About me
About me

Out of order and control


Hold up! Before you read on, please read this...

This post was published more than 15 years ago

I keep old posts on the site because I often enjoy reading old content on other people's sites. It can be interesting to see how views have changed over time: for example, how my strident teenage views have, to put it mildly, mellowed.

I'm not a believer in brushing the past under the carpet. I've written some offensive rubbish on here in the past: deleting it and pretending it never happened doesn't change that. I hope that stumbling across something that's 15 years old won't offend anyone anew, because I hope that people can understand that what I thought and felt and wrote about then is probably very different to what I think and feel and write about now. It's a relic of an (albeit recent) bygone era.

So, given the age of this post, please bear in mind:

  • My views may well have changed in the last 15 years. I have written some very silly things over the years, many of which I find utterly cringeworthy today.
  • This post might use words or language in ways which I would now consider highly inappropriate, offensive, embarrassing, or all three.
  • Factual information might be outdated.
  • Links might be broken, and embedded material might not appear properly.

Okay. Consider yourself duly warned. Read on...

Profoundly undemocratic; a nonsense; an outrage; a disgrace.

This Times leader clearly has strong opinions on the methods Labour used to force through its anti-terror legislation.

I’ve covered my opinions on the legislation itself, but I’ve yet to register my disgust about the fact that the government have forced through some of the most significant legislation of our time with just six hours of debate. That can’t be a good thing, and certainly can’t be in the best interests of the public.

And this from a man who says he’s not arrogant. To feel that you can force this kind of thing through with such a pathetic debate is arrogant. Mr Blair should learn that he doesn’t always know best, and the best way for him to learn this would be to suffer a battering at the next election.

This bill got through with a Labour majority of just fourteen. This shows why a party having a huge majority is generally bad for the country: A huge proportion of Labour MPs can be against something, as well as both of the main opposition parties, and it can still be passed. If the parties had roughly equal numbers, then the bill would have to be a compromise, healthily debated, and so would simply emerge as a better, crucially safer, bill.

Tony Blair and his government, despite their protestations, are clearly arrogant: If anybody’s “Out of order and control”, it’s them. And I hope that you, the electorate, will send that message to them by voting for someone else.

This 406th post was filed under: Election 2005, News and Comment.

Recently published posts

Random posts from the archive

The content of this site is copyright protected by a Creative Commons License, with some rights reserved. All trademarks, images and logos remain the property of their respective owners. The accuracy of information on this site is in no way guaranteed. Opinions expressed are solely those of the author. No responsibility can be accepted for any loss or damage caused by reliance on the information provided by this site. This site uses cookies - click here for more information.