politics – Page 2 – BRUCE AND HOLLY

Concerns Over Jury Trials in Leveson’s Proposals

July 12, 2025 bruceandholly

I’m nervous about Leveson’s proposals to abolish jury trial in intermediate cases and replace them with trial by a judge and two magistrates. It is as though he’s suggesting that either way offences carrying a likely penalty of less than 3 years imprisonment are not serious. But a theft conviction can be very serious if you lose your career as a result. Fair enough if you are actually guilty of the offence charged. That’s where the jury comes in. People like you and me with the same collective sense of fairness and justice. Not quite the same when you are facing an impatient prosecution-minded magistrate or judge who just wants to get through their case list. And what is the point of even electing trial, if you are not going to get to argue your case before 12 people who are living similar lives as you are.

Another thing I have long noticed is the increasing remoteness for our justice system from common expectations of right and wrong. Where everything seems to be decided on on academic technicality. We’ve come a long way since the passing of ‘people’s judge’, Tom Denning. Then there is the secrecy over the judicial appointments process itself. Whether it’s the appointment of judges and magistrates or the members of a parole board, who ignore public outrage when releasing a dangerous murderer. Who appoints these people? I’m sure that I have never been consulted. All that is left between them and us is 12 members of a jury. Now they want to take that away, Why? Because of successive government incompetence when it comes to our criminal justice system. How does it save money by delaying a case for two or three years instead of bringing it on now? It just doesn’t make sense to me.

My own solution would be to move to an American system of elected judges and magistrates. Make them accountable.

Law, Uncategorized

Dorset Council and Planning Enforcement

November 17, 2024 bruceandholly

Speed is of the essence when it comes to the enforcement of planning regulations. Unauthorised building work can become immune from planning enforcement in as little as four years. For an authorised change of use, it is 10 years. Although the law was changed on 25 April, 2024 to extend the enforcement of time limits from four years to 10 years in relation to unauthorised building work, that change does not apply retrospectively. It means that unauthorized building work completed before that date will continue to be subject to the four year rule before it becomes immune from enforcement. Nor are planning irregularities always a victimless crime. Imagine if you were disturbed day and night by the revving of car engines because your next door neighbour had turned their domestic garage into a motor repair shop. Wouldn’t you want your council to take action?

Nor are local authorities obliged to act against planning irregularities in every case. Only when they consider it ‘expedient’ to do so. But this does not absolve councils from the responsibility to investigate complaints of planning breaches, where they are reported, in order to make that crucial decision. The council which refuses to do this and allows a planning irregularity to become ‘established’ by default, opens itself up to the possibility of ombudsman complaints. Nor is it any excuse for the local authority to say that it does not have the resources to investigate planning irregularities. Does it have the resources to pay out the compensation claims which will inevitably follow if it fails to act against planning irregularities where there is a need to do so?

Once a planning irregularity has been reported, it needs to be investigated. Only then, can a decision be made as to whether it is ‘expedient’ to take enforcement action. But that is only the beginning of a statutory process.

Information has to be gathered. A decision made whether it is expedient take planning enforcement action or to ignore the irregularity because it is considered harmless. Once it is decided that enforcement action has to be taken, a legal decision has to be taken as to the appropriate course of action to be taken against that planning-breach. There are several choices. Including a planning contravention notice; breach of condition notice; or the traditional enforcement notice, against which there is an appeal to the Secretary of state, which could, although rarely, lead to the cost of a public inquiry. Once any statutory appeals against the enforcement process has been exhausted, the local authority have to follow up with prosecution if the breach continues.

It is also important that councils are seen to be robust when it comes to regulatory enforcement. Otherwise it sends the wrong message. That planning irregularities can be ignored. It is why Dorset Council’s backlog of 900 cases is so problematic. Many of those pending cases are already on their way to becoming immune from planning enforcement, as well as those cases which have already become immune. If the council does not have the resources in-house to deal with it, and maybe it should consider outsourcing that function.

Uncategorized

Trump!

November 9, 2024 bruceandholly

I felt it in my bones. That Trump was going to win the 2024 presidential election. Kamala Harris seemed nice enough. But she just couldn’t get her point across. I don’t understand what she stood for. Collecting celebrity endorsements, waving your arms and going ‘Ra! Ra! Ra!, are not enough to win a presidential election. It’s about having a message that resonates. And Trump certainly had that. I really don’t want Taylor Swift telling me how to vote in a UK general election. So Britain has just got to roll with it. Something I don’t think was helped by David Lammy’s 2019 comments about Trump. Wow! That’s going to be good for business. Oh I forgot! He and Starmer had lunch with Trump. So that makes it all right.

When I wrote about Trump in my 2021 book, Write Quick. Get Published, I had no idea that he was going to make a comeback. For me, he was just a trope of a showman come politician. An entertainer. Someone who used their celebrity to propel himself into the White House. This is what I said.

“If you are writing a political thriller, wouldn’t you want to reserve a place for Donald Trump? He might be the bad boy of American politics. But he’s also a big character. He’s larger than life. Remember that before he became president, he was an entertainer. He hosted the American version of The Apprentice from 2004 to 2015. Like Reagan before him, it was his celebrity which propelled him into the White House. Pitch him against other politicians in a stand-up comedy contest and he’d win hands down. No one is asking you to like him. Of course you’d have to change the name. And not include anything which might identify the real person behind that character. You might even decide to cast your president as a female. But the core authentic personality would still be the same. “

There are also some things on which I agree with Trump. Like Trump, it irritates me the way the West has outsourced all of its jobs, manufacturing and pollution to China. Why is it that I can’t buy anything that isn’t made in China? Even the £150 jacket which I saw in Debenhams before it closed up shop. Even the Covid testing kit which I chucked in the bin. It’s as though I don’t have a choice. Several years ago, a weddings outfitter was prosecuted after pretending that wedding dresses were made in its own factory, when in fact they had a label saying that they were made in China. I’m glad I wasn’t wearing it.