Sunday, 12 December 2010

Misrepresentation by a politician is a political crime

There must surely be something drastically wrong whereby a complete f'wit, for example Ed Balls, first: gets elected; second: manages to become a high-ranking government minister in the last government; and third: is allowed, in Opposition, to get away with utterances such as those contained in this report by the Telegraph - without, it seems, a voice raised in dissent.

As the report correctly states, following the UK government having to accede to a ruling by the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), prisoners have now the 'right' to vote - not only in general elections, but also in any election of a police commissioner. Condemning the fact that the reported exercise to elect police commissioners will cost £100million, Balls then condemns the fact that prisoners will have the right to vote in that election:
"But to make matters worse we're set to be the first country in the world, alongside two small states in America, where convicted criminals can vote for police chiefs from inside their prison cells. Ministers have failed to include anything in the legislation to rule this out. It is madness and we will oppose these plans....."
What I find completely obnoxious is the fact that Balls is fully aware of the ECHR ruling and that failure to comply would have meant untold £millions in fines imposed by the EU plus similar amounts which would, no doubt, have had to be paid in litigation and compensation. What is also obnoxious, nay despicable, is not just that Balls should issue a statement so incorrect - calling for legislation to rule out something that cannot be negated - but that the journalist responsible makes no attempt to counter Ball's erroneous statement. Couple both Balls statement and the writing of the journalist and you then have two people deliberately misleading the public.

When such a situation arises - a misleading politician combining with an incompetent journalist - it is no wonder the public are unaware of the effects of Britain's membership of the EU. When a situation exists - as it now does - whereby the public are unable to rely on the truth from our politicians and media, the the nation is well and truly 'foxtrotted'!


Voyager said...

"What I find completely obnoxious is the fact that Balls is fully aware of the ECHR ruling and that failure to comply would have meant untold £millions in fines imposed by the EU "

Balls is a twerp but Nottingham Boys High School has a few - Hoon. Matthew Taylor, Ken Clarke, and Gauleiter Balls.

As for the ECHR Britain is bound by treaty to implement the measure. The two most complained nations at the ECHR are Britain and Italy.

The EU does not have jurisdiction here beyond an overlap between European Charter and European Convention....but there is also a jurisdictional conflict between ECJ and ECHR which has not been resolved.

The British Government usually loses cases at the ECHR because it does not contest with gay rights and other issues

Anonymous said...

Voyager, I think you mean "compliant" nations but I am not sure about Italy.
The problem is that no one will tell the truth about the EU, since Heath every politician has lied and is still lying. They will not tell us the truth. For that alone they are to be condemned. People in general do not know how much damage has been inflicted on our Country, and it is deliberate!