the National Hemp Service makes me question what Jeremy means when he goes on about the NHS.
I was going to suggest Chuka Umunna's book, teach them how to adapt to the modern economy, but then perhaps we should all spare a thought for Chuka at Christmas time going forward.
That knighthood seems entirely unsurprising. Fuck IDS, but he has been a front line politician for decades. Why are you all acting surprised?
Of the 330,000 calls taken by the FCO this year, ten of the more unusual ones were:
- A man rang to complain about the aeroplane food on the way to his holiday destination, asking us to change him to a different airline for the return journey.
- A customer calling from Nigeria wanted to speak to the rapper 50 Cent and asked the British Consulate to share his phone number.
- A woman emailed to ask if she could buy 30 sheets of A4 paper from the British Consulate, as she couldn't find any where she was in Texas.
- A caller rang to say they had left their headphones in their hotel room in France and asked if Embassy staff could pop round and see if they were still there.
- A couple thinking of moving to Portugal contacted the British Embassy to ask how removal companies got large items of furniture into small flats in Lisbon.
- A caller wanted to ask about getting British nationality for his son, who had recently been born overseas. He hoped the child would qualify for citizenship on the basis his parents were certain he'd been conceived in the UK.
- A man rang to ask us to provide a television for his friend who had been hospitalised in Australia because the one in his ward was broken.
- A woman rang from Qatar to ask how we could help deal with a make-up artist for her wedding as she wasn't happy with the service she'd received.
- A woman calling from Sweden had been invited to an event at Windsor Castle and wanted advice on what to wear for it.
- A couple in China who had engaged the services of a sperm donor wanted to know if our staff could verify the nationality of the sperm as British.
I've seen a lot of hate for UC in these threads. Is it the idea of it that you hate or the implementation? I saw Labour say they'd scrap it but there didn't seem any plan for what to replace it with.The thing is his last real effort as a front line politician is Universal Credit.
I can't even imagine how that feels to the people that have suffered under its botched, cruel implementation.
I've seen a lot of hate for UC in these threads. Is it the idea of it that you hate or the implementation? I saw Labour say they'd scrap it but there didn't seem any plan for what to replace it with.
good luck , gross you have to deal with thisI remember I posted a bit about my wifes fight with PIP. She posted in the mental health thread about it but for anyone who saw the previous posts on it from the GE thread/Brexit thread:
Mandatory reconsideration failed, still 0 points and the 'decision' report they sent with the letter said basically the same thing as last time.
Next up, tribunal stage, yay... ;-;
I remember I posted a bit about my wifes fight with PIP. She posted in the mental health thread about it but for anyone who saw the previous posts on it from the GE thread/Brexit thread:
Mandatory reconsideration failed, still 0 points and the 'decision' report they sent with the letter said basically the same thing as last time.
Next up, tribunal stage, yay... ;-;
Wellfare rights officer. He knows us very well and he knows the system. We're counting on him to navigate this crap.
The irony. So begins the quiet Tory manifesto promise to 'examine' the structure of our democracy.In an interview on BBC Radio 4's Today programme, Lord Howard, an unelected peer, questioned whether the law should be made by "elected, accountable politicians, answerable to their constituents and vulnerable to summary dismissal at election, or by unaccountable, unelected judges who can't be removed".
"What we've seen in recent years is a very considerable increase in the power of the judiciary, partly as a result of the expansion of judicial review," he added,
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...michael-howard-lady-hale-judges-a9262186.html
The irony. So begins the quiet Tory manifesto promise to 'examine' the structure of our democracy.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...michael-howard-lady-hale-judges-a9262186.html
The irony. So begins the quiet Tory manifesto promise to 'examine' the structure of our democracy.
Working closely with Parliament, the Government should:
Legislate to reverse the effects of the Supreme Court's recent prorogation judgment, restoring the non-justiciability of key prerogatives and vindicating the political constitution. Affirm parliamentary sovereignty and stand ready to respond to attempts to undermine it. Review the scope of judicial review and legislate to limit it where appropriate, reversing the effects of particular judgments by legislation when necessary. Exercise existing ministerial powers in relation to judicial appointments, rejecting or requesting reconsideration of candidates where there are doubts about their suitability. Legislate to increase ministerial involvement in judicial appointments. Amend the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 to rename the Supreme Court the Upper Court of Appeal and, more importantly, to specify that the Court's function is to adjudicate disputes about law and not to serve as the guardian of the constitution. Recognise that modern European human rights law is not necessary to protect rights, but may in fact endanger good government and the rule of law. Aim to take back control from the European Court of Human Rights by: i. Proposing a new protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights permitting member states to make reservations to interpretations of the Convention by the European Court of Human Rights; and ii. Unless and until such a protocol is agreed, considering not complying with select judgments of the European Court of Human Rights that brazenly depart from the terms of the European Convention on Human Rights. Decline to accept that it is unconstitutional to act in ways that are lawful in domestic law and yet are inconsistent with judgments of the European Court of Human Rights. Amend the Human Rights Act 1998 to address and to limit its misuse by UK judges, which would involve amendments to: i. Limit its application to events that arose after 1 October 2000 and to limit its extra-territorial application; ii. Forbid UK courts from finding legislation or government action incompatible with the Act if or when the case would fall within the UK's margin of appreciation or if the European Court of Human Rights has not found an incompatibility in closely analogous circumstances; iii. Protect secondary legislation as well as primary legislation from invalidation by reason of alleged rights-incompatibility; and iv. Prevent misinterpretation of other legislation. Reject the idea that there is or should be a constitutional convention that obliges Parliament to change any law declared to be rights-incompatible. Review and reform retained EU laws that may confer too much power on domestic judges, and make ministers and Parliament, not courts, responsible for changing retained EU law.
Indeed. They're laying the groundwork to strip away any veneer of protection we've enjoyed from the elected dictatorship we call the Government. There's report too, from the policy exchange and written by a law professor at Oxford.
He writes
Oh I love this: "Recognise that modern European human rights law is not necessary to protect rights, but may in fact endanger good government and the rule of law. "
Reject the idea that there is or should be a constitutional convention that obliges Parliament to change any law declared to be rights-incompatible.
I'm not sure which is worse - that, or this:
So if the law is infringing upon your rights, there should be no obligation on Parliament to change it.
Fucking what.
I'm really sorry to hear this. Good luck with the tribunal.I remember I posted a bit about my wifes fight with PIP. She posted in the mental health thread about it but for anyone who saw the previous posts on it from the GE thread/Brexit thread:
Mandatory reconsideration failed, still 0 points and the 'decision' report they sent with the letter said basically the same thing as last time.
Next up, tribunal stage, yay... ;-;
I remember I posted a bit about my wifes fight with PIP. She posted in the mental health thread about it but for anyone who saw the previous posts on it from the GE thread/Brexit thread:
Mandatory reconsideration failed, still 0 points and the 'decision' report they sent with the letter said basically the same thing as last time.
Next up, tribunal stage, yay... ;-;
A clampdown on illegal immigration was relaxed because Ministers feared the Queen believed it could affect the polo season, it was claimed last night.
The Home Office had planned to close a loophole that granted special visas to hundreds of foreigners working in the so-called 'sport of kings' amid fears it was being used as a backdoor for low-skilled migrants to enter the country.
But the proposals were watered down in the wake of Buckingham Palace's considerable interest in the matter, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.
One source said the Queen became 'very animated' over the plans, while a former official said Ministers went 'above and beyond' normal practice to address Palace concerns.
Thanks for the well wishes everyone!
On the bright side, we're going on our honeymoon in a few weeks so we'll have some time to forget about all this shit and recharge our batteries.