Daily View 2×2: 16 June 2009

2 Big Stories

Should we be pleased that Labour are finally granting the public an inquiry into the Iraq war? Not when it’s held in private, as Gordon Brown suggests in the case of the long-awaited review. The BBC has the response of Rose Gentle, mother of a British soldier who died in Iraq:

We have fought and fought for this but it will be no use and it could all be for nothing behind closed doors.

Nick Clegg was also unimpressed.

Meanwhile, neighbouring Iraq, the ramifications of Iran’s disputed election continue to play out with protests in Tehran and at least one fatality. The Guardian Council have now permitted a recount, John Leyne reports:

I hear from the Guardian Council that they are ready to recount those ballot boxes queried by the opposition.

My understanding of that would be that the opposition can then just query every single ballot box, in effect launching a complete recount.

2 Must-read Blog Posts

Yesterday, Bernard Salmon offered his response to Scotland’s Calman Commission:

Although Calman did make an effort to take evidence from a range of groups, there now needs to be much more public involvement in deciding how we proceed.

And the best way that can happen is if we have a referendum on the proposals, with independence being the other option.

Elsewhere, I enjoyed – but had some big problems with – a post by Tristan at Liberty Alone:

The reality is that a freed market will be regulated, but not by third parties. The regulation will be done by us, the market participants. Who do you trust more to regulate the market? Those freely engaging in exchange or some bureaucrat or politician who not only does not know anything about the exchange but who is also open to bribery (or open to bribing others through use of their power)?

I know who I’d prefer – those acting in the market.

But can we have the perfect information necessary for constant citizen-consumer social regulation? I like the emphasis on community entrepreneurship, but the problem of perfect information means there’s rarely a truly free market in practice. And hence there is sometimes a need to frame markets in order to secure individuals’ freedom in shaping their own lives – rather than have them shaped by market forces.

What do you think? As ever, feel free to discuss any of these stories or issues below…

Read more by .
This entry was posted in Daily View.

One Comment

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

To have your photo next to your comment please signup your email address with Gravatar.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?


Recent Comments

  • Simon R
    @ Peter Martin.. Yep, exactly right. Every time since the industrial revolution that some big technical innovation has come along allowing jobs to be automated,...
  • Mick Taylor
    SOME of our so called privatised rail companies are owned by people outside the country, but so are car companies, utilities, football teams and so on. BUT at ...
  • Simon McGrath
    Still no actual costing - always seems to be missing from UBI articles....
  • Gwyn Williams
    “However, since then Wales has regained its Principality status.” I must have missed that. Wales was established as a Principality of the Kingdom of England...
  • Chris Perry
    It would be nice to hear from a few people in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, please?...