

There are things I like and things I don't like. I will have to live with them and adapt, regardless. We all will. It's life and it's politics.

Get on with life as it will be for the next 5 years because you can't change it. The nation has decided and good or bad for you, me and everyone else......that's what we do.

you have had a rant and that's fine. But it will change nothing. Accept it and move on

Sunshinemummy

David. wrote: »

and maybe a member will, cant see why as we have topless men on here and that seems to be ok

Can we please have more topless men? x

Behind_The_Sofa wrote: »

And look at that, as if by magic Redfox pops up as soon as Wheres My Cashback gets annoyed at me.

I've already admitted to a previous ban. How on earth I never got banned when I had a temporary PPR whilst they investigated "multiple reports that I was using an AE is beyond me."

Now that Redfox is on the case I'm sure to be gone tomorrow so for those that don't know or haven't worked it out I used to be Happy Chappy - The one a certain handful of lurkers who took from the thread but didn't contribute too had it in for.

Hello Happy Chappy.

fairclaire wrote: »

Moff to bed soon.

We had Henlans posting the other day (if it was indeed him) and he got lots of welcome backs. He never left, he just posted here under various ailases all that time.
I personally never understood why he was vilified at the time. I was new but he did no worse than what goes on on a daily basis here now. The 'line' was probably different then.

There are lots of people that post here who aren't what or who they seem. There always will be. You accept them because they share glitches. That's what we are all here for at the end of the day.

Anyway goodnight

Henlans was rather nice to me when I first found this thread. I was awol when he disappeared and never really understood it (same with a number of other people).

Savvybuyer

Can we end political discussions with the end of this thread? I am merely asking, but not anyone in particular.

I've actually been reading the Conservative manifesto tonight, since it is the thing that - I expect 16% of which - will be the direction of the country in the next five years. It doesn't actually concern (as in upset rather than affect) me at present.

They plan to scrap the Human Rights Act and introduce a British Bill of Rights. So that, in the manifesto's words, a "common sense" approach can be followed by the British courts (whatever that might mean).

From the way it is being reported on the news tonight, it seems to me whoever at PR at Conservative HQ that is briefing the media tonight is under a fundamental misunderstanding as to how things work. It's said to be so that British courts can interpret without being overruled by Europe. I thought that was the entirely separate European Court of Justice - yet, assuming we stay in the EU (and it is an assumption - certainly we will be staying in the EU for the time being - at least until the referendum is held), that Court will still continue to make judgements on cases on which the UK courts seek an EU Court opinion/ruling and EU law, including the interpretations of what is required by the ECJ, will still apply.

If we are scrapping the Human Rights Act, are we pulling out of the European Convention on Human Rights? That is from an entirely separate organisation, the Council of Europe not the EU, and the final interpretation rests with the European Court of Human Rights.
If we scrap the Human Rights Act, we are then back to the situation we were before it was brought in - where presumably British citizens can, after exhausting our processes, go to the Court of Human Rights and indeed be awarded compensation from the UK government, albeit that the lack of legal aid may impede access to justice from the off.

Membership of the EU requires compliance with human rights conventions and then linked in to being a signatory to the Convention on Human Rights.

So, for the foreseeable, if we scrap the Human Rights Act and introduce a British Bill of Rights are we going to have two separate jurisdictions operating in tandem and not always consistently with one another - it seems to me a recipe for stupidity and additional red tape and bureaucracy, as well as making lawyers very busy and pleased, rather than "common sense" - namely the British Bill of Rights - what will that say - "Here enacted is a British Bill of Rights:..." and the European Convention of Human Rights to which the UK is signatory and bound by the European Court of Human Rights, or else we are to see numerous derogations around all over the place and selective withdrawals from decisions from which we do not like as well as criticism from the international community for not complying with the human rights that are set out in the Convention.

In short, what an utter mess and confusion - and I thought some people might like to read my view here. In short, whatever the British courts may do with a Bill of Rights, which may cover some rights not covered by the Convention and vice versa, we'll still have the overruling by "Europe" - in the form of the Court of Human of Rights - and either the British Government being required to pay compensation or else derogate from the convention. I don't see how it could do the latter on consistent occasions without accounting for the political pressure from the international world, acting as a serious restraint in that area, or without being seeing to disrespect the human rights in the Convention to which it is a signatory. So there still will be "overruling" in cases in which it is politically impossible to derogate. And why let that dog you in the furore of the media that that will doubtless create?

Quite right that we should be overruled in my view in cases where we are not respecting the fundamental human rights that the European Convention on Human Rights, so often twisted by the right-wing press, gives to us.

It won't prove possible to scrap the Human Rights Act (which requires our courts to interpret compatibly with the Convention) and have a British Bill of Rights without creating this mess. I don't see that we are pulling out of the Convention - and to do that would require that we leave the EU - or maybe that is part of the "plan"?:think: Imagine the furore if we withdrew from the EU and left the Council of Europe Convention though! Could we really then be one of the few countries in Europe that does not comply with Convention rights?

Of course, the "scrap Human Rights Act", "have British Bill of Rights" etc. is political rhetoric and has, once again, not been thought through or considered these real significant obstacles and points. And nor does it have to - as it aimed at the media and general public consumption and not actual jurisprudence or international/supra-national law.

Behind_The_Sofa_2

Savvybuyer wrote: »

Can we end political discussions with the end of this thread? I am merely asking, but not anyone in particular.

I've actually been reading the Conservative manifesto tonight, since it is the thing that - I expect 16% of which - will be the direction of the country in the next five years. It doesn't actually concern (as in upset rather than affect) me at present.

They plan to scrap the Human Rights Act and introduce a British Bill of Rights. So that, in the manifesto's words, a "common sense" approach can be followed by the British courts (whatever that might mean).

From the way it is being reported on the news tonight, it seems to me whoever at PR at Conservative HQ that is briefing the media tonight is under a fundamental misunderstanding as to how things work. It's said to be so that British courts can interpret without being overruled by Europe. I thought that was the entirely separate European Court of Justice - yet, assuming we stay in the EU (and it is an assumption - certainly we will be staying in the EU for the time being - at least until the referendum is held), that Court will still continue to make judgements on cases on which the UK courts seek an EU Court opinion/ruling and EU law, including the interpretations of what is required by the ECJ, will still apply.

If we are scrapping the Human Rights Act, are we pulling out of the European Convention on Human Rights? That is from an entirely separate organisation, the Council of Europe not the EU, and the final interpretation rests with the European Court of Human Rights.
If we scrap the Human Rights Act, we are then back to the situation we were before it was brought in - where presumably British citizens can, after exhausting our processes, go to the Court of Human Rights and indeed be awarded compensation from the UK government, albeit that the lack of legal aid may impede access to justice from the off.

Membership of the EU requires compliance with human rights conventions and then linked in to being a signatory to the Convention on Human Rights.

So, for the foreseeable, if we scrap the Human Rights Act and introduce a British Bill of Rights are we going to have two separate jurisdictions operating in tandem and not always consistently with one another - it seems to me a recipe for stupidity and additional red tape and bureaucracy, as well as making lawyers very busy and pleased, rather than "common sense" - namely the British Bill of Rights - what will that say - "Here enacted is a British Bill of Rights:..." and the European Convention of Human Rights to which the UK is signatory and bound by the European Court of Human Rights, or else we are to see numerous derogations around all over the place and selective withdrawals from decisions from which we do not like as well as criticism from the international community for not complying with the human rights that are set out in the Convention.

In short, what an utter mess and confusion - and I thought some people might like to read my view here. In short, whatever the British courts may do with a Bill of Rights, which may cover some rights not covered by the Convention and vice versa, we'll still have the overruling by "Europe" - in the form of the Court of Human of Rights - and either the British Government being required to pay compensation or else derogate from the convention. I don't see how it could do the latter on consistent occasions without accounting for the political pressure from the international world, acting as a serious restraint in that area, or without being seeing to disrespect the human rights in the Convention to which it is a signatory. So there still will be "overruling" in cases in which it is politically impossible to derogate. And why let that dog you in the furore of the media that that will doubtless create?

Quite right that we should be overruled in my view in cases where we are not respecting the fundamental human rights that the European Convention on Human Rights, so often twisted by the right-wing press, gives to us.

It's not just the human rights revoking that's the problem. It's the cuts to welfare that's that's hurting the sick and disabled and how they dress is up to look like something else. Have a google at how many people have died/committed suicide due to benefit sanctions or being fit for work. Then do more research and look to see how many people who died/commuted suicide who had appeals in and would have had them overturned had they been alive. It's not just a few, it's thousands and thousands. I can't even look for the links to put them in this post because it sickens me. The Tories are a party for the rich and will crap on anyone that gets in the way of their pals making money.

As I've said, to the lower middle class and lower classes that voted Tory let's hope you never have a run of bad luck, I really do.

Savvybuyer

Just a think - that this thread (the bits I've caught and I've not caught up so could have missed it) seems to be biased against the Conservatives, in the sense that no-one who is Conservative appears to have wanted to come onto here and defend the Conservative's approach. Come on - are you really really shy Tories?

Or is instead that we are just sensible people and are all unanimous about what the Conservative's plan means?

I wa reading yesterday about how the bedroom tax (sorry, "spare room subsidy") is in breach of the United Nations Conventions on the Rights of Child. The UK is currently in breach of a UN Convention - if that continues, there will be utterly damning criticism from the UN next year when they investigate (which they do every few years).

Iain Duncan Smith dismissed our own Children's Commissioner's report as being based on "anecdotal evidence", despite the DWP itself relying on anecdotal evidence in its presentations of statistics - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29733582 - and being criticised by the UK Statistics Authority.

Oops - I forgot - he's a politician and therefore does not have to substantiate anything he claims or rely on anything other than rhetoric, anecdote and his own view. The thing is though how the mainstream media are totally ineffective and do not hold anyone to account, the same as the political system.

fairclaire

oh dear......the human rights act is a European policy. not a British one. We were forced to adopt it as part of European policy.
We have more human rights in this country than most of the globe.

it's a cop out to fall back on human rights. We do have them. we just don't appreciate it

only people who live as freely as we do could complain about human rights.

if you truly had youre 'human rights' removed you'd know about it! We are very lucky and we should never forget it

Behind_The_Sofa_2

Sunshinemummy wrote: »

Can we please have more topless men? x

I second that!:money:

itch_for_a_glitch

Savvybuyer wrote: »

I've actually been reading the Conservative manifesto tonight

Bit late really.

Ah well, never mind.

Anon

A very sensible suggestion was made earlier that political discussion ends when this thread ends.

... please can I therefore make a suggestion that this thread ends early now .

Have a good evening all.

Anon