Blair PRISON PLEDGE Exposed As A SHAM After £30m Is Left
UNSPENT.
*
Daily Mail
Monday, June 26, 2006.
by
James Slack
Home Affairs Editor.
TONY Blair’s promise to build more jails was exposed as a
‘total sham’ yesterday.
It has emerged that the Home Office Minister said the
Government has had permission to build a prison in his constituency for several
years
‘but not a brick’ has been laid.’
Phil Wheatley,
director-general of the Prison Service, has been forced to give interviews
denying the Government plans were in ‘crisis’.
But critics say the result of Labour’s inaction has been
:
An increase in lenient
sentences and early release of dangerous offenders.
Shadow Home Secretary David
Davis said:
‘This is yet another example
of the Government’s total failure to address the lack of capacity in our
prisons.
[Or in plain language the
PRISONS are FULL.]
‘Mr Blair’s drive this week
to provide more prison places now looks
A TOTAL SHAM.’
The Prime Minister unveiled plans to create
4,000 new prison places on Friday, in a speech promising to ‘rebalance’ the
skewed criminal justice system.
BUT officials yesterday
confirmed they had been given
£30,000,000
-two years ago to find new
sites and had not spent it.
The Home Office has
also under spent on other projects by
£370,000,000
-over the same period. The
combined total would pay for:
ALL 4000 PRISON SPACES.
Labour’s former Home Office
Minister George Howarth said there was a site in his Merseyside constituency of
Knowsley North and Sefton East which had gained planning permission for a
PRISON
-but no construction work
had been done.
He added: ‘So far I don’t think the Prison Service has
got to grips with the need for more prison places. In my constituency, they have planning permission for a 600-place
prison and they have had that for several years, YET there is NO SIGN of a
BRICK being LAID or ANYTHING happening AT ALL.’
Her Majesty’s Inspector of
Prisons, Anne Owers, has said that jails will soon be putting up signs to say
THEY ARE FULL’
The total prison population
in England and Wales stands at 77,711-only 1,717 short of the maximum
operational capacity of
79,428
A Home Office spokesman said the
£400,000,000
-had not been handed back to
the Treasury and could theoretically,
STILL BE SPENT.
[After sitting on the
money for two years]
* * *
*
Human Rights
U-Turn
By James Slack
Home Affairs Editor
Friday, June
23,2006.
LABOUR is preparing
to make a huge U-turn by ditching plans to change the [1998] Human Rights Act.
Instead of facing up to the chaos caused
by the law, MINISTERS will blame the POLICE, Parole Board and laws pre-dating
their time in power.
But the ACT was passed in 1998; a year AFTER Labour was
elected.
The strategy is to protect Tony Blair from
the embarrassment after he blamed the Act for the release of killers and the
Government’s failure to kick out FOREIGN TERROR SUSPECTS.
Last night, the Premier signalled his
intent by attacking the JUDGES. And in a speech today, he will insist Labour is
determined to ‘rebalance’ the JUSTICE SYSTEM in favour of VICTIMS.
Although Labour introduced
the Human Rights Act, Mr Blair blamed the COURTS for giving to much weight to
offenders’ human rights.
He said: ‘The absolute human right of the defendant is
taken into consideration too much.
‘We need to look at the balance
of human rights of the victims, defendants and the community.
‘We need to stop the process
taking up to a year and stop witnesses feeli9ng intimidated.’
In his speech today he was
expected to stick to the line that the [Human Rights] Act will be reviewed.
BUT Home Secretary John Reid
is preparing to absolve the legislation from blame. He claims many scandals are the FAULT of the POLICE and other
officials for not understanding the Act properly.
Failing to remove foreign
convicts is being blamed on the 12 -year legislation passed by the
Conservatives and a 1996 judgment by the European Court of Human Rights.
Mr Reid was sent a letter by
Tony Blair last month suggesting the Act be changed.
In a separate letter to Lord
falconer, the Constitutional Affairs Secretary, Mr Blair asked for a strategy
that improves the public’s confidence in the ACT.
But Mr Reid said yesterday:
‘There can be
interpretations of the law which are ill-informed. It is not the Human Rights
Act at all. Sometimes parole boards make decisions believing they are required
to do certain things by the Human Rights Act -which they are not.
‘Police will not put up
posters because they believe they are prohibited when they are not.
People say we cannot keep
documentation on Ian Huntley because it is contrary to the Data Protection Act.
It is not.
His comments represent a
huge change from MR Blair’s suggestion to amend the ACT.
[Well Tony Blair we are told
is a LAWYER -whereas Dr Reid is NOT. As much as we have never trusted Tony
Blair with OUR CONSTITUTION we would consider his views on the Human Rights Act
to those of Mr Reid]
In May, Mr Blair branded a case in which
High Court Judge - Mr Justice Sullivan allowed nine Afghan hijackers to stay in
Britain ‘an abuse of common sense.’
But Mr Reid said: ‘If we look at the level of scrutiny we have
got to give to every case before deportation, which is long tedious and
difficult, it is from an Act passed in 1994, I think by Michael Howard.’
‘The scrutiny demanded is
about three times as much as the Human Rights Act would require.’
He also blamed the Chahal
judgment by the European Court of Human Rights in 1996, which prevents the risk
of harm to British citizens being considered in deportation hearings.
Instead, only the human rights
of the suspected terrorist can be taken into account.
Mr Reid said: ‘That decision
was before we had a Human Rights Act.’
Rather than change the Act,
MINISTERS are likely to repeal the 1994 legislation and challenge the European Court’s
1996 verdict.
Shadow Home Secretary David
Davis said:
‘After nine years, three
huge majorities and over 50 pieces of Criminal Justice legislation there is
only one Prime Minister to blame for the utter chaos in our Criminal Justice System.
‘It is astonishing mixture
of complacency and self-righteousness that the Government will blame anyone but
themselves for the disasters at the Home Office.’
[Well Mr Davis cannot throw
up his hands and deny any blame in the present chaos in our once world renowned
Justice System.
It was a Conservative Prime
Minister Edward Heath a known Nazi Agent for the past 60 years with
his colleague Geoffrey Rippon and the third member of the Balliol
College Nazi Ring Roy Jenkins. It was the College Master [Lindsay]
who alerted MI5 at the time.
Mr Heath who died last year from a
coronary which afflicted him when he was in Salzburg in 2003 for a music
festival but in reality to be advised by his Nazi controllers that British
Intelligence knew of his long spy career and on receiving the stunning news
immediately suffered a seizure.
He received a Pomp and Ceremony
burial service in Salisbury Cathedral in 2005 (details on our Bulletin Board) who
over 35 years ago was instrumental in getting us into the present mess by his blatant
LIES of a supposed TRADING ONLY
European
Common Market
which was known by its
exponents then that it would eventually lead a
United States of Europe
The passing of the
Masstricht Treaty in 1992
by the
Conservative Government
-destroyed the ability of a
return to being governed by our OWN LAWS, which could be repealed or amended as
conditions demanded and not as now in servitude to European Human Rights Act
and other EU institutions. Many citizens of Europe in 1951 had had no
experience of Human Rights which Britain’s lawyers showed the way in the
1951 Convention on Human
Rights.
We had no need then and even
now to be a party to such a Convention as our own
Magna Carta
Petition of Right
and other Acts of
legislation on our Statute Book and a FREE people are our security against TYRANNY
at HOME and ABROAD if OUR PARLIAMENT so DESIRED.
If
Mr Davis is concerned about what is happening to our country he should reflect
that it is the inability of his Party to abide by behaviour suggested by his
party’s name that has been responsible for our present difficulties throughout
the span of our Society.
We
say to Mr Davis either change your Party NAME or give what your Party has
always valued -it’s conservativism-its protection of OUR CONSTITUTION and its COMMON
LAW and VALUES.
Otherwise
Mr Davis don’t waste our time by blaming others when your party has done enough
damage to ensure we hope it never gets elected again in this century.
Proportional
Representation might lead to a less strong government but we would not have
almost lost all our inherited ‘Rights and Liberties’
* * *
[Font
altered-bolding & underlining used-comments in brackets]
JUNE/06