Skip to main content

The Sinn Fein Votes

There were two votes yesterday on a Free Vote. As they were on a Free Vote I feel I should explain my logic for voting as I did.

A report from the Independent Monitoring Commission initially called for a suspension of the members allowances for the MPs that don't take their seats in the house of commons. (Sinn Fein). This same group concluded recently that matters had changed and hence the allowances should be restored. These allowances are mainly used to support constituents.

Additionally the government proposed that SF be given a sum of money equivalent to the "Short Money" that is used to fund parties' research into policy matters on legislation. Given that SF do not attend the House they do not get involved in these matters in the same way. Hence this equates moreso to a bung than a source of finance to support their work on legislation.

Motion 3 was to provide the Short Money equivalent - I voted against.
Motion 4 was to reinstate the constituency allowance - I vote for.

Both motions were passed with Tony Blair voting for both motions.

Comments

Bob Piper said…
Good for TB. Just because Sinn Fein do not attend the House of Commons it does not mean that their elected representatives do not have to be aware of the consequences of legislation on their constituents. Let's face it john, you will never in a blue moon have the opportunity to introduce legislation in any meaningful sense, the same as all of the other backbenchers in the House. That doesn't mean your Party will not want to research and investigate Government legislation to know what impact it will have on constituents. I'm more concerned about the public money you are wasting asking bloody fool questions for self publicity purposes.

Popular posts from this blog

Standards Board and Ken Livingstone

The link is to the case where Ken Livingstone appealed the decision of the Adjudication Panel for England.

The Standards Board and associated Adjudication Panel have done a lot of damage to democracy in the UK. The courts are, however, bringing them into more sanity.

The point about Ken Livingstone's case is that it was high profile and he also could afford to appeal. The Standard Board has a problem in that those subject to its enquiries face substantial costs that they cannot claim back.

This is an issue that needs further work.

In essence the Judge found that what he said brought him into disrepute, but not the office of Mayor. We do need the machinery of the SBE and APE to concentrate on things that matter rather than people being rude to each other.

Problems with Outlook Express - emails lost dbx corruption

In the light of the enthusiasm shown for my post relating to the OCX control that must not be named (and probably Microsoft's most embarrassing error of recent years) I thought I would write someting about Outlook Express.

Outlook Express is the email client that comes as part of windows. I use it myself, although I have my emails filtered through a spam filter of my own devising written in java. It takes email off a number of servers using POP3 (Post Office Protocol TCP Port 110) and sends it using SMTP (Simple Mail Transfer Protocol port 25).

I have recently spent a few hours dealing with the problem that arises when .dbx files get corrupted during compacting.

Outlook Express (OE) stores the emails (and other things) in files with the suffix .dbx. Each folder has its own .dbx file. They are stored in hidden directories. This makes it harder to deal with things when OE goes wrong.

It is very important to back up your stored *.dbx files as otherwise if you have a disk crash/stol…

Statement re False Allegations Campaign

Many people will know that my family and I have been subject to a campaign of false allegations by Esther Baker for the past 4 1/2 years. Yesterday there was a court judgment Baker v Hemming [2019] EWHC 2950 (QB) which formally confirmed that the allegations were false. Esther Baker, who had brought a libel claim against me, dropped her defence of Truth to my counter-claim and was taken by the judge as no longer trying to prove her allegations. Due to Baker's various breaches of court rules and orders, she has been barred from further repeating her allegations even in the court proceedings. Further claim of mine in libel against Baker are ongoing. There is a good summary in the Daily Mail here.

This demonstrates the challenge in fighting false allegations in today's Britain. A substantial campaign was built up to promote allegations which had no substance to them. Various Labour MPs and in pa…