Very rum. Seems the totally evil Sir Christopher Chope
has totally blocked this righteous Law to make Female Genital Mutilation a crime in our Sceptered Isle...
...or, if not an "FGM Law" per se, as the Guardian insists, at least an amendment to Section 5A of, and Schedule 2 to, the existing 2003 Act.
There was I thinking that: FGM has in fact been illegal in Britain for 23 years or so; the law has only resulted in one prosecution and one conviction in all that time; Sir Christopher's objection was that an amendment relating to the custody of children should be properly scrutinised and debated in Parliament; far from blocking the amendment, the consequence of his action is that now Parliament has the opportunity to debate this very thing.
Imagine a world in which Parliament had some responsibility for making law, and making effective law at that; a world in which colourful ethnic pastimes like FGM were actually treated as crimes and prosecuted with vigour... a nightmare world against which the
MPs are spending a lot of time at the moment on important matters like "What I Did In My Holidays", bringing pine cones in for the Nature Table and sneering at Sir Christopher to advertise their own righteousness. Little chance, it seems, of any debate on FGM getting squeezed into the schedule anywhere.
11 comments:
Totally agree. I keep loads of notes on news of all kinds and this bloke is in my Utter W*S section.
If you read the Guardian or the Independent it's all our fault for not doing enough to tackle this problem, and others like forced marriage. I really don't know what people who do these things are doing here in the first place. What's so racist about making sure that migrants understand and will abide by our laws and core principles?
On the usual sillier note what is this thing about up skirting? Pretty weird to be turned on by a picture of some thighs. Bit more interesting than smelly socks I suppose.
This darn blog is turning me into an expert on identifying store fronts!
Personally I think Sir Chris is good value... stopped a crap law about upskirts that would have made photography virtually impossible in the UK, now forcing Parliament to avoid debating FGM as it's got M-----s in it. When MPs of all parties are queueing up as one to slate the man, and the BBC and Guardian are leading the popular onslaught, you know he's got to be right.
I wish I got store fronts, I just get the same three buses over and over. I'll try to get rid of the thing.
Well, made overt and explicit photography impossible on pain of imprisonment and damn right too... the only way to proceed under that righteous law would have been to surreptiously use a secret cam to take pictures undetected up, say, girls' skirts... oh, wait...
Reading your post properly (unusual) I see you were defending him as ensuring proper scrutiny. Don't it see meself, and neither do a great many others. The amendment was a simple one liner giving the courts power to protect children deemed to be at risk, surely MPs could have read it and decided how to vote without a long debate? Possible it may not be debated for months now, if at all.
PS The Guardian seems divided, one pro article, one anti.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/feb/12/in-defence-of-christopher-chope-on-fgm-legislation
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/feb/12/in-defence-of-christopher-chope-on-fgm-legislation
Bah! How can one deduce if summit is bollox if the Guardian does not have a united front to oppose?
PPS Ok, here we go, traffic lights or store fronts?
Mountains or hills, that's a new one! Can't you change it so I can click on images with lady's bottoms? I wouldn't mind that.
Groan wrong link
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/commentisfree/2019/feb/11/christopher-chope-blocking-bills-make-women-safer-senior-white-wealthy-power-anti-fgm-bill
What no bums yets?
I go with Dr Brenda Kelly, who works in the field, and others writing in other papers for the defence, against any number of fuckwitted Guardian hacks (Frances Ryan et al). Kelly points out that the family courts already deal with children at risk of FGM, so what is the amendment achieving apart from virtue-signalling?
What saddens me is the mendacious and violent reaction "FGM LAW BLOCKED!!! Nazi Trumpy McHitlerFace!!!"... in fact an amendment to existing law which doesn't achieve much, but you'd think Chope had made FGM compulsory in Primary Schools or summat.
One or two MPs at least asked the question on Monday, if this is such a good idea why hasn't the Govt already done it, why a private member's bill? One would like to ask also, why only one prosecution in 25 years? What is the actual prevalence of FGM, how do we define and scope the problem? How effective are current arrangements, given the family court is already heavily overloaded?
Like politics in the US increasingly, just yelling about MAGA hats (even if they aren't involved) and no hope of any serious discussion or decision... decadence.
I've set the word verification to NO to get rid of the reCaptcha garbage but no dice, apparently... and no ladies' bottoms either.
Post a Comment