Forget April - Are We Just Fools?

Yesterday was April Fool's Day when traditionally the papers publish a fake story to tease the reader over something that isn't real.

Having scoured the online editions, I thought I had found the BBC's attempt when I read that our coalition government, who spend so much time spouting on about 'The Big Society' are planning to resuscitate a policy which was buried by the previous Labour government - following severe opposition – advocating the state monitoring of our internet usage and email activity.

Sadly, it was a genuine article!

Of course, it's all because of those nasty terrorist people who cost us so much money and provide the perfect excuse for nosy intelligence agents to expand their remit.

Much of the opposition to the previous government's attempt to invade our privacy came from a smooth talking Conservative calling himself David Cameron (he has since changed his name to Prime Minister)

In 2009 he said:

"Today we are in danger of living in a control state. Every month over 1,000 surveillance operations are carried out. The tentacles of the state can even rifle through your bins for juicy information."

Of course, his coalition partners, the Lib Dems, were at the same time just as vocal in their opposition to the proposal, but have since been seduced by the spoils of political prostitution.

It seems bizarre that politicians have recently been raising merry hell over a few celebs being phone-tapped by a group of tacky journos, but are not demonstrating too much outrage at a government that wants to sift through the electronic equivalent of a dirty laundry basket.

A spokesperson for the Home Office tried to justify the government's new stance by saying:

"It is vital that police and security services are able to obtain communications data in certain circumstances to investigate serious crime and terrorism and to protect the public."

If I was a terrorist, or a criminal, I would be insulted by the assumption I was too stupid to use avoidance tactics or encryption when communicating with others. But, we all know that in reality it is about nothing more than controlling us all through the use of fear.

Conservative David Davis, who previously ran against Cameron for the Tory Party leadership summed it up thus:

It is not focusing on terrorists or on criminals, it is absolutely everybody,"

and he continued

"Historically governments have been kept out of our private lives. Our freedom and privacy has been protected by using the courts by saying 'If you want to intercept, if you want to look at something, fine, if it is a terrorist or a criminal go and ask a magistrate and you'll get your approval'. You shouldn't go beyond that in a decent, civilised society but that is what is being proposed."

It seems Cameron's speech writers inadvertently missed a word out of his 'Big Society' speech. It should have read 'Big Brother Society'

Help I'm A Prisoner - I'll Vote Me Out Of Here!

I have always been of the view (somewhat naively it now seems) that if someone commits an unlawful act against the society in which we live, they forfeit the right to be a part of our society for a specified period of time set by a Court of Law - they are ‘banged up’

While I can accept - to a point - there might be an argument in favour of having certain ‘distractions’ within a prison  (like flushing toilets, exercise areas and the odd communal television) I am not in agreement that a custodial sentence should entitle you to the same individual rights you enjoyed before being sentenced; I believe prisons should be seen as a deterrent and a punishment - not as Premier Inns with added security.

However, it seems I am now politically incorrect.

The Ministry of Silly Interfering Decisions, (otherwise known as the European Court For Human Rights) has decreed that we, as a nation, must obey a stupid EU court ruling allowing all prisoners within  the UK prison system the right to vote.

No, I am not referring to those expensive phone votes during programmes like X Factor or Strictly Come Dancing, but to a proper vote that elects the very government that maintains the laws that put them all away in the first place.

Of course, our government is saying it is unable to oppose such European madness, so it looks like the next logical move could be to allow conmen, thieves and sexual deviants to stand for Parliament!

Merde!!.... that’s one idea that’s already too late!

The Hacker Who Broke Into US Never-Never Land!

"Cyberspace doesn't exist any more than never-never land. I was no more in America than anyone who is on a long-distance telephone call. The fiction of cyberspace should be properly tested in a British court because it is no more real than Santa Claus. They cannot "return" me to a country I wasn't in, yet they continually refer in court to "returning me". If I was being returned to the place where my crime was committed, I would be returned to Crouch End. I am not a fugitive, I was physically in North London and have remained in North London"

The words of Gary McKinnon the man the USA says could be the most dangerous hacker in the world after he broke into their military computers.

He now awaits the decision of a judicial review in the UK on whether he should be extradited to the USA.

Personally, I think he has a very good point and the Americans should admit they failed to protect their computers behind a firewall powerful enough to shield their secrets!

In reality, it is all about politics and a one sided 'special relationship'

Could this be one of the first real tests for our new Foreign Secretary?

Cutting Through UK Nuclear Deterrent With A Knife!

One of the headline grabbing arguments between the leaders of the three main political parties in this election has been the subject of our nuclear deterrent.

While the Liberal Democrats have been very vocal in saying it should be scrapped, both Labour and the Conservatives accuse Nick Clegg, the Lib Dem leader, of being naive.

Sadly, though, they are all right.

We are about to invest billions of pounds into the renewal of a weapons system, which will hopefully never be used, when that money could be filling a large part of the financial hole, from which, we are trying to escape.

A nuclear weapons industry should never have been conceived. It is a technology that could have been harnessed for the good of all and not the destruction of a select few. It has split the world into those countries that 'have' and those that 'have not'. Sadly though, it was not only conceived; it was used.

Of course, those that 'have' justify their position by arguing it is a deterrent and we must maintain it because we are living in an age of terrorism and growing radicalism throughout the world.

The likes of Nick Clegg, they argue, are being naive in thinking otherwise. Unfortunately, I think they are probably right, although before they become too smug, it is worth pointing out the irony in their argument using a domestic parallel example.

The increase in knife crime in the UK has been rising steadily over the last few years with many teenagers losing their lives as a result. One of the arguments they use for being 'tooled up' with knives is that they carry them as a deterrent, in case of attack.

Have you spotted the irony?

Our authorities argue forcibly against such logic and say you are more likely to suffer as a result of carrying a knife.

So, how is it our politicians cannot see the same logic applies to having a nuclear deterrent?

It seems there will be no clear winners in this debate and the cost could, ultimately, be far more than we are prepared to pay!

Nosey Neighbours Speeding Us Along The Road To Communism!

As if things are not bad enough in our new Big Brother world, Kent police have started to issue some of its residents, in the larger towns, radar detection kits to check on the speed of passing motorists. If they are exceeding the limit, the speed flashes onto a large roadside sign and the vehicle's registration number is recorded by one of the vigilantes... errrm I mean... helpful citizens.

The police then send a warning letter to the naughty motorist although no legal action can be taken - yet anyway!

If the scheme is judged to be a success, then the rest of the county will follow and presumably soon after that the world!

This tactic, by the authorities, of encouraging us all to spy on each other I find to be very worrying. We have already seen TV adverts providing a dedicated phone number to shop those we suspect of being benefit scroungers.

What is more worrying is that there are people willing to take part in schemes such as these.

However, it is not a new idea. We spent many years, as a free society, criticising such actions when they were a part of everyday life in both Communist China and Russia.

Over to you Comrades!!

No Room At The Inn For Gays - But Jesus Is OK!

While the political rumblings might not be as severe as the 7.2 on the Richter scale being experienced by those in Mexico, Shadow Home Secretary, Chris Grayling, must have felt more than a little quake in the pit of his stomach following publication of comments he made in private to the Centre For Policy Studies, a centre-right think tank.

He was referring to the case of a gay male couple turned away from a B&B on the grounds that the owner’s religious convictions meant she could not allow them to stay.

Mr Grayling expressed his personal view (in private to the committee but secretly recorded and sent to the Observer) that: "I think we need to allow people to have their own consciences” and “if it's a question of somebody who's doing a B&B in their own home, that individual should have the right to decide who does and who doesn't come into their own home."

Of course, technically at least, he is wrong as the Equality Act (Sexual Orientation) Regulations 2007 states no one should be refused goods or services on the grounds of their sexuality.

But, the law does not often allow for the concept of common sense or political point scoring.

The media has been full of what should really have been a non-story and the fact it has even gained such prominence I find to be more worrying than the actual incident at the B&B itself.

Most of us would have walked away from the experience with the attitude that ‘shit happens’ and booked into somewhere else that was more tolerant of our lifestyle and was run by someone with less hostile views. Nothing would ever have been heard of the story again.

However, the couple in question, who apparently felt "we were treated as lepers in the worst possible way." (is there a good way?) felt the need to report the B&B owner to the police and are considering suing “for a principle”.

And that is where 'politics' checked into the B&B and I became disturbed:

One of the couple is, apparently, leader of the Lib Dem group on his local council.

Stonewall the activist organisation promoting gay rights has warned:

"There are lots of gay people out there who are thinking about voting Conservative – many for the first time in their lives,"

"They will now be interrogating these issues much more thoroughly."

Did you spot the implied threat?

The Observer, a paper which would be outraged if a similarly dubious recording had been made by an agency of the state, seems to find it acceptable to print Mr Grayling’s personal views when they are not even shared by the party he represents.

We are in election year and we must remember everyone wants to ‘score a goal’ against the opposition, or position themselves into a better place on the field of play.

One thing is for certain. Legislation cannot force acceptability of what is still a minority (yes, shock horror, the gay community is still a minority), albeit vocal group of people.

Acceptability comes about by behaviour and example.

For me, the couple lost all sympathy when they were seen on yesterday’s news 'mugging' the camera while draped in each other’s arms. It was a show of carefully staged ‘affection’ making a political point too crass even for the Camerons or the Browns to attempt.

Perhaps, the situation was best summed up by Andrea Williams, the director of the Christian Legal Centre:

"It is vital in a diverse and free society that we truly tolerate one another's views."

That should be taken as a two way street!!

'Terrorism' 'Liberty' And The 'Fear of Fear!'

Parliament’s Joint Committee on Human Rights, comprised of peers and MPs from all parties, has reached a conclusion that many of us formed a long time ago - the government’s response to the threat of terrorism in the UK far exceeds the probability of an incident.

The committee has questioned whether ministers could legitimately argue, nine years after the 9/11 attacks, whether a “public emergency threatening the life of the nation” remained.

The government insists the threat from terrorism remains “real and serious”

A Home Office spokeswoman stated:

“The threat to the UK from terrorism remains real and serious and we are committed to doing all we can to protect our nation's security while protecting individual liberties using the proper safeguards.”

And therein resides the lie...

Individual liberties have been eroded massively since the turn of this century. A knee-jerk reaction, Anti-Terrorism Bill, was rushed through the commons after the attacks of 9/11 and 7/7. It was not properly drafted, or debated, and has introduced all sorts of restrictions on the ‘individual liberties’ we have been permitted to enjoy in recent years.

Local and district councils have used the bill as a ‘snoopers charter’, monitoring the recycling habits of residents within their boundaries, while tourists and photographers have been left open mouthed with shock, when stopped and searched by police officers for the potential terrorist crime of photographing public buildings. Refusal to comply with intrusive questions has often led to unjustified arrest. Nearly every time, the police officers themselves, do not understand the rights of individuals under the act.

Identity cards are still being discussed as a mandatory requirement for all of us residing in the UK and ministers use every opportunity to hype up the terrorist threat, to ensure we comply with their wishes to introduce even more controls over our everyday lives.

I have not bothered to go into the number of surveillance cameras operating in the UK since 7/7 or the diversity of their use, which cannot even be slightly justified by any terrorist threat.

I do not question whether the UK is a target from an act of terror in the foreseeable future. We have always been threatened by terror of one sort or another. The seventies were a far more dangerous period than that we are in now and it became a common occurrence to be within range of an IRA bomb going off in London. We were not, however, stopped in the streets for no reason, or surveilled by faceless camera operators while going about our daily lives.

I find it surprising that none of the mainstream political parties have mentioned the present erosion of our civil liberties as being something worthy of discussion in the forthcoming general election debates - or is it really that surprising?

Hitler’s Reich Marshall, Hermann Goering summed the politics up thus:

“…it is always a simple matter to drag people along whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. This is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in every country.”

It seems nothing has changed!!

Robin Hood And The Twitter Terrorist!

It’s a well known fact that Twitter is the place where terrorists the world over announce their intentions to commit another outrage. Well isn’t it?

Errrr actually no it’s not.

It is, instead, a place where millions of people the world over empty their heads by sharing thoughts that can sometimes be outrageous and stupid. It is not known for being a place of enormous intellect. It is communication in its simplest form - however irritating it can sometimes seem.

Unfortunately, no-one had told the officers of the South Yorkshire Police, who arrested a 26 year old man for tweeting, in total frustration at the effect the bad weather was having on his travel plans: "Robin Hood airport is closed," continuing "You've got a week and a bit to get your shit together, otherwise I'm blowing the airport sky high!!"

A week after posting the comment, Paul Chambers was arrested at his place of work under the Terrorism Act and questioned for seven hours, before being released on bail.

He said "I would never have thought, in a thousand years, that any of this would have happened because of a Twitter post," and "I'm the most mild-mannered guy you could imagine."

He has since been suspended from his work, pending an internal enquiry and banned from Robin Hood Airport, in Doncaster, for life.

An expert on privacy laws and free speech, Tessa Mayes commented:

"Making jokes about terrorism is considered a thought crime, mistakenly seen as a real act of harm or intention to commit harm.

"The police's actions seem laughable and suggest desperation in their efforts to combat terrorism, yet they have serious repercussions for all of us. In a democracy, our right to say what we please to each other should be non-negotiable, even on Twitter."

Of course she is right.

No-one would ever dispute that we should take the threat of terrorism seriously but if we are to live in fear of being arrested everytime we make a misjudged comment or an attempt at a joke, then the terrorists have already won the war.

The police, of all people, should know the difference between a genuine threat and what is obviously nothing more than a foolish declaration of frustration.

Be careful what you say or you could find your self being apprehended by a right bunch of tweets!

Was Hoon Just The 'Puppet'?

If you feel your life is a little bit cold at the moment, Geoff Hoon must be finding it positively Siberian.

After yesterday's failed attempt, with Patricia Hewitt, to stir up a leadership challenge in his party, he is now having to suffer the full scorn and ridicule of his colleagues.

I have surprised myself by spending today feeling some sympathy for his situation. There are many things that just do not add up.

It seems almost inconceivable, that someone with Hoon's experience of top level politics would have been so inept as to stir up such a controversy, if he were not to have been assured of success and support in the first place.

Watching him being interviewed on Newsnight last night, it was obvious from his body language, he was deeply disappointed at the way things had turned out and was holding back on revealing the true story. His admission of failure was a rare thing to see from a politician with his pedigree.

Even though the media has spent today revealing off-the-record comments from senior politicians and speculating about certain members of the Cabinet being spineless and performing U-turns, I doubt the real story will be told until Mr Hoon leaves the world of politics - which could be sooner than he originally planned - and publishes his memoirs.

The whole charade, however, does seem to have been carefully choreographed by someone with a skill for manipulation of both the media and politicians and the talent of being able to provide himself with a plausible denial of any knowledge of the incident in public.

There are not many within the world of Parliament who are so skilled at such dark arts....

Who could be the Puppet Master?....the show continues!!

UK Policing -A Change For The Worse!

Last time I checked, we were living in a free society where the right to demonstrate was just that - a right.

When it was peacefully carried out, it was unhindered by the police - intervention only came about after a public order offence was being, or likely to be committed.

This disturbing video report in the Guardian newspaper shows how police tactics have now changed for the worse and we should, perhaps, start examining our own society more closely before we start to criticise those in other countries.

Judge for yourself....

PM Brown Takes Low Blow From Blears!

If the wheels on Prime Minister Gordon Brown's bus have not yet fallen off, they are certainly wobbly to the point of collapse.

Following yesterday's rumour that Home Secretary Jacqui Smith is to leave his cabinet, Communities Secretary Hazel Blears, has now followed, using perfect showbiz timing (some might question what she ever did anyway).

Of course, both women have been severely criticised recently for their dubious use of the expenses system and both were tipped to be removed from their positions in the cabinet in the next few days. But, while it might be almost believable that Ms Smith's intentions are honourable, in the case of Ms Blears they are most certainly not.

To walk out so publically just a day ahead of tomorrow's polling, is nothing short of a treacherous act, aimed at toppling her leader over the cliff edge, on which he is presently balancing. She is, by her action, hoping to kick-start an open revolt amongst Labour MPs to force the PM from office. It could be that she will succeed.

Tonight, it was reported, that the signatures of over a hundred MPs have already been collected, in a sign of no confidence in their leader.

Blears' actions have been described by one political commentator as being "Deliberate, calculated and with intent".

Whether Brown goes or stays - and I really could not care as they all seem to be odious individuals who command no respect - I just hope that Blears, by displaying such disloyalty, will never be seen performing in the political spotlight again.

Extradition To US Without Evidence - Time For Change!

Yesterday, I was sent a request to sign a petition on behalf of a husband and wife living in Scotland, to stop their extradition to the USA.

Their names are Brian and Kerry-Ann Howes and they have four children. Their 'crime' is to have supplied two chemicals - both of which are perfectly legal in the UK - to drug rings in America, where it is said they were used in the production of the drug crystal meth - a form of amphetamine that has been crystallised to allow it to be smoked.

Howes had been selling chemicals over the internet for several years. The chemicals he supplied are commonly used in the production of pyrotechnics and for medical use. He always took the precaution of verifying delivery addresses and receiving payment by credit card. His business premises were monitored by Health and Safety officials. He was, by all normal standards, a genuine trader.

The US authorities, however, disagree and say he is part of a global drugs ring which operates bases worldwide.

I have no idea whether the Howes are drug dealers or are innocent of the allegations, but there lies the problem.

Since the letter of request for extradition to the US was presented, they have each spent over 214 days on remand in prison and both are now living under a curfew at home. They have not been officially charged with any crime and no evidence against them has been presented to a UK court. They are presumed to be guilty on the basis of a letter from the US authorities.

How has this come about? Because in the aftermath of the terrible events of 9/11, when the only exercise taken by government ministers was that provided by knee jerk reactions, home secretary at the time, David_Blunkett, signed the Extradition Act 2003 which removed the obligation on US law enforcement agencies to present British courts with prima facie evidence of an offence. All that is now needed, is a letter of allegation before proceedings commence; if they say you are guilty, we believe them without question.

What makes things even worse, is that the change was never debated in Parliament but, instead, was passed using Royal Prerogative.

The treaty is unjust, unethical, unconstitutional and just about every 'un' word you can think of. It undermines the basic principle of our justice system and plays into the hands of a country that has - over recent years - demonstrated its complete disregard for human rights by detaining and torturing people without trial.

As for the Howes, if they are extradited, their lives will be destroyed. Their children will be taken into care and Brian and Kerry-Ann face up to 20 years in a US prison. If they had been suspected terrorists, they could not have been held for longer than 28 days without charge. They have already been held for seven times this limit. They are, seemingly, the victims of a ridiculous law that needs to be changed.

So, without having been able to make a judgement based on anything other than word of mouth, I am going to sign the petition. This is not because I think the Howes are either innocent or guilty of the allegations but because I have always valued the fairness of justice and consider their treatment by the present system has been unfair. I am protesting to bring about a change to the present system and restore it to one based on evidence presented to our courts.

I wish them luck and for the sake of all our freedoms, I hope you do too!

UK Is Slave Trade Destination.

One week after my post Heathrow Children Trafficked For Sex revealing children going missing into the slave trade from a children's home in Hillingdon, Parliament's Home Affairs committee has declared that the UK is fast becoming a destination of what amounts to a modern-day slave trade.

The MP's from all parties that make up the committee, have said there are at least 5,000 victims of trafficking in Britain.

Most of them are women and children and most are being forced into the sex trade or used as professional beggars on the streets.

Committee chairman Keith Vaz said:

Yes we have good information on the scale of the problem, enforcement is patchy, prosecution rates are low and there is little protection for victims"

Why is this being allowed to happen in 21st century Britain?

It seems that the Home Office need to bring together the UK Border Agency and the police and make them work together as a priority to bring this situation to a speedy end.

Heathrow Children Trafficked For Sex!

Q. How do you lose 80 children in just over two years?

A. Put them in a children's home run by Hillingdon council.

As incredible as it may seem, that is what has happened to many of the children - mainly of Chinese origin - who have arrived unaccompanied at Heathrow Airport.

They are taken to the home while their individual cases are investigated by officials and it is supposed to be a place of safety.

However, according to a confidential report written by the UK Border Agency and leaked to the Guardian newspaper two thirds of the children taken to the home disappear within a week. It is thought they are targeted by organised criminals and made to work in the sex industry or as street sellers for the drugs trade.

In the just one year, 77 children fled the centre and only four were traced; one was pregnant after having been forced to work in a brothel in the Midlands.

A spokesperson for Hillingdon Council tried to excuse their lamentable failure by saying;

"We cannot lock the doors because it's a breach of their human rights"

Surely, the real breach of human rights has been the total failure of the authorities to protect these children in the first place. It seems almost unbelievable that the situation has been continuing for so long and has only now been revealed because of a leaked official report.

Shadow Home Secretary Chris Grayling commented:

"To have such a large number of children going missing when they are supposed to be in care is unacceptable. We need an urgent explanation from the Home Secretary"

Therein lies the problem - it's that woman again!

The Home Secretary's Final Comedy Routine?

As any good comedian knows, it is all in the timing.

So what better proof could we have all been shown, than that supplied by the woman who has given us many laughs over the past few weeks, Home Secretary, Jacqui Smith.

On the same day she has announced the introduction of the controversial identity card scheme which is to be piloted in Manchester, the internet security firm, McAfee, has reported that internet hijacking is now officially out of control and very few computers will be immune from attacks in the next few years; so far, they have detected over twelve million infected computers.

The identity cards have been heavily criticised both on the grounds of human rights and of database security.

The Home Office intend to allow high street stores such as Boots and Happy Snaps to eventually handle the issuing of the cards on its behalf. It is very unlikely the computers of such stores will be adequately protected against highjacking and our personal details will be easily available for cloning by the internet gangs.

On grounds of cost alone, Shami Chakrabarti, director of civil liberties group, Liberty, said:

"One begins to wonder what planet the Home Secretary is living on when in the middle of a recession, she wants to charge us £30 for an ID card and another £30 for handing over our own personal information"

Perhaps then, it is time that the curtain was finally brought down on this particular comedienne!

A Crashing Time For Police Drivers!

Figures obtained under the Freedom Of Information Act have revealed that police officers caused over 64 accidents per week last year - that's a staggering 3,357 over the full year.

Since 2004, the number of police-related car accidents has also included the loss of 150 lives.

These figures may even be lower than they should be, as ten regional forces declined to supply their own accident figures.

Staggeringly, some of the incidents were attributed to simple things like failing to use mirrors when reversing, failing to stop at junctions and taking bends too quickly. Over zealous driving while involved in chasing suspects was also a major cause of crashes.

The Royal Society For The Prevention Of Accidents commented that police should take heed of their accident rate and:

"lessen the risk of the same mistakes happening in the future"

Next time you get stopped for a suspected traffic offence take comfort from the fact it may be a classic case of 'don't do what I do - do what I say!'

Police Need A Demonstration!

Another week and another police officer is suspended after being caught on video at the G20 demonstrations in London. This time, it is for allegedly striking a woman on the leg with his baton and hitting her in the face with his hand after she apparently swore at him.

Yesterday, the police from a different force, pre-empted a planned demonstration at a power station and arrested the demonstrators before they had even set off for the location. They had no idea whether it was to be a peaceful protest, or not, but decided to bring it to an end before it had even started. No-one was subsequently charged with any offence.

Democracy is built on the bricks made from freedom of speech; it is the right of everybody to voice their discontent and peacefully demonstrate at the site of their displeasure.

The police should attend to provide an impartial and visible deterrent to both sides in a dispute and to intervene only when a breach of the peace is likely to happen. However, since the 'reign' of Margaret Thatcher and the violent confrontations which took place with the miners, the police have become increasingly political; they are no longer seen as being impartial.

The assumption now, is that all demonstrators are hell bent on violent confrontation when normally, the majority are not. Of course, there has always been the minority who profess to be anarchists and try to incite violence but the police know that.

The present methods of containment used by the police are themselves confrontational. The practice of 'kettling', where demonstrators are held in one place, often for hours at a time, by officers wearing helmets and hidden behind riot shields, does not inspire confidence by those being 'contained'.

The new Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, Sir Paul Stephenson, has ordered a review into the methods used by his officers at the G20 protests.

Let's hope it is an impartial investigation and starts on the assumption that democracy is a right and not a gift from the government!

More 'Blues' For The Home Secretary!

You really couldn't make it up

Only two weeks ago,Home Secretary, Jacqui Smith, was embarrassed by the revelation that her expenses had included compensation for pay-per-view adult films watched by her husband.

Yesterday, a link from her department's Home Office website had to be removed, after it was discovered that it was connected to....wait for it.....a porn site!!

The discovery was made by a journalist who was trying to unearth more about the regulations which come into force today, obliging internet service providers to record details of emails and internet phone calls. He contacted the BBC.

The Home Office said the original link had been taken over by a new company.

It does, however, pose a more serious question. If the Home Office cannot keep track of a simple link on their own website, how are they going to be able to keep track of all the personal details in their databases, associated with the proposed introduction of identity cards?

In the words of one of the Home Secretary's predecessors , is the Home Office really "fit for purpose"?

More MPs Caught Feeding At the Trough

It is becoming even easier to know when it is Sunday. It has become the day when papers like The Mail On Sunday expose the latest MP who has been caught claiming massive expenses from the public purse.

This week, it is former Defence Minister, Geoff Hoon's turn to perform in the spotlight. He was granted an official, rent free, residence during his tenure in office, while at the same time, he was claiming £70,000 second home allowance on his 'constituency home' in Derby and renting out his London house through a commercial letting agent for an estimated £70.000.

Of course. like so many of his fellow claimants, Mr Hoon has used the excuse: "I only claimed what the rules allowed for". Officially, he is correct - after all the rules were drafted by his fellow MPs.

Morally, though, he is just another greedy MP who has crossed the line of acceptable standards. If he did not possess the judgement to realise that fact, he was surely not a suitable candidate for the senior role of Defence Secretary, in the first place.

Therefore, one must assume he knew only too well what he had been doing and is guilty, along with many of his colleagues, of abusing his position and the trust shown in him by the country.

Meanwhile, a recent performer in the spotlight, Home Secretary Jacqui Smith, is now having to face more embarrassment after she is said to have claimed: a £39.99 barbecue, a £2.50 toothbrush holder, a £14.00 doormat, a £104.56 gas patio heater, and a £369.99 flatscreen TV.

All are, apparently, essential commodities to enable her to 'perform her duties as an MP'

I wonder which greedy 'pig' will be caught at the trough next week!

Home Secretary Fiddling - Again!

As red faces go, it must have been almost on fire!

Home Secretary Jacqui Smith, has been forced to pay back money claimed on her expenses. Her husband had been watching pay-per-view adult films on a cable TV subscription, paid as part of her controversial second home allowance.

Ms.Smith has already been in the spotlight for the dubious method by which she accounts for the claim and this latest news can only add even more fuel to the fire.

Her husband, Richard Timney, works as his wife's Commons adviser and, presumably, is also used as a 'claimable item' from the public purse.

While I would not criticise the right of anyone to watch adult films in the privacy of their own homes, it does seem a bit rich that the husband of the woman responsible with any legislation regarding such a right, is caught with his proverbial pants down.

Maybe it is time for Ms. Smith to get the handcuffs and truncheon out of the playbag!!