Tony Blair today attacked claims that this summer’s riots were fuelled by “moral decline” and warned that talk of a broken society risked damaging Britain’s reputation.
In a rare intervention into domestic politics, the former Prime Minister issued a stark warning that ”muddle-headed analysis” of the recent riots by left and right-wing politicians was in danger of producing the wrong policy responses. He insisted the disturbances were ”an absolutely specific problem that requires a deeply specific solution”.
The comments came as Birmingham police released alarming CCTV footage of rioters taking part in disturbances earlier this month firing shots at officers and a police helicopter. Data from Scotland Yard also emerged that appeared to show as many as 30,000 people were involved in looting, arson and criminal damage during rioting in London…
In an apparent sideswipe at David Cameron, who sharply criticised the initial police response to the riots, Mr Blair said that it was essential that the police felt they had the backing of the Government.
”The police need to know they have strong support. They need to feel it from politicians and public alike,” he said.
Meanwhile, Mr Cameron promised a fightback against ”the wrong-headed ideas, bureaucratic nonsense and destructive culture” which had led to the current problems, including the ”twisting and misrepresenting of human rights”.
19 Comments
*Snort!*
So the riots were bad because it tarnished the British brand wot. Next time keep the violence indoors where it belongs.
Well we have (in effect) a Conservative government, Adrien, so yes – between consenting adults certainly.
Oh DEM, you ARE deliciously wicked.
As it’s a British Tory govt may I say you’ve forgot to mention the livestock, the rubber, the French governess and the camel.
All consenting of course. And none of them ever pinched a pair of shoes from anyone.
Lorenzo mentioned on the Thomson thread that the Tories used to have sex scandals while Labour had money scandals (ie, whatever you were most repressed about came crawling up out of the unconscious), but I have to say I’ve noticed in recent times (don’t ask how I know this), at least in Britain, a large number of earnest young Labourites have let their politics invade the bedroom, producing all sorts of weird repressions and complications.
Negative consequences of ‘the personal is political’, I’m afraid: one finishes up inviting Gordon Brown into one’s bedroom.
It’s a New Labour innovation; the cornerstone of the third way. Bill Clinton wrote the manual.
Eeeeewwwwwww!
This blog does go to weird and wonderful places sometimes
The Blair B*tch Project.
This is Botch or Butch? Don’t be so abtuse please DEM
Contemplating the sex lives of politicians one is confronted with the inherent offense to aesthetics that such things should exist at all. I remember a colleague of mine at NUS informing me that two particularly odious members of the Natural Awfulness of Labor Students had a relationship thus: XXX and YYY…. have sex!!!
Well it was enough to put us off the subsidized breakfast.
Perhaps there’s a basis for a new theocratic moral instruction. The 15th circle of Hell is an ongoing orgy for the Lustful in which congress with most hideous parliamentarians and presidents is forced upon your soul.
It’s called the Hubba Bubba Blubber room.
Adrien, that’s gross. Very funny, but gross.
Adrien@10. That’d only encourage the hideous politicians to be even more hideous
But of course those politicians should be depicted in some hellish painting – they talk utter Bosch.
Adrien, that’s gross. Very funny, but gross.
I can’t help it. I was exposed to the Labor Club at a tender age.
Dave – They need no encouragement.
Libs are totally wrong to refuse the pair. Pairing is a tradition that is too valuable to lose and to refuse it shows them to have limited foresight. Shame Chris Pyne!
Christopher Pyne mentioned the man on the Clapham omnibus yesterday. Nothing good. And also, I very much agree with Henry.
I agree, refusing pairing is a bad move. Attacking a longstanding principle that helps make Parliament decently functional is not justified, particularly when the Government is already in enough strife.
At the end of Barry Lyndon Lord Bullingdon cripples the anti-hero dishonorably, with utter ruthlessness and yet within the rules.
To refuse pairing is a good trigger for a spill. And considering the G-G’s cozy relationship with members of the government, considering the dismissal of Whitlam, such a scenario can not but be dramatic.
I think an Oz-centric comedy about geopolitics from an Australia perspective is in ???. [Sorry Adrien, your linky died- ADMIN DEM]
The plot should revolve around an obscure Asian dictator’s threatening to nuke his whole country unless the US government grants him his own film production company in LA, complete with the Bel-Air palace and marriage to Paris Hilton (or same).
It now seems Tony Blair was in bed not only with Gaddafi, which we suspected all along because it was known they communicated, but he was very deeply intertwined with Rupert Murdoch too, being Godson to his child. Unbelievable – is there anyone the man in the street can trust to represent his interests?