Party Political Broadcast For The Conservative Party Narrated By Hrh...

[Mozz71]

That was pretty much useless wasn't it? All bullocks and bluster.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-50039587

[Mozz71]

Sorry, could a mod move this to News please?

[ToraToraTora]

no I think it's in the correct category.

[dannyk13]

Repost it yourself in news and a mod can remove this.

[gulliver1]

Complete waste of Tax Payers Money , just a manifesto for a party with NO Power .

[ABSpareEditor]

I have moved this thread into the category "News". Moderators do not have the ability to move threads into different categories.

[ichkeria]

Yes certainly a very odd time for a Queens Speech, with so many imponderables.
Budget on 6 November I hear ;-)

[Mozz71]

//I have moved this thread into the category "News". Moderators do not have the ability to move threads into different categories.//

Cheers Ed. Good to know.

[chrissa1]

Thus it ever was. Nothing new here.

[youngmafbog]

I'm not sure I see your point.

This has to be gone through no matter what Government and it is always rowlocks. Why did you even bother listening?

[AuntPollyGrey]

Mozz HRH has no say in the contents of the Queens Speech. She just has to read it, possible through gritted teeth, but that's her job!

[youngmafbog]

HRH won't read any of them through gritted teeth, she is the one Roayal to understand what being Royal invoves in this country.

[New Judge]

//Complete waste of Tax Payers Money//

Are you suggesting that, in order to save a few quid, we should simply dispense with the Opening of Parliament and the Queen's Speech, Gully? Do you understand how the UK's Constitution, and in particular the relationship between Parliament and the Monarch works? Or is this just another one of your inane "Aunt Sallys"?

[ToraToraTora]

well judge, I advise never to try and reason with an idiot.

[gulliver1]

16.31 this manifesto speech is just "FOOLS GOLD"

[gulliver1]

16.59, who left the tool shed door open?.

[ichkeria]

I think the point the OP is making is that, unlike a “normal” Queen’s Speech, which starts a new session of Parliament, often after an election, here is a government with no majority, claiming to want a general election and which will almost certainly face one weeks into the new Parliament.
Then there’s Brexit, which we don’t know if or how or when it is going to happen. Presumably these bills will effectively become part of the Tory party manifesto at that election.
Hence ...
The Speech was presumably the pretext for the original illegal prorogation, and the government is sticking to its guns. I suppose they don’t really have anything else to do. If the Speech is voted down, and it’s hard to see it not being, it will of course leave more time for, er, “other business” :-)

[gulliver1]

This speech is already dead in the water,
not even clear blue water can save it
The Cons are just moving the deck chairs around on The Titanic.

[New Judge]

//16.31 this manifesto speech is just "FOOLS GOLD"//

Very possibly. But how about answering my question. Better still, don't bother because I already know the answer.

Ikky, the prorogation was ruled unlawful, not illegal. There's quite a difference.

[ichkeria]

Ok NJ : tho leaving aside the fact that I don’t really see the difference (NO! please don’t!) my point wasn’t really concerned with that aspect primarily.
I just thought I’d throw it in :-)

[New Judge]

Illegal = against the law. Mr Johnson broke no laws.

Unlawful = (e.g.) excessive use of powers (which the court ruled Mr Johnson did. An easier example to grasp is "unlawful arrest". An arrest is unlawful if a police officer undertakes one when there was no lawful justification. The officer broke no law (so the arrest was not "illegal") but he exceeded his powers (so it was unlawful).