Skip to main content

Blair - government by spin

I think there is a start in a trend of newspapers actually checking out what the government actually achieves.

If we start with Make Poverty History the Independent has done some work entitled "have we made poverty history" this shows that some progress has been made, but nothing like as much as was intended.

Then there is the Banning of Hunting which has resulted in more hunting with dogs.

The legislative agenda was clearly driven by spin. There was a problem with infection in hospitals, so a Bill was announced. Why legislation is needed to do a better job cleaning in hospitals is unclear? Disinfectant would be more useful.

We have "The Respect Agenda". I was summonsed to 22 Whitehall to discuss this. There was the plan to have a "respect action plan", which encountered widespread ridicule.

We are now having Expert Seminars on Respect. At least some people will end up getting some benefit out of it - the consultants running the seminars.

The legislation on terrorism was clearly not properly thought through. Many of the problems really related to the way in which PACE operates. A simplistic solution was adopted and then there was an attempt to drive it through - which luckily failed. It still appears that children asking for a penny for the guy are risking prosecution for glorifying terrorsm.

The Religious and Racial Hatred bill appears to actually be otiose. I am still hoping to find the judgement I think from 1983 that drives much of the context of actually the 86 Public Order Act. I did read an article that indicated the bill was otiose.

In the mean time we have reorganisations and silly cuts such as proposed cuts to supplies of ostomy bags.

In essence it appears that the government are too busy spinning to actually spend time thinking.

Comments

Bob Piper said…
Fortunate then that the Lib Dems are too busy fighting each other for anybody to pay them any attention whatsoever. Go back to your constituencies and prepare for obscurity.

Popular posts from this blog

Millionaires and politics

The Labour Party spent most of the last election criticising me for being a successful businessman (aka millionaire). That is business in the private sector employing over 250 people. It is worth looking at the situation for the Labour Candidate now:

For the year 2016-7 Annual Income from Parliament74,962Specifically for her book51,250Other media income etc5,322.82Total declared income131,534.82

Traditionally anyone with an annual income of over £100,000 has been considered to be a millionaire. I did not use my position in parliament to increase my income.


I have been asked for sources for this. This BBC piece looks at how one should define rich. It was written in 2011 so the figures will be slightly out of date. There are perhaps 2 relevant pieces:
"In 1880 a rich person would have had £100,000 in assets or an income of £10,000 a year, he says. About a hundred people a year died leaving £100,000 and by 1910 this was 250 - "a microscopic fraction of the number of death…

Homelessness vs Selling Books

Candidates in elections tend to find themselves very busy with lots of things to do.  It is, therefore, necessary to prioritise things to ensure that the important things are dealt with.

To me the issue of homelessness and rough sleeping is an important issue.  Therefore, when Birmingham's Faith Leaders group contacted me to ask me what I would propose and whether I would work with them to make things better I was pleased to respond with my views and indicate that I would work with them after the election.

The Faith Leaders Group (Bishops and other religious leaders in Birmingham) have now sent out their report.

Sadly, according to their report,  I was the only candidate for Yardley to respond.  The group in their report said:

"Particularly disappointing was the lack of response from some of those candidates seeking re-election as MP for their respective constituencies."
It is worth looking at the priorities of my opponent.
Interestingly today she has decided to be at th…

Gender Issues comparison of candidates

John Hemming believes that an MP should represent everyone in their constituency.  This should be regardless of their race, religion, gender, abledness, sexual orientation or anything else.  It should be everyone.

When he was an MP he worked on issues relating to men, those relating to women and those relating to non-binary people. Everyone.

For example here is John Hemming on a demonstration outside the courts with the campaign group Women Against Rape (it related to the case of a mother who had her child removed from her because the mother was raped).




Jess Phillips, who campaigns on women's issues, notwithstanding the questions asked about her appointments in her parliamentary office, had the following response when asked for a debate on issues specifically relating to men: