Once Again, what’s #ing point of the Lib Dems? #debill

I’m inclined to agree.

The overal turnout was pretty atrocious – like someone on Twitter said, you can’t criticise the voting public for not turning up to vote – we don’t get paid for it, MPs do! Yet only around 5% of the MPs that are being paid to do their job actually bothered to turn up today. Disgusting.

Eric, many thanks for blogging about this. I have never been a member of any party, but respect your loyalty to yours. Please don’t blame another party for the failure of YOUR government to prevent a clamp-down on civil liberties. Good luck.

I’m pissed off. I’m truly pissed off. That’s all.

No, to be fair, and I’m pretty sure you’re a fair bloke, there’s more to it than meets the eye. There’s only so much room for MPs to speak and those with a particular interest come in on debates. There’s lots of others around, many watching on monitors. True, a lot aren’t engaged, especially with this bill obv I think too many, but the absence of the Lib Dems was a way of them avoiding the consequences of voting where their mouths apparently are. Apparently being in the operative function there.

Thanks again for the inside track. All seems a little bit of a faux panic where lots of people rush off to marginals, then pop back again for (am I right?) PMQs tomorrow. What’s all the rushin’ about? Makes me think that – for some – it’s all about the glamorous activities and things like – um – making laws can fit in as and when. Tsk. And tut.

Nope, you’re not right. There’ll be plenty of seats available at PMQs tomorrow. Know ur pol proclivities (God, sounds like 70′s The Good Olde Days) but while I respect Pete Wishart’s prof experience, and I do actually have some of his albums, he was just as up for the DE Bill in its current form as anyone else, as far as I could see. TBH, I think it’s just too close to the general election for decent legislation, especially complex stuff like the DE Bill. Don’t mean complex as in ‘diff to understand’; more, ‘multi-faceted and lots of detail’. Oh well.

Sure. Parliament should just have been dissolved. Plenty of ‘new guns’ would have been keen to kick the re-presented bill into shape.

Pete’s a great guy, very earnest and of course he’s been elected to Parliament and I’ve not. But last time we spoke he was shouting in my face about my (alleged) lack of leadership skills – which again he may have been in a good position to comment on. But I’m in the Runrig Fan Club, not any one individual’s… (Whoops. Now I’m in trouble.)

“there’s more to it than meets the eye”

Yeh across parties MPs were furthering they own career either out campaigning or keeping shtum in-case they get promoted to chief bag carrier for the PPS in charge of pencil sharpeners over at the ministry at the next parliament.
just need to look at MPs twitter feeds about how fabulous a reception they were getting on doorstep (bullshit!) to bother themselves with the democratic process, hence why a large part of those speaking are those quitting at the election.

But I’m a cynic when it comes to politicians

Although after how much the lib dems went on about how they were totally against it they were the biggest piss take. It would be funny if it wasn’t such a controversial bill

Numbers not including hunt or bradshaw:

Labour
13.5 / 362

Lib Dem
1 / 63

Conservatives
14 / 193

and some nutter the SNP busted out of a mental hospital.

As is their wont they adopted a position relating to their own interests. Only the well informed and honest Labour rebels will be in a butter one.

The Lib-Dems will be able to say HMG’s Bill had the support of both opposition parties?

Let’s hope the third party squeeze causes them to reassess their position.

If anything it just shows why we need more Lib Dems. What we are seeing is Labour and Tory banding together to pass an ignominious, ill thought out piece of legislation.

The sensible thing would have been for the Government to let this bill drop – so don’t blame us for Labour’s shortcomings.

No, on this occasion, Caron, even if just those Lib Dems who Tweeted their objection to the bill had turned up they could have forced a vote. And tonight, the Lib Dems will vote for the Bill. Most will avoid turning up and tweet from a distance, but so what? Most MPs of all parties support the bill, but at least those of us who don’t turned up. And we will again tonight.

[...] Nick Clegg… well, Mr Angry was in the House once again, claiming the Tories and Labour were colluding to defeat parliamentary reform. If the Lib Dems are so keen to make sure their agenda is followed, one has to wonder why they were so conspicuous by their absence during yesterday’s reading of the Digital Economy Bill (dissected superbly by Eric Joyce on his blog). [...]

“It’s not the ones we lose that bother me, it’s the ones we don’t suit up for”

Up until yesterday I intended to vote Lib Dem, but christ, even the Tories put up more of a fight. If they won’t speak for me it’s hard to justify voting for them.

hi eric, forgive me if I have misunderstood, but if the debill vote is tonight, then what could the LibDems voted on yesterday? Are you saying that if all the LDs had turned up and “forced” a vote yesterday, then it could have been defeated yesterday and there would be no vote tonight ?

And if that was the case, wouldn’t the government have just brought in more “troops” to beat down that vote, making yesterday pointless once more?

If there had been a vote last night, which the Lib Dems could have forced, then a lot of MPs from other parties would have been under pressure to vote against by their constituents. Also, the government would have had to take much closer note of the disconnection clauses objections. As it is, there’ll be a vote tonight and if the govt thought the Lib Dems would vote against, again they might have been more open to a concession on disconnection. But the Lib Dems are going to vote to pass the disconnection clauses, as I understand it. Maybe some will have the courage of their tweets, though.

Of all the speeches yesterday the most unexpected and lucid reasoning came from the unlikely direction of one John Redwood. I’ve never heard such a balanced and sensible overview of the reality of copyright, coming from a politician.

He also asked a very important question of Stephen Timms during the summing up, which Mr Timms failed to comprehend and then brushed aside. Simply, how far will the government take this? Could he (John Redwood) download something and share it with his immediate family having purchased it?

I’d also add to that, will the bill extend beyond the virtual world? Half of the electorate are probably carrying around mp3 players with music they didn’t pay for in accordance of BPI preference (all mp3s should be purchased not ripped or shared).

Anyway, my point is that like your good self, John Redwood has a grasp and understanding of the technology and reasonable expectation of what will happen to his work as an author post publication. It’s a shame all front benches are completely oblivious to these realities, chosing to listen instead to the twisted representation of those with a much bigger vested financial interest.

John Redwood’s was a great speech. He’s pretty new-media savvy and a former Business Sec, so he knows his stuff. What I thought was especially striking is how he put the DE Bill into a copyright context which made it easily understandable in terms of daily human behaviour. Often, new media stuff is discussed in a way which seems to dislocate it from the stuff people have a fair grasp of – how they use/consume any media – papers, books, whatever. Stephen Timms misunderstood his excellent question. Redwood tried three times but it wasn’t going in. Maybe he’ll try it again tonight!

Thanks for clarifying that. We’ll have to wait and see. First time watching the debate now, and the lack of technical knowledge of the people defending this Bill is shocking. I don’t know much about politics, but I know computing and networking.

[...] Eric Joyce MP (Lab) But for days now I’ve been hearing about how the Lib Dems were dead against it. How they were going to show how they can change British politics by being the radical party of the centre (whatever that means). And do you know what they did? Answer – Nothing At All. [...]