Tag: health

Andrew Rosindell’s Political Philosophy (Part Two)

Andrew is a libertarian. Unlike the political opportunist Julia Lopez, he has firm political beliefs so you know where you stand with him. He said, “Freedom with responsibility and freedom of choice are surely what the Conservative party should stand for.”1 He spoke three times against the proposal that access to tobacco should be abolished over many decades to save lives. (Addendum for the vote)

Libertarians oppose government interference in the lives of adults.2 Rishi Sunak is trying to prevent the preventable harms3 of smoking by ultimately ending legal sales. This builds on many current laws. One says motorcyclists must4 wear helmets whilst anyone travelling in cars must wear a seatbelt. Libertarians say this is a denial of ‘freedom of choice’ as it treats adults like children.

Andrew’s views on Covid-19 vaccination was consistent with his philosophy. “I have long campaigned against lockdown restrictions since the Summer of 2020 and have vehemently opposed mandatory vaccination in any setting.”5 Mandatory vaccinations are an example of unnecessary protection in his opinion.

Libertarianism promotes responsibility. It implies an increase in death and injury from not wearing helmets or seatbelts for example, which is the price of freedom. The 74,600 deaths3 annually from smoking would probably increase without intervention. Andrew’s position is coherent but might not suit public opinion, which thinks most protective laws are a ‘Good Thing’.

Addendum: Havering’s MPs and their vote

Jon Cruddas, Labour, voted for the proposal banning smoking for 15 year olds, Julia Lopez, Conservative minister, voted against and Andrew abstained.

Tobacco and Vapes Bill (Division 123: held on Tuesday – Hansard – UK Parliament The debate was on the 16th April 2024

Notes

1 Tobacco and Vapes Bill – Hansard – UK Parliament  col.220 Andrew has changed his mind. In 2010 he voted to maintain a ban on smoking Public Houses and Private Members’ Clubs (Smoking) Bill: Recent Votes – TheyWorkForYou Liberatarians accept protective laws for children.

2 Should Governments Prevent Preventable Harm? | Odeboyz’s Blog (oedeboyz.com) see also Paternalism in Historical Context: Helmet and Seatbelt Legislation in the UK | Public Health Ethics | Oxford Academic (oup.com) Andrew voted against the provision of free school meals during holiday periods for example Free School Meals (Division 154: held on Wednesday 21 – Hansard – UK Parliament

3 Statistics on Smoking, England 2020 – NHS England Digital The 2020 figures are 74,600 deaths and half a million hospital admissions

4 Motorcycle Helmets and Sikh Religion – Motorcycle Rider (motor-software.co.uk)

5 Scrap ‘ludicrous’ mandatory vaccination policy, says Rosindell | Romford Recorder

Havering Council Meeting, 17th January 2024 (part one)

Keith Prince had a tour de force (1 hour18)1 His motion was opportunist (see addendum) building on the anger that SEN children’s school transport should be ‘reviewed’. It’s believed this will reduce the quality of the service. (A clue is a possible £1.4m saving over four years.).2

Keith said HRA and Labour amendments were out-of-order. This isn’t a technicality. If they were out-of-order, HRA and Labour would be caught in a cleft stick. They’d have to vote FOR the motion and lose £1.4m. Alternatively, vote AGAINST and show they were ruled by accountants.3

The Monitoring Officer rescued them. In an excruciating passage he wriggled4 and produced a ‘solution’. HRA’s amendment was accepted and the review of SEN transport continues its ‘consultation’ period.

Oscar Ford (2:08) kept remarking on ‘cost effective’ transport and Havering’s financial position. Unfortunately, an option is Uber. Robert Benham (2:13) noted Uber allocates drivers randomly and many children need continuity or get distressed. David Taylor (2:28) commented on Uber’s surge pricing mechanism, which makes predictions impossible. Ray Morgon (2:41) quoted a comment from ‘someone’ who said cabbies were making ‘thousands of pounds’ from SEN transport to bolster his argument.5 No evidence, no names.

Keith Darvill (2:21) politicised the issue in a telling speech.

 

Addendum: The Conservative Motion

“This Council calls on the Cabinet not to proceed with the proposed cuts and changes in service, proposed in the Home to School Transport consultation. It further recognises that such cuts would have a detrimental impact on both children and parents, causing them increased stress and anxiety.” (Public Pack)Agenda Document for Council, 17/01/2024 19:30 (havering.gov.uk) p39

 

Notes

1 Annotator Player (sonicfoundry.com) All times refer to this webcast The item begins at 1 hour 18 minutes and finished at 2:01 hours = 33 minutes of debate.

2 Several councillors noted they’d spoken to protestors outside the Town Hall. Specifically, Cllrs. Persaud, Taylor and Wise who made comments in their speeches

3 Typically this is known as a lose-lose situation

4 Giving a minute-by-minute timeline to ‘explain’ why the cock-up wasn’t his fault. And then discovered an arcane sub-clause ‘rarely’ used to defend the indefensible.

5 This is an example of Confirmation Bias where *evidence* is used to support an argument and countervailing points are ignored or downplayed