DOES THIS MEAN EVICTION FOR TONY

[pabird]

Blair unveils his 'respect' plans

People could be evicted from their own homes if they cause a nuisance under a new "respect" action plan.

Your views: Respect culture

Asbos and orders: A glossary

'Respect' key to Blair third term

 

The above headlines Tones change in law on BBC site

 

Is our Tone changing the law to allow us to evict him

[zody]

or letting there own son get drunk and make a fool of himself in the street, but has Mr Blair forgotten this, TWAT

[The Invisible Man]

These are ludicrous proposals, which would be laughable if they weren't so scary. Do they apply to everyone or just council tenants?

 

Who actually defines "nuisance"? What is considered acceptable in some areas or sections of the community, or even dare I say that old British nightmare class, miht be considered a nuisance in another. How often does a nuisance have to occur to be a nuisance? Can a household have a party once a month, once a year, or never? At what time does it have to stop? Who decides? Why?

 

If someone (the whole household, or the alleged perpetrator?) is evicted from their homes for three months, where do they go? What do they do?

 

What about a shift worker starting his/her car and closing its door in the small hours of the morning? Is that different to someone coming home from a club at 5am every day? (lucky so and so).

 

What about a family that eats a lot of curry, causing a powerful aroma? SOme people like it, some don't.

 

Dogs barking, music or TV's playing, hoovers hoovering - during the day? What is an acceptable decibel level? How many hours at a given level?

 

This all smacks of Big Brother and the police state, but even more, a child-like approach to government and politics.

 

Obviously someone falling over drunk is not necessarily causing a nuisance. As for cheap jibes at political leaders, Thatcher should be retrospectively evicted for the lasting damage inflicted on society.

[GJ-again]

 

Did he then kick the sh*t out of the cars down his street, wake up all the neighbours, shout verbal abuse at no-one in particular, physically assault the elderly neighbour who happened to go outside to see what was going on? NO.

 

Comparing Mr Blairs son to kids like this is missing the point, I think. We've all been, well most of us, p*ssed at least once in our lives but haven't gone on a rampage and destroyed property.

 

Somethings got to be done. Bring back the cane!

[The Invisible Man]

Quote:

Smithy's Girl said:

Bring back the cane!

Some people pay good money for that sort of thing........... apparently.

Mostly MP's and Ministers, I think...

[pabird]

Quote:

The Invisible Man said:
These are ludicrous proposals, which would be laughable if they weren't so scary. Do they apply to everyone or just council tenants?

This all smacks of Big Brother and the police state, but even more, a child-like approach to government and politics.
As for cheap jibes at political leaders, Thatcher should be retrospectively evicted for the lasting damage inflicted on society.

Thatcher made people rely on their own efforts which did bring to society a more selfish attitude in the "I will be successful" culture of the day
She also over stayed her welcome by one term
Our Tony and mate (not) Brown have removed the decisions on how we spend our cash by consistent removal of it to their wasteful pockets
They have been constant only in failure and senior citizens, the sick and the hard working self-motivated have been kicked in the nether regions from day one
They have inflicted an alarming rate of growth in pond life with their attack on family life and preference for assisting the idle (lacking known parentage)
Meanwhile they remove from parents, courts, school teachers and police the tools of correction with stupid nanny state politically correct crap that further feeds the pond life of which they are so fond
Mean while the number three man in the line of authority in our government is John Prescott, enough said

[zody]

Even lightweight I am told, he has his own Miss Whiplass, my point also Miss Smiffygirl is people in glass houses

[GJ-again]

Quote:

zody said:
my point also Miss Smiffygirl is people in glass houses

Sod the glass house's luck you throw a stone at. You really missed the point! I think.

[The Invisible Man]

It strikes me (again, Mistress!) that it's because Tone DOESN'T like "pond life" that he's toying with these half-baked ideas.

 

Part of the lack of hassistance for those who really need it is due to the fact that political parties now compete to offer the lowest tax rate. You can fiddle with statistics about alleged hidden taxes, which have always and always will exist, till the cows come home but basic rate tax was much higher for everyone before Mrs T introduced the misguided culture of "pay no tax and buy all the services you need with the money instead". That was the nub of the selfishness culture that she introduced. I would favour higher basic rate tax in return for decent services - hospitals, doctors, transport, education for all, support for those who genuinely cannot support themselves, ie unemployed (with provisos that I think we might agree on), sick or with disabilities, universal state pension, state funded research, the arts, and proper kit for sensibly sized armed forces. I suppose free beer might be pushing my luck.

 

I do agree that the benefit system is widely abused, not only literally by fraud but inherently, in the system. I am sure we can all point to actual examples of people with greater income while not working than those in work. Plus of course they will get pensions.... however I would not like to pin this on any single government of either complexion. It is something that has drifted inexocrably in over the last 40-odd years.

 

I am not sure what you mean by "lacking known parentage". Nor is the promotion or otherwise of "family life" any business of government. How societies and social relations work has no "natural" or somehow "proper" system, it is simply a cultural matter that can change over time - and indeed be manipulated for political or commercial ends. How people choose to live is entirely their own business.

 

Where I feel we might agree is that however people choose to live, they need to be able to support that decision. To be a single parent, for example, is a lifestyle choice, and should not be financed by the state (ie everyome else).

 

I am not sure about "tools of correction". I suspect that the problem lies earlier than that in many cases, but certainly one reads of many cases where the punishment does not fit the crime.

 

Making someone homeless for a nuisance offence seems to be such an example, albiet the other way. Feeding pigeons however should be a capital offence, for the feeder and the pigeon.

[pabird]

I am not sure what you mean by "lacking known parentage". [color:"red"] [/color] WHAT? IS THE CORRECT TERM FOR SOME ONE BORN OUT OF WEDLOCK Nor is the promotion or otherwise of "family life" any business of government. [color:"red"] [/color] NOT SO IN LABOUR GB, SINGLE TEENAGE MUMS ARE GIVEN COUNCIL FLATS WHERE AS IN THE PAST A TEENAGE MUM HAD TO BE ACCOMODATED IN THE FAMILY HOME THUS DISCOURAGING TEENAGE MUMS How societies and social relations work has no "natural" or somehow "proper" system, it is simply a cultural matter that can change over time - and indeed be manipulated for political or commercial ends. How people choose to live is entirely their own business. [color:"red"] [/color] THIS L-GOVERNMENT HAS PUNISHED MARRIED COUPLES VIA THE TAXATION SYSTEM

 

Where I feel we might agree is that however people choose to live, they need to be able to support that decision. To be a single parent, for example, is a lifestyle choice, and should not be financed by the state (ie everyome else). [color:"red"] [/color] AGREED SEE ABOVE

 

[color:"red"] [/color] As for Maggie, I worked as a contractor within several of the nationalised industries and we simply could not afford the reckless manner in which public money was burnt, Maggie gave us a dynamic which had been missing for yonks and my only negative with her government was the lack of compassion in the manner of dealing with miners, an industry that had to go but with a time span that gave decency in change

 

I am not sure about "tools of correction". I suspect that the problem lies earlier than that in many cases, but certainly one reads of many cases where the punishment does not fit the crime.

 

Making someone homeless for a nuisance offence seems to be such an example, albiet the other way. Feeding pigeons however should be a capital offence, for the feeder and the pigeon. [color:"red"] [/color] SHOOT BOTH OR EITHER

[Big J R]

I don't personally take one bit of interest in ANYTHING Tony Bliar says.

 

He's going ! He KNOWS he's going, so he can say whatever the f'uc he likes.

 

He'll be a multi-millionaire within a year of leaving the leadership, and there'll aleays be Cherie's lucrative earnings to fall back on if it all goes 'pear-shaped' !