There's a long profile of and
interview with Tom Harris in the
Sunday Times. He expands on his
views on the family. A fascinating read. He clearly believes his views have finished him in the Labour Party. If that is true, what an indictment of our politics. But I suspect that he is wrong and that it will be the making of him and propel him into the front line of politics ... when Labour is in opposition.
I am NOT pleased with Mr Harris. He has twice spiked posts in a thread he started on his blog - apparently on the specious grounds that they were “factually wrong” - they were completely accurate - or “too offensive” -ie inconvenient to Tom Harris.
ReplyDeleteHe thus allows only one side of the argument to be put - the one convenient to Mr Harris’s original point of view.
It’s not how one expects an MP to behave.
Keep praising him Iain, that will ensure the Labour hierarchy hate him even more :)
ReplyDeleteTom irritates me to death most of the time, in a light hearted sort of way, but he is a worm who has turned. He has gone from government toady to being very much someone with his own views and an obvious passion for social cohesion and unfashionable scrutiny of the liberal consensus.
ReplyDeleteI used to think he was just the interesting face of New Labour, but he is not - he is a voice crying in the wilderness and he is making the change from weathervane to signpost at light speed.
You could well be right Iain, he may even decide to become an independent once the smoked-filled rooms are locked to him. If he does, I do hope Frank Field goes with him. He certainly deserves better than the labour party.
ReplyDeleteSimon Gardner, I wouldn't blame anyone, MP or otherwise, for spiking your effusions after he had received a few of them.
ReplyDeleteIain
ReplyDeleteGive it a rest, mate.
You spent today where (according to Twitter) exactly?
PS
ReplyDeleteYou ain't popular over at DK's
Get stuffed, Iain: that man is guilty as hell. And he will still be guilty when he is hanging, choking and kicking, from the lamp-post which should be his final place of rest—and he will still be guilty as the crows feast on his colossal, bulging eyes.
Tum ti tum
Political lovey love-ins are unedifying at the best of times.
ReplyDeleteThe Conservatives should bring Tom Harris over to the Tory Party.
ReplyDeleteLabour can't see past the language of political correctness to ever do anything to really help people in need.
OT but .... "Where's Guido ....?"
ReplyDeleteVervet - you can still see Guido here for some reason:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.5thnovember.blogspot.com/
BOOZE PRICING? HELL NO!
ReplyDelete"Simon Gardner, I wouldn't blame anyone, MP or otherwise, for spiking your effusions after he had received a few of them."
ReplyDeleteFor once, my sympathies are with a Labour pol!
Gardner, like most militant atheists, is an utterly self-absorbed nacissist.
It isn't enough for him that he is free to not believe with the rest of us - he wants to spread 'non belief' with exactly the same crusading zeal of the evangalising religious!
All muust reflect his outlook, or he'll thcweam and thcweam until he is thick...! And if he is muzzled on another blog, he'll flee to any other blog that'll have him to whine about it. Why he doesn't just set up his own blog, I don't know.
I guess he isn't as secure in his non belief as he might like us to think... ;)
On another point, why is Guido's blog down?
ReplyDelete'He thus allows only one side of the argument to be put - the one convenient to Mr Harris’s original point of view'.
ReplyDeleteI doubt if anybody who has followed Tom Harris's blog for more than a few weeks would find that remark anything other than risible.
He'll be on the Labour (opposition) front bench again after the election for two reasons: merit, and becuase he'll be one of the few left.
Simon Gardner: "He thus allows only one side of the argument to be put - the one convenient to Mr Harris’s original point of view.
ReplyDeleteIt’s not how one expects an MP to behave."
You stupid, stupid child... That's exactly how you should expect an MP to behave!
SG:
ReplyDeleteIt’s not how one expects an MP to behave.
Au contraire, it is exactly how one would expect a current MP to behave!
Pogo said...“"He thus allows only one side of the argument to be put - the one convenient to Mr Harris’s original point of view. It’s not how one expects an MP to behave." You stupid, stupid child... That's exactly how you should expect an MP to behave!”
ReplyDeleteAbsolutely fair enough. :) I stand very much corrected. (Well I perforce have to.) It’s certainly how this particular MP has behaved and I note your point that it’s how the generality of MPs behave. You may well be right.
There's a lot in what Tom Harris has to say and, whatever you think about the current Gov's role in it, it is a situation that has taken a lot longer than ten years to develop. Does anyone see any signs that a future Cameron government would be able to make material change to the problem of people spending a lifetime on benefits (especially in the coming era of high unemployment)?
ReplyDeleteTom Harris can make it back to the top of the Labour party!
ReplyDeleteTom, just say this mantra every night before bed:
'Families are a patriarchal bourgeois plot designed to oppress women.'
Got that Tom? Just remember not to say it in public. You can say it in BBC Green Rooms though, you get bonus points.
'He thus allows only one side of the argument to be put - the one convenient to Mr Harris’s original point of view'.
ReplyDeleteo contrare - he seems very willing to allow differing views to appear on what is after all his blog where he makes the rules and anyone who disagrees is free to start their own blog with their owwn rules (like labourlist !!!!)
@Iain Dale.
ReplyDelete"He clearly believes his views have finished him in the Labour Party."
No he doesn't.
But I suspect that he is wrong and that it will be the making of him and propel him into the front line of politics ... when Labour is in opposition.
....which was the point all along.
Tom Harris is a very intelligent guy. He knows exactly what he's doing. You don't give him enough credit. He's engineering his comeback quite nicely.
@Tory Boy
"On another point, why is Guido's blog down?"
It isn't, his www.order-order.com web address is broken.
His blog can still be found at 5thnovember.blogspot.com
Having fallen out with the Labour leadership is only going to be a handicap for about 15 months.
ReplyDeletedavidc said... “he seems very willing to allow differing views to appear on what is after all his blog...”
ReplyDeleteThat’s demonstrably untrue.
(In the case in point - not to go on about it at length - any mention of papal responsibility for a couple of million AIDS deaths is completely banned as he has made clear in correspondence - because he doesn’t like it. Such a point was entirely germane to the thread and the challenges laid down as well as being true.)
Mr Harris pretends democratic debate; he doesn’t practice it.
I am sure a little digging would find other examples of Mr Harris’s anti-democratic tendency.
simon gardner@
ReplyDelete'--any mention of papal responsibility for a couple of million AIDS deaths is completely banned as he has made clear in correspondence - because he doesn’t like it'.
to which i repeat
'--what is after all his blog where he makes the rules ---'
Simon Gardner.
ReplyDeleteYou are so mouthy and so quick to complain that people ban your posts and so preposterous..
Why don't you start your own blog so that people like me can come and heckle?
If Tom Harris won't accept the Guardianista modish myth of "papal responsibility for a couple of million AIDS deaths" then he is a better man than I took him for.
ReplyDeleteLittle Black Sambo said... “If Tom Harris won't accept the Guardianista modish myth of "papal responsibility for a couple of million AIDS deaths" then he is a better man than I took him for.”
ReplyDeleteA few points:
• It’s no myth. The last pope was a mass murderer of staggering ambition. Those deaths continue still;
• In any case, the point is an entirely valid one - either way but Tom Harris MP petulantly disallows it completely - however many times it is rephrased;
• This in the face of therefore unrefuted claims that no modern christian atrocities are cited (unrefuted because Tom Harris censors them);
• No doubt “I was a Christian, and involved in a very evangelical church...” had some bearing on that.
If you are going to throw a subject open for public debate (in this case by ridiculing some complaiants to the ASA), it behoves you to allow said public debate.
The man is a disgrace to his office.
It's interesting how rare putting forward individual views are now in poltics. Says a lot about our political and media climate. When you think about the heavyweights in the post-war cabinets... and what we've got now *shudder*
ReplyDeleteSo. As I said...
ReplyDeleteThe new pope is carrying on in the old pope’s murderous tradition. For the C4 TV news - here is the Channel 4 News page of the story
Go there and watch the Channel 4 news report video - press the “Watch the report” link;
OR look in particular at the video of the Discussion - hilarious BTW;
AND there’s the pope’s remarks which sparked the story.
“Pope blames condoms for HIV
By: Lindsey Hilsum - C4 News
“Pope claims condoms are part of the problem, not the solution, to the Aids epidemic, sparking controversy at the start of his first trip to Africa.
“Speaking to reporters en route to Cameroon, Pope Benedict insisted chastity and marital fidelity were the only ways of preventing the spread of HIV.
“His remarks have outraged aid organisations trying to combat the disease, which is thought to have infected more than twenty million people.”
The story is in this morning’s [18-3-09] Guardian The wrong message on condoms - The pope is trying to take away one of the few things ordinary Africans can do to help themselves and there is an opinion piece and discussion (Pope claims condoms could make African Aids crisis worse) on the Guardian’s Comment is Free site.
The Indie [18-3-09] also carries the story and a discussion (Pope says condoms won't solve Aids).
And even the London Times [18-3-09] has weighed in - The Times = March 18, 2009 - John Paul’s 1990 speech ‘sentenced millions to die’
ReplyDeleteSo who is “factually wrong” or “too offensive” now Tom Harris MP?