The Professors passion for "The Science of Deceit" started here...

Employed by the Ministry (in a covert capacity) to help introduce the law ending dishonest politics, you can see his hand all over the posts of past.

Current political circumstances have forced him to reveal himself and as we speak, MPs are signing up to re-introduce The Elected Representatives (Prohibition of Deception) Bill for debate with over 80,000 voters supporting them.

Posts before Jan '08 are purely for the record (with hindsight they make fascinating reading). Posts after May 13th mark the Professor's return.

Meet the Professor

Wednesday, March 14, 2007

Peter Bottomley, Round 2

You'll remember from Monday our boisterous allegations to Karen Buck that Mr Blair lied over his voting record on the fox hunting ban.

Peter (amongst other statements over institutionalised lying) kindly points out Mr Blair's memory of events around the Bill for a fox-hunting ban isn't the same as public records.

Some would call this lying.

He also admits a Minister determined to be evasive is a very difficult
animal to hold to account for an MP, let alone a member of the public.

Just as we thought we were going to make a home run... we didn't even get to first base.

So far we've a 100% record. Everyone we've spoken to says honesty's an absolute requirement, admits there's a gap in accountability, but won't bite at the Misrepresentation of the People Act.

We've noticed the portrait of his wife seems to have horns on her forehead. We're assured by our tech bods this a trick of the light - not divine light.


  1. Tony Blair did vote for a ban on fox hunting.

  2. Only once in 1992 - then what, lied about the vote being blocked in the Lords when he didn't schedule any parliamentary time for it? Not good enough if you ask me.

  3. Misleading granted. But technically, he didn't lie. A bit strong to prosecute someone for a mistaken memory//misleading info.

  4. The 1992 bill was not the one that eventually passed. It is misleading for Blair to claim to have been involved in the banning of hunting when his vote was for a bill that never became law.

    At the time he claimed to have voted for the bill that did eventually ban hunting, he hadn’t. Though he subsequently voted for a multi-option bill to be read, he did not then follow through to vote for the option to ban hunting.

    This is not the behaviour of an honest man.

  5. I don't doubt Blair was for the Fox hunting ban - but if you were sitting in a pub and a mate said to you they voted for something, you'd take that to mean they actively actually participated. If your mate said they voted Labour when in fact they voted Labour 10 years ago and didn't bother to vote in the last election, you'd think they were a liar.

    All this is beside the fact that Blair seems to think it was blocked by the House of Lords. By Karen Bucks own admission, to say something which on public record is patently untrue would be "utterly stupid" and "not credible".