Following on from another thread.
Local councils and government don't see clubs as an essential part of a lifestyle choice, either business wise, socially, or in any other way.
But if you had to fight your case as to how important they are to help a club re-open, what would be your positive evidence and how would you put your case across to the powers that be to support their and yours lifestyle choice? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
We don't go to clubs but the best course of action would be point out that
Secondary legislation introduced by the Government purportedly under The Health Protection (Control of Disease) Act 1984 ("the 1984 Act") is ultra vires;
That those same regulations disproportionately breach various rights of individuals and businesses contrary to the Human Rights Act 1998 ("the HRA") which incorporates the European Convention on Human Rights ("the Convention");
That by imposing on itself five tests for varying or terminating the restrictions contained in the regulations it introduced under the 1984 Act, the Government has fettered its discretion and failed to take into account a range of other important factors which ought to mitigate in favour of relaxing or terminating those restrictions; and
the Government's decision or direction to close social clubs, to which people can make their own judgement to attend (or not) in March should be quashed.
Easily sorted once you stand up for your loss of human rights.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
 |
By *tasiaCouple
over a year ago
West Bromwich |
"We don't go to clubs but the best course of action would be point out that
Secondary legislation introduced by the Government purportedly under The Health Protection (Control of Disease) Act 1984 ("the 1984 Act") is ultra vires;
That those same regulations disproportionately breach various rights of individuals and businesses contrary to the Human Rights Act 1998 ("the HRA") which incorporates the European Convention on Human Rights ("the Convention");
That by imposing on itself five tests for varying or terminating the restrictions contained in the regulations it introduced under the 1984 Act, the Government has fettered its discretion and failed to take into account a range of other important factors which ought to mitigate in favour of relaxing or terminating those restrictions; and
the Government's decision or direction to close social clubs, to which people can make their own judgement to attend (or not) in March should be quashed.
Easily sorted once you stand up for your loss of human rights.
"
Wow....a post on Fab that backs up what they say with law and references.
Thank you.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"We don't go to clubs but the best course of action would be point out that
Secondary legislation introduced by the Government purportedly under The Health Protection (Control of Disease) Act 1984 ("the 1984 Act") is ultra vires;
That those same regulations disproportionately breach various rights of individuals and businesses contrary to the Human Rights Act 1998 ("the HRA") which incorporates the European Convention on Human Rights ("the Convention");
That by imposing on itself five tests for varying or terminating the restrictions contained in the regulations it introduced under the 1984 Act, the Government has fettered its discretion and failed to take into account a range of other important factors which ought to mitigate in favour of relaxing or terminating those restrictions; and
the Government's decision or direction to close social clubs, to which people can make their own judgement to attend (or not) in March should be quashed.
Easily sorted once you stand up for your loss of human rights.
"
Only issue with that is that we will soon no longer be part of the court of european rights. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"We don't go to clubs but the best course of action would be point out that
Secondary legislation introduced by the Government purportedly under The Health Protection (Control of Disease) Act 1984 ("the 1984 Act") is ultra vires;
That those same regulations disproportionately breach various rights of individuals and businesses contrary to the Human Rights Act 1998 ("the HRA") which incorporates the European Convention on Human Rights ("the Convention");
That by imposing on itself five tests for varying or terminating the restrictions contained in the regulations it introduced under the 1984 Act, the Government has fettered its discretion and failed to take into account a range of other important factors which ought to mitigate in favour of relaxing or terminating those restrictions; and
the Government's decision or direction to close social clubs, to which people can make their own judgement to attend (or not) in March should be quashed.
Easily sorted once you stand up for your loss of human rights.
Only issue with that is that we will soon no longer be part of the court of european rights. "
No we will still be members of human right act, this is separate from Brexit |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
