Parliamentary debate on football governance and CCFC (2 Viewers)

Forums New posts
lewys33

lewys33

Well-Known Member
Fair play to him for sticking to his guns! Unfortunately for us the damage is done, this will be to try and stop this happening in the future.
 
SkyBlue76

SkyBlue76

New Member
Just checked the internet to find out what an adjournment debate actually is (it sounds impressive, but is it just another version of an Early Day Motion?).

Seems that this is the last debate of the day which, on Tuesday's, is at 10pm. I can't imagine too many back benchers are still there but to be fair to Bob this is a formal debate and calls for a response from a government minister. It will not result in any kind of vote but it sounds better than an early day motion.

Well done Bob. I can't help but feel that we are fighting a bit of a losing battle (Administrators report hasn't helped, ACL seem to have gone quiet, potential investors have gone very quiet) but I'm just pleased that there are some people out there who are not letting this drop. I know most fans are still resolute and hopefully NOPM will eventually yield results, but in terms of keeping the profile up, Bob is doing a great job.
 
M

Monners

Well-Known Member
SkyBlue76 said:
Just checked the internet to find out what an adjournment debate actually is (it sounds impressive, but is it just another version of an Early Day Motion?).

Seems that this is the last debate of the day which, on Tuesday's, is at 10pm. I can't imagine too many back benchers are still there but to be fair to Bob this is a formal debate and calls for a response from a government minister. It will not result in any kind of vote but it sounds better than an early day motion.


Hear! Hear!

Well done Bob. I can't help but feel that we are fighting a bit of a losing battle (Administrators report hasn't helped, ACL seem to have gone quiet, potential investors have gone very quiet) but I'm just pleased that there are some people out there who are not letting this drop. I know most fans are still resolute and hopefully NOPM will eventually yield results, but in terms of keeping the profile up, Bob is doing a great job.
Click to expand...
 
A

alphapappa

Guest
Said it before said it again - these are easy to achieve (I have achieved it personally twice!). Again as I have said before, unless a government minister sees votes in it ( and ultimately Coventry and surrounding are a closed shop - as they will always vote Labour). As such, this is a meaningless gesture! Bob ainsworth is a marginal MP, on the loony left fringe - so sadly once again this adds to the reality that this is a pointless "achievement!". If I can achieve it without a campaign, that just shows how meaningless these are! Mine was in front of cabinet ministers!
 
H

Hugh Jarse

Well-Known Member
Fair play to him, if we are not in it, we can't win it.

It will be very interesting to hear the response though!
 
skybluetony176

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
SkyBlue76 said:
Just checked the internet to find out what an adjournment debate actually is (it sounds impressive, but is it just another version of an Early Day Motion?).

Seems that this is the last debate of the day which, on Tuesday's, is at 10pm. I can't imagine too many back benchers are still there but to be fair to Bob this is a formal debate and calls for a response from a government minister. It will not result in any kind of vote but it sounds better than an early day motion.

Well done Bob. I can't help but feel that we are fighting a bit of a losing battle (Administrators report hasn't helped, ACL seem to have gone quiet, potential investors have gone very quiet) but I'm just pleased that there are some people out there who are not letting this drop. I know most fans are still resolute and hopefully NOPM will eventually yield results, but in terms of keeping the profile up, Bob is doing a great job.
Click to expand...

possibly it wont be about the debate, it may well be about what Bob has to say. who knows what bombs he might have to drop using parlimentry privaliges? even if he doesn't, like has already been said fair play to him for pushing the issue's not only with our club but also within the FL/FA and the the pirate code they call rules and regulations.
 
Last edited:
Nick

Nick

Administrator
Does the privilege mean he can basically say anything he wants with no comes backs of legal action?
 
James Smith

James Smith

Well-Known Member
Nick said:
Does the privilege mean he can basically say anything he wants with no comes backs of legal action?
Click to expand...

Pretty much, yes

www.parliament.uk said:
Parliamentary privilege

Parliamentary privilege has two main components:

•Freedom of speech, which is guaranteed by Article IX of the Bill of Rights 1689

•The exercise by Parliament of control over its own affairs, known technically as ‘exclusive cognisance’.

The privilege of freedom of speech protects what is said in debate in either House. As Article IX states:

That the freedom of speech and debates or proceedings in Parliament ought not to be impeached or questioned in any court or place out of Parliament.

The Joint Committee on Parliamentary Privilege set out the modern interpretation of Article IX in 1999, as follows:

... The modern interpretation is now well established: that article 9 and the constitutional principle it encapsulates protect members of both Houses from being subjected to any penalty, civil or criminal, in any court or tribunal for what they have said in the course of proceedings in Parliament.
Click to expand...

http://www.parliament.uk/documents/commons/lib/research/briefings/snpc-04905.pdf
 
Last edited:
letsallsingtogether

letsallsingtogether

Well-Known Member
Because he can fair play to him.

Nick said:
So you can go in there and just make random stuff up like Tony Blair had sex with a dog etc with no come backs?

What does concern me though is if he is so confident of his facts and points, why does he need to hide behind the parliament thing? It is good that it is getting the situation out there though.
Click to expand...
 
skybluetony176

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
Nick said:
So you can go in there and just make random stuff up like Tony Blair had sex with a dog etc with no come backs?

What does concern me though is if he is so confident of his facts and points, why does he need to hide behind the parliament thing? It is good that it is getting the situation out there though.
Click to expand...

i think it has to be factual (technically Sherrie isn't a dog). like in the case of john terry's affair with wayne bridges ex, their was an injunction meaning he couldn't be named without the person doing the naming breaking the law unless, as happened an MP named him in parliament and he is immune from prosecution as he was protected by his privilege. so in theory if bob has some info on shitsu or the FL that they are protecting with an injunction or maybe even by judicial review appeal he can talk about it in parliament, name names or expose wrong doings with no comeback.

the bit about JR appeal is a guess by the way, not necessarily fact.
 
M

Monners

Well-Known Member
Nick, he is paid to attend Parliament to look after his constituents interests. He can do this best by doing precisely what he is doing - by getting the issue with how football is governed on the public record.
 
bigfatronssba

bigfatronssba

Well-Known Member
Nick said:
So you can go in there and just make random stuff up like Tony Blair had sex with a dog etc with no come backs?

What does concern me though is if he is so confident of his facts and points, why does he need to hide behind the parliament thing? It is good that it is getting the situation out there though.
Click to expand...

You can say whatever you want is my understanding. However with something personal about another MP I think the speaker would order you to apologise.

Ainsworth may know what he's saying is true, but he might not have proof, therefore he couldn't say it outside.

I think much of this comes from the days of the civil war. At that time those who questioned the king could be sentenced to death. Parliament demanded that the king has no authority over what is debated in there.
 
J

Jack Griffin

Guest
Nick said:
So you can go in there and just make random stuff up like Tony Blair had sex with a dog etc with no come backs?

What does concern me though is if he is so confident of his facts and points, why does he need to hide behind the parliament thing? It is good that it is getting the situation out there though.
Click to expand...

Why does Joy need to hide... period!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)
Top