Scottish Politician Invites Your Opinion


by Dick Puddlecote
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/DickPuddlecote/~3/82p-217mppM/scottish-politician-invites-your-opinion.html

Scottish Politician Invites Your Opinion Mesmerised Scottish politician Jim Hume is planning to present a bill to the Jockish parliament to ban smoking in cars and wants to hear your opinions. As such, he has produced a consultation document which is all his own work and not in any way aided by tax sponging tobacco controllers. Nope, not at all.

You can read the whole thing here.

Every item of junk science on the subject has been breathlessly reproduced, with Jimmy adding his own ignorant spin to it along the way. The result of which is that he has proposed some really illiberal shit.

I therefore propose to prohibit smoking in a vehicle while a child aged under 16 is present. The ban would apply irrespective of whether the vehicle was moving or stationary, on a road, a private driveway or any other private or public land. My proposals would also include convertible vehicles irrespective of whether the top is down but would not apply to motorcycles and sidecars.

Only in the crazy world of anti-tobacco fruitcakery can second-hand smoke in a soft top at 70mph on a motorway with the roof down be deemed a potentially lethal substance to poor innocent passengers.

Still, he is giving the illusion of democracy by asking what you think … before carrying on regardless. The questions are on page 39, but to save you some time:

1. Do you support the general aim of the proposed Bill? Please indicate “yes/no/undecided” and explain the reasons for your response.

2. Do you agree that legislation is a necessary and appropriate means of addressing the issues identified?

3. What (if any) would be the main practical advantages of the legislation proposed? What (if any) would be the disadvantages?

4. Do you agree that a ban should apply to smokers while in a car with children under 16 years of age?

5. Do you agree that the age of an offender shall be anyone aged 16 or over?

6. Do you agree with making the fine for an offence (£60) in line with offences for failing to wear a seat belt and the use of a hand-held device while driving?

7. What types of vehicles should the ban apply to? Do you believe that these proposals should include convertible cars irrespective of whether the top is down?

8. What is your assessment of the likely financial implications (if any) of the proposed Bill to you or your organisation? What (if any) other significant financial implications are likely to arise?

9. Is the proposed Bill likely to have any substantial positive or negative implications for equality? If it is likely to have a substantial negative implication, how might this be minimised or avoided?

10. What lead-in time should be allowed prior to implementation of the ban and how should the public be informed?

11. Do you have any other comments on or suggestions relevant to the proposal?

Be nice with the last one, folks.

You have until the end of the month to answer these questions, and I heartily encourage you to do so via the means below.

You are invited to respond to this consultation by answering the questions in the consultation and by adding any other comments that you consider appropriate.

Be nice with that too, eh?

Responses should be submitted by 5pm on Friday 30th August and sent to:

Jim Hume MSP
M2.20
The Scottish Parliament
Edinburgh
EH99 1SP
Tel: 0131 348 6702
Fax: 0131 348 6705
E-mail: jim.hume.msp

Please indicate whether you are a private individual or an organisation.

He is promising to make the responses public, so fire away and see if you get published.82p-217mppM

About these ads

8 responses to “Scottish Politician Invites Your Opinion

  1. I find your reference “jockish parliament” rather racist. You might disagree with the individual’s opinion but it is still an assembly representing the people of Scotland on a whole raft of matters, just as the Welsh assembly does for the Welsh people. Scotland is a varied country with a very varied population and your insulting remark turns them all into a stereotype. Paki parliament, Chinky government, jockish parliament, hardly terms for a rational political debate. You have just lost a reader.

  2. We didn’t, at the Libertarian Alliance, refer to the “Jockish Parliament”. We have reproduced someone else’s creative writing.

    If you want to do the adult equivalent of that well-known childish gesture of shutting your ears, then please fell free so to do.

  3. Thank you for you friendly advice, I will consider it and make up my mind.

  4. As a sweaty sock I have no problems with this on two fronts:

    1) It’s just a word, and;

    2) I’m a grown adult.

    p.s. Tell me again how white Europeans can be racist to each other? Outwith the definition of a ‘Newspeak’ law, I mean.

    Original point – this MP = nonentity; “do not feed” I believe the kids say nowadays.

  5. Pingback: Scottish Politician Invites Your Opinion - SurvivalismUpdates.com

  6. I believe that in WW1 – a conflict not long previously ended when i was born – Scottish soldiers in their own regiments referred to themselves as Jocks. The English soldiers, on hearing it, found it humorous and took it up. The Scotch fellas called us “Sassenach” in return, and we didn’t mind either. After all, we were each as likely to be dead the next morning as each other.

  7. Pingback: Scottish Politician Invites Your Opinion - SurvivalismUpdates.com