Elementary Logic #110

An interesting postscript to the debate we’ve been having on my last exposition of Elementary Logic. I’ve no particularly bitter axe to grind here because I didn’t vote for Boris, but I am nonetheless enraged by the almost instantaneous discovery that he’s a rubbish liberal.

It appears Bojo and David Cameron are of one mind* on the link between petty crime and serious crime. Bojo has made his first policy announcement, and yes, it’s “Ban More Fun”. We’re no longer allowed to drink on the tube, or we’ll get it confiscated from our little mits by the fun police.

I firmly believe that if we drive out so-called minor crime then we will be able to get a firm grip on more serious crime. That’s why from 1 June the drinking of alcohol will be banned from the tube, tram, bus, and Docklands Light Railway.

You may well be thinking, haaaang on. Drinking in public isn’t actually itself a crime, is it? Well, you’d be wrong. Traditionally, public order legislation has only given police the power to make arrests for actual drunkenness, and/or disturbance of public order. That was before NuLab. As of 2001 it became possible, under the Criminal Justice and Police Act of that year, for local authorities to designate public places as alcohol free zones, and after that the police can issue on-the-spot fines to those who infringe the zone.

Thus, drinking becomes a crime. Cripes! Just as well NuLab passed that particular intrusive mumsyish measure, eh, Boris? Will these cretins ever realise that they’re helter-skeltering together down a tight little blue-and-red spiral of ever-decreasing policy difference? Remember the wisdom of The Thick Of It:

She doesn’t just think inside the box, she’s built another box inside it and she’s doing all her thinking in there…

* Dave Monday to Wednesday, Boris Thursday and Friday, and the brain gets the weekend off.


  1. I thought this was the application of a London Transport by-law saying that if you’re given notice before you enter the system you cannot drink.

    I’m not so concerned about this. Its petty, its almost unenforcable, but its the application of a right that LU already has.
    Ideally this would not be a decision in the political realm, but it is.
    I can also see LibDems doing this sort of thing…

  2. “I can also see LibDems doing this sort of thing…”

    So can I. [Shudders]

    I didn’t know about the extant by-law but it fits with what the Times is reporting: that the only punishment available to enforcers will be ejection until the ban becomes “enshrined in a by-law” in a year’s time, when on-the-spot fines will be possible. I take it this means a by-law which will be made by the GLA under the power given by CJPA, i.e. a new by-law which will actually make it a criminal offence to drink on the tube.

    My concern is the usual one, that there are already laws, and plenty of them, to deal with the disorder and offences that are associated with public drinking. It appears from the (updated this morning) Times article that Boris plans to use some of his new 440 PCSOs to help enforce the ban – so that would be instead of using them to tackle said disorder and offences presumably.

    It’s middle-aged, middle-class hand-wringing and an attempt by one societal group to impose their “correct” culture on another, and it winds me up.


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 )

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s