Call_me_Virgil

Call_me_Virgil

79p

641 comments posted · 3 followers · following 0

1 week ago @ http://www.conservativ... - WATCH: Johnson on the ... · 0 replies · +1 points

So by your thinking should any Muslim immigrants be looking to build a caliphate in the UK, you would give them your unequivocal support.

2 weeks ago @ http://www.conservativ... - John Bald: The legal s... · 1 reply · +1 points

You can't take the Reaxder's Digest" approach to law. You need to read the entire judgement , not only the majority verdict from hale, bit to contract it wither the dissenting approach taken by Neuberger.

I'll give you a clue as to the critical issues at play - the key issues is which should prevail - 'justice'; that favoured unmarried women or commercial certainty?

2 weeks ago @ http://www.conservativ... - John Bald: The legal s... · 3 replies · +1 points

You are wrong. In a common law system such as ours judges do indeed make the law. What precedents do you think they are using? They are common law precedents - made in court by judges. Who else do yiuy think made the precedents? They only;y stopped making criminal laws when it was seen that retrospective criminalisation was incompatible with the rule of law.

You are also wrong about the HRA. One of the more fatuous errors seen on sites such as this is that we don't have a 'written' constitution. I n fact, its completely uncontentious amongst the most basic of constitutional scholars (think GCSE) that large parts of our constitution are written, but they are not codified. Certain parts are not written, most notably of late the prerogative powers. But examples of statutes that are clearly constitutional, (i..e affect the rights of citizens and the operation of the state) are the HRA and the FTPA. Constitutional common law judgements (which are of course written) would include Factortame II which established that all domestic law had to be interpreted as being compatible with EU law and probably both Miller cases.. You don't think that a case the gives primacy to EU law is not constitutional?

If you want to really understand what a social justice warrior Lady Hale is then I suggest you read her judgement in Stack v Dowden where she developed the concept of the implied constructive trusts to give ownership rights to non-married co-habitees. its a House of Lords case, so, I'm sure that it will meet with your approval. Personally, I find Nueuberge'rs dissenting judgement more compelling. Do tell me why you think.

Brexit will decrease me rights and revoking the HRA will deny me even more. If that's your vision of Conservatism, you're welcome to it - not for me.

Added in edit: I should add, I find it rather disturbing that as an educationalist, you see the the definition of academic achievement and inspiration as being conditional on having right right politics. Isn't that the sort of thing you condemn the far left for?

2 weeks ago @ http://www.conservativ... - John Bald: The legal s... · 5 replies · +1 points

There is some very strange stuff in this article. We have a common law system. That means that judges do make the law - that's the whole point. Until the 1960s they were making criminal law - thankfully that has now stopped. But, and its a very important but, parliament is the superior institution. if parliament has legislated the courts will defer to that legislation - nobody questions that. Certainly not hHale or any other of the SC Judges. They may have to discern what parliament meant, but having done so, will give effect to it. The HRA is a written part of our constitution given its legitimacy and authority by parliament. The role of the judiciary is to give effect to the act as parliament intended. Parliament can choose not to comply and the courts have no further authority - for example voting rights for prisoners.

it's also a pretty crass comment to accuse Hale of 'gloating". If any judges 'won' it was those of the Scottish Courts, whose judgements were not reversed.

Because of the numerous glass ceilings that Hale has smashed and because of her relatively modest upbringing she is an absolute hero to many young women. If there is anyone =who demonstrates the transformative value of education and study, it is her. You should use her as inspiration rather than snide ridicule.

3 weeks ago @ http://www.conservativ... - Interview. Leadsom acc... · 1 reply · +1 points

We are agreed that public sector infrastructure needs investment.

The issue of FoM is nuanced. I have held fellowships in non-EU conurntries where I was no assured o f the right to remain shoul I have wished to (as it happened, I didn't).

Lets say I'm a very talented French molecular biologist wi tha yoihng family looking to establish myself in the Biotech sector. Because I'm talented, I have tow very good job offers. One in a UK biotech firm, the other in Germany. Both pay well.

If I go the the UK, my future is uncertain. I may be able to stay, I may not - who knows. If I go to Germany, I know that I can put down roots and settle my family. For many people, not all, this difference will be determinative. This is making it harder to recruit EU citizens to UK companies.

Presuming you are a UK tax payer, how would you regard your taxes funding non-UK scientist at the expense of UK ones? Isn't that part of you whole case for Brexit?

The same principle applies to the EU funding non-EU scientists out of EU funds (ie EU citizens taxes).

3 weeks ago @ http://www.conservativ... - Interview. Leadsom acc... · 0 replies · +1 points

My apologies, but I have absolutely no idea how your response relates to my comments on the OP

3 weeks ago @ http://www.conservativ... - Interview. Leadsom acc... · 12 replies · +1 points

Brexit has already damaged the UK life-sciences sector and will continue to do so. To paint brexit as an opportunity counter to the truth.

I'll give you three examples

1) The move of the EMEA from London to Amsterdam. The EMEA was a great incentive for Pharma and Biotech companies to have at least their Regulatory Affairs people in the UK. This in turn often lead to a greater presence of R&D folk in the UK.

2) Ending FoM makes the UK less competitive than the continent for talented young researches looking to establish their careers.

3) Being outside of the EU means we are outside many EU based funding mechanism and thereby excluded from important research collaborations.

For those interested, see the recent output from the Royal Society on these issues.

3 weeks ago @ http://www.conservativ... - Interview. Leadsom acc... · 0 replies · +1 points

The reason here are no hedgerows in the Low Coutries is because they are farming reclaimed land. Its the same with the fens in the UK. There never were hedgerows (plenty of ditches - perhaps somebody should send Borris a map to Wisbeach). Having gone to all the trouble of reclaiming the land, it makes sense to maximise its use for profit.

3 weeks ago @ http://www.conservativ... - If MPs carry on delayi... · 0 replies · +1 points

Should you get carried away, you might wan to read the earlier decision, which is harder to find, so I'll post you a link
https://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/format.cgi?doc=/ew...

3 weeks ago @ http://www.conservativ... - If MPs carry on delayi... · 2 replies · +1 points

Tony, rather than getting cross let me approach this from another angle.

We have three tier judiciary (in England, the High Court, the Court of Appeal and the SC).

Why?

Answer; because judges make errors in law. Those errors can be reversed and those reversals either confirmed ,or re-reversed.

In Miller II, the English court ruled that the case was not justicable.

The highest Scottish Court took the opposite view.

One of them had to be wrong.

Having considered the law, the SC ruled that the Scottish court got it right. Only once they had decided that the issue was justicable did the SC go on and consider the legality of prorogation. The English CoA had not considered the issue. The SC did not overturn a ruling by the CoA that Johnson acted unlawfully.

All SC decisions (and most CoA) cases are available online. They have to give their reasoning in public - there is nowhere for then to hide. As the court of last instance, what they say is, by definition, the law, unless and until it is changed by themselves (as happened recently on joint-enterprise - Jogee) or Parliament changes the law.

This case was written by Hale (you get to recognise her style). Its very accessible to non-lawyers. I genuinely think you should read it, if nothing else Hale does write beautifully.