Simon Jupp goes “ostrich” in Covid votes

In the three Covid votes last night, Simon Jupp voted against covid passes, abstained on mandatory vaccination of NHS staff, and even abstained on the retrospective extension of mandatory face coverings.

A Tory MP who voted for the measures said it was “good of the nutters to self-identify”.

Fleur Anderson (Lab) asked why the Tories MPs opposed to the “papers please” aspect of Covid passes are not opposing the elections bill, which is requiring people to produce photo ID when they vote.

Will anyone be joining Simon when he next goes nightclubbing?

Neil Parish supported the Government and Opposition on all three.

2 thoughts on “Simon Jupp goes “ostrich” in Covid votes

  1. I am with Fleur Anderson on this.

    A lack of consistency and / or contradictory positions on similar matters is IMO a key sign of matters being decided on a political (or even corrupt) basis rather than on the basis of facts and logic and a rational basis. This is simply hypocrisy and needs to be called out on each and every occasion. IMO you don’t need any definitions of “freedom” to call out hypocrisy.

    I should also add that this sort of hypocrisy was also apparent in East Devon under the Tory administration. Why was one planning application in Newton Poppleford recommended for refusal by officers and then refused on the basis that it was in a AONB, and yet a highly similar planning application for King Alfred’s Way was supported by officers and approved despite it being in an AONB? When you see these sorts of entirely contradictory recommendations made by officers of a council whose reputation for planning corruption is renowned (it was quite literally the first thing I was told about EDDC when I moved to Ottery St. Mary), you seriously have to wonder whether this contradictory stance was a consequence of corruption?

    Like

  2. “Fleur Anderson (Lab) asked why the Tories MPs opposed to the “papers please” aspect of Covid passes are not opposing the elections bill, which is requiring people to produce photo ID when they vote.”

    Good question

    Anyone who paints ‘FREEDOM’ on a banner and waves it about to advertise what they want, should be challenged to produce papers to explain what they mean by it. Given that philosophers over the last millenium and more have not yet found a satisfactory definition, the odd (often very odd) bannerist would not seem best placed to finally sort this one out for us. Some definitions of personal liberty would fit very easily into an anarchist rulebook (should there ever be such a thing), while others – the ‘freedom as acceptance of rules’ school – can morph into endorsement of authoritarianism. But the Tories can’t stop talking about freedom as if everyone knew what they meant. Which is why Fleur Anderson (and the rest of us) should get a proper answer to her question.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.