Liberty is an outmoded concept according to Tony Blair and Charles Clarke. Such sentiments are more usually associated with totalitarian despots. We would expect Joseph Stalin to have said something similar. Yet Britain is a common law country, one with a long standing history of personal liberty. Yes, America claims to be the land of the free and, indeed, enjoys a written constitution to boot. A constitution that the current administration is busily consigning to the shredder. However, during the height of the cold war, standing in Times Square and preaching the benefits of communism would have served as a sharp reminder of just how free American citizens really are. The same activity at speaker’s corner in Hyde Park would earn nothing more than bemused heckling. The USA may talk the talk – and George Dubya is full of it – but when it comes to freedom, we, the British have led the way even without a written constitution to protect those inalienable rights.
Until now. The government talks of civil liberties in sneering terms. Indeed it has become fashionable to deride civil libertarians as if we are ill educated cranks or worse, conspiracy theorists. Yet this country stood as a beacon against the darkness of tyranny barely two generations ago. Are their memories so short? It was not always so. A former shadow Home Secretary once stated that a subject’s liberty should not be taken by politicians, but by a court of law. History demonstrates time and time again that politicians who ignore the rule of law and award themselves too much power will, sooner or later, abuse it. If not them, then their successors.
When Charles Clarke tells us that it is his responsibility as an elected politician to ensure our safety by making detention orders rather than an unelected judiciary, he is wholly wrong. He is correct when he points out that we should not stand back complacently and do nothing. No one is disputing that a threat exists. Yet terrorism is best defeated by refusing to concede to its demands – and that includes refusing to sacrifice our way of life. It is in part this that brought the provisional IRA to the negotiating table. It is this lesson that the islamofascists must be made to learn. The judiciary make their decisions upon evaluation of the evidence and nothing but the evidence. They apply the rule of law. A politician has another agenda entirely. It will never be appropriate for them to wield such power. A judge will never detain a suspect unless the evidence supports it – they have no interest in whether the person before them is a political nuisance. Can we be sure a politician will do likewise? And the day that happens is the day we concede defeat and the terrorist wins.
When Blair and Clarke justify their erosions of our centuries’ old rights that have survived some of history’s darkest hours and most dire threats, they demonstrate their ignorance of both history and human nature.
And that insightful shadow Home Secretary? The Right Honourable Tony Blair.
I agree with the thrust of your arguement Mark, altho’ I would like to make a couple of points.
Not so long ago if you asked an Irishman they might have a rather different idea of just how free this country was.
Let us not forget that MI5 retain around 500,000 files on supposed dissidents (such as anyone who’s a member of a left-wing organisation)
When it comes to the threat of terrorism actually I would debate that, it has been hyped up in the way crime rates etc. have been in recent times to create the culture of fear that has allowed some of the most draconian legislation in the modern age. With terms like ‘The War on Terror’ and ‘Clash of Civilisations’ whichcan be used to whip up fervour for a battle which has no discernible end.
Finally the surprise is mainly that Labour have carried on the work of the repressive Tory idiots who one expects to pass laws to prevent the hoi polloi from interfering with the établissment Remember the original Criminal Justice Bill that removed the right to silence etc. and labours outrage at the time. And yet they would now have us believe that it is necessary to remove the right to jury trial as well as giving politicaians the power over the imprisonment of suspects.
So in conclusion whilst I think you are right in the examples you highlight, I believe it is merely a continuation of Thatcherism.Visit me @ http://redbaron.blog-city.com
[Longrider replies] Oh, I agree – we’re not perfect. And there was indeed a time when the Irish were vilified in the same way as the Moslems are now.
I also agree about the hyperbole – and I made this point in an earlier entry. What we are seeing is the politics of fear. When politicians instil sufficient fear of a convenient bogeyman, they can erode liberties with the consent of the ignorant populace.
Thatcherism continues – I feel deeply betrayed that a Labour government should be doing this. And I will do whatever I can to reduce their majority at the next election.