Jon Bright (London, OK): Sometimes politicians produce statements so blandly hypocritical that one wonders if they have actually deceived themselves. Current International Development Secretary Hilary Benn may not think that the public are idiots but what are we to think of him judging by his self-aggrandising call for a treaty to 'control' the movement of small arms. In the current search for British values is he suggesting that one of them is two-faced perfidy?
What annoys most about this statement? Is it Benn's cheerful reassurance that we won't be banning 'conventional' weapons? Is it his inhuman explanation of the conflict in Darfur as a result of the huge amount of arms there? Is it the way he dresses up the obvious as a deeply held conviction: "Small arms kill one person every minute. I believe this is neither inevitable nor acceptable". None of the above. It is his refusal to mention the wide ranging corruption inquiry into one of the largest and most profitable arms dealers in the world - BAE - that Benn's government is going out of its way to squash (a point which, happily, was not lost on the many people who commented on his piece). A treaty controlling the illegal trade in small arms will only place control of this trade in those arms merchants we deem to be legal. When are we going to start controlling them? If Hilary wants to look principled, he should find areas where he isn't already so compromised.
