The cost of innocence

By | | ,
Comments Off on The cost of innocence

It seems that too many people are being found innocent of offenses by the magistrates courts, so not only are these people having the cheek to not just pay fines for things they didn’t do but they’re costing the Government money by proving they didn’t do anything in the first place. This is obviously a shocking state of affairs, but worry not for it has come to my attention (via comments over at Leg Irons) that steps are proposed to address this terrible problem.

The cunning plan that our glorious leaders have come up with, is that if due to some mistaken belief in your own innocence you feel the need to not just accept a fine and any other associated punishment and have the temerity to go to court and actually win – well then to punish you for such behavior they’ll no longer pay your costs. Obviously this will in many cases mean that actually being innocent and defending that innocence will be more costly than just accepting the initial penalty , but you can’t put a price on justice can you and in these difficult times we all have to chip in to keep the wheels of state turning. It’s not as though there’s any risk that if there was no cost to prosecuting people, that the Government and their agents would be any less diligent in ensuring that there was a case to answer before taking 2innocent” people to court.

All that said it does appear that a few hot heads and self-interest groups are objecting, disreputable types like the Tory party, the bar association and the like. If for some odd reason you think it might be terribly unfair to be put of pocket by proving your innocence then here is a petition against it.

0

Will no one think of the MP’s?

By | |
Comments Off on Will no one think of the MP’s?

I recently commented on how terribly ghastly being asked to pay back some money was for our beloved parliamentarians. I obviously didn’t realise just how terrible it was, but it seems to be causing some sort of mental aberration in Frank Field. Still using the defence that as he only claimed 30 to 50 % of what he was allowed to it must all have been utterly required for his parliamentary duties. He then goes on to say:

“Robert Verkaik in today’s Independent goes further. He argues that Sir Thomas Legg’s decision is not akin to retrospective changes to the criminal law, but to the changing of tax loopholes or windfall charges on corporations who have benefited from unintended legislative consequences.

The charges arising from the closing of tax loopholes, however, are never retrospectively imposed.”

Ok, once you’ve stopped laughing. I’m sure you can see the terrible effects the stress of having to pay back some money must have had on this poor poor man. The wind fall taxes certainly weren’t retrospectively imposed after the profits were made, the changes to VED in 2008 also obviously weren’t retrospective, and the tax man will never come after you years after you’ve made a mistake on your tax and had it seemingly approved and ask for it all back, plus interest. Oh and this Government has never argued:

“that retrospective taxation requires carefully scrutiny for its justification, but it is capable of being justified by sufficiently strong arguments.”

Obviously the only sensible way forward out of this mess is to create another bit of “non-retrospective” law to let them all off the hook and pay them suitable compensation for the mental anguish that being forced to lift their snouts biefly from the trough brief has obviously caused.

Update Anna Raccoon also points out the
‘pre-owned asset tax’ amongst others none of which could possibly be construed as retrospective tax or legislation, as those are bad.

0

Expenses the whinging

By | |
Comments Off on Expenses the whinging

A bit late to press with this one, I blame work and other commitments so just for a change I will be linking to all sorts of other people that have already said what I’m thinking far more clearly than I will.

After a quiet summer the MPs are back to find that Sir Thomas Legg has completed his report and decided that an awful lot of them should really repay a small amount of the money they’ve fraudulently taken from us over the years. Amazingly enough this suggestion has met with a wailing and gnashing of teeth and cries of “being close to minimum wage” and roulette wheel justice even from the likes of the normally sane Frank Field. In fact so painful is it for these honourable members to have to pay back some of their ill gotten gains that they’re threatening to sue or even (can you believe it?) resign. Yes it really is that terrible for them, so bad that the main parties are actually working together to deal with this horrible catastrophe.
Continue reading →

0