The Government is not out of touch

I am fed up with constantly hearing that the Government as a whole and individuals within it are out of touch with real life.

They are not.  Even the rich ones have kids, go to work and own houses.  Yes they may have a bit more cash than the rest of us, but that does not make them out of touch.  That's like saying being poor is the default position of the human race and we should all aspire to poverty so we can keep in touch with our roots.  It's nonsense.  Look at Andrew Mitchell.  He had a crappy day, got wound up and acted like a prat to somebody who didn't deserve it.  Who can honestly say they haven't been rude to somebody they shouldn't have been rude to?  I'm not excusing him, I'm merely saying that he shows us that he's a bit of a twat when he's in a bad mood like most people in the world.. even Mother Theresa was said to be rude to her nuns at times.

If we are going to criticise the Government and the individuals within it then let us do it for the right reasons.

As a whole the Government has shown itself to be incompetent (e.g. train franchising, handing court interpreting over to ALS, two tier road tax, police cuts, attacks on legal aid, student tuition fees, etc) and populated by fools (Andrew Mitchell (who even if he is like everyone else still should have known better), George Osborne (who can't buy the right train ticket before travelling), Nick Clegg (too many reasons to mention), Ken Clarke (for shafting the CJS like certain footballers shaft cheap elderly prostitutes), Dave Cameron (well for everything really), etcetera).

In summary, Government is no more out of touch with real life than anybody else... but they are incompetent and foolish.

Comments

  1. Bystander 30 October 2012 at 18:09

    Nice!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. JKohl31 October 2012 at 14:11

      «handing court interpreting over to ALS»
      Please submit your experience here http://forums.parliament.uk/court-language-services/index.php?index,1

      Delete
  2. Richard12 November 2012 at 11:38

    Agreed Andrew Mitchell had had a bad day, and wasn't feeling conciliatory, but why does nobody say that the copper was in a ditto situation? Why he blazes did copper, that day, want to tell a senior minister to get off his bike & walk, rather than ride through the big gate like he had previously done?

    IMHO there were two own goals that day, there!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Defence Brief12 November 2012 at 12:00

      Have to agree that we've not heard much about what the officer said. Even people who are angry rarely let fly without a spark to ignite their temper. The truth though is that nobody cares what, if anything, the officer said... the media just wanted a Tory politician's scalp and that is what it got.

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Are items referred to in s.9’s as exhibits bound to be served?

  Background - CPS served a witness statement on me that exhibited two BWV clips that are potentially relevant to the Crown’s case and may have some relevance to the defence case insofar as they are likely to show the lighting and weather at the time events happened. Somebody has listed the clips as unused material rather than putting them in the exhibits folder that accompanies the served evidence. This raised an interesting (to me anyway) question about whether a party who exhibits an item in a statement is bound to serve it on their opponent. At court the judge took the view that the Crown were at liberty to classify items exhibited in s9s as unused material if they chose not to rely upon them in evidence. I took the view that if they are exhibited then they must be served along with the witness statement that exhibits the item and that the solution to a situation where the Crown say they are now unused is to edit the witness statement to remove the reference, by agreement with ...
More gibberish >>

Is there twice as much violent crime in the UK versus the USA?

Image
The tweet from Charlie Kirk I came across a screenshot of a Twitter post while on Facebook this morning. The original post now has 11,000 retweets and 23,000 likes on Twitter. As you can see from the picture somebody called Charlie Kirk, who is a right-wing American commentator, claims that there are 933 violent crimes in the UK per 100,000 people. This is more than double the rate he claims for the USA where he says there are only 399 violent crimes per 100,000 people. The UK doesn’t feel that violent to me, so is it true? We’re all gonna die According to the FBI, in 2016 there were 1,248,185 violent crimes committed across the whole of the USA. That is an increase of 4.1% on the 2015 figure but still represented only 386.3 violent crimes per 100,000 people . So, Mr Kirk appears to be slightly overestimating the violent crime in the USA. I should say that I am using the 2016 figures as those are the latest available on the FBI website, so maybe he has slightly differe...
More gibberish >>

Driving without insurance

Image
Insurance is a contract that remains in force until it expires or is cancelled As you may, or may not, know I specialise in motoring law and most of my work involves defending people accused of drink driving . With the drink driving often come other road traffic offences such as driving while disqualified and driving without insurance. It’s driving without insurance I want to talk about today because I think far too many police officers, solicitors, barristers and judges miss a key legal point when looking at these cases. I’ve received prosecution papers today for somebody accused of driving while disqualified and driving without insurance. The no insurance element is claim that the suspect did not tell the insurer about the disqualification. In his statement, the police officers says, “ [I] contacted [the insurer] who called me back informing me they would not consider the insurance policy valid as there were no convictions disclosed.” Looks like an open an...
More gibberish >>