Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg has again emphasised the critical importance of retsoring law and order to the streets of Britain after the widespread rioting of the past few days. However, he also noted that — once calm is fully restored — there will be a need for a proper debate about ensuring young people in deprived areas feel they have a much greater stake in their own communities. Here’s what Nick said on the BBC this morning:
Subscribe
-
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
-
Like us on Facebook
-
Subscribe to our feed
-
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Most Read
Search
Op-eds
-
We need a debate on Electoral Reform (Samuel Jackson)
-
Mathew on Monday: We must never deny the importance of soft power (Mathew Hulbert)
-
‘What is truth?’ (and why this matters to Liberal Democrats) (Mark Paine)
-
How to empty the hotels (Suzanne Fletcher)
-
Governments must do more for survivors of same-sex sexual assault (John Jewers)
-
Market Harborough goes bananas on Carnival day
-
A boiler explosion at Stonton Wyville in 1862 killed four men
-
You have no idea if the Spending Review boosted growth
-
Developing your new business pipeline
-
Family's horror seeing tourists eat from saucepans in idyllic Cotswolds village
-
Weekly Road Report - West End Ward #dundeewestend
-
Wales set to lose most from disabled benefit cuts
-
Bridges action day
-
In 1946 there was a plan to move Snailbeach village to a new site
Recent Comments
Suzanne Fletcher
Interesting and relevant article from Bradley Hillier Smith: this is the beginning, I don't have the article weblink so just copy an pasting 1st page. message...
Cassie
An eye-opening, and brave, article. Changing the recording system seems a very simple change to make, and it seems crazy no government has ever done it....
Nonconformistradical
@Ben C "Difficulties valuing the few remaining properties that aren’t on the land register...." Do you know how many there are? If you don't why have you ...
Andrew Melmoth
@Mick Taylor We are not re-joining the EU because there is a blocking minority capable of electing a Tory/Reform government. And that isn't going to change in ...
Tristan Ward
"how foolish it now seems for the political scientist Francis Fukuyama to have declared, in an at the time much lauded book in 1992, the ‘end of history.’" ...
25 Comments
There is something wrong with this country. The rioters had a mindset that has been encouraged over the last 30 years and you find it in all walks of life.
That mindset is basically people being out to take whatever they can regardless of the consequences for society at large. We’ve been taught to think only in terms of ‘me’, ‘mine’ and ‘my’ since Thatcher, all mainstream political parties encourage this.
This attitude manifests it’s self in very different ways among different groups of people, but its root is the same.
In politicians it manifests in them drawing up a set of expense rules that they can abuse to claim tens of thousands of pounds in ‘expenses’ which they can use to speculate on the property market and then dodge the taxes they expect ‘little people’ to pay.
In the super rich it manifests it’s self as blatant tax avoidance even when the country is experiencing economic troubles, basically they’re saying ‘to hell with the country it’s all about me, me, me and if I can avoid paying tax I will, simply because I can’.
In the city it manifests as traders betting on other companies failing and people at the top of the banking system choosing to walk a way with millions despite having ruined a bank.
And in poorly educated young people it manifests itself as them simply taking stuff from shops during periods of social unrest simply because they think they can get away with it. It is very much like when the politicians claimed thousands from the public purse in dubious expenses simply because they could, and managers at banks paid themselves huge unjustifiable bonuses simply because they could.
We seem totally unable to see our own part in this mentality and I therefore think we’re not going to be able to correct it.
I don’t think there are very many arguing against the view that law and order has to return to the streets – this might already have been achieved. It is very clear that should there be any renewed rioting it will be met with significant force. However, from what Cameron has said today, I don’t see that there will be much of an attempt to understand the causes and remedy them – for the remedy would fly in the face of the Coalition’s [and Labour’s] desire to fully embrace the global free market. By definition, this creates very big winners, but also very big losers.
A growing social underclass will be accepted, apart from some cosmetic changes, and increasingly harsh sanctions will be used to deter the worst off from rebelling against their plight.
@ John Roffey
I’m intrigued as to whether Cameron et al truly believe there’s no need to understand and remedy the causes or rather it suits them politically not to do so. The outcome in your final para is not the one I’d like to see.
2 johng: I hope I am excused for being cynical, but what Cameron et al have achieved by not responding to the riots quickly and allowing them to spread has been to galvanize public opinion behind harsh sanctions. I posted the UKPolling findings on another thread:
‘Asked if the police should be able to use various tactics in response to riots provoked some pretty gung ho responses – 90% of people thought they should be able to use water cannon, 84% mounted police, 82% curfews, 78% tear gas, 72% tasers, 65% plastic bullets, 33% live ammunition. 77% thought that the army should be brought in.’
Note: 33% thought the police should be able to use live ammunition! Many thousands were in fear of their lives during the riots and many millions were concerned that the riots might come to their town. If Cameron’s plan was to demonize this underclass and set the majority of the population against them – he has been very successful.
I seriously doubt that there will be any real attempt to address the underlying causes.
Nick Clegg committed arson when he was young and destroyed a building, so he should know what is going through the arsonists’ minds. Or was it just a prank by a little rich boy who, unlike those raised in the ghetto, could pay his way out of trouble?
And now Cameron, who we all know smashed up a restaurant while he was in the Bullingdon Gang, is “looking at” closing Twitter, Facebook and others during times of unrest. I remember a few months ago he was calling Egypt’s actions “inexcusable” for wanting to shut down the internet.
It seems like all it takes to turn people who would normally be “liberal” into hard-right authoritarians is removal of their perception of safety. I’ve seen people who I know to be quite liberal, who were appalled at the army being used in the MidEast on their people now calling for our army to be used on and to kill our people. I am not comparing the rioters to protesters in the Middle East, but rather the reaction of many British people to violence abroad and at home. I’m actually shocked at how easily some British people can be convinced more bloodshed and repression will solve the problem.
“Those who would trade liberty for security deserve neither.” – Benjamin Franklin
Nick – “…they acted as if they didn’t really have anything to lose…” Well, guess what, they don’t!!
In the wake of the riots in Athens, Nick predicted this would happen – why is he now behaving as if it is a big surprise!
Interviewer: ” But rioting in the streets? It’s a bit much….”
Nick: “I think there’s a very serious risk…”
Well it’s not as if they’re short of excellent role models, even if the immediate family falls short in some cases, they need only look to our bankers, politicians, footballers, business leaders, media etc for role models …. oh, well, maybe not.
Did he speak in the common? Britain’s Liberal leader?
“I don’t see that there will be much of an attempt to understand the causes”
“I’m intrigued as to whether Cameron et al truly believe there’s no need to understand and remedy the causes”
“I seriously doubt that there will be any real attempt to address the underlying causes.”
I think I can help you guys in your efforts to identify those underlying causes :-
People saw an opportunity to nab a pile of stuff for free, and they took it.
Think of it as the download culture transposed to the hgh street for a few nights.
sam: “In the wake of the riots in Athens, Nick predicted this would happen – why is he now behaving as if it is a big surprise!”
Sadly the clip does not include the hilarious moment when Bill Turnbull reminded Nick about his Greek comments.
I was too bleary eyed to recall Nick’s reaction, though I’m sure it was the usual blustering nonsense and evasion of Turnbull’s question.
@ Stuart Mitchell:
‘People saw an opportunity to nab a pile of stuff for free, and they took it.’
I don’t think anyone is really disputing that, However, the majority, with lives that they value, would not take the opportunity – if only for the reason that it could all be jeopardized.
It is necessary to look deeper if, perchance, you hoped to avoid a repeat.
“‘People saw an opportunity to nab a pile of stuff for free, and they took it.’
I don’t think anyone is really disputing that, However, the majority, with lives that they value, would not take the opportunity – if only for the reason that it could all be jeopardized.”
That’s what we have become like as a society, and it is happening in all walks of life –
* Millionaires paying accountants to find a tax loophole and then taking the opportunity to pay less tax than their domestic servants and doing it simply because they can.
* Senior bankers in failed nationalised state banks seeing taking the opportunity to take a few million in undeserved bonuses from the tax payer and doing it simply because they can.
* MPs abusing a system that they themselves designed to claim expenses that they shouldn’t really have claimed, again, they were doing it simply because they could.
It’s all the same really, just a different manifestation of the same underlying attitude of everybody being out for them selves with no regard for the wider society at large. And that attitude has been encourage from the top down. If the rioters could have claimed £100,000 for living in their parents spare room and claimed it was ‘within the rules’ they would have done that instead.
It is, of course, a pure coincidence that here in affluent rural Essex there was no social unrest, but there was social unrest in some of the poorest areas in Western Europe. Funny, that.
“If Cameron’s plan was to demonize this underclass and set the majority of the population against them – he has been very successful”.
Yeah right – it was Cameron’s plan. What are you smoking? Do you think Cameron was sneakily tapping away on the Blackberry in Italy, secretly directing the nation’s youth with cunning messages designed to trick them into looting and ransacking? Perhaps he even instructed the cops to pop a few caps in yo ass when he was on the way to the airport. Get a grip.
“However, the majority, with lives that they value, would not take the opportunity – if only for the reason that it could all be jeopardized.”
It is of course true that those with the most to lose will be more reluctant to take such a risk.
However, if you have been following the court reports today as I have, you will have been as astonished as I was by the broad range of individuals on display.
Young people from wealthy backgrounds.
Teaching assistants and school mentors.
A kickboxing instructor (not sure why that one surprised me so much but it did).
An 18 year old lad who, far from being one of the million+ youth unemployed, actually left his job in Manchester, went home to get out of his work clothes, then returned to join in the looting.
Many others in their 30s, 40s, or even older.
Those who are trying to characterise this as a problem of one particular age group or social class are barking up the wrong tree. Many of the people jailed today had a plenty big enough stake in society. They were prepared to risk it all on a looting binge. “Amoral greed” seems the best description for it.
I’m sure there are some who were not young and unemployed, but the majority were under 25 – the police say half were under 18. Anyway, I think you have to draw a distinction between those who engaged in rioting and arson with those who opportunistically snatched some sweets, beer or trainers through a broken window in the heat of the moment.
There are parts of Essex which suffer deprivation on a par with Liverpool and Tottenham, yet Essex did not riot. Why is that?
There are parts of Britain which have been the recipients of all manner of public funding, yet the lot of the population of the areas does not seem to improve in any sustained way. Why is that?
@ Alistair:
Clearly I do not know if this was a pre-planned strategy, but I would be surprised if riots, as a result of the austerity measures, had not been discussed before they were introduced, particularly with a plan to cut in the police numbers running alongside.
I happen to believe that politicians can be devious – alternatively Cameron could just have got lucky, either way, he is now free to use the most harsh of measures without fear of a public outcry.
I’ll add one more thing: bringing David Laws back into government would be a continuation of this very problem of the rich and powerful not facing any kind of punishment for their actions.
If a benefit claimant lies on his application for housing benefit, he is a cheat, is committing a crime and will be fined or given a custodial sentence based on the severity of the fraud. If he was also entitled to claim a larger benefit, but did not, that does not excuse or invalidate the rules he broke in the first place. This situation is the same with David Laws. He broke the rules about his benefits, but only got a slap on the wrist for it.
PW – Two points in relation to your questions above.
1 No two places or situations are the same. Tottenham clearly had a direct spark to ignite the mayhem. In other places it would depend on how persuasive those getting people on the streets were, how strong were the counter pressures on people etc. There were several places where something almost “kicked off” but not quite. So someone or a small group made an attempt. It also from the court cases emerges that many of those convicted (70% I think quoted) were from areas OTHER THAN where the mayhem in question took place. Somaybe the correlations you should be looking for are home postcodes of those convicted?
2 Your second question seems more overtly political, and looks as if you are trying to justify your own opinion. There is also evidence the otherway, ie that aid does and can help areas
PW: Just because not all deprived areas erupted into violence doesn’t mean that deprivation has nothing to do with it. Happy, contented people do not riot. So why are they upset and discontented? Or maybe it’s something in the water that made people spontaneously erupt into mass criminality in London, Birmingham, Liverpool, Manchester, Wolverhampton .,.
Daniel Brett: “Happy, contented people do not riot.”
That’s the strangest statement I’ve read all week. Do you seriously believe that it’s impossible to be a happy and contented looter, arsonist, or thug?? Sadly, life simply isn’t like that.
Wandsworth Council (always one of Thatcher’s favourites) have started eviction proceedings against a family after the son was charged with offences relating to the riots. Note the word “charged”, not convicted.
Notwithstanding that Cameron has backed the move and has effectively declared the boy to be guilty in the process. It seems the PM does not understand the concept of “innocent until proven guilty”. If even the PM cannot be trusted to uphold that simple concept, what hope is there?
Is it too much to hope for a senior Lib Dem to condemn these remarks?
You simply cannot go round breaking the law.
Unlesss you have a rich Daddy. Why did the millionaire’s daughter get conditional bail and others less privileged remanded? No doubt Daddy will hire a very good lawyer when she goes to court, wonder what the outcome will be? Why are Cameron and Johnson in their positions after the Bullingdon Club antics? Oh yes, rich Daddies. There will be even more anger when it is seen that the courts are coming down harder on some more than others just because they will pay their way out with expensive lawyers and who knows, use a special sort of handshake?