Fit for purpose viewing

by Stephen Tall on January 23, 2007

Excellent, attention-grabbing video here on behalf of the Lib Dems’ ‘We Can Cut Crime’ campaign.

There’s one they forgot, though… Chances of John Reid becoming the next Labour leader – one in 13. Unlucky for some.

Enjoy reading this? Please like and share:


Wow! That has to be one of the least effective pieces of ‘communication’ I’ve ever seen.

It allows New Labour to once again wheel out their hoary old arguments that ‘trials’ in a ‘court’ are expensive and wasteful (far better, surely, to just slap a quick ASBO on most criminals). It also panders to Conservative fears on being soft on crime. And, to top it all, it fails to offer a single reason why Lib Dem policy would be any different, as well as playing obviously fast and loose with statistics (one cannot find the research on which the claim is based even if one follows the link to the website – what one does find is the fact that the research says something completely different, that there is a 1 in 100 chance of the perpetrator of a crime being punished in court.)

Is it trying to say that more crimes should be tried in court? That more public resources should be directed towards trial lawyers? Is it saying that we don’t need trials? Should we just legalise more things, so that fewer people are criminals?

This is muddy thinking, muddy speaking, and verges very close to being the simple dissemination of untruths. There is not a 1 in a 100 chance of a crime being punished in court, there is, according to your website, a 1 in 100 chance of a ‘perpetrator of a crime’ being punished in a court.

Given that the perpetrators of crimes include people who have been issued with speeding tickets, many people might agree that there are effective ways of punishing people outside a courtroom. Also, the statistic makes very little sense unless in using the word ‘perpetrators’ you mean ‘alleged perpetrators’. Unfortunately, we will never know, as the website does not give us access to where this ‘information’ came from.

This is cheap and badly thought through hackery of the worst kind, and I expected better of the Lib Dems.

by Nathaniel Tapley on January 24, 2007 at 3:30 pm. Reply #

Ming Campbell’s chances becoming LibDem leader 10,000-1. Whoops, he IS LibDem leader! Oh dear! Well, i suppose it could be worse!

by Simon on January 24, 2007 at 3:57 pm. Reply #

“I expected better of the Lib Dems.” I don’t believe you for a moment, Natt.

by Stephen Tall on January 24, 2007 at 4:34 pm. Reply #

Nor should you.

by Nathaniel Tapley on January 24, 2007 at 5:30 pm. Reply #

Leave your comment


Required. Not published.

If you have one.