Upskirting bill blocked by single Tory mp

Freddie1980 said:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44496427

Sir Christopher is a leading member of a group of backbench Conservatives who make a practice of ensuring that what they see as well-meaning but flabby legislation is not lazily plopped on to the statue book by a few MPs on a poorly attended Friday sitting.

And after all this is a bill to create a new criminal offence, for which people can go to jail.
Click to expand...

So given its been posted numerous times now, and is really just updating an existing act to the modern-day, which part of it do you think is flabby or in some way wrong
 
Seems this as really got tefals back up :D

Great thing we live in a country where, he can try next election to have this guys seat taken by another party!

That'll show him.
 
kindai said:
Seems this as really got tefals back up :D

Great thing we live in a country where, he can try next election to have this guys seat taken by another party!

That'll show him.
Click to expand...


It's only 1 of 2 active threads atm and I'm bored.


It's just funny there's a rumour of a clearly be reason people are agreeing with but csnt formulate any actual argument about what needs to be debated by legal laymen in the commons.

This seems exactly the stuff that should be done on a Friday in the commons, routine updating of minor laws.

I think the best way to remove him would simply be to send him a massive gift basket of foie gras each month
 
For one thing, 'upskirting' is already a criminal offence, covered by existing legislation on voyeurism and outraging public decency.

For another, it's common practice to block bills to introduce new laws late on a Friday afternoon, as the low number of MPs in the house means that they are rarely given due examination and debate. This helps to prevent poorly worded and ineffectual laws being passed
 
trigg_27 said:
For one thing, 'upskirting' is already a criminal offence, covered by existing legislation on voyeurism and outraging public decency.

For another, it's common practice to block bills to introduce new laws late on a Friday afternoon, as the low number of MPs in the house means that they are rarely given due examination and debate. This helps to prevent poorly worded and ineffectual laws being passed
Click to expand...


It's not covered by voyeurism this bill is to make it covered by the voyeurism act...

Voyeurism applies only to private acts, being out in public is not a private act so it does not cover upskirting.


Outtanging public decency requires 2 witnesses so again while it a been used it does not cover upskirting if there isn't 4 people present.

The law has been posted many times in this thread it is very specific and well worded.

What part of it do you personally feel is "ineffectual?
 
Freddie1980 said:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44496427

Sir Christopher is a leading member of a group of backbench Conservatives who make a practice of ensuring that what they see as well-meaning but flabby legislation is not lazily plopped on to the statue book by a few MPs on a poorly attended Friday sitting.

And after all this is a bill to create a new criminal offence, for which people can go to jail.
Click to expand...
that's a load of hairy balls that doesn't explain in any coherent way what his actual objections were.
 
It's also a 3rd party view point the same article says he has not stated why he blocked it.

The same article says he has Stated he doesn't actually know what upskirting is..
 
Tefal said:
It's also a 3rd party view point the same article says he has not stated why he blocked it.
Click to expand...
exactly. he's clearly a puffy nutjob pervert sat on a Friday afternoon with **** all else to do but try and make himself seem important. him and his ilk should be put to good use somewhere...….shovelling dog **** and digging holes would be a good start. idiots like this is part of the reason our government and judicial system is ******.
 
Thekwango said:
exactly. he's clearly a puffy nutjob pervert sat on a Friday afternoon with **** all else to do but try and make himself seem important. him and his ilk should be put to good use somewhere...….shovelling dog **** and digging holes would be a good start. idiots like this is part of the reason our government and judicial system is ******.
Click to expand...


Don't mention dogs, bit of a sore point with him he just blocked another bill to try and get stronger protections for police dogs and horses from attack
 
But one question here given private members bill are only heard on a Friday and people are claiming he blocked it because it was raised one Friday.

How exactly do you expect it to ever move forward as it can only be heard one Friday and he objects to it because it was raised on friday
 
That text detailing hia efforts to stop flabby laws also reads like a pr exec desperately trying to justify belligerent behaviour. Is thia group of MPs a formal gathering or just a group of like minded arses throwing their weight around?
 
Tefal said:
Don't mention dogs, bit of a sore point with him he just blocked another bill to try and get stronger protections for police dogs and horses from attack
Click to expand...

He also blocked the "Stopping excessive force being used in mental health units" bill today, Senis Law, with the help of his filibustering friend

Conservative MP Philip Davies spoke for nearly two-and-a-half hours, addressing more than 100 amendments put to the Mental Health Units (Use of Force Bill) at report stage by MPs, including several of his own.

The Shipley MP clashed frequently with his own front bench over the need for some of his amendments, at one stage branding ministers "shameful" after being told one was "unnecessary".

Other MPs also voiced their frustration at the length of his speech, which finished after 148 minutes.

Mr Davies argued the government should accept changes to improve the state of the proposed legislation.

With less than 10 minutes for debate time on the bill's third reading, time ran out during a speech by another Conservative MP, Sir Christopher Chope, who then went on to block another bill, that would have outlawed "upskirting".
Click to expand...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44494263
 
kindai said:
Seems this as really got tefals back up :D

Great thing we live in a country where, he can try next election to have this guys seat taken by another party!

That'll show him.
Click to expand...


I know tefal says he's gay, and it's probably not very PC to say this, but I suddenly had this shocking image of him wearing a skirt and some old geezer "upskirting" him and later that day looking at his captures in a dingy bed sit and saying to himself, "Bleedin' `ell, what's all this `ere then....?"

Sorry ;)
 
Tefal said:
But one question here given private members bill are only heard on a Friday and people are claiming he blocked it because it was raised one Friday.

How exactly do you expect it to ever move forward as it can only be heard one Friday and he objects to it because it was raised on friday
Click to expand...
The guy comes across as the type that argues just for the sake of arguing, always has to have an alternative point of view regardless of the subject, constant counter point upon constant counter point just because he can, just being awkward because he can. AKA large phallus shaped object...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom