Should McKenzie Friends be more questionable and less trustworthy than solicitors, barristers and judges?
Especially when they work pro bono as we do?
It’s all about money, isn’t it: for he who pays the piper plays the tune! Does the legal profession care whether money in circulation adheres to the Bank of England Act 1694? Do they understand what is dishonest with our money system? Would a book on Capitalism and Morality make a difference?
Legal professionals are paid by Legal Aid or from private wealth. Whether they do or don’t achieve ‘justice’ seems to be a question of which barrister is better at the ping pong that judges observe before them.
I’m told that judgments are written before hearings and that barristers and judges agree them between each other.
It’s a game of nit-picking, without any holistic or systemic approach. It’s an opportunity for abusing power and position. It’s an invitation to commit fraud and malfeasance in public office. Continue reading
The future of Legal Aid and Litigants in Person: can we Safeguard Access to Justice? was an excellent event chaired by Joshua Rozenberg and organised by the Halsbury Law Exchange last night 22.09.2016.
One of the four panellists was Steve Hynes, the author of “Austerity Justice”.
In the morning I was cheered up with “Go on, Love”, as my walking sticks took me to the tube.
“Carry on, Soldier”, I thought when I spoke with a retired Crown Prosecutor who used to work with Austin Mitchell MP on the Campaign for a National Legal Service (CNLS). On behalf of the Forum for Stable Currencies, Austin had submitted Early Day Motions to ensure Public Credit for Public Purposes from 2001 to 2011.
On the legal issue of the supposed ‘neutrality’ and ‘independence’ of the Judiciary:
- who decides on its budget?
- who finances court buildings, judges, court staff, prisons?
- the money does not seem to come out of Governments budgets – but last night everybody seemed to assume that Government is responsible for the quality of the ‘justice system’.
On the financial power to control, maybe we need to go back to the Enforcement of the Bank of England Act 1694:
- it made trading ‘financial products’ punishable – at three times the value of the trade!
Lord WARNER, as a former Director of Social Services, feels strongly about the need for protecting children in care from predatory adults.
If you click on the image, you get to Parliament Live. The next reading will be on Wednesday at 3.45pm.
Lord Warner wants to ensure the integrity of the proposed ‘personal advisors’ by requesting:
- safeguards re performance standards
- vetting re suitability
- a public register.
He also mentions these examples from his work experience: Continue reading
Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident, dear Political Group Leaders,
In the wake of the UK Referendum and its repercussions, this is to request you to take into account the implementation of EU Resolution 2016/2575(RSP) on Safeguarding the Best Interests of the Child across the EU on the Basis of Petitions addressed to the EU Parliament. UK and non-UK parents and children deeply require our support for their future. In the UK, 23% of the prison population were in ‘care’, but official statistics show trends of ‘forced removals’ and ‘forced adoptions’ rising consistently since 1994: http://chn.ge/28VXiEz
For a number of reasons, the UK has been worst in offending the UN Convention of Child Rights and we therefore had to ‘go to Europe’ – with 30 parents hoping to get their children returned – relying on EU Directives, after the UK Judiciary, Parliament and Government had failed us badly.
International Reports with recommendations by the UN and the Council of Europe have had no effect, but the Fact-Finding visit of MEPs and other PETI activities have – yet only as a small beginning! As further encouraging signs, involvements by Tatjana Zdanoka MEP and Yana Toom MEP in individual cases resulted in success in England and Scotland by having children returned which is, however, extremely rare.