Mother of Parliaments Aborts Public Transparency
posted at 3:50 pm on July 29, 2010 by J.E. Dyer
[ Political Correctness ] printer-friendly
It’s a good thing, in pragmatic terms, that the progeny of the British Empire are now doing their own thing, self-government-wise. The US, Canada, Australia, India, New Zealand – a long list of us who have Mother England to thank for our democratic traditions have been self-sustaining in that regard – in fact, self-directed – for years, decades, or centuries.
But it’s still a profoundly sad thing to see Our Mum doddering into oblivion, suffering old-age dementia, political Alzheimer’s, whatever metaphorical tag we want to put on it, as the 2010 Pageant of the Absurd rambles on. I’m not talking here about David Cameron’s impolitic communications in Turkey – the truckling reference to Gaza as a “prison camp” – but about the less-reported visit of Arab-Israeli members of the Knesset to a committee of the House of Commons on Wednesday, 28 July.
At the hearing held in their honor, the Israeli Arabs reportedly “launched a blistering attack on the Jewish state and its Parliament,” with one informing members of the Commons’ “Palestine Solidarity Campaign” that “Israel is much worse than the apartheid regime in South Africa. There were no ethnic cleansing policies there, but there are those policies in Israel.”
Yada-yada. You can read the rest at the link. The visit and the charges made amount to the usual boilerplate, but Parliament’s handling of the event was appalling, by the very standards which that once-admirable body long pioneered and exemplified. It turns out that public attendees who were expected, in advance, to be critical of the agenda advocated in this hearing were denied access to it.
Here is the story of one blogger who was removed by the police – not because he behaved improperly or had any history of doing so, but before he was even in the hearing chamber at Westminster, and because he was known to blog from a pro-Israel standpoint.
Here is the story of another pro-Israel blogger denied access to the same hearing.
This report recounts that a third individual, who was admitted to the hearing, spoke in support of Israel and was afterwards “surrounded and intimidated in an incident witnessed and recorded by the police.”
This kind of thing can’t be spun as the misinterpretation of another culture’s charming customs. This is our culture. And this is our culture under the quasi-pharmaceutical influence of a wildly radical “political correctness” – a PC so extreme that it sets the police on anyone who is merely suspected of not being in agreement with it.
There is nothing Western, rational, reasonable, liberal, or empirical about ejecting skeptics from political hearings. There is no prized, quintessential Western tradition in which this is acceptable or makes sense. Parliament failed, in this case, to live up to Western standards of political discourse and public transparency. This is a matter for regret and anger, and the blame for it cannot rationally fall on the culture and traditions of the West. They neither prompt nor excuse such actions. In fact, the Western liberal tradition requires, as evidence of bona fides, that political deeds and words endure critical public scrutiny.
No, this is a matter of one the West’s iconic, centuries-old institutions behaving in a decidedly un-Western, illiberal, non-transparent and culturally foreign manner. No special circumstance like civil war, dueling aspirants to the monarchy, or societal upheaval excuses this lapse in peaceful transparency. We could debate how much of a dividing line there is between this and collectivist-Marxist repressions of political liberty. But given the topic of the hearing in question, it would be fatuous to a degree of idiocy to dismiss the concept of dhimmitude from critical examination.
Cross-posted at The Optimistic Conservative.










Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
And without diligent vigilance, coming soon to a government near you.
Vote early, vote often.
Robert17 on July 29, 2010 at 4:59 PM
You seem to be under impression that the meeting was a Parliamentary Committee meeting. It wasn’t. It was a meeting of Palestine Solidarity Campaign. Had it been a official committee meeting I might be alarmed by your article but it wasn’t so I’m not alarmed and they were well within their rights to decide who should and should not attend. It’s really up to the sponsor (in this case a radical paper and a few radical MPs).
Parliamentary Committees are all televised in their entirety and Parliament is more transparent than it ever has been. Open debates continue as they have for a long long time. Your article is misleading and your conclusions are a load of bollocks.
lexhamfox on July 29, 2010 at 7:45 PM
lexhamfox — I appreciate the information, but the meeting was held at Westminster, as I understand it, and not in some private or at least non-governmental venue. Moreover, the first blogger was converged on by police and forcibly escorted from the premises, clearly an overreaction to his peacefully expressed desire to attend the event. This guy has no history of disruptiveness; he would obviously have departed peacefully on his own if someone administering the event had simply told him directly that the hearing was closed to him.
If you really regard this as normal behavior for a group of MPs holding a political hearing — as opposed to a party strategy session or a conclave discussing national secrets — then I am doubling down on my major conclusion. The direction Britain is heading saddens me greatly.
J.E. Dyer on July 30, 2010 at 10:30 AM
You assert that the meeting was “a committee of the House of Commons.” It was not a Committee meeting. You inserted that false information yourself.
Parliamentary Committee meetings are transparent and open to the public. When the HofC is in session it is also open to the public. Both of these and many other governmental meetings are in fact recorded for the public and freely available for those unable to attend in person.
This is the important part. What you struggle to paint as an official governmental gathering was in fact a private event held at the Palace. The rules for attending those private functions are clear and can be found here. Note that participants require a written invitation. I suspect that this is why they were turned away. Now you can make an argument that MPs should not be allowed to hold private meetings and events at the Palace and there are many critics who think that there should be vetting and review of such events but I myself think that it is an important that MPs are able to retain this privilege.
The police get very efficient when there are crowds at the Palace and I understand that there are more stringent rules in the pipeline because of crowding issues there. I used to have extensive access to the Palace when I worked for the Cabinet Office. I have been turned away from many private events and once, after accidentally following my boss into
a Members Only part of the Palace, I was escorted out off my feet (I’m 6’4″) and ejected from the Palace. Rules are rules and you can’t expect the police to sort out why the guy did not have an invitation before ejecting him.
I would have no problem with your attacking the MPs sponsoring the event or the Campaign holding the event. They deserve it. Your attack on the British Parliament, however, is misleading and misplaced. I can say with some confidence that the same thing would have happened in most any other Western house of government when a private meeting or event is held.
So… go ahead and double down on your hysterical (“culturally foreign… Marxist”) and misinformed conclusions about the British Parliament. What part of your ‘culture’ involves insisting you are correct even after your basic arguments have been shown to be incorrect?
There is enough genuine PC stupidity out there to examine and ridicule without making up facts painting an entirely false picture for your readers.
lexhamfox on July 30, 2010 at 2:44 PM