45
submitted 1 year ago by NightOwl@lemm.ee to c/worldnews@lemmy.ml
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] livus@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago

Sounds like good grounds to challenge it. This thing of having Lords put through a bill that Parliament rejected would set a terrible precedent.

The change, through a statutory instrument in the Lords, came after the chamber rejected the same change, proposed months earlier in a heavily debated and scrutinised new public order act. Peers do not by convention normally vote down statutory instruments.

[-] peter@feddit.uk 2 points 1 year ago

They'll just keep pushing it through until it gets by. I don't wanna be cynical but we're running out of options for stopping them

[-] livus@kbin.social 2 points 11 months ago

That sucks. We have had a similar problem here (NZ - parliamentary democracy with only one House) where they increasingly use "under urgency" to avoid debate and scrutiny.

this post was submitted on 29 Nov 2023
45 points (97.9% liked)

World News

32352 readers
467 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS