Madeleine the truth
Video link with English subtitles
A mixture of law, politics, autobiography and humour. Once described as "The Devilish Advocate" (Guardian), I do have the ability to provoke a response. Sometimes it comes from someone who uses a thought process, and sometimes from jerks usually associated with the knee.
Thursday, April 30, 2009
Prison 'no good' for mentally-ill
Prison 'no good' for mentally-ill
Offenders with mental health problems should serve their sentences in the community rather than in prison, a report has recommended...
"Mental illness is not a crime and people who break the law because of it should not be in prison."
I could have told you this when I was sentenced and punished for being mentally ill!
Related content...
'Hot and dry' UK summer forecast
The UK is "odds on for a barbecue summer", with no repeat of the washouts of the last two years, according to Met Office forecasters.
My whether forecast predicts prison riots if Jack Straw does not hurry up and sort out allowing convicted prisoners their human right to vote...
Offenders with mental health problems should serve their sentences in the community rather than in prison, a report has recommended...
"Mental illness is not a crime and people who break the law because of it should not be in prison."
I could have told you this when I was sentenced and punished for being mentally ill!
Related content...
'Hot and dry' UK summer forecast
The UK is "odds on for a barbecue summer", with no repeat of the washouts of the last two years, according to Met Office forecasters.
My whether forecast predicts prison riots if Jack Straw does not hurry up and sort out allowing convicted prisoners their human right to vote...
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
ConVerse guilty of fraud by ASA
ConVerse guilty of fraud by ASA
ASA Adjudications
Spyhole Press Ltd t/a ConVerse
175 Hill Lane
Manchester
M9 6RL
Number of complaints: 1
Date: 29 April 2009
Media: Press general
Sector: Publishing
Ad
A front-page flash on ConVerse - a newspaper distributed to prisons - stated "THE HIGHEST CIRCULATION NATIONAL NEWSPAPER FOR PRISONERS."
Issue
A reader challenged whether the claim "THE HIGHEST CIRCULATION NATIONAL NEWSPAPER FOR PRISONERS" was misleading and could be substantiated.
The CAP Code: 3.1;7.1;18.1;18.3
Response
ConVerse said the "highest circulation" claim was based on the number of copies delivered to prisons. ConVerse said the Oxford English Dictionary defined "circulation" as "the number of copies of each issue of a newspaper, magazine, etc. distributed." They said they believed their "highest circulation" claim was therefore likely to be understood as referring to the number of copies distributed only. They supplied figures, which they described as circulation figures, published respectively in ConVerse and their competitor publication. They believed the figures showed that, over the preceding 15 months, ConVerse had circulated 52,000 copies more than the competitor publication. They said that amounted to an average of 3,500 more copies per month, which they believed justified the "highest circulation" claim. They said that, in addition to England and Wales, their competitor's publication was also circulated to prisons in Scotland and Northern Ireland, and so their competitor's circulation figures for England and Wales were in fact smaller than their total circulation figure. ConVerse said they conducted surveys with prisons every six months to check that the newspaper was being received and distributed satisfactorily and whether too many or too few were being delivered. They said that, for a prison population of 83,000 prisoners in England and Wales spread across 139 prisons, their latest monthly figures (dated February 2009) were that they had printed 48,000.
They said the "national" part of their claim referred to England and Wales. They said the Probation Service referred to itself as the National Probation Service and its remit covered England and Wales but not Scotland or Northern Ireland.
Assessment
Upheld
The ASA considered it was reasonable for ConVerse to use the term "national" within England and Wales to refer to distribution within England and Wales. We noted that the figures ConVerse had supplied and described as circulation figures would have been described as distribution figures if they had been subject to normal Audit Bureau of Circulations (ABC) criteria. We noted that the print invoices ConVerse had supplied showed their print run figures exceeded the distribution figures that the competitor publication claimed for itself. We noted the dictionary definition of "circulation" which ConVerse had supplied, together with the exceptional circumstances of a free newspaper that was distributed to prisons only. We nevertheless considered readers, and in particular advertising buyers who were potential advertisers with ConVerse, would be familiar with ABC's use of the terms "distribution" and "circulation" and that they were therefore likely to understand ConVerse's "highest circulation" claim to mean that they had the highest sales figures. We considered that, because ConVerse had not shown that they had the highest sales figures of any national newspaper distributed to prisons, the claim was likely to mislead. We told ConVerse to remove the claim and, in future, to avoid using the word "circulation" to describe the number of copies of ConVerse distributed.
The ad breached CAP Code clauses 3.1 (Substantiation), 7.1 (Truthfulness) and 18.1 and 18.3 (Comparisons).
Action
The ad must not appear again in its current form.
Adjudication of the ASA Council (Non-broadcast)
Comment: Mark Leech has once again been shown to be a fraudster.
ASA Adjudications
Spyhole Press Ltd t/a ConVerse
175 Hill Lane
Manchester
M9 6RL
Number of complaints: 1
Date: 29 April 2009
Media: Press general
Sector: Publishing
Ad
A front-page flash on ConVerse - a newspaper distributed to prisons - stated "THE HIGHEST CIRCULATION NATIONAL NEWSPAPER FOR PRISONERS."
Issue
A reader challenged whether the claim "THE HIGHEST CIRCULATION NATIONAL NEWSPAPER FOR PRISONERS" was misleading and could be substantiated.
The CAP Code: 3.1;7.1;18.1;18.3
Response
ConVerse said the "highest circulation" claim was based on the number of copies delivered to prisons. ConVerse said the Oxford English Dictionary defined "circulation" as "the number of copies of each issue of a newspaper, magazine, etc. distributed." They said they believed their "highest circulation" claim was therefore likely to be understood as referring to the number of copies distributed only. They supplied figures, which they described as circulation figures, published respectively in ConVerse and their competitor publication. They believed the figures showed that, over the preceding 15 months, ConVerse had circulated 52,000 copies more than the competitor publication. They said that amounted to an average of 3,500 more copies per month, which they believed justified the "highest circulation" claim. They said that, in addition to England and Wales, their competitor's publication was also circulated to prisons in Scotland and Northern Ireland, and so their competitor's circulation figures for England and Wales were in fact smaller than their total circulation figure. ConVerse said they conducted surveys with prisons every six months to check that the newspaper was being received and distributed satisfactorily and whether too many or too few were being delivered. They said that, for a prison population of 83,000 prisoners in England and Wales spread across 139 prisons, their latest monthly figures (dated February 2009) were that they had printed 48,000.
They said the "national" part of their claim referred to England and Wales. They said the Probation Service referred to itself as the National Probation Service and its remit covered England and Wales but not Scotland or Northern Ireland.
Assessment
Upheld
The ASA considered it was reasonable for ConVerse to use the term "national" within England and Wales to refer to distribution within England and Wales. We noted that the figures ConVerse had supplied and described as circulation figures would have been described as distribution figures if they had been subject to normal Audit Bureau of Circulations (ABC) criteria. We noted that the print invoices ConVerse had supplied showed their print run figures exceeded the distribution figures that the competitor publication claimed for itself. We noted the dictionary definition of "circulation" which ConVerse had supplied, together with the exceptional circumstances of a free newspaper that was distributed to prisons only. We nevertheless considered readers, and in particular advertising buyers who were potential advertisers with ConVerse, would be familiar with ABC's use of the terms "distribution" and "circulation" and that they were therefore likely to understand ConVerse's "highest circulation" claim to mean that they had the highest sales figures. We considered that, because ConVerse had not shown that they had the highest sales figures of any national newspaper distributed to prisons, the claim was likely to mislead. We told ConVerse to remove the claim and, in future, to avoid using the word "circulation" to describe the number of copies of ConVerse distributed.
The ad breached CAP Code clauses 3.1 (Substantiation), 7.1 (Truthfulness) and 18.1 and 18.3 (Comparisons).
Action
The ad must not appear again in its current form.
Adjudication of the ASA Council (Non-broadcast)
Comment: Mark Leech has once again been shown to be a fraudster.
New guidance to crack down on dangerous dogs
New guidance to crack down on dangerous dogs
Save me pleads Rocky
Link.
And...
'Guidance for enforcers on dangerous dogs law'
Link.
What is dangerous here is that instead of a criminal trial before a jury of 12 peers, and the beyond reasonable doubt standard of proof, it is a civil matter before a magistrate, and the standard of proof is on the balance of probabilities. All it requires is someone to think a dog is dangerous, or that someone thinks a dog owner is irresponsible. It is frightening.
Save me pleads RockyLink.
And...
'Guidance for enforcers on dangerous dogs law'
Link.
What is dangerous here is that instead of a criminal trial before a jury of 12 peers, and the beyond reasonable doubt standard of proof, it is a civil matter before a magistrate, and the standard of proof is on the balance of probabilities. All it requires is someone to think a dog is dangerous, or that someone thinks a dog owner is irresponsible. It is frightening.
They don't like it up 'em
They don't like it up 'em
Shock defeat for Government in Commons over Gurkhas
The Government suffered a shock defeat today over the right of the Gurkhas to settle in the UK.
Is this the Avengers? With all the knife crime about I am surprised that Joanna Lumley has not been charged with being in possession of an offensive weapon. In any event, it's about time that Gordon Brown suffered a defeat. It's a shame Nick Clegg is such a coward when it comes to prisoners human rights to the vote.
Shock defeat for Government in Commons over Gurkhas
The Government suffered a shock defeat today over the right of the Gurkhas to settle in the UK.
Is this the Avengers? With all the knife crime about I am surprised that Joanna Lumley has not been charged with being in possession of an offensive weapon. In any event, it's about time that Gordon Brown suffered a defeat. It's a shame Nick Clegg is such a coward when it comes to prisoners human rights to the vote.
Jailhouselawyer and Rocky under attack again
Jailhouselawyer and Rocky under attack again
Police harassment.
Charges
1 Use threatening words/behaviour to cause harassment alarm or distress
On 18/01/2009 at the City of Kingston upon Hull used threatening abusive or insulting words or behaviour or disorderly behaviour within the hearing or sight of a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress thereby
CONTRARY TO SECTION 5(1) AND (6) OF THE PUBLIC ORDER ACT 1986.
2 Dog not under proper control - complaint only
Between 16/10/2008 and 18/01/2009 at the City of Kingston upon Hull being the owner of a dog which was dangerous and not kept under proper control, complaint is laid by Humberside Police who applies for an order that the dog is to be kept under proper control or destroyed.
PURSUANT TO SECTION 2 OF THE DOGS ACT 1871.
I am angry that the police had me in the police station for 7 hours!
Related content...
Some history
Rocky is innocent and so am I
Police harassment.
Charges
1 Use threatening words/behaviour to cause harassment alarm or distress
On 18/01/2009 at the City of Kingston upon Hull used threatening abusive or insulting words or behaviour or disorderly behaviour within the hearing or sight of a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress thereby
CONTRARY TO SECTION 5(1) AND (6) OF THE PUBLIC ORDER ACT 1986.
2 Dog not under proper control - complaint only
Between 16/10/2008 and 18/01/2009 at the City of Kingston upon Hull being the owner of a dog which was dangerous and not kept under proper control, complaint is laid by Humberside Police who applies for an order that the dog is to be kept under proper control or destroyed.
PURSUANT TO SECTION 2 OF THE DOGS ACT 1871.
I am angry that the police had me in the police station for 7 hours!
Related content...
Some history
Rocky is innocent and so am I
Police harassment
Police harassment
Taking Rocky for a walk in Pearson Park I was approached by the police who were just on their way to arrest me under section 5 of the Dangerous Dogs Act for not having my dog under control.
I agreed to turn up at Pearson Park police station at 10.30am.
TTFN.
Taking Rocky for a walk in Pearson Park I was approached by the police who were just on their way to arrest me under section 5 of the Dangerous Dogs Act for not having my dog under control.
I agreed to turn up at Pearson Park police station at 10.30am.
TTFN.
David Cameron powdering his nose with cocaine
David Cameron powdering his nose with cocaine
Is this what they mean with snout in the trough?
Idea: JHL
Photoshop: RonKnee
Is this what they mean with snout in the trough?
Idea: JHL
Photoshop: RonKnee
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
Jeremy Bamber death penalty appeal fails
Jeremy Bamber death penalty appeal fails
Jeremy Bamber, who is serving life for killing five members of his family in 1985, lost his Court of Appeal challenge on Tuesday against an order that he must die behind bars.
Bamber protests that he is innocent.
And, by the way, did I tell you that I am the Pope?
Jeremy Bamber, who is serving life for killing five members of his family in 1985, lost his Court of Appeal challenge on Tuesday against an order that he must die behind bars.
Bamber protests that he is innocent.
And, by the way, did I tell you that I am the Pope?
Questions and answers in the House of Commons on prisons and probation
Questions and answers in the House of Commons on prisons and probation
Prisons and Probation
3.30 pm
The Secretary of State for Justice and Lord Chancellor (Mr. Jack Straw): With permission, Mr. Speaker, I shall make a statement on prisons and probation.
Let me begin by paying tribute to the 70,000 staff working in the services. Last Monday, the Minister responsible for prisons, my right hon. Friend the Member for Delyn (Mr. Hanson), issued a written ministerial statement about the serious disturbance that occurred at Ashwell prison, Rutland on Easter Saturday. Prison Service staff acted with exemplary skill and professionalism in dealing with the riot. I thank them sincerely, as I do officers of Leicestershire constabulary and other emergency services who so ably assisted. Prison Service and police investigations are now under way.
Investing in prison and probation services has been a key priority for this Administration. Prison places are up by nearly 25,000, to 85,000, with spending rising by a similar proportion. The probation case load has risen by 52 per cent. since 1997, but spending has increased by 70 per cent. in real terms. This is the first post-war Government to see a sustained reduction in crime—down 39 per cent. since 1997, with the chances of being a victim the lowest for a generation. There was a 23 per cent. fall in adult reoffending between 2000 and 2006.
Understandable concern has been expressed about the numbers of juveniles and women held in custody. There has over the past year been a reduction of 8 per cent. in the number of juveniles in jail, while the number of adult women prisoners has fallen by 3 per cent. over the same period. In response to my noble Friend Baroness Corston’s recommendations, I have committed £15.5 million over two years to help divert vulnerable women offenders from prison. We also want the Prison Service and the NHS better to deal with offenders with mental health problems. My noble friend Lord Bradley’s report on this will be published shortly.
My noble friend Lord Carter of Coles was asked in 2007 to consider how better to manage short and medium-term prison pressures. I published his report alongside an oral statement on 5 December 2007. Since the publication of Lord Carter’s report we have already provided an additional 3,500 prison places. Lord Carter recommended that net capacity should be brought up to 96,000 by 2014 and that 7,500 of these places should be created by the construction of three 2,500-place prison complexes, described as Titans. In June last year we launched a consultation on those proposals. I am most grateful to all those who responded. The Government’s response to the consultation is published today, along with the document “Capacity and Competition Policy for Prisons and Probation” and an economic impact assessment. Copies are available in the Vote Office and the House Library.
Once a prison is established in an area, almost without exception the local community becomes very supportive of it. A prison is a source of secure, well-paid employment and a focus for much highly creditable volunteering. The research evidence, which shows that prisons have no adverse effect on house prices or crime rates, is then borne out by experience, although proposals for new prisons can at first be controversial.
27 Apr 2009 : Column 570
I did see merit in Lord Carter’s proposals for 2,500-place prisons, especially as they would have been complexes with four or five distinct and separate regimes, but most of those whom we consulted took a different view, and believed that the advantages were far outweighed by the disadvantages. Not the least of those of that view was Dame Anne Owers, Her Majesty’s chief inspector of prisons.
I have looked very carefully at everything that has been said and, in the light of the consultation, concluded that the right approach is to deliver the 7,500 places not through Titans but through five prisons holding 1,500 offenders, each divided into smaller units. We already operate successfully a number of prisons at or around that size.
John Bercow (Buckingham) (Con): You’re a great man!
Mr. Straw: We will leave that to one side for a moment.
The new prisons will be neither Victorian replicas nor large warehouses. They will be modern, purpose-built institutions for adult male prisoners only. They will be safe, secure and effective in helping prisoners deal with their offending and develop the work, education and life skills that they need to turn their lives around.
I can announce today that we are working to secure sites for the first two 1,500-place prisons at Beam Park West in the London borough of Barking and Dagenham, and at Runwell in the borough of Chelmsford in Essex. Both prisons will be privately built and run, and their construction and operation will sustain many hundreds of jobs. Prison capacity planning depends crucially on projections of future demand and judgments about the cost-effectiveness and appropriateness of replacing older places with new capacity. Those and other considerations are kept under constant review, and further decisions about sites and the removal of older provision will be announced in due course. However, in that context, I can tell the House that we will not be pursuing a prison on the Omega site in Warrington.
Work is already in hand to increase capacity by approximately 8,500 places over the next three years. It also remains my intention to withdraw the end-of-custody licence scheme as soon as safely possible. The expansion will include two new public prisons, Isis, adjacent to Belmarsh, and Coltishall, a former RAF base in Norfolk; and two new private prisons, Belmarsh West and Maghull. We are also expanding HMP Littlehey, near Huntingdon, to provide 480 places by early next year, as a quicker, more cost-effective option than buying and converting a prison ship.
At all times, but especially in today’s economic climate, we have a duty to ensure that prison and probation services work as efficiently and effectively as possible in the interests of the public. We are seeking to improve the efficiency of public sector prisons through reforms to work force structures for new uniformed staff and by reducing management costs. From today we will consult on the detail of those plans.
Nearly 90 per cent. of prison places are delivered directly by the public sector, but the private sector also plays an important part. The Government’s approach to competition was described in last November’s pre-Budget report and in last Wednesday’s Red Book.
Related content...
Dominic Grieve: "Prison crisis is entirely of the Government's own making"
Shadow Justice Secretary Dominic Grieve responded for the Conservatives to Jack Straw's statement on prisons and probation yesterday:
"I thank the Justice Secretary for advance sight of his statement. I join him in paying tribute to the service and commitment of prison and probation staff, and police and emergency services, under such challenging conditions. May I therefore express my disappointment that once again he has trailed a major policy announcement in the weekend press, with the Government’s usual disdain for this House?
I should say at the outset that I welcome the Government’s U-turn on Titan prisons; giant warehouses are no good for reforming prisoners or for protecting the public. However, the Justice Secretary first announced Titans amid great fanfare in 2007. Why has it taken almost two years to work out what Opposition parties, the chief inspector of prisons, the voluntary sector and prison officers told him then? Is it because the Government ran out of money, or because the policy ran out of spin? The stark reality is that this U-turn is the nail in the coffin of a flawed approach to tackling crime.
Violent crime has nearly doubled under Labour, with Ministers advised to expect a further surge during this recession. The Justice Secretary has released more than 50,000 prisoners early, including 14 violent offenders every day, to grossly inadequate aftercare; and we have seen Ashwell prison virtually destroyed in a riot. Does he now at last accept that these systematic failures are the direct result of his Government failing both to provide enough prisons and to provide the right prison regime? Take prison numbers; more than half of prisons are overcrowded, and 70 per cent. of prisoners are in overcrowded cells; and on top of early release, dangerous offenders have been moved to open prisons to create space. We now face the possibility of serious unrest, with prisons bursting at the seams. Can he tell the House whether he received any warning from the Prison Service of the riot at Ashwell before it took place? Has he received any further warnings of possible unrest elsewhere?
The current crisis is a direct result of reckless neglect by Ministers. Many will suspect that the sudden conversion over Titans is really just cover to delay or dilute the Government’s pledge to provide the additional 15,000 places that we need, net, by 2014. Ministry of Justice officials advised only last year that 15 prisons would be needed to match the capacity otherwise provided by Titans, but the Justice Secretary is now proposing just five. Will these be mini-Titans, or is he reneging on his pledge to provide the extra places that we need within the timetable that his officials have said is necessary? We will look carefully at the particular sites that he now proposes. Can he explain what consultation process is under way for each site?
Then there are the costs. The Prison Service already faces a black hole of nearly £500 million. How will the Justice Secretary fund these proposals? He says that he intends to end early release. Well, he has said that before. When will it end, and does he recognise that nothing can make up for the failure to invest in the prison estate since he was first warned of the looming crisis more than a decade ago?
As I said, I welcome the abandonment of the Titan model in favour of smaller prisons, because we will never reform until our prisons until we reform the poor regimes that are the direct result of overcrowding. However, these proposals are too little and too late. Can the Justice Secretary confirm that more than half of all prisoners now have serious drug addictions, but that less than 10 per cent. are on rehabilitation programmes? Can he confirm that vital programmes in work and skills have been shelved because of the overcrowding, and does he accept that far from a reduction in adult male reoffending from prison, as he claims, there has in fact been a rise in reoffending from 57 per cent. in 1996 to 65 per cent. in 2006, at which point the Government fiddled the figures rather than tackle the problem?
Turning to probation, the Justice Secretary has, I think, announced cuts. Will he tell the House how many probation areas will see a reduction in their budget, and can he guarantee that public safety will not be compromised? Amid the disinformation and bluster, two things are now crystal clear. The Government are papering over the cracks of a prison crisis that is entirely of their own making and, as the author of that failure, the Justice Secretary appears incapable of providing a credible solution."
Prisons and Probation
3.30 pm
The Secretary of State for Justice and Lord Chancellor (Mr. Jack Straw): With permission, Mr. Speaker, I shall make a statement on prisons and probation.
Let me begin by paying tribute to the 70,000 staff working in the services. Last Monday, the Minister responsible for prisons, my right hon. Friend the Member for Delyn (Mr. Hanson), issued a written ministerial statement about the serious disturbance that occurred at Ashwell prison, Rutland on Easter Saturday. Prison Service staff acted with exemplary skill and professionalism in dealing with the riot. I thank them sincerely, as I do officers of Leicestershire constabulary and other emergency services who so ably assisted. Prison Service and police investigations are now under way.
Investing in prison and probation services has been a key priority for this Administration. Prison places are up by nearly 25,000, to 85,000, with spending rising by a similar proportion. The probation case load has risen by 52 per cent. since 1997, but spending has increased by 70 per cent. in real terms. This is the first post-war Government to see a sustained reduction in crime—down 39 per cent. since 1997, with the chances of being a victim the lowest for a generation. There was a 23 per cent. fall in adult reoffending between 2000 and 2006.
Understandable concern has been expressed about the numbers of juveniles and women held in custody. There has over the past year been a reduction of 8 per cent. in the number of juveniles in jail, while the number of adult women prisoners has fallen by 3 per cent. over the same period. In response to my noble Friend Baroness Corston’s recommendations, I have committed £15.5 million over two years to help divert vulnerable women offenders from prison. We also want the Prison Service and the NHS better to deal with offenders with mental health problems. My noble friend Lord Bradley’s report on this will be published shortly.
My noble friend Lord Carter of Coles was asked in 2007 to consider how better to manage short and medium-term prison pressures. I published his report alongside an oral statement on 5 December 2007. Since the publication of Lord Carter’s report we have already provided an additional 3,500 prison places. Lord Carter recommended that net capacity should be brought up to 96,000 by 2014 and that 7,500 of these places should be created by the construction of three 2,500-place prison complexes, described as Titans. In June last year we launched a consultation on those proposals. I am most grateful to all those who responded. The Government’s response to the consultation is published today, along with the document “Capacity and Competition Policy for Prisons and Probation” and an economic impact assessment. Copies are available in the Vote Office and the House Library.
Once a prison is established in an area, almost without exception the local community becomes very supportive of it. A prison is a source of secure, well-paid employment and a focus for much highly creditable volunteering. The research evidence, which shows that prisons have no adverse effect on house prices or crime rates, is then borne out by experience, although proposals for new prisons can at first be controversial.
27 Apr 2009 : Column 570
I did see merit in Lord Carter’s proposals for 2,500-place prisons, especially as they would have been complexes with four or five distinct and separate regimes, but most of those whom we consulted took a different view, and believed that the advantages were far outweighed by the disadvantages. Not the least of those of that view was Dame Anne Owers, Her Majesty’s chief inspector of prisons.
I have looked very carefully at everything that has been said and, in the light of the consultation, concluded that the right approach is to deliver the 7,500 places not through Titans but through five prisons holding 1,500 offenders, each divided into smaller units. We already operate successfully a number of prisons at or around that size.
John Bercow (Buckingham) (Con): You’re a great man!
Mr. Straw: We will leave that to one side for a moment.
The new prisons will be neither Victorian replicas nor large warehouses. They will be modern, purpose-built institutions for adult male prisoners only. They will be safe, secure and effective in helping prisoners deal with their offending and develop the work, education and life skills that they need to turn their lives around.
I can announce today that we are working to secure sites for the first two 1,500-place prisons at Beam Park West in the London borough of Barking and Dagenham, and at Runwell in the borough of Chelmsford in Essex. Both prisons will be privately built and run, and their construction and operation will sustain many hundreds of jobs. Prison capacity planning depends crucially on projections of future demand and judgments about the cost-effectiveness and appropriateness of replacing older places with new capacity. Those and other considerations are kept under constant review, and further decisions about sites and the removal of older provision will be announced in due course. However, in that context, I can tell the House that we will not be pursuing a prison on the Omega site in Warrington.
Work is already in hand to increase capacity by approximately 8,500 places over the next three years. It also remains my intention to withdraw the end-of-custody licence scheme as soon as safely possible. The expansion will include two new public prisons, Isis, adjacent to Belmarsh, and Coltishall, a former RAF base in Norfolk; and two new private prisons, Belmarsh West and Maghull. We are also expanding HMP Littlehey, near Huntingdon, to provide 480 places by early next year, as a quicker, more cost-effective option than buying and converting a prison ship.
At all times, but especially in today’s economic climate, we have a duty to ensure that prison and probation services work as efficiently and effectively as possible in the interests of the public. We are seeking to improve the efficiency of public sector prisons through reforms to work force structures for new uniformed staff and by reducing management costs. From today we will consult on the detail of those plans.
Nearly 90 per cent. of prison places are delivered directly by the public sector, but the private sector also plays an important part. The Government’s approach to competition was described in last November’s pre-Budget report and in last Wednesday’s Red Book.
Related content...
Dominic Grieve: "Prison crisis is entirely of the Government's own making"
Shadow Justice Secretary Dominic Grieve responded for the Conservatives to Jack Straw's statement on prisons and probation yesterday:
"I thank the Justice Secretary for advance sight of his statement. I join him in paying tribute to the service and commitment of prison and probation staff, and police and emergency services, under such challenging conditions. May I therefore express my disappointment that once again he has trailed a major policy announcement in the weekend press, with the Government’s usual disdain for this House?
I should say at the outset that I welcome the Government’s U-turn on Titan prisons; giant warehouses are no good for reforming prisoners or for protecting the public. However, the Justice Secretary first announced Titans amid great fanfare in 2007. Why has it taken almost two years to work out what Opposition parties, the chief inspector of prisons, the voluntary sector and prison officers told him then? Is it because the Government ran out of money, or because the policy ran out of spin? The stark reality is that this U-turn is the nail in the coffin of a flawed approach to tackling crime.
Violent crime has nearly doubled under Labour, with Ministers advised to expect a further surge during this recession. The Justice Secretary has released more than 50,000 prisoners early, including 14 violent offenders every day, to grossly inadequate aftercare; and we have seen Ashwell prison virtually destroyed in a riot. Does he now at last accept that these systematic failures are the direct result of his Government failing both to provide enough prisons and to provide the right prison regime? Take prison numbers; more than half of prisons are overcrowded, and 70 per cent. of prisoners are in overcrowded cells; and on top of early release, dangerous offenders have been moved to open prisons to create space. We now face the possibility of serious unrest, with prisons bursting at the seams. Can he tell the House whether he received any warning from the Prison Service of the riot at Ashwell before it took place? Has he received any further warnings of possible unrest elsewhere?
The current crisis is a direct result of reckless neglect by Ministers. Many will suspect that the sudden conversion over Titans is really just cover to delay or dilute the Government’s pledge to provide the additional 15,000 places that we need, net, by 2014. Ministry of Justice officials advised only last year that 15 prisons would be needed to match the capacity otherwise provided by Titans, but the Justice Secretary is now proposing just five. Will these be mini-Titans, or is he reneging on his pledge to provide the extra places that we need within the timetable that his officials have said is necessary? We will look carefully at the particular sites that he now proposes. Can he explain what consultation process is under way for each site?
Then there are the costs. The Prison Service already faces a black hole of nearly £500 million. How will the Justice Secretary fund these proposals? He says that he intends to end early release. Well, he has said that before. When will it end, and does he recognise that nothing can make up for the failure to invest in the prison estate since he was first warned of the looming crisis more than a decade ago?
As I said, I welcome the abandonment of the Titan model in favour of smaller prisons, because we will never reform until our prisons until we reform the poor regimes that are the direct result of overcrowding. However, these proposals are too little and too late. Can the Justice Secretary confirm that more than half of all prisoners now have serious drug addictions, but that less than 10 per cent. are on rehabilitation programmes? Can he confirm that vital programmes in work and skills have been shelved because of the overcrowding, and does he accept that far from a reduction in adult male reoffending from prison, as he claims, there has in fact been a rise in reoffending from 57 per cent. in 1996 to 65 per cent. in 2006, at which point the Government fiddled the figures rather than tackle the problem?
Turning to probation, the Justice Secretary has, I think, announced cuts. Will he tell the House how many probation areas will see a reduction in their budget, and can he guarantee that public safety will not be compromised? Amid the disinformation and bluster, two things are now crystal clear. The Government are papering over the cracks of a prison crisis that is entirely of their own making and, as the author of that failure, the Justice Secretary appears incapable of providing a credible solution."
Man jailed for text crash death
Man jailed for text crash death
A driver who killed a mother-of-two in a head-on crash while he had been arguing with his wife via text message has been jailed for nine years.
Justice is served.
I wonder if he is regretting not being the corrupt Lord Ahmed able to get away with it in a corrupt system?
A driver who killed a mother-of-two in a head-on crash while he had been arguing with his wife via text message has been jailed for nine years.
Justice is served.
I wonder if he is regretting not being the corrupt Lord Ahmed able to get away with it in a corrupt system?
Time to clean out the pig sty
Time to clean out the pig sty
Gordon Brown: I have no regrets about failed MPs' expenses reform plan
PM claims he has made 'enormous progress' in reforming the system of MPs' allowances despite failing to win cross-party support for his plans
Brown: I've sorted out the problem of MPs expenses by not sorting out the problem...
Brown has messed up on MPs' expenses
The prime minister underestimated his own MPs' ability to grow a backbone on an issue that is close to their hearts
Gordon Brown: I have no regrets about failed MPs' expenses reform plan
PM claims he has made 'enormous progress' in reforming the system of MPs' allowances despite failing to win cross-party support for his plans
Brown: I've sorted out the problem of MPs expenses by not sorting out the problem...
Brown has messed up on MPs' expenses
The prime minister underestimated his own MPs' ability to grow a backbone on an issue that is close to their hearts
WTF has a spent burglary conviction got to do with becoming a doctor?
WTF has a spent burglary conviction got to do with becoming a doctor?
I think it is pointless having the idea of a spent conviction if the conviction is not deemed to be spent.
I think it is pointless having the idea of a spent conviction if the conviction is not deemed to be spent.
Three cleared of aiding 7/7 bombers
Three cleared of aiding 7/7 bombers
Three men were today cleared of helping the July 7 bombers plan their attacks by carrying out a reconnaissance mission in London.
But two of the men, Waheed Ali and Mohammed Shakil, were convicted of a second charge of conspiracy to attend a place used for terrorist training.
Tourists are terrorists if they are "accused of visiting the London Eye, the Natural History Museum and the London Aquarium" according to anti-terrorist police.
Even meeting in a McDonald's car park and being filmed walking down a London street is deemed to be suspicious.
Asians who grow up in tight-knit communities throughout Britain are suspects. That Asians have been doing this since at least the 1960s is neither here nor there.
Iraqi bookshops are suspect because they specialise in foreign texts.
Anyone Asian-looking is suspect if they attempt to board any flights to Pakistan at Manchester airport (or any other airport for that matter).
Shopping for camping equipment and getting your haircut are definitely suspicious activities.
Worst of all, having images of 9/11 on your computer and text glorifying the destruction is a big no no.
Supporting the anti-American invasions of Muslim lands is an act of terrorism.
America and other Western democracies have to recognise that retaliations are inevitable if they go around interfering in Islamic countries. There will be a huge price to pay for the illegitimate invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan. If you stir up a hornets nest you can hardly complain if you get stung. Actions only lead to reactions. Aborigines call it payback.
Related content...
Pakistan snubs Brown in terror bust-up
Arrest of 11 innocent Pakistani students and Prime Minister's rebuke put relations under strain
Why are our troops on foreign soil?
Three men were today cleared of helping the July 7 bombers plan their attacks by carrying out a reconnaissance mission in London.
But two of the men, Waheed Ali and Mohammed Shakil, were convicted of a second charge of conspiracy to attend a place used for terrorist training.
Tourists are terrorists if they are "accused of visiting the London Eye, the Natural History Museum and the London Aquarium" according to anti-terrorist police.
Even meeting in a McDonald's car park and being filmed walking down a London street is deemed to be suspicious.
Asians who grow up in tight-knit communities throughout Britain are suspects. That Asians have been doing this since at least the 1960s is neither here nor there.
Iraqi bookshops are suspect because they specialise in foreign texts.
Anyone Asian-looking is suspect if they attempt to board any flights to Pakistan at Manchester airport (or any other airport for that matter).
Shopping for camping equipment and getting your haircut are definitely suspicious activities.
Worst of all, having images of 9/11 on your computer and text glorifying the destruction is a big no no.
Supporting the anti-American invasions of Muslim lands is an act of terrorism.
America and other Western democracies have to recognise that retaliations are inevitable if they go around interfering in Islamic countries. There will be a huge price to pay for the illegitimate invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan. If you stir up a hornets nest you can hardly complain if you get stung. Actions only lead to reactions. Aborigines call it payback.
Related content...
Pakistan snubs Brown in terror bust-up
Arrest of 11 innocent Pakistani students and Prime Minister's rebuke put relations under strain
Why are our troops on foreign soil?
Elephants abandon troubled Zimbabwe
Elephants abandon troubled Zimbabwe
Growing pressure from poaching and human encroachment in Zimbabwe has driven hundreds of elephants to migrate from the country, conservationists have said.
When even the elephants have had enough of Robert Mugabe it must surely be time for him to go?
Growing pressure from poaching and human encroachment in Zimbabwe has driven hundreds of elephants to migrate from the country, conservationists have said.
When even the elephants have had enough of Robert Mugabe it must surely be time for him to go?
Monday, April 27, 2009
Lord Snooty of Bullingdon Oxford Restaurant Trasher
Lord Snooty of Bullingdon Oxford Restaurant Trasher
David Cameron: The age of austerity
Come in number 2 your time is up.
I don't know who the guy is immediately above, but it is not Dave the Rave.
I am presently analysing David Cameron's speech at the Tory Cheltenham Forum. Whilst I have also read the transcript, it is not possible to pick up from that the bags under his eyes, and the five times he pinches his nose in the same way that someone with a raging cocaine habit pinches their nose. I noticed the same thing with the video of David Cameron in India.
Photoshop of Lord Snooty Cameron by RonKnee.
David Cameron: The age of austerity
Come in number 2 your time is up.
I don't know who the guy is immediately above, but it is not Dave the Rave.
I am presently analysing David Cameron's speech at the Tory Cheltenham Forum. Whilst I have also read the transcript, it is not possible to pick up from that the bags under his eyes, and the five times he pinches his nose in the same way that someone with a raging cocaine habit pinches their nose. I noticed the same thing with the video of David Cameron in India.
Photoshop of Lord Snooty Cameron by RonKnee.
Prison officer held in drug find
Prison officer held in drug find
A prison officer has been arrested on on suspicion of smuggling crack cocaine into Walton jail on Merseyside.
The 42-year-old is being questioned after his arrest at HMP Liverpool, said Merseyside Police.
The man's home was then raided by officers where a quantity of ammunition was discovered.
Following the security alert the jail was also searched. The prison officer has been suspended from work while detectives carry out an investigation.
A prison officer has been arrested on on suspicion of smuggling crack cocaine into Walton jail on Merseyside.
The 42-year-old is being questioned after his arrest at HMP Liverpool, said Merseyside Police.
The man's home was then raided by officers where a quantity of ammunition was discovered.
Following the security alert the jail was also searched. The prison officer has been suspended from work while detectives carry out an investigation.
Nick Clegg says MPs should be allowed to be benefit cheats
Nick Clegg says MPs should be allowed to be benefit cheats
The Lib Dem leader has urged his fellow party leaders to back his plans for reforming MPs' second-homes allowances.
Nick Clegg's proposals would see the allowance replaced with expenses for only basic utility bills, council tax and either rent or mortgage interest.
MPs get over £60,000 basic salary per year. They are not poor enough to expect the taxpayer to pay for their utility bills. I have to pay mine out of my £60 per week Jobseekers Allowance.
The Lib Dem leader has urged his fellow party leaders to back his plans for reforming MPs' second-homes allowances.
Nick Clegg's proposals would see the allowance replaced with expenses for only basic utility bills, council tax and either rent or mortgage interest.
MPs get over £60,000 basic salary per year. They are not poor enough to expect the taxpayer to pay for their utility bills. I have to pay mine out of my £60 per week Jobseekers Allowance.
Why are we jailing innocent children?
Why are we jailing innocent children?
The government claims it is necessary to put children who have not committed any crimes in prison. I beg to differ. It is totally unnecessary. Nor is it a crime for their parents to refuse to be deported. This barbaric practice of jailing innocent children must end.
Detention of children 'must stop'
Children who have been refused asylum should no longer be detained while awaiting deportation, the children's commissioner for England has said.
Related content...
'We saw the sky from a little park'
The government claims it is necessary to put children who have not committed any crimes in prison. I beg to differ. It is totally unnecessary. Nor is it a crime for their parents to refuse to be deported. This barbaric practice of jailing innocent children must end.
Detention of children 'must stop'
Children who have been refused asylum should no longer be detained while awaiting deportation, the children's commissioner for England has said.
Related content...
'We saw the sky from a little park'
U-turn on supersized prisons is not so titanic
U-turn on supersized prisons is not so titanic
We should, I suppose, be grateful to the financial crisis for getting rid of one of the government's most thoughtless, misguided and damaging (to society) plans in the field of criminal justice - the building of three ultra-sized so-called Titan prisons, at an underestimated cost of £1.2bn, which would inevitably have doubled once building had commenced.
But if you believe the Ministry of Justice, money had nothing to do with it. How could anyone dare to think that the government wanted to cut down on expenditure? No, the real reason for scrapping the Titans, the ministry asserts, was that Jack Straw and his team had listened carefully to the points made by penal policy experts and reformers, and had suddenly been converted by the persuasiveness of their arguments. The concept of Jack Straw as a born-again listener to good sense is difficult to summon up, but that's what is being claimed. I was blind but now I see, he is expected to announce today.
UPDATE:
Related post...
No Titan jails? Great, now for reform
Far too much money in the prison system is being diverted to bureaucracy and away from work with offenders
We should, I suppose, be grateful to the financial crisis for getting rid of one of the government's most thoughtless, misguided and damaging (to society) plans in the field of criminal justice - the building of three ultra-sized so-called Titan prisons, at an underestimated cost of £1.2bn, which would inevitably have doubled once building had commenced.
But if you believe the Ministry of Justice, money had nothing to do with it. How could anyone dare to think that the government wanted to cut down on expenditure? No, the real reason for scrapping the Titans, the ministry asserts, was that Jack Straw and his team had listened carefully to the points made by penal policy experts and reformers, and had suddenly been converted by the persuasiveness of their arguments. The concept of Jack Straw as a born-again listener to good sense is difficult to summon up, but that's what is being claimed. I was blind but now I see, he is expected to announce today.
UPDATE:
Related post...
No Titan jails? Great, now for reform
Far too much money in the prison system is being diverted to bureaucracy and away from work with offenders
MPs should sod off
MPs should sod off
MPs to get up to £5,000 summer recess payment
MPS would be given a one-off payment of up to £5,000 to maintain their second homes this summer as part of Gordon Brown's controversial overhaul of their expenses system.
"One of the biggest complaints among MPs is that under the new system they would receive no cash towards their mortgage interest or rent payments during the 11-week summer recess because the Commons is not sitting. Harriet Harman, the Leader of the Commons, has told mutinous MPs that the proposals include "transitional arrangements" to help them meet their bills over the summer".
Everybody else has to meet their bills from their wages. In this respect MPs should be no different.
MPs to get up to £5,000 summer recess payment
MPS would be given a one-off payment of up to £5,000 to maintain their second homes this summer as part of Gordon Brown's controversial overhaul of their expenses system.
"One of the biggest complaints among MPs is that under the new system they would receive no cash towards their mortgage interest or rent payments during the 11-week summer recess because the Commons is not sitting. Harriet Harman, the Leader of the Commons, has told mutinous MPs that the proposals include "transitional arrangements" to help them meet their bills over the summer".
Everybody else has to meet their bills from their wages. In this respect MPs should be no different.
I wonder if swine fever might rid us of a few snouts in the trough MPs?
I wonder if swine fever might rid us of a few snouts in the trough MPs?
Swine flu: Britain should expect cases, says Health Protection Agency chief
Swine flu: Britain should expect cases, says Health Protection Agency chief
Does Lord West know best?
Does Lord West know best?
Government minister Lord West places bet on Labour losing election
Lord West, the Government minister who oversees Britain's counter-terrorism strategy, has placed a bet on Labour losing the next election.
"The Security Minister made the bet in mid-2007 as Gordon Brown succeeded Tony Blair. At the time, Labour enjoyed a strong opinion poll lead and Lord West is understood to have received odds of 66-1.
The disclosure of the bet will embarrass the Prime Minister and it is not clear whether Lord West can remain in office while having a financial interest in Labour losing the next election".
Perhaps this pirate should be made to walk the plank?
UPDATE:
Minister denies betting on Labour defeat
Government minister Lord West places bet on Labour losing election
Lord West, the Government minister who oversees Britain's counter-terrorism strategy, has placed a bet on Labour losing the next election.
"The Security Minister made the bet in mid-2007 as Gordon Brown succeeded Tony Blair. At the time, Labour enjoyed a strong opinion poll lead and Lord West is understood to have received odds of 66-1.
The disclosure of the bet will embarrass the Prime Minister and it is not clear whether Lord West can remain in office while having a financial interest in Labour losing the next election".
Perhaps this pirate should be made to walk the plank?
UPDATE:
Minister denies betting on Labour defeat
Sunday, April 26, 2009
NHS to waste £20M per year in search to save money
NHS to waste £20M per year in search to save money
NHS offers millions of pounds in prize money for innovation
Cash prizes totalling £20 million are being offered by the Department of Health to people who come up with innovative ways of cutting costs or discover health care breakthroughs.
"The NHS is struggling to find £2.3 billion efficiency savings this year and is facing the possibility of a budget freeze on spending in the near future"...
"The challenges will be set annually by an expert panel which will include staff who will advise ministers and set the parameters of the challenge.
Prizes will be up to £5m per innovation and winners will be celebrated at an annual awards event".
£2.3 billion efficiency saving spending £20 million annually needlessly?
NHS offers millions of pounds in prize money for innovation
Cash prizes totalling £20 million are being offered by the Department of Health to people who come up with innovative ways of cutting costs or discover health care breakthroughs.
"The NHS is struggling to find £2.3 billion efficiency savings this year and is facing the possibility of a budget freeze on spending in the near future"...
"The challenges will be set annually by an expert panel which will include staff who will advise ministers and set the parameters of the challenge.
Prizes will be up to £5m per innovation and winners will be celebrated at an annual awards event".
£2.3 billion efficiency saving spending £20 million annually needlessly?
Guilty peers Lord Taylor of Blackburn and Lord Truscott face a year's suspension
Guilty peers Lord Taylor of Blackburn and Lord Truscott face a year's suspension
TWO Labour peers at the centre of the lords for hire scandal have been found guilty of misconduct by a sleaze inquiry and face suspension from parliament, according to senior House of Lords sources.
Senior peers have concluded that Lord Taylor of Blackburn and Lord Truscott have broken the code of conduct of members of the upper house.
The investigation began after undercover Sunday Times reporters posing as lobbyists found that the two peers were prepared to help to amend legislation in return for cash.
They could now be barred from parliament for up to a year and lose tax-free allowances of up to £335 a day.
There really is no difference between the House of Lords and the house of corrections.
TWO Labour peers at the centre of the lords for hire scandal have been found guilty of misconduct by a sleaze inquiry and face suspension from parliament, according to senior House of Lords sources.
Senior peers have concluded that Lord Taylor of Blackburn and Lord Truscott have broken the code of conduct of members of the upper house.
The investigation began after undercover Sunday Times reporters posing as lobbyists found that the two peers were prepared to help to amend legislation in return for cash.
They could now be barred from parliament for up to a year and lose tax-free allowances of up to £335 a day.
There really is no difference between the House of Lords and the house of corrections.
Torture? It probably killed more Americans than 9/11
Torture? It probably killed more Americans than 9/11
A US major reveals the inside story of military interrogation in Iraq. By Patrick Cockburn, winner of the 2009 Orwell Prize for journalism
The use of torture by the US has proved so counter-productive that it may have led to the death of as many US soldiers as civilians killed in 9/11, says the leader of a crack US interrogation team in Iraq.
Related content...
CIA ignored warnings from US soldiers that torture and extreme stress would not work
A US major reveals the inside story of military interrogation in Iraq. By Patrick Cockburn, winner of the 2009 Orwell Prize for journalism
The use of torture by the US has proved so counter-productive that it may have led to the death of as many US soldiers as civilians killed in 9/11, says the leader of a crack US interrogation team in Iraq.
Related content...
CIA ignored warnings from US soldiers that torture and extreme stress would not work
Inside Yarl's Wood: Britain's shame over child detainees
Inside Yarl's Wood: Britain's shame over child detainees
Emily Dugan on the shocking treatment of families in immigration centres
Children held in the infamous Yarl's Wood immigration detention centre are being denied urgent medical treatment, handled violently and left at risk of serious harm, a damning report by the Children's Commissioner for England will say tomorrow.
It is to Britain's shame that we are still imprisoning children. And to Serco's shame that the company is making profits out of children suffering.
Emily Dugan on the shocking treatment of families in immigration centres
Children held in the infamous Yarl's Wood immigration detention centre are being denied urgent medical treatment, handled violently and left at risk of serious harm, a damning report by the Children's Commissioner for England will say tomorrow.
It is to Britain's shame that we are still imprisoning children. And to Serco's shame that the company is making profits out of children suffering.
Revealed: Cameron's freebie to apartheid South Africa
Revealed: Cameron's freebie to apartheid South Africa
David Cameron accepted an all-expenses paid trip to apartheid South Africa while Nelson Mandela was still in prison, an updated biography of the Tory leader reveals today.
The trip by Mr Cameron in 1989, when he was a rising star of the Conservative Research Department, was a chance for him to "see for himself" and was funded by a firm that lobbied against the imposition of sanctions on the apartheid regime.
Critics described it as a "sanctions-busting jolly" that raised questions about the character of the man who, after a week when the Government's credibility on the economy hit a new low, is now on course to be prime minister in a little more than a year's time.
Mr Cameron will portray himself as prime minister-in-waiting today when he addresses his party's spring conference in Cheltenham with a promise to introduce a "government of thrift".
The trip is revealed for the first time in a newly updated edition of Cameron: The Rise of the New Conservative, by James Hanning, the deputy editor of The Independent on Sunday, and Francis Elliott, the deputy political editor of The Times.
Labour should not be engaging in smear tactics against the Tories when there is enough truth out there to show them up for what they really are. For example:
"David Cameron asks us to judge a leader's character – well, Gordon Brown at this time was active in the anti-apartheid movement, while Cameron was enjoying a sanctions-busting jolly. That is a measure of character.
"This just exposes his hypocrisy because he has tried to present himself as a progressive Conservative, but just on the eve of the apartheid downfall, and Nelson Mandela's release from prison, when negotiations were taking place about a transfer of power, here he was being wined and dined on a sanctions-busting visit.
"This is the real Conservative Party, shown by the fact that his colleagues who used to wear 'Hang Nelson Mandela' badges at university are now sitting on the benches around him. Their leader at the time Margaret Thatcher described Mandela as a terrorist".
It is doubtful that Iain Dale will mention this on his blog. Because he too is a hypocrite and a liar. Paul Staines/Guido Fawkes who is also a racist and BNP supporter has previously boasted about wearing a hang Nelson Mandela T-shirt.
David Cameron accepted an all-expenses paid trip to apartheid South Africa while Nelson Mandela was still in prison, an updated biography of the Tory leader reveals today.
The trip by Mr Cameron in 1989, when he was a rising star of the Conservative Research Department, was a chance for him to "see for himself" and was funded by a firm that lobbied against the imposition of sanctions on the apartheid regime.
Critics described it as a "sanctions-busting jolly" that raised questions about the character of the man who, after a week when the Government's credibility on the economy hit a new low, is now on course to be prime minister in a little more than a year's time.
Mr Cameron will portray himself as prime minister-in-waiting today when he addresses his party's spring conference in Cheltenham with a promise to introduce a "government of thrift".
The trip is revealed for the first time in a newly updated edition of Cameron: The Rise of the New Conservative, by James Hanning, the deputy editor of The Independent on Sunday, and Francis Elliott, the deputy political editor of The Times.
Labour should not be engaging in smear tactics against the Tories when there is enough truth out there to show them up for what they really are. For example:
"David Cameron asks us to judge a leader's character – well, Gordon Brown at this time was active in the anti-apartheid movement, while Cameron was enjoying a sanctions-busting jolly. That is a measure of character.
"This just exposes his hypocrisy because he has tried to present himself as a progressive Conservative, but just on the eve of the apartheid downfall, and Nelson Mandela's release from prison, when negotiations were taking place about a transfer of power, here he was being wined and dined on a sanctions-busting visit.
"This is the real Conservative Party, shown by the fact that his colleagues who used to wear 'Hang Nelson Mandela' badges at university are now sitting on the benches around him. Their leader at the time Margaret Thatcher described Mandela as a terrorist".
It is doubtful that Iain Dale will mention this on his blog. Because he too is a hypocrite and a liar. Paul Staines/Guido Fawkes who is also a racist and BNP supporter has previously boasted about wearing a hang Nelson Mandela T-shirt.
Nadine Dorries' affair with a third party led to her divorce
Nadine Dorries' affair with a third party led to her divorce
As I understand it, Nadine Dorries claims that she is upset because it is alleged in one of the emails between Damian McBride and Derek Draper that she is supposed to have had a one night stand with a MP.
I fail to see the point of attempting to smear Nadine Dorries on this ground, with an invention, when the real story is that Nadine Dorries lied about there not being a third party involved in the break up of her marriage with her husband who is suffering from multiple sclerosis. The truth is she was then and still is having an affair with this third party.
The Telegraph is reporting that "The decision by Mrs Dorries to sue over the emails threatens to ensure that the saga, which ministers hoped had ended, will continue for weeks and months to come".
This Tory strategy to attempt use the courts against Labour was first mentioned here on conservativehome.com.
It is the hypocrisy of the Tories which gets me. David Cameron talked about the morals of marriage, but when Nadine Dorries gave up her 33 year relationship with her husband to put her desire for power first David Cameron welcomed her with open arms and said her divorce was a private matter. Double standards is dishonest.
As I understand it, Nadine Dorries claims that she is upset because it is alleged in one of the emails between Damian McBride and Derek Draper that she is supposed to have had a one night stand with a MP.
I fail to see the point of attempting to smear Nadine Dorries on this ground, with an invention, when the real story is that Nadine Dorries lied about there not being a third party involved in the break up of her marriage with her husband who is suffering from multiple sclerosis. The truth is she was then and still is having an affair with this third party.
The Telegraph is reporting that "The decision by Mrs Dorries to sue over the emails threatens to ensure that the saga, which ministers hoped had ended, will continue for weeks and months to come".
This Tory strategy to attempt use the courts against Labour was first mentioned here on conservativehome.com.
It is the hypocrisy of the Tories which gets me. David Cameron talked about the morals of marriage, but when Nadine Dorries gave up her 33 year relationship with her husband to put her desire for power first David Cameron welcomed her with open arms and said her divorce was a private matter. Double standards is dishonest.
Saturday, April 25, 2009
Is Nadine Dorries being foolish in suing over smeargate emails?
Is Nadine Dorries being foolish in suing over smeargate emails?
Iain Dale is masturbating at the thought of Nadine Dorries taking legal action.
I have a sneaky suspicion that Nadine Dorries is rattling her cage about suing over the smeargate emails. This is not about going to court. Rather this is about seeking an out of court settlement. As one commenter has observed: "Nadine, its patently obvious you're milking this for all its worth, grow up or get out". It sounds like good advice to me. I am reminded about the cartoon which shows two farmers in dispute over a cow, one pulls the cow's tail whilst the other pulls the cow's head, meanwhile a lawyer is underneath milking the cow's udders for all it's worth! If she does succeed in making money out of this, I hope she has the good sense to take a leaf out of Jack Knight's book and donate the proceeds to charity? Perhaps, one that seeks a cure for multiple sclerosis might be a good idea? The Daily Mail exposed how Nadine Dorries dumped her husband who has MS to become a MP.
Perhaps, she should read The lying lies and dirty secrets of Ms Nadine Dorries MP because she does not come across as whiter than white in this post and she may have to show in court in what way her reputation has been damaged by the smears.
The funniest thing about all of this was the interview with Gordon Brown shown on Have I Got News For You. He said he takes full responsibility for it, and the person responsible for it [Damian McBride] has gone.
The problem with Nadine Dorries not apologising when she is in the wrong herself, and then demanding an apology when she has been wronged and upon receiving it saying it is not enough, if the Tories get into power at the next General Election and she retains her seat and if and when something goes wrong she may well find that her simply offering an apology will not suffice.
Iain Dale is masturbating at the thought of Nadine Dorries taking legal action.
I have a sneaky suspicion that Nadine Dorries is rattling her cage about suing over the smeargate emails. This is not about going to court. Rather this is about seeking an out of court settlement. As one commenter has observed: "Nadine, its patently obvious you're milking this for all its worth, grow up or get out". It sounds like good advice to me. I am reminded about the cartoon which shows two farmers in dispute over a cow, one pulls the cow's tail whilst the other pulls the cow's head, meanwhile a lawyer is underneath milking the cow's udders for all it's worth! If she does succeed in making money out of this, I hope she has the good sense to take a leaf out of Jack Knight's book and donate the proceeds to charity? Perhaps, one that seeks a cure for multiple sclerosis might be a good idea? The Daily Mail exposed how Nadine Dorries dumped her husband who has MS to become a MP.
Perhaps, she should read The lying lies and dirty secrets of Ms Nadine Dorries MP because she does not come across as whiter than white in this post and she may have to show in court in what way her reputation has been damaged by the smears.
The funniest thing about all of this was the interview with Gordon Brown shown on Have I Got News For You. He said he takes full responsibility for it, and the person responsible for it [Damian McBride] has gone.
The problem with Nadine Dorries not apologising when she is in the wrong herself, and then demanding an apology when she has been wronged and upon receiving it saying it is not enough, if the Tories get into power at the next General Election and she retains her seat and if and when something goes wrong she may well find that her simply offering an apology will not suffice.
Straw denies £300m hole in prisons budget
Straw denies £300m hole in prisons budget
Super-jails scrapped because of opposition, minister insists
Jack Straw was accused last night of scrapping plans for a new generation of "Titan" super-jails because of a £300m "black hole" in the Government's prisons budget.
Prison expansion is not a sign of tackling crime, because this is like shutting the gate after the horse has bolted. More prisons is just a sign of failure, less prisons is a sign of success. If crime prevention and rehabilitation worked then we would be witnessing a reduction in the size of the penal estate, not statements promising to provide more prison places.
Super-jails scrapped because of opposition, minister insists
Jack Straw was accused last night of scrapping plans for a new generation of "Titan" super-jails because of a £300m "black hole" in the Government's prisons budget.
Prison expansion is not a sign of tackling crime, because this is like shutting the gate after the horse has bolted. More prisons is just a sign of failure, less prisons is a sign of success. If crime prevention and rehabilitation worked then we would be witnessing a reduction in the size of the penal estate, not statements promising to provide more prison places.
Friday, April 24, 2009
Government pays private company to illegally spy on the public
Government pays private company to illegally spy on the public
The Guardian has exposed an undercover operation involving a Detective Constable working for Strathclyde police, and another person, attempting to recruit a Plane Stupid activist into becoming a police spy.
Given that the Detective Constable is the lowest rank within the police service, they do not have assistants working for them, usually the Detective Constable assists a Detective Sergeant or officer of a higher rank. Therefore, the reference to the Detective Constable's "assistant" in the article is suspect.
The Guardian article states that the Assistant Chief Constable for Strathclyde police, George Hamilton, claims that the undercover operation was within the powers granted by the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act. However, RIPA "is about defining the powers the government and its security, intelligence and communications bodies will have to snoop on electronic communications and data". I fail to see how attempting to recruit an activist to spy on other activists and report back to the controllers falls within the power of RIPA. Nowhere in the article is their mention of internet activity, which is what RIPA is supposed to cover.
According to the Guardian article: "It is known that at national level, a confidential intelligence unit has been set up by the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) with the power to operate across the UK, mount surveillance and run informers, with the intention of building up a detailed picture of "domestic extremism"". I wrote a post here explaining that ACPO is not actually an association at all but is in fact a private company. Therefore, it does not have any public power to set up any confidential intelligence unit with the public power to operate across the UK. In other words, it is a mercenary force. As such, it is illegal. I have discovered that the National Counter Terrorism Security Office (NaCTSO) is a police unit co-located with the Centre for the Protection of the National Infrastructure (CPNI), and reports to and is funded by the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO).
What the Guardian article fails to point out is that Assistant Chief Constable for Strathclyde police, George Hamilton, is a member of the private company ACPO whilst at the same time is supposed to be working for the public. I suspect that both the Detective Constable and the so-called "assistant" were not engaged in any public duty in attempting to recruit the activist as a spy, rather they were doing so for the private company ACPO. If this is the case, why is the government paying a private company to illegally spy on civilians?
The Guardian has exposed an undercover operation involving a Detective Constable working for Strathclyde police, and another person, attempting to recruit a Plane Stupid activist into becoming a police spy.
Given that the Detective Constable is the lowest rank within the police service, they do not have assistants working for them, usually the Detective Constable assists a Detective Sergeant or officer of a higher rank. Therefore, the reference to the Detective Constable's "assistant" in the article is suspect.
The Guardian article states that the Assistant Chief Constable for Strathclyde police, George Hamilton, claims that the undercover operation was within the powers granted by the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act. However, RIPA "is about defining the powers the government and its security, intelligence and communications bodies will have to snoop on electronic communications and data". I fail to see how attempting to recruit an activist to spy on other activists and report back to the controllers falls within the power of RIPA. Nowhere in the article is their mention of internet activity, which is what RIPA is supposed to cover.
According to the Guardian article: "It is known that at national level, a confidential intelligence unit has been set up by the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) with the power to operate across the UK, mount surveillance and run informers, with the intention of building up a detailed picture of "domestic extremism"". I wrote a post here explaining that ACPO is not actually an association at all but is in fact a private company. Therefore, it does not have any public power to set up any confidential intelligence unit with the public power to operate across the UK. In other words, it is a mercenary force. As such, it is illegal. I have discovered that the National Counter Terrorism Security Office (NaCTSO) is a police unit co-located with the Centre for the Protection of the National Infrastructure (CPNI), and reports to and is funded by the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO).
What the Guardian article fails to point out is that Assistant Chief Constable for Strathclyde police, George Hamilton, is a member of the private company ACPO whilst at the same time is supposed to be working for the public. I suspect that both the Detective Constable and the so-called "assistant" were not engaged in any public duty in attempting to recruit the activist as a spy, rather they were doing so for the private company ACPO. If this is the case, why is the government paying a private company to illegally spy on civilians?
Super-jails are first to feel squeeze from Whitehall
Super-jails are first to feel squeeze from Whitehall
Jack Straw abandons contentious proposal to fix overcrowding in prisons
By Andrew Grice and Nigel Morris
Plans to build three giant "Titan" prisons are to be scrapped by the Government as it begins the squeeze on public spending which was announced in Wednesday's Budget.
The Independent has learnt that Jack Straw, the Justice Secretary, has abandoned his flagship proposals for the 2,500-place jails after the Treasury objected to the cost of his £1.2bn prison building programme.
But government sources last night insisted that Mr Straw decided to retreat because of the strong objections raised by penal reform groups as well as local opposition in the areas where the super-jails were planned.
Although the total number of prison places will not be cut, he will announce on Monday that the Government intends to instead build five jails, each with 1,500 places. But only two of the new prisons will go ahead immediately.
A plan to buy a prison ship with 450 places has also been abandoned, after building a traditional jail was found to be 25 per cent cheaper. Proposals for a new generation of multi-storey "Titan jails" holding up to 2,500 inmates each were drawn up by Mr Straw in 2007 in response to prison overcrowding.
They were the key element of a building programme designed to bring prison capacity in England and Wales to 96,000 by 2014. Last week there were 82,757 offenders behind bars – an increase of more than 1,000 since the beginning of the year.
The next idea which should be scrapped is plans for prisons with 1,500 prisoners. This is 1,250 more than should be housed in a prison if rehabilitation is to work properly. No prison should contain more than 250 prisoners.
Titan prisons plans 'abandoned'
Plans for three 2,500-place Titan prisons costing an estimated £350m each are to be ditched, the BBC understands.
Instead, Justice Secretary Jack Straw is expected to reveal proposals for five 1,500-place jails, with two set to go ahead immediately.
Sources say the decision has nothing to do with the Budget or making savings.
Crime reduction charity Nacro said even if Titans were dropped, the government still had a strategy of prison expansion that was a waste of money.
Jack Straw abandons contentious proposal to fix overcrowding in prisons
By Andrew Grice and Nigel Morris
Plans to build three giant "Titan" prisons are to be scrapped by the Government as it begins the squeeze on public spending which was announced in Wednesday's Budget.
The Independent has learnt that Jack Straw, the Justice Secretary, has abandoned his flagship proposals for the 2,500-place jails after the Treasury objected to the cost of his £1.2bn prison building programme.
But government sources last night insisted that Mr Straw decided to retreat because of the strong objections raised by penal reform groups as well as local opposition in the areas where the super-jails were planned.
Although the total number of prison places will not be cut, he will announce on Monday that the Government intends to instead build five jails, each with 1,500 places. But only two of the new prisons will go ahead immediately.
A plan to buy a prison ship with 450 places has also been abandoned, after building a traditional jail was found to be 25 per cent cheaper. Proposals for a new generation of multi-storey "Titan jails" holding up to 2,500 inmates each were drawn up by Mr Straw in 2007 in response to prison overcrowding.
They were the key element of a building programme designed to bring prison capacity in England and Wales to 96,000 by 2014. Last week there were 82,757 offenders behind bars – an increase of more than 1,000 since the beginning of the year.
The next idea which should be scrapped is plans for prisons with 1,500 prisoners. This is 1,250 more than should be housed in a prison if rehabilitation is to work properly. No prison should contain more than 250 prisoners.
Titan prisons plans 'abandoned'
Plans for three 2,500-place Titan prisons costing an estimated £350m each are to be ditched, the BBC understands.
Instead, Justice Secretary Jack Straw is expected to reveal proposals for five 1,500-place jails, with two set to go ahead immediately.
Sources say the decision has nothing to do with the Budget or making savings.
Crime reduction charity Nacro said even if Titans were dropped, the government still had a strategy of prison expansion that was a waste of money.
Thursday, April 23, 2009
The budget: A case of history repeating itself
The budget: A case of history repeating itself
You would think with all the expenses MPs fiddle that the Chancellor would be able to afford a new case?
You would think with all the expenses MPs fiddle that the Chancellor would be able to afford a new case?
Jailhouselawyer responds to BIHR response to Michael Wills
Jailhouselawyer responds to BIHR response to Michael Wills
The British Institute of Human Rights can justly be accused of spin in its press release April 21, 2009.
Let me first put things into perspective. How about the Inhuman Rights Act? Or, the Selective Human Rights Act? Maybe even the Human Rights Veneer Act? We have the Executive and Judiciary and Parliament (add to them the Equality and Human Rights Commission, and British Institute of Human Rights) all refusing to deal with the issue of universal franchise of 60,000+ UK citizens.
Is Michael Wills, a Justice Minister, the appropriate person to give a lecture on rights and responsibilities? You would think so as he works at the Ministry of Justice. However, his conscience must be elsewhere. Because it is the Ministry of Justice which is denying convicted prisoners their human right to vote. The Minister of Justice, Jack Straw, is a suspected war criminal over his involvement in flights of extra-ordinary rendition. That’s like putting Hitler in charge of a Jewish holiday camp. Someone who does not care about his involvement in torture, does not care about prisoners human rights to vote. If he was a man of honour he would resign, instead of being more interested in fancy dress which is the Lord Chancellor’s robes.
According the BIHR press release: “The British Institute of Human Rights welcomes any opportunity for a national conversation on how human rights can be further protected in the UK”.
It’s good to talk. How about you start doing something other than just talking about the subject and listening to others talking about it? If you are too busy talking about it then you are not acting out what you have already talked about. Actions speak louder than words. Let’s have some action from you can we?
The British Institute of Human Rights can justly be accused of spin in its press release April 21, 2009.
Let me first put things into perspective. How about the Inhuman Rights Act? Or, the Selective Human Rights Act? Maybe even the Human Rights Veneer Act? We have the Executive and Judiciary and Parliament (add to them the Equality and Human Rights Commission, and British Institute of Human Rights) all refusing to deal with the issue of universal franchise of 60,000+ UK citizens.
Is Michael Wills, a Justice Minister, the appropriate person to give a lecture on rights and responsibilities? You would think so as he works at the Ministry of Justice. However, his conscience must be elsewhere. Because it is the Ministry of Justice which is denying convicted prisoners their human right to vote. The Minister of Justice, Jack Straw, is a suspected war criminal over his involvement in flights of extra-ordinary rendition. That’s like putting Hitler in charge of a Jewish holiday camp. Someone who does not care about his involvement in torture, does not care about prisoners human rights to vote. If he was a man of honour he would resign, instead of being more interested in fancy dress which is the Lord Chancellor’s robes.
According the BIHR press release: “The British Institute of Human Rights welcomes any opportunity for a national conversation on how human rights can be further protected in the UK”.
It’s good to talk. How about you start doing something other than just talking about the subject and listening to others talking about it? If you are too busy talking about it then you are not acting out what you have already talked about. Actions speak louder than words. Let’s have some action from you can we?
Iain Dale admits he's a liar
Iain Dale admits he's a liar
Iain Dale on Twitter: "Actually, I lied".
Although he was only going on about appearing live on radio...
Miracles happen.
Iain Dale on Twitter: "Actually, I lied".
Although he was only going on about appearing live on radio...
Miracles happen.
Before Mark Leech called me a racist he should have checked his facts
Before Mark Leech called me a racist he should have checked his facts
Reference to the libel can be seen here.
Reference to the libel can be seen here.
Police and PM in dock over arrest of terrorist suspects
Police and PM in dock over arrest of terrorist suspects
Case against Muslim men amounted to one email and handful of telephone conversations
The case against 12 Muslim men involved in what Gordon Brown described as a "major terrorist plot" amounted to one email and a handful of ambiguous telephone conversations, it emerged last night after all the men were released without charge.
Eleven Pakistani students and one British man were freed after extensive searches of 14 addresses in North-west England failed to locate evidence of terrorist activity, according to security sources. Police did not find any explosives, firearms, target lists, documents or any material which could have been used to carry out an attack.
Last night Lord Carlile, the reviewer of terror laws, said he would be heading an immediate "snapshot" investigation into the arrests.
The Home Office said it would deport the 11 Pakistani men, who are aged 22 to 38 and were in Britain on student visas, because the Government believed they represented a threat to national security.
This could be the script for a film titled The Twelve Angry Muslim Men. They were arrested prematurely. A top cop forced to resign. The government claiming that they pose a threat to security in this country, but not a shred of evidence is produced to support this belief. Nevertheless, they were all detained for almost 2 weeks. Then when a judge orders their release from custody, they are transferred into a different type of custody namely immigration detention centres. The government is seeking to deport them, even though they are legally in this country on student visas, on the grounds that they are an embarrassment to the government.
Because the 12 angry Muslim men have been branded as suspected terrorists in this country, should they be deported they face torture and death in their own country Pakistan for being tarnished as suspected terrorists.
Powers granted to protect the public are being used to terrorise the public.
This case has all the appearance of "My Geranium is Subversive", a psychological study undertaken in prison where guards suspected the innocent activity of inmates watching a plant grow as being a threat to the good order and discipline of the prison.
Related content...
Deporting these students shames us
Case against Muslim men amounted to one email and handful of telephone conversations
The case against 12 Muslim men involved in what Gordon Brown described as a "major terrorist plot" amounted to one email and a handful of ambiguous telephone conversations, it emerged last night after all the men were released without charge.
Eleven Pakistani students and one British man were freed after extensive searches of 14 addresses in North-west England failed to locate evidence of terrorist activity, according to security sources. Police did not find any explosives, firearms, target lists, documents or any material which could have been used to carry out an attack.
Last night Lord Carlile, the reviewer of terror laws, said he would be heading an immediate "snapshot" investigation into the arrests.
The Home Office said it would deport the 11 Pakistani men, who are aged 22 to 38 and were in Britain on student visas, because the Government believed they represented a threat to national security.
This could be the script for a film titled The Twelve Angry Muslim Men. They were arrested prematurely. A top cop forced to resign. The government claiming that they pose a threat to security in this country, but not a shred of evidence is produced to support this belief. Nevertheless, they were all detained for almost 2 weeks. Then when a judge orders their release from custody, they are transferred into a different type of custody namely immigration detention centres. The government is seeking to deport them, even though they are legally in this country on student visas, on the grounds that they are an embarrassment to the government.
Because the 12 angry Muslim men have been branded as suspected terrorists in this country, should they be deported they face torture and death in their own country Pakistan for being tarnished as suspected terrorists.
Powers granted to protect the public are being used to terrorise the public.
This case has all the appearance of "My Geranium is Subversive", a psychological study undertaken in prison where guards suspected the innocent activity of inmates watching a plant grow as being a threat to the good order and discipline of the prison.
Related content...
Deporting these students shames us
Prisoners denied the vote because MPs have their snouts in the trough
Prisoners denied the vote because MPs have their snouts in the trough
Whilst prisoners are denied the vote because MPs will not vote on the issue:
"MPs are expected to vote on proposed changes next week and Mr Brown wants changes in place by July - the same month detailed expenses claims by all MPs, including receipts, dating back to 2004 are due to be published after a lengthy Freedom of Information battle".
MPs are paid to go to work. It is pure daylight robbery to pay them an attendance allowance for turning up as well!
Whilst prisoners are denied the vote because MPs will not vote on the issue:
"MPs are expected to vote on proposed changes next week and Mr Brown wants changes in place by July - the same month detailed expenses claims by all MPs, including receipts, dating back to 2004 are due to be published after a lengthy Freedom of Information battle".
MPs are paid to go to work. It is pure daylight robbery to pay them an attendance allowance for turning up as well!
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
British troops tortured and killed Iraqi civilians, court hears
British troops tortured and killed Iraqi civilians, court hears
British troops tortured and killed Iraqi civilians before covering up their crimes by claiming their victims died in battle, the High Court was told.
Rabinder Singh QC, represented the government at the ECtHR in Hirst v UK(No2) and lost...
Seven Iraqis called on the court to order an independent inquiry into the British army's conduct on May 14th and 15th 2004.
The court was told the men were among a number of Iraqi civilians captured and tortured by British troops at Al Majar in Iraq on May 14th.
Although all seven were released, Rabinder Singh, representing them, said the following day 20 civilians were returned dead to their families, including a teenage schoolboy.
British troops tortured and killed Iraqi civilians before covering up their crimes by claiming their victims died in battle, the High Court was told.
Rabinder Singh QC, represented the government at the ECtHR in Hirst v UK(No2) and lost...Seven Iraqis called on the court to order an independent inquiry into the British army's conduct on May 14th and 15th 2004.
The court was told the men were among a number of Iraqi civilians captured and tortured by British troops at Al Majar in Iraq on May 14th.
Although all seven were released, Rabinder Singh, representing them, said the following day 20 civilians were returned dead to their families, including a teenage schoolboy.
Cry your heart out Iain Dale
Cry your heart out Iain Dale
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
PRESS RELEASE: ORWELL PRIZE 2009
WINNERS ANNOUNCED
•Andrew Brown wins Book Prize for Fishing in Utopia
•Patrick Cockburn wins Journalism Prize for London Review of Books and The Independent
•Pseudonymous police blogger, Jack Night, wins Special Prize for Blogs
•Judges award additional Special Prize to Tony Judt
The Orwell Prize tonight, Wednesday 22nd April 2009, announces its winners for 2009, at its annual Awards
Ceremony at the Foreign Press Association, London. The judges unanimously decided upon the following winners.
Andrew Brown, journalist, author and editor of The Guardian’s Comment is free belief, won the Book Prize
for Fishing in Utopia, published by Granta. Brown lived in Sweden as a child in the 1960s, before returning ten
years later, marrying a Swedish woman, working in a timber mill and raising a small son in the country. Woven into
the personal memoir is an exploration of the social and political system of Sweden.
The judges said: “The book tells, in a style which is both charming and crystalline, the story of how the author
fell in love with Sweden and everything Swedish, including his first wife, the fishing and the socialism, more
particularly the spirit of equality which seemed to pervade the whole country. And when he falls out of love, it
is not a straightforward disillusionment but rather a rueful recognition of how incredibly hard it was and is for
a country of dirt-poor farmers to emerge into an industrial nation without losing some of the idealism in the
affluence. The descriptions of fishing are as enchanting as anything since Izaak Walton, but in its light and easy way
the book is as profound as it is enchanting.”
Patrick Cockburn won the Journalism Prize for articles from the London Review of Books - the first time
the publication has provided a Journalism Prize winner - and The Independent. An experienced Middle East
correspondent, winner of awards such as the Martha Gellhorn Prize and author of three books on Iraq, Cockburn
won not only for his work on the situation in Iraq, but also for an article on his son’s slide into schizophrenia. His
most recent book, Muqtada al-Sadr and the Fall of Iraq (Faber), was longlisted for this year’s Book Prize.
The judges said: “Patrick Cockburn reminds us that reporting is the foundation stone of good journalism, and
that there’s no substitute for intimate knowledge when it comes to describing a country and its conflicts. He has
covered the Middle East for thirty years and his dispatches from Iraq are an exemplary untangling of the political
and social complexity that lies behind one of the world’s great crises. He writes fairly, compassionately and clearly,
with a steady and knowledgeable eye and without any self-dramatics. His work enriches our understanding.”
Jack Night, a serving police officer, won the Special Prize for Blogs for his blog, NightJack - An English
Detective. The pseudonymous Night won for his dispatches from the front line of policing, on dealing with
criminals and the courts, on the beat and with the bureaucracy.
The judges said: “Getting to grips with what makes an effective blog was intriguing – at their best, they offer a
new place for politics and political conversation to happen. The insight into the everyday life of the police that
Jack Night’s wonderful blog offered was – everybody felt – something which only a blog could deliver, and he
delivered it brilliantly. It took you to the heart of what a policeman has to do – by the first blogpost you were
hooked, and could not wait to click onto the next one.”
The judges also awarded a Special Prize for Lifetime Achievement to Tony Judt, whose book Reappraisals
(William Heinemann) had been shortlisted for the Book Prize. Previous winners of Special Prizes are Clive
James, Hugo Young, Lord (David) Lipsey (for his Bagehot columns in The Economist) and BBC Newsnight.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
PRESS RELEASE: ORWELL PRIZE 2009
WINNERS ANNOUNCED
•Andrew Brown wins Book Prize for Fishing in Utopia
•Patrick Cockburn wins Journalism Prize for London Review of Books and The Independent
•Pseudonymous police blogger, Jack Night, wins Special Prize for Blogs
•Judges award additional Special Prize to Tony Judt
The Orwell Prize tonight, Wednesday 22nd April 2009, announces its winners for 2009, at its annual Awards
Ceremony at the Foreign Press Association, London. The judges unanimously decided upon the following winners.
Andrew Brown, journalist, author and editor of The Guardian’s Comment is free belief, won the Book Prize
for Fishing in Utopia, published by Granta. Brown lived in Sweden as a child in the 1960s, before returning ten
years later, marrying a Swedish woman, working in a timber mill and raising a small son in the country. Woven into
the personal memoir is an exploration of the social and political system of Sweden.
The judges said: “The book tells, in a style which is both charming and crystalline, the story of how the author
fell in love with Sweden and everything Swedish, including his first wife, the fishing and the socialism, more
particularly the spirit of equality which seemed to pervade the whole country. And when he falls out of love, it
is not a straightforward disillusionment but rather a rueful recognition of how incredibly hard it was and is for
a country of dirt-poor farmers to emerge into an industrial nation without losing some of the idealism in the
affluence. The descriptions of fishing are as enchanting as anything since Izaak Walton, but in its light and easy way
the book is as profound as it is enchanting.”
Patrick Cockburn won the Journalism Prize for articles from the London Review of Books - the first time
the publication has provided a Journalism Prize winner - and The Independent. An experienced Middle East
correspondent, winner of awards such as the Martha Gellhorn Prize and author of three books on Iraq, Cockburn
won not only for his work on the situation in Iraq, but also for an article on his son’s slide into schizophrenia. His
most recent book, Muqtada al-Sadr and the Fall of Iraq (Faber), was longlisted for this year’s Book Prize.
The judges said: “Patrick Cockburn reminds us that reporting is the foundation stone of good journalism, and
that there’s no substitute for intimate knowledge when it comes to describing a country and its conflicts. He has
covered the Middle East for thirty years and his dispatches from Iraq are an exemplary untangling of the political
and social complexity that lies behind one of the world’s great crises. He writes fairly, compassionately and clearly,
with a steady and knowledgeable eye and without any self-dramatics. His work enriches our understanding.”
Jack Night, a serving police officer, won the Special Prize for Blogs for his blog, NightJack - An English
Detective. The pseudonymous Night won for his dispatches from the front line of policing, on dealing with
criminals and the courts, on the beat and with the bureaucracy.
The judges said: “Getting to grips with what makes an effective blog was intriguing – at their best, they offer a
new place for politics and political conversation to happen. The insight into the everyday life of the police that
Jack Night’s wonderful blog offered was – everybody felt – something which only a blog could deliver, and he
delivered it brilliantly. It took you to the heart of what a policeman has to do – by the first blogpost you were
hooked, and could not wait to click onto the next one.”
The judges also awarded a Special Prize for Lifetime Achievement to Tony Judt, whose book Reappraisals
(William Heinemann) had been shortlisted for the Book Prize. Previous winners of Special Prizes are Clive
James, Hugo Young, Lord (David) Lipsey (for his Bagehot columns in The Economist) and BBC Newsnight.
Schhhhh...Do you want to know a secret?
Schhhhh...Do you want to know a secret?
Jonathan Evans, Director General of Security Services (MI5)
The Chapel at Corpus Christi College, Cambridge
A Google search with the words "Cambridge University MI5" will produce several results showing links between the institute of learning and the intelligence service.
However, neither the Cambridge University website nor the MI5 website provide any information about Jonathan Evans, Director General of Security Services (MI5), being in Cambridge tomorrow and why a group of people will be meeting at Corpus Christi College to be whisked off to a secret destination to meet Jonathan Evans.
Just as well I am not a terrorist with the aim of popping off the DG of MI5...
Jonathan Evans, Director General of Security Services (MI5)
The Chapel at Corpus Christi College, CambridgeA Google search with the words "Cambridge University MI5" will produce several results showing links between the institute of learning and the intelligence service.
However, neither the Cambridge University website nor the MI5 website provide any information about Jonathan Evans, Director General of Security Services (MI5), being in Cambridge tomorrow and why a group of people will be meeting at Corpus Christi College to be whisked off to a secret destination to meet Jonathan Evans.
Just as well I am not a terrorist with the aim of popping off the DG of MI5...
Gordon fiddles while London burns
Gordon fiddles while London burns
Why is there a budget when nobody has any money?
Why is there a budget when nobody has any money?
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
The Human Right Act 1998: A case study Hirst v UK(No2)
The Human Right Act 1998: A case study Hirst v UK(No2)
Anthony Lester emailed me on the evening of 19 April 2009, to inform me that there is to be a question on the prisoners right to vote in the House of Lords the next day, and that he intended to ask a supplementary question, and sought my advice in relation to this.
"Lord Lester of Herne Hill: My Lords, is the Minister aware that the Republic of Ireland, the Republic of Cyprus and Hong Kong have found it easy to enact measures to give prisoners voting rights? Will he explain why we are finding it so difficult, if it is not—as I believe it to be—an example of timidity in the face of what the Government fear from the press? Have the Government taken into account that their timid prevarication will lead to costs to the taxpayer if prisoners take cases to Strasbourg for this gross violation of a binding judgment and then we have to pay the costs of all these legal proceedings? Was that taken into account when the Government decided to kick this into the long grass?".
I am surfing the web and come across Hard times call for a new bill of rights by Justice Minister Michael Wills. I wondered if he was able to write some of it with a straight face? Perhaps, he was writing it tongue in cheek? For example, he writes:
"In such an uncertain world people need to know their rights and freedoms will be protected, whatever happens around them, and that others, including governments, will behave responsibly towards them".
Ok, so we have a recession. Fine words coming from a Justice Minister, the very department of government responsible for prisoners human right to vote. This government introduced the Human Rights Act 1998, and the Ministry of Justice website has publications relating to the Act and written by the predecessor to the MOJ the Department of Constitutional Affairs. For example,
Making sense of human rights - a short introduction
Published on 30 October 2006
This guide is designed for officials in public authorities to assist them in working with the Human Rights Act 1998. It gives a brief introduction to human rights for use in straightforward situations.
"This guide is designed for officials in public authorities to assist them in working with the Human Rights Act 1998 – which has been described as the most important piece of constitutional legislation passed in the United Kingdom since the achievement of universal suffrage in 1918".
The European Court of Human Rights referred to the principle of universal suffrage in Hirst v UK(No2).
A problem is highlighted by wikipedia:
"The concept of universal suffrage does not imply any impropriety in placing restrictions on the voting of convicted criminals or mentally ill persons. Such restrictions exist in many countries with universal suffrage".
However, for me universal suffrage means one person one vote.
According to Making sense of human rights:
"What are human rights?
Human rights are rights and freedoms that belong to all individuals regardless of their nationality and citizenship. They are fundamentally important in maintaining a fair and civilised society".
I think it is fair to claim that prisoners have a legitimate expectation that they are included as individuals here, and that this legitimate expectation extends to being treated fair and that society is civilised towards them.
"The Convention rights
Article 3 of Protocol 1: Right to free elections
Elections for members of the legislative body (e.g. Parliament) must be free and fair and take place by secret ballot. Some qualifications may be imposed on who is eligible to vote (e.g. a minimum age)".
According to the government's position
"It has been the established policy of successive United Kingdom Governments that convicted prisoners should lose their right to vote for the period for which they are incarcerated. Currently, prisoners who are serving a custodial sentence in a place of detention within the UK are barred from voting under section 3 of the Representation of the People Act 1983 and related legislation".
However, this position was challenged successfully in Hirst v UK(No2). That was 5 years ago. Whilst there are examples of countries where governments have enacted to give prisoners voting rights, the UK government has prevaricated to the point where I would say that they have attempted to pervert the course of justice. Justice delayed is justice denied is an English law principle.
"Human rights in practice
What does the Human Rights Act mean for public authorities?
The Human Rights Act has the following implications for the work of public authorities:
•
It makes it unlawful for public authorities (these include central and local government, the police and the courts) to act in a way that is incompatible with a Convention right.
•
Anyone who feels that a public authority has acted incompatibly with their Convention rights can raise this before an appropriate UK court or tribunal".
I did raise the issue in the High Court, but it was not treated with the respect it deserved and the judges would not play ball.
"What does the Human Rights Act do?
It makes the human rights contained in the ECHR enforceable in UK law. This means that it is unlawful for a public authority to act in a way that is incompatible with a Convention right. Anyone who feels that one or more of their rights has been breached by a public authority can raise the matter in an appropriate court or tribunal. If they are unhappy with the court’s decision and have pursued the issue as far as it can go in the UK, they may take their complaint to the European Court of Human Rights".
So, I went off to the ECtHR. The Committee of Ministers in Europe has the duty to execute the Court judgment in Hirst v UK(No2). The government is claiming that it is responding to the judgment in its own slow way. I am claiming that the government is not really responding at all, but just going through the motions and playing for more time.
"What difference does the Human Rights Act make?
The principal effect of the Human Rights Act is to enable people to enforce their human rights in the domestic courts. It should mean that people across society are treated with respect for their human rights, promoting values such as dignity, fairness, equality and respect".
And here lies a problem. The weakness in the Human Rights Act is that the courts are powerless to strike down statutes which are not compatible with the Convention. The courts are only empowered to declare that a statute is incompatible.
And this leads to a second problem:
"A declaration of incompatibility sends a signal from the courts to Parliament that the UK may be breaching its international obligations under the ECHR. Parliament does not have to change the law: it retains its sovereignty as the UK’s lawmaking body".
How can it be claimed that Parliament does not have to change the law when it is clearly the right thing to do to change the law? This absurdity cannot stand and must be changed. In effect, Parliament is claiming the right to abuse citizens human rights despite there being a Human Rights Act supposedly guaranteeing those very human rights.
UPDATE:
Related content
Wrong reasons for a bill of rights
The proposed legislation detracts from one of the few genuine, long-term changes Labour could be proud of
Anthony Lester emailed me on the evening of 19 April 2009, to inform me that there is to be a question on the prisoners right to vote in the House of Lords the next day, and that he intended to ask a supplementary question, and sought my advice in relation to this.
"Lord Lester of Herne Hill: My Lords, is the Minister aware that the Republic of Ireland, the Republic of Cyprus and Hong Kong have found it easy to enact measures to give prisoners voting rights? Will he explain why we are finding it so difficult, if it is not—as I believe it to be—an example of timidity in the face of what the Government fear from the press? Have the Government taken into account that their timid prevarication will lead to costs to the taxpayer if prisoners take cases to Strasbourg for this gross violation of a binding judgment and then we have to pay the costs of all these legal proceedings? Was that taken into account when the Government decided to kick this into the long grass?".
I am surfing the web and come across Hard times call for a new bill of rights by Justice Minister Michael Wills. I wondered if he was able to write some of it with a straight face? Perhaps, he was writing it tongue in cheek? For example, he writes:
"In such an uncertain world people need to know their rights and freedoms will be protected, whatever happens around them, and that others, including governments, will behave responsibly towards them".
Ok, so we have a recession. Fine words coming from a Justice Minister, the very department of government responsible for prisoners human right to vote. This government introduced the Human Rights Act 1998, and the Ministry of Justice website has publications relating to the Act and written by the predecessor to the MOJ the Department of Constitutional Affairs. For example,
Making sense of human rights - a short introduction
Published on 30 October 2006
This guide is designed for officials in public authorities to assist them in working with the Human Rights Act 1998. It gives a brief introduction to human rights for use in straightforward situations.
"This guide is designed for officials in public authorities to assist them in working with the Human Rights Act 1998 – which has been described as the most important piece of constitutional legislation passed in the United Kingdom since the achievement of universal suffrage in 1918".
The European Court of Human Rights referred to the principle of universal suffrage in Hirst v UK(No2).
A problem is highlighted by wikipedia:
"The concept of universal suffrage does not imply any impropriety in placing restrictions on the voting of convicted criminals or mentally ill persons. Such restrictions exist in many countries with universal suffrage".
However, for me universal suffrage means one person one vote.
According to Making sense of human rights:
"What are human rights?
Human rights are rights and freedoms that belong to all individuals regardless of their nationality and citizenship. They are fundamentally important in maintaining a fair and civilised society".
I think it is fair to claim that prisoners have a legitimate expectation that they are included as individuals here, and that this legitimate expectation extends to being treated fair and that society is civilised towards them.
"The Convention rights
Article 3 of Protocol 1: Right to free elections
Elections for members of the legislative body (e.g. Parliament) must be free and fair and take place by secret ballot. Some qualifications may be imposed on who is eligible to vote (e.g. a minimum age)".
According to the government's position
"It has been the established policy of successive United Kingdom Governments that convicted prisoners should lose their right to vote for the period for which they are incarcerated. Currently, prisoners who are serving a custodial sentence in a place of detention within the UK are barred from voting under section 3 of the Representation of the People Act 1983 and related legislation".
However, this position was challenged successfully in Hirst v UK(No2). That was 5 years ago. Whilst there are examples of countries where governments have enacted to give prisoners voting rights, the UK government has prevaricated to the point where I would say that they have attempted to pervert the course of justice. Justice delayed is justice denied is an English law principle.
"Human rights in practice
What does the Human Rights Act mean for public authorities?
The Human Rights Act has the following implications for the work of public authorities:
•
It makes it unlawful for public authorities (these include central and local government, the police and the courts) to act in a way that is incompatible with a Convention right.
•
Anyone who feels that a public authority has acted incompatibly with their Convention rights can raise this before an appropriate UK court or tribunal".
I did raise the issue in the High Court, but it was not treated with the respect it deserved and the judges would not play ball.
"What does the Human Rights Act do?
It makes the human rights contained in the ECHR enforceable in UK law. This means that it is unlawful for a public authority to act in a way that is incompatible with a Convention right. Anyone who feels that one or more of their rights has been breached by a public authority can raise the matter in an appropriate court or tribunal. If they are unhappy with the court’s decision and have pursued the issue as far as it can go in the UK, they may take their complaint to the European Court of Human Rights".
So, I went off to the ECtHR. The Committee of Ministers in Europe has the duty to execute the Court judgment in Hirst v UK(No2). The government is claiming that it is responding to the judgment in its own slow way. I am claiming that the government is not really responding at all, but just going through the motions and playing for more time.
"What difference does the Human Rights Act make?
The principal effect of the Human Rights Act is to enable people to enforce their human rights in the domestic courts. It should mean that people across society are treated with respect for their human rights, promoting values such as dignity, fairness, equality and respect".
And here lies a problem. The weakness in the Human Rights Act is that the courts are powerless to strike down statutes which are not compatible with the Convention. The courts are only empowered to declare that a statute is incompatible.
And this leads to a second problem:
"A declaration of incompatibility sends a signal from the courts to Parliament that the UK may be breaching its international obligations under the ECHR. Parliament does not have to change the law: it retains its sovereignty as the UK’s lawmaking body".
How can it be claimed that Parliament does not have to change the law when it is clearly the right thing to do to change the law? This absurdity cannot stand and must be changed. In effect, Parliament is claiming the right to abuse citizens human rights despite there being a Human Rights Act supposedly guaranteeing those very human rights.
UPDATE:
Related content
Wrong reasons for a bill of rights
The proposed legislation detracts from one of the few genuine, long-term changes Labour could be proud of
Seven year itch?
Seven year itch?
The newly wed wife who's husband assaulted and then sexually assaulted a woman and received a 7 year prison sentence...
"Mrs Palmer said she was too upset to comment on the sentence but it is understood she is standing by her husband".
During the trial Mr Palmer said: "When women become hysterical, it is necessary sometimes to slap them to bring them round".
Perhaps, Mrs Palmer should reflect on this over the next 7 years and come to her senses?
The newly wed wife who's husband assaulted and then sexually assaulted a woman and received a 7 year prison sentence...
"Mrs Palmer said she was too upset to comment on the sentence but it is understood she is standing by her husband".
During the trial Mr Palmer said: "When women become hysterical, it is necessary sometimes to slap them to bring them round".
Perhaps, Mrs Palmer should reflect on this over the next 7 years and come to her senses?
Inside Broadmoor
Inside Broadmoor
Peter Sutcliffe is held there. So is Ian Brady. But can anything be done to treat the criminally insane? Katherine Faulkner is given a tour of the hospital
Getting into Broadmoor is almost as difficult as getting out. It's not just the mobile, tape recorder and camera that have to go. Watches, phone cards, sticky tape and Tic Tacs are off limits too. On the second of two full-body searches, a security guard discovers a tiny plastic sachet containing a spare button still attached to the inside of my new shirt. "No plastic bags," she barks, confiscating it.
Passing out of the gauntlet of security and into the hospital courtyard, there is an eerie silence, disturbed only by quiet footfalls on gravel and the vague clink of security gates. The towering, wire-topped fences that loom in every direction around the leafy grounds belie the hospital's apparent pleasantness. The Moors Murderer, Ian Brady, the Yorkshire Ripper, Peter Sutcliffe, and the East End gangster Reggie Kray have all been guests inside these walls.
Beyond the courtyard is the redbrick arch of the entrance to the old lunatic asylum. Broadmoor opened in 1863, in the Berkshire village of Crowthorne, as the country's first purpose-made home for the criminally insane. Its hanging clock must once have had a foreboding aspect for hapless "lunatics" offloaded underneath it from horse-drawn ambulances, unlikely to ever again see the outside world. Today, it looks toy-like, almost comical, dwarfed by the colossal, snaking walls that shield it, along with a jumble of newer buildings, from the outside world.
Peter Sutcliffe is held there. So is Ian Brady. But can anything be done to treat the criminally insane? Katherine Faulkner is given a tour of the hospital
Getting into Broadmoor is almost as difficult as getting out. It's not just the mobile, tape recorder and camera that have to go. Watches, phone cards, sticky tape and Tic Tacs are off limits too. On the second of two full-body searches, a security guard discovers a tiny plastic sachet containing a spare button still attached to the inside of my new shirt. "No plastic bags," she barks, confiscating it.
Passing out of the gauntlet of security and into the hospital courtyard, there is an eerie silence, disturbed only by quiet footfalls on gravel and the vague clink of security gates. The towering, wire-topped fences that loom in every direction around the leafy grounds belie the hospital's apparent pleasantness. The Moors Murderer, Ian Brady, the Yorkshire Ripper, Peter Sutcliffe, and the East End gangster Reggie Kray have all been guests inside these walls.
Beyond the courtyard is the redbrick arch of the entrance to the old lunatic asylum. Broadmoor opened in 1863, in the Berkshire village of Crowthorne, as the country's first purpose-made home for the criminally insane. Its hanging clock must once have had a foreboding aspect for hapless "lunatics" offloaded underneath it from horse-drawn ambulances, unlikely to ever again see the outside world. Today, it looks toy-like, almost comical, dwarfed by the colossal, snaking walls that shield it, along with a jumble of newer buildings, from the outside world.
Monday, April 20, 2009
Prisoners: Voting - House of Lords questions 20 April 2009 (Hansard)
Prisoners: Voting - House of Lords questions 20 April 2009 (Hansard)
Prisoners: Voting
Question
2.52 pm
Tabled by Lord Ramsbotham
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what arrangements they have made for European prisoners in British prisons and British prisoners in European prisons to vote in the forthcoming European elections.
Lord Ramsbotham: My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question standing in my name on the Order Paper. In doing so, I declare an interest as president of UNLOCK, the National Association of Reformed Offenders.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Ministry of Justice (Lord Bach): My Lords, all sentenced prisoners detained in UK prisons are barred from voting in British electoral regions for European elections. EU citizens who are eligible to vote in other member states will be given such assistance as practicable to enable them to exercise their vote. Arrangements for British prisoners detained in prisons in other member states are for the authorities in the relevant member state in accordance with those prisoners’ voting entitlement.
Lord Ramsbotham: My Lords, I thank the Minister for that predictable reply. I remind the House that it is now five years since the European Court found that the Government were in breach of European human rights by denying prisoners the right to vote and four years since the Government’s appeal against that ruling was rejected. It is also four years since the Government announced a consultation on that ruling, which was reported on only last week at the same time as the announcement of a second consultation on the same subject. I have two questions: first, why is there this continued prevarication in defiance of the rule of law, of human rights and the rehabilitation of offenders—all causes that the Government claim to champion? Secondly, what message does the Minister think that that continued defiance of the rule of law sends to prisoners?
Lord Bach: My Lords, there is no defiance. Prisoner voting rights is a sensitive and complex issue. As Ministers have promised, we recently published a second, more detailed public consultation on how voting rights might be granted to serving prisoners and how far those rights should be extended. Frankly, we need to take the wide spectrum of opinion in the United Kingdom together with the considerable practical implications for the courts and prison authorities and for the conduct of elections. We aim to arrive at a solution that fully respects the judgment of the court while fitting appropriately with the traditions and contexts of our own country.
Lord Lester of Herne Hill: My Lords, is the Minister aware that the Republic of Ireland, the Republic of Cyprus and Hong Kong have found it easy to enact measures to give prisoners voting rights? Will he explain why we are finding it so difficult, if it is not—as I believe it to be—an example of timidity in the face of what the Government fear from the press? Have the Government taken into account that their timid prevarication will lead to costs to the taxpayer if prisoners take cases to Strasbourg for this gross violation of a binding judgment and then we have to pay the costs of all these legal proceedings? Was that taken into account when the Government decided to kick this into the long grass?
Lord Bach: My Lords, on a previous occasion I quoted the noble Lord back to the House. The noble Lord is on record as saying only in November of last year that neither he nor the Joint Committee on Human Rights was suggesting that the Government have an overall bad record in terms of implementation of the judgments of Strasbourg. He went on to say that that is not the case. In answer to the supplementary question of the noble Lord, Lord Ramsbotham, I tried to explain that the question of whether prisoners, who by some arguments forfeited their right to vote while they are in prison, should be allowed to vote is a difficult one. The European Court of Human Rights has spoken, and we have to implement that judgment. How we implement it is a difficult issue, and would be for any Government.
Lord Elystan-Morgan: My Lords, does the Minister not agree, however, that it is simply not a matter of “may” or “might” but of “must”, and that for some years we have clearly been in breach of a specific legal obligation? Does he not agree also that it is entirely wholesome that these people, who have been placed beyond the walls of society for their transgressions—and perfectly properly so—should be reminded that they are human beings and citizens with fundamental rights? Indeed, in some cases that situation may remind them of the reciprocity between obligations and rights in relation to the community.
Lord Bach: My Lords, I have to remind the House that when the European Court of Human Rights ruled on the appeal in October 2005, about three and-a-half years ago, it did not specify which prisoners should be given the vote. Indeed, the Court held that the blanket ban was unlawful, but expressly recognised that each member state had some discretion as to who should be given the vote. The Court expressly stated that it was not for it to impose on the UK full voting rights for all prisoners, but it was for the UK, through its democratically elected Parliament, to implement the judgment, taking into account its constitutional traditions. That is why in the second consultation paper, produced earlier this month, we set out a number of different options. Indeed, we invite noble Lord with views on this to answer the consultation.
Lord Tebbit: My Lords, is it not clear that despite the judicial imperialism, to which we are becoming accustomed, the British people have not been asked to give their view on the matter, and that the Parliament of this Kingdom has not yet been invited to give its view on this matter? The noble Lord and his colleagues are to be congratulated on resisting the judicial imperialism, of which we hear far too much.
Lord Bach: My Lords, I am tempted to thank the noble Lord. However, I will resist that temptation because we do not see this as judicial imperialism. I have to say that the judgment of the Court could just as easily have been made when the Government of which he was a distinguished member were in power, and it would have been just as necessary for them to react to it in the same way.
Lord Grocott: My Lords, whether or not prisoners have the right to vote in European elections, is it not worth reflecting on a broader note? Of those who have the right to vote in European elections, a substantial majority do not bother to exercise it. Is not one of the reasons for this that elections to the European Parliament are conducted on the basis of proportional representation, a system that removes the relationship between the elected and the electors? Would it not be wise to take a lesson from recent history, that the best system for European and any other elections in this country is that of first past the post?
Lord Bach: My Lords, I have waited for this moment for some time: to be able to say to my noble friend, my ex-Chief Whip, that his question is slightly wide of the Question to which I originally responded.
Prisoners: Voting
Question
2.52 pm
Tabled by Lord Ramsbotham
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what arrangements they have made for European prisoners in British prisons and British prisoners in European prisons to vote in the forthcoming European elections.
Lord Ramsbotham: My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question standing in my name on the Order Paper. In doing so, I declare an interest as president of UNLOCK, the National Association of Reformed Offenders.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Ministry of Justice (Lord Bach): My Lords, all sentenced prisoners detained in UK prisons are barred from voting in British electoral regions for European elections. EU citizens who are eligible to vote in other member states will be given such assistance as practicable to enable them to exercise their vote. Arrangements for British prisoners detained in prisons in other member states are for the authorities in the relevant member state in accordance with those prisoners’ voting entitlement.
Lord Ramsbotham: My Lords, I thank the Minister for that predictable reply. I remind the House that it is now five years since the European Court found that the Government were in breach of European human rights by denying prisoners the right to vote and four years since the Government’s appeal against that ruling was rejected. It is also four years since the Government announced a consultation on that ruling, which was reported on only last week at the same time as the announcement of a second consultation on the same subject. I have two questions: first, why is there this continued prevarication in defiance of the rule of law, of human rights and the rehabilitation of offenders—all causes that the Government claim to champion? Secondly, what message does the Minister think that that continued defiance of the rule of law sends to prisoners?
Lord Bach: My Lords, there is no defiance. Prisoner voting rights is a sensitive and complex issue. As Ministers have promised, we recently published a second, more detailed public consultation on how voting rights might be granted to serving prisoners and how far those rights should be extended. Frankly, we need to take the wide spectrum of opinion in the United Kingdom together with the considerable practical implications for the courts and prison authorities and for the conduct of elections. We aim to arrive at a solution that fully respects the judgment of the court while fitting appropriately with the traditions and contexts of our own country.
Lord Lester of Herne Hill: My Lords, is the Minister aware that the Republic of Ireland, the Republic of Cyprus and Hong Kong have found it easy to enact measures to give prisoners voting rights? Will he explain why we are finding it so difficult, if it is not—as I believe it to be—an example of timidity in the face of what the Government fear from the press? Have the Government taken into account that their timid prevarication will lead to costs to the taxpayer if prisoners take cases to Strasbourg for this gross violation of a binding judgment and then we have to pay the costs of all these legal proceedings? Was that taken into account when the Government decided to kick this into the long grass?
Lord Bach: My Lords, on a previous occasion I quoted the noble Lord back to the House. The noble Lord is on record as saying only in November of last year that neither he nor the Joint Committee on Human Rights was suggesting that the Government have an overall bad record in terms of implementation of the judgments of Strasbourg. He went on to say that that is not the case. In answer to the supplementary question of the noble Lord, Lord Ramsbotham, I tried to explain that the question of whether prisoners, who by some arguments forfeited their right to vote while they are in prison, should be allowed to vote is a difficult one. The European Court of Human Rights has spoken, and we have to implement that judgment. How we implement it is a difficult issue, and would be for any Government.
Lord Elystan-Morgan: My Lords, does the Minister not agree, however, that it is simply not a matter of “may” or “might” but of “must”, and that for some years we have clearly been in breach of a specific legal obligation? Does he not agree also that it is entirely wholesome that these people, who have been placed beyond the walls of society for their transgressions—and perfectly properly so—should be reminded that they are human beings and citizens with fundamental rights? Indeed, in some cases that situation may remind them of the reciprocity between obligations and rights in relation to the community.
Lord Bach: My Lords, I have to remind the House that when the European Court of Human Rights ruled on the appeal in October 2005, about three and-a-half years ago, it did not specify which prisoners should be given the vote. Indeed, the Court held that the blanket ban was unlawful, but expressly recognised that each member state had some discretion as to who should be given the vote. The Court expressly stated that it was not for it to impose on the UK full voting rights for all prisoners, but it was for the UK, through its democratically elected Parliament, to implement the judgment, taking into account its constitutional traditions. That is why in the second consultation paper, produced earlier this month, we set out a number of different options. Indeed, we invite noble Lord with views on this to answer the consultation.
Lord Tebbit: My Lords, is it not clear that despite the judicial imperialism, to which we are becoming accustomed, the British people have not been asked to give their view on the matter, and that the Parliament of this Kingdom has not yet been invited to give its view on this matter? The noble Lord and his colleagues are to be congratulated on resisting the judicial imperialism, of which we hear far too much.
Lord Bach: My Lords, I am tempted to thank the noble Lord. However, I will resist that temptation because we do not see this as judicial imperialism. I have to say that the judgment of the Court could just as easily have been made when the Government of which he was a distinguished member were in power, and it would have been just as necessary for them to react to it in the same way.
Lord Grocott: My Lords, whether or not prisoners have the right to vote in European elections, is it not worth reflecting on a broader note? Of those who have the right to vote in European elections, a substantial majority do not bother to exercise it. Is not one of the reasons for this that elections to the European Parliament are conducted on the basis of proportional representation, a system that removes the relationship between the elected and the electors? Would it not be wise to take a lesson from recent history, that the best system for European and any other elections in this country is that of first past the post?
Lord Bach: My Lords, I have waited for this moment for some time: to be able to say to my noble friend, my ex-Chief Whip, that his question is slightly wide of the Question to which I originally responded.
I have a dream...
I have a dream...
Government of all the talents with Susan Boyle as the Prime Minister we would conquer the world!
I have a dream...She waited 47 years, a life sentence...Move over Elaine Paige
Go on girl blast it out Here.
Government of all the talents with Susan Boyle as the Prime Minister we would conquer the world!
I have a dream...She waited 47 years, a life sentence...Move over Elaine Paige
Go on girl blast it out Here.
South Korean blogger cleared of spreading false information
South Korean blogger cleared of spreading false information
Unemployed Seoul man who called himself Minerva gained reputation as a prophet with economic predictions
A South Korean court today acquitted a blogger charged with spreading false information on the internet under a mysterious pseudonym, in a high-profile case that sparked heated debate over freedom of speech in cyberspace.
Park Dae-sung, 30, an unemployed Seoul resident, was acquitted by the Seoul central district court. Judge Yoo Young-hyeon said he could not see that Park "had the intention to undermine public interest" or that he "realised the contents of the articles in question that he wrote were completely false".
Park, writing anonymously under the pen name "Minerva" after the Greek goddess of wisdom, caused a sensation and gained a reputation as an economic prophet in South Korea last year by denouncing the government's handling of the economy and making largely negative predictions. Some, including the collapse of US investment bank Lehman Brothers, proved correct, helping create interest in his online postings and adding to his aura of mystery.
Unemployed Seoul man who called himself Minerva gained reputation as a prophet with economic predictions
A South Korean court today acquitted a blogger charged with spreading false information on the internet under a mysterious pseudonym, in a high-profile case that sparked heated debate over freedom of speech in cyberspace.
Park Dae-sung, 30, an unemployed Seoul resident, was acquitted by the Seoul central district court. Judge Yoo Young-hyeon said he could not see that Park "had the intention to undermine public interest" or that he "realised the contents of the articles in question that he wrote were completely false".
Park, writing anonymously under the pen name "Minerva" after the Greek goddess of wisdom, caused a sensation and gained a reputation as an economic prophet in South Korea last year by denouncing the government's handling of the economy and making largely negative predictions. Some, including the collapse of US investment bank Lehman Brothers, proved correct, helping create interest in his online postings and adding to his aura of mystery.
George Osborne in panties, bra and suspenders
George Osborne in panties, bra and suspenders
George Osborne in panties, bra and suspenders.
"In another smear, the emails also said that an ex-girlfriend of Osborne’s has photos of him in a bra, knickers and suspenders".
Hat-Tip Bob Piper
Photoshop: RonKnee
George Osborne in panties, bra and suspenders."In another smear, the emails also said that an ex-girlfriend of Osborne’s has photos of him in a bra, knickers and suspenders".
Hat-Tip Bob Piper
Photoshop: RonKnee
Sunday, April 19, 2009
Carol Thatcher unrepentant over tennis player 'golliwog' remark
Carol Thatcher unrepentant over tennis player 'golliwog' remark
Carol Thatcher has said she does not regret her use of the word "golliwog" to describe a black tennis player, which led to her being sacked by the BBC.
Whatever will Iain Dale say?
It seems as though the politically uncorrect BBC had a politically uncorrect Carol Thatcher on when she is supposed to have been sacked.
I did not watch much of Andrew Marr, he announced the Zombies, Carol Thatcher, George Osborne and Paddy Ashdown. Time to take the dog out for a walk!
Carol Thatcher has said she does not regret her use of the word "golliwog" to describe a black tennis player, which led to her being sacked by the BBC.
Whatever will Iain Dale say?
It seems as though the politically uncorrect BBC had a politically uncorrect Carol Thatcher on when she is supposed to have been sacked.
I did not watch much of Andrew Marr, he announced the Zombies, Carol Thatcher, George Osborne and Paddy Ashdown. Time to take the dog out for a walk!
Tory MP Francis Maude in row over second home allowance
Tory MP Francis Maude in row over second home allowance
Francis Maude is using the expense allowance given to MPs for second homes to pay for a £345,000 flat just 70 yards from a house he owns in London, according to a new television programme.
Francis Maude is using the expense allowance given to MPs for second homes to pay for a £345,000 flat just 70 yards from a house he owns in London, according to a new television programme.