• House of Lords Reform: by Rex Poulton.

      0 comments

    Sir,
    The House of Lords Reform Bill is illegal and has no foundation in law whatsoever. The Coalition’s commitment to “bring forward proposals for a wholly or mainly elected upper chamber on the basis of proportional representation” is contrary to British Higher Law and the long established and accepted Constitutional arrangements of Parliament. These were laid down in law hundreds of years ago specifically to protect the people from despotic Government as is probable were the Bill ever to succeed. Let me explain.

    Since Edward Heath’s knowing and wilful deception and betrayal of Britain when he signed the 1972 European Communities Act, each and every British Government has been an unlawful assembly. His signature was null and void as are each of the EU Treaties signed since then. Britain is not actually part of the European Union at all. It never has been.
    More importantly still, his signature was a major act of High Treason (whose penalty is death by hanging – which he escaped) against the interests of Her Majesty, the inalienable rights at Common Law of each of her subjects and against the United Kingdom as a nation state. Every single member of parliament since then who did nothing to halt the charade is thus guilty of Compounding that Treason (life imprisonment), if not also of Misprision of Treason (same penalty) in knowing of it but doing nothing to stop it.
    This in turn means that every statute law passed since the early 70’s is null and void as every successive Government had no legal basis and the Royal Assent therefore, is considered not to have been applied. What Heath unwittingly did was to place every British parliament outside the law, thus of no legal effect.
    Moreover, since Parliament has not been constructed in line with the arrangements put in place by our forefathers, no bill passed in the Palace of Westminster since the 1911 Parliament Act has been legal. This is because of unlawful interference by the House of Commons in the Common Law cognisance of the House of Lords to conduct its business in its own way and to determine who sits in it.
    No foreign laws unilaterally imported by Parliament (EU or any other laws) have any effect in Britain whatsoever. The importation of foreign laws into England is an affront to the Honour and Dignity of Queen Elizabeth II as Queen of England. This is an Act of High Treason against Her Majesty and the English Constitution.
    The tripartite arrangement of Parliament (Monarch, Lords, Commons) was so designed in Constitutional Law as to prevent for all time, any unlawful power-grab by any person or persons against the wishes of the other parties to the tri-partite agreement. That law is Higher Law which can never be repealed impliedly or otherwise and will immediately strike down any conflicting statute. Thus, just as intended in those far off enlightened times, it will remain supreme, unalterable and in lawful force to the end of time. It is our Law.
    The Lords with their Letters Patent are there under Constitutional Law to assist the Crown by vetting all legislation put forward by the Commons. Only if it is in the best interests of the British people will it be referred to the Crown for further consideration and if appropriate, Royal Assent – otherwise it does not become law. Under the planned elected senate, such people’s protection will be removed and discarded. High Treason again.
    British Constitutional Law is extant and is Common Law which enshrines and protects the inalienable rights and privileges of the common people. To close the Lords and replace the House partially or otherwise with an elected senate is a political construct effectively to remove all political power to the Commons essentially for their own ends. THAT is not democracy, it is fascist dictatorship. And that is after all, why so much effort is being applied to make it happen. It is Sedition which at this level, is High Treason.
    It is the Common Law of England that each House in Parliament has total control over who sits in it and how it conducts its business. Neither House has lawful authority to interfere in the business of the other. To do so is High Treason as it is an attempt to subvert the lawful arrangement of Parliament, the English political process and thus to adversely effect the Crown and the rights and interests of the people – who are sovereign.
    When Tony Blair put through the 1999 House of Lords Act, it was ultra vires. He not only acted treasonously in wilfully subverting the Constitutional Law but he placed himself above Her Majesty and removed the Crown’s lawfully binding order upon the Lords to assist in advising the Monarch. This for Blair, was to imagine the death of Her Majesty as a Sovereign Queen and was a major act of High Treason contrary to the 1351 Treason Act and the Common Law of England. His 1999 Act was unlawful on three counts. First, it is treason. Second, it was illegal as it had originated from an unlawful assembly and third, because he had no authority in law whatsoever to attempt to alter the Upper Chamber.
    More recently, David Cameron and Nick Clegg seek closure of the House of Lords and its replacement with an elected senate. This too, is a major act of High Treason for the same three reasons. Under current law therefore, Blair, Cameron and Clegg are each guilty of these multiple acts of High Treason whose penalty is death by hanging. There are further instances recorded on TV video of treason being committed by Blair, Cameron and Clegg and their names top the growing list of those to be brought to account for their crimes when the country reverts to the people as it will.
    Though Parliament claims “Reform of the House of Lords has been on the agenda for over 100 years”, that does not make it right, acceptable or appropriate. Asquith’s Parliament Act in 1911 was itself treasonous because it removed the authority of the House of Lords to reject a bill thus interfering with the Common Law cognisance to conduct its own business according to its collective conscience. The Act was therefore null and void. Reform will not “increase the legitimacy of the House of Lords” as is falsely believed, but will make it accountable to the Commons for their own purposes. Far from being of any benefit to the British public, the whole idea of reform is a political pipedream of the Commons as history clearly shows and is entirely outside the law.
    The Commons are on an unlawful power grab. Any change to the House of Lords as originally intended, will result in an out-of-control Commons dictatorship (more so than we have already) and sidelining of the Crown as an effective part of British Government. Potentially, the Crown’s final removal will be the next step. Each of these is High Treason punishable by death at the will of the people. The British public are seething with anger. I just hope that all those who are guilty of the above will be able to come to terms with the consequences for their treachery that they have all brought upon themselves.
    Rex Poulton
    Salisbury
    British Gazette comment: Rex Poulton described the present legal situation very well. This is why the British Gazette has used the terms, “unlawful” and “masquerading as the government” in past articles. Precisely because of the situation so well described by Rex.
    Of course it begs the question, “What does one do about it?”
    There are those who argue that a legal challenge should be undertaken. This has been tried in the past and has failed. The reasons for the failure are obvious: the Judiciary are every bit as complicit s the Europhile politicians. It is the judges who have unlawfully upheld the treason that EU Directives should take precedence over English and Scottish Law. Asking such a judge to give a proper lawful judgement is to ask that judge to indict himself and his colleagues for High Treason. We are of course reminded by the well known words of Sir John Harington:
    “Treason doth never prosper: what’s the reason? Why, if it prosper, none dare call it treason.”
    Sir John Harington KB (4th August 1561 – 20th November 1612) of Kelston in Somerset was a courtier, author and the inventor of the flush toilet. He became a prominent member of Queen Elizabeth I’s court.

    Write a comment