u/HKNorman is the Minister of State for Drugs & Addiction and the Solidarity candidate for Manchester North. Her views expressed in this column are not necessarily that of the Manchester Evening News' Editorial Board.
--
A few weeks ago, my colleague, u/WineRedPsy, wrote an article about the dangers of bringing the Supreme Court in to rule on political matters amid the debate on devaluing Sterling. The Opposition were quick to cry foul, alledging, rather bafflingly, that the Chief Secretary to the Treasury's warning amounted to threatening the judicial system, when it is they themselves who were threatening to do so. I have no doubt that the fact that today's ruling essentially proves my colleague's point is lost on them.
In plain words, I find the attempts to politicise the judiciary to be rather pathetic. Pathetic in the sense that the Opposition, using a junior Shadow Cabinet minister as a proxy, took an internal government decision to appoint an interim Home Secretary and tried to spin it as a breach of law, only to have the Supreme Court throw the case out. It is heartening that the Supreme Court did not indulge the Opposition's attempt to politicise it, for this case at least, but that doesn't mean such attempts aren't still harmful.
They are harmful because if the Opposition continues to attempt to politicise our judiciary, over matters such as devaluation, a decision taken by the democratically elected Government of this country, or the appointment of an interim Secretary of State, it risks trivialising the role of the highest court in the land to resolving petty political squabbles that the Opposition failed to prevail in by democratic means. It also creates a precedent that it is acceptable to question the legality of any decision the Government takes, when the Government takes those decisions within the confines of the law.
It is, frankly, pathetic that when the Opposition fails to prevent a legislative action by a majority Government, elected legally and acting legally, decides to bring the Supreme Court in as a last-ditch attempt to obstruct the Government. It is harmful because doing so undermines the very institution that we, as public servants, ought to defend.
This story was in yesterday's Manchester Evening News.
Fuming tourists defend seaside town after mum's "eerie feeling" on visit
The story is as follows:
1 Woman goes to Saltburn and feels sick because of a past experience there
2 People who love Saltburn say it's a lovely place
3 That's it.
To make this story even worse, Saltburn is 135 miles from Manchester according to Google.
Can anyone find a more ridiculous story than this?
https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/uk-news/fuming-tourists-defend-seaside-town-21316857
Rigatoni
I'm helping out an older fella who's Dad was on the front page of the MEN sometime in 1973/74. He's been through a lot recently and it would mean the world to him to have even a print of it. We've been to Britishnewspaperarchive.co.uk and they don't have anything in that date range. Any ideas on where else we can look?
