ThunderDragon Blog

We should all support Damian Green against the Stalinesque tendencies of the police state. His crime is just to release documents that were leaked to him - documents that were in the public interest.

Even though this isn’t something that I would normally suggest, considering the importance of the issue, I can but support the idea of disrupting the State opening of Parliament. MPs must be able to do their job and oppose the government with al the information at their disposal.

We should all Go Green.

Image: TheYoungConservative

This is an example that all politicians should pay attention to, two politicians that have resigned after a failure, on principle, as he feels a “moral responsibility ” for the terrorist attacks.

Two of the men responsible for India’s internal security submitted their resignations today as the fallout from the deadly attacks in Mumbai continued.

The national security adviser, MK Naryanan, offered to leave just hours after India’s ruling Congress party announced that the home minister, Shivraj Patil, had resigned. (The Guardian)

When was the last time that a British politician resigned on a principle over a massive failure that was not directly personal? Certainly not since I’ve been politically aware, despite several opportunities. And I can’t imagine any of the current Labour Cabinet feeling a “moral responsibility” about anything.

When it comes to this sort of thing, politicians do get a tough job. Usually there isn’t anything they can or could have done do prevent whatever had happened, but have to take the flack for it anyway. But that’s just one of the perils of doing their job.

Peter Mandelson is actually doing something positive for the country! I know that you’re probably sceptical of this, but it’s true - he is indeed:

Peter Mandelson is at the centre of a Whitehall row over a planned clampdown on cigarette sales which threatens to overshadow this week’s Queen’s Speech.

Alan Johnson, the Health Secretary, is said to have legislation which would ban big displays of cigarettes – effectively forcing their sale under the counter – “ready to go” as a key part of the Government’s programme for the next 12 months.

However, Mr Mandelson’s department, Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (BERR), is said to be objecting to the proposals on the grounds that they would harm the profitability of small businesses during the slump. (The Telegraph)

Even though this is likely to be nothing to do with the Dark Lord himself, at the very least he isn’t overruling his department.

This legislation would make the credit crunch and recession even more devastating than it would otherwise be for small retail businesses, something I thought the government were supposed to be trying to prevent - albeit rather poorly - rather than cause?

Even if we ignore the economic case against this, the personal choice one is more than strong enough alone - people know that cigarettes are bad for them and can decide for themselves whether or not to smoke.

Maybe Mandelson can redeem himself one tiny iota by saving us from such horrific legislation, born of an unholy alliance between economic imbeciles and nanny-staters.

How and what MPs should write in their letters needs to be “clarified” to prevent it being used for purely party political processes. To be honest, I can’t see how it’s really all that complicated. The rules are simple:

Do not use pre-paid envelopes or official stationery for party political or campaigning letters or propaganda.

How hard is that to understand? The only people MPs should be sending letters to paid for by the taxpayers are those who have requested information or help, or asked a question of them. And those letters should not unduly be along party lines.

Any replies MPs make should use phrases up to a similar form of political language as contained in the contact from the constituent. If I wrote to my MP stressing the word “Labour Government” and “Conservative Opposition”, for example, then they are entitled to respond using the same phrases and form of language. But if I do not refer to the partis that form the Government or the Opposition, neither should they.

What, precisely, is so hard for some MPs to grasp? Is this really the level of the people we elect as MPs, that they can’t understand such simple rules?!

What is the job of an Opposition MP? To hold the government to account. And this applies double to a shadow minister. So why was Damian Green arrested - and arrested under counter-terrorism laws?

His supposed crime is “aiding and abetting misconduct in public office,” by which we can translate into English as “receiving leaks from civil servants”. But it’s not like this is (a) a new thing, or (b) that only civil servants leak - after all, the ship of state is the only ship that leaks from the top…

On being released after being held for nine hours, Damian Green said:

I emphatically deny I have done anything wrong.

I have many times made public information that the Government wanted to keep secret - information that the public has a right to know.

In a democracy, opposition politicians have a duty to hold the Government to account. I was elected to the House of Commons precisely to do that and I certainly intend to continue doing so.

No-one who believes in parliamentary democracy can agree with this arrest. It’s not like he has been involved releasing information that we don’t have a right to know. The BBC has a list of the relevant leaks:

• The November 2007 revelation that the home secretary knew the Security Industry Authority had granted licences to 5,000 illegal workers, but decided not to publicise it.
• The February 2008 news that an illegal immigrant had been employed as a cleaner in the House of Commons.
• A whips’ list of potential Labour rebels in the vote on plans to increase the pre-charge terror detention limit to 42 days.
• A letter from the home secretary warning that a recession could lead to a rise in crime.

Exciting stuff, huh? A terrorist could have made really good use of that information! Not.

What does make no sense is the government denial that either Gordon Brown or Jacqui Smith - the Home Secretary - had any prior knowledge of the arrest, even though dvance warning was given to David Cameron, Boris Johnson and both the Speaker and Serjeant at Arms of the House of Commons. So they thought to tell all these people, but not the Home Secretary or Prime Minister of the arrest of a senior MP? Rubbish.

David Cameron is standing behind Damian Green, because he has done nothing wrong. His arrest for receiving leaked information is the hallmark of a police state. He’s not a terrorist, he’s a politician. And he was doing his job.

The rise of the BNP is Hazel Blears fault. But not hers alone. It is the fault of all mainstream polticians. Because they have neglected sections of the electorate. She is right when she says that:

shouting ‘Nazi’ is not the answer…

We must recognise that where the BNP wins votes, it is often a result of local political failure.

Estates that have been ignored for decades; voters taken for granted; local services that have failed; white working-class voters who feel politicians live on a different planet. In such a political vacuum, the BNP steps in with offers of grass-cutting, a listening ear and easy answers to complex problems.

Like has been said by myself and Sayeed Warsi [and a large number of other Conservatives], we must engage with BNP voters. We must expose their policies for what they are. As I said then, and also more recently [I'm copying and pasting because I can't be bothered to re-write it]:

People don’t vote for the BNP because they’re racist, but because they have concerns that are not being addressed by any other party because of ‘political correctness’.

The Conservatives - and all major political parties - must address the prime reason why people vote for the BNP - and that is because they feel ignored. They have some legitimate concerns about crime, justice, and immigration which the main parties aren’t addressing and thus they feel ignored. If we listen to the voters - the vast majority of whom aren’t racists - then we can convince them that the BNP are not the party who can deal with the problems they are concerned with, but just a bunch of racists and bigots.

Ignoring them just because they have the stigma of the label “BNP voter” attached to them is not an option in a democracy. They are still part of the electorate. Just ignoring them is what caused the problem in the first place. If we listen to, and engage with, them then they will no longer feel any need to go and vote for the BNP - and they will thus wither and die as they should. But if we continue to ignore their concerns, the BNP will just gain more support. We must act now to stop it - and this is the only way.

And now it seems that Hazel Blears has come around to our way of thinking…

If you’re in the South, Labour don’t give a shit about you. Not only do they have a massive Northern bias in the Cabinet, they want to help their chums oop North at the expense of us in the South:

Nick Brown, the Chief Whip, called yesterday for the North East to be exempted from the Government’s controversial tax on empty commercial buildings. However, Mr Brown, who is also Minister for the North East, said that the tax was appropriate for London and the South East. (The Times)

So only the businesses and people in the North need and/or ‘deserve’ tax relief in the middle of a recession? That’s like saying only Labour supporters want the recession to end at all. Utter bollocks, in other words.

Labour only care abour channelling money to their supporters. This has been evident over the past eleven years. It is entirely unacceptable. [But then again, even the North might be going blue come the next general election...]

Nick Brown should be severly rebuked by Gordon Brown for making such a ridiculous statement. However, as he is Chief Whip and an ardent Brownite we can but presume that Gordon Brown is smiling on this.

Brown should act as Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, not just of the areas where Labour have their voters, or he should resign.

I really couldn’t care less about the publication of a list of BNP members. I mean, seriously, who cares? Let’s make this clear: the BNP are a legitimate political party. However distasteful we may find their political beliefs, they have a right to hold them and to be a member of a political party that supports them.

Rather than threatening BNP members/voters, we should engage with them. Yes, we should. If we don’t, we can’t destroy the racist elements. Political parties must address the prime reason why people vote for the BNP - and that is because they feel ignored. If we listen to the voters - the vast majority of whom aren’t racists - then we can convince them that the BNP are not the party who can deal with the problems they are concerned with, but just a bunch of racists and bigots.

Ignoring them just because they have the stigma of the label “BNP voter” attached to them is not an option in a democracy. They are still part of the electorate. Just ignoring them is what caused the problem in the first place. If we listen to, and engage with, them then they will no longer feel any need to go and vote for the BNP - and they will thus wither and die as they should. But if we continue to ignore their concerns, the BNP will just gain more support.

The very concept that it could be sackable offence to be a member of a legitimate political party is nothing short of disgusting. Especially when the police and prison services have been told to actively “root out” BNP members.

The national policies are clear that membership of the BNP is incompatible with the requirements of the role of a police officer (IPPC)

How, precisely? So long as they leave their politics at home and do their job properly, how does it make any difference? Unless it is expected that no police officers ever be a member of any political party, of course - which is patently ridiculous.

Democracy demands that there is freedom of political beliefs. As soon as membership of a specific legitimate political party is proscribed, democracy begins to fail. Parliament must stand up for democracy and pass a law demanding that membership of a political party is no bar in itself to any profession, or democracy will begin to fail.

Anyone who believes that such membership disqualifies anyone from any profession is an anti-democrat.

Did anyone else automatically assume from reading the headline that this story was referring to the MPs…?

Image nicked from Guido

You can’t say better than a good old rabble-rousing PMQs.

Though isn’t accusing someone else of being “party political” rather, well, party political?

The simple fact of this situation is that there has been massive failures that have resulted in the death of “Baby P”, and yet nothing real seems likely to be done about it. Shameful.