BBC: Kennedy (LIb-Dem) says 'public mood should not dictate legislation'

[mogster]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4126358.stm

The government should not let the public mood dictate legislation in the wake of the 7 July London bombings, Lib Dem leader Charles Kennedy has warned.
He criticised Tony Blair's plans to extend powers to deport or bar from the UK foreigners who encourage terrorism.

(snip)

Mr Kennedy said the Lib Dems may not support the legislation, which could threaten the cross-party consensus which has been in place since 7 July.

"There is a worried mood in the country, and rightly so, about the problems and dangers being faced and the terrible events that have taken place.

"But you can't just legislate by mood. You have also got to legislate introducing means which actually set out what you are trying to achieve."

[wli]

1. and this is representative democracy???

[julianer]

4. The PM is claiming that

the public mood is in favour of repressive measures. This is a dubious claim at best.

Kennedy is right. The Lib Dems, for all their wishy washy timidity, are fairly consistent in defending civil liberties and human rights. Good for them.

[wli]

6. well, better to call them on the BS claims of public mood than that

[julianer]

8. I'm sure your heart is in the right place

but you are misinterpreting the situation here.

Blair is trying to blame the Muslim community for not dealing with 'the evil in their midst' because he can't get away with the line that there is no link between Iraq and the bombings. The right wing press has been in full Muslim demonisation mode and Blair is jumping on the bandwagon.

His proposals are vague but a Home Office minister has failed to categorically deny that people like George Galloway (and me) won't be arrested and charged under this legislation - for arguing that there IS a link between Iraq and the bombs ('justifying' terrorism).

This is a major attack on civil rights including overturning parts of the Human Rights Act and a possible breach of the European Convention on Human Rights.

It is not about not following the democratic will of the people - it is about trying to jam through repressive legislation to stop criticism of the government, IMO.

[EST]

9. I'm sure you are in a much better position to analyze

the situation than I, but I listened to Blair's "briefing" completely through two and a half times and I kept getting the impression that he was specifically trying to avoid condemning people for pointing out how rotten the government is, while advocating the kicking out of foreign extremists whose mission is to enter the country for the express purpose of violent overthrow of the government or the inducement of others to do so. Where did I go wrong?

[lockdown]

12. Where did I go wrong?

You believed Tony Blair.

Sorry. :D

[EST]

14. Oh

Yeh

[D-Notice]

2. A rational approach

it'll never work...

As the Sun says:

Has the ridiculous Lib-Dem leader already forgotten the 52 murders?

[T_i_B]

3. The Government has to listen to the people

If Tony Blair had "let the public mood dictate" his Iraq policy we might not be in the mess we are in over there at present.

That said, there are still concerns over the proposed anti-terror legislation and the public mood might not necessarily be in favour of Tony Blair re-writing the Human Rights act.

[evermind]

5. Apparently it's not public mood, anyway, dictating legislation,

it's Fox news; since these measures were exactly what O'Reilly was calling for the UK to do in the immediate aftermath of the bombings..

[MisterP]

17. or its equivalent: Murdoch has his fingers in a LOT of British pies,

notably the Sun.

[burrowowl]

7. Legislation

should be passed on reason not emotion or mood.
How many Blacks were hung lawfully because of mood in the US!?!?
The Japanese Americans locked up because of mood. Native Americans because of mood.
Listening to LBJ's speech (C-SPAN) telling Congress that: state laws prohibiting the 'Negro' to vote are not Constitutional, these laws were based on 'mood', i.e., racism, etc.

[suegeo]

11. They've been studying human nature for a long time now

People in government have been studying human psychology for some time now. They know how a group will react in a crisis. The herd panics.

On a micro (non-group) level: There is a reason for the advice given after a loved one dies: "Don't make any big changes right away." Like sell your house. Or make large investments. You are not thinking clearly after a tragic event such as losing a loved one.

So, on a macro (large herd) level: they show us the gore of mass murder, and they mess with our heads. They then take advantage of the panic and fear and irrational mood of people, who are not thinking as clearly as normal. They take advantage of the weird mood in order to control the people and take away their rights.

It's psychological abuse by government. (and their psyho ops group in the USA at least, FOX news and the rest of the whores)

They are evil bastards.

[Greeby]

10. What he means is

This shouldn't be based to pandering to the chest-beating right-wingers who are salivating at the idea of Muslims and immigrants being deported.

[sattahipdeep]

13. Maybe we should remember these words:

First they came for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up,
because I wasn't a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up,
because I wasn¹t a Jew.
Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn¹t speak up,
because I was a Protestant.
Then they came for me,
and by that time there was no one
left to speak up for me.

The Rev. Martin Niemoller wrote those words in Germany in 1945. An early supporter
of Adolph Hitler, he realized, too late, his terrible error.

[K-W]

15. Lets not confuse public opinion with public mood.

What he is saying is that the fact that people are scared shitless isnt a justification for draconian laws.

[muriel_volestrangler]

16. And Blair openly admits he's taking advantage of the current mood

The action I am talking about has in the past been controversial, each tightening of the law has met fierce opposition, regularly we have a defeat in parliament or in the courts. The anti-terrorism legislation of course passed in 2002 after September 11th was declared partially invalid, the successor legislation hotly contested. But for obvious reasons, the mood now is different, people do not talk of scare-mongering, and to be fair the Conservative leadership has responded with a genuine desire to work together for the good of the country, as have the Liberal Democrats.

http://www.number-10.gov.uk/output/Page8041.asp

It was in reply to this "we can get anything past parliament now, thanks to the current mood" comment that Kennedy put forward his objections.

[lovuian]

18. As I said Charles Kennedy will be Prime Minister of England

someday!!! He's telling England watch out for Blair using your emotions!!!

[Chicago Democrat]

19. Ted Kennedy - DEMOCRATIC SAINT!!!

If there is such a thing! Ted Kennedy should be cannonized and emulated in all cases!

TEDDY WE LOVE YOU!

[T_i_B]

20. And Charles Kennedy?

Leader of the UK Liberal Democrat party, whom this article is actually about. What about him then?