Monday, January 29, 2007

The Transparency of John Reid

Today's front page report in the Sunday Times is another piece of headline grabbing from John Reid. He's supposedly going to use lie detectors on paedophiles to check that they aren't reoffending. A bit after the event, I'd say, but it enables him to free up some much needed prison cells.

However, in typical New Labour style, this story isn't quite what it seems or as fresh as it looks. It is yet another 'reannouncement'. It was floated in August 2004 in the Solicitor's Journal and indeed the Sunday Times itself has run the story at least twice before.

Last week we had John Reid splitting up the Home Office, this week lie detectors for paedophiles. What will it be next week? Compulsory jail sentences for bloggers who can see through his headline grabbing initiatives?

15 comments:

  1. This is by far the finest comment on this subject I have read in a long time

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2007/01/29/do2901.xml

    Please do your utmost to circulate this as widely as possible

    ReplyDelete
  2. or use this link

    http://tinyurl.com/2w6xv9

    ReplyDelete
  3. What a lightweight.

    Just for paedophiles?

    He hasn't got the cojones to extend it to fraud and electoral offences...

    ReplyDelete
  4. How can it be both after the event, and a re-announcement?

    ReplyDelete
  5. It’s about time John Reid done something for the victims of crime, like ending the statute of limitations the hold back many cases of institutional sexual abuse and torture, as well as being the one of the main reason these are often referred to as historic…

    Excellent Blog my friend...

    ReplyDelete
  6. ian said...
    How can it be both after the event, and a re-announcement?

    Iain (Dale)...Do you ever get frustrated by posts from commenters who can't be bothered to read what you have written?

    ReplyDelete
  7. he just made a fool of himself on radio 4, he was so rattled he actually confirmed he would be home secretary under gordon brown!

    ReplyDelete
  8. Lie detector for government ministers?

    This is all BS, another "eye catching initiative" that will come to nothing.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Reid is now rightfully blaming Gordon Brown for the shortage of prison places.

    The "money god's" chickens are coming home to roost.

    ReplyDelete
  10. If lie detectors are so accurate that they can be used on paedophiles (who I'm sure are some of the world's greatest in covering up their tracks) - then I humbly suggest we do away with the jury system and institute trial by polygraph. Think of the savings that could be made, Tony! Removal of the judiciary in one fell swoop! What a legacy to leave the country after 10 glorious years!

    I commend it to the House.

    ReplyDelete
  11. My first thought was it would be better for the public if these tests were regularly administered to government Ministers. Later thoughts as well actually!!

    ReplyDelete
  12. We know when Tony Blair lies his lips move. What we really need is a truth detector test for MPs. If only their noses grew an inch each timed they lied...

    ReplyDelete
  13. "He's supposedly going to use lie detectors on paedophiles "

    Perhaps they could test these devices on the Cabinet first??

    Q: Why was the Receiver of Wrecks so slow off the mark when that container ship beached off Devon?

    A: He had his hands totally full with D Blunkett, C Clarke and J Straw. He would have thrown them all overboard but none of them was fit for porpoise.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I was under the impression that lie-detectors were so unreliable that they could not be used as evidence in British Courts? In which case it cannot be legal for JR to test these pedo's either.

    Apparently they give have a severe tendancy for false positive results, due to the stress the testee is under, and to top it off, a lot of people can fool the machine when lying anyway...

    ReplyDelete
  15. The myth of the lie detector.

    It makes Reid look ridiculous to suggest this is an answer to anything.

    It is junk science.

    http://www.newstatesman.com/200610160033

    ReplyDelete