Wednesday, 11 March 2009

Tom Harris MP

I have been following Labour MP Tom Harris' blog for a while. It's a good read with an interesting mix of political and personal posts.

He (somewhat predictably it must be said) ran into some controversy about this post. It's a bold, honest and well written opinion, which has attracted over 300 comments. Was it wrong for him to express his views? I don't think so.

You may not agree with what Tom said, but he makes some valid points. The shame is that having expressed an opinion which opened up a wider debate, albeit briefly, his views attracted the motion below by Bill Kidd MSP. The knee jerk motion is almost dripping with synthetic outrage whilst offering no alternative view apart from 'you can't say that'.

Well he can, and he did. And well done to him.

*S3M-3634 Bill Kidd: Labour’s True Beliefs—That the Parliament condemns the views of Tom Harris, Labour MP for Glasgow South, who, in response to hearing how proud a father was of his daughter’s newborn baby, stated in his blog "But proud? Proud that his teenage daughter was not only sexually active but was now a mother? Proud that any chance of a decent education, followed by a decent job, was now remote at best? Proud that she was, in all likelihood, about to embark on a lifetime of depending on benefit handouts for her and her child?"; considers sickening the beliefs espoused by the MP when he stated that "They become pregnant because they have absolutely no ambition for themselves. They have been indoctrinated with the lie that they’ll never amount to anything, and have fulfilled that prophesy by making no effort to achieve any qualification. Very often they live with parents (or a parent) who have no jobs themselves, who are setting the example of benefit dependency for all their offspring"; believes that such right-wing and downright offensive language is completely indefensible, and calls on the Labour party to sanction Tom Harris publicly and for the MP to issue an immediate apology.
Supported by: Bill Wilson*, Joe FitzPatrick*, Sandra White*

1 comment:

Simon Gardner said...

I am NOT best 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.

He thus allows only one side of an argument to be put - the one convenient to Mr Harris’s original point of view.

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 complainants to the ASA), it behoves you to allow said public debate.

It’s not how one expects an MP to behave. The man is a disgrace to his office.