We thought it might be fun to take one of our occasional trips down Memory Lane to see what we were writing about on this day in 5 of the 9 years of our existence.

19th October 2006

Pre the Crash, leader Ming Campbell takes Labour to task on poverty and talks about, guess what, a fairer society. Who says we are inconsistent. Worth reading as much of it is relevant now.

I am determined to take the fight for a fairer Britain into the mainstream of British politics, and into the heartlands of the Labour Party.

I am determined to show that defeating poverty and increasing opportunity does not mean creating a state of dependency.

I am determined that Britain should not simply swap the days of calculated neglect under Mrs. Thatcher for years of benign neglect under Mr. Cameron.

I am determined to show that there is an alternative to the Dependency State of Gordon Brown.

I am determined to show that there is a sustainable way to remove the scourge of child poverty that does so much to undermine our social cohesion.

I am determined to show that way is the Liberal way.

The mainstream, not the centre, but essentially means the same thing.

19th October 2008

That was when Colin Powell, former Secretary of State to George Bush, endorsed Barack Obama for President.

19th October 2009

Unfortunately the link is no longer available, although it didn’t take long to find an alternative. Remember what it was like to live under authoritarian New Labour.

19th October 2012

Stephen Tall brings us news that Andrew Mitchell had resigned after a month long battle to keep his job as Government Chief Whip over the Plebgate scandal.

19th October 2013

I wrote of my concerns about the proposed Sexual Risk Orders in new legislation:

It’s not a new idea. Labour brought in the first generation of such orders in 2003. Reading the actual legislation worried me a bit. Here’s one of the things that put you at risk of being put under one of these orders:

giving a child anything that relates to sexual activity or contains a reference to such activity;

It’s pretty sloppy wording. I gave my daughter not exactly this book, but one of its predecessors as part of what I would think any reasonable person would consider essential education. Come to think of it, I’ve encouraged her to read some good works of fiction, like Della says OMG by Keris Stainton which very sensitively explore some of the questions young people have as they’re growing up. I’m a huge fan of that book, actually, because it has some very clear themes about what constitutes a healthy sexual relationship. I don’t think anyone has been subjected to an order for something like this, but if we value our liberty we shouldn’t be allowing such wording into our laws.

It worries me that these new updated orders could be placed on people who don’t present a threat to children with very little scrutiny and possibility for appeal. If the Police think someone has done something, why not charge them with it? If they are grooming a child online, then there will be the evidence to prove it, for example.

Not that it stopped them being passed, of course.