Labour election leaflet unveils anti-foreigner shift in ID cards policy

As I blogged about a few days ago, the Labour Party in the Crewe and Nantwich by-election is attacking the Conservative candidate for opposing “making foreign nationals carry an ID card”. As I said then,

The use of the word “foreign” there seems to come with some rather unpleasant overtones in this context, the implication being that ‘ooh, foreigners – they’re terribly nasty aren’t they – so surely you can’t be against keeping tabs on them now, can you?’

But – as Alex has reminded me – there’s more to this than that. Because, you see, making foreign nationals carry an ID card hasn’t until now been Labour policy. Indeed, as the Home Office’s own website says at the time of writing:

Will it be compulsory to carry a card?
No.

That’s pretty clear really, isn’t it?

So what does this all mean?

One explanation of course is that Labour have got so desparate their leaflets are departing from the script and attacking other candidates for views that actually the Labour Party itself holds. Perish the thought.

The alternative? Well, that Labour have used the by-election to introduce a hasty change in their ID cards policy and gone for an (even more) macho anti-foreigner stance.

I do wonder, in that case, how many people in the Labour Party have been told that their policy has been changed in this way. Do you think, for example, that all the visiting Labour MPs have been told about this change? And I wonder if they are all happy with this extra anti-foreigner turn of screw slipped out during a by-election campaign?

Read more by or more about or .
This entry was posted in Parliamentary by-elections.
Advert

9 Comments

  • Hywel Morgan 13th May '08 - 11:13am

    As Kinnock might have said:

    If Labour start to head towards defeat in 2009/10, I warn you not to look a bit foreign, I warn you not to be young, I warn you not to be poor and not a key swing voters group…..

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 ...?

Advert

Recent Comments

  • Paul WalterPaul Walter
    Peter, please see my ample answers above. I have made it perfectly clear what I believe. Best wishes, Paul...
  • Peter Martin
    @ Paul, I accept you are agreeing to an extent. A limited extent. "There are ample legal mechanisms for ensuring that the financial settlement with t...
  • Paul WalterPaul Walter
    Peter: “We shouldn’t tolerate the term “Crown Dependency” being a synonym for “tax haven”.” I don’t know whether you are actually reading my ...
  • David Raw
    I rather thought the 3rd Duke and Duchess of Atholl sold the Isle of Man's feudal and sovereign rights in 1765 for £70,000 via the Isle of Man Purchase Act 176...
  • Roland
    @Peter Martin - I was responding to the curved ? ball Jeff throw out about Motability: If they can't charge VAT then its okay to reclaim the VAT rather than sim...