From the wordsmiths who brought us 'Up Yours Delors!', The Sun newspaper's esteemed band of journalists led the delighted anti-European cries of delight after the MPs voted to back a ban of prisoners being allowed the vote. As a European directive, the British taxpayer will potentially have to pick up the tab to pay any possible compensation fees for prisoners.
It never ceases to amaze me how ambivalent a government can be towards unnecessary expenditure, when under normal circumstances its representatives cannot resist using the word 'cuts'. It would seem the implied instructions to the public are 'cut your spending, be grateful for what you have and there will be no further financial help from us'. That is of course unless you are part of the government, a banker or in prison.
We are supposed to be 'in it together' but these folks are having their own private party. Honourable citizens, upstanding members of the community and anyone not old enough to vote are not invited to this one.
The only conflict I have with my position is the concept of prisoners voting makes me uncomfortable. I would have found it difficult to support prisoner voting. If I feel that way, then I am sure some of the more rabid right-wing parliamentarians must have been having sleepless nights about it. This amounts to making the whole anti-European aspect to the discussion somewhat misleading.
I support European integration to an extent, despite the fact every now and again a piece of legislation flows from Europe which I do not particularly like. Then again, I also despise some legislation flowing from Westminster - more so than ever since last May in fact. The problem for Europe is it lacks the same legitimacy Westminster holds in the eyes of the public. So whereas it is the legislation which comes under scrutiny from Westminster, Europe comes under scrutiny from its legislation.
The right-wingers claim the outcome of the prisoners vote is a victory for UK sovereignty over the EU. Others claim it is another example of anti-European posturing. For me this is about neither. It is about policy.
Despite my discomfort, I accept that eventually there will be a need to compromise. A benchmark will be set which establishes the level of seriousness before an offender forfeits their right to civil participation. Then we can move on and put those possible compensation payments to better use.
