Apologies

Apologies for the lack of posts lately. Most of the committee have had their penultimate exam this morning and we have our final one in Classical Political Thought tomorrow morning at 9:30, and then we are free for four months!!!

 And your normal high quality service of stimulating debate will continue.

:-) Please stay with us

Alan Johnson. Tosser

   

Clearly, some politicians think we’re completely stupid.

According to the Daily Mirror, Peter Hain is partial to the NEW Manic Street Preacher’s album. Hmm, possibly.

Hilary Benn head-bangs to the Killers. Doubtful.

But Alan Johnson has really excelled himself. Does he really believe that his sad, pathetic attempt to ingratiate himself with youth culture will convince anyone?

Does this 57 year old man really expect us to believe that his ipod playlist includes The Kooks, Ron Sexsmith, Arcade Fire, The Zutons and Super Furry Animals?

It sounds ridiculous.

In these more enlightened times he will not be reproached if he comes out of his closet and admits to a preference to 70s prog rock; Emerson Lake and Palmer, Uriah Heep, Yes, etc… Even perhaps a certain fondness for glam rock; Sweet, Mud, Gary Glitter (perhaps not that enlightened).

I for one would certainly have found this collection of rock gods far more believable and dignified.

Good God, even Hazel Blears, who’s supposed to be so on message that there are rumours her pager has been surgically inserted into her brain, at least had the dignity to chose more believable choices; Motown, Van Morrison.

Alan, don’t be ashamed. Don’t severe your remaining links with your postman past. Play your vinyl with pride. Our votes will not be bought by your glance at the itunes top ten.

Graham Brady – ‘A man of principle’, or a bit of a Prat?

Put frankly, I am not in the slightest bit impressed by the resignation of Shadow Europe Minister Graham Brady, and I will gladly tell you why. Yes, I concede that it was more than likely that the minister in question ‘jumped before he was pushed’ – especially considering reports that he would be dropped in the summer reshuffle – but this is in no way indicative of an attempt by David Cameron to stifle the debate over grammar schools, nor to ruthlessly suppress dissent; such suggestions are juvenile at best…

Moreover, Mr. Brady is quite undeserving of the labels of being ‘honourable’ and ‘principled’ that have been lavished upon him. As I doubt very much that his impending removal from the Shadow front bench was due to his ‘fierce’ opposition to the recently announced education policy, or for that matter his attempts to ‘reopen the debate’ as certain pundits have suggested, but more his sheer incompetence.

Let us place this in perspective; he effectively tried to provide unequivocal evidence for the continuing relevance of grammar schools by demonstrating the 7% difference between the ability of pupils to attain five A*-C GCSE passes in areas dominated by grammar schools, and in those that are not - data that incidentally only made it to page six of the Times, not exactly groundbreaking. Surely the most obvious explanation for such statistics is that areas in which grammar schools are situated are far more affluent; affluence (as David Willets rightly identified) being highly significant to academic achievement! It is precisely this lack of ability that makes me quite relieved that Brady has resigned – particularly considering the complexity of the situation that we face in Europe.

There is certainly a meaningful debate to be had over academic selection, but Graham Brady made no potential contribution to it.

P.S:  I wonder what would have happened had we realised the significance of David Willets’ remarks on grammar schools when we met him last… the mind boggles…   

Funny YouTube Video #12

Funny YouTube Video #11

MOSCOW VIOLENCE

Yesterday, a group of a few dozen individuals was attacked in Moscow, Russia. Why? As incredulous as it may sound, the gay-rights group, which included British human rights campaigner Peter Tatchell, and a few West-European politicians, were attempting to deliver a petition to the Mayor of Moscow demanding the most basic right to march. Quite why they wanted to petition a Mayor who regards homosexuality as “satanic” is beyond me, but hey, that’s their right! Or not. What resulted was a clash between these few individuals and a group of some far-right yobs. Peter Tatchell was just one among many victims, receiving a nasty punch to the head.

Now, if Russian politicians (or even the people) do not want to grant these rights, then whilst it is clearly not the most desirable set of circumstances, it is at least democracy (or close enough)! What is not acceptable, however, is for the Russian authorities to allow these campaigners to be exposed to the levels of violence seen yesterday. One campaigner cried, “where are the police? Why aren’t they protecting us?” Mr. Tatchell was heard shouting, “someone protect me!” after being hit. This is a truly tragic state of affairs to be occuring in one of the world’s most well-known capital cities. Shouts of ‘death to homosexuals’ should surely have been met with arrests on charges of incitement of violence and hatred, although I am no expert on what Russian law permits. One police spokesman, in demonstrating a despicable height of ignorance, claimed that the campaigners were attempting to “exploit the theme of human rights.” Fiddlesticks!

Despite the niggles that some people have with Peter Tatchell (perhaps understandably), he should be admired, and his steadfast efforts to emancipate the oppressed people around the world celebrated! With many members of the gay community here in Birmingham presumably taking part in the Gay Pride celebrations in the city this weekend, it provides a stark contrast with the disgraceful scenes that have taken place in Moscow. Russia certainly did show herself off yesterday in some of her finest colours… Alas, they were not rainbow ones.

A Slippery Slope: Stop and Question Powers.

The Government in the aftermath of its embarrassment about restraining orders is considering new anti terror powers one of these potentially could be the power for police to stop and question anyone anytime about their identification and Movements. This I think is symptomatic of the slippery slide we are increasingly falling down in this country where civil liberties are slowly eroded because of a perpetuated fear.

Tony Blair when writing about these criticisms of terror legislation said that this was “ symptomatic of a society that placed civil liberties above protection from terrorism”. This is a mistake. The problem with the new extended powers is that they could be used on those who are not terrorists. Police would need no suspicion to stop you. I do not trust the police enough to believe that this would be used correctly on the streets.

Furthermore I do not see it as my duty to society to justify my movements and identity to a police officer on their whim. This Government is starting to over react to terrorism and what it should be focusing on more is directed intelligence against those who are suspected not a flat rule for all. This in combination with other seemingly small changes or erosions creates in the end a significant change in our rights.

We need to face up to terrorism, but what is this government doing about the long term cause of it, how is it addressing it in schools, how is it regulating faith schools this government seems o be taking a one pronged approach. I am not advocating a softly softly approach to terrorism, and those who have significant evidence against them should have that presented to a court and tried. I do not however trust the government enough for them to create powers that could be used against me. If there needs to be no suspicion for a stop and question what stops a police officer stopping someone because of his own prejudices?

A better funding intelligence service, quicker trials, a broader educational approach and maintaining the values that Government claim to defend for us against terrorism are our best hope. I do not want to live in a country where I can be stopped without reason. We all need to assess whether by the end of all this new legislation whether what is left will be worth defending.

I accept that it is not bad now, but I think we could be entering a phase of Government where our rights and freedoms are challenged so be aware you have been warned.

Home soon for Alan Johnston?

My apologies for not blogging in such a long time – the exam period makes it a bit more challenging to keep up with current affairs as a constant cycle of revision seems to replace it! However, as exams are easing off a bit now, I ve no doubt there will be a flurry of exciting blogs and new information to get involved in…

The story of Alan Johnston, the BBC reporter has been in the press for several months now as his abduction in Gaza City on the 12th March this year caused widespread concern for his safety and sparked a number of human rights campaigns and online petitions for his safe return. The story particularly caught my eye this morning as there is a possibility that Alan will soon be released according to Gazi Hamad, a Palestinian government spokesman and member of Hamas who is working to release Alan as soon and as safely as possible.

Yet is this just more talk and no action from government officials in Palestine? Since his abduction there has been barely any news about Alan Johnston at all – not even information or evidence he is still alive. Despite Hamad stating that he is safe and well, the situation clearly concerns those close to him at home.  Video tapes allegedly made by the kidnappers show only his BBC identity card and as he was held up at gunpoint whilst driving back from work, there are fears for his safety.

It is an absolute outrage. Here we have a man living in Gaza as the only reporter from the Western world, in order to do his job and provide sound news coverage for the BBC and effectively working for the people in Gaza too. Yet now he is being used as a pawn in certain Muslim conquests, as the same video tape demands the release of Muslim prisoners from prisons in the UK.

I realise that Alan Johnston is certainly not the first journalist or for that matter any member of British services to be kidnapped and treated in this way and he probably will not be the last, but it does raise the point that the government in this country seem to have little control over his release. Both Tony Blair and United Nations Secretary General, Ban Ki-moon have already called for his immediate release, but this clearly has had no effect on those holding Alan hostage. I would like to ask if the British government should be doing more? Is it possible for them to do anymore? Despairingly it seems at the moment that the fate of Alan Johnston is in the hands of his kidnappers.

If you would like to show your support for Alan Johnston or join the 100,000 who have already signed the online petition for his release, click on the link below.

Desmond Tutu: a sane voice.

Archbishop Tutu has finally broke the chronic and painful silence on the Gay issue and other issues affecting the global communion. This is a much-needed opinion. He criticised many Anglican leaders in the Africa continent about being obsessed with homosexuality in the church and that they should focus on the more pressing issues that are affecting their congregations such as AIDS, war, poverty. The church is neglecting its flock and not focusing the attention of the world on the most desperate situations many Africans face.

He also was out spoken about his own national church that of Zimbabwe that is seemingly towing the line of the now despotic Mugabe. Whilst the world has also seemingly ignored the crisis there, its church leaders have done little to voice concerns. Zimbabwe has gone from the breadbasket of Africa to being unable to feed itself. Perhaps this is an overly critical appraisal of the Zimbabwean church because of the threat of violence. However where are the cries of outrage from the AU and the African Churches. They are forgetting about the real needs of their followers and getting embroiled in this seemingly endless debate on sex.

The Church needs to remember what its real issues are and I hope it addresses these at its Synod, and that the headlines it creates focuses attention on those in real need.

Money for Grades: Dellusional.

Today the Shadow Education secretary has announced that a scheme that gave those from poorer backgrounds more money in education should be implemented. I think this is a ridiculous plan that will not achieve results.

Firstly we should learn from this government that throwing money at problems does not solve them and that more radical change is needed if we are to deal with increasing standards in our schools. We have seen huge increases in spending and seen some improvements.

Secondly David Willets commented that many children from richer backgrounds receive more intellectual stimulation in the home, therefore resources should be focused on those who do not. How is he intending to implement that? What if in a richer home both parents work and have no time in the evening to read their children to sleep, but a stay at home mum who lives on less money does. Which child I receiving more stimulus? You cannot judge academic stimulation on how much money your parents earn.

Thirdly I disagree with this policy on principle I do not think it is the job of the state to make up for differences in background because things that affect earning are hugely more complex than just how much money the household earns. I do not see it as the role of the state to level the playing field in this manner. What it should be doing is improving schools for everyone equality, schools are the sphere of the state, family situations are not. What this amounts to is positive discrimination, which as you will know from previous blogs I am a vehement hater of. This policy assumes poorer children could not possibly compete on an equal level as richer children, it is underestimating them before they even start.

I must say however his idea that you place the spending power in the hands of the parents by giving them what the state would spend on your child to then choose which state school you send them too. This would mean schools would have to compete for pupils and give them a further impetuous to improve. Even if he did choose to have this more market led system in schooling the differences in middle class and working class “allowances” he is advocating would not get rid of the middle class bias. Those with money will always be able to pay for the best.

Raising standards is not about limiting those who have a richer background, those children and parents from a poorer background need to be persuaded why education is good and they may just have to work harder than someone who can afford a private tutor, but that is how it should be. I came from a poorer background and had none of the benefits of a tutor, well read parents, but what I did have was parents who understood why I needed to study and a state comprehensive school that allowed me to do that. I did not receive special treatment because I had less money, how patronising is that?

This is a desperate attempt of the new Cameron ideology to court swing voters, but I think they can see through this. It is an ill thought out idea. Empowering people form poorer backgrounds to achieve well is essential, but this I not the way to do it. The state should focus more on providing everyone a good education regardless of background.

No room at the Inn!

It has just been announced that Prison numbers have reached an all time high 80,812 an increase of 154 in the past week, with 320 spare places left. At this rate the prisons will be full (including operation safeguard) within the next month. This is a very serious situation and the government have clearly not done anywhere near enough about the obvious need for an increase in prisons.

Operation safeguard costs about £450 a night in a police cell compared to the £66 a night for a normal prison space and since October has so far cost £23million. The situation is extremely serious and New Labour are responsible for this, the rising crime rates over the past ten years coupled with little expansion of the prison service being the major causes.

What are they doing about it now though; the biggest course of action has been to split up the home office’s responsibilities so that the Prison service is now dealt with by the new ministry of justice. Effectively the Home Secretary is passing on the job to someone else, but the problems that the prison service are facing will not be solved by this change, instead I fear it will create a whole range of new problems.

There is a serious problem with our prison service and it’s not just the lack of expansion of the prison service we have more of our population in prison than anywhere in Western Europe; somewhere around 147 people per 100,000. Is this because we are just more criminally minded or is it intrinsic problems within our sentencing system?? Whatever the answer may be we’re still facing the same problem…

Funny YouTube Video #10

Hodge racist remark

I know Margaret Hodge’s remarks were said a couple of days ago, so I am slightly slow to be commenting on it.

I cannot believe that she said, ‘British people should get housing above immigrants coming to the UK.’ I have to agree with Alan Johnson’s remarks that it was the language that the BNP would use.

Housing allocation like the NHS should be done entirely upon need, not where you were born! I can imagine the reaction from Labour benches if one of our frontbench spokesman said a remark like this, ’same old racist Tories bla bla bla.’ I think the remarks are outrageous, and I do hope Brown does not appoint her on his frontbench.

What a day!

Yesterday my day began at 5:30 in the morning, as a student I am not very accustommed to this, normally it is only if I decide to treck to some far distant place to watch a football game or unless I am coming back in from a night out!

However, I had to cram for my international relations exam, which began at 9:30, four hours later it finally finished and I hopped on a train to London with Theo for the ConservativeHome awards, on the train back we celebrated our victory with the champagne we had won, no expense spared from ConservativeHome it wasvintage Sainbury’s champagne, finally arriving in Birmingham at 10:30 only the seventeen hours after I had woken up!

 It was a really enjoyable evening, and I am writing to say how welcome everyone made us feel. Often attending non CF events I sometimes find it can be quite hard work to be taken seriously and for anyone to have any time for us. This was certainly not the case last night it was really good to get the chance to talk to Tim Montgomerie, Sam Coates, Iain Dale and some of the great lads from Maida Vale Conservatives.

We would like to thank everyone who voted for us, and the complimentry comments that people have left on our threads, it really has been the icing on the cake, to the end of our second month as a committee.

We have some exciting developments in the pipeline for the blog as we look to expand onto the next level.

To quote the greatest PM of all time Winston Churchill, ‘this is not the end, it is not even the beginning of the end, it may well though just be the end of the beginning’.

ConservativeHome Awards Video

ConservativeHome Awards

Apologies to the reduction in the number of blogs recently, we have unfortunately entered exam period…

After our international relations exam yesterday Jimmy and myself rushed down to London for the awards event in London. The event had a great turnout and we had the opportunity to meet a lot of interesting people along with organising a couple of exciting things for the future….

We would like to give our thanks to the absent bloggers who couldn’t be with us due to exams and revision and a special mention to Daniel Cowdrill who established this very blog in October.  We were commended and nominated on the nature that our blog has a diverse range of opinions from all of the committee, which obviously proved to be a successful combination. We were ecstatic to have won and were gifted with a bottle of bubbly which we drank on the way home!!!!

We aim to build on our success with the blog providing a centre of debate for all young people as well as expanding our general readership.. Most importantly we’d like to thank our dedicated readership, for without them and their votes this award would not have been possible!!

The winners of the other categories were:

Best Parliamentary Blog: Nadine Dorries MP
Best Young Conservative Blog: Birmingham CF
Best Anonymous Blog: Archbishop Cranmer
Best Local Government Blog: Maida Vale Conservatives
Best Newcomer Blog: Praguetory
Best Conservative Blog: Iain Dale

Our Nuclear Future.

This is one Manifesto pledge the Government should feel good about not meeting, that is the ruling out of nuclear power as a means of electricity production. The U turn in policy since 1997 I strongly welcome.

If we as a country want to reduce our carbon footprint provide reliable energy, reduce out dependence on unstable or unfriendly nations then Nuclear power is the way forward. The government has for a change taken steps to act in the nations benefit and whilst this may be controversial it is correct.

With oil fast disappearing and Russia’s supply of gas becoming increasingly unreliable Nuclear gives us a clean, safe and advance fuel source.

There are concerns however which I feel are valid. The nuclear industry has never been one that is profitable, with huge clean up, maintenance, and running costs. They also cause a lot of fear because of the memory of Chernobyl (it was run by communists remember!). Two of these are valid worries, the waste and profitability. Both need to be addressed if nuclear fuel is going to be a success.

Renewable energy could potentially power up to 40% of our energy needs I think it should, in tandem with nuclear. There is so much potential in this country for renewable energy that at present we squander, it is also a huge niche for a new high tech manufacturing industry to grow, and that should be here.

It is only with the sustained knowledge and development of nuclear energy that we will have the scientists capable of researching new methods with hydrogen and fission.

Nuclear power is right for Britain’s energy needs, I hate to say it, but the government has got it right. This time.

Holy Homosexuality: Why does the Church of England fear Schism?

The first openly gay Bishop Gene Robinson has notably not been invited by Dr Rowan Williams to the General Synod, this move has exacerbated the already fierce discussions within the Communion about homosexuality, and re focused world attention on the increasingly inevitable Schism.

Dr Williams has feared the boycotting of the Global South Bishops if Mr Robinson had attended. It was at the last General Synod that the debate around homosexuality officially came out, and in the past decade we have seen the split between the liberal and evangelical wings of the Anglican Communion drift further and further away. The Archbishop of Canterbury, the first among equals has tried his best to pacify both sides and has desperately tried to keep the Union in tact. The question is why?

During these 10 years the Congregation has witnessed a complete moral paralysis, the church does not know what it thinks, and ultimately cannot interpret what the will of God is. This painfully agonising balancing act that Dr Williams is trying to pull off is not pleasing either sides and is causing many worshipers to leave the Anglican communion to join other denominations that know what they think. The resurgence in Catholicism is one good example, whilst being controversial the Catholic Church has remained firm in its beliefs on homosexuality and contraception.

The Anglican church is not the Catholic Church what Dr Williams says is not infallible, there is not a strict ideological structure there is in fact no global structure it is a bond based on common values. It would seem now impossible to have both a western liberalism and an evangelical African Anglicanism in the same organisation. If the Communion was to split then it would rid itself of this moral paralysis, it could either be liberal or evangelical the different factions could then focus on re engaging with people.

This split would revive a dying institution, the two factions would regain a moral direction and both factions would be satisfying their congregations fully. The reformation gave birth to Christian dogmatic diversity, why not split and evolve again.

Dr Rowan Williams is wrong to fear Schism, the Church of England must split if it is to regain moral credibility and survive. I see no problem in a one faith two church model for Anglicanism.

Tony Blair goodbye Song

This appeared in the Daily Mail recently I thought it was too good to miss out on:

 Tony Blair’s grand tour of a grateful nation has been cancelled, due to lack of popular demand.

So he’s off globetrotting instead. He plans to visit France, Germany and a number of African countries over the next six weeks, while the British taxpayer is still picking up the bill.

Then it’s off to cash in on the American lecture circuit. I’m not the only one to remark that his farewell tour looks like lasting longer than Frank Sinatra’s. He’ll probably end up playing Vegas.

Lay-dees and gennul-men, give a big Caesar’s Palace welcome to Old Lyin’ Eyes himself.

(As always, it helps if you sing it.)

And now, the end is near

So I’m away
To earn top dollar.
My friends, I’m getting out
Before the Yard
Can feel my collar.

I’ve lived a lie for years
I’ve travelled First
I’ve taken freebies.
I’ve stayed
With my friend Cliff
And one of the
Bee Gees.

Regrets, I’ve none at all
Well, none that is
I’d like to mention.
I did what I had to do
And now I’m off
To count my pension.

Goodbye to Number 10
The Cabinet
And civil service
I leave
A Government
That’s not fit for purpose.
Yes, there were times
When there was doubt
I often thought
I’d get found out.
But through my teeth
I lied and lied
I shed a tear
When Diana died.
And when I thought
That I’d been caught
I blamed Lord Levy.

I’ve won three in a row,
I’ve spun,
I’ve told some stories.
And when It all went wrong
I blamed it all on the Tories.
To think they fell for that
And all along
I was roared on.
And now,
It serves them right,
They’re lumbered with
Gordon.

What have I achieved?
Why should I care?
I’ve got a house
In Connaught Square.

And now I’m free
To get very rich.
And that will please
The Wicked Witch.
My record sucks
But I’m making serious bucks
In a straight kinda guy way!

Are there any other songs you could suggest that should be played on the soundtrack of TBs long goodbye!

Freedom from, not freedom to

This is a misquote from The Handmaid’s Tale by Margaret Attwood a phenomenal dystopian science fiction. It is a misquote because after 20 minutes trying to find the quotation I want, I can’t but the sentiment is there. The difference of being free from and free to.

What is the difference? When you are free from, you are often censored or protected from something or prevented from certain information. Freedom to is your ability to act, make decisions and choose.

How is this related to Government policy? With the threat of terror constantly reaffirmed in the media we now live in a state of constant concern about the dangers of it this has allowed this more oppressive principle to slip into legislators ideas, and we need to challenge it. The proposed bill on the prevention of incitement to racial hatred. This bill would make you free from discussing extreme views; it restricts your right to freedom of speech, freedom from (open discussion on religion).

The extension of CCTV and the want to have greater surveillance of us and increased control through I.D cards supposedly protects us from terrorism, benefit fraud and crime, the freedom from. However this affects what we are free to do as well, such as privacy, to have a level of privacy from government intrusion, freedom of action in public.

We are living increasingly in a country willing to condemn before charge, with the longest pre charge detention lengths, one in which expressing an alternative point of view is deemed a violation of the “Organised and serious crimes act” such as the pensioner man handled out of a labour conference.

This combined with the fact that today the deputy chief constable for Hampshire questioned the extensive use of cameras in low crime areas and the policy of retaining our DNA. This is a stark warning for us all to wake up and make the government accountable for the changes in the law it is pushing through.

I want to be free to do, not free from an exaggerated sense of danger.

Over to you, Mr Brown

Professor Lord Anthony Giddens will be conducting a public debate about his new book Over to You, Mr Brown on the transition from Tony Blair to Gordon Brown at the European Research Institute of the University of Birmingham on 11 June 2007 at 18.30.

Other speakers include: Professor William Paterson, Alan Milburn MP and Gisela Stuart MP.

The event will conclude around 20.00 and be followed by a drinks reception in the atrium of the European Research Institute.

Starts: 11 Jun 07
Start Time: 6.30 pm
Venue: European Research Institute Conference Room, University of Birmingham
Contact: Nathaniel Copsey – n.copsey@bham.ac.uk

The Eleven Fuss: Grammar schools and selection.

David Cameron has been very brave in severing Tory support for the promotion of the grammar school model. We (as a party) now support the academy blueprint laid down by the Labour party but claim that we would push it further than Brown would ever dare. This is a mistake. We should not be against selection. Academic selection at the age of 11 is I think ridiculous and is often disadvantageous to boys who tend to mature academically slower than girls, however the selection ethos should not be lost. Setting in our schools should be mandatory as this is the only way to push the brightest pupils, teachers no matter how good they are cannot not “differentiate” effectively. Academic setting would benefit those lower down the scale as well as special resources could be focused on them and help them improve better. For those in the middle sets the setting system would foster a sense of competition and want to move up therefore pushing them more. Where we should have more drastic selection is at age 14 where student are more able to understand the importance of their decisions and importance of doing well to meet requirements. Here I envisage a duel schooling system, one that is there for academic book learning. Subjects here would be like English literature, history, sciences and maths, but much more theoretical science and maths. The other school, which should be given equal kudos, would focus on applied learning still teaching the key skill in maths and science and having a smaller focus on written subjects, but this would focus much more on engineering, practical science and applied maths. This more hands on approach I think would engage a huge swath of pupils- particularity boys- who get bored easily and whose manual and practical skills are not developed currently. What we would then have is a system that allows both practical and more traditional learning to be educated in an appropriate environment, I also think this new system would reduce the “feminisation” of education which has been reported recently. David Cameron should not be scarred of selection, but he is right to stop promoting the 11 plus it is out of date for our society and does not promote social mobility, which is I think a core conservative value, that to empower the individual to better themselves.

The Blair Tea Party.

Tony Blair today said in response to the allegation that you can no longer get a good cup of tea in London any more:

“I fear you may be right. This is a British tradition that must not be lost. If I were running for office again, I’d make it a major part of any platform”

Perhaps London does not have a delightful Hudson’s, I would recommend it to the PM as in a few weeks he will have too much time on his hands, will that be Assam or Darjeeling Sir?

Enough of this Labour Nanny State

I have just finished a long discussion with the Guild president as to why the Mermaid fountain, is not used as a fountain. The action was taken after a serious accident involving the fountain last year and as a result, it is deemed too unsafe for use. As the President highlighted it is not his fault but the result of legislation brought in over the past few years, passing the responsiblity of peoples actions onto other people.

This is such a common problem in society today, legislation has enabled people to pass the buck which is not right nor just. Of course institutions organisations and people have a duty of care, but there is a line and we have stepped way over that. People are free human beings living under a democracy and they have rights and should be responsible for their actions, when things go wrong it does not always mean someone should be held accountable. It is a disgrace that we are becoming such a letigious society with personal injury claims occuring left right and centre and present government legislation enforcing this.

If someone has chosen to climb a statue they know the risks when they undertake that, it does not mean we should remove all statues, because if that’s the case surely we should also remove all drain pipes, trees and anything else which has the potential to be dangerous.

People want the freedom to make their own choices, therefore when things go wrong sometimes they have to accept responsiblity for it.

Our right not to know.

I never thought I would agree with Menzies Campbell but yesterday I did. Regarding the Freedom of Information (Exemption) Bill that was debated and passed in the Commons yesterday Campbell said that there should not “be one law for MPs and a different law for everyone else”. Despite a stoic and passionate speech by Richard Shepard, amongst others, MP’s voted to exempt themselves from the openness of the Freedom of Information Act and thus erode part of the accountability of Parliament. I’m sure the irony of Blair’s statement wasn’t lost on him when he said “no comment” when asked for his opinion on the issue. Though it’s interesting that the media have already started to consult him for peripheral commentary only and not something more substantial. It would be far too trite of me to say that it was a sad day in the Commons today because of it this issue but I think it truly was. M.P.’s expenses are the least of our worries. I don’t think any sane M.P. would bother fiddling his expenses just like no sane P.M. would lie about intelligence taking us to war. It is inconceivable that these figures won’t be released due to this Bill. What is disconcerting, and perhaps if you forgive the hyperbolae disheartening, is that Parliament even debated the removal of rights that lead to greater transparency of their actions. Brown has said that “His place is not to dictate” on this issue. Too true, he’s not even Prime Minister yet. There are already many detractors and critics of this Bill but perhaps we can find a more authoritative source of derision for this type of thing than Campbell. “The community perpetually retains a supreme power of saving themselves from the attempts and designs of anybody, even of their legislators, whenever they shall be so foolish or so wicked as to lay and carry on designs against the liberties and properties of the subject’ (John Locke 1683). Its sometimes unfortunate that so few of care to do so.