Day: September 3, 2019

Question for @Greens @AustralianLabor

Advertisements

Philip Allott: The Legality of a No-Deal Brexit Could Be Challenged

UK Constitutional Law Association

It may be that there is no such thing as a date of 31 October 2019 for a no-deal UK withdrawal from the EU.  On 9 April 2019, according to Le Monde, Michel Barnier, chief negotiator for the European Council in the withdrawal negotiations with the UK, said: ‘The EU will never take a decision on a ‘no deal’. That will be a choice for the British.’

On 10 April, the European Council adopted a very obscure decision.  ‘In response [to a British request], the European Council agrees to an extension to allow for the ratification of the Withdrawal Agreement.  Such an extension should last only as long as necessary to allow for the ratification of the Withdrawal Agreement and, in any event, no longer than 31 October 2019.  If the Withdrawal Agreement is ratified by both parties before this date, the withdrawal will take place on the first…

View original post 954 more words

Gun Register Will Fail at First Shot

One Sock: Heather Roy's Blog

Heather Roy

28 July 2019

Registers and health screening programmes have two things in common.  First, they both cost a lot to establish and administer.  Second, they are both effective only when compliance is at or very close to 100 percent. It follows then that excellent compliance should be assured before a gun register is put in place. Are the gangs really going to register their weapons, having already refused to surrender those that have been banned? Of course not. And having aggravated the rural community and law abiding gun owners the government should expect civil disobedience from many. An effective, well-functioning register needs buy-in. The $42 -$52 million cost of a gun register quoted by Police Minister Stuart Nash is taxpayer money down the gurgler.

Monday’s announcement by the Prime Minister about changes to gun licencing (gun owners will likely pay 2-3 times more for half the preseent licence…

View original post 630 more words

80 years today since we entered World War Two

croaking cassandra

It is eighty years today since New Zealand declared war on Germany, joining the United Kingdom in responding to the unprovoked aggression of the German invasion of Poland.  Until just now, glancing at one of the government historical websites, this statistic hadn’t occurred to me

New Zealand was involved for all but three of the 2179 days of the war — a commitment on a par only with Britain and Australia.

It is estimated that 11928 New Zealanders died in the course of that conflict, a death rate (per million population) higher than in any other Commonwealth country.  Dreadful as the war was, it still strikes me as something closer to a just war (for our side) than most other conflicts in modern history –  although, of course, the counterfactual is unknowable.

Back in the very early days of this blog, I wrote a short post on some aspects…

View original post 1,067 more words

On The Level: Why Unreliable Wind & Solar Increase Power Prices

STOP THESE THINGS

The relationship between rocketing power prices and chaotically intermittent wind and solar is crystal clear. Let’s call it Germany, Denmark and South Australia, where wind and solar obsessions have driven power prices into orbit.

While RE zealots continue to chant the mantra that wind and solar are practically free, and getting cheaper all the time, the reality is that the cost of their collective chaos is born by the generation system as a whole, principally those readily dispatchable sources, coal, gas and nuclear.

As detailed by Tom Stacy and George Taylor in their study of the US experience (summarised below with the full paper linked below that) adding intermittent wind and solar to your grid is a guarantee of spiralling power prices.

The Levelized Cost of Electricity from Existing Generation Resources
Institute for Energy Research
Tom Stacy and George Taylor
June 2019

Introduction

In this report, we analyze publicly available…

View original post 562 more words

This prorogation is improper: the government should reverse it

The Constitution Unit Blog

meg_russell_2000x2500.jpgalan.jfif (1)professor_hazell_2000x2500_1.jpgBoris Johnson’s prorogation announcement has generated widespread criticism, and will be hotly debated when MPs return today from their summer break. Meg Russell, Alan Renwick and Robert Hazell argue that the decision to suspend parliament for five weeks was an improper use of executive power, sets dangerous precedents, and undermines fundamental principles of our constitution. It should therefore not proceed. MPs may seek to block it, and so may the courts, but the preferable route would be for the government to recognise its mistake and reverse it.

MPs return to Westminster today after the five-week summer recess in deeply unusual and worrying circumstances. Last week Prime Minister Boris Johnson, who has faced just one day of parliamentary scrutiny since taking office on 24 July, triggered a prorogation of parliament, set to last another five weeks. Particularly given the Brexit deadline of 31 October, this has caused widespread consternation: among…

View original post 2,246 more words

The New Gay Conversion Therapy?

Gender Abolitionist

Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity. 

Let me state, for the record, I don’t believe anyone has an innate “Gender Identity”.  Gender is a social construct, super-imposed on biological sex to uphold Patriarchal structures.

Gendered expectations  limit and constrain women whilst grooming boys to occupy a dominant role, as men.  Historically, feminists made a distinction between “sex” and “gender” to deconstruct, biologically determinist,  theories of sex differences.  It was never a radical feminist position  that women, or men, were born with a “natural” gender.  (Note to evolutionary biologists. I am not a proponent of blank slate theory.  I am, however, wary when biology is used to justify women’s position in the sex hierarchy).  Feminists dispute that gendered roles  are a natural, inevitable, consequence of our biology. Our Gendered role is distinct from our Biological Sex.

Gender versus Sex discourse is now distorted into the antithesis of a feminist analysis…

View original post 1,882 more words

Boris the maestro

Boris is playing his opponents like puppets on a string.

Point of Order

Pity Boris Johnson’s opponents.  They don’t seem to be thinking as far ahead as he is. Their latest plan is to introduce emergency legislation to the UK Parliament to delay Brexit beyond 31 October.  First, he gave them the narrowest of windows to do this, before Parliament is prorogued next week. Now – the day before they hope to introduce a bill – he appeals to the public.

It’s deft work after the bumbling PR of Theresa May’s administration.  But he has accepted that he is running what is essentially a minority administration and is using that against the opposition.

View original post 335 more words

The Man Who Would Be Queen: Michael Bailey {Part One}

Gender Abolitionist

Part 1: The Controversy.

Having seen many references to this book I have, finally,  got around to reading it.  It doesn’t take a strictly biologically determinist or a social constructionist stance. It is sympathetic to gay and trans rights.  {Though not in ways likely to satisfy Trans Activists, in 2019}. There is plenty to disagree with, for one,  I think the cover was needlessly tabloid.  However it’s  well worth a read and, finally, I understand the acronym MWWTBQ. Bailey talks about erotic motivations for transition, why feminine gay males are in danger of being, wrongly, diagnosed as “trans”, and why gay males reject their feminine brothers.   All topics deeply unpopular in some sections of the Trans community and with *some* gay males. Hence  why it feels necessary to discuss the controversy, prior to discussing the book itself.

The book had sold only 4000 copies,  when it…

View original post 909 more words