Brexit the economy and house prices part 7: Brexit Harder

Malthusian

mayonnaise wrote: »

I'm all for a bit of remaining, but Caroline Lucas' suggestion of an all female emergency cabinet is even more bonkers than going for a no deal brexit.

I think it should be an all black cabinet.

That said I think Lucas' idea of an all female cabinet is genius, because it is the only realistic chance a socialist woman has of becoming PM.

SpiderLegs

Malthusian wrote: »

I think it should be an all black cabinet.

That said I think Lucas' idea of an all female cabinet is genius, because it is the only realistic chance a socialist woman has of becoming PM.

How about an all Jewish cabinet. Team Jeremy would be spitting feathers.

Moby

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/sweeping-powers-to-impose-curfews-and-alter-the-law-under-no-deal-brexit-llx3t3v7v?fbclid=IwAR1EUmiA2hWXluMp2h2PqPRGGR8H8BSyflkduEf6Dfk519LhxQBUI_Fz-aY


'Ministers will have draconian powers to bring in curfews, redirect food supplies and even change the law without consulting parliament in the event of a no-deal Brexit.
Senior civil servants in Whitehall have discussed plans to use the sweeping authority of a little-known law to deal with any unexpected consequences of a disorderly departure from the European Union.
The legislation grants ministers emergency powers to deal with any event that threatens to cause “serious damage” to the UK.
Officials are understood to have advised ministers that the law could be used to give police, local authorities and other public bodies immediate powers to tackle potential problems such as fuel or food shortages without the need to change the law first.'

BikingBud

Moby wrote: »

'Ministers will have draconian powers to bring in curfews, redirect food supplies and even change the law without consulting parliament in the event of a no-deal Brexit.
Senior civil servants in Whitehall have discussed plans to use the sweeping authority of a little-known law to deal with any unexpected consequences of a disorderly departure from the European Union.
The legislation grants ministers emergency powers to deal with any event that threatens to cause “serious damage” to the UK.
Officials are understood to have advised ministers that the law could be used to give police, local authorities and other public bodies immediate powers to tackle potential problems such as fuel or food shortages without the need to change the law first.'

So rather than the sensationalist journalist perspective why don't you go to source?

In recent months, questions have been asked in Parliament about the Government’s civil contingencies planning in the event of the UK leaving the EU without having ratified a negotiated withdrawal agreement (ie a ‘no-deal’ Brexit).

The use of emergency powers (ie the creation of temporary legislation) is set out in part 2 of the Civil Contingencies Act 2004 (CCA 2004). The Act provides the Government with powers to create emergency regulations to deal with emergencies that threaten “serious damage to human welfare”, or that threaten damage to the environment or the security of the UK. Damage to human welfare is defined in the Act to include disruption to transport networks or to the supply of food, money, energy, or health services.

The CCA 2004 provides powers for the monarch or a senior Minister of the Crown to make emergency regulations, under certain circumstances, to deal with the most serious emergencies. In practice, such regulations are drafted and their substance determined by the Government. The powers are wide-ranging, providing the Government with the power to make any provision that could be made by an Act of Parliament or through the use of the royal prerogative. The regulations must be laid before Parliament as soon as is practicable, and they would lapse after seven days if not approved by both Houses of Parliament.

This briefing summarises the circumstances in which emergency powers can be used, the procedure for creating emergency regulations, and the provisions for parliamentary scrutiny of the regulations.

And

http://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/LLN-2019-0034/LLN-2019-0034.pdf

Another hon. Member asked about the Civil Contingencies Act. It does cover food supply, but it is designed for a national emergency. In a worst-case Brexit scenario, we do not believe that overall food shortages would be such that it is necessary to invoke the Act. In the scenarios that we are working to, that would not be required. None the less, as I have said several times, we are working with and speaking to colleagues across Government to minimise disruption and to consider the possible impacts on vulnerable groups.25

The Civil Contingencies Act 2004 was introduced by Tony Blair’s Labour Government in response to a perceived need to update the UK’s civil resilience profile to address issues not covered by the Emergency Powers Act 1920, such as terrorist threats and disruption to modern technology and communication infrastructure.3

Section 19 of the CCA 2004 defines “emergency” for the purposes of part 2 of the Act:
1) In this Part “emergency” means—
a) an event or situation which threatens serious damage to human welfare in the United Kingdom or in a Part or region,
b) an event or situation which threatens serious damage to the environment of the United Kingdom or of a Part or region, or
c) war, or terrorism, which threatens serious damage to the security of the United Kingdom.
(2) For the purposes of subsection (1)(a) an event or situation threatens damage to human welfare only if it involves, causes or may cause—
a) loss of human life,
b) human illness or injury,
c) homelessness,
d) damage to property,
e) disruption of a supply of money, food, water, energy or fuel,
f) disruption of a system of communication,
g) disruption of facilities for transport, or
h) disruption of services relating to health.

The very same legislation probably enabled military support to ensure a recent dam crisis was averted. Was that also draconian?

paparossco

“One detailed study of the Civil Contingencies Act described it as ‘the most powerful and extensive peacetime legislation ever enacted’, containing within it ‘the tools for dismantling civil society’, with ‘the potential to inflict terrible damage on the constitution of the United Kingdom’ (Walker and Broderick 2006: 188, 214). The authors also drew attention to the slim likelihood of any effective parliamentary or judicial review of actions taken under emergency powers. In effect, the legislation provides the framework for extra-constitutional and dictatorial forms of rule, backed by military force.”

https://lawexplores.com/britain-civil-contingencies-and-prerogative-powers/

Ok let’s not go OTT on this but we do live in interesting times......

Arklight

Great. A bunch of right wing racists in power and legislation for martial law.

LHW99

Arklight wrote: »

Great. A bunch of right wing racists in power and legislation for martial law.

As Biking Bud stated this is the "Civil Contingencies Act 2004" - enacted by a Labour Government under Tony Blair.
Once enacted any law that is relevant may be used by the Government in power at the time - presumably it would have been forseen that Labour would not actually be in power indefinately - or perhaps not?

Moby

BikingBud wrote: »

So rather than the sensationalist journalist perspective why don't you go to source?


And

http://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/LLN-2019-0034/LLN-2019-0034.pdf




The very same legislation probably enabled military support to ensure a recent dam crisis was averted. Was that also draconian?

All you have done is google the Civil Contingencies Act and have unnecessarily illuminated what it is while completely ignoring my point. When such contingencies are being discussed or considered, doesn't it make you think? It's not a good place for us to be as a country to contemplate having to use legislation designed for a national emergency and the fact that these discussions are taking place is very concerning.

I don't remember Farage or Johnson talking about the Civil Contingencies Act during the campaign do you? It was all sunlit uplands,.... leaving the EU was going to be easy and other countries would be lining up to give us a trade deal... blah blah
In reality it's clear that brexit is more like preparing for a war or increased likelihood of social disorder!.....hardly the picture of a country at ease with itself is it!

Never mind though John Bolton has promised us a great trade deal so all the quiet preparations for social disorder will be unnecessary!

mayonnaise

Herzlos wrote: »

It couldn't be worse than the cabinet Boris selected, surely?

What's wrong with Boris and his cabinet?
At least they deliver.

- fibre broadband for every home by 2025
- billions for a cross-Pennine Norther Powerhouse rail link late July
- 4.6 billion annually for schools 2 weeks ago
- 20k extra police early last week
- NHS saved late last week
- Criminal Justice system sorted yesterday
- Prison Service funding tackled today

:T

Arklight

mayonnaise wrote: »

What's wrong with Boris and his cabinet?
At least they deliver.

- fibre broadband for every home by 2025
- billions for a cross-Pennine Norther Powerhouse rail link late July
- 4.6 billion annually for schools 2 weeks ago
- 20k extra police early last week
- NHS saved late last week
- Criminal Justice system sorted yesterday
- Prison Service funding tackled today

:T

Don't forget:

- A birching for every school boy
- Additional funding for evening classes to teach women to know their place
- Separate queues in the post office for foreigners, leading straight to deportation buses
- A free copy of "Jacob Rees Mogg's Guide to Why Kenyan Concentration Camps Weren't That Bad' in every home
- Priti Patel's "Death Sentence Lottery" to be aired twice weekly
- "Mend and Make Do" - the lost art of almost every pleb being poor and uneducated again to be taught in schools


It's a bright new dawn in Bigoted Brexit Britain, and this is the cabinet to deliver.