This blithering idiot has stalled two eminently sensible bills apparently simply because he doesn’t like private members’ bills. If that’s correct, he’s an idiot.
The bills? One making upskirting illegal, the other making it an offence to attack police and prison service animals.
Guardian article here.
The bill about animals comes from a quirk of UK law which this bill was supposed to resolve. And I could understand if he had objected to the upskirting bill if it had not been gender neutral - jokes about what’s underneath kilts, anyone? But that does not seem to be the case.
BTW Parliamentary time is a big problem for bills like these and they can easily get lost through lack of it.
Can you explain what “private member’s bills” means to those of us with a slightly different governmental structure? Is it that some bills are sponsored by a party, and others by individuals?
Wait, we can punch police horses at the moment?
I’ve got a score to settle
What about this behaviour makes him a carp?
The first bill is definitely a private members bill, even if it weren’t sponsored by an individual!
Not a carp, a private member.
But the OP said he’s a “complete carp”.
Obviously, it’s meant to refer to any seafood product.
They are bills introduced to the UK Parliament by ordinary MPs rather than by the government. The lucky MPs are determined by random ballot. Very few become law - only those high up on the list have a real chance, and anything put in the way of a bill is likely its downfall due to limited Parliamentary time. Private member’s bills can also be a back way for a government to introduce some ‘quick fix’ legislation - the member gets persuaded to drop his or her pet bill in favour of some bit of legislation the government realises they need to enact.
Found the Irishman.