Hands up if you like charles clarke
Update: And this…
Out on the wilder shores of that Free Republic of the Blogs, a consensus has emerged. It is that the restrictions on compensation have nothing to do with budgets. Rather, the restriction is an attempt to head off future trouble.
Given that more and more laws have been passed that hack away at our rights, and given that the courts rule, time and again, that these are illegal and in breach of the Human Rights Act, perhaps he expects a logjam of cases of wrongful imprisonment to come before the courts?
Is it me or did it just go cold in here?
Posted on April 20th, 2006 at 8:58pm under Affronts to democracy, UK politics
| Related posts... • It was 60 years ago today • Uranium rights vs human rights • New Labour and human rights: words and deeds |
• Permalink • Trackback • Subscribe |
|
|
|
• 2 Comments |
Praise indeed given what you know I think of your prose style. Ta.
Watch tomorrow’s Times for a cleaned up version.
[...] I can’t add much more to what has already been said about the appalling Clarke’s comments about cutting compensation to the victims of such miscarriages, except to add my voice to those condemning him for the noxious man that he is. Only someone completely devoid of any moral compass could even think of making such a suggestion. [...]