Azara Blog: Cameron tries to take political advantage from three dead teenagers

Blog home page | Blog archive

Google   Bookmark and Share
 

Date published: 2007/02/16

The BBC says:

Tory leader David Cameron has called for more powers to "compel" fathers to look after their children in an effort to tackle gang culture.

He said he backed tax breaks to help families stay together and promoting a "culture of responsibility and respecting authority".

The comments follow the fatal shootings of three London teenagers.

But Prime Minister Tony Blair said the killings were not "a metaphor for the state of British society".

Mr Cameron called for a "complete change in our values".

He said: "I believe in marriage. I believe in people making a commitment to each other and staying together and trying to bring up their children properly."

Children were often attracted to gangs if they lacked a father figure, he added.

Mr Cameron said: "We have got to sit up and realise we are running things by the wrong values. We need to support families."

New Labour is on the rocks (mainly because of Iraq) and this is the best that the Tories can come up with. The media love the fatal shootings because they death and destruction sells copy. But with Poisson statistics you are always going to get the occasional bunching of events, it means absolutely nothing. So for Cameron to jump on this bandwagon is pathetic. (He even claimed that "our society is badly broken". Right, it's amazing anyone can get to work or the shops without being shot.)

At least the interviewer on the Today Programme on Radio 4 this morning had one decent question to ask Cameron. Allegedly drugs are part of the reason gangs are allegedly such a problem, and the interviewer wanted to know what the difference was between a poor kid in a gang using drugs and being condemned for it, and some rich kid at Eton (i.e. Cameron) taking drugs and brushing it off twenty or twenty five years later as a youthful indescretion. Unbelievable that anyone had the nerve to ask that question. Of course Cameron had no real answer. Evidently moral strictures are for the little people. (And can you imagine anyone asking Bush such a pointed question?)

And onto the idea that Cameron "believes in marriage". Fine, he is married. The question is whether he wants to give tax breaks to married people just for being married. It seems that yes, he does. Does Cameron think that unmarried partners are scum? Does Cameron think that single people are scum? It seems that yes, he does. Of course people with children (married or not) already get loads of State subsidies, including free schooling. It's not yet clear (since he never answers a question straight) how much money Cameron wants to throw at people just for being married, and how much more money he wants to throw at people just for having (young) children.

_________________________________________________________
All material not included from other sources is copyright cambridge2000.com. For further information or questions email: info [at] cambridge2000 [dot] com (replace "[at]" with "@" and "[dot]" with ".").