You have to laugh… the Tories are spending a fortune shoring up the idea that they are supporting the NHS and then the Young Britons Foundation pops up in the form of their Chief Executive, Donal Blaney – a lawyer – with talk of waterboarding, shooting down environmental protesters and another spokesman saying the NHS is the biggest waste of time in the UK.

See also: The next stunt? – A Tory ‘ Madrasa’… a Madrasa? Mon Dieu!

Many Tories, deny that there is anything sinister about the YBF and I accept that we are not dealing here with a group of crypto-fascists with muscle spasm problems in their right arms – but, clearly, the views expressed by Donal Blaney are a bit ‘right of sanity’ if he is not joking about waterboarding being acceptable.

The Tories are scrambling to disassociate themselves with the YBF – but they do have a bit of a problem…according to The Guardian they appear to be outsourcing training to the YBF at a cost of ‘hundreds of pounds per person’. Of course… it is possible (and in the minds of some Tories..probably a certainty) that The Guardian is putting the boot into the YBF for ‘political reasons’.

The Guardian noted: “A spokesman for the Conservative party said people attend YBF courses of their own volition and they are not financially supported by the party.

Conservative Central Office would not comment on whether the planned YBF training courses being promoted by Conservative Future will go ahead in the light of the revelations.”

Jon Venables and the Rule of Law

Our country may, according to Cameron et al, be ‘broken’, our country may be ‘broke’, our country may be dysfunctional and populated with venal, self important, self serving and selfish people – an apocalyptic vision made manifest each day by the Sun and The Daily Mail – but, thankfully they are in the minority.

I cannot begin to imagine the pain and misery suffered by Jamie Bulger’s mother and father – few have suffered the horror of having a child murdered, far more intense arguably than accidental death or even honourable death in military service and only those who have suffered such loss, truly, can even begin to understand and empathise meaningfully.  I do not, however, support the view taken by Jamie Bulger’s parents and 70,000 others who have signed The Sun’s petition that they have a right to know every detail about Jon Venables.  The principle of a fair trial trumps such individual rights and misery – for otherwise we return to the law of the lynch mob and not , as former DPP Sir Ken Macdonald QC states...” (the) steely progress of a criminal case to its just conclusion, whether that is conviction or acquittal.”

There is every prospect, if Venables’ identity is revealed – that some vigilante or criminal in prison will exact ‘ extra-judicial justice’ whether by throwing hot sugar water over Venables or worse, killing him – for the glory of being applauded as a hero by those who seek justice through the lynch mob’s rope.

I’m with Sir ken Macdonald QC on this…he writes: “None of us, of course, owns the truth in any of this. But we may suspect that, since he has been returned to jail, Jon Venables could have done something sufficiently serious to face trial in the future. And what if there are others to be tried alongside him? It is a racing certainty they will argue that any case must be abandoned if the jury has an inkling about their companion in crime. It would be a shame if a tabloid conclusion that this young man has done something awfully wrong turns out to be true and yet he can never be tried because a couple of editors were too blind to our system of justice to see how they might frustrate it.”

Today’s story for Editors eager to please and appease could well lead to far greater injustice.  There was a quote on twitter yesterday to the effect… “They should have hung them when they were 10.  Killing children is wrong”  Ignoring the unintended irony in such a quote… that, it would seem, is a very common view – but they do say that if there was ever a referendum on the death penalty in Britain – the majority would bring back the rope. I would not.  Flawed though our system of justice is (and probably always will be in an imperfect society)  – it is by far better than the rule of the mob.

Justice cannot be served at trial unless Jack Straw holds his nerve on unmasking Jon Venables
Sir Ken Macdonald

Jack Straw was called to the house this afternoon at 3.30 to give a statement on the recall of Jon Venables to prison.  The press speculation on Venables’ return has been quite extraordinary.  Straw made it clear that he had every sympathy for the the parents of James Bulger – but at the request of the Police and DPP information on Venables was suppressed to ensure that there would be a fair trial.

Dominic Grieve, Shadow Justice Secretary, stated that the Justice Secretary was entitled to support but he had to earn that support by making a clear statement about the way the justice system worked.  Grieve also stated that the Justice Secretary could have avoided all the press speculation had he been more clear about how the recall system works and to explain the need for a fair trial.

For my own part – the rule of law, the principle of fair trials, is more important than individual needs, and while I can well understand the distress of James Bulger’s family, a fair trial on the new offences would be impossible, in all likelihood, if more information was given at this stage.  The mood of the house was with Straw’s position and the Rule of Law – thankfully.

The press has not been that helpful here and, I suspect, the reports they have published may well have added to the distress of James Bulger’s parents.  I would go further and say that the press has followed its own needs, rather than the needs of the Bulger parents.

Dear Reader

There is a lot of anger on the net, on discussion forums, in the comments section of blogs and even on Twitter.  Separating the techniques of the professional anger people who use ‘anger’ to make a point – for that can be useful, there do appear to be a lot of morons and trolls out there who have nothing better to do  after wetting their beds than to abuse and insult people on twitter or bloggers who try to express ideas and views.

John Bolch at Family Lore has had enough of people wanting to grind their axes on his blog…. Please, grind your axes elsewhere.

John writes…” I try to keep this blog a reasonably open place, where people can state their opinions freely, whether or not they coincide with mine (a quick read through the blog will confirm this to any neutral reader). Unfortunately, the privilege to comment freely is all too often abused by those with an axe to grind, and too much time on their hands (alas, it seems that this is probably the lot of family law bloggers). Too often, posts are hijacked by such people, whose comments often have little or no relevance to the point of the original post. I’m sorry, but if you want to grind your axe about lawyers biased against fathers/secret family courts/whatever went wrong when you experienced the family justice system, then please do so elsewhere, and let’s keep comments here relevant and civil.

So, if your comment is not approved, or is deleted, now you know why. Of course, defamatory or spam comments will also be rejected.

Politicians are used to maniacs turning up on their blogs and most have a policy of ‘be civil’. Richard Dawkins has now got involved…

The BBC reports: Richard Dawkins has intervened in a dispute about the moderation of his official website. He says the nastiness of comments added to the site is a sign of “something rotten in the internet culture”.

It appears that the site, which describes itself as a “clear thinking oasis” has been muddied by thoughtless abusiveness.

Doubtlessly, some will say that the stridency of the new atheism movement may partly explain the aggressiveness one finds on the Dawkins website; that if Dawkins’s fan-base is populated by those who enjoy the sharpness of his verbal assault on belief and believers, then those acolytes might be tempted to outdo one another in futher sharpness.

But, to be fair, the Richard Dawkins I have met is a gentleman and a scholar, and I am not at all suprised by his stand against incivility.

We all get angry.  These days, I prefer not to…in fact, I go out of my way not to get angry. I prefer to laugh and I would far rather parody something than write a diatribe to make a point. Fortunately, I get interesting and surreal comments from relatively insane sane people on my blog and the bed wetters and trolls tend not to be terribly interested in anything I write or comment on. I have a pretty open policy on comments, but I don’t tolerate people slagging each other off – unless they do it with style, elan and panache - and anyone who comes on to my comments section to say “Great… I’ve been looking for a site like this..keep up the good work” runs the risk that I will divert their URL for their law service (or other commercial activity) to a dodgy porn site.

I am pleased to announce, should anyone be daft enough to be abusive, troll-like or unpleasant on  my blog, that I have a new award – Charon’s Bed-Wetter Award….

It is highly unlikely that I shall ever have to make this award… but I shall do so, possibly, if I get seriously tedious people writing unpleasant nonsense…or law firms (and other commercial organisations) who try to get free Google juice by putting inane and irrelevant comments on a post and then link to their crappy service!

Old Holborn and Anna Raccoon did the business with the help of a lot of people on the blogosphere… I was happy to support this (and did) and thank you to those of my readers who did

Anna Raccoon reports: “A quick update to let everyone know what the state of play is with Nick Hogan.

The Blogosphere has reacted in magnificent fashion, the target has been reached in a mere 4 days. There are legal technicalities which Denise is fully aware of, which will be sorted very soon – and he will be home.

I have spoken to Denise several times today, as has Nick, from prison.  He is very much happier than he was yesterday, considerably cheered by the huge bag of cards and letters he has received this morning, and Denise is fully aware of everything that is going on.

My heart goes out to Denise, she has been subject to constant rumour and scurrilous speculation, which has only made a difficult situation more difficult to bear, but rest assured, she is in constant contact with Old Holborn and myself, and wants me to thank you all from the bottom of her heart.

They said it couldn’t be done – well it couldn’t without Old Holborn’s help, or Guido’s final push, but this has been a non-partisan, non-political, non-campaigning, tour de force on behalf of ordinary people who were shocked at an ordinary man being jailed for failing to report his fellow citizens.

Well done everyone!”

The level of political debate, as the election gets closer, continues to decline.  The Guardian reports…

Business secretary says Ashcroft has Cameron ‘by the balls’ and that affair reveals ‘fundamental weakness’

The Guardian reports: “In a highly personal attack, the business secretary said in an interview with the Guardian that Ashcroft had Cameron “by the balls”, the affair showed Cameron was “too weak to pick a fight with his own party” and the Tories were “fundamentally unchanged”.

The story is no longer about non-doms – Labour has a few of those lurking in the deep as well – but about integrity and controlling power. Ashcroft, having made  undertakings about tax to a point that Hague said publicly that Ashcroft would be paying tens of millions in taxes, did a quiet deal behind the scenes to ‘alter the effect of the undertaking’ and then, it would appear, kept Hague in the dark until ‘two months ago’.  Hague then seems to have kept Cameron in the dark, given Cameron’s statement that he knew only a month ago.   It is clear now why Cameron wanted to draw a line under the mater and tried to fob the Press off by saying that the horse was now dead so there was no need to continue flogging it.

Unfortunately for Cameron, the horse is very much alive and the left continues to probe and raise the issue.

The Times, a bit behind the curve on this issue, asks: Did you hear the one about the mother banned from taking a snapshot of her baby in the pool? Or the student prevented from photographing Tower Bridge at sunset? Be warned. The authorities now have the power to confiscate your camera — or even arrest you — for daring to take a picture in public…

The Independent covered this some time back and, indeed, so did the blogs but it remains, nevertheless an important issue about Police, Police Community Support Officers and others exceeding their powers and, of course, Parliament giving these people too many powers. While I am disposed towards the Labour party their record on civil liberties and the explosion of new criminal laws is very poor  and the Libertarians, left or right leaning, are right – government needs to curb its taste for knee jerking.  Clarkson got it right recently when he said that one man getting on to a plane with exploding underpants  has produced fear in the minds of Americans who seem curiously afraid of a lot of things compared to British and Europeans more used to terror outrages on our soil and our government has followed suit with a raft of poorly thought out laws giving poorly trained police et al the opportunity to ‘big it up’ in their high Viz yellow jackets.

Whatever flavour or colour of government wins the next election – the nanny state tendency and political correctness really does have to be looked at. I read somewhere at the weekend that Harriet Harman has now managed to ban use of  the term ‘Chairman’ in parliament.  I have never been a great fan of gender when it comes to nouns (This is something foreigners do with their languages!) and I can’t really get hot under the collar about a female leading a panel being described as ‘Chair’ or ‘Chairwoman’  when there are rather more pressing issues to worry about.  I am not running the country.  Ms Harman is.  Perhaps she could get on with doing so on the ‘bigger issues of our times’?

There is far too much interference in our lives from central and local government. CCTV cameras watch our every move, microchips are fitted in our rubbish bins to make sure we don’t overfill them or put in the wrong stuff, PCSOs, when they are not gathered in groups eating buns on street corners, are misapplying the law with tourists and members of the public, police officers are hesitating to break doors down to save people’s lives because of health & safety laws,… the list goes on and on and on… and worse, our government (and I doubt whether the Tories would be any better) continues with kneejerk policy making nd dancing to the tune of tabloids who are more interested in selling newspapers to their mass readership than the fine detail and intricacy of good government.

An example of dancing to the tune of the tabloids is the clamour for the government to release details as to why Jon Venables has been returned to prison.  I was appalled, as all were, by the horrific abduction and killing of a very young boy by two  juveniles all those years ago.  I have every sympathy for the family who continue to serve a ‘life sentence’ of misery as a result of their  son being  murdered, but I do also feel that as Venables now faces serious charges, law and procedure must be followed to ensure that Venables gets a fair trial for the offence he committed – a serious offence which merited his being returned to prison. Surely everyone is entitled to that… or do the tabloids have a greater right than the individual?

The BBC reports: “Gordon Brown has told the Iraq inquiry the war had been “right” – and troops had all the equipment they needed. The PM also insisted he had not been kept in the dark by Tony Blair despite not being aware of some developments.”

Godon Brown gave a very competent performance at the Iraq Inquiry – perhaps aided by the lack of forensic questioning skills of the inquisitors which allowed him to evade the difficult follow up questions – or to be more accurate, move on to the next question because there were no penetrating follow up questions as there would have been had experienced counsel been handling the questioning. Armed Forces ‘top brass’ popped up on Newsnight and elsewhere to say various things – ranging from Brown being ‘economical with the truth’ to making disingenuous’ statements.  Certainly, Brown gave a far better performance than I expected – and he knew his brief and the detail.  More importantly, he had the balls… to use a metaphor from the opening section of this Review… to acknowledge the debt we owe to our armed forces and their families and to acknowledge the suffering of the families.  Blair did not do so.  Unfortunately, Brown is now being castigated by the press, bloggers and others for making political capital by going to visit the troops in Afghanistan.  Sometimes, a prime minister just cannot win.

The Law Society Gazette reports: “The success fees charged by lawyers in defamation cases will be cut by 90% after justice secretary Jack Straw laid an order to amend the laws on ‘no win, no fee’ agreements. From April the maximum uplift charged by lawyers for winning defamation cases taken on under conditional fee agreements will be reduced from 100% to 10% of their original fee, subject to parliamentary approval.

The Ministry of Justice said the amendment is designed to prevent legal costs in defamation cases spiralling out of control. It follows its four-week consultation ‘Controlling costs in defamation proceedings’, which was published in January.Straw said the move would ‘help level the playing field’ so that journalists and writers can continue to publish articles that are in the public interest without incurring disproportionate legal bills.

So… are things looking up?

The Lawyer reports: Eversheds has become the latest firm to reopen its graduate recruitment programme after confirming it has offered positions to all of the trainees it deferred in 2009 as well as its scheduled 2010 cohort. In total the firm expects to take on 76 trainee solicitors in 2010 made up of 49 from its 2010 intake and the 27 candidates it deferred from 2009.

CEO Bryan Hughes said: “Whilst the economy remains fragile in some areas we’re seeing the benefits of having proactively managed our business as our performance continues to improve.”

The Times reports: “There is no better place than Switzerland to be a chicken. Or a hamster. Or even — though the jury is still out on this — a goldfish.

The reason is that the country has an extraordinary set of animal protection laws that closely define the obligations of pet owners and farmers.

Now it is about to go a step farther: a national referendum tomorrow will decide whether to allow animals official legal representation.

The canton of Zurich already has an animal advocate, Antoine Goetschel, a kind of courtroom Dr Dolittle who, for the past two years, has been fighting the corner for flogged horses, depressed Dalmatians and tortured fish.

A “yes” vote will place publicly funded animal welfare lawyers, like Mr Goetschel, across the country. “Then I think the Government should create some form of academy or educational forum for animal barristers,” Mr Goetschel said. “These are not skills learnt at law school.”

This may well be a step too far for us… but we aren’t far behind.  I understand, following recent tabloid reports about dangerous dogs ripping faces off children, that the government plans to bring in a National Dog Owning test before anyone can keep a dog.  I’m reasonably sure, without needing to set up a Quango to look into it,  that the great majority of pet owners in this country love and  care for their animals well – but, yet again, a very small minority provides an opportunity for nanny to get her ruler out and be stern…. will this absurd knee jerking interference never end?

More later in the day…

Few things surprise me these days, so when I woke at 3.30 this morning and started reading the newspapers online I barely registered more than mild astonishment when I read the Guardian story on the new Tory Madrasa!  I’m afraid that I also started humming ‘Springtime for Hitler’ – a truly marvellous bit of parody from The Producers. (Watch Springtime for Hitler on YouTube)   I seem to hum that song quite a bit these days when I read daft stories about the Tories…. or should that be…. stories about daft Tories?  ( Update: I am more than prepared to accept that Eric Pickles is, as my friend Peter Groves has said in the comments section – a decent guy. I agree. He is usually entertaining on TV … and is known to have a sense of humour.  You only need to see his tweets on Twitter to appreciate that. ….  I am just faffing abart with my captions and what follows! It is Saturday!).

The Guardian: Candidates trained by rightwing group that rubbishes NHS, dismisses global warming and backs waterboarding

Tory parliamentary candidates have undergone training by a rightwing group whose leadership has described the NHS as “the biggest waste of money in the UK”, claimed global warming is “a scam” and suggested that the waterboarding of prisoners can be justified. At least 11 prospective Tory candidates, an estimated seven of whom have a reasonable chance of winning their seats, have been delegates or speakers at training conferences run by the Young Britons’ Foundation, which claims to have trained 2,500 Conservative party activists.

The YBF chief executive, Donal Blaney, who runs the courses on media training and policy, has called for environmental protesters who trespass to be “shot down” by the police and that Britain should have a US-style liberal firearms policy. In an article on his own website, entitled Scrap the NHS, not just targets, he wrote: “Would it not now be better to say that the NHS – in its current incarnation – is finished?”

Blaney has described the YBF as “a Conservative madrasa” that radicalises young Tories. Programmes have included trips to meet neo-conservative groups in the US and to a shooting range in Virginia to fire submachine guns and assault rifles.

There is ‘another’ Guardian story on this …

Guardian: Rightwing group Young Britons’ Foundation has begun to earn reputation as ‘Conservative madrasa’

Given that Donal Blaney is a member of the legal profession – he is a solicitor and senior party of GriffinLaw – perhaps an unfortunate choice of name given another well known right wing Griffin? – I wanted to find out more about the YBF – Young Britons Foundation and Donal Blaney.

Donal Blaney is senior partner of Griffin Law – all perfectly straightforward and they offer a wide range of legal services. Griffin Law also had a ‘Legal first’ …  Griffin Law makes law by serving via Twitter

“Today the High Court showed that while it may be steeped in tradition, it is certainly not behind the times by granting an order which allowed service of an injunction via Twitter. The Order which is called a Blaney’s Blarney Order after the subject matter – a blog called Blaney’s Blarney (donalblaney.com) – requires an unknown Twitter user anonymously posting under the same name, and thus breaching the copyright and intellectual property of the blog’s owner, to stop posting and immediately identify themselves.”

When I tried to read Donal Blaney’s blog – in the spirit of wanting to learn more of the thoughts of this lawyer and Young Briton’s Foundation visionary… I was, sadly, met with this…

I rather suspect that I won’t be getting an invitation…

Thwarted… I then popped over to the Young Britons Foundation website. Donal Blaney is Chief Executive of the YBF.  There was talk of a ‘Rally’ in Parliament… a Rally?… and opportunities for visitors to the blog (unfortunate enough not to have been able to attend the ‘Rally’)  to look at pictures of happy radicalised Britons at the ‘Rally’

And then there was a case study of a Conservative Activist’… an ‘Activist’…?

YBF Activist Profile

“Emma Carr When did you first become an ‘active conservative’? I have been an active Conservative for about three years and I have known I am a Conservative for about five or six years.   It wasn’t until I went to University that I found opportunities to become involved in local campaigns and Conservative Future.”

I rather liked the phrase… “I have known that I am a conservative for about five or six years”.  It was after reading this phrase that I heard the dulcet Scottish tones of comedian Frankie Boyle, late (sadly) of Mock The Week, in my mind…and I am almost positive I could hear him say… “I’ve known I’ve had VD for  five or six years.”…

And Dan Hannan… who can be very amusing on television..and is a very good orator, whatever you think of his views, is President of The Young Briton’s Foundation.

Now I happen to think that it is a good thing to keep very young people busy with things like the Scouts, Cubs etc etc… I was a Cub in my youth..where I developed a penchant for awarding myself honours.  (I really should have been a Tory!)  A friend of mine and I found a box of badges and cub rank  stripes in a box in the ‘Scout Hut’.  We were the most heavily decorated cubs in Scotland… I had badges for absolutely everything down both arms of my green cub pullover… it was ridiculous.  I promoted myself to ‘Senior Sixer’ but was rumbled because I got greedy and gave myself three yellow stripes instead of two… c’est la vie, as I explained to the dodgy teacher – or Akela as we had to call him – who was a bit too keen on Scouting for Boys.(It’s a very old joke… but it is Saturday.)

I digress… and I do think it is a great idea for younger people to take an interest in politics by joining political groups at school and university. I’m not sure I swallow the entire Guardian line that 2500 people have been radicalised by attending YBF events and shoot em ups in the States… but it is a bit of a worry when one reads statements like this in the press…

The Guardian reports: “Writing openly on his own website, Blaney, a Kent-based solicitor, has argued that “humiliation or psychological interrogation techniques are, in my view, not a problem … Waterboarding doesn’t do the prisoner any permanent physical harm although he may be reluctant to shower or use a flannel again in the future when/if he is freed.”

This is passed off as humour. Humour?  I don’t think Mr Blaney will be appearing ‘Live at The Apollo’ anytime soon on the strength of that gag… if you forgive the unfortunate metaphor.

And then there is this… also from The Guardian report..

With strong links with the American neo-conservative movement, the YBF regularly sends activists on subsidised trips to conferences in the US. “We go into schools and we proselytise conservatism and we get hold of the best kids and train them up,” Blaney has said. “We have been described as a Conservative madrasa, so we bring the next generation out to the States and bring them back radicalised.”

This story is wonderful nonsense… or is it? Is The Guardian warning us that Donal Blaney is training a regiment of ‘Stepford Tory Activists’ who are going to march all over us if David Cameron manages to avoid snatching defeat from the jaws of Victory and actually wins the election with a working majority?

Iain Dale has the right attitude..! and if you want a pretty clear perspective on the Tory camp… his blog is worth a read.

I shall leave you, as I prepare myself for coffee, Marlboros and coffee with the newspapers on the King’s Road with two lines from the Springtime for Hitler lyrics…and a pic from the movie!

“We’re marching to a faster pace
Look out, here comes the master race!”

Don’t have nightmares…. as they used to say on Crimewatch..

As we get closer to the election, The Tories are finding that the Press is getting more interested in their policies and ‘other activities’. The Guardian reports this morning…

Exclusive: Bills for huge opinion polls for Conservatives ’sent to peer’s Belize firm’

Fresh concerns about Lord Ashcroft emerged tonight when he was accused of “systematic tax avoidance” by exploiting his offshore status to avoid paying VAT on opinion polls he commissioned for the Conservatives. Ashcroft privately ordered what he boasted was the biggest political polling exercise ever conducted in Britain in 2005, in order to aid the Tories as they targeted marginal seats. The cost of the polls, commissioned from YouGov and Populus, is believed to have approached at least £250,000.

But sources familiar with the transactions told the Guardian that the bills were paid by one his companies in Belize, meaning he did not pay VAT.

Tonight, the Liberal Democrats’ Treasury spokesman, Vince Cable, said: “This is quite serious. We are now not talking just about Ashcroft’s non-dom status, but about systematic tax avoidance in funding Conservative party activities such as polling. How far were the Conservatives aware that Ashcroft did not pay VAT, as would have been incurred by any normal polling activity?”

The Guardian also noted that Hague did not tell Cameron about Lord Ashcroft’s non-dom tax status until a month ago and “Ashcroft did not even reveal his tax status to Cameron when in December the leader approached him to discuss plans to ban non-doms from parliament, despite the fact that he had already told Hague.”

It is comforting  to know that Cameron is on top of things and running a tight ship when it comes to party affairs. Still… you have to hand it to the Tories, their strategy of pumping money into marginal seats may well win them the election….and Cameron is certainly ‘boldly going where no man has gone before’…or as we say down in Battersea while drinking Rioja…Ad eundum quo nemo ante iit.

I’m beginning to feel a bit sorry for Cameron….an aphorism by Horace may be of assistance in these difficult days, Dave…Aequam memento rebus in arduis servare mentem – Remember when life’s path is steep to keep your mind even.

Peter Brookes, in The Times, has caught the mood exceptionally well with this marvellous cartoon.

And talking of ‘unusual dealings’… RollonFriday reports…“Two ex HBJ Gately Wareing lawyers who were accused of attempting to extort money from the Duke of Buccleuch have appeared in court.

The Sun leads this morning with…

The 27-year-old murderer of toddler James Bulger was given a new name nine years ago.  The Sun notes…”Fearful Venables is being given 24-hour protection inside jail as he gorges on burgers and chips in his cell.”

Venables, detained under his own name (kept from all but a few senior prison staff, is under 24 hour guard but, as The Sun reports, tough lags will be certain to know that he is in the prison.  The government continues to refuse to explain why Venables is back in prison.

Coverage of a serious news issue  having drained them, The Sun reverts to type and reveals that Mick Jagger did something with Angelina Jolie….. which is, clearly, in the public interest….I can’t even be bothered to extract the lurid details….!

The Independent reports: Man claiming ill-treatment in Egypt says Britain ‘turned a blind eye’ to his rendition.

Britain may have colluded with America in the rendition of terror suspects that involved “torture flights” from UK territory, judges were told yesterday.

The claim was made by Mohammed Saad Iqbal Madni, 28, a former Guantanamo Bay inmate who was returned to Pakistan in August 2009 after seven years in custody.

Mr Madni alleges he was detained in Indonesia on 9 January 2002 and sent to Egypt, where he endured three months of torture. He alleges he was beaten, electrocuted, denied medical treatment and hung from metal hooks attached to the ceiling.

His lawyers, the legal charity Reprieve, say that there is “considerable circumstantial evidence” that the plane carrying Madni from Indonesia to Egypt passed through the British territory of the Indian Ocean island of Diego Garcia. Yesterday they asked the High Court in London to force the British Government to hand over all the information it might have about the flight, including the names of the US personnel Reprieve claims were aboard. They contend that documents held by the British Government could provide evidence that the UK authorities knew of the rendition flight and “turned a blind eye”.

Politics just gets better everyday…although I am beginning to wonder if the Rioja I drink is making me hallucinate when I read the newspapers and that the stories I read aren’t actually real.  The latest ‘Alice and Wonderland’ fable comes from The Independent…

An Electoral Commission report today cleared the Conservative Party and its deputy chairman Lord Ashcroft of breaching electoral law in relation to £5.1 million of donations from Bearwood Corporate Services.

The Commission rejected allegations that Bearwood – which is controlled by Ashcroft – was not carrying on business in the UK and was therefore ineligible to donate money to political parties.

However, the Commission has asked to meet Conservative officials to ensure that they are clear about their responsibilities for complying with the law.

It transpires, however, that the Electoral Commission has no power to compel people to attend for questioning…so some Tories decided they would decline the invitation to tell the Electoral Commission what had been going on.  It would appear, therefore, that the Electoral Commission cleared the Tories on incomplete evidence… how wonderfully BRITISH!… Yes Minister has nothing on what is going on in 2010!

The Independent notes…. “Today’s report said there was “no basis to conclude” that the donor was anyone other than Bearwood. And it said there was “insufficient evidence to conclude, on the balance of probabilities, that the party was uncertain as to the identity of the donor when accepting the donations”. But it revealed that a number of Conservative officers and staff declined to be interviewed on the issue. The Commission has no power to force people to attend interviews.”

And the report said: “The Commission asked various officers and staff within the party to attend interviews on a voluntary basis, but these requests were not agreed to.”

A Conservative spokesman said the party has “a clean bill of health”.

Next!  There is bound to be something surreal to report on tomorrow from those in power and those who seek power..over us.

The Times reports: “The Ashcroft non-dom tax saga exploded on the floor of the House of Commons today as Harriet Harman called for Tory heads to roll. The Leader of the House, deputising for Gordon Brown at Prime Minister’s Questions, said William Hague, the Shadow Foreign Secretary, had “not a shred of credibility” on the issue. During a stormy 30-minute session, Ms Harman said the country had been misled into believing that the Tory peer was paying full tax in Britain.”

I watched PMQs yesterday.  It was like watching Dr Who as a child…I would have been better hiding behind the sofa. Hague may well have a few questions to answer about the Ashcroft affair but he is a better orator.  Meanwhile, Unite boss Jack Dromey, Harman’s house husband  is taking time out from bringing British Airways to its knees and is being parachuted in to a safe seat.  Apparently he achieved this remarkable feat by winning on an all wimmin shortlist according to Hague….. but it may be that I was hallucinating and dreamed this up while taking some restorative Rioja. I have very little sympathy for the proposed British Airways strike but if Mr Dromey and his cabin crew cohorts want to wreck British Airways and bring British Airways down even further in these hard times they will… but BA supremo Willie Walsh is fighting back with some corporate Viagra to stiffen his resolve if Unite harden their position.

The Guardian reports: Former leader’s disclosure reveals peer kept financial affairs secret from senior Conservatives for a decade.

Time to shoehorn a bit of law in… I shall do it gently with this wonderful piece from our American friends…

The Wall Street Journal blog reports: “A word’s inclusion in the Urban Dictionary isn’t exactly the same as it being added to the OED. Anyone, it seems, can add pretty much any word to the UD at any time. Exclusive it ain’t.

Still, the UD goes where others don’t dare go. And along the way picks up some funny, if not g-rated or politically correct, definitions.

But the one to which we’ll introduce you today has nothing to do with drugs, sex, or rock & roll. It’s funny, though, and will probably strike many out there as either spot-on or downright offensive. It goes like this:

Slackoisie

Prounounced “Slack-wah-zee”. This term was coined by J. Daniel Hull, Esq., author of the “What About Clients?” blawg (Pictured right …looking relaxed – CQC), and popularized by Scott H. Greenfield, Esq., author of the “Simple Justice” blawg. It refers to:

(1) a class of narcissistic young professionals, particularly attorneys (usually Gen Y/millennials), who believe that having a job is an entitlement, rather than a privilege. They often complain about the work they have (if working), opine the lack of “real lawyer” jobs available in the market, and are critical of the long hours and inadequate pay found at most small firms. They believe they are entitled to work/life balance, that their opinions on any subject are inherently important and that whatever benefits they enjoy are inadequate. The Slackoisie are more interested in having a place to go in the morning and some spending money than committing themselves to their clients and the profession; or

(2) a slacker with an exaggerated sense of self-importance and entitlement.

I like this word… I’ve come across a few of this breed in my time in the law over here…. gawd bless ‘em… some of them live in West London, the land of milk and honey where they know how to pronounce ‘grande latte’ and do so with imperious style at various coffee filling stations on Chiswick High Street while they try to make the best of house price values in a country heading towards a double dip recession.  It may be time for me to resurrect my ‘West London Man’ parody series.

On that issue… Guido Fawkes has an interesting observation this morning about Britain’s debt (less safe than Chile even after the Earthquake) and it would appear that our American friends (taking a break from sitting on the fence on the Falkland’s issue) now bracket our economy with that of Greece and are saying that we are the next basket case.

Guido notes: “Chile has just had an 8.8 on the richter scale earthquake, looting and rioting are commonplace.  Even so, U.S. investors still prefer Chilean government debt to UK government debt as measured by CDS rates. Do you get how bad things are?”

The Times reports: “Jack Straw, the Justice Secretary, was under pressure last night to lift the veil of secrecy over the decision to return one of James Bulger’s killers to custody for breaking the terms of his parole……..Mr Straw insisted that it was not in the public interest to disclose the reason for the recall, but he was contradicted by Mr Johnson, who said: “I believe the public do have a right to know and I believe they will know all the facts in due course but I must in no way prejudice the future criminal justice proceedings.”His comment was later clarified by the Ministry of Justice, which said that Mr Johnson had been referring to a review by the Parole Board of the decision to recall Venables. The ministry said: “The Home Secretary was talking in general terms about criminal justice proceedings. He is referring to forthcoming proceedings by the Parole Board.”

Jack Straw has been very busy recently.  It appears that he may not be too keen on the appointment of Lord Justice Wall as President of the Family Division…

Jack Straw has challenged the appointment of a new head of the family justice system who castigated the Government over its policies, including opening family courts, The Times has learnt.

An appointments panel staffed by senior judges put forward Sir Nicholas Wall to fill the post of President of the Family Division, but only one month before the post is vacated no announcement has been made. Mr Straw, the Justice Secretary, is understood to have exercised his right under the new appointments system to ask the panel to reconsider.

One senior judge said: “It is an appalling state of affairs, not to know who is taking over.” Another said: “An appointment like this is usually announced several months ahead. There is no explanation as to what is going on.”

The Times noted…. wrly?….“but the belief in legal circles is that Lord Justice Wall’s comments in a lecture last November will not have helped his cause. He told the Association of Lawyers for Children that it was the duty of judges to speak out over changes that were damaging the service to children and families.”

I have little interest in Family Law, but John Bolch of Family Lore and Pink Tape will, no doubt, be commenting on this?

The Independent reports: “Controversial open-ended prison sentences introduced to protect the public may have to be scrapped after inspectors warned that their cost to the penal system outweighed any benefits.Just 75 of almost 6,000 convicts held under the indeterminate sentence for public protection (IPP) have won their liberty since the measure was brought in by Labour four years ago.The result, said Chief Inspector of Probation, Andrew Bridges, and the Chief Inspector of Prisons, Anne Owers, is that prisons have become swamped with inmates whom the probation service did not have the resources to deal with. They warned that the situation has become “unsustainable” and called on ministers to begin a major review of the policy.”

A quick look at what the law bloggers are up to….

Obiter J reviews the thorny issue of… Mobile phones and driving: just what is “using”

and begins his analysis with …”Regrettably, a lot of legislation is not always entirely straightforward to interpret (or “construe”).  The Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations 1986 Rule 110 seems to give rise to such problems.  Reg. 110(1) states – “No person shall drive a motor vehicle on a road if he is using (a) a hand-held mobile telephone; or (b)…”

The Fat Bigot…says…Goodbye Michael Foot

For my part – Michael Foot was a superb orator, an intelligent and thoughtful radical and probably the worst (in terms of effectiveness) leader of the Labour Party… but one of the best in terms of principle. His manifesto may have been described as the longest suicide note in history… but he did bring to politics a sense of fairness and critical thinking which is not always to the forefront of modern political agendas.

Finally…Bystander JP of the Magistrate’s blog asks…

Two middle-aged men are side by side in the dock. Each has a care worker with him as both have learning difficulties. They have committed sexual offences against girls of 12 (I have to be careful here, but suffice it to say that no physical contact was involved, but rather crude and inapproriate sexual talk) that has obviously caused great fear and upset to the young victims. The defendants are quickly identified, and brought to court.

They are charged under Section 12(1)a and other sections of the Sexual Offences Act 2003.

Hat Tip to LadyBizBiz for alerting me to this great picture on MSN this morning.  She’s right… I just couldn’t help myself.

The Times reports: ” British courts were at the centre of a bitter diplomatic battle last night as Serbian and Bosnian authorities fought for custody of a former Bosnian leader arrested at Heathrow. Ejup Ganic, 63, was detained on Monday after Serbia asked for his extradition on charges of killing wounded Bosnian Serb soldiers during the Balkan wars. Yesterday Bosnian authorities dismissed the arrest as a political stunt and vowed to ask Britain to extradite him to Sarajevo instead, setting the scene for an unprecedented legal struggle.”

It will be interesting to see how this plays out, given the Karadzic trial.  Israel is also concerned that some of their political leaders face arrest in Britain should they set foot in Britain. Are we going to see an escalation of countries arresting political leaders throughout the world?

Guido Fawkes, only this morning, is concerned as to where Tony Blair is in the world at the moment: Has Tony Gone Offshore?

Back in September Guido asked:

“When was the last time you saw Tony Blair in the UK? Billionaire’s yachts in the Med, sure, US TV chat shows, sure. Six-figure speaking engagements in the Far East, of course. “Peacemaking” in the Middle East, allegedly. Is he seen in the UK? No, not much.”

A tax issue? .. that would be ironic and ‘un-patriotic’.

Former MI6 officer charged with exposing spy techniques
The Times reports: “A former member of MI6 will appear in court today charged with breaching the Official Secrets Act by exposing spying techniques. Daniel Houghton, 25, from North London, is accused of disclosing a number of electronic files with articles about intelligence gathering methods at the Central Criminal Court, better known as the Old Bailey. He is also charged with stealing MI5 files containing similar information at the court between September 2007 and May last year.”

The Guardian: Papers reveal Tories gave repeated promises over peer’s financial status

A  Lords committee has rejected a call for an inquiry on the grounds that it no jurisdiction over events occurring before 2000.

Revenue investigators were last night facing demands to launch an inquiry into the tax status of Lord Ashcroft, the billionaire businessman bankrolling the Conservative party, amid new questions about how he was allowed to break a promise to permanently base himself in the UK to secure a seat in the House of Lords.

As anger grew over Ashcroft’s admission that he has secretly remained a non-dom for the nine years he has sat in parliament, there were separate calls for inquiries into his nomination for a peerage in 2000 and his tax affairs.

Last night Vince Cable, the Liberal Democrat Treasury spokesman, called on the HMRC to review Ashcroft’s tax status in the UK. “There does seem to be a strong case for HMRC to investigate the potential abuse of non-dom status,” he said.

I’m with Cable on this one.  It does seem to me extraordinary that the Tories and Labour are quite happy to take money from non-dom businessmen, but that is not really the key issue here.  The key issue  is the rather more worrying one about ‘truth’ in terms of what Hague and Cameron actually knew compared to their public statements. Lord Ashcroft, turned down for a peerage initially because of his tax position appears to have promised unequivocally to regularise matters and then, hey presto, a ‘revision’ occurred with a senior civil servant to ‘interpret’ matters rather differently. Hague is on record as saying that the newly ennobled Lord Ashcroft’s peerage would cost him ‘tens of millions of pounds’ annually.  It appears that this is not the case.  A Freedom of Information request, it is suggested, should do the trick. I have no idea whether brrooms are available from the John lewis catalogue on expenses.

One assumes that Hague and Cameron have been telling the truth.  If that is the case, then they must have been rather surprised by Ashcroft’s admission the other morning that he is, after all, non-dom?  Tail wagging the dog or vice versa?  Cameron seemed to be rather keen to get the press to stop flogging the horse with a bit of deflection onto Labour non-doms and by trying to draw a line under the matter.  I don’t think this one is going to go away quickly and may well be an election issue not of tax or party financing, but one of truth, character, probity and suitability to govern?

And on that note, let me leave you (for the present) with this Cartoon from lawyer, artist and bon-viveur Charles Fincher …..

With a lead article in The Times today relating tales of Lord Ashcroft as Blofeld (and even being given a white toy cat, apparently) I could hardly resist getting out the Photoshop for the inevitable pic….

The Times

Be that as it may…. there are dark forces present this eve, as I read the political blogs.

Guido Fawkes blogs with evidence with two interesting posts:  The Market Hates Labour
providing a clear graph that when Labour rises in the polls the pound drops and the pound rises when the Tories rise in the polls. Guido also provides a snazzy graph to show how Lord Ashcroft’s attendances in the Lords cost the taxpayer NOTHING whereas Lord Paul’s attendances have cost us a WHOPPING £281,263 in expenses

Boris… in a very well written piece, complete with a bit of Latin… suggestio falsi and suppressio veri prefers the sanguine, cold, objective fact of Betfair to the turbulent polls on the premise that when people invest money, they think carefully (apart from, presumably,  those who invested their money with Madoff) and the Betfair odds have not moved.  The money is firmly with a Conservative majority. Others, to be fair, made this point at the weekend, but not with such style and elan.

Boris ends with the clarion call… “Do we really want another five years of the holepunch-hurling horror of Gordon Brown’s management style? Do we want the Downing Street switchboard to be endlessly jammed with people bleating to some “bullying helpline”? Is this any way to run a country? And that is just froth compared to the real charges against Labour.

If Gordon Brown is on course to win the election, then Elvis Presley is on course to win The X Factor and Shergar to win the Grand National.”

Peter Hoskin in The Spectator writes…

The Business Secretary has since come out snarling, saying to Sky News this morning:

This is a dangerous route for Labour to go down, on many levels.  Not only (as Guido points out) is Mandelson not really the best poster boy for clean politics, but it risks drawing more attention to Labour’s own non-dom donors, and suggests that Brown & Co. aren’t just “getting on with the job” of government.  With the election only weeks away, maybe they should create the impression that they’ve got better things to do.”

But it is not all politics with the political bloggers. Yesterday, I publicised Old Holborn’s campaign to free Nick Hogan, the first publican to be imprisoned for failing to pay fines for Smoking offences at his pub.  Interestingly, Old Holborn and Anna Raccoon are looking into the legal position as to whether it is lawful to jail a bankrupt who is in no position to pay his fine

Old Holborn reports today… “In less than 36 hours, you have donated more than £5,238 to support Nick Hogan after he was jailed for 6 months for non payment of fines. Anna and I are currently investigating whether it is indeed lawful to jail a registered bankrupt as his ability to pay the fines is zero…….Various other organisations are becoming involved and support has been overwhelming. Donations have arrived from the four corners of the world, left wing, right wing and independent bloggers are carrying the news far and wide.”

If you wish to contribute or just read about this extraordinary case... please go here.

The recession may or may not be over. The pound is falling,there is serious division between economists and political parties on the best way forward in dealing with the significant debt hanging over Britain PLC and there is doubt about our position in credit reference stakes.

I thought it might be interesting to look at the legal press and take the temperature.

[The pic comes from a website supplying interesting legal prints]

The Lawyer reports: One Essex Ct vs Herbies – back from the brink

The Lawyer can reveal that relations between leading London set One Essex Court and litigation giant Herbert Smith reached crisis point last year following a bust-up over unpaid bills – underlining increasing tension between solicitors and barristers over fees. Herbert Smith set relationship partner Kevin Lloyd was forced to call a summit with One Essex Court senior clerk Darren Burrows after the firm failed to hand over ­barrister fees worth more than £500,000.

The claimant failed to settle fees with Herbert Smith.  In turn, “the firm therefore wanted to avoid paying its barrister team……“Herbies got burnt quite badly on the case, they were left exposed,” one source said. “It’s a bit unfair. The barrister relies on the lawyer to be honourable and pay.”

The Lawyer noted…”They [Herbert Smith] said they’re the top litigation firm and One Essex Court would have to play ball,” the source said. “But Darren wasn’t happy about that and refused.” Following the crisis talks it is understood that Herbert Smith has just begun handing the set instructions again – 15 months after the case. In a statement the set said: “One Essex Court does not ordinarily comment on its relationship with ­individual clients. That said, our fees have been settled on this matter and there are no outstanding issues. We’ve always enjoyed an excellent relationship with Herbert Smith and that ­continues to be the case.”

Unfortunately, chain reactions are common in all walks of business life and sometimes, through necessity,  if the top dog is not paid, those lower in the pecking order don’t get paid either.  Perhaps it is a sign of our times that a leading law firm with pressures of its own due to the downturn had to delay payment.  No further information is available on the matter but it would not surprise me if that lay at the root and in such circumstances is it unreasonable that a set of Chambers, enjoying work from a top firm – with the prospect of more in an upturn, should take part of the strain? That is often what happens in business.  Why should the law business be any different?

It seems that money is starting to flow again in the leading law firms.  A quick look at the headlines reveals some prospect of a brighter future?

SJ Berwin starts quarterly partner distributions after 12-month freeze |  Freshfields becomes first UK firm to lift associate salary freeze |  BLP hires advertising guru for marketing push

On the other hand… there are still areas of difficulty, possibly rooted in 2009 rather than 2010 prospects…

Dewey and Debevoise post double-digit revenue drops for 2009 |  Latham saw PEP rise but revenue fall in “tough” 2009 |  Hammonds shelves Munich base following Eversheds raid |  LG to phase out salaried role in favour of two-tier partnership

It is difficult to say, on a quick look at a few week’s of legal news, what the lieof the land is but it is probably fair to say that fortunes are mixed with some areas of specialist legal practice associated with recessions doing well (litigation and insolvency) doing reasonably well and other areas of practice (M&A, corporate finance, property et al), not so. Speaking with two experienced City lawyers to get their thoughts revealed caution and little in the way of optimism as yet, with one saying that it was unlikely to ‘get any better until well into 2011). Lawyers are often last in to a recession, they say, and last out.

I missed this story last week.

Withers found guilty of contempt of Parliament in privilege case

Legal Week reports: “Withers has been found guilty of contempt of Parliament after suggesting that an MP could face legal proceedings for criticising a client of the firm in Parliament. The Commons standards and privileges committee said yesterday (25 February) that Withers was in contempt of the House when it threatened Liberal Democrat MP John Hemming with libel proceedings if he were to repeat “defamatory claims” about the firm’s client in Parliament. The claims had initially been made in a Liberal Democrat leaflet.

The report said the committee was “surprised that a firm of the standing of Withers” took so long to realise that any comments would have been covered by parliamentary privilege, which allows MPs the right to speak freely in Parliament without the fear of being sued for libel. Despite finding the firm guilty of contempt, the committee said it would not take further action against Withers as the UK top 50 firm had apologised “unreservedly” both to the House and Hemming, after taking legal advice from counsel.

The Law Society Gazette leads this week with: Referral ban ‘will not reduce costs’

Banning referral fees will harm the legal profession and will have no effect on reducing law firms’ marketing costs, the chair of the Claims Standards Council (CSC) said last week.

Speaking at the CSC annual conference in Manchester, Accident Advice Helpline managing director Darren Werth said it is ‘shocking’ that the Law Society and Lord Justice Jackson want to ban referral fees. ‘It will drive businesses underground,’ he said, creating ‘a future not in line with a modern commercial world’ by ‘legislating against market forces’.

The Legal Services Board’s consumer panel recently commissioned management consultants Charles River Associates to undertake an ‘economic study’ of referral fees. Jackson concluded in his final report on civil litigation costs that referral fees should be banned in personal injury cases, while the Law Society Council voted at the end of last year to press for a ban on referral fees. SRA chief executive Antony Townsend said last week that the SRA ‘supports and is contributing to the cross-sector review of referrals by the LSB’.

Law Society Gazette

So… with the Bar wanting a level playing field, a senior judge against referral fees and the Solicitors Regulatory Authority voting to ban referral fees – there is now the prospect that these wise men and women may have actually harmed the legal profession? – Mon Dieu!

The issue is, I suspect, still rooted in the hoary issue of whether the law is a business or a profession…but, as ever, I could be wrong.  You can buck the market if you want to shoot yourself in the foot, but remain a professional – albeit a poorer one.

It seems appropriate to end with this..from the Bar Council

It was a fine sunny morning, cold but fresh, when I arrived at the cafe to eat my British breakfast.  I usually drink black coffee…called an ‘Americano’ in the modern way, and not wishing to baffle the Lithuanian waitress by asking for a British black coffee, I compromised my early morning patriotism and ordered the Americano.

The patriotism thing started by David Cameron has descended into a very ‘British farce’ with the Home Secretary weighing in with his comments about Lord Ashcroft’s un-patritotic behaviour only for Eric Pickles et al to lob in those great British patriots who support Labour – Lord Paul, Mittal et al. I was both delighted and ‘pleased’ that John Rentoul, chief political commentator at The Independent gave me a hat tip for my obvious parody of Cameron as Lord Kitchener.

The Polls this morning reveal that Labour has gone down, the Tories up and the gap is now 5 points.  This is still not enough to avoid a hung parliament – and the markets showed their displeasure at the prospect of a hung parliament yesterday by letting the pound drop.  Some say that the currency speculators view Britain as the ‘New Greece’ and are closing in.  Britain’s credit rating is dropping.  Yesterday there was a report that we are paying more than Italy for international money.

Capitalists@work (a blog I heartily recommend) has a very blunt message…. Just Vote Labour

The post is amusing and well crafted and makes some very good points about ‘floaters’… or floating voters who haven’t made their minds up yet.  Worth a read.  Here is an extract!

….But don’t ponce about saying you’re not yet convinced because all the information you will ever need is only a click away on your laptop. All the benefits or otherwise are just a stroll down your local high street, a visit to the health centre, school or a tour of your workplace.  If you think that Dave is a lightweight and you’re unsure then vote for Brown. The Lib Dems or any of the smaller parties are not going to win power. It is red or blue.

The choice my floating friends is painfully simple. If you are happy with what you have, then stick with it. If , like me, you think that five more months, let alone years, of the Prime minister will result in the UK becoming an”abandoned fairground for all” then vote for Cameron and at least the hope of something different…But stop kidding that there is some magical word or phrase that would swing it all around. You either like it as it is or you want a leap into the unknown and whatever that brings with it.

The Sun… (Britain’s most ‘Patriotic’ newspaper?) ran riot today with polls, surveys and comment. After lobbing a bit of ‘fresh salacious meat’ to the circling readers in the form of a story about a BBC reporter who may have hanged himself during a private sex act and agonising about Ashley Cole who has apparently ruined his life by texting pictures of himself in his underpants to various hot birds – The Sun got back to the business of promoting the Tories.

The Sun thundered……. “A MASSIVE 72 per cent of Sun readers believe family life has crumbled under Labour, our poll reveals……And 43 per cent blame the booming benefits culture….The same number say children should be raised in a married family”

But then… on page 6…came the headline…

permitting them to come up with a wonderful blast from the past…

“A weak currency arises from a weak economy which, in turn, is the result of a weak government’

Gordon Brown 1992

On the subject of “No Notes”  speeches…. Beau Bo D’Or really does have the last word with this wonderful picture…

Well…there we are… orf to listen to a bit more Elgar while I sit in the sun and read the sensible (if less influential in terms of reaching voters)   newspapers.

Have a patriotic day… it is your duty… for the country we ALL love.

UPDATE:  You may wish to have a look at this?

Pressure mounts on Conservatives over Lord Ashcroft non-dom tax revelation

The Guardian: Conservatives refuse to answer accusations Lord Ashcroft breached tax promises made on his ennoblement

All the parties appear to have a non-dom Lord or sophisticated investor lurking in the background as this spreadsheet from the Guardian reveals

The difference appears to be that Lord Paul has never been secretive about his non-dom status, the moneys used by Labour do not appear to be focused on marginal constituencies and Lord Paul does not appear to have broken any promises in connection with his peerage or elevation as a Privy Councillor and….. Lord Paul is not part of the ‘directing mind and body’ of the Labour Party.  Watching Newsnight last night, Michael Gove eloquently put the case for the Conservatives by deflecting attention to the activities of Lord Paul funding Labour and by challenging Kirtsy Wark to ask other parties tough questions…adding…with what appeared to be a hint of menace…’because we’ll be watching’.  This does not augur well for the BBC if the Tories get in?  Kirsty Wark was, pleasingly (to use a variant of a word enjoyed by David Cameron) was able to reassure Gove that the BBC would be asking tough questions of everyone in the run up to the election.

Watching David Cameron put out his well rehearsed statement that Ashcroft’s personal affairs are a matter between him and H M Revenue & Customs and then say that he was pleased that Ashcroft had revealed all was fascinating – the body language reminding me of a child who has been caught ‘in flagrante delicto’, and digging his heels in before defllecting the conversation on to something else with ‘imperial authority’.  Finkelstein of The Times on Newsnight did not think this story ‘would play’ with the electorate and that it was simply  a Westminster row.  We shall see….

The Guardian reports: “By keeping non-dom status Lord Ashcroft avoided paying tens of millions of pounds in tax in the UK while sitting in the Lords and still bankrolling the Conservatives. In 2005 he said he had given “well in excess of £10m” to the party.The Tories refused to answer accusations that Ashcroft had breached the promise he made to become resident and pay full tax as a condition of his ennoblement in 2000 – or reveal when the party leadership first learned that the peer had hung on to his non-dom status.

The Guardian put seven key questions to Tory central office about its deputy chairman, asking what David Cameron and Hague knew about Lord Ashcroft’s financial arrangements….

Jack Straw, the justice secretary, said today: “He was only granted his peerage on the basis he would return to live in the UK, become fully resident, and pay tax in the UK on his wider income.

“Lord Ashcroft has been forced to admit that he has not complied with this promise and that for the last 10 years the Conservatives have been concealing the truth. Instead of paying tax in the UK on all his earned income, he has been channelling millions into the Conservative party to help them buy this election.”

Independent: “Secret papers withheld by Chilcot inquiry reveal Foreign Office fears over invasion.  An invasion of Iraq was discussed within the Government more than two years before military action was taken – with Foreign Office mandarins warning that an invasion would be illegal, that it would claim “considerable casualties” and could lead to the breakdown of Iraq, The Independent can reveal. The extent of Whitehall opposition to the policy eventually backed by Tony Blair emerges just three days before Gordon Brown will appear at the Iraq Inquiry, where he will be asked to explain his role in the Government’s decision to invade.”

Having followed the Iraq Inquiry fairly closely, it will be fascinating to see how Gordon Brown performs. Brown does not have the communication skills of Campbell or Blair.  Brown’s fuse is fairly short, it would seem from recent reports, and I suspect, given the brooding antipathy between Brown and Blair, there is a story here to be dragged out of Brown. Perhaps the ‘grand inquisitors’ emboldened by recent revelations, and having had plenty of time to rehearse their questions, will demonstrate some forensic skill and ask the right questions?

The Fat Bigot writes…
Boring is hard to sell
“Perhaps it’s just a reflection of my experience, but I simply don’t think general life is very exciting. It has its moments, of course it does, there are spells of huge joy and deep misery. Most of it, however, is just getting on with getting on. I know I am luckier than most in that my field of work has provided variety and intellectual challenge of a type not many enjoy. When we look at the general scheme of life, though, it is not full of thrills.

If you are a politician faced with an electorate plodding through their everyday lives it’s fairly obvious that promising them rewards they do not have to work for is more likely to gain their vote than telling them they shouldn’t expect riches if they vote for you. This is one of the reasons socialists will always garner votes. They claim there is wealth for all if only they could be in charge and arrange things suitably. Every time they are elected they fail to deliver on that promise, and every time the next election comes around they promise the same thing while the alternative candidate does not. The promise itself is as enticing, yet as tantalising, as the rack of scratch cards on a shop counter. Faced with a choice between the idealist claiming he can make you rich and the realist saying he won’t, it is hardly surprising that people vote for the former.”

Carl Gardner, ex-government lawyer and author of the Head of Legal blog, writes: Binyam Mohamed: finally, an end

“I’m sorry it’s taken me so long to comment on the Court of Appeal’s judgment in R(Mohamed) v Foreign Secretary. People usually claim to hate saying they told you so. I love saying it if I’m honest, but only if I really did tell you so, something you may well doubt if you listen again to my podcast discussion with Charon QC about the case at an earlier stage.”

John Bolch of Family Lore (and many others, I suspect) is already bored with the endless coverage of politics in the media. I have some sympathy with this – but I enjoy politics and accept that my observations are either frivolous or parodic.

John writes: Just make it end…

“Like most people in this country, I don’t give a damn who wins the election, I just want it to be over. Unfortunately, however, there are a few who still think our votes can be bought, so it is my duty to inform you that The Times reports today that the Tories will be attempting to woo voters by including tax breaks for married couples in their manifesto. No details are given (including how a bankrupt country is to pay for such tax breaks), but no doubt I will have to return to this yet again, once the manifesto is published. I can’t wait…!

Simon Myerson QC, author of the Pupillage and How to Get It blog writes…“A Bit of a Kicking Back”

The Guardian: £140,000: the annual cost of jailing a young criminal

Jailing one young criminal costs the taxpayer as much as £140,000 a year, a report says today. Locking up young offenders makes them more likely to commit further crimes and be unemployed later in life, the New Economics Foundation says. The think tank calls for drastic cuts in the use of youth custody. Budgets to pay for it should be given to councils and the money reinvested in rehabilitation programmes, the report says.

The Guardian: Human rights groups call for reform of government’s security committee
Calls come after appeal court judges conclude security services were able to get away with ‘a dubious record’ on torture

The Guardian: Committee urges ministers to abandon control orders
Joint committee on human rights says system imposing severe restrictions on terror suspects who cannot be taken to court is no longer sustainable

The Independent: Inmates advised on early release options

Prisoners who will miss out on early release because a Government scheme was brought to an end are being advised to apply for another scheme to avoid “disappointment”, it was revealed today. Last week Justice Secretary Jack Straw announced End of Custody Licence, which allows inmates out up to 18 days early, would be cancelled next month. But a circular sent to jails in England and Wales advises inmates to apply for release under Home Detention Curfew, which allows prisoners out up to four and a half months early with an electronic tag. The notice even sympathises with inmates who find they cannot now be released on ECL……The Tories accused ministers of a “cynical and dishonest ploy”.

//

The cat is out of the bag… as they used to say in the Royal Navy between bouts of “rum, sodomy and the lash” (Winston Churchill) ….. Ashcroft has fessed up… but the Guardian isn’t letting him off the hook.

Toby Helm does the business in the boot putting in stakes…

The Tory attitude to this scandal says a lot about the party and its self-image as one born to rule

Yes… we know Lord Paul and other non-doms are doing the same thing.. but are they trying to target marginal seats with quids and are they senior members of the Labour ‘apparatus of power and change’ ? ?

UPDATE… now THIS… from a ‘Master of the Art of Politicalart ‘  [Beau Bo D'Or ] is funny… at least I think it is… and I hope you will..

I may not get very far with this – but  I have decided to celebrate the fact that the sun shone and  my new rather spiky haircut – which a lovely Spanish woman did – and the fact that I am both resident and domiciled somewhere… by starting a series of posts on politics for the younger person.

First up is Mr Fantastic. (Older readers may care to look at the Wikipedia entry to see what I am on about.. or, indeed, telephone NHS Direct and tell them that the Lord Ashcroft story finally did me in).

OK… OK… I’ll get my coat…. and see if you can catch me…. I’m orf…

It has been quite a day… with the revelation by Lord Ashcroft that things were not quite what some thought them to be. Jack Straw has responded with a fairly robust statement, Iain Dale, disclosing that Lord Ashcroft is an investor in his publishing business, opens the batting for the Tories with some stat porn, Guido Fawkes  reminds us that he has been calling for Ashcroft to come clean for some time (He has) and reminds us that Labour also has possession of a non-dom peer and Privy Councillor to boot in Lord Paul.  Gerald Warner puts the boot into Cameron by saying that he is ” in a modernising hole and, thankfully, still digging” … and just so that Cameron is left in no doubt about the strength of feeling among some traditional tories… Warner puts the boot in again..

“Good, Dave! This is excellent news. Because, Dave, there is no one we want more to see in a hole and still digging than you. It would have been regrettable if you had taken fright, assumed a mask of traditional Conservatism and possibly fooled some genuine Tories into voting for you. Much better that you should persevere in the demented and traitorous stance that will cause you to crash and burn. So, this is good news.

Just one or two personal pronouns out of place there, though. “We” did not decide we wanted to modernise the Tory Party – you and the Maudernisers did. And, yes, you didn’t do it on your own, you had a bunch of muppets to support you and some hoods from CCHQ – as it is now inelegantly known – to put the frighteners on local constituenecy associations and make sure they selected their candidates from a PC table d’hôte menu of women, ethnic minorities and homosexuals. That strategy, of course, was devised when you had a 25-point poll lead; how it plays out in present circumstances remains to be seen.

The man behind the story and, indeed, the Tory Party…Lord Ashcroft… demonstrated masterly skills of evasion and obfuscation with his statement – forced in advance of a Freedom of Information request about to be published by the Cabinet Office.

Lord Ashcroft: As for the future, while the non-dom status will continue for many people in business or public life, David Cameron has said that anyone sitting in the legislature – Lords or Commons – must be treated as resident and domiciled in the UK for tax purposes. I agree with this change and expect to be sitting in the House of Lords for many years to come.

The difference, however, between Lord Paul and Lord Ashcroft seems to be that Lord Ashcroft was initially turned down for a peerage and only got it because of promises he made… promises, Jack Straw says, which have not have been kept.

“Lord Ashcroft was initially turned down for a peerage. He was only granted his peerage on the basis that he would return to live in the UK, become fully resident, and that he would pay tax in the UK on his wider income.

“Today Lord Ashcroft has been forced to admit that he has not complied with this promise and that for the last ten years the Conservatives have been concealing the truth.”

Tomorrow could be even better….. the spinning jennies could be working overtime….

I smoke and while I am happy  to accommodate non-smokers I would have preferred the smoking ban to have accommodated smokers by providing separate areas for smokers inside. Pubs have closed, bars have closed and some pubs are no longer the places they used to be – simply because smokers often enjoy drinking as well and they aren’t going to pubs on cold wet windy days and nights.  They are drinking and smoking at home.

Political blogger and libertarian, Old Holborn, has an excellent campaign – which I am both happy to support by making a donation (I have just done it) and by publicising it.

I quote from Old Holborn’s blog…

There has been a fair amount of comment in the blogosphere regarding the six month jail sentence given to Nick Hogan for flouting the ‘no-smoking ban’.

Outrage has been duly expressed, here, there, and everywhere. Perhaps we can do better than just express outrage?

Nick was actually jailed for non-payment of the fine originally imposed for a ‘mass smoke-in’ on the day the ban came into force in 2007 in his pub, the ‘Swan and Barristers’ in Bolton. He no longer has that pub. He was fined again when council inspectors walked into his present pub and discovered a group of customers smoking – Nick wasn’t even on the premises.

I could not agree more.  Outrage is often expressed on the net and on Twitter – but outrage alone is not going to solve Nick Hogan’s problem. Do have a look at Old Holborn’s blog post to find out what the law is on Smoking (interesting) and if you are minded to help… a lot of £1 donations will free Nick Hogan.  I had some money knocking about in Paypal – enough for four packs of Marlboro…. and Nick Hogan is more than welcome to it!  If you wish to donate – please visit Old Holborn’s blog and follow the instructions there!

The Independent reports: European Court set to give public figures chance to gag press on damaging stories

It could spell the end of the kiss and tell: public figures might, within 18 months, have the power to stifle bad news stories before they are published, a senior lawyer has warned.

The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) is currently fast-tracking a landmark case, brought by Max Mosley, to tighten UK privacy laws. Mark Stephens, a lawyer acting for a group of media and free speech organisations opposing Mr Mosley in court, believes that the extraordinary pace with which it is proceeding suggests that the judges are about to rule in the former Formula One boss’s favour.

That would mean a change in the law that would force the press to contact anyone that they are intending to run a story about to warn them if it could potentially breach their privacy, giving public figures a chance to gag newspapers before publication.

While I am not at all interested in Max Mosley’s desire to dress up in striped ‘prison style’ uniform, have his head examined for lice and then be beaten by blonde dominatrixes shouting at him in faux German accents (He then had a spot of shouting in German himself after his own thrashing) I am concerned that press freedom may be curtailed by public figures when it is in the public interest that their activities be disclosed

Article 8 European Convention on Human Rights – Right to respect for private and family life

1. Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence.

2. There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.

The Independent noted: “Mr Stephens, partner at Finers Stephens Innocent, argued that the revelations about Mr Mosley’s sex life, published in the News of the World, are not covered by Article 8. He added: “There should be no injunction preventing publication. What Mosley is doing is trying to drive a coach and horses through the rules and get injunctions against newspapers prior to publication. This could be the end of ‘publish and be damned’. Are we really saying that next time we want to write a story about a public figure, we should give them 48 hours’ notice?”

I did a podcast with Mark Stephens last year when the Trafigura case raised issues about the use of superinjunctions. Given the relative ineffectiveness of High Court injunctions in the internet and twitter age,  it may be useful for the law makers and the Ministry of Justice to investigate the increasing use of superinjunctions.  Privacy of the individual for matters which do not impact on the public interest is one thing (deserving of protection) – activities which are potentially harmful to the wider public interest is quite different – and a free press is essential if we are to prevent mission creep to suppress freedom of the press.

And…another case on privacy…mission creep?

The Times reports: KATE MIDDLETON, the girlfriend of Prince William, is set to win a controversial claim for alleged invasion of her privacy. She is expected to receive at least £10,000 in damages, plus substantial legal costs, after threatening to sue a photographer and two British picture agencies over photographs taken of her at Christmas. The images were not even published in Britain. Middleton’s claim follows a decision by the Queen to crack down on alleged intrusions into the private lives of the royals. Middleton’s action may also be an attempt to restrain photographers ahead of an engagement to the prince.

Sources close to negotiations over the dispute say that the photographic agencies have offered to meet Middleton’s demands because they cannot risk losing an expensive court battle. One said: “We can’t fight them. If it went to court and we lost, it could cost £100,000.”

The Times report noted that the photographer took the photos from a public footpath – not using a telephoto lens  – and while Ms Middleton may well have been concerned about photographers taking photographs ‘through the window’  of her eating lunch,  that did not happen.

The Times noted..”Middleton instructed her lawyers to seek damages and take legal action if she did not receive a suitable response. One source said: “They are trying to crucify the photographer; maybe they want to set an example.”

It is a difficult balance, but those who seek to live lives in a public way and take advantage of the very significant financial rewards in doing so must accept reasonable interest from the public in their activities generally and, if they stray into illegal activity, the full scourge of investigative journalism. For my own part, being a good ‘republican’, I would be quite happy if I never saw a photograph of a Royal again – save in the execution of a public state duty.  The trouble with celebs, royal or not, is that they often seek press coverage when it suits their interests and then complain when it does not.  We are too craven in this country about the ‘great and the good’ – I suspect quite a few celebs would bleat like stuck pigs if their rather (often)  tedious activities were not covered by the tabloid press.

And finally… on a cheerful note, particularly if you are a student – I am delighted to let law students know about a new series of Revision aids from Oxford University Press – the Concentrate series.  OUP has published quite a few already:

English legal System | Contract Law | Criminal Law | Equity & Trusts | Public Law | EU Law | Evidence Law | Business Law | Employment Law | Land Law

I disclose that OUP has sponsored Insite Law Magazine costs to assist in our keeping resources free - but I have no hesitation in saying that this series is an excellent supplement for students should they wish to focus their revision.

David Cameron has played the ‘Patriot’ card…. it is our patriotic duty to vote for him… to save the country we love.  Where the F**k did the Laurel & Hardy Institute of Policy come up with this idea?… in a crack den?

Well… all I can say in response… after cracking open the Photoshop to do a very obvious pastiche on Kitchener is quote (slightly modified) the lyrics to the Dad’s Army theme tune…

Who do you think you are kidding Mister Cameron

if you think we’re on the run?

We are the boys who will stop your little game

We are the boys who will make you think again

‘Cause who do you think you are kidding Mister Cameron

If you think Old Labour’s done?

If you have not seen this short film yet – please do have a look.  It is an excellent film… Hat Tip to blogger Old Holborn...who writes: “I am sick to death of being told what the law is by people who have no idea of the law yet are being paid by me to uphold the law.”

Quite…

Watch the film

You may also like to look at this for a statement on your rights as a photographer!

In a week when prime Minister Gordon Brown has been mocked and ridiculed for his ‘bully boy’ ways and parodied in the Taiwan news - the Tories face the prospect that they could actually lose the election and their change of stance to put the focus squarely on a choice between Cameron and Brown and 6 ‘principles or pledges’ may well reflect that ‘reality’.  It won’t be good breakfast reading for Cameron (or Osbore) that YouGov shows the Tory lead cut to just 2 points.  If that lead is reflected in the polls Labour will be the largest party but with no overall majority.

Sunday Times: GORDON BROWN is on course to remain prime minister after the general election as a new Sunday Times poll reveals that Labour is now just two points behind the Tories. The YouGov survey places David Cameron’s Conservatives on 37%, as against 35% for Labour — the closest gap between the parties in more than two years. It means Labour is heading for a total of 317 seats, nine short of an overall majority, with the Tories languishing on a total of just 263 MPs. Such an outcome would mean Brown could stay in office and deny Cameron the keys to No 10. The poll result presents the Conservative leader with one of the greatest challenges of his leadership today as he makes the keynote speech to his party’s spring forum.

Perhaps rather more worrying for the Tories is that they appear to be saddled by Osbore – who is not revealing any  talent for ideas or communication. Simon Heffer, writing in The telegraph, puts the boot in with…..

Simon Heffer finds the Shadow Chancellor’s recent bout of lunatic posturing irksome. Heffer writes: “George Osborne is becoming a real problem. He gave a lecture on the economy earlier this week whose message I found incomprehensible. There will be cuts, he said. Good. But Dave Cameron, his boss, said shortly beforehand that there had better not be “swingeing” cuts. When is a cut not a cut? What makes a cut, if it be a cut, swingeing?

Heffer then places the ball in front of the posts, runs up and kicks… “What most annoyed me about Little George, though, was the despairing way in which I heard him announce on Radio 4 on Wednesday that “we” would have to “get” the salaries of bankers “down”. I concede that a couple of banks are largely owned by the taxpayer. However, most aren’t: and none totally is. So why does George feel it is his place, like some member of the Socialist Workers’ Party, to call for bankers to be paid less? Since when was the Conservative Party, should it win power, planning to Sovietise our economy in a fashion that would allow it to control bankers’ pay? And even if it were, what does it think this idiotic and unpleasantly illiberal move would achieve?

While I am no great fan of bankers getting paid vast amounts of money, the realpolitik is that unless every major economy in the world acts in concert on banker’s salaries , bonuses et al – the market will rule and the very high reward structure for banks will have to remain. Political posturing is fun for a while but then the harsh ays of reality kick in.  If Britain a banking sector, let alone one of the most effectrive in the world, we can’t control what the banks do in terms of rewards to the top people who make the money.

Heffer also suggests that Darling would do well to suspend the plan to tax at 50p.  This is a sensible proposal.  Economist will punch each other out of the way to get into a TV studio and claim that taxing at 50p will not raise a great deal of money and will simply cause those who do create wealth to find a more generous tax regime.  Lowering taxes, they say, is the way forward and is likely to raise more tax revenue in the medium term.

I do not relish five years with Gordon Brown as leader.  I do not relish five years with a Labour government which continues to erode civil liberties.  I do not relish five years of a Labour government which permits 20,000 council workers to enter homes without a warrant.

I do relish Labour choosing a new leader, getting rid of tired, dead wood, and trying to build a party to reflect a ‘future fair for all’ and which has a long hard look at geopolitics to see whether we really need to play policeman with America in the future, whether we need to continue, long term, in getting involved in long protracted and expensive military engagements overseas when policy might be better focused and directed on our own defence and relations with Europe and the Commonwealth.  Why… we may even be able to negotiate a sensible solution with Argentina on the Falklands to ensure the islanders are free and all benefit should oil be found?!  Good grief…. that sort of thinking won’t do at all… Sun readers will be coughing into their cornflakes at that idea.

It does seem that the weight of professional world opinion is with Labour in terms of the solution to the deficit and Darling does seem to be getting stronger – hopefully too strong for Brown, should he win, to parachute Ed Balls or any other acolyte into Number 11.

I don’t suppose Brown is vulnerable in his constituency?  Where is Alex Salmond when you need him?!  I suspect the Tory bloggers and twitterers will be a bit quiet this morning while they get their spinning jennies out to cast their ’silk’ later in the day!