Queen's speech has a family friendly legislative order.

**nevosopelo** · 11th-May-2012

This week Queen's speech in the House of Lords gave the full legislative programme for the next run of Parliament law making. The speech itself, must be said, sounded like a grandmother reading her grandson christmas list.

Queen's speech 2012: main bills at a glance | Politics | guardian.co.uk

It is important for this forum that new laws are to be passed to give parents a strong commitment to family. Unfortunately, the speech was devoid of details of the new laws. Therefore, there is no choice but to speculate on what's coming for fathers from the government. It is well known that the PM. has a set of family friendly points the law has to meet, but is also known that the government is getting legal advice on how to strengthen the law, for the couples who splits up, so their children can have a strong relationship with both parents. There has been little info. on removing some of the laws that causes the split in the first place. Hence, next Parliament will be about tinkering with the rights of accesses to the children and not much else. Hopefully, that may change as the law making progresses. However, men should not hold their breath, it may take far longer than one session of Parliament to bring about any change.

NEVO

**felixblue** · 11th-May-2012

rubbish. by "family friendly", the statists mean "we will have more control on what families do, because we are the metaparents and we know best"..

**nevosopelo** · 11th-May-2012

Quote from felixblue

rubbish. by "family friendly", the statists mean "we will have more control on what families do, because we are the metaparents and we know best"..

If so, it will not be for long, predictions show that married families will be a small minority in a couple of decades. If true, whatever the new laws, it will apply to very few people.

NEVO

**Richard** · 11th-May-2012

And why the wait? We all know what needs to be done. When - or rather IF the atate gets round to the changes, our kids will be adults and half of us will be dead of old age.

Alas, its gonna take a couple more events like summer '11 before things change.

Amazing, decades of campaigning and NOTHING, a few petrol bombs and even the Queen praises fathers.

But as Felixblue says, its empty words. And judging by the enormous amounts of "Likes" he has received, his word is good

Still, the wind is blowing North, from the South Hundreds of protesters clash with police in Naples (VIDEO, PHOTOS) — RT

The alternative is well known, and coming from the East Bring Nazi to school day? SS lesson at Latvian nursery sparks controversy (VIDEO) — RT

**Celtic Druid** · 11th-May-2012

Regarding access to children, although improvements can certainly be made, judges already have at their disposal an array of powers to levy upon defiant mothers who don't comply with court orders. It's pointless bringing in a raft of new measures, if the current ones aren't being properly implemented by namby-pamby judges. You just end up with more burdensome legislation clogging up an already overbearing system and fewer fathers united with their kids. Good for lawyers though.

It seems that access to children is the only type of court order which the judiciary allows to be systematically flouted. I suspect that if men constituted the majority of primary parents (the non-floating vote), authorities would have no problem robustly enforcing any such orders!

**nevosopelo** · 12th-May-2012

Quote from Celtic Druid

Regarding access to children, although improvements can certainly be made, judges already have at their disposal an array of powers to levy upon defiant mothers who don't comply with court orders. It's pointless bringing in a raft of new measures, if the current ones aren't being properly implemented by namby-pamby judges. You just end up with more burdensome legislation clogging up an already overbearing system and fewer fathers united with their kids. Good for lawyers though.

It seems that access to children is the only type of court order which the judiciary allows to be systematically flouted. I suspect that if men constituted the majority of primary parents (the non-floating vote), authorities would have no problem robustly enforcing any such orders!

The hard fact is that the "array of powers to levy upon mothers" are utterly ignored because doing something about it will undermine the divorce business for those involved in family court. Only women do not mind to be solicitor's suckers, they will spend any amount to get the man they promise to love, thoroughly clean up of anything worthy.

NEVO