INFORMATION

This website uses cookies to store information on your computer. Some of these cookies are essential to make our site work and others help us to improve by giving us some insight into how the site is being used. For further information, see our Privacy Policy. Continuing to use this website is acceptance of these cookies.

The Saatchi Bill

Any topic related to science can be discussed here.
Message
Author
User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24067
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: The Saatchi Bill

#41 Post by Alan H » February 28th, 2015, 10:54 pm

Latest post of the previous page:

I would trust nothing the Telegraph - the Bill's 'media partner' - or Nutt or Saatchi says, but:

Fury as Lib Dems kill off Saatchi Bill
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24067
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: The Saatchi Bill

#42 Post by Alan H » February 28th, 2015, 11:34 pm

Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24067
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: The Saatchi Bill

#43 Post by Alan H » March 6th, 2015, 3:12 pm

That should now be the end of it. No MP moved the Bill today, so (as I understand it) it is dead.



What a fucking waste of nearly 12 months opposing this bloody awful nonsense, promoted as it was by PR, spin and hype by Tory supporter and backer Lord Maurice Saatchi.

However, we have another prick of a Tory MP pronouncing that he - if re-elected - bring it back from the dead. We will be ready for it.

Why, oh why, won't politicians listen to what people who know what they are talking about tell them? There are real obstacles to innovation but Saatchi's pet theory wasn't one of them. It never was. What an absolute fucking waste.
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Dave B
Posts: 17809
Joined: May 17th, 2010, 9:15 pm

Re: The Saatchi Bill

#44 Post by Dave B » March 6th, 2015, 4:15 pm

What an absolute fucking waste.
That's politics for yer.
"Look forward; yesterday was a lesson, if you did not learn from it you wasted it."
Me, 2015

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24067
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: The Saatchi Bill

#45 Post by Alan H » March 11th, 2015, 1:17 pm

Watch the debate organised by HealthWatch UK:

The HealthWatch UK debate on the Medical Innovation Bill

You can see the top of my head in the audience...
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24067
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: The Saatchi Bill

#46 Post by Alan H » April 26th, 2015, 10:18 pm

We were at the QED Conference in Manchester this weekend and the Stop the Saatchi Bill campaign was shortlisted for the Skeptic Magazine's Ockham award in the Campaign/Event category.

We won!
Ockham Award.jpg
Ockham Award.jpg (121 KiB) Viewed 3199 times
This was truly a team effort - a team that consisted of several professors (medicine, science and law), several doctors, a QC, several lawyers, Nick Ross (the TV presenter), several bloggers and a few others! But even then, stopping the Saatchi Bill involved many others not part of our campaign directly - so we can't take all the credit! Others who campaigned against it included several of the medical Royal Colleges and in Parliament, some Lords and two MPs in particular: Dr Sarah Wollaston (Conservative MP for Totnes and a GP) and Dr Julian Huppert (Lib Dem MP for Cambridge and a scientist).

We now have two awards sitting side by side.
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24067
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: The Saatchi Bill

#47 Post by Alan H » April 26th, 2015, 11:10 pm

On the subject of QED, they do an into video each year. Here was Saturday's one:

Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Dave B
Posts: 17809
Joined: May 17th, 2010, 9:15 pm

Re: The Saatchi Bill

#48 Post by Dave B » April 27th, 2015, 9:17 am

:party:

Well done, those chaps, oh and chapesses of course!
"Look forward; yesterday was a lesson, if you did not learn from it you wasted it."
Me, 2015

Nick
Posts: 11027
Joined: July 4th, 2007, 10:10 am

Re: The Saatchi Bill

#49 Post by Nick » April 27th, 2015, 10:18 am

Well done indeed, Alan. :thumbsup:

Why, oh why, won't politicians listen to what people who know what they are talking about tell them?
Does that include economists...? :wink:

User avatar
Dave B
Posts: 17809
Joined: May 17th, 2010, 9:15 pm

Re: The Saatchi Bill

#50 Post by Dave B » April 27th, 2015, 10:51 am

Nick wrote:Well done indeed, Alan. :thumbsup:

Why, oh why, won't politicians listen to what people who know what they are talking about tell them?
Does that include economists...? :wink:
No, unless they are politically biased and motivted economists. Not sure who is lower these days, politicians or journalists. Economists come a tad higher than journalists IMHO.

Only a tad mind you. :D
"Look forward; yesterday was a lesson, if you did not learn from it you wasted it."
Me, 2015

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24067
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: The Saatchi Bill

#51 Post by Alan H » June 6th, 2015, 5:47 pm

What's this? Another Tory completely ignoring the evidence and relying on ill-informed dogma?

Yes, predictably, the Saatchi Bill is back. How else would the Tories repay him for getting them back into power without those pesky LibDems?

Maurice Saatchi’s Zombie Quack Bill To Be Rushed Through Parliament

Saatchi’s Bill could harm thousands

Saatchi's tag line and the title of his book is: 'Brutal simplicity of thought'. That, in just three (trade marked) words, shows up his inability to think.

I think the motto should instead be 'Brutally simplistic thoughtlessness'.

As HL Menken said (or rather usually paraphrased as):
For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong.
Saatchi is wrong. Very wrong.
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Dave B
Posts: 17809
Joined: May 17th, 2010, 9:15 pm

Re: The Saatchi Bill

#52 Post by Dave B » June 6th, 2015, 6:11 pm

Saatchi is wrong. Very wrong.
That counts for nothing when you have friends who put vested interests before the needs of the mere common people!
"Look forward; yesterday was a lesson, if you did not learn from it you wasted it."
Me, 2015

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24067
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: The Saatchi Bill

#53 Post by Alan H » October 9th, 2015, 11:40 pm

Call to action!

Please spread this far and wide and encourage friends and relatives to think about writing to their MP - we've tried to make it as easy as possible.

Read the blog post and this fact sheet:
2015-10-09_23h39_45.png
2015-10-09_23h39_45.png (102.01 KiB) Viewed 3093 times
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24067
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: The Saatchi Bill

#54 Post by Alan H » October 15th, 2015, 1:28 pm

Opposition is growing, but there's still time to contact your MP before tomorrow's second reading: Call to action!
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Dave B
Posts: 17809
Joined: May 17th, 2010, 9:15 pm

Re: The Saatchi Bill

#55 Post by Dave B » October 15th, 2015, 4:04 pm

Bit late but message on way,
"Look forward; yesterday was a lesson, if you did not learn from it you wasted it."
Me, 2015

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24067
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: The Saatchi Bill

#56 Post by Alan H » October 15th, 2015, 5:11 pm

Dave B wrote:Bit late but message on way,
Nor late at all!
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Dave B
Posts: 17809
Joined: May 17th, 2010, 9:15 pm

Re: The Saatchi Bill

#57 Post by Dave B » October 15th, 2015, 5:50 pm

Alan H wrote:
Dave B wrote:Bit late but message on way,
Nor late at all!
Thought it said the reading was tomorrow (?)
"Look forward; yesterday was a lesson, if you did not learn from it you wasted it."
Me, 2015

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24067
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: The Saatchi Bill

#58 Post by Alan H » October 15th, 2015, 6:05 pm

Dave B wrote:
Alan H wrote:
Dave B wrote:Bit late but message on way,
Nor late at all!
Thought it said the reading was tomorrow (?)
Did you send it by post? I assumed email.
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Dave B
Posts: 17809
Joined: May 17th, 2010, 9:15 pm

Re: The Saatchi Bill

#59 Post by Dave B » October 15th, 2015, 6:13 pm

Alan H wrote:
Dave B wrote:
Alan H wrote: Nor late at all!
Thought it said the reading was tomorrow (?)
Did you send it by post? I assumed email.
Sent it via tye link-link. But if reading tomorrow what is the chance of him seeing my message before the vote? I will just be one of lots thst his staff may get round to sorting sometime.
"Look forward; yesterday was a lesson, if you did not learn from it you wasted it."
Me, 2015

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24067
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: The Saatchi Bill

#60 Post by Alan H » October 17th, 2015, 12:19 am

The second reading of Chris Heaton-Harris's version of the Saatchi Bill was today. The Bill passed 31 to 19. I'm pleased to say that our MP voted against it.

I was put today so only watching it now. I'm 90 minutes in with another two hours to go. I may have lost the will to live by the end.

However, the speeches by its supporters (so far, CHH himself and Philip Davies) are god-awful, mind-numbingly mind-numbing, ignorantly ignorant, stupefyingly stupid... They really have no grasp whatsoever on reality, never mind science, medicine and research and think they know more and better than all the medical Royal Colleges, the Academy of Medical Research Charities (which speaks for all the major research charities) and everyone else who oppose it. It is arrogant beyond arrogance. Their grasp of argumentation and logical fallacies is non-existent.

The two notable exceptions to this are Heidi Alexander, Shadow Health Secretary, and Dr Sarah Wollaston whose contributions are superb and knowledgeable.

Are all debates on legislation this mind-numbingly bad? If so, I fear for democracy than ever.

Perhaps we should have a version of Tam Dalyell's West Lothian Question: those with no science, medicine or research understanding should not be allowed to speak or vote on Bills such as this.

If you really want to, you can watch it here or read it here.
Last edited by Alan H on October 17th, 2015, 11:25 am, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Edited to give the permanent Hansard url.
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24067
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: The Saatchi Bill

#61 Post by Alan H » November 1st, 2015, 10:21 pm

Please drop a short email to your MP! Follow the money
We need you to email your MP again, this time asking him/her to turn up for the Money Resolution on Tuesday and ask the Bill’s supporters why they want to waste precious public money on a database that will not and cannot produce any innovation and why they want to increase NHS litigation costs.

We only have 24 hours to do this so please do it now: we need to make sure that the Money Resolution is defeated on Tuesday, ensuring that public money is not available to fund this dangerous and unnecessary Bill.
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

Post Reply