08 January 2007

There's Talk Of Witch-Hunts

The leaders of the major parties (by that I mean Blair and Cameron) are supporting Ruth Kelly as am I for her personal decision to pay for her son to be educated privately. More here.

However, Labour MP Barry Sheerman, chairman of the Commons education select committee, said: "Before we start a witch-hunt about a particular Cabinet minister, let us find out what the circumstances are and let's then duly consider that" .

So they've banned fox-hunting, but witch-hunting - that's OK. And who's we? And what does "finding out the circumstances" involve? Do "they" want to see Master Kelly's school reports/medical records before deciding that the decision is OK? Is it just me or do you get the feeling that being an open Christian in the Labour Party is frowned upon? Don't let the b*****s grind you down, Ruth.

Update

Personally, I thought the quote I found was the most newsworthy, but the BBC has kindly removed the element of Shearman's quote emboldened above. The rest of the article looks the same. Anyone would think NuLabour have got the Beeb in their pocket.

10 comments:

Croydonian said...

I expect she will be tightening up her cilice tonight.

Anonymous said...

I agree PT, but she should have announced it herself. Although it is a personal decision, she is a member of the government, and the media always have a way to finding these things out.

Anonymous said...

Kelly is just another two faced Socialist hypocrite, nothing new there.

Praguetory said...

Rumours abound about her trying to get an injuction on the papers from publishing this. Has anyone seen any firm evidence of this? Why is it that every time I try to support a Labourite I end up back-sliding?

Anonymous said...

The Tories are supporting this rank hypocrisy? What? Huh? Eh?

Snafu said...

PT, I disagree!

If a Labour Education Secretary is unable to champion the needs of children with "learning difficulties" whilst in Office, I fail to see why she should subsequently be able to let her child opt out of the state system and receive the benefits of a private education.

How many working class parents can afford to opt out if the state system is failing their child's needs? It is particularly frustrating when you consider that she opposed weak Conservative proposals for "Pupil Passports" that would have provided an escape route for parents on modest incomes whilst I suspect she also supported the abolition of the Assisted Places Scheme!

Praguetory said...

It's a change of government we need, not a change of personnel on their front bench. Let the Labour party fight amongst themselves I say. The rest of us know they can't deliver on education.

Ellee said...

snafu, Well said, Ruth Kelly truly let down all parents with dyslexic children when as Education Secretary she was in the best position to help them, using her personal experience to make changes.

Spicy Cauldron said...

I think the fact that she's Opus Dei would (unfortunately) help, not hinder her, frankly. I don't think this has anything whatsoever to do with her religious convictions or any given club she belongs to, shades of Freemasonry or otherwise.

What I think is appalling is that she could have done something to improve the lot of the many dyslexic and other disadvantaged students in education. She didn't. Like so many before her of various political persuasions, the purse sings a different song to the political mind where her own kids are concerned.

We no longer have politicians of conviction but politicians of opportunity. Ruth Kelly is an offensive symptom of a much wider and significant malaise. Hypocrisy and self-serving actions are the order of the day, and have long been so. This problem has only worsened since Labour came to power. They did not start it. For that, we need to go back to the start of the whole 'me me me' culture and such insane notions as 'there is no such thing as society'. x

Laban said...

see Revisionista for all BBC stealth edits. The quote's on version 7 (of 15 !)

http://newssniffer.newworldodour.co.uk/
articles/20583/diff/7/8