Tuesday, October 17, 2006

That YouTube moment!

(Press Association)

Before this story thankfully dies the death it deserves, I want to raise one or two points!
First of all, whilst it was silly and indefensible, the point behind it is one that needs addressing. Namely that David Cameron tries so hard to show he is down with the electorate it's embarrasing. Sion Simon went the wrong way about it. Not only was it silly, but it was personal. There is a difference between criticising someone's approach and suggesting they would give away their wife and children! Plus there was no real satire or humour, the impression wasn't good, and there is a perception out there that this kind of thing is best left to the satirists and MP's should try witty asides and dry humour. Snobbish yes, but that is a prevailing viewpoint!
Okay, there are about four points there ;), but the second major point is this! Is it me or does anyone smell a whiff of hypocricy here? If a Conservative MP did this about Tony Blair or Gordon Brown, would the same people who were quick to defend Simon be up in arms! Would those Tories quick to attack Simon be so sharp if it was one of them attacking a senior Labour politician?
It's moments like these that turn people away from the insularity that is Westminster politics and the sooner we work to move ourselves away from that the better!
In any case both Sion Simon and Tom Watson are sorry and it should be left at that!

3 comments:

Andrea said...

"There is a difference between criticising someone's approach and suggesting they would give away their wife and children!"

I don't think Sion Simon was really advocating to give Samantha Cameron (and the 3 children...even if SS missed one) away.
I think it was using that comment (you can argue it was pretty tasteless) to imply that Cameron would do anything to gain voters.
It's like the expression "he'll pass over his mother's dead body"*...it doesn't mean that the person in question would really do it

* now don't tell this expression doesn't exist in UK.

Paul Burgin said...

I agree it was satire, but even so it was badly done and that gave it both a pathetic and unpleasant edge. That said he did apologise, what I wanted to point out were the elements of hypocricy in this case!

Praguetory said...

I thought it was Sion's obnoxious behaviour on Sky and the Beeb that really got people's backs up (mine included). That was the bit that made the whole chapter worthy of condemnation. Before that, whilst I thought the shot was cheap and it reinforced my view that he should be spending more time with his constituents I couldn't get too animated.