show/hide profile info
Register to take part
email

Constitutional Crisis for over 50 years

  • 0 Replies
  • 1016 Views

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

*

Offline the leveller

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • 4010
  • +75/-0
Constitutional Crisis for over 50 years
« on: October 28, 2015, 09:07:08 PM »
Constitutional Crisis for over 50 years

Sent to the press, media and interested parties

 

Dear Sir,

How dare George Osborne and David Cameron have the cheek and audacity to talk about a Constitutional crisis, because the unelected’ Lords were for once doing their prescribed job, and protecting the people from draconian government policy.

Ignorance is not unusual in our government over the last half century, and most of it has been deliberate.

The British Parliament was set up in the first place with an elected House of Commons and an appointed House of Lords, with the Queen having the final say on legislation.

Our current shower have deliberately forgotten this salient point in their pursuit of global power through the EU, and have made themselves dictators in their own institution by hamstringing the Lords, and stealing the Royal Assent/Prerogative for their own use.

They wouldn't know the meaning of Democracy if it sneaked up and bit them on the behind, and they seem to have conveniently forgotten that they are servants of the people, not their masters.

yours faithfully

Mrs Jane B.
Name and address supplied
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
David Cameron                                                                          Albert Burgess

10 Downing Street                                                                     15 Parliament Road

London                                                                                       Thame

SW1A 2AA                                                                                OX9 3TE

 

                                                                                                   27-10-2015

 

Ref Convention

 

David

You really should find Professor Bogdanor and give him a good kicking for the complete balls up of your knowledge of the English Constitution. Your statement that breaching a convention is worse than lying to the country is the most idiotic thing you could say. You are required to tell Her Majesty's subjects the truth at all times we the tax payers who pay your wages demand nothing less. If you can't handle that you are in the wrong job so feel free to resign.

 

So let us look at this convention from a historical view point. In 1667 the House of Commons exceeded there constitutional authority when they told the House of Lords they could not amend a money bill. There was and is no legal basis for this claim in fact it interferes with the House of Lords common law cognisance to conduct its business its own way, a ten year argument ensued before the House of Lords in a moment of madness gave way and agreed not to amend a money bill. There was and is a strong legal argument that they were wrong to agree to this.

 

In 1909 Asquith put forward a budget which included a pension for the working man, the House of Lords looked at this and decided the extra tax needed to pay for it was more than the working man could afford on top of the tax he was already paying, and believing they could not amend it rejected the budget. Asquith a Fabian and a spoilt brat decided to drive a horse and cart through the constitution by putting forward the Parliament Act though, the House of Lords agreed to this, Asquith having threatened to put 500 new Peers into the house who would vote for its abolition. The King, King Edward VII REFUSED the assent on the grounds it was unconstitutional and removed a protection from his subjects. He ordered Asquith to go to the country. Asquith and his ministers toured the country saying those bastard Lords did not want the working man to have a pension. The Peerage felt it was beneath them to explain their reasons. Asquith was returned and in his speech the King, King Edward VII SAID THE ONLY REASON I AM DOING THIS IS BECAUSE MY MINISTERS HAVE TOLD ME I MUST. Constitutionally the King is the supreme governor of England and no one can legally tell him to do anything.

 

The Convention which you are misunderstanding says the House of Lords is prevented from amending the bill not doing as they have rejecting it.

 

I feel that you need to revisit your constitutional education I am happy to meet you in Downing Street to correct your education.

Respectfully Submitted

 

 

Albert Burgess     

 
« Last Edit: October 28, 2015, 09:13:55 PM by the leveller »


email
 
Share this topic...
In a forum
(BBCode)
In a site/blog
(HTML)



COMODO SECURE

Powered by EzPortal
Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 
Comodo SSL