Reply to: The Lords and finance Bills.

[AtW]

So, Gideon got slapped in the face and now will have to "lessen the impact", this means that he will also need to raise more money from somewhere to cover the shortfall.

Expect to see this "archaic" situation of dividends tax band being different from income tax band to be reviewed with great prejudice.

[darmstadt]

You might not be able to look at them for much longer
Report: US military worried Russia might target underwater cables - Europe - Stripes

Damn, have to get that satellite link up and running, again!

[DodgyAgent]

And Venezuela has a tulipload of oil (and more than their fair share of extremely attractive women it has to be said)

You might not be able to look at them for much longer
Report: US military worried Russia might target underwater cables - Europe - Stripes

[MrMarkyMark]

and more than their fair share of extremely attractive women it has to be said)

Guess we might have to think of somewhere else then.
I wouldn't want to pollute that blood line .

[darmstadt]

Surely if we're going to give Scotland to anyone it should be Venezuela, then Scotland can have the socialism it deserves

Surely anyone that can afford to pay for them.
Especially now the price of oil has tanked

And Venezuela has a tulipload of oil (and more than their fair share of extremely attractive women it has to be said)

[MrMarkyMark]

Surely if we're going to give Scotland to anyone it should be Venezuela, then Scotland can have the socialism it deserves

Surely anyone that can afford to pay for them.
Especially now the price of oil has tanked

[MicrosoftBob]

If the Ruskies want Scotland they can have it.

No reason to object.

Surely if we're going to give Scotland to anyone it should be Venezuela, then Scotland can have the socialism it deserves

[DodgyAgent]

If the Ruskies want Scotland they can have it.

No reason to object.

Good point It would however require a quickie "Bill through Parliament"

[OwlHoot]

So if a bill needs to be passed to declare war on Russia after invading Scotland and a bunch of unelected bureaucrats in fancy dress decide "to slow it down" then that would be a good thing?

No bill is needed to declare war, as that is a royal prerogative so the cabinet or "executive" can advise the Sovereign to go ahead without the consent of Parliament.

A parliamentary bill would then be needed to pay for the war; but that would be a finance bill, which the Lords could not block (or at least not for long, even in the unlikely event they tried).

AIUI

[DaveB]

So if a bill needs to be passed to declare war on Russia after invading Scotland and a bunch of unelected bureaucrats in fancy dress decide "to slow it down" then that would be a good thing?

No, because that would be absurd.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_absurdum

AKA The what's next brigade.

[NotAllThere]

So if a bill needs to be passed to declare war on Russia after invading Scotland and a bunch of unelected bureaucrats in fancy dress decide "to slow it down" then that would be a good thing?

Red herring. This is not a matter of urgency; it is about preventing hasty, ill-thought out, government action. Declaration of war does not need Lords approval. I seem to recall that power resides in the hands of the PM alone (acting on behalf of the monarch).

[TestMangler]

So if a bill needs to be passed to declare war on Russia after invading Scotland and a bunch of unelected bureaucrats in fancy dress decide "to slow it down" then that would be a good thing?

Glad you raised that. Was worried about that happening but didn't want to hijack such a frivolous thread with serious points

[DodgyAgent]

. Anything that slows any government down and forces a rethink is a good thing,.

So if a bill needs to be passed to declare war on Russia after invading Scotland and a bunch of unelected bureaucrats in fancy dress decide "to slow it down" then that would be a good thing?

[MrMarkyMark]

But this wasn't a finance bill, in the sense of being primary legislation, which is what the convention applies to. Gideon and Dave thought they were being very clever by pushing it through as a statutory instrument instead; but that means the Lords damn well can block it.

The reason they used - or rather, tried to use - a statutory instrument is that it reduces the amount of scrutiny and debate it's subject to in the Commons. A statutory instrument is supposed to be used for minor matters that don't require a lot of discussion, not major legislation like this. But they thought they could get away with it, and they've been caught out, because it turns out they're not as clever as they think they are, the arrogant pair of twats.

This.
Underhand and sloppy, hence they were caught out .

The Lords' rejection isn't definitive. The government retains the power to push the bill through. Anything that slows any government down and forces a rethink is a good thing, which is why I'm in favour of a second chamber. The fact that they're unelected is, in my view, immaterial, since the Lords cannot enforce its will.

Exactly. It is in this type of situation why the Lords should be there in the first place. I don't think this issue with tax credits has been thought through.
I do agree there should be reform, but this should be carefully considered not just sledge hammered in.

[MicrosoftBob]

Ah.

So you want unfettered one party statedom, so you?

No that's what the current Labour party want