Skip to main content

Sad death of 100th Service person in Iraq


John Hemming MP together with Lorely Burt MP, John Barrett MP, John Leech MP and Richard Ross MP attended the vigil in memory of the deaths of 100 British Servicemen and Women at 5pm on Tuesday 31st January 2006.

The Liberal Democrat MPs shared in the reading out of the names of the servicepeople who had died.

John Hemming MP said, "The government have a key responsibility for the lives of our service people. They need to recognise that there is no good reason for keeping our boys and girls as military targets in Iraq. Work should commence for their return to the UK."

"This war was a mistake. The continued occupation is also a mistake."

"We do recognise that in theory we could have been arrested for reading the names of the service people. However, it is important that MPs stand up for free speech and the right for people to have their voice heard."

Lorely Burt MP said, "Our hearts go out to the families of the service people who have been killed in Iraq. We only hope that there will be no more tragedies as happened today."

Comments

TonyF said…
Who were the Labour and Tory MPs there?
Richard Gadsden said…
Uh, John, probably not 31st March...
TonyF said…
However, it is important that MPs stand up for free speech and the right for people to have their voice heard."

That's not what you said when you had me and my wife expelled from the party!
john said…
I did not see any Labour or Tory MPs there.

Secondly, I did not move to have Tony Foley expelled from the Lib Dems.

Thirdly, if you are a member of a political party then you cannot campaign against that party. There is a limited extent to which the party can be criticised and as soon as people say "don't vote for this candidate" they are going beyond that limit. That is not a constraint on free speech it is a constraint on membership of a political party.
TonyF said…
The words were 'refuse to support the candidate'.
You know, the same words you used with Charles Kennedy.
john said…
There is a difference between quietly not doing anything and running an Evening Mail press story about ripping up membership cards.

A story which might (given that it was reprinted by Labour and delivered across the constituency) have resulted in us losing the by-election.
TonyF said…
I don't recall ripping up membership cards or anything in the paper about it.

As for quietly not doing anything, you were in the Evening Mail say you would not support Kennedy.

I'd say the bully boy tactics used on a middle aged woman who wanted to speak to Kennedy in the By Election had more to do with Nokia losing the election.
john said…
I have since found the article. In fact you were ripping up a party poster.

It says "City Liberal Democract activists have withdrawn their support for candidate ..."

It has a photo of you and Maxine tearing up a poster.

That is publicly campaigning against a candidate.

It is not the same as not supporting someone in an internal party election.
TonyF said…
Publicly campaigning against a candidate?

Why not print on here the actual words John.

Liberal Democrats in Birmingham were campaigning against the siting of mobile phone masts near schools. Nichola Davies was and still is a member of the Mobile Phone Operators association. She was responsible for the siting of a phone mast next to a school in Boldmere, Sutton Coldfield. To support her would be Hypocricy. There was no mention of a campaign against her. But then, the rest of you supported her, didn't you?
So who kept to their beliefs and who was the Hypocrite?

I now refer you back to 'free speech and voices must be heard'

Popular posts from this blog

Statement re false allegations from Esther Baker

Statement by John Hemming
I am pleased that the Police have now made it clear that there has been a concerted effort to promote false criminal allegations against me and that the allegations had no substance whatsoever.
I would like to thank Emily Cox, my children, Ayaz Iqbal (my Solicitor), my local lib dem team and many others who supported me through this dreadful experience. There are many worse things that happen to people, but this was a really bad experience.
It is bad enough to have false allegations made about yourself to the police, but to have a concerted campaign involving your political opponents and many others in public creates an environment in which it is reasonable to be concerned about ill founded vigilante attacks on your family and yourself. Luckily there was a more substantial lobby to the contrary as well, which included many people who were themselves real survivors of abuse, which has helped.
I am normally someone who helps other people fight injustice. …

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…

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…