Rejected petition Issue Subpoena to YouTube for evidence we want access restoring for preparation of 20mph petitions
We want access to these privileged articles https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCxAJNxpbJFO6lQHvwH3g3wA
Example:
It was done for David Davis MP by a department or committee of GOV to restore his channel.
It is actually a core primary function of petition committees & GOV; Example Standing orders.
HOC petition committee powers
Standing order 145a(3)
(3) The committee shall have POWER to send for persons, papers & RECORDS, to adjourn from place to place & to report from time to time.
More details
The Parliamentary Papers Act 1840 was updated by Broadcasting act 1990 to include video and digital articles.
SENEDD standing orders 2025
23.6
A petition is not admissible if it:
(i) contains fewer than 250 signatures. We must have this published so that we can share it & collect the.signatures to get this actioned by one of the following
Which can be done.
Because you must understand that you dont just command documents TO yourselves, but TO the public or a section of the public. Release. Order to publish.
23.10
(i) refer the petition to the government, ANY other committee of the Senedd (Media or Transport) OR ANY OTHER PERSON OR body (who have POWER to call for documents & evidence, even a COURT or JUDGE for them to take such action! Read. Understand.
(ii) report to the Senedd; or
(iii) take ANY other action.
The responsible committee must notify the petitioner of any action taken under Standing Order 23.9.
So there plenty of scope for action for crucial requisition of documents
Why was this petition rejected?
It’s about something that the Senedd or Welsh Government is not responsible for.
This petition appears to be asking YouTube to do something. It concerns an issue for which a petition is not the appropriate channel.
We only reject petitions that don’t meet the petition standards
Rejected petitions are published in the language in which they were submitted