Quote:
Originally Posted by ian@huth
Just because an item is in a political parties manifesto doesn't mean that the voting populace put them in power because of that one item. It could be other items in the manifesto weighed against what was in the other parties manifestos that enabled them to win.
If you remember correctly the wording of the bill resulted in delays to its publication and was altered significantly just prior to publication. Many bills are introduced to Parliament and never result in legislation or are altered so much that the resultant legislation is completely different to what was originally on the table. Don't forget also that opposition parties often take a stance against government proposals, particularly on highly emotive issues where a fair proportion of government MPs may be (and in the case of a complete smoking ban are) at odds with their leadership. I suggest that your emphatic *will* be altered to *MAY*.
|
If you truly, truly believe that - well, I don't need to say any more to try to convince you otherwise. I am happy to let history run its course and I'm confident that what eventually gets onto the statute book will be *at least* as strict as the initial Bill. If you'd been following this in the Media you would know that the likelihood is it will get beefed up in the Commons, not watered down as is often the case with Bills.
As for the point about voting and manifestos - I agree, which is why I put 'within the limitations' in my post.