Friday, November 11, 2005

Tony Parsons' Technocracy...

Was it a cynical move to pit intellectual flyweight Tony Parsons against experienced parliamentarians Clare Short (Labour rebel) and Kenneth Clark (Tory "Big Beast") on the Beeb's "This Week" last night? You might actually believe so, considering the outcome of the debate...

Parsons, columnist for The Daily "People's Bog Roll" Mirror, showed the intellect and in-depth analysis of a boiled parsnip, while ranting about "fanny arsed MPs" who had dared so treacherously to pull the rug from below the PM's feet on the 90 days detention without charge legislation, whilst otherwise "fiddling their expense reports".

Firstly, we were shown a video of Parsons livid ravings against the "Westminster playpen", which with their "Ivory tower mentality" had put the country at great risk by not following the Police's advice and by letting the Leader Supremo down. The Tories were equally lambasted but then Tony doesn't really need choice on who to vote for, as democracy as far as he's concerned is just a nuisance, standing in the way of those few righteous people, capable of securing the country's safety single-handedly, like Tony and Ian Blair.

Then followed a debate between all protagonists and moderated by Andrew Neil, which at times threatened to degrade into fisticuffs. Tony Parsons showed a rarely seen ignorance of the subject matter at hand. His central tenet can be summarised as "Democracy is Dead, Long live Technocracy: just leave it to the experts, mate!"

Now I'm all for listening to the experts, including the Police, but it would be a complete inversion of democratic principles to bypass debate in Parliament and let the Police mandarins dictate Government policy.

Parsons also gladly conceded his ignorance on the detention without charge legislation. "28 days, 90 days, well I don't know either, we have to rely on the Police recommendations". You twat!

Parsons strikes me as being one of these loathsome people who don't understand democracy very well, can't really be bothered with it that much and then complain they aren't getting their way...

And of course, according to this "people's champion", anyone against these long detention times will have blood on their hands when the next attack occurs...

The main argument against long detention times without charge isn't party political or civil liberties protection (although that comes into it as well). The main argument is that it simply isn't necessary. Current detention times of 14 days (now almost certainly to be extended to 28 days after amendments by the Lords) with efficient Police and surveillance work are more than adequate to fight and prevent crimes of terror. Gathering prima facia evidence prior to arrest and the presumption of innocence aren't just civil liberties issues: they also contribute to effective, rather than sloppy Police work.

And before we sign over the parliamentary debate to the Met's advice, let's not forget three other facts:

1. the "shoot to kill policy", also recommended by Sheriff Ian Blair, proved to be disastrous,
2. when the Police argued against 24 hour drinking times, HMG ignored their recommendations. It seems this government applies a pick-and-mix attitude to the Police's recommendations,
3. it would appear the senior Police officials have in fact been leaned on by HMG to persuade MPs in their constituencies to vote for the 90 days. Some democracy...

Tony Parsons, stick to writing crap about Camilla, that's about your level really...

Keywords:
, , , ,

5 Comments:

At 11:22 AM, Anonymous jultra said...

You make some excellent points Gert.

I didn't see that show but Parsons is indeed a shocking little twat.

Indeed, the police were brought into a deliberate political campaign. It's more than disgusting, it's mind blowingly corrupt.

 
At 3:16 PM, Blogger Gert said...

I forgot to mention Parsons looks a bit like an SAS reject, that frustration could well explain the "strongman's" perspective on things...

I wouldn't really call it corrupt but the conflict of interest is clearly there...

 
At 5:27 PM, Anonymous jultra said...

It's not brown paper envelopes corruption I agree, but some degree of personal gain has been alleged in the case of senior officers jostling for new positions in a force boundary changes.

In the sense of dishonorable, underhand, and some level of moral depravity though, I would call it corrupt. Ian Blair's activities in this area predates the election where we was coming out on TV for New Labour policies then too.

That said, the root of responsibility rests New Labour who have quite a track record in this area and positioning key cronies and allies where they need to.

Anyway great post Gert.

 
At 8:04 PM, Blogger Richard said...

Remind me which of the Mirror's two young [to me] columnists Parsons is, gert. Is he the [fellow] scouser or the geordie?

Routledge is the one I like reading, at the Mirror. I wonder why? I wonder who it is that his style/approach reminds me of? Eh? ;^]

 
At 8:33 PM, Blogger Gert said...

jultra:

I think the term we're looking for is "greasing the wheels of industry", aka "jobs for the boys"...

Richard:

Not sure and don't care! But I saw what I saw and that's enough...

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home