Novelist. Author of APSARAS and tales from the beautiful Saigh Valley. First person to quantify spiritual values.

Total Pageviews

Tuesday, 29 October 2013

British justice in the dock

A judge, John Saunders, has warned the jury in the News of the World 'phone-hacking' trial that British Justice is also in the dock.He's not kidding and it isn't only this trial that proves that UK justice is anything but.
Haringey council has agreed to pay a former employee £600,000 for failure. She was sacked after the council failed to protect a child, so called baby 'P', despite widespread evidence that he was being abused. However on appeal a judge ruled that she was unfairly sacked. Presumably, since her failure was well established, the appeal succeeeded on a technicality. So despite her 'guilt' she walks away with over half a million whilst the child is irrevocably dead. Mind you, large as this settlement is, I bet it doesn't amount to as much as the amount earned by the lawyers and barristers in the case. How is it possible that the guilty can be so rewarded? It can only be in the UK where the judges take stupidity to a new higher level.
Back at the Old Bailey, eight defendants face trial and all eight have pleaded not guilty. I imagine they have all been granted legal aid. That means eight legal teams costing say £10,000 a day for the six months the court is expected to sit; all paid for by the taxpayer. Why have these people been allowed to plead 'Not Guilty'? Either they did it or they didn't. If the proof is there they should be sent down now or if there is no proof they should be released. The public isn't going to be menaced or mugged by these people and they certainly don't want to fork out millions defending people whose only crime is disrupting the confidence of celebrities and politicians.
The only winners will again be the legal profession, the lawyers and barristers who are taking the generous British taxpayers for another ride. Something stinks in the british justice woodpile.

Saturday, 26 October 2013

Grangemouth common sense

There has been an outbreak of common sense in Grangemouth, scene of an industrial dispute between refinery owners, INEOS, and the UNITE union.
It seems that following fresh negotiations, the Company have reversed their threat to close part of the plant and the Unite union has promised, amongst other measures, to abandon strikes.
I have long wondered (see here) why it was okay for workers to legally withold their labour (strike) but not okay for Companies to withold their employment. Now INEOS have demonstrated just this move in calling Unite's bluff. This is not the first time that this union has threatened both local and national interests with their absurd posturing. (see here)
For too long the union fat cats have pursued their ideological ambition on the backs of ordinary workers, threatening to bring essential industries AND public services to their knees. The Government should invoke the spirit of Mrs Thatcher and curb the working practices of the worst offenders which includes Unite.

PS. It's worth repeating here, whilst the UK is facing a huge Energy problem, that John Prescott, the former deputy leader of the Labour Party, as good as admitted that the Labour Party had run down the Nation's Nuclear Energy industry at the behest of the National Union of Mineworkers, thereby overturning years of experience in the field. Is it any wonder that we now have to import this technology?

Sunday, 20 October 2013

A thought on the Royal Mail flotation

Just a thought.
That Royal Mail shares were undersold to mostly financial institutions in the City and beyond is surely beyond dispute despite Government claims to the contrary. Call me a cynic but is it possible that the Tories might benefit from some sort of commission on profits made from the sale of these shares? Has a covert deal been done? The money generated, and it may be a significant amount, would come in handy to fight a General election just eighteen months away?
Let's face it, there are few ways the Government can help the financial sector during a recession, particularly so when the Banks are public enemy number one, and what better way than a 'rigged' flotation. No doubt any such money would be moved through anonymous accounts and any wrongdoing hard to prove but the point is this: why is it we distrust politicians these days to the extent we imagine this sort of thing is going on?

Monday, 7 October 2013

The politics of Ralph Miliband

The dispute between Ed Miliband and the Daily Mail over the Labour leader's father's politics has been entertaining. It has been easy to write off the Marxist views of the old Belgian, less easy to forgive his stand on the Falklands War and his dislike of british institutions like the monarchy.  It makes you wonder why, if he didn't like britain why didn't he hop on a Russian ship as the Nazis advanced? But I wonder if all he said on  on the British Capitalist system was all that crazy.
In particular I believe that he was correct to draw attention to the threat posed by mega companies and Banks to the State and the well being of its citizens. Today some Banks and companies turnover more cash than the GDP of some countries. They are the product of an unregulated Capitalist market economy gone mad and it seems to me that nobody or State can halt the progress of these Giants. I believe that it may be too late to curb their excessive influence on greedy politicians throughout the world. This should be a lesson that the old Market Economy is flawed and governments around the world should make changes because when these Companies become a global monopoly, make no mistake, they will be in charge and the major politicians of the day will be in the boardroom.

One more thing about the Milibands. I have previously commented that Baroness Warsi should not be admitted to the House of Lords because her parents were immigrants and there ought to be a two generation qualification for these honours. see:-

I fear the same should be said about the Milibands. It is my contention that the law should be changed to disqualify them from standing as MPs.

Some thoughts on the jailing of Amanda Hutton

Amanda Hutton has been jailed for 15 years for the manslaughter of her four year old son by starving him to death. Following his death she failed to notify the authorities and continued to claim child allowance as his little body decomposed.
It is clear that this woman, an alcoholic who drank bottles of vodka while feeding her son scraps, has to pay for her negligence. But how? Is prison the best way of punishing her? Is she a danger to the public? I doubt it!
She will probably serve seven and a half years, if she survives that long in a hostile prison environment, at, shall we say £350 a day, costing tax payers just under a million pounds.
Why not stick her in the stocks each weekend for a year, the penalty to include a permit for the throwing of soft fruit, and allow the public to vent their feelings towards her. My guess is she'd quickly understand the error of her ways and the Nation's pent up frustration and outrage at her behaviour will be assuaged at little or no cost to the public purse.

That Amanda Hutton was obviously guilty of this crime leads me to ask why she was allowed to plead 'Not Guilty' resulting in a long trial at great public expense? Would it have anything to do with generating huge and unnecessary fees for the legal teams?

I can hear apologists for the legal system saying that we measure our civilization by how we treat our prisoners and others will say that the poor woman needs help to overcome her addiction and then rehabilitation to make her a valued member of society. Who pays for this?
But wait! Hush; while I strain to hear the whisper of voices representing the one person whose voice will not be heard; the little boy who wasted away, unloved who doubtless cried himself to sleep at night, frightened and in pain. I'm sick to the back teeth of the liberal minded do-gooders, the judges and lawyers who only think of the perpetrators because, let's be honest, they know they cannot be judged by the dead. Well I can and they are failing the innocent and the weak. Who will stand up to this bewigged bunch and make sure that the evildoers get what they deserve at minimum cost to the taxpayers?