Tory Party Lobbying

Arron Fitzgerald, 16 Jun 2006 08:27:04

I'm currently a member of the Conservative Party, and at this stage I may
begin lobbying to convince the Party to oppose any legislation that appears
as a matter of policy. I believe the Party can frame its opposition,
without the risk of being painting 'pro-pervert' on the basis on the
following principles:

1. That any legislation would divert scarce law enforcement resources from
real criminal activity, in particular child pornography (and thereby
undermining the protection of children). That would make a good soundbite.

2. That the government will face lengthy and costly litigation all the way
to the ECHR (although hopefully not further than the High Court), and
considering Mr Singh's legal opinion with the real prospect of losing and
thereby heaping worldwide ridicule on the UK.

3. That this is just another headline-grabbing gimmick to divert public
attention from the current crisis at the Home Office.

Considering David Cameron's response to Mediawatch's enquiry during his
leadership campaign, I believe there's every chance of making progress in
this area.

Arron Fitzgerald


----- Original Message -----
, 16 Jun 2006 08:27:04
To:
Sent: Friday, June 16, 2006 8:03 AM
demolitionred, 16 Jun 2006 10:24:52

We have a quote from Cameron on the homepage of the website and a few of us had a very interesting meeting with Edward Garnier QC MP, shadow minister for Home Affairs..

I think it is defintely worth pursuing the tories further.


deno, 16 Jun 2006 17:53:16

In a message dated 16/06/2006 17:19:32 GMT Standard Time,
arron_fitzgerald@hotmail.co.uk writes:

I'm currently a member of the Conservative Party, and at this stage I may
begin lobbying to convince the Party to oppose any legislation that appears
as a matter of policy. I believe the Party can frame its opposition,
without the risk of being painting 'pro-pervert' on the basis on the
following principles:

1. That any legislation would divert scarce law enforcement resources from
real criminal activity, in particular child pornography (and thereby
undermining the protection of children). That would make a good soundbite.

2. That the government will face lengthy and costly litigation all the way
to the ECHR (although hopefully not further than the High Court), and
considering Mr Singh's legal opinion with the real prospect of losing and
thereby heaping worldwide ridicule on the UK.

3. That this is just another headline-grabbing gimmick to divert public
attention from the current crisis at the Home Office.

Considering David Cameron's response to Mediawatch's enquiry during his
leadership campaign, I believe there's every chance of making progress in
this area.

Arron Fitzgerald




Yes, this looks an excellent approach. Police have enough on their hands
persuing real criminals without nanny state creating new ones out of people at
present innocent.

Also quoting various academics, etc., who may not like BDSM or porn but say
censorship will not work, potential rapists and thrill killers would not heed
the legislation so the whole
proceedure is a tragic waste of time and scarce resources. Prisons are
already full and surely they cannot afford to build more to jail chaps who look
at films, etc?
deno posted 16th June

Attachment:.
message.html (text/html)

Graham Marsden, 16 Jun 2006 18:09:21

Hi there,

Arron Fitzgerald wrote:

> I'm currently a member of the Conservative Party, and at this stage I may
> begin lobbying to convince the Party to oppose any legislation that appears
> as a matter of policy. I believe the Party can frame its opposition,
> without the risk of being painting 'pro-pervert' on the basis on the
> following principles:

Some very good suggestions there and ones that would work on MPs from
either side of the house, I think.

Cheers,
Graham.