This renegotiation ‘thingy’ (2)

Apropos my first post today, below is a copy of the letter to which Sean O’Hare referred in his comment on John Redwood’s blog.

(click to enlarge)

Sean O’Hare’s letter was originally forwarded to Ken Clarke who seems to have passed it on to Mark Harper to respond. So Mark Harper believes that Parliament is the supreme legal authority in the UK – a statement which is in stark contrast with the opinion of the European Commission. As an aside it appears also that Magna Carta has been largely repealed – really?

If Magna Carta is considered to be part of the uncodified constitution of our nation; if Lord Denning considered it “the greatest constitutional document of all times – the foundation of the freedom of the individual against the arbitrary authority of the despot”; if Lord Woolf considered it the “first of a series of instruments that now are recognised as having a special constitutional status”; why is it that politicians have decided, by the second half of the 19th century, to repeal nearly all of its clauses in their original form and thus negate a document considered to have special constitutional status – and all without the express agreement of those they are meant to serve? Why is it that later politicians, who profess to believe in freedom of the individual, have made no attempt to reverse the decisions of those that have gone before?

If Magna Carta is of such importance that it is the foundation of the freedom of the individual against the arbitrary authority of the despot, then it sure ain’t had much effect on the aims of our ‘democratically elected despots”! For that reason it is imperative that our system of democracy is changed so that the political elite can be constrained in their lust for total power.

Digressing slightly, watching the Olympics (which I did say I would not do – but hey, how can one not watch someone excelling on behalf of your nation) what struck me was the fervour among the British people that their athletes generated. The challenge that ‘We of Harrogate’ face is instilling a similar fervour in the British people where the democracy and political system of our country is concerned. Politics Home summarizes an article by Sebastian Coe in The Times as: “An Olympics by the people, for the people”. What ‘We of Harrogate’ need to achieve is to instill in the people of Britain a sense of democracy and political system that is ‘by the people, for the people’.

Within emails sent to those who attended ‘Harrogate’ are some who believe that the EU is the ‘enemy’ who should be fought day and night – to whom I can but say: how shortsighted, how deluded. The ‘enemy’ are the 650 who we stupidly elect each 4/5 years, coupled with their sycophantic ‘2nd and 3rd XIs’ – the ‘enemy’ are already within our gates. It is important to recall that with any growth it is no use just cutting the foliage, until you remove the root anything else is a complete waste of time and effort. As Richard North has repeatedly stated, the only method by which they will be defeated is by the creation of a movement, one with ideas for change – a change that cannot fail to garner more and more popular support as its beliefs are made known.

Once again, just saying………..

22 Responses

  1. DP111 says:

    Is there any strategy to achieve what one may call the “Harrogate Agenda”?

    Short term goals – how to achieve them?

  2. Woodsy42 says:

    I agree with him – no parliament may bind its successor. Except that Magna Carta was not an act of parliament so is not theirs to repeal.

    • Yeah… Silly me, I should have read the comments first Woodsy42!

    • IanPJ says:


      Quite so. Magna Carta may not be repealed. The best that parliament may do, similarly with the Treason Laws, is to smother it by creating Statutes that hide it, temporarily change its meaning or cancel out the effects. Those Statutes however must be explicit in so doing, as a constitutional document may not be impliedly repealed in any way.

      The original documents and laws do not go away, they are merely hidden from use. When the Statute concerned expires or is amended or repealed, then the original meanings come back to life.

      I refer you to this post to assist in explaining.

      • david says:

        Thanks for the comment IPJ and Ihave suggested Sean O’Hare returns to read it and your kind link.

  3. Sean O'Hare says:


    Good question! The Chartists achieved success using the MSM. The Harrogate Agenda will have to rely on the this and other blogs.

    • david says:

      I will respond to other comments shortly but, initially, how we respond is by using technology. This is best explained by an old story:

      “I was visiting my son last night when I asked if I could borrow a newspaper. ‘This is the 21st century, old man,’ he said. ‘We don’t waste money on newspapers. Here, you can borrow my iPod.’

      I can tell you, that bloody fly never knew what hit it……”

  4. Magna Carta is the correct way to create a declaration of human rights, which is why the government has spent the last 800 years trying to hide it from view… However, as it was an agreement between the people (or an important segment of the people) and those that have set themselves up as rulers (by whatever means), there is nothing that our rulers can legally repeal without our say so… WHATEVER THEY MIGHT CLAIM.

    The whole point of such a document, is that it is beyond the reach of kings and prime mincers because it is directed AT THEM, it is a list of WHAT THEY CANNOT DO, as opposed to a “human rights declaration” which is framed by government and it tells the people WHAT THEY CAN DO… A completely different and odious thing.

    Anyway, I am sure we all know this…

  5. Robin says:

    Due To An Administrative Error .

    Who made the error ? How ?

    If anyone thinks this is unimportant , they dont deal enough with The Powers That Be .
    So the name . Position . Responsibility . ?

    • david says:

      Robin, I have been to bed and also partaken of a fair amount of ‘Scotland’s Finest’ -your comment re Who and How refers to…….?

  6. Robin says:

    Is that Dhalwhinnie stuff ?
    Seriously ,
    Who mislaid the correspondence ?

    Can we have democracy , direct,representative or whatever , if bureaucrats can play games ? And /or act in a conspiratorial fashion , roping in any elected person to pursue their own agenda ?
    It doesn`t even have to be a really sinister agenda , such as the FCO wanting us to be subsumed into the EU . Avoiding work that doesnt give them any benefits , or covering up their ineptitude are enough to to stymy democracy .

  7. david says:

    “Is that Dhalwhinnie stuff ? Seriously , Who mislaid the correspondence?”


    It matters not what bureaucrats/civil servants have as their agenda and thus attempt to ‘influence’ the political mind – if we the people don’t like the ideas being proposed we can call a halt.

    What is it about the basics of direct democracy that you do not understand?

    Apols if I have misunderstood your comment – suffered a self-inflicted surfeit of Scotlands Finest this evening…….

  8. Robin says:

    You cannot have proper democracy if public sevants sabotage the democratic process .
    How do you call a halt ?

    Again How do you call a halt ?

  9. david says:

    Robin, I will respond when I am more ‘capable’ – see comments on other posts regarding ‘Scotland’s Finest’ – but I have to say that initially you have not been following the discussion!

    ‘A demain’ as our nearest neighbours are wont to say…..

  10. Robin says:

    No Im not following the discussion . I`m adding to it an important bit about people power and direct democracy .
    It`s not just about “influence ” of politicians .
    Although , bye the bye , remember the saying He Who Has The Ear Of the Prince Becomes His Mouthpiece . An important aside to government .

    • david says:

      On the point about public servants having influence, I presume you are referring to civil servants, fake charities and the like.

      I can but repeat my previous argument that what exactly is the point of civil servants etc attempting to influence politicians with their ‘agendas’when, at the end of the day, they know the people can stop any measure they don’t like?

      If you care to provide an example of the scenario you fear we can take this discussion further.

      • Sean O'Hare says:


        I think Robin’s comment about an administrative error refers to the letter. I originally wrote to my MP on 29th November pointing out contradictions between the Constitution and EU Law. He responded on the 21st December informing me he had written to Ken Clarke for his opinion. That is the last I heard until Mark Harper’s letter arrived.

        I’m not really concerned with the delay and don’t think there is anything sinister about it.

        I haven’t actually replied as yet (they’re all away on holiday anyway!) so thanks to IPJ for the info regarding common law v statute. I shall make good use of it!

        • Robin says:

          Stuart maybe im misreading the delay in your correspondence with them , would anyone allow “admin error ” to be an innocent little thing within the private sector ?

      • Robin says:

        OK say we have direct democracy in that powers are taken away from the politicians .
        The people decide they want a particular policy pursued .
        Some within the UNELECTED part of the Powers That Be eg the civil service decide they know better .

        To give an example that is happening for real –

        the British Government (elected , and a replacement, elected ) has said that Romanians and Bulgarians cannot enter the UK and take up paid employment .
        Yet there are thousands of them doing just that . Not self employed (another scam perpetrated against us ) , but as employed with NI numbers .
        This is in direct contravention of the previous and present governments declared policy .
        Some civil servants within the system are sabotaging the democratic process .
        Why they are doing it ? Depends on the individuals concerned . Sometimes its because they consider they have high ideals and are more compassionate than the rest of us .Then there are other reasons all the way down to the fact they cant be bothered to apply themselves to their duty properly regardless off the effects on the nation .
        This is just one example .
        ( What sort of people do you think are in the educational establishment , not just the teachers ?)
        Is there anything to put a stop to this ?

        • david says:

          Yes! On immigration the rules are presently set by the EU. I say (and forget the EU factor for a moment) as sovereign people if we say no immigration then it is no immigration, period.

          Ah, I hear you say, but what about foreign students studying at uni? Unis are situated in counties and as education would be for the people in local counties to decide, so they can decide if they want their unis thrown open to all.

          You mention policies carried out by a government and followed by another and that one government cannot bind another. Under direct democracy that is all academic as it will be the people that decide what policies are permitted to become law.

          As I have responded elsewhere in the comments section, all this is a quantum leap and total change to what happens at present – but if people want control of their own lives then there is a price to pay and that is they need to start taking an interest in what is happening not only in their country, but also in their area.

Hosted By PDPS Internet Hosting

© Witterings from Witney 2012