The independent reviewer of control orders says the orders should be used as a "last resort".
Lord Carlile of Berriew QC also said the control order system is a "justifiable and proportional safety valve" for the protection of society.
Excuse me, sunshine, but we don't do "safety valves" in this country; justice is supposed to be impartial and impassive. The phrase "safety valve" suggests precisely the fucking opposite to me. Anyway, that is not the zenith of the bollocks being spouted here.
Three people under such orders have absconded and Lord Carlile said there were problems with having individuals under constant surveillance.
But he said this should not undermine the benefits of control orders.
What the fuck? So, control orders should only be used as a "last resort" and they are "safety valves", and yet they don't work because we can't actually keep the offenders under surveillance.
So, what you are saying, you thrice-cursed chimp from the planet Wank-toss, is that they don't work, we can't enforse them, they shouldn't be used and all of this "should not undermine the benefits" of control orders.
Why don't you practise what you are going to say in front of the mirror before you open your gob in front of the media?