The Significance of the Resignation of David Blunkett as Home Secretary
David Blunkett: A Personal Profile
The messy personal scandal which has brought about the political
demise of the Home Secretary is out of character for a man who has
always prided himself on his strong moral values.
David Blunkett has been a key figure in shaping New Labour's social
agenda, a politician whose uncompromising principles shape both his
private and professional life. He refused to back down when his tough
anti-terror legislation and changes to the criminal justice system
came under fire from judges, lawyers and human right campaigners. His
belief in traditional family values bolstered him as he remained
within an unhappy marriage for 18 years for the sake of bringing up
his three sons. And yet it was the suggestion of personal sleaze -
unproven allegations that he may have repeatedly misused the
privileges of power to help his mistress, Kimberley Quinn, and to
obtain visas for her Filipina nanny - that has led to his downfall.
His cause was not helped by the flash of arrogance he showed in
savagely criticizing his Cabinet colleagues in interviews with his
biographer, whose book has just been published. The blind 57-year-old
showed enormous dedication and strength of character to overcome his
disability in his rise to power within New Labour. Born in Sheffield,
he suffered the loss of his father at a young age, when the gasworks
foreman was killed in a horrific industrial accident. The future Home
Secretary was educated at Sheffield School for the Blind from the age
of four and the Royal Normal College for the Blind, Shrewsbury, where
he studied Braille, typing and shorthand. Lonely and living away from
home, he drove himself to achieve academically. After leaving school,
Mr. Blunkett went back to Sheffield and worked for the Gas Board,
studying economics, politics and economic history A-levels in the
evenings. Later, he attended Sheffield University where he obtained an
honours degree in political theory and institutions. Hand in hand with
his drive to better himself went his passion for politics.
Do you agree that the failure of the 1886 Home Rule Bill was due to ‘tactical mistakes’ made by Gladstone?
who had been seen by many Tories as a future leader of the party lost
This essay will address whether New Labour contained policies with which it wished to pursue, or was solely developed in order to win elections. It is important to realise whether a political party that held office for approximately 13 years only possessed the goal of winning elections, or promoted policies which it wished to pursue. If a party that held no substance was governing for 13 years, it would be unfair to the people. New Labour was designed to win elections, but still contained policies which it wished to pursue. To adequately defend this thesis, one must look at the re-branding steps taken by New Labour and the new policies the party was going to pursue. Through analysis, it will be shown that New Labour promoted policies in regards
The Death of Lord Liverpool as the Most Important Reason for the Collapse of the Tory Ministries
In Chapter 7 of Democracy’s Discontent, Michael Sandel discusses the Progressive Era and social reform of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Sandel describes the era as being divided into 3 visions: decentralization, nationalist, and consumerist. I would argue that the vision of decentralization informed the anti-chain store movement, but the anti-trust movement was influenced by both the consumerist and decentralization visions. The criticisms of “too-big-to-fail” banks are the decentralized vision and the Affordable Care Act can be seen as both the nationalist and consumerist visions.
Outwardly, the politicians seem love peace and uphold justice but on the sly, they are keeping scheming and may furtively deride the common people who are deceived by them. Huck runs to Judge Thatcher’s
Britain as an Awkward Partner in the European Community. Britain emerged from the war in a relatively favourable position. compared to its European neighbours. In 1946 industrial production was as high as at any time pre-war, and increasing quite fast.
What began as a shortage in the Canadian labour market ended with one of the most revolting and atrocious displays of prejudice and discrimination against an entire country and culture of people. The events leading up to Humiliation Day brought forth a legalized intolerance that would leave an inescapable bruise on Canadian history.
Politically, it wasn't without cost to John Howard. Political interest groups among his conservative base raised hell, and the move met strong resistance from some in rural areas. His party's coalition partner in those areas suffered in subsequent elections. But the majority of Australians, shocked by the mass killing, backed action. Sound familiar? And the best part: it worked.
Throughout history, the actions of governments have always been debated; however, occasionally there are certain events which spark much controversy, both at the time of the event and by historians today. One of these controversial acts was the invocation of the War Measures Act in 1970, an act which suspended the civil liberties of Canadian citizens. In October 1970, in what became known as the October Crisis, the Front de libération du Québec, (commonly known as the FLQ) which was a French Canadian organization advocating independence from Canada, kidnapped two politicians. This initiated a series of events, one of which was the invocation of the War Measures Act by Prime Minister Pierre Elliot Trudeau. Many historians argue that Trudeau was justified in invoking the War Measures Act because the October Crisis ended shortly after the Act was invoked. However, this argument is invalid as justification; primarily because the War Measures Act was an extreme overreaction by Trudeau, as the threat of the FLQ was largely small-scale, and the demise of the FLQ was impending with the rise of the Bloc Quebecois. Furthermore, the Act may have inspired Quebecers who favoured separatism, as they saw the government desperately employ the most extreme measure to stop the FLQ. Finally, the War Measures Act suspended the civil rights of citizens within a democracy, violating the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
With the end of the Second World War, the world began its new era with the Cold War. In Europe, many (new) experiences occurred, advancing mainly in Western European nations: an economic boom never before seen, increased wealth for its citizens, but increased tension with the Soviet Union along the Iron Curtain. In this new age, many western countries developed their own version of a socialist society; after the war, leaders found it imperative that they provide for their constituents, prevent in-house fighting within Western Europe while preparing and arming themselves for any potential opposition from the Soviet Union along its borders with Eastern Europe. The United Kingdom, most notably, approached this mindset through nationalization.
The articles also frequently make use of outside sources from political leaders. Theresa May, the British Prime minister, is quoted in several of the articles giving her thoughts on the situation, and is echoed by United States President Donald Trump, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, among others. The inclusion of comments from leaders outside the United Kingdom pushes the overall largeness of the attack, and gives the perspective of leaders. Furthermore, it gives an underlying implication of potential changes politically in the future to stop future attacks. It’s worth noting that there is also a structural bias here, the inclusion of outside leaders, particularly the American President, is undoubtedly influenced by the audience the
“Economics are the method; the object is to change the heart and soul” (Thathcer, 1981). Margaret Thatcher is undoubtedly one of the most renowned individuals in British history. Initially the first woman to be elected as party leader, who entered 10 Downing Street as the Prime Minister. Secondly her revolutionary policies and solid capitalist ideology shook Britain.
John Humphrys begins the article complaining about the removal of hyphens from more than 16,000 words in the OED (Oxford English Dictionary). He referred it as laziness as he wrote: “Are our lives really so pressured, every minute occupied in so many vital tasks, every second accounted for, that we cannot afford the millisecond (no hyphen) it takes to tap the key?” (2007:1) Mr. Humphrys also states that text messaging, is as a form of laziness and a threat to the English language; due to the frequent usage of abbreviations and emoticons within in text messages. However, what Mr. Humphrys failed to realize, is that the abbreviations and emoticons were actually were made for a whole different other purpose. Text messaging weren’t always as affordable
...has so much power. The findings of this research could be used by campaigners in an attempt to swing an election in their favour, creating an unfair bias in parliament and denigrating the ideals of democracy.