Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Ed Balls Likes To Use His Phone When Driving watch

    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tjf8)
    Yes, I am. I don't think it would be possible to quantify or monetise the emotional and psychological effect of such a dreadful impact on someone's life, especially with the child dying at such a young age as well. I imagine that that would outweigh the financial cost massively, for anyone.

    I guess if you think Cameron would manipulate the life and death of his child into a soulless PR mechanism then I simply credit him with a little more humanity and integrity than you do.
    I think it's more a case that he genuinely sees no difference between his need for PR and his personal and human issues - he really wouldn't see anything wrong with using it to give him a more human appeal. He's a thoroughly modern politician(!) in the Blair mould, who had a similar disdain for the distinction between private and public.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SpiggyTopes)
    Is Ed much different to Chris Huhne, who resigned and is now in prison over speeding and passing his points on?
    Well to be fair to Balls which does make me feel a little dirty, there is a huge difference between a minor motoring offence and perverting the course of justice.

    (Original post by SpiggyTopes)
    Why is Osborne being given a tough ride yet Balls barely had to answer for his much worse crime?
    Timing.

    Whatever next, Iain Duncan Smith using a disabled toilet?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    That posting is hilarious! What a five-star ****er.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    I would suggest that parking your car in a disabled bay is actually morally worse than driving whilst chatting on your mobile. Not least when your government is leading a massive assault on the incomes of disabled people.
    I think you went to far here- you can't make a political point with such an absurd comment- after all it's morally worse to potentially kill someone rather than merely deny them a parking space!
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    Are you suggesting it doesn't? Of course it does.

    It's become increasingly clear that Cameron's PR background and love for spin extended to the use of the child - he certainly made hay of it at the time, with lots of appropriate photo opportunities for the press and public statements. Strange how it hardly ever gets a mention now that the battle to reduce income for the non-working disabled is fully underway.
    Rubbish! He hasn't been mentioned for years. If you're so horrible to suggest he would use his child as a PR stunt-why would he have stopped? He'd be excellent PR at the moment against all those people saying he has no idea what it's like to have a disabled child.
    Offline

    16
    A lot of people are going to look very stupid when they find out George Osbourne was in the back and it was someone else who actually parked his car there.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by und3niable_)
    I agree here, we're talking about Morals, not what is more dangerous. These people evidently aren't related to or know someone who is affected by the disabled cuts
    My nephew is registered disabled. Would I rather his mother wasn't able to park in the disabled bay, or he was injured/killed in an accident caused by some idiot talking on their mobile phone and not paying attention to the road?

    Don't be so bloody stupid.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    Do you have an actual argument?
    What actually is your argument, out of interest?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by amyshamblesxx)
    What actually is your argument, out of interest?
    On which bit? The moral equivalence bit?
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    On which bit? The moral equivalence bit?
    Yes.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Well from my point of view the risk of having a potentially fatal accident when talking on the phone is increased, however it is still only a risk. Whereas if somebody has parked in a disabled parking space then they have fully committed to something which is morally wrong.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by amyshamblesxx)
    Yes.
    I personally regard it as no worse in moral terms. For sure, it's risky to self and others talking on a mobile whilst driving, but it's also very immoral to take a place designed specifically for the use of the disabled, who regularly struggle to find a space they can use. They are different kinds of things and there are also (by the way) risks to the health and wellbeing of disabled people from the latter. I am in no way supporting talking on mobiles whilst driving (I've been at the receiving end of terrible behaviour from people doing it) but one doesn't excuse the other. I am not arguing in favour of Ed Balls - personally I can't stand him.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by WJB440)
    Well from my point of view the risk of having a potentially fatal accident when talking on the phone is increased, however it is still only a risk. Whereas if somebody has parked in a disabled parking space then they have fully committed to something which is morally wrong.
    Risking peoples' lives so you can play on your phone is worse than waiting a couple of minutes or parking a space 2yds away.

    Also, can I add that Osborne didn't park there.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Genocidal)
    A lot of people are going to look very stupid when they find out George Osbourne was in the back and it was someone else who actually parked his car there.
    The unbelievable thing is that they do know! It's amazing!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    I think it's more a case that he genuinely sees no difference between his need for PR and his personal and human issues - he really wouldn't see anything wrong with using it to give him a more human appeal. He's a thoroughly modern politician(!) in the Blair mould, who had a similar disdain for the distinction between private and public.
    At the risk of going off-topic, if the separation of public and private affairs is desirable can we agree that Eddie Mair should be condemned for his prying into Boris' affair? I myself care little about what politicians get up to in their own time, as long as it doesn't impact their job performance, but I think Cameron was never out of line by modern standards.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by und3niable_)
    I agree here, we're talking about Morals, not what is more dangerous. These people evidently aren't related to or know someone who is affected by the disabled cuts
    Ok, morally speaking, I'd say it's worse to endanger someone's life than inconvenience them, regardless of how much or little state subsidy they receive.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tjf8)
    At the risk of going off-topic, if the separation of public and private affairs is desirable can we agree that Eddie Mair should be condemned for his prying into Boris' affair? I myself care little about what politicians get up to in their own time, as long as it doesn't impact their job performance, but I think Cameron was never out of line by modern standards.
    Isn't Boris open for anything, since he himself volunteered for the hour-long programme by Michael Cockerill the other day, which poured through every aspect of his private life? Eddie Mair's was tame stuff by comparison.

    Also Boris is just clearing the decks, 'getting it all out', before he runs for Tory leader, so that he can just call 'old news' on it when any of it resurfaces. I don't even really believe that the Eddie Mair thing was an ambush, they pre-define the scope of these interviews before agreeing to come on and having watched it again several times, I feel it had an element of staginess to it.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Interesting point: There are approximately 750,000 people in wheelchairs in the UK. That's 1.19% of the population. Disabled parking spaces are required to make up 6% of parking spaces.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    Isn't Boris open for anything, since he himself volunteered for the hour-long programme by Michael Cockerill the other day, which poured through every aspect of his private life? Eddie Mair's was tame stuff by comparison.

    Also Boris is just clearing the decks, 'getting it all out', before he runs for Tory leader, so that he can just call 'old news' on it when any of it resurfaces. I don't even really believe that the Eddie Mair thing was an ambush, they pre-define the scope of these interviews before agreeing to come on and having watched it again several times, I feel it had an element of staginess to it.
    Since programmes like that exist, Cameron should have the right to talk about his private life. Clearly people are interested.

    Anyway this is miles off the point!
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tjf8)
    Since programmes like that exist, Cameron should have the right to talk about his private life. Clearly people are interested.

    Anyway this is miles off the point!
    Yes, in which case, I can hardly be attacked for stating the obvious, that Cameron was happy to exploit his child's problems for PR purposes, in the best possible taste, of course. :rolleyes:
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.