Skip to main content

Crime is taken seriously by Ming Campbell

I am pleased with Ming Campbell's approach on the issue of Crime. To quote from his speech:

A party which is serious about social justice cannot fail to be serious about preventing crime and enforcing the rules.
...
I want to be clear: I support the discriminating use of ASBOs in tackling crime and discouraging anti social behaviour.

Liberal Democrats in local government have used ASBOs to good effect.
...
Penalties should go beyond custody. People like Ian Huntley should not have the vote. If you are guilty of a serious breach of the law, you forfeit the right to elect those who make the law.

Comments

John Hemming said…
The point is that I have never believed that Huntley should have the vote. The change is that my perspective on these issues is becoming into the ascendency in the party.

Hence the party will adopt the approach taken by the party in Birmingham.

I live next door to council flats in any event.
PoliticalHackUK said…
Ming may take it seriously - hey, he has a job to try and save - but he doesn't write party policy. Or are you arguing that the LD constitution is irrelevant?
Bob Piper said…
Hack... If he's not, I am!
John Hemming said…
Parliamentary Group Policy is determined by the Parliamentary Parties in the House of Commons and House of Lords.

General Election Manifesto issues are obtained by a double latch from the Conference and Parliamentary Parties.
John Hemming said…
I accept that I am bound by the manifesto upon which I stood unless I made it clear to the electorate in my consituency where I disagreed with it.

I work with my colleagues in the parliamentary party by discussion at the meeting of the parliamentary party.

The double latch applies in practise to the manifesto.

Regardless of what is said by any documents the above applies in practise. There are conflicts between the Bill of Rights 1688 and other documents.

The Bill of Rights takes precedence.
John Hemming said…
The constitution of the Lib Dems is, of course, relevant.

Constitutional Laws of the UK take precedence.

Popular posts from this blog

Six months for recording a court hearing - Norman Scarth

The link is in Russian about the imprisonment of Norman Scarth who is actually 85. He has a complex history including a court hearing which found that he used a chainsaw to fight off bailiffs when he was 75. [a court judgment which is disputed see comments] However, that does not justify imprisoning him for 6 months for recording a court hearing (see the link and ask google to translate it if your Russian is not up to it). It has got into the Argyll News Because he has been held such that people cannot get to him to sign paperwork an application for a writ of Habeas Corpus was made today. This has been adjourned until next week. The English judicial system is really not good at responding to major abuses of human rights by the judicial system.