| Magpies urge FA to punish De Jong Newcastle write to the Football Association asking for action to be taken against Nigel De Jong for breaking Hatem Ben Arfa's leg. news.bbc.co.uk |
Sir Paul Stephenson must not tolerate police abuse of power | Fiona Murphy Until the police is fully accountable, members of the public should not be criticised for taking legal action against themIn a letter reported by the Guardian, the Metropolitan police commissioner Sir Paul Stephenson claims that members of the public are making speculative legal action against the police, with lawyers gaining large fees. But, as a solicitor specialising in such actions, I find these claims bear no resemblance to my own clients' experience. It is precisely because the Met has permitted a culture of impunity to take hold that people are forced into the civil courts to seek some semblance of redress.The motivations of those assaulted, falsely imprisoned or maliciously prosecuted by the police is to achieve accountability. These cases concern allegations of criminal conduct but convictions of police officers remain extremely rare. In the 12 years of this firm's operation, and despite hundreds of successful civil claims, we have seen criminal prosecutions in a handful of cases and convictions in two cases only.In our view the reason is straightforward: the quality of most investigations remains shockingly poor and the police's commitment to achieving successful disciplinary or criminal outcomes is patchy at best. The culture of impunity has been challenged, but not changed.A concerning feature of our clients' experience is the lack of public attention brought to bear on the abuses exposed by this litigation: the Met is not alone in imposing confidentiality clauses as a precondition of compromise. And statements in open court, which once served to highlight state abuse, are no longer available in false imprisonment and malicious prosecution cases.Last week I attended a conference to mark the 10th anniversary of the Human Rights Act being passed in to law. Senior judicial figures presented papers concerning the sea change in legal thinking in London, Belfast and Dublin brought about by human rights law. Our contribution was at a more mundane level – we were asked to talk about the practical realities of representing victims.The most practical reality of all is the availability of public funding. Legal aid practitioners have become well used to justifying every penny of public funds they spend and hourly rates have fallen in real terms by two thirds since 1994.The restrictions have seen several legal aid firms close and those that remain are overwhelmed with enquiries from victims who cannot find representation.We see little evidence that police and Home Office lawyers are required to operate to similar standards of accountability. Admittedly, damages for human rights abuses are modest but it is the conduct of the state's own lawyers that determines the overall legal costs. Sir Paul is simply wrong to assert that claimants are not at risk on costs if they decline an early offer.Police forces have become more comfortable with early admissions of liability and the provision of apologies. These have real meaning for victims. They mitigate damages and dramatically reduce legal costs. Similarly, forces have proven willing to engage in alternative dispute resolution including availing of opportunities to involve our clients in ensuring that lessons are learned. We anticipate that this improved dialogue was influenced by an improved human rights culture within policing at a senior level, but it would appear that Sir Paul is moving against the tide in his letter to the home secretary.It is ironic that Sir Paul is directing his communications to the home secretary, when it is the Home Office that is the least responsible in its own response to human rights litigation. Their lawyers are paralysed by the inability to obtain instructions and costs are increased by an institutional reluctance to apologise and admit liability at an early stage. In consequence highly meritorious claims are litigated to the door of the court in contravention of everything that the Woolf reforms of civil justice were intended to achieve.So, my message to Sir Paul is to get his own house in order: concern yourself with ensuring that your officers are accountable to the rule of law – that is your responsibility. When your officers transgress, admit liability, apologise and pay the modest compensation that the law affords. You will make significant savings in legal expenses. Concern yourself primarily with the message you are sending to your officers: not that you are willing to criticise victims for bringing cases but rather than you will not tolerate abuse of power in their ranks.PoliceSir Paul StephensonUK Civil libertiesHuman rightsFiona Murphyguardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds guardian.co.uk |
Full independence will save Scotland from worst of cuts, says Alex Salmond First minister says 'bad' cuts – expected to lead to a fall of about £4bn in Scottish budget – are attack on compassion, fairness and social justice Alex Salmond today claimed full independence would save Scotland's public services and economy from the worst effects of the "bad" spending cuts due to be unveiled this week.The first minister said Wednesday's comprehensive spending review – expected to lead to a fall of about £4bn in the Scottish budget – was an attack on the core principles of compassion, fairness and social justice dear to Scottish voters.He told the Scottish National party's annual conference in Perth that he would "not be a manager of Westminster-directed cuts nor part of parliament which acts as a message boy for decisions made elsewhere".In a speech that sought to be ambitious in its vision and scope before next May's Scottish elections, Salmond said: "There is no point in being a pocket money parliament when the pocket money stops."We are not the helpless agents of globalisation, but free citizens of a wealthy land. We are not slaves to the banking system or vassals to the lords of high finance."I do not want independence for its own sake, but for the sake of the people here and now and those to come."The Scottish secretary, Michael Moore, has predicted that the cuts would take Scotland's funding back to its level in 2005 – about £25bn, a drop of some £4bn – by 2015.The Scottish government claims that keeping all Scotland's share of North Sea oil and gas would leave it £1bn a year better off.Salmond's ministers have begun setting out cuts in public services, including a 25% cut in NHS managers, but the first minister's main aim today was to rally his party for the 2011 Scottish parliamentary elections.After nearly four years in power, the SNP faces a bruising contest. Early opinion polls suggest Labour is poised to regain power at Holyrood and form its own minority government.Labour – now the only major party at Holyrood which is not in government – will attack the nationalists for breaking a series of pledges at the last Scottish elections, presiding over higher unemployment, NHS job cuts and a collapse in school building.During the conference, the SNP has pledged to keep the freeze in council tax for a further two years, costing £70m a year.Salmond announced that up to 6,000 government and NHS workers would get a "living wage" of at least £7.15 an hour – costing around £3m – and Scotland's seven police forces could be merged.He did not specify a number, but it is thought ministers believe only three forces are needed.He also announced that Joseph Stiglitz, the Nobel prize-winning economist who has been severely critical of George Osborne's spending plans, would now advise the SNP government on the economy.Campbell Christie, a former head of the Scottish TUC, will lead a commission inquiry into public services. But Salmond has attempted to sidestep a policy by policy confrontation over spending cuts by accusing all his main opponents of preventing Scotland from achieving its full potential – full independence within the European union.He acknowledged that the SNP had failed to make its case on independence by assuming voters knew what it meant, and reached out to Labour and left of centre Liberal Democrat voters."What I mean by independence is the profound right to enjoy the same equality of opportunity, and to live in more equal communities," he said. "What I mean by independence is jobs – to protect and create them."Is this a grand dream? Yes. But that is the difference between us and the other parties in this election."We have the vision and we have the means to deliver it ... [I] fight not for flags and anthems, but fairness and compassion. I fight for a generation that is not burdened by the mistakes of this one."The three main UK parties killed off his bill for a referendum on independence in this parliament and only about 25% of voters currently favour independence.But the SNP believes the spending cuts will significantly bolster its arguments for autonomy, and plans to make that dispute central to its election campaign.Iain Gray, the Scottish Labour leader, said: "Alex Salmond is the last man Scotland should listen to on jobs and cuts. [Due] to the Salmond slump, we have lost 50,000 construction jobs and the SNP have also cut 3,000 teachers and 4,000 NHS jobs – all this with a record Scottish budget."Now is a time for honesty, tough decisions and protecting and creating jobs. However, Alex Salmond thinks he can get by on election gimmicks, dodge all responsibility and blame someone else for his legacy of failure."Alex SalmondSpending review 2010Scottish politicsScottish National Party (SNP)George OsborneLiberal-Conservative coalitionScotlandSeverin Carrellguardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds guardian.co.uk |
Three killed in helicopter crash Three people from south-east England have died in a helicopter crash in the Mourne Mountains on Saturday. bbc.co.uk |
Co-operative Group considers sale of life assurance business Co-op Group appoints Deutsche Bank as advisor on review of its insurance arm, which has policies worth around £18bnThe Co-operative Group is considering the sale of its life assurance business, which has nearly three million customers in the UK, with policies worth around £18bn.The diverse group, whose interests range from supermarkets to banking, has appointed Deutsche Bank as an advisor on a strategic review of the insurance arm. It is understood the mutually owned group has received a number of expressions of interest since issuing an information memorandum, with would-be bidders including Resolution and Phoenix, the investment firms keen to consolidate the insurance industry. However, the Co-op has not entered into serious sale talks and has not ruled our retaining the unit.The insurance arm is housed within Co-operative Financial Services, which was created by a merger with the Britannia building society last year to form a business that now offers current accounts, mortgages, pensions and life insurance.The financial services business saw profits rise by 50% to top £75m in the first half of the year, but the figures were accompanied with a downbeat economic forecast from the group's chief executive. Peter Marks said conditions would not improve until 2011 "at the earliest". Co-op's travel arm has been the hardest hit, with profits falling by more than two-thirds to £400,000 in the first half following the volcanic eruption in Iceland. Group-wide pre-tax profits fell by 30% to £169.2m.Co-op has launched the review of its insurance business at a time when the insurance industry is a regular subject of takeover speculation. The Royal Bank of Scotland has begun vetting potential advisers over the potential sale of Direct Line, while RSA has bid for Aviva's UK, Irish and Canadian general insurance operations and Prudential scrapped a $35.5bn (£22.6bn) acquisition of AIA in Asia.The group has made some aggressive corporate moves in recent years, led by the Britannia merger and the £1.6bn takeover of Somerfield, a move that reinforced the Co-op's position as the UK's fifth largest grocery retailer with 3,000 stores in £7bn in annual sales. Although the newly acquired stores have missed sales targets, the group has countered criticism of the deal by boosting profits through accelerating cost cuts.Earlier this month Co-op merged its travel and foreign exchange business with Thomas Cook as the under-performing division was hit by weak consumer sentiment and tough competition as rivals scrambled to woo holidaymakers with cheap deals.Co-operative GroupInsurance industryBankingMergers and acquisitionsPrudentialDan Milmoguardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds guardian.co.uk |