Skip to main content

Bill of Rights debate yesterday including hyperinjunctions

The link is to Yesterday's bill of rights debates.

There is no sense me copying the whole of the debate here. You can simply click on the link

The issues looked at are:
1. Freedom of speech
2. Super and hyper-injunctions
3. People's right to talk to MPs
4. The lack of accountability of the official solicitor
5. Problems with secret courts

This will give the video.


BillBen said…
Well done, Mr Hemming. Thank you for highlighting the details of the Bill of Rights.
I would suggest that you now publicise in Parliament every unjust Family Court case that you can, knowing those same corrupt Family Courts will be unable to stop you or pursue you for Contempt Of Court.
All the best.
BillBen said…
Please, Mr Hemming, you need to start proceedings for Contempt of Parliament against various judges, the Official Solicitor and even some social workers. Then, maybe, this would concentrate their minds and ensure some justice.
All the best.
Smoking Hot said…
Well done John, people are spreading the issue that you so admirably high-lighted. Keep up the good work.
Dave H said…
Well done for pointing this out.

In the case where the state threatened to take the child into care if the father talked to you, there is an important issue that if there is danger to the child, care proceedings should be commenced regardless of any communications by the father. If the child is not in danger then surely the state is not acting in the best interests of the child by threatening to remove the child to care. As such, action should be taken against those state officials for such threats in the hope that it might make others think twice.
john said…

Popular posts from this blog

Statement re false allegations from Esther Baker

Statement by John Hemming
I am pleased that the Police have now made it clear that there has been a concerted effort to promote false criminal allegations against me and that the allegations had no substance whatsoever.
I would like to thank Emily Cox, my children, Ayaz Iqbal (my Solicitor), my local lib dem team and many others who supported me through this dreadful experience. There are many worse things that happen to people, but this was a really bad experience.
It is bad enough to have false allegations made about yourself to the police, but to have a concerted campaign involving your political opponents and many others in public creates an environment in which it is reasonable to be concerned about ill founded vigilante attacks on your family and yourself. Luckily there was a more substantial lobby to the contrary as well, which included many people who were themselves real survivors of abuse, which has helped.
I am normally someone who helps other people fight injustice. …

Homelessness vs Selling Books

Candidates in elections tend to find themselves very busy with lots of things to do.  It is, therefore, necessary to prioritise things to ensure that the important things are dealt with.

To me the issue of homelessness and rough sleeping is an important issue.  Therefore, when Birmingham's Faith Leaders group contacted me to ask me what I would propose and whether I would work with them to make things better I was pleased to respond with my views and indicate that I would work with them after the election.

The Faith Leaders Group (Bishops and other religious leaders in Birmingham) have now sent out their report.

Sadly, according to their report,  I was the only candidate for Yardley to respond.  The group in their report said:

"Particularly disappointing was the lack of response from some of those candidates seeking re-election as MP for their respective constituencies."
It is worth looking at the priorities of my opponent.
Interestingly today she has decided to be at th…

Millionaires and politics

The Labour Party spent most of the last election criticising me for being a successful businessman (aka millionaire). That is business in the private sector employing over 250 people. It is worth looking at the situation for the Labour Candidate now:

For the year 2016-7 Annual Income from Parliament74,962Specifically for her book51,250Other media income etc5,322.82Total declared income131,534.82

Traditionally anyone with an annual income of over £100,000 has been considered to be a millionaire. I did not use my position in parliament to increase my income.

I have been asked for sources for this. This BBC piece looks at how one should define rich. It was written in 2011 so the figures will be slightly out of date. There are perhaps 2 relevant pieces:
"In 1880 a rich person would have had £100,000 in assets or an income of £10,000 a year, he says. About a hundred people a year died leaving £100,000 and by 1910 this was 250 - "a microscopic fraction of the number of death…