Comments on: Retrospective Law Under Urgency http://www.darntonvsclark.org/2006/10/16/retrospective-law-under-urgency/ Constitutionally-limited government, 1688-2006, RIP. Pass the bananas. Thu, 20 Nov 2008 09:46:50 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.2 by: Sinner http://www.darntonvsclark.org/2006/10/16/retrospective-law-under-urgency/#comment-1977 Tue, 17 Oct 2006 20:34:49 +0000 http://www.darntonvsclark.org/2006/10/16/retrospective-law-under-urgency/#comment-1977 Rumpole - of course they can. in fact they could promise to reintrouce the death penalty and execute every labout party member and their extended families. now *that's* a third world dictatorship we could really be proud off (OK, well, to be really proud, take up out to the tip & shoot 'em without any validating legislation) Rumpole -
of course they can.

in fact they could promise to reintrouce the death penalty and execute every labout party member and their extended families.

now *that’s* a third world dictatorship we could really be proud off
(OK, well, to be really proud, take up out to the tip & shoot ‘em
without any validating legislation)

]]> by: Rumpole http://www.darntonvsclark.org/2006/10/16/retrospective-law-under-urgency/#comment-1936 Tue, 17 Oct 2006 07:12:37 +0000 http://www.darntonvsclark.org/2006/10/16/retrospective-law-under-urgency/#comment-1936 LBJ Thanks for that. If Labour members in breach of the spending limit fail to declare their interest is there any remedy or is it just tough? Can/should National publicly announce their intention to invalidate the validating legislation if elected to government with the express intention of prosecuting the offenders and demanding repayment with interest? LBJ

Thanks for that. If Labour members in breach of the spending limit fail to declare their interest is there any remedy or is it just tough? Can/should National publicly announce their intention to invalidate the validating legislation if elected to government with the express intention of prosecuting the offenders and demanding repayment with interest?

]]> by: LBJ http://www.darntonvsclark.org/2006/10/16/retrospective-law-under-urgency/#comment-1909 Tue, 17 Oct 2006 03:08:35 +0000 http://www.darntonvsclark.org/2006/10/16/retrospective-law-under-urgency/#comment-1909 Rumpole - no. see here: http://www.sirhumphreys.com/lbj/2006/oct/16/last_one The convention you cite doesn't exist. Rumpole - no.

see here:
http://www.sirhumphreys.com/lbj/2006/oct/16/last_one

The convention you cite doesn’t exist.

]]> by: Sinner http://www.darntonvsclark.org/2006/10/16/retrospective-law-under-urgency/#comment-1850 Mon, 16 Oct 2006 16:43:47 +0000 http://www.darntonvsclark.org/2006/10/16/retrospective-law-under-urgency/#comment-1850 http://stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,3830636a10,00.html MPs who give with one hand will get pay rise in the other <b> it's not paying it back if it doesn't cost you anything<b> http://stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,3830636a10,00.html

MPs who give with one hand will get pay rise in the other

it’s not paying it back if it doesn’t cost you anything

]]> by: Sinner http://www.darntonvsclark.org/2006/10/16/retrospective-law-under-urgency/#comment-1844 Mon, 16 Oct 2006 10:28:24 +0000 http://www.darntonvsclark.org/2006/10/16/retrospective-law-under-urgency/#comment-1844 Darnton listening to the interview why didn't you give a straight answer to the question about "what does it mean when you win" and "whould this go away if labour paid it back last year" <b>the answer is: if the High Court finds this is illegal, then every member of the party campaign team and labour cabinet must resign</b> They should have resigned a year ago when this was pointed out and they wont resign even if they loose. BUT paying it back changes <b>nothing</b> you need to say this now. Darnton

listening to the interview

why didn’t you give a straight answer to the question about “what does it mean when you win” and “whould this go away if labour paid it back last year”

the answer is: if the High Court finds this is illegal, then every member of the party campaign team and labour cabinet must resign

They should have resigned a year ago when this was pointed out
and they wont resign even if they loose.

BUT paying it back changes nothing

you need to say this now.

]]> by: Sinner http://www.darntonvsclark.org/2006/10/16/retrospective-law-under-urgency/#comment-1843 Mon, 16 Oct 2006 10:22:42 +0000 http://www.darntonvsclark.org/2006/10/16/retrospective-law-under-urgency/#comment-1843 It;s really simple if this is not corrupt, then no validation is necessary if this is corrupt, then validation is yet more corruption. It;s really simple

if this is not corrupt, then no validation is necessary

if this is corrupt, then validation is yet more corruption.

]]> by: Craig D http://www.darntonvsclark.org/2006/10/16/retrospective-law-under-urgency/#comment-1841 Mon, 16 Oct 2006 10:03:13 +0000 http://www.darntonvsclark.org/2006/10/16/retrospective-law-under-urgency/#comment-1841 They're just unstoppable. "Well, fine, we'll pay it back, but we did nothing wrong, and we are going to put a bill through making it all ok, on urgency. Oh and now we want to make election donations illegal and it's all those damn brethren, golfers and right wing bloggers." They’re just unstoppable.

“Well, fine, we’ll pay it back, but we did nothing wrong, and we are going to put a bill through making it all ok, on urgency. Oh and now we want to make election donations illegal and it’s all those damn brethren, golfers and right wing bloggers.”

]]> by: Kim http://www.darntonvsclark.org/2006/10/16/retrospective-law-under-urgency/#comment-1839 Mon, 16 Oct 2006 09:22:47 +0000 http://www.darntonvsclark.org/2006/10/16/retrospective-law-under-urgency/#comment-1839 Oh Bernard I did have my reservations whether the deferment of the judicial conference should have been agreed by plaintiff. Now they have bought time to strategise and retro legislate. We won't let them get away with it will we !! Oh Bernard
I did have my reservations whether the deferment of the judicial conference should have been agreed by plaintiff. Now they have bought time to strategise and retro legislate. We won’t let them get away with it will we !!

]]> by: Rumpole http://www.darntonvsclark.org/2006/10/16/retrospective-law-under-urgency/#comment-1838 Mon, 16 Oct 2006 08:43:48 +0000 http://www.darntonvsclark.org/2006/10/16/retrospective-law-under-urgency/#comment-1838 If the retrospective legislation is enacted does this leave the way open to invlidate the result as the convention that MPs do not vote on anything that benefits them personally? Also can National campaign that in government they would invalidate such legislation and make all MPs liable personally for their respective parties debts with interest and be barred from office until their debt be discharged? If the retrospective legislation is enacted does this leave the way open to invlidate the result as the convention that MPs do not vote on anything that benefits them personally? Also can National campaign that in government they would invalidate such legislation and make all MPs liable personally for their respective parties debts with interest and be barred from office until their debt be discharged?

]]>