Wednesday, June 05, 2013

Chris Grayling - the Gerald Ratner of Justice

From Brother Ivo:

The announcement that the Government now seeks to privatise the Courts has led Brother Ivo to begin wondering if it is time for the Conservative Party to change its name.

For centuries the party has been a place which gathered together those who were not opposed to change per se, but were nevertheless instinctively inclined to view iconoclasm with a high degree of scepticism. Persons with experience and a depth of understanding of our history and culture joined together to challenge the superficial and the merely fashionable.

Conservatives valued the Monarchy, the Established Church, Parliament, the unwritten Constitution and the Common Law. They were patriotic and respected the Armed Forces. They recognised that the whole country benefitted from a meritocracy that enabled leaders to rise to service from every part of society. Thus, Lord Roberts rose from private soldier to Commander of the Army; Tom Denning from draper's son to Master of the Rolls; Betty Boothroyd from chorus girl to Speaker of the House of Commons; and Margaret Thatcher, a shopkeeper's daughter, to the Premiership itself.

Conservatives learn from history because they still have regard for it and give time to its study and understanding: they appreciate lessons from the good and bad in classical civilisations, the Reformation, the Civil War, the Enlightenment, the French and American Revolutions, and the great reforms of Victorian England.

It was this valuing of the past which made the Conservative Party instinctively prefer pragmatism to short-term populism, and it traditionally had the sophistication to know that great institutions, like great wine, need time to mature. It distrusted the impulse of the 'progressive' to 'shake things up', knowing that it was precisely that - an intellectually adolescent expression of carelessness married to an emotional lack of self-esteem creating a personality desperate to make its mark.

You cannot be a British Conservative without appreciating balance.Thus the doctrine of the separation of powers between the Legislature, Administration and Executive was developed to reign in the potential of the powerful to become over-mighty. The traditional expression of sovereignty (pre-EU) was expressed in that subtle balanced phrase - 'The Queen in Parliament'.

So many of our current problems -and those to come - have their roots in our having turned our backs on our traditional understandings and values, encouraged by management gurus and the short-termism of focus-group-driven politics.

When David Cameron decided to alter legislatively the institution marriage, Brother Ivo began to suspect that here was a man who not only did not understand that institution, but that he did not value institutions themselves. The drive to privatise the Courts adds weight to this suspicion.

If we were to identify the characteristics of a nation state, we would note very early that at its core must be a judicial system. Protecting the realm and respecting and protecting the hard-won rights of the subject were the two most important roles of the monarch who embodied the identity of the people.

A legal system has three irreducible aspects: it is normative, institutional, and coercive.

A law will lay down rules of behaviour - thou shalt do this, thou shalt not do that - but by itself that does not make a law. The rules of a game or a club or a religious tenet will say as much. To become a law there must be additional features. There needs to be a mechanism to determine whether the law has been infringed, and to manage the process of determination. Thus a law needs to have a recognised institutional structure to differentiate it from mere vigilantism. Finally, a law must be coercive; unless the state can authoritatively enforce its laws, we do not have a law: we might have a rule, a morality or a convention, but it cannot be regarded as a law.

It may be a rule that a gentleman rises when a lady enters the room, but in the absence of a penalty or a structural mechanism to adjudicate, it is no law.

For society to be stable, confident and trusting in its government, the independence and integrity of that judicial system is paramount. One should be very, very cautious indeed before interfering with it and risking undermining that confidence.

When one understands the Law and its institutions, it becomes clear that these matters are closely bound up to our national sovereignty. When a nation state outsources to an outside body its responsibility to treat its subjects fairly, we have manifestations of impotence such as the case of Abu Qatada. Nobody expected such problems to arise or to become so intractable and expensive, yet those who tinkered with our national institutions and sovereignty for the sake of selling a few more Morris Minors to the Continent backed 'the wrong side of history, as our progressive friends like to grandiosely proclaim.

Brother Ivo is in two minds over this metaphor; unsure as to whether we have shackled ourselves to a lunatic or a corpse.

So we come on to the proposal to privatise the Courts.

It is worth reminding ourselves of a little history. Once justice was very local; the laws comparatively simple and comprehensible, and the vast majority of cases were determined by local Justices of the Peace (an ancient and honourable institution) and Judges. These people knew their communities: they knew the locality, the police and the villains.

Unfortunately, this was all changed by those whose self-confidence led them to believe they could 'rationalise' the system.

Paradoxically, the more sentences lightened, diversionary programmes were developed and early releases became the norm, the more we seemed to spend and the more determined we became to complicate our proceedures to preserve our criminals from encountering inconvenience and discomfort.

Courts, police stations and probation services were closed under the bureaucrat's grand design. The Legal Services Commission reduced (and continue to reduce) the number of solicitors firms permitted to undertake the work.

It was intended to save cost, yet it largely resulted in budget-shifting. Perhaps one department had fewer buildings to maintain - yet the police, probation officers, interpreters, lawyers, magistrates, defendants and witnesses all now had to travel further on a daily basis. Importantly, defendants were no longer judged by those from their own communities.

Functionality was not improved.

The recent changes to Legal Aid have already created the obscene chaos of housing clients facing eviction in London being told they had to instruct specialist lawyers in Swansea who were then desperately trying to find a local lawyer agent in London to resist an eviction but failing because nobody local had neither the expertise or availability because they no longer had the incentive to keep up with the law in that area.

Incidentally, when the Government bemoans the state of the modern High Street, has anyone considered the costs and effects upon such communities of the removal of local justice? Justice determined at an appropriate level was a value to towns with courthouses which the rationalising bureaucrat never thought of considering, yet any true Conservative would know that our towns were established where they were for reasons, amongst which were market, military, meeting and moot.

The more justice is removed from the community, the less respect it enjoys: remote justice is suspected and the coordination of it magnifies the costs exponentially. The Ministry of Justice budget amounts to £2bn per annum. It has decided to virtually eliminate civil Legal Aid for most ordinary people to save £350million per annum. One wonders if our rationalising bureaucrats have engaged in joined-up thinking to liaise with the nation's diversity coordinators about the £125 million pa costs of Court interpreters alone? Immigration and multiculturalism that places a low priority on a common language imposes massive unseen costs across the board.

To be fair to the Government in this important regard, they do at least now publish the figures, and if you would like to know where the £2bn Ministry of Justice budget is spent, it is readily available.

What do you think of £110,000 pa being paid for breathalysing staff? Or £36m paid to Capita for 'temporary interim managers'? In 2012, ATOS was paid £1,054,200,000 for 'IT services'. Cable & Wireless received £26million for video conferencing, presumably for many conversations that formally occurred by folk taking a short walk around town.

One cannot read these figures without concluding that the Government is already a long way down the road in its out-placing of legal services to the private sector. Surely true conservatives would be questioning whether we ought to be continuing in this direction. If companies like Capita and G4S are making their money by centralising functions, outsourcing processes and solving issues by corporate strategies, what prospect is there of anyone asking about the return of local justice to local communities?

In terms of fairness alone, if very vulnerable litigants need additional help to understand the dilemmas in which they find themselves, how might that be addressed by a corporate 'pile 'em high, sell 'em cheap' model of providing legal services? Access to justice is a PR slogan: it no longer reflects the reality in many cases.

Above all, where is the possibility of these companies being made leaner and fitter by competition? The natural Conservative catches the whiff if crony capitalism when large companies begin the seduction of Government. Do you think such companies buy exhibition stands at the party conferences that increasingly exclude grassroots members? Party volunteers may not get a voice at conferences or access to ministers - but we all know who does.

One of the dreadful consequences of embracing European traditions over our own has been the de facto loss of the Office of the Lord Chancellor. He held an anomalous position by being simultaneously part of the Executive, Administration and Legislature, yet we Anglo-Saxons did once put our trust in the character of our people, whether as Monarch or principal government official. They used to be lawyers of considerable stature, but that went when Jack Straw got his judicial tights in a twist and was confused as to whether he was a Lord Chancellor Arthur or Minister of Justice Martha - wig or no wig - all very confusing.

We now have in place former Social Democrat, Chris Grayling, who started work in television and then went into management consultancy. One presumes he knows the outsourcing mindset of Capita and G4S rather well.

Perhaps a few of our true remaining Conservatives might like to tell him that the great British Institutions evolved because fine people devoted themselves to public service. The Gerald Ratner approach to business may have its role in the market place, but it does not belong at the heart of the administration of Justice.

(Posted by Brother Ivo)


Blogger bluedog said...

An excellent post, Brother Ivo. As the British state continues to abdicate its long held and hard won responsibilities there are other claimants waiting in the wings.

What if the Muslim Council of Britain, funded by our close friends and allies the Saudi monarchy, decides bid for the privatised courts and rolls out sharia courts in all localities where Muslims exceed 10% of the population? Communicants will understand that criminal courts cannot exist without the coercion power to which Brother Ivo alludes. Naturally the Wahabi imans administering justice in relevant localties would be inclined to hire fellow Muslims in the role of police.

Perhaps the British Muslim Police will start by arresting all 'married' homosexuals.

O what a tangled web we weave.

The answer of course to this daily dose of folly is the destruction of the Conservative Party and its ideological partner in crime, the Labour Party. Any Conservative or Labour MP with the merest unease about the downward spiral in British society should immediately defect to UKIP, to raise again all that is good in British life.

The stupidity of the British ruling elite defies comprehension.

5 June 2013 at 09:14  
Blogger Tony B said...

Neither does it have any place in the NHS. And it is interesting that you mention Labour as partners in crime, who argue that government cuts are ideologically motivated, but then say they wouldn't change them. Just who do they think they are fooling? Our political system has become a charade, they are all there to do what big business asks them to do. but whereas we know broadly what policies blue, red, and yellow will work to, purple have no real policies at all as far as I can tell.

5 June 2013 at 09:26  
Blogger Gnostic said...

A very thoughtful and carefully crafted post, Brother Ivo.

The traditional Conservative ethos was defenestrated alongside Margaret Thatcher. What was left (sic) couldn't wait to urinate our sovereignty away against the first Brussels wall they encountered.

While I am alarmed at this latest proposal of political lunacy from the Westminster asylum, I'm not surprised. That I, and the majority of the electorate didn't vote for any of this dismal rabble offers no comfort.

5 June 2013 at 09:50  
Blogger Jim McLean said...

Cranmer and Brother Ivo should be part of every school's core curriculum. Not just for excellent historical overviews, or sociological trends but also lessons in how to write elegantly and with precision.

5 June 2013 at 09:52  
Blogger Lady Anne said...


You say they're there to do what "big business" asks them to do - but is it? Or are they rather there to do what the EU, or even the Bilderberg Group, say they are to do?

The whole gay marriage business is a case in point. It came from nowhere, and swims against the wishes of everyone I know, and much of the Conservative party grass roots. It appears to be slowly passing into law against all probability. As one quote has it, "Public opinion does not change this fast in free societies. Either opinion is not changing as fast as it appears to be, or society is not as free."

Not since King Henry decided to ditch the Catholic Church and start the C of E has there been such a swift change of scenery. And we all know he was an autocratic monarch, who was pursuing a specific end. Much of the country then had either no say at all - or didn't dare in case they lost rather more than their jobs! Society wasn't free then - is it any more free now?

5 June 2013 at 09:52  
Blogger G. Tingey said...

Horribly true.

"follow the money"

5 June 2013 at 09:58  
Blogger Anglican said...

Is it time to found a Real Conservative Party?

5 June 2013 at 10:07  
Blogger David Hussell said...

Brother Ivo. An excellent, carefully crafted post. Thank you.
This is no longer a democracy, and only barely a nation state. It is an elected dictatorship. All three "main" parties have lost their way, almost totally. We have been fed lies. Our status as a independent nation state has been stolen from us by stealth, cunning and half truths. The so called gay marriage thing is a creature of the EU and its God defying laws. This shredding of justice is yet another step to make true conservatives shudder.
Ukip and true political independence is the only path that can save this country from tyranny and even further excesses of Godlessness.
God Save The Queen.
And to do this, vote Ukip !

5 June 2013 at 10:30  
Blogger John Wrake said...

Is it not time to turn away from the tainted view that Party politics holds the key to the necessary reform. All those Parties currently represented in Parliament have turned their backs on our Constitution - it matters not whether from ignorance or expediency or malice.

Nothing can better express the current folly than the fact that, on the day when the Queen leads her people to a service of thanksgiving in Westminster Abbey recalling her Coronation, The House of Lords, full of political placemen, votes in favour of a Bill, which, if it becomes Law, will force the Queen to break her Coronation Oath.

That the Prime Minister should take part in that Service while forcing through the Bill in question is worthy only of the madhouse.

It is time that those with a love for their country read again that Great Charter, a written part of our Constitution, which set out the safeguards to our freedom from despots.

John Wrake

5 June 2013 at 10:36  
Blogger Mrs Proudie of Barchester said...

An excellent, excellent post Brother Ivo...

5 June 2013 at 10:38  
Blogger Tony B said...

Lady Anne

I suspect big business and Bilderberg are essentially the same thing.

5 June 2013 at 11:00  
Blogger Lady Anne said...

You're probably right, Tony!

Your Grace, could we have a "Like" button for our posts on here?

5 June 2013 at 11:02  
Blogger david kavanagh said...

Brother Ivo,

Well we just don't have the old conservative party anymore. It is dead.

So they are privitising the courts (as well as the NHS, The Royal Mail& Britain nuclear research facilities) are they?

I thought one of the key principals of government was that they raised taxes to pay for things like law and order, not raise taxes and put the money into private companies, for their profit?

What next?

The armed forces? Why not have mercenaries for hire, rather than a long standing professional army?

Why note sell off the Church of England, with its massive investment portfolios?

5 June 2013 at 11:16  
Blogger david kavanagh said...

Lady Anne,

The Bilderburg group is just one of those shadowy organisations which the global illuminate use to control the rest of the world, such as the UN & The council on foreign relations. The illuminate report to us Jews and we really run the show on behalf of shape shifting reptiles from a space time tunnel in the distant future.

Didn't you know that?

5 June 2013 at 11:19  
Blogger John Wrake said...

My comment has not appeared, so I will repeat it.

Is it not time to turn away from the worn-out fiction that political Parties are the answer to our current problems.

All the political Parties currently represented in Parliament have turned their backs on our Constitution, whether from ignorance, expediency or malice doesn't matter.

Nothing better sums up the current chaos than the fact that on the day that the Queen leads Her people in a Service of Thanksgiving in Westminster Abbey for Her 60 years of service since Her Coronation - a Service in which the Prime Minister reads a Lesson as representative of Her people, The House of Lords, full of political placemen, approves a Bill being pushed through Parliament by the same Prime Minister, which, if it becomes law, will require the Queen to break her Coronation Oath.
This is the politics of the madhouse.

It is time that those who love their country read again that Great Charter which set out the safeguards to our freedom from despots.

John Wrake

5 June 2013 at 11:54  
Blogger Johnny Rottenborough said...

Persons with experience and a depth of understanding of our history and culture

As a great Conservative once said: ‘England is the stage on which the drama of English history was played and the setting within which the English became conscious of themselves as a people.’

I won’t embarrass Brother Ivo by naming him. Suffice to say that Brother Ivo, discomfited by the policies necessary to maintain England as the stage of the English, was moved to protest against him and, in all likelihood, celebrated when he and the Conservative Party went their separate ways, one to glory and the other to embrace Brussels, mass immigration, gay marriage and constitutional vandalism.

5 June 2013 at 11:58  
Blogger Nick said...

Insightful and perceptive as usual YG. I wish I could say the same of our Prime Minister. Presumably, the courts will follow in the footsteps of the NHS and set up in our local supermarkets - Kangaroo courtrs with nectar points.

This kind of privatisation is the Government really saying "We don't really value this institution any more". It reduces its importance to that of the corner shop and people will lose respect for it and confidence in it. Of course, Mr Cameron knows a lot about devaluing institutions.

It's also ironic that the government is trying to save a few million by creating British Justice plc, when it has just wasted £4 billion on its SSM deal with Labour

One other point, which I make at the risk of provoking YG's wrath, wasn't it the late Margaret Thatcher who started this trend of selling off the nations assets, turning the nation into a penny bazaar?

5 June 2013 at 12:15  
Blogger Corrigan said...

Privatizing justice, eh? We'll at least the neo-Liberals (for that is what the Tory Pary actually is - kind of like the Labour Party) have finally come out of the closet about it. We always knew that justice was the property of whoever could buy the best legal team; now we just buy the court lock, stock and barrel. Very business frinedly. Cuts the middleman right out, don't you think?

5 June 2013 at 12:21  
Blogger IanCad said...

Thanks for a most interesting post Brother Ivo

Quite the history lesson in fact.

If ever the Conservative party needed a reappraisal of its purpose it is now.
UKIP is not the solution but it may be the catalyst through which a revived CP will emerge.

I had no idea who Gerald Ratner was.Wow! I bet he wished he had kept his big mouth shut.

Your usage of the word "Moot" had me checking my dictionary. I have often used it, and to my shame, I now realise, in an entirely incorrect manner. I always understood it to mean "Needless" or "Irelevant."
Can't wait until my wife uses it again. That's one argument I will win.

5 June 2013 at 12:54  
Blogger Peter D said...

What a descent as a nation! From men like Chancellor More who advised the Crown, to this political, self serving numpty.

5 June 2013 at 12:56  
Blogger Mr Integrity said...

Chancellor More burnt protestant 'heretics' and never repented of same.

5 June 2013 at 14:24  
Blogger David Hussell said...

No we do not want any burnings, but we do need a functioning Common Law based system of justice. So we need out of the wretched EU Court and out of the whole EU totalitarian political project. Bring back nation state based democracy with accountable politicians in Westminster.

5 June 2013 at 14:40  
Blogger Jay Bee said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

5 June 2013 at 14:42  
Blogger Jay Bee said...

These revelations about the legal system come as no surprise. Undermining the institutions is all part of the plan. Systematic demolition and re-engineering of Society.
The Conservative Party is deceiving the electorate by sailing under a false flag. The Cameroons are social liberals, a reckless band of trendies with nothing but elitist contempt for anyone patriotic or anything worth preserving. Reasonable concerns about seismic issues like SSM, Mass Immigration, and EU Dominance are brushed aside, and questioners dismissed as suffering from whatever "phobia" political correctness assigns to the subject under discussion. I will not vote for any branch of the LibLabCon Common Purpose conspiracy. A plague on the lot of them.

5 June 2013 at 14:49  
Blogger Marie1797 said...

Brother Ivo brilliant post thank you. So they are doing with Justice what New Labour did in 98/99 with the Benefits Agy and Job-centres, centralisation with farming out to private firms, SERCO in the BA case. The service worsened and costs far more to administer in the end. Claimants or customers as they had to be known as were confused as they couldn't talk with a local advisor who stood right next to them anymore but had to ring a centralised number from the job-centre. Customer telephones had to be installed in each JC and the staff there didn't need to keep up with changes in entitlements and regulations. They are now just a glorified stationery cupboard and messenger service.

To do this with the Justice system though is far more risky and dangerous.
Bluedog makes a brilliant point that this government of greedy socialist nitwits that are not the Conservative party had not even thought about in their short sighted fever for selling off to the highest bidder and centralisation.

The obsession with centralisation and corporatisation has more I think to do with getting inline with the EU in order that we can become a full member in the future than it has to do with saving money.

UKIP is the only way to go.

5 June 2013 at 15:00  
Blogger David Hussell said...

Well said Jay Bee.

5 June 2013 at 15:26  
Blogger Nick said...

Indeed, well said Jay Bee.

The damage this government is doing to our "democratic" system of politics is incalculable. It will get to the point, in fact has done already, where nobody will believe anything a party says before an election. Once in power they will please themselves, doing deals with any party, including the opposition, to get their obsessive and ill-conceived plans into place, and put two fingers up to the people, voters and party workers, who put them there.

It would be remarkable just to see a party stick to its manifesto pledges for a change. it really begs the question: Why go out and vote at all? Certainly, my cross will never appear next to the name of any Lab/Lib/Con candidate EVER AGAIN

5 June 2013 at 16:34  
Blogger David Hussell said...

I never considered myself a revolutionary at all, but a natural conservative in faith and politics. But I conjecture that the blatant disrespect for democracy, and the other institutions upon which a well governed society depends, is now so advanced across all the "main" parties (plus the BBC) that we have a relatively narrow window of opportunity to return Westminster, from which so much flows, to decency and normality before something far less palatable becomes necessary. It is a chilling thought.

5 June 2013 at 17:29  
Blogger The Explorer said...

David K (11:19)

I don't believe that about the reptiles: I think you're having us on.

If you're right, I think you should team up with Richard Dawkins and his Flying Spaghetti Monster.

You could also team up with Bertrand Russell and his orbiting teapot. (I know he's dead, but if you're in touch with beings from the future, you shouldn't have any trouble reaching back into the past.)

5 June 2013 at 17:38  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Calm down Ivo. They’re only talking about privatising the court administration. A damn good idea too, if you ask this man. Works well with prisons and prisoner transport, so why not ?

Now listen. If you want to live free of socialist cradle to grave bollocks, we need more of this kind of thing. It’s not going to happen on its own, you know. One would especially like to see the Benefits Office fully privatised. Just think of the savings that would achieve, especially if the private people running it were forced to make good overpayments out of their profit margin, as well as fraud if it went undetected by negligence.

pip pip !

5 June 2013 at 18:34  
Blogger Peter D said...

Integrity said ...
!Chancellor More burnt protestant 'heretics' and never repented of same.

Well no, he didn't burn anybody - the State did.

Thomas More supported the Catholic Church and saw the Protestant Reformation as heresy and a direct threat to the unity of both church and society. His actions have to be placed within the turbulent religious climate of the time.

You do know that Thomas More has been added to the Church of England's calendar of Saints and Heroes of the Christian Church, along with with John Fisher?

There were six burned at the stake for heresy during More's chancellorship; a standard punishment for heresy that continued to be used by both Catholics and Protestants during the religious upheaval of the times.

Thomas More was trying to prevent a repetition in England of the 100,000 deaths in the German Peasants' Revolt of 1524-25 - inspired by protestantism. He and others, including Henry VIII, openly blamed these deaths on the socially destabilising effects of Luther's heresy. He was also trying to prevent other ills, such as alleged eternal agony in Hell for the souls of those misguided into heresy.

He stood by the Monarch until his resignation, always gave his best advice and acted on his conscience for what he understood to be the spiritual and temporal good of those in his time.

Who can we say this of today?

5 June 2013 at 18:55  
Blogger Albert said...

Conservatives valued the Monarchy, the Established Church, Parliament, the unwritten Constitution and the Common Law.

Ah yes, the days before conservatives voted to put HMQ in the position in which she will be expected to violate his coronation oath about God's laws, so that they can undermine the constitution and unravel the establishment of the poor old CofE.

I think Anglican @1007 has a point! Of course, to give the new Conservative Party an Anglican feel, I would suggest it should be called "the continuing Conservative Party."

5 June 2013 at 19:24  
Blogger Albert said...

Sorry, I mean her coronation oath - I'm not sure what happened there!

5 June 2013 at 19:24  
Blogger David Hussell said...

From memory, I recall that the revolt of the German peasants has to be seen in the context of a series of bad harvests and general economic woes. The nobles overreacted slaughtering thousands. Luther lost some moral high ground, as we would say in these "enlightened" times, by being understood to be egging on the atrocities of the nobles, Luther being a law and order man in many ways.
No matter how hideous the burnings here were, on both sides, they were small beer compared to the scale of events in continental europe.

5 June 2013 at 19:32  
Blogger David Hussell said...

What about : "The New Conservative Party". Or would give the game away?

5 June 2013 at 19:34  
Blogger Albert said...



5 June 2013 at 19:35  
Blogger Corrigan said...


It really doesn't matte whether it works (administratively) or not - the point is that it is an abdication of the most basic responsibility of government. If the state can't be arsed to do even that much for itself, why should anyone care about anything?

5 June 2013 at 20:00  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

How about the ‘Continuity Conservative Party’ or even the 'Provisional Conservative Party'

5 June 2013 at 20:02  
Blogger alan baker said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

5 June 2013 at 20:07  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Corrigan dear chap. There was a time when we ALL cared. But since we joined the EU, those who are elected to run the UK are elsewhere engaged. The only people who ARE arsed to do anything are private enterprise. And they do it for the profit, and they are increasingly overseas outfits. That is how far the UK has fallen.

For those, including this man, who still cares, vote UKIP. You know it makes sense...

5 June 2013 at 20:10  
Blogger David Hussell said...

I know that it's trite but the phrase, "knows the cost of everything but the value of nothing", really does apply to many senior members of this government. How did the Conservative Party allow itself to be taken over by such soulless people with no "feel" for what is right and proper, decent and true. These men have no bottom.
I shall be off to the Ukip SE conference on Friday, and that should give me a lift. We have to displace these awful people.

5 June 2013 at 20:42  
Blogger Owl said...

UKIP is the conservative party.

LibLabCon has had nothing to do with conservatism for many, many years. It just took a long time for for the public (and many Conservative MPs) to realise it.

5 June 2013 at 20:51  
Blogger bluedog said...

Mr IanCad @ 12.54, Mr Gerald Ratner was an entrepreneur who set up a chain of jewellery shops selling cheaply priced items that were within the budget of office girls. When asked what he thought about his product, Ratner famously observed, 'It's crap'.

There was shock and outrage, but in fact GR had simply told the truth.

5 June 2013 at 21:28  
Blogger Peter D said...

David Hussell
"These men have no bottom."

Wanna bet? Half the trouble is that some are fixated on their own and others bottoms!

5 June 2013 at 22:59  
Blogger Masrek Rollin said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

6 June 2013 at 01:29  
Blogger david kavanagh said...


It's a well known conspiracy theory, which too many people believe, so Perhaps a tad bit of irony there.

6 June 2013 at 09:34  
Blogger The Explorer said...


As in my response. Ever seen 'Borat'?

6 June 2013 at 11:02  
Blogger david kavanagh said...


Yep, nothing like British Jewish comic actors amusing us all.

PS-I was thinking of introducing Inspector to Brüno Gehard. I am sure that they'd be good friends in no time.... or perhaps Johnny Rottenborough to Admiral General Haffaz Aladeen...

6 June 2013 at 12:30  
Blogger Save Probation said...

Failing Grayling is currently selling off the Probation Service to G4S. Read more about that over at my Save Probation Blog.

Very soon an individual will be able to be investigated by G4S police staff, prosecuted by a G4S prosecutor, in a G4S Court, then taken in a G4S security van to a G4S prison, to be locked in by G4S Prison Officers and rehabilitated on release by G4S Probation Officers. This is madness!!

We need to stop this man before we have no Justice system left.

16 June 2013 at 01:25  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Lift a finger on behalf of convicted criminals – surely, thou be having a laugh ?

16 June 2013 at 12:13  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older