Pro-forma consultations
I do hate this wretched government. They claim to be guardians of individual liberty, while trampling on it with massively invasive IT projects. They claim to listen to the public, while ignoring everyone who dissents from their “vision” for the country. They reject the advice of experts, will undoubtedly stand firm in the face of scathing criticism from their own committees, and ignore the views of citizens who take the time to respond to their consultations.
It is the last item that has aroused my ire on this occasion. The Government have just announced that “samurai” swords are to be banned. I use quotes because the government’s definition of a samurai sword is, as is typically the case, incredibly broad. Next year, “a curved, single edged sword” will be added to the Offensive Weapons Order, making them illegal to make, buy, loan, rent, import… anything, essentially, except to own. I happen to think that this is classic “safety theatre”, a feel-good initiative with no substance that will achieve nothing, but that’s not really the point. What has irked me is the Government’s blatant dismissal of the views of the electorate, gathered during a consultation conducted earlier this year.
The consultation received 270 responses. 85% of those said that these swords should not be banned. 91% of respondents disagreed with the government’s definition. Several respondents commented that the definition is so loose that it could include almost anything. A former police officer responded to say that, no matter what weapons were added to the order, no effect would be had on the UK’s knife culture. He said that the knives most often used in crime are cheap, readily available and easy to dispose of.
The responses to this consultation were clear. The view opposing the Government’s position was unambiguous, informed and and held by the vast majority. The Government’s reaction is similarly clear: they don’t give a shit. They’re going to add these weapons to the order anyway. The response to the consultation doesn’t even bother to refute the opposing view. What was the point in having a consultation in the first place if their reaction to it is to ignore the parts they don’t like? This was clearly a pro-forma exercise. A piece of theatre. A waste of time, money and credibility with the electorate.
They do acknowledge that some people have a legitimate reason to own these weapons, and have said that there will be exceptions to the ban for collectors, martial artists and re-enactment societies. I await, with baited breath, an announcement giving some detail to these assurances. I have absolutely no doubt that whatever provisions are made will be utterly inadequate.
Anything but a total shambles would, after all, be completely out of character.
Bookmark this post: 
