Vicky Pryce-More Lib Dem Hypocrisy

While I strongly believe that those who commit crime should be rehabilitated the case of Vicky Price stinks of hypocrisy and double standards. You may remember she was the missus of Chris Huhne who went to chokey for lying about taking his speeding points for him. It went on for a long period of time and only came out when he buggered off with another woman and Ms Pryce wanted to vent her spleen, or drop him in it.


Vince Cable, often seen as the most effective leader of the opposition in the current parliament, has taken her on as a government advisor. So a loony like Cable, whose instinct is to pass ever more interfering, nanny state laws that he expects the rest of us to obey, is happy to be advised by a jailbird. (Full story)


At a time when confidence in politicians is as low as it has ever been, and confidence in our democracy is at a similar low, what kind of idiot invites her back as a government advisor? An idiot Lib Dem like Vince Cable.

More On Liberal Democrat Nutters.

The Lib Dems have a history of bizarre chracters, so I thought I'd do a quick update. Here we go:

Lib Dem MP John Hemming's wife has just been sentenced for kidnapping his lover's kitten. Full story.

Lib Dem 'Mithering Business' Secretary Vince Cable, who constantly whines about businesses not paying enough tax, has been fined £500. Oh yes, it was for failure to pay a tax bill. Full story.

Then there's Chris Huhne, Energy Secretary. He's spent the summer denying claims from his ex-wife that she took speeding points on her licence on his behalf. As far as I know the case is still being looked at by the Crown prosecution service. Full story.

I won't mention Huhne's clanger when he sent what he thought was a private message to his open Twitter feed. But if you want to find out more the full story is here.

And we're being ruled by these clowns!

John Hemming MP, Another Lib Dem Buffoon

Lord knows there are enough already, but John Hemming has now added to the number of known Lib Dem buffoons. MPs are elected to represent us and to legislate, not use the House of Commons to indulge their insatiable egos.

If you don't know Hemming is the MP who abused parliamentary privilege to name Ryan Giggs as the footballer who had his privacy protected with a superinjunction. Regardless of the rights and wrongs of the superinjunction, and I think they are pretty horrendous, why should MPs of all people be allowed to flout the law and get away with it? If MPs can flout laws they don't like then why can't I? My view of Ryan Giggs is that he's been a fool, should have taken his medicine and got on with it. If he had done that the embarrassment would have been over weeks ago.

Of course the problem with Lib Dems is that they seem to think they are morally superior to us mere mortals, hence Hemming pulling a cheap stunt like he did. Hence why Chris Huhne is making such a fool of himself. Hence why Vince Cable is making such a fool of himself. Hence why the Lib Dems were wiped out earlier this month in the local elections, and will be slaughtered at the next general election.

Interesting to see that it has taken a member of the House of Lords to confront the issue of superinjunctions with dignity. Lord Wakeham has written the following letter which appears in the Telegraph:

Dear Sir,

The Prime Minister is right to say that the current situation with regard to privacy injunctions is “unsustainable” and to highlight that the problem is not one of the judiciary’s making because they are simply interpreting the law as it stands.

At the time the legislation was going through Parliament, I predicted that this intolerable state of affairs would inevitably flow from the way in which the European Convention on Human Rights was incorporated into our domestic law through the Human Rights Act. It was clear to me that because Parliament was relinquishing control of the issue, the resulting law would inevitably go further than we wished – despite the fact that Jack Straw, when Home Secretary, said that the legislation was not intended to create a general law of privacy – because the Courts would be forced to hand out increasing numbers of injunctions. And the reason for that is that in privacy matters, unlike in libel, the Courts inevitably err on the side of the applicant when considering whether to grant an injunction, and not on the side of a newspaper. That is the root of the inherent “unfairness” the Prime Minster referred to, and why this shambles has arisen.

Section 12 of the Human Rights Act attempted to enshrine in law the PCC’s common sense Code of Practice which protects an individual’s right to privacy as well as defining the public interest which justifies intrusion, with a view to cases being sorted out by the Commission and not the Courts. It has clearly failed to deliver that goal and the problem needs urgently addressing.

There are no palliative routes. The Courts cannot sort this matter out on their own. Nor is the answer simply in “strengthening” the Press Complaints Commission, which already has considerable powers but is often unable to deploy them because it is too frequently bypassed for the Courts in high profile cases. Instead the Human Rights Act may have to be amended, possibly by limiting the role of the Courts to dealing with issues that impact only on public authorities and the State (as the drafters of the Convention envisaged). That would leave the media outside the direct supervision of the Courts on privacy issues and enable the PCC – which can react much more swiftly to changes in newspaper technology than the law will ever be able to do so - to reassert its primacy in this area, as Parliament always intended.

Yours faithfully
Lord Wakeham
(Chairman, Press Complaints Commission, 1995-2001)
House of Lords, London, SW1

So of course the Lib Dems want to wreck the House of Lords:

The Liberal Democrats are another party whose desire to radically reform the House of Lords goes back a long way.
They were the last government to seriously reform the House of Lords when the passed the 1911 Parliament Act, which dramatically reduced peer power.
In their submission to the Royal Commission they set out plans for a directly-elected "Senate" made up of 261 members.
The Senators would be elected from across the UK using the massive constituencies used in the European elections.
Elections would be held every two years with a third of the senate being elected at each poll.
Predictably for the Liberal Democrats the elections would be held under proportional representation.

From the BBC website.

No wonder the few remaining Lib Dem activists are foaming at the mouth about their party joining the Coalition, now they are in the full glare of publicity, being junior partners in government, we can all see what they are really like.

Chris Huhne, Lib Dem Brats and the AV Referendum

I can't believe Chris Huhne is still whining and griping about the No campaign before the referendum on Thursday. Every time he opens his mouth he reminds me of an old phrase my mum used to use to whingeing kids: "Stop yarling or I'll give you something to yarl about". I suspect that Huhne is yarling because he knows they have lost the referendum but isn't man enough to take his medicine.

The problem with the Lib Dems crying foul about the No campaign misleading the electorate is that the Lib Dems have been the biggest misleaders of the electorate for decades. Even in the referendum campaign they have misled. For example:

They claim that the expenses scandal wouldn't have happened with AV. Lie!

They claim that MPs would not have seats for life under AV. Lie!

They claim that MPs would have to work harder under AV. Lie!

The Liberal Democrats have had too many years of being able to come out with outrageous promises knowing they would never be in a position to implement or break them. Now they are actually part of the Coalition we can all see what a bunch of vacuous, juvenile poseurs the likes of Clegg, Huhne and Cable actually are.

In recent weeks I have gone from being an AV supporter to being adamantly opposed to it, indeed I have already used my postal vote against. I wasn't so much persuaded by the No campaign, rather by the childish and simplistic campaign run by the supporters of AV. Don't pretend your campaign is about making politics more accountable and less shallow by coming out with nonsense such as the above, backed up by a bunch of publicity hungry media whores like Eddie Izzard, Stephen Fry and Joanna Lumley. That's not just shallow it's tacky and patronising.

Try harder next time.

If you are interested in my other posts on AV please click on the Alternative Vote label below.