Unfortunately for the Lib Dems, in terms of media support for Cameron and the Conservatives, we’ve reached tipping point. The warm response from across the board on the report suggesting binning 49 benefits is indicative of this point.

Our assembled media/business/voluntary sectors are now in a dash to make sure that they are part of the Cameron landslide before they look too opportunistic.

But if you get things right and you can still be the main opposition at the start of the coming decade.

Sure, she probably should have highlighted the LibDems’ opposition to ContactPoint but ultimately it is the Tories who will almost certainly be in power after the next election and who will be the ones to scrap it.
If Cameron is promising to do the right thing (and personally I’m not sure I would actually advocate scrapping it outright) then it is not unreasonable to give him credit for it, and it also pertinent to point out that that we can no longer rely on Labour to protect the values which Russell highlights in her final sentence. That doesn’t make it a Tory hagiography.

It’s not just Jenny Russell. The Guardian have been publishing pro Tory articles in the name of liberty for years now, mostly from Henry Porter. Porter is a natural Tory, he even supported the pro hanging rightwing David Davis in his re election stunt. Pretty much everything the government do is described by Porter as an attack on liberty, and he constantly says we are heading for a police state.

As an example, does Russell’s article make clear that the CAF details are not on contactpoint? It is recorded that a CAF has been done, but not what is in it. If you didn’t know this the article could easily give the impression that sensitive details are being recorded on a database open to 300 000 professionals.

The Guardians’ coverage of liberty is similar to the rights approach to the US healthcare debate: exclude accurate information and imply, or actually claim, that everything is a step towards fascism.

“Porter is a natural Tory, he even supported the pro hanging rightwing David Davis in his re election stunt”

So did Tony Benn? It’s like ferrets in a sack here isn’t it?

@3 – right, all those opposed to NuLab authoritarianism must be Tories

Who is Jenni Russell?

‘It formed a central blank of our Freedom Bill earlier this year’ – ha ha ha – in a blank of a bill, was this seriously the core?

Jenni Russell is the same dimwit who managed to miss the point of the TUC motion attacking mandatory dresscodes that demanded harmful footwear as something that narrowed the choice of individuals – when it plainly didn’t. Personally I think she should be taken out and shot.

I don’t care if someone is pro-Tory, but if you’re going to be pro-Tory at least do it intelligently. Jenni Russell doesn’t.

I actually think Jenni Russell is one of the more astute commentators out there. I think the problem is that it has become cool amongst Guardianistas to flirt with Cameron. But to compare genuine concerns about Labour’s lackadaisical attitude to civil liberties. The arguments against ID cards, ContactPoint, etc. tend to be evidence-based while Labour’s policies are grounded in rhetoric and dogma. The arguments against Obama’s healthcare reforms by contrast are all rooted in ignoring the facts.

At least there was discussion of Contact Point on the Guardian…you’ve just nipped up to claim a bit of credit for the LibDems, again using the issue as a little party political booster.

I have it on good authority that Grimethorpe Rovers were advocating a brand of ‘total football’ as early as the mid sixties. The fact that they are now forgotten and all the credit is laid at the door of Rinus Michaels and his Ajax and Dutch National squads is not to belittle Grimethorpe’s contribution, rather an acknowledgement of their complete and utter pointlessness. There’s a lesson there for the LibDems

@JamesGraham

Have you read Porters latest article on Cif? In it he agues that a police force who are targeting PDTs (potentially dangerous people) are part of the police state Labour have brought in.

As the poster speedkermot points out in the thread this has been the case foe many years. In fact as the police are requirered to proactively prevent crime rather than just reacting to it, it would be a dereliction of duty if they did not concentrate on the people they thought would be most likely to commit serious offences. Mostly these people already have some minor convictions, but a lack of convictions should not overrule good intelligence.

Porter also posts on the thread, saying that it is wrong for the police to take any action (including surveillance) against a person who does not have any criminal conviction. If this was actually taken up the police would not be able to do anything! If a murder was reported to them they would have to say, sorry we can’t do anything, the suspect doesn’t’ have any convictions.

The practice of targeting people the police believe to be dangerous is normal practice for every police force the world over, it has been normal practice for the UK police for many years, it is necessary and useful. And yet Porters rhetoric presents it as yet another new attack on liberty.

@ cjcjc and Praguetory

I was still half asleep when I posted that. I should have written Porter is a natural conservative (small c), not a natural Tory.