James Dean reports in the Law Society Gazette
Baroness Hayter said that the Legal Services Board, LSCP and Legal Ombudsman (LeO) have been told by the Ministry of Justice to take their websites offline and replace them with government-approved sites by 31 March.
Hayter said that the three bodies had been informed by Cabinet Office minister Francis Maude of the move in October last year, sparking criticism from those involved. She said that LeO chair Elizabeth France complained to Maude, saying that ‘there was no justification for an ombudsman, set up to demonstrate independence from government regulation and the profession and spending no government money’, being forced to use the government’s .gov web address.
I was under the impression, wholly unjustified it would seem now, that the Tory-led farrago running our country was not in favour of top down control, was not in favour of the nanny state and wanted Big Society. What possible justification can the government have, therefore, for encroaching on the independence of the Legal Ombudsman and other law quangos by requiring them to toe the line to the rather dull style and content of the government websites? Why don’t these independent bodies demonstrate their independence by refusing to comply? Or would that not be that handy when it comes to the annual dishing out the gongs ceremony?
Bad start for bill of rights
Afua Hirsch in The Guardian: If the Tories really want public engagement in the new review, why did they bury the last one?
Afua Hirsch’s article is interesting and worth a read. Another example of government lack of attention to detail?
The seven supposed members of this new commission, including Lib Dem peer Lord Anthony Lester, deny any knowledge of their appointment
The Prince’s Speech
Prince Andrew urged to undergo human rights awareness training
The Guardian: Foreign Office adviser says Duke of York’s close ties with autocracies ‘a classic case of unjoined-up government’
I would have thought that Prince Andrew could do with some Human awareness training. I can’t remember which newspaper I saw it in… but there was a marvellous cartoon yesterday showing Prince Andrew at his computer looking at his Facebook page with the caption… “You have two new despots”
Just awareness training surely? It doesn’t need to be qualified.
I’m with Alan Johnson on this (from last night’s This Week). I simply can’t get very excited about this – it’s a PR issue and, as was pointed out lots of politicians have also been associated with some dubious characters, not to mention a few business men.
I suspect they are delighted that Fleet Street’s finest are busy on this story. So much easier to come up with something like this than investigating the behaviour of truly powerful people.
Just another tale of a dysfunctional individual brought up in social housing. Just a slightly bigger one than most.
nb. what Prince Andrew can’t be forgiven for is building that hideous house on the edge of Windsor Great Park. My aunt lives nearby, albeit in a vastly less conspicuous dwelling. As it is, the place would be considered tasteless by Wayne Rooney. I believe it is for sale.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1153465/The-fall-house-York-Why-mansion-sold-Duke-mystery-15m-deal-gone-ruin.html
HRH The Prince Andrew should not, as a member of the Royal Family, be involved in any trade negotiations. It is for businessmen and politicians to conduct any negotiations no matter who they are with. Dealings on an international scale are often highly political. To have this any other way is to bring the Royal Family into politics where they should not be.