![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Politics just got interesting
Feb. 15th, 2006 09:04 pmBlimey, they say a week's a long time in politics, and it's only Wednesday!
Firstly, the ID cards vote. Can't say I'm terribly surprised about this, as the government seems fairly determined to stamp their feet until they get their way. I still can't see a single advantage to this hare-brained scheme, only that it will make my life less convenient and, if anything, make me more susceptible to identity fraud. Here's hoping the Lords wing it right back down again...
I notice my MP, true to form, voted in favour again. I keep meaning to badger her about that. The thing is, I also want to write to her about house prices and ask if the government's planning on doing anything to help first-time buyers (apart from making idiotic suggestions like, "Club together with six of your mates and buy a 2-bedroom semi between you"). If I do both, would she just think I was spamming her? And if I pick one, which should it be?
Not that she'd probably care. She's got a stupidly big majority, and it's not like there's even the remotest chance of me voting for her next time.
Then there was yesterday's smoking ban, to which I have to say,
"W00t!"
It's obviously a contentious piece of legislation, but I'm over the moon about it. Yeah, I've heard the civil liberties argument, but frankly I think the freedom for people to socialise or work in a clean*, healthy** environment is more important.
* I recently went to Wetherspoons in town since it went non-smoking. It was nice to be able to breathe clean(ish) air for a change, and not have the immediate compulsion on getting home to wash my hair, throw the clothes I'd just been wearing in the wash and get my coat dry-cleaned.
** It was only recently that I discovered a lot of smokers honestly don't believe there are any health risks associated with passive smoking. Er, hello???
"If you don't want to go somewhere smokey, why not go somewhere else?" goes the argument against a blanket ban. "If there's such a call for it, more landlords will make their pubs non-smoking." This is a great theory, with one teensy little problem.
Every time I've gone out drinking in town in - ooh - ever, with a mix of smokers and non-smokers, the same thing happens. The 10-20% smokers in the group kick up a fuss and refuse to go anywhere where they can't light up. The non-smokers cave in for the sake of a quiet life. And landlords know this is what happens, and are petrified of losing custom.
Finally, why all these new offenses for terrorism? What's wrong with all the existing laws against murder, conspiracy to murder and incitement to murder? Isn't treating terrorism differently, and creating all this publicity, in itself glorifying terrorism?
Firstly, the ID cards vote. Can't say I'm terribly surprised about this, as the government seems fairly determined to stamp their feet until they get their way. I still can't see a single advantage to this hare-brained scheme, only that it will make my life less convenient and, if anything, make me more susceptible to identity fraud. Here's hoping the Lords wing it right back down again...
I notice my MP, true to form, voted in favour again. I keep meaning to badger her about that. The thing is, I also want to write to her about house prices and ask if the government's planning on doing anything to help first-time buyers (apart from making idiotic suggestions like, "Club together with six of your mates and buy a 2-bedroom semi between you"). If I do both, would she just think I was spamming her? And if I pick one, which should it be?
Not that she'd probably care. She's got a stupidly big majority, and it's not like there's even the remotest chance of me voting for her next time.
Then there was yesterday's smoking ban, to which I have to say,
"W00t!"
It's obviously a contentious piece of legislation, but I'm over the moon about it. Yeah, I've heard the civil liberties argument, but frankly I think the freedom for people to socialise or work in a clean*, healthy** environment is more important.
* I recently went to Wetherspoons in town since it went non-smoking. It was nice to be able to breathe clean(ish) air for a change, and not have the immediate compulsion on getting home to wash my hair, throw the clothes I'd just been wearing in the wash and get my coat dry-cleaned.
** It was only recently that I discovered a lot of smokers honestly don't believe there are any health risks associated with passive smoking. Er, hello???
"If you don't want to go somewhere smokey, why not go somewhere else?" goes the argument against a blanket ban. "If there's such a call for it, more landlords will make their pubs non-smoking." This is a great theory, with one teensy little problem.
Every time I've gone out drinking in town in - ooh - ever, with a mix of smokers and non-smokers, the same thing happens. The 10-20% smokers in the group kick up a fuss and refuse to go anywhere where they can't light up. The non-smokers cave in for the sake of a quiet life. And landlords know this is what happens, and are petrified of losing custom.
Finally, why all these new offenses for terrorism? What's wrong with all the existing laws against murder, conspiracy to murder and incitement to murder? Isn't treating terrorism differently, and creating all this publicity, in itself glorifying terrorism?
