UK Politicians Vote To Gag Public

A contentious Political Bill is being forced through the UK Parliamentary system known as the Lobbying Bill described a Member of The House of Lords thus;

"The Lobbying Bill would stop charities and campaigning groups from speaking out on some of the most important issues facing the country and the planet, even once recent Government changes to the Bill are taken into account."

Other reported statements include;

I’m afraid it's bad news. Most Conservative and Liberal Democrat MPs chose to follow party orders. They reversed the main improvements made in the House of Lords.

This means they voted:
- to remove new rules limiting secret lobbying by big business
- to put back in key limits on what campaigners, charities, and voluntary groups can do to speak up on issues of the day
(38 degrees organisation)

Lobbying in the UK as in the US is a very abused and corrupt system where literally money talks and Politicians vote other than by conscience, it's a fact of political life. The bill however is tied in with curtailing the activities of NGO groups, charities and organisations as diverse as The Women's Institute, MENCAP, The Salvation Army, Royal College of Nursing, Butterfly Conservation, The British Heart Foundation and even The Anthony Nolan Bone Marrow Trust.

ATS Conspiracy Theorists will immediately see the connection to anarchy and chaos that this collective presents to UK let alone Worldwide peace and agree that they must be gagged! As do the majority of UK M.P.s for some inexplicable reason, and they are getting feisty about it with one Conservative prat of an MP calling the Police when some constituents turned up on a pre-booked visit to hand in a petition, another, this time typically arrogant Conservative MP is quoted as saying;

Sir Peter Bottomley, the MP for Worthing West, claims emails from campaigners irritate parliamentarians and disrupt their work

A Conservative MP has said that the approach of the campaigning group 38 Degrees to influencing MPs’ views on the lobbying bill was "stupid" and counter-productive.

The group has been raising concerns with MPs about measures contained in the lobbying bill, which it says will prevent campaigning groups and organisations from speaking out in the run-up to elections.

But Sir Peter Bottomley, the MP for Worthing West, told a meeting of the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Civil Society and Volunteering in Westminster yesterday that receiving "hundreds of emails" from campaigners disrupted the work of parliamentarians and ultimately irritated them...
(Third Sector via 38 degrees)

Democracy and Freedom of Speech in a modern country denied to the people, where have I heard that before?
If the Politicians get this through, contentious Political,issues will not be able to be raised in the run-up to a General Election and maybe at some other time prior to an important vote. As you can tell, lobbying is still OK though.
Cue sound of numerous swine feeding at trough!

Well I'd treat this like any judge thinking they can gag. Grab a bullhorn and blast them. And I don't stop, give in to demons and illegal felons who sign their names proudly on documents that are crimes against humanity, violating civil law, common law, and constitutional law. Judges same thing, just a person who is doing wrong and I would never stand under any criminal.

reply to post by Shuftystick


Do you have any links to source material on this subject? I would like very much to read more on the subject, as the ability of the citizenry to respond to the government is one of my personal pet topics.

Any further information will be most gratefully received.

Lobbying

one of the most disgusting things I have ever come to know. It's bribery and corruption on the most visible level...yet sanctioned by the law.

reply to post by Shuftystick


I reckon we should all watch this video. Its directly relating to the Bill you are referring to, and will contain detail which is extremely current on that topic. From the initial comments by a gentleman named Graham Allen (I think his name is) it appears that at least a few parliamentarians are not at all happy with the way the government are treating the House of Commons with regard to the process of this Bill through parliament. Worth a watch. Knowledge is power and all that!

Have at it!

www.bbc.co.uk...

It's like I always tell people, the idea of democracy is an illusion!
The only way the system is ever going to change is if the entire system is changed. For that to happen, at the very least we need the following points enforced:

1. Fixed term service. No career politicians and no golden parachute at the end but a set "bonus" for their service (within reason).
2. Candidates wishing "to serve" to have no other income from corporate or other private entities.
3. Full transparency. Any meetings with private entities / business leaders and corporate execs to take place during working hours, within parliamentary premises and to be recorded / transcribed as a matter of public record. Anyone doing otherwise to be immediately sacked and investigated for the breach of this protocol, as well as penalties for the business leaders attending.
4. Any stockholding by candidates to be frozen until their fixed term is completed.
5. Government owned hostelry for use of parliamentarians during official business within the capitol. No more "second homes" and underhanded expenses scams. Narrower expenses options and nothing paid without a receipt / invoice approved by oversight office.
6. Full oversight of all government issued contracts, in line with standard business practices and oversight.

I could go on but at least that would be a start. If the politicians cannot be trusted, which is patently obvious right now, then we need to force accountability on them. After all, they are supposed to answer to the people and we do pay their wages and currently finance their criminal incompetence and schemes!

Would it be possible that a successive government could reverse/replace whatever laws/rules this gov is changing, back to the original rules? Or overwriting everything back to it was before this self-serving lot changed it all?

This gov is changing everything to how they want it, so surely the next gov can change things back?

reply to post by TrueBrit


there you go services.parliament.uk...

a little more here
www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk...
about the funding caps charity's/campaigners and lobbying groups are concerned about, in fact contrary to the ops post is that some caps are being raised for the benefit of above groups.

doobydoll
Would it be possible that a successive government could reverse/replace whatever laws/rules this gov is changing, back to the original rules? Or overwriting everything back to it was before this self-serving lot changed it all?

This gov is changing everything to how they want it, so surely the next gov can change things back?

That's another example I always use when discussing the whole election process we have in use.
The idea that we vote out one lot and put another group in power means nothing when they are all financed by the same groups and under the same influence.
When did an incoming government ever roll back the ridiculous and unpopular legislation that the previous government enacted? I am having a real hard time thinking of any examples!

reply to post by Britguy


It is worth adding, that incoming governments, during their election, often promise to change idiotic laws, and wind up leaving them in place, despite having been elected partially on the merits of such promises.

READ THIS QUICKLY PLEASE AFORE IT GETS REMOVED..

Shufty has to be careful what he says as he may be being stalked as examination of a recent post relating to UFO somewhere near Wiltshire in the past 24 hrs will show.

However, Shufty will state that open source research is one of the strongest tools in the armoury of the truth seekers. There is no over zealous policing on the open internet and some of threat sources of information are those that would be deemed emanating from TPTB I.e. The Library of Congress site and some of the sites available fro the media/journalistic areas.
FOI results also provide some true gems.

I tend to support my posts with attributed comments rather than links as I find that easier. The ageing process affects the greys matter, the eyes and co-ordination with the fingers never mind needing reading glasses, so, if I continue to attempt to remain a member and contribute to this site in future I would plead for consideration for the effects of the ageing process as well as a an absolute love hate relationship with IT!

I don't get worried about having points removed by moderators or the various threats about further 'applications ' by the moderators as I believe that freedom of speech transcends earthly controls by a cosmic gap beyond human comprehension.
Having spent almost 40 yrs in a law enforcement environment I can honestly say I never dealt with any transgressor with contempt or sheer dismissal of their views or complaints. Read into that, anyone, what you may!

If I can help anyone I will. I used to be a drugs trainer for my organisation and have seen everything from the basest level of drug addiction to some realistic views by serving cops about how futile the war on drugs has been. So when it comes to tolerance, having attended the funeral of a drug addicted family member with colleagues from the local drug squad who were quite devastated as they had helped the lad free himself from his habit I am satisfied that I can talk with true experience from the other side of the fence so to speak. The war on drugs was a failure before it started and I believe that my statement that you might as well legalise it all has been totally debunked by a certain moderator, no names mentioned but take care where you place you feet, Texas State flag motto applies.
Take a copy of this for I will be banned for sure for challenging the mods.
As if...!
If this turns out to be my last post, frankly if don't care as some mods appear to allow O.P.s to admit and condone drug use and then smash those that illustrate what is going on.
Deny Ignorance?
So, maybe goodbye, or maybe suspended, who knows but at leastI know right from wrong.

reply to post by Shuftystick


Dude... while I entirely agree with you about the importance of independant research and rigor in all things, I must say that the post to which I am replying, could not have less to do with your original thread topic. My flabber, is officially ghasted.

TrueBrit
reply to post by Shuftystick

 

Dude... while I entirely agree with you about the importance of independant research and rigor in all things, I must say that the post to which I am replying, could not have less to do with your original thread topic. My flabber, is officially ghasted.

LOL I went back through the thread thinking I'd mist something

Blimey peeps, that's a ratio of 1:1 replies to flags.

I am truly humbled by this response, but it indicates an amazing awareness of a little known attack on civil liberties that really threaten to gag free speech whilst allowing lobbying to continue.

BTW 38 degrees is so called because that is the angle of slope at which an avalanche starts...

Shuftystick - (schedule 3 CITES list inhabitant)

reply to post by Shuftystick


I can see why they are against it. Not only is any bill which is pressed through the machine so fast instantly worthy of further scrutiny, but this particular one seems to have been turned from a preventative for lobby power abuse, into an open valve, where the only voices which will be prevented from being heard, are those of the people and good charities. Worse, it fails entirely to address the real issues, and properly identify targets for lobbying by nefarious entities.

Apparently the exchange of PMs between the staff and yourself to deal with what you consider an "issue" are not good enough for you.

You'd prefer to make posts about how you're going to be banned for disagreeing with staff etc. I guess martyrdom is exciting?

Our staff has attempted to be quite cordial with you and work out whatever problem you seem to have with us (according to your messages, in your one month here you decided our moderating style is unacceptable).

I guess that didn't work and you prefer to publicly discuss how you're going to go "head to head" with ATS.

Ok then.

I hope you find somewhere that the moderation style suits your demands. Apparently we weren't it and I'd hate to prolong what clearly is some serious suffering for you in having to endure our horrible site and horrible staff.

You're welcome.