MAJOR ISSUES BULLETIN
 
     
     
 

 

REVENGE OF PARLIAMENT-WE HOPE THERE WILL BE NO RETREAT -NOW!

 

 

Daily Mail

Thursday, February 2-2006

 

by

 

Peter Oborne

 

*

 

Revenge of Parliament

 

Ever since he came

To power, Mr Blair

has tried to destroy

Parliament. Now

History has come

Full circle…and

The Commons is

Destroying

Mr Blair.

 

*

[Provided there is no backsliding by those honourable members]

 

ON TUESDAY night in Parliament, something very dramatic and irrevocable occurred:

 

THE DEATH

OF AN EXPERIMENT IN GOVERNMENT

When Tony Blair obtained power in May 1997, he self-consciously set out to rule Britain in a different way than ever before.

 

He turned his back on the

 

TRADITION

of

Representative Democracy

and

 

The British

 

[ENGLISH]

 

HOUSE of COMMONS.

 

Instead he sought to rule like a foreign President, directly answerable to the People without the burdensome restraint of mediating

INSTITUTIONS

Like

CABINET and PARLIAMENT

 

Tuesday night showed that Mr Blair’s presidential project is over. POWER is back in the HOUSE of COMMONS where it belongs - something which all of us should celebrate, whatever our political persuasion.

 

NO Prime Minister since the post was invented by Sir Robert Walpole almost 300 years ago has ever voted less than Tony Blair.

 

Even Margaret Thatcher, who was often accused -not least by Labour- of ignoring Parliament, voted in around 30 per cent of all divisions. Tony Blair has struggled to turn up more than 5 per cent of the time.

 

One very senior official, who worked closely with the Prime Minister for many years, once told me:

 

‘Basically, in 10 Downing Street there is a contempt for Parliament, and that attitude permeates the whole Government’.

 

Humiliation

 

On Monday night, Tony Blair paid a deadly price for that casualness and contempt. His failure to pay serious attention to Parliament caused him to lose key measures from his religious hatred Bill in the Commons vote.

 

But much more important than the damage to a single piece of legislation is the grievous blow to Tony Blair’s personal authority.

 

Tuesday night’s humiliation follows the rebellion against the Government’s Terrorism Bill last November. It means Tony Blair’s Government has been defeated on vital legislation twice in just three months.

 

There are now growing doubts about the Prime Minister’s ability to get his business through the COMMONS.

 

He is being forced to weaken many other pieces of legislation- above all, his flagship Education Bill - in order to avoid similar defeats.

 

Tony Blair’s parliamentary weakness now recalls Jim Callaghan in 1978-79 or John major in 1996-97. And yet Blair -unlike Major and Callaghan, who led minority governments- has a comfortable majority and won a General Election victory only nine month’s ago.

Blair’s weakness is a direct result of his long-standing contempt for Parliament.

 

In all previous administrations, Labour or Tory, the chief whip has been one of the most senior figures in the entire government, on occasions more powerful than the Chancellor of the Exchequer or the Foreign Secretary.

 

Francis Urguhart in Michael Dobbs’s novel House of Cards is the model for these traditional chief whips:

 

Devious-Machiavellian and much feared by rank-and-file MPs.

 

By contrast, Hilary Armstrong is just a harmless drudge. She commands as much mystique as a wet blanket and inspires as much fear as a tabby cat.

 

It is the chief whip who keeps the troops in order, using threats if need be. Poor Armstrong threatens nobody.

 

It is the job of the chief whip to act as an early warning system, scenting trouble.

 

But poor Armstrong hasn’t a clue what is going on. Even her fellow ministers treat her as an absurdity.

 

It was Armstrong who gave Tony Blair the disastrous advice to stand out for the 90 days’ detention without trial in the Terrorism Bill - advice that led to defeat.

 

And on Tuesday night it was Armstrong who preposterously told Blair that it was safe to leave the Commons just before the Government lost by a single vote.

 

The recent collapse of discipline on the government backbenches is, of course Armstrong’s responsibility. But it was Tony Blair who gave her the job.

 

Foolhardy

 

He did so after destroying the authority of the whips’ office by booting them out of their traditional and very grand office in 12 Downing Street and replacing them with his hubristic media operation led by Alastair Campbell.

 

He would never have made this foolhardy change if he understood the weight and importance of the British [ENGLISH] Parliament.

 

And that lack of understanding reveals everything about Tony Blair’s attitude to government.

One needs only to look back through history to realise the astonishing importance of parliament in the creation of the British nation.

 

In the 1640’s the tyrannical rule of Charles I was confronted and defeated through the

[English]

 

House of Commons.

 

Two hundred years ago an idealistic Tory MP named William Wilberforce abolished the Slave trade through persuasion in the [English] House of Commons.

 

In the United States this was achieved 60 years later- and not through debate, but by civil war.

 

Sixty -six years ago, as the German bombers roared up the Thames before dropping their cargoes of destruction, Winston Churchill uttered his great speeches of defiance against the evil menace of Hitler from the sweaty cockpit of the parliamentary chamber.

 

Shallow

 

But New Labour has never cared for British [English] history. Chancellor Gordon Brown demonstrated this insouciance in the most dramatic way possible when he delivered his speech on ‘Britishness’ last month.

 

[Well! it is Mr Brown’s Government that has been responsible for the break-up of the ‘Britishness’ by the especial treatment of Scotland with its Parliament and Wales with its Assembly and no doubt later a Parliament.

 

It is ENGLAND and its English Constitution and its English House of Commons, which should be the topic of importance.

 

It was the Prime Minister Stanley Baldwin in the third decade of the 20th century who decried the incoming habit of referring to BRITAIN when in reality it was ENGLAND, which was in the minds of the majority of people and had been the custom for most of the history of our country.]

 

He earnestly sought to define the British nation [which no longer exists] through abstract qualities like:

 

FREEDOM

 

FAIRNESS

 

RESPONSIBILITY’

 

There is nothing wrong with any of these qualities. Yet nowhere in his speech could the Chancellor bring himself to define our country through our greatest institution of all- the

 

[ENGLISH

 

PARLIAMENT]

 

[NOT]

 

BRITISH PARLIAMENT.

 

[It was a so-called British Parliament, which has over the last 32 years gradually given away the Heritage of England over 1400 years in the making.

 

It was a so-called British Parliament that ignores the wishes of the people of England and permits Scottish and Welsh

MPs to vote on English matters.

 

It was a so-call British Parliament that gave its sanction to an illegal invasion of Iraq.

 

It was a so-called British Parliament that has shelved Habeas Corpus the creation of the Magna Carta - for a year.

 

It was a so called British Parliament with its MPs who have watched over the destruction of their own House of Commons for almost ten years and until recently had done nothing to protect their Illustrious House though they found time to increase their own gilt-edged pensions and salaries at the same time almost voting their own House of Commons out of existence.]

 

*

 

And yet it is Parliament, more than anything else, that defines who we are and the wonderful things we stand for as a nation.

 

Parliament has sat beside the Thames at Westminster for 700 years. It contains far more truth and wisdom than a shallow politician like Tony Blair can begin to

comprehend.

 

It is easy to understand why a modernising New labour politician fond of vapidly boasting that Britain was a ‘young country’ should have wished to make this greatest of all Institutions an irrelevance.

 

It is easy to understand why Tony Blair should have hated the House of Commons for the irritating way in which it called his authority into question and opened him up to public criticism.

 

Almost ten years ago, when Tony Blair became Prime Minister, he set out quite consciously to destroy the POWER of PARLIAMENT.

 

Now history has turned full circle, and Parliament has come back to destroy Tony Blair.

 

[Well! We will have to see-one should remember that every member of the House of Commons shares the responsibility for the almost destruction of their House.

 

Without them Tony Blair could not have proceeded so far in his plans. Each member of the Commons who supported him knowing as they must have done of what he intended are themselves as guilty as the Prime Minister.

 

We will not celebrate - Yet!

 

- as we are not convinced that there is any major change in the Chamber with its in the main out for what they can get attitude which landed us all in this fine mess in the first place.]

 

*

 

Peter Oborne is Political Editor of the Spectator.

 

[Font altered-bolding and underlining used-comments in brackets]

FEB/06

 

*

 

*

The abolition of Britain
by The Reform Treaty
- Second Reading-Passed by majority of 138

*

Veteran parliamentarian TONY BENN speaks of the absolute necessity of a

REFERENDUM

HEAR HIM ON

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=o0I-ZdvQz1o

*

 

 

 

*

13th October,2007

 

So You Want Out Of The EU

 

THEN WHY NOT SIGN THE

RENUNCIATION of EU CITIZENSHIP

 

WHY WE ASK YOUR SUPPORT

When we first saw the petition we reasoned that it had no chance of success from No 10 but we supported it in order to gauge the number of Britons who would publicly put their name to a list which stated that they wished to RENUNCIATE EU CITIZENSHIP and retain only BRITISH.-THAT IS WHAT THIS IS ABOUT. Some might say that to hide behind a negative premise is both cowardly and playing into the hands of the EU FEDERALISTS.  DON'T LET THEM GET AWAY WITH IT- Place your vote so ALL can see that YOU CARE. about YOUR COUNTRY and YOUR FREEDOM.

 

 

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/Optout

Details from petition creator

With the signing of the Maastricht Treaty the people of Britain were given

DUAL CITIZENSHIP

-both

EUROPEAN and BRITISH

The extra tier of citizenship was thrust upon the people without their consent -and in many cases knowledge.

The PEOPLE of GREAT BRITAIN should be allowed the option of opting out of the EUROPEAN CITIZENSHIP if they so wish. The GOVERNMENT will then be able to provide those who have opted out with

BRITISH DOCUMENTATION

-only such as British  (not EU) passports, driving licences and other national documents.

EU laws will also NOT APPLY to those who

HAVE OPTED OUT OF EUROPEAN CITIZENSHIP

 

[PETITION OPEN UNTIL OCTOBER 08]

 

*

 

www.noliberties.com

[Latest Addition - June07]

*

www.eutruth.org.uk

*

www.thewestminsternews.co.uk

*

 

www.speakout.co.uk

*

 

Daniel Hannan - Forming an OPPOSITION to the EU

www.telegraph.co.uk.blogs

 

*

 

 

VOTE

MAY -2007

 

TO LEAVE THE EUROPEAN UNION

WITH THE ONLY PARTY WITH A MANDATE

TO SET YOU

 FREE

 

THE

UK INDEPENDENCE PARTY

www.ukip.org

 

TO RECLAIM YOUR DEMOCRACY DON'T VOTE FOR THE TRIPARTITE PARTIES IN WESTMINSTER

BUT

SMALL PARTIES THAT SPEAK THEIR MINDS WITHOUT SPIN AND LIES.

*

 

ONLY

PRO-PORTIONAL REPRESENTATION

WILL BRING DEMOCRACY BACK TO THE ENGLISH PEOPLE

*

Home Rule for Scotland

WHY NOT

HOME RULE for ENGLAND

 

*

MAY/07

 

[All underlined words have a separate bulletin