I will continue to be forthright about bad ideas.
As will Jennifer Eccles.
Gransnet forums
News & politics
This is one of many reasons why so many people marched in London.
(156 Posts)Another dangerous illegal immigrant being housed courtesy of the British tax payer.
Abdelrahmen Abouelela was in a bomb making cell in Egypt, they were planning terrorist attacks.
He found his way to Turkey where he now has a wife and child.
He left them and arrived illegally in the UK
Home Office officials spent 17 months pondering over whether or not to grant his asylum application, despite apparently knowing of his bomb-making conviction, before he raped the vulnerable woman in Hyde Park last November.
17 months to decide if should be granted asylum……this should have taken 17 seconds and now a poor woman has been raped.
I would love to know how much this man will have cost us by the time he ends his prison sentence then approaches the ECHR and will no doubt avoid deportation.
I agree JenniferEccles, we are supposed to keep out rapists and criminals, yet here he is.
I will continue to be forthright about bad ideas.
Caleo
JenniferEccles
Meanwhile we currently have a certain US President here who must be absolutely appalled at our inability to protect our borders.
I know he is universally hated on here but I still maintain we need a leader here like him who Gets Things Done.Is your contribution usually so simplistic?
How rude! Weren't you taught if you can't say something nice, say nothing at all.
Caleo
The long time it has taken to examine the case of a refugee is the opposite of shameful. I am proud of my country that it has fair laws and moral justice system.
I am also proud of the King and Queen that they help so efficiently and thoughtfully with a very difficult diplomatic situation.
JenniferEccles
Meanwhile we currently have a certain US President here who must be absolutely appalled at our inability to protect our borders.
I know he is universally hated on here but I still maintain we need a leader here like him who Gets Things Done.
Is your contribution usually so simplistic?
The long time it has taken to examine the case of a refugee is the opposite of shameful. I am proud of my country that it has fair laws and moral justice system.
It is rarely done but it can be done and could be done if Reform tried to rip up the HRA.
That would be dependent on whether they tried to do it through primary or secondary legislation.
If it's primary legislation and in the manifesto what could the Lords do then?
JenniferEccles
I enlarged your message to me Whitewavemark2 to see if you had put a smiling face in agreement with me!!
😄😄 you should know better than that!
Yes they can.
The Parliament Acts of 1911 and 1949, establishing the ultimate supremacy of the Commons, do not apply to secondary legislation. The Lords can kill an SI with a Fatal Motion. It ends the Parliamentary legislation process and forces the government to start again if they wish to re-introduce legislation. It is rarely done but it can be done and could be done if Reform tried to rip up the HRA.
www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/article/comment/fatal-power-lords
MaizieD
keepingquiet
What does this have to do with the march on London? I thought that was a peaceful demonstation of great British values or something?
Not to do with terrorism? Maybe I'm mistaken...It's to do with racism. Which is under debate on this thread.
(I suspect we've moved on from arguing the 'peacefulness' or otherwise of the march.)
No not racism but anti illegal immigration.
I'm not sure I would take Rees Mogg's word on constitutional matters, PaynesGrey. The Lords can only delay. They can't prevent.
I enlarged your message to me Whitewavemark2 to see if you had put a smiling face in agreement with me!!
Indeed. The sudden withdrawal of the Winter Fuel Payment last year was an example of hasty secondary legislation using a a Statutory Istrument . But look at the uproar over that and the damage that has done to the Labour Government even though they have now made, if not a U turn, at least a J turn.
The Lords could have overturned the SI last September. Baroness Ros Altmann did try with a Fatal Motion but it is not the policy of a party’s peers to vote against what has been passed by its MPs. Thus we saw Lords, who I would regard as socialists, voting against Altmann's motion.
Here’s where Farage would be scuppered. What Reform doesn’t have are any peers to support them in this way.
Rees Mogg at the Reform Conference said they would need to appoint 500 new Reform peers. Where would they find them? Even if they could find 500 names to nominate they would have to get past the vetting of the Appointments Committee. I can’t see it happening with its current composition - a chair who saw most of her family wiped out in the Holocaust and a committee member who is very hot on DEI. Trying to stuff the Lords with Reform peers in order to rip up the Human Rights Act isn’t going to cut any ice.
keepingquiet
What does this have to do with the march on London? I thought that was a peaceful demonstation of great British values or something?
Not to do with terrorism? Maybe I'm mistaken...
It's to do with racism. Which is under debate on this thread.
(I suspect we've moved on from arguing the 'peacefulness' or otherwise of the march.)
Sarnia
JenniferEccles
Meanwhile we currently have a certain US President here who must be absolutely appalled at our inability to protect our borders.
I know he is universally hated on here but I still maintain we need a leader here like him who Gets Things Done.Absolutely. Faults a-plenty but Donal Trump Loves America and will always put it first.
I wonder if you can explain why a President who 'loves America' is putting thousands of US citizens out of work, has raised the cost of living for them by imposing tariffs on imports, is allowing Medicaid to be cut, leaving poor US citizens without access to health care, is allowing the country to become vulnerable to environmental disasters by cutting funding to deal with them, and other anti the nation's wellbeing actions which I'm sure other posters will contribute?
Can you explain how all this shows his love of America? What will it all achieve?
(And, incidentally, he is only president of part of 'America', a good part of the continent comprises many other countries over which he has no control)
What does this have to do with the march on London? I thought that was a peaceful demonstation of great British values or something?
Not to do with terrorism? Maybe I'm mistaken...
PaynesGrey
You must have a fundamental lack of understanding of how Parliamentary process works if you think that Farage will get anything done. Fortunately, it take more than a Sharpie pen.
Oh, I don't know. We may not have 'Executive Orders' but we have Henry VIII clauses and Statutory Instruments. Given some extremely vaguely worded or detail free legislation these little instruments can be used to great advantage. And if something is in the manifesto the government was elected on the House of Lords can't even delay it.
Lawyer David Allen Green is certain that our Constitution could easily be used for any purpose by a government with a sufficient majority (I wish our current one would take note)
I got Chatgtp to precis it for me but the whole is worth reading
Start
Green argues that the UK’s constitutional system is vulnerable: a sufficiently radical, illiberal government could accumulate unchecked, near-absolute power. Existing legal and political safeguards are weak and likely inadequate to restrain such a government.
davidallengreen.com
Key Arguments
Structural Weaknesses
The UK lacks a codified constitution. Power is not defended by a single overriding document but by conventions, statutes, judicial review, and institutional norms.
davidallengreen.com
Because many constraints are customary or based on precedent rather than entrenched legal rules, they can be altered or ignored by political actors with enough will.
davidallengreen.com
Precedent of Overreach and “Only Good Fortune”
Green suggests that past governments have pushed constitutional boundaries more than might be noticed, but have been restrained in practice by political opposition, civil society, or books of habit. If those brakes failed (or if the government is more radical), the system could tilt.
davidallengreen.com
He emphasises that what has prevented worse outcomes historically has often been “good fortune” rather than strong structural checks.
davidallengreen.com
Paths to Absolute Power
Through control of Parliament (especially with a strong majority), altering or repealing laws that protect liberties or institutional checks.
davidallengreen.com
Through politicising or undermining independent institutions (courts, the civil service, regulatory bodies) that might act as barriers.
davidallengreen.com
Through attacks on transparency, accountability, and the rule of law—if the government limits judicial review, weakens legal protections, or reduces oversight.
davidallengreen.com
Comparison with Other Systems
Green compares the UK constitution to others (implicitly to the US) and suggests that the UK’s lack of entrenched checks makes it potentially more fragile against an illiberal takeover.
davidallengreen.com
Warnings & Implications
It’s not a prediction that all upcoming governments will become illiberal in this way. Rather, it's a warning that if a government with radical or illiberal objectives comes to power, it has the tools to remould the constitutional order.
davidallengreen.com
The piece suggests that citizens, institutions, and legal frameworks should pay attention now: to reinforce norms, safeguard institutions, and consider what legal reforms (e.g. entrenching some rights) might be needed to prevent abuses.
davidallengreen.com
Implicit Assumptions & Critiques
Assumes that a government with illiberal intent will have not just electoral power but also control of Parliament and sufficient obedience (party discipline etc.).
Assumes that civil society, media, and courts, which have so far acted as de facto checkers, might be compromised, co-opted, or rendered ineffective under a more radical government.
The piece doesn’t deeply model what popular resistance might do, or times when international or legal constraints (e.g. treaties, human rights laws) could pose obstacles.
End
davidallengreen.com/2025/08/yes-an-incoming-illiberal-and-radical-uk-government-would-have-absolute-constitutional-power/#respond
You must have a fundamental lack of understanding of how Parliamentary process works if you think that Farage will get anything done. Fortunately, it take more than a Sharpie pen.
JenniferEccles
Meanwhile we currently have a certain US President here who must be absolutely appalled at our inability to protect our borders.
I know he is universally hated on here but I still maintain we need a leader here like him who Gets Things Done.
Absolutely. Faults a-plenty but Donal Trump Loves America and will always put it first.
JenniferEccles
Meanwhile we currently have a certain US President here who must be absolutely appalled at our inability to protect our borders.
I know he is universally hated on here but I still maintain we need a leader here like him who Gets Things Done.
🙄
Meanwhile we currently have a certain US President here who must be absolutely appalled at our inability to protect our borders.
I know he is universally hated on here but I still maintain we need a leader here like him who Gets Things Done.
Sources:
BBC News, Evening Standard, Telegraph, GB News
“Even the worst people deserve a legal defence.”
But I believe he will go.
Deportation is automatically attached to the sentence and his family are not here.
As someone said upthread, doing away with the Human Rights Act harms us all.
There is no doubt the government should address public unrest about such concerns as the OP 's.
These concerns should addressed with understanding and suitable language; not only the particular case of Abdelrahmen Abouelela but general unrest.
Join the conversation
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join the discussion, watch threads and lots more.
Register now »Already registered? Log in with:
Gransnet »