The debate about the prime minister continues. Tony Blair wants us to let him “get on with the job”, the suggestion being that he is being hindered in doing work people actually want him to continue. If he can convince the public that the current debacle is a distraction from the serious job of politics then he can undermine the move to replace him.
However Labour’s backbench Mps want to be rid of Blair precisely because they don’t like the sycophancy within the cabinet, the cow-towing to Washington and its foreign policy and the general sense that civil liberties in this country are being, frankly, attacked.
John Reid told Demos that we had to forfeit some of our freedoms in order to avoid having them taken away, not an inherently illogical point but its use was designed to instil the sense that we are facing some kind of national crisis-I don’t believe we are.
Margaret Beckett failed to make the necessary criticism of Israel during the war on Lebanon, her predecessor Jack Straw did-presumably because he does not need to be quite so fawning as leader of the house. Now Tony Blair is announcing that ‘sanctions’ may be employed against those who look likely (based on what criteria we are still unsure) to bring up children who will be a ‘menace to society’.
Is it any wonder that people want to be rid of a PM who inspires cronyism and debars the possibility of dissent from his increasingly strange agenda? Tony Blair looks to me like he is succumbing to desperate and short term answers to pressing policy concerns. He is following a realpolitik agenda, is severely jaded and out of energy. We need to stop this constant distraction from a serious issue and sort out a leadership change openly. This issue concerns our next Prime Minister!
In other news:
Impact Magazine is three days from print and nearing completion. I have applied for a job as a publicist for a student entertainment website and am going to hand my CV into The Bag of Nails (a grotty student pub in Nottingham).
However Labour’s backbench Mps want to be rid of Blair precisely because they don’t like the sycophancy within the cabinet, the cow-towing to Washington and its foreign policy and the general sense that civil liberties in this country are being, frankly, attacked.
John Reid told Demos that we had to forfeit some of our freedoms in order to avoid having them taken away, not an inherently illogical point but its use was designed to instil the sense that we are facing some kind of national crisis-I don’t believe we are.
Margaret Beckett failed to make the necessary criticism of Israel during the war on Lebanon, her predecessor Jack Straw did-presumably because he does not need to be quite so fawning as leader of the house. Now Tony Blair is announcing that ‘sanctions’ may be employed against those who look likely (based on what criteria we are still unsure) to bring up children who will be a ‘menace to society’.
Is it any wonder that people want to be rid of a PM who inspires cronyism and debars the possibility of dissent from his increasingly strange agenda? Tony Blair looks to me like he is succumbing to desperate and short term answers to pressing policy concerns. He is following a realpolitik agenda, is severely jaded and out of energy. We need to stop this constant distraction from a serious issue and sort out a leadership change openly. This issue concerns our next Prime Minister!
In other news:
Impact Magazine is three days from print and nearing completion. I have applied for a job as a publicist for a student entertainment website and am going to hand my CV into The Bag of Nails (a grotty student pub in Nottingham).
posted by huwtube at 2:33 pm
1 Comments:
I think that Blair's attempt to catch future criminals in the womb is another of his post-holiday 'look at me, I'm still fully in charge and brimming with dynamism' ideas. I notice that it seems to have fallen out of the media spotlight, like the remainder of his barmy schemes...
Post a Comment
<< Home