Wednesday, July 13, 2011

For Law, Against New Laws

As the News International scandal rumbles on in a way that increasingly resembles an endless car journey (what’s that? Rupert Murdoch is still a cunt? What a ground-breaking story!) we hear, in amidst the faux outrage from rival media outlets and the shameless vengeance of that uber-twat Gordon Brown, occasional calls for new laws and/or public inquiries. And for the life of me I can’t work out why.

It should be clear to everybody now other than the terminally stupid and Rebekah Brooks that something went badly wrong not just within News International, but in the initial police investigation into the phone hacking. And it is hardly controversial to say that hacking into the phone of a missing schoolgirl or the phones of dead soldiers is a bad thing. But does this warrant a new law to prevent it happening again? Does it require some sort of public enquiry in order to prevent a repetition? Of course it doesn’t. Why? Because phone hacking is already illegal. The same goes for blagging. So rather than calling for further regulation and for a public flaying of News International, perhaps we could all call for the existing laws to be enforced. And if the initial police investigation was ineffective in doing that, well, there are laws about perverting the course of justice that could apply to that neutered attempt to look into the misdeeds of the Murdoch empire. There are laws against what the NI journalists did; if they are enforced, then there is no need for further laws.

And this really rather obvious, yet curiously ignored, idea can be applied elsewhere. For example, rather than having ever more imaginative ways to stigmatise drinkers and smokers in the name of protecting the children, perhaps the existing laws – which have been in place for as long as I can remember – could be enforced. It is illegal for children to drink and smoke. Further legislation around this is irrelevant if the existing laws are enforced.

It would be wrong to say that every aspect of British life is regulated through the government, although it increasingly feels that way. But there are a plethora of often repetitious laws on the statute books, yet still our leaders feel the need to add to those laws. Why do this? Well, part of it is the naked desire of the ruling class to be seen to be doing something. It is easier for them to say that they are going to introduce a raft of new laws to deal with a problem than it is for them to say that the existing laws just need to be enforced and the people need to be patient. It is the mindset of “shiny new thing make it all better” – a new law will definitely stop xyz from happening in the future… despite the fact that other laws have not done so. One of the things the people need to do is to call their rulers on what could best be described as their total bullshit when it comes to new laws, but the increasingly bovine population hardly seems capable of that.

Ever since Obama was elected to the White House using slogans consisting of largely meaningless, yet positive, sounding slogans (“Hope”, “Change” etc) it has been the desire of all parties in this country to paint themselves as the party of change. So I’d like to suggest a way in which those parties could actually offer real change. Why don’t you commit to implementing no new laws where existing laws are already in place? Why not commit to making the existing legal system work rather than clogging it up with repetitious and pointless legislation? Yeah, I know that will remove a lot of the busy work that you like to have as legislators, but it would also be an example of leadership. And surely it hasn’t become too utopian to expect our leaders to actually lead?

So let’s try to engage our critical faculties, in as much as they still exist, when it comes to legislative proposals from our MPs. Let’s make sure that they only go off on their legislative adventures if it is absolutely necessary. Let’s reward those who are wise when it comes to the rule of law, and punish those who believe that legislation is about getting a good headline rather than making life better for the people of this country. Don’t get me wrong, there’s a whole host of laws that need to be repealed in order to enhance life in this country, and I would love to see that happen. But before it does, we need to stop the fuckers in Parliament adding to the sum total of legislative bollocks in this country. And as our starting point, suggesting that new restrictions on the press and public inquiries into the alleged misdeeds of News International are fucking pointless when what they did is already illegal.

Labels: , , , , , , ,

3 Comments:

At 11:11 pm , Blogger Tom Paine said...

Quite so.

 
At 11:50 pm , Blogger thespecialone said...

Well said that man.

 
At 8:11 pm , Blogger cabalamat said...

It is illegal for children to drink

Only if they are under 5.

 

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home