Tom Richmond: Straw's pompous pledge for victims of crime

IT'S not just Iraq – and his obstinate refusal to accept the advice of his lawyers over the legality of the 2003 invasion – where Jack Straw has betrayed the public.

So, too, has been his ineffectual treatment of victims of crime – and the need for yet another policy launch this week to start putting their needs first.

With typical pomposity, the Justice Secretary described this week's launch of the National Victims Service, at a cost of 8m, as "a defining moment".

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

"If victims need help, we will be there for them. And fundamentally, it will ensure that supporting victims is firmly embedded in the culture of the justice service, as a core function of the service, not an optional add-on," he added.

Yet it was Straw, as Home Secretary in 1997, who was tasked with implementing New Labour's manifesto promise "to put victims at the heart of the criminal justice system".

If he, and his successors, had done so, we might be spared the expense of another cosmetic exercise on the eve of a general election.

It would also have meant that the widows of the two brilliant surgeons stabbed to death by an Iraqi immigrant at Pindersfield Hospital, Wakefield, almost 20 years ago would have been told, in advance, that the killer is to be released shortly – and will not be deported to his homeland because he might pose a safety threat there.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

So much for their rights to be kept informed about the progress of cases – another of Straw's much vaunted promises in 1997.

What about the heart-rending case of Fiona Pilkington, who was driven to despair by yobs that she killed both herself and her disabled daughter? It shouldn't need a new national body for the police to impose the rule of law.

And what about Molly Godley, the retired Yorkshire nurse now living in Exeter who is still waiting to be told why murder charges were dropped against two youths following the death of her son Ian in an arson attack in Scotland in February 1998?

Twelve years on, the pensioner is still none the wiser – despite pleading with Straw, Tony Blair and the Scottish judiciary for answers. A National Victims Service will be of little comfort to her if politicians, who can no longer be trusted, are allowed to raise false expectations on the eve of an election. I'm afraid this new initiative will change little – and waste a lot of money in the process.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

CURIOUSLY, one name continues to be omitted from the list of potential Labour leaders – Alistair Darling, the Chancellor.

Yet, despite presiding over the recession, he probably speaks more sense than many would-be leaders inside the Cabinet.

He foresaw the scale of the slump – and was condemned for being so candid. He recognises the need for greater haste over cutting the budget deficit. And he's now paving the way for civil servants to take a pay cut, a recognition that public sector salaries have become over-bloated under New Labour.

In some respects, history is likely to be kinder to Darling than any contemporary analysis. After all, he inherited the ballooning deficit from Gordon Brown. And his scope to reform the Treasury has been constantly blocked by his predecessor's control-freakery from inside his 10 Downing Street bunker.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Yet, if Brown had listened to his Chancellor, Labour might be better placed – and the recovery more robust.

LABOUR clearly regard George Osborne, the Tory shadow chancellor, as their best electoral asset – because of his poor public persona.

It's why Business Secretary Lord Mandelson, in debating the recession with his Conservative opposite number Ken Clarke, name-checked Osborne in virtually every answer.

Expect more of the same.

A QUESTION. Why does the BBC always feature industrial revolution landscapes, and people in markets, when it focuses on the economy in the North? Newsnight's point on Monday night was a sound one – the recession may be officially over, but this view is not shared by many ordinary people.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Did they really need Paul Mason, its economics editor, standing in front of an old mill (subtext – it's grim up North) and interview a Kirkgate market fishmonger in Leeds when they could have interviewed people in the far more stylish Victoria Quarter over the road?

HAVING agreed to hold leadership debates, Michael Crick, Newsnight's esteemed political editor, has revealed the first major snag – the timing of these set-piece contests.

Assuming a May election, it was intended that the debates would take place on April 14 (ITV), April 21 (Sky) and April 28 (BBC). Yet the first two dates will clash with the semi-finals of the Champions League, with British football clubs expected to feature prominently.

Even moving the debates back a day is problematical – they will coincide with the semi-finals of the Europa League (formerly the UEFA Cup).

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

It risks Messrs Brown, Cameron and Clegg playing second fiddle to football. Perhaps this is their game plan.

IT was somewhat ironic that Gordon Brown chose this week to lecture football clubs – like Manchester United – on their levels of indebtedness.

This is, after all, the Prime Minister who is presiding over a record deficit, largely as a result of his decade-long tenureship of the Treasury, and which is hampering Britain's growth prospects.

Has the man no shame?

TALKING of sport, Mr Brown is relishing the prospect of his fellow

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Scot, Andy Murray, winning the Australian Open tomorrow – and becoming the first British winner of a "Grand Slam" tennis tournament since 1936. Just think of the extra tax he will have to pay the Treasury.

But, given Murray's millionaire status and the riches coming his way, is there any justification for the taxpayer-subsidised RBS bank to continue sponsoring him when the player has all the money that he needs?