A victory for common sense

Thankfully, however, the country’s highest court has proved it still possesses the ability to recognise the fundamental difference between right and wrong.

In unanimously dismissing appeals brought by convicted killers Peter Chester and George McGeoch, judges at the Supreme Court showed a relieved nation that, in spite of a propensity for questionable decisions, particularly when it comes to lengths of sentence, the judiciary has not lost its marbles just yet.

Chester, who is housed at Wakefield’s maximum security jail, was given a life sentence after raping and strangling his niece, Donna Marie Gillbanks, in Blackpool in 1977.

Yet the 58-year-old had the gall to insist that by failing to grant him the right to vote, the Government was breaching his human rights.

Unsurprisingly, he found a willing ally in the European Court of Human Rights, which ruled that a blanket ban on serving prisoners going to the polls was incompatible with its human rights convention.

The European court said it was up to individual countries to decide which inmates should be denied the right to vote from jail, but that a total ban was illegal.

Yet, in yesterday’s Supreme Court ruling, judges rightly showed their contempt for such diktat, acknowledging that overwhelming public opinion has it that those who have committed heinous crimes have forfeited a number of entitlements – the right to vote being one of them.

This divergence of views once again strengthens the case for Britain leaving the ECHR, a move signalled by Home Secretary Teresa May this summer.

Justice Secretary Chris Grayling has spoken too of reviving the Tories’ 2010 election pledge to draw up a British Bill of Rights.

There is an argument that such a Bill should take a lead from America and make provision to ban the most serious offenders from voting even after they have been freed.

After all, Donna Marie Gillbanks, who was just seven when Peter Chester raped and murdered her, will never be able to visit 
a ballot box, so why 
should he?

Some might say monsters like him should not have 
the right to breathe, let 
alone vote.

Chinese lessons

BENEATH Boris Johnson’s trademark bluster and bumbling there lies a razor-sharp brain. Yet even he failed to recognise the significance of an emerging China when he insisted back in 2005 that “we do not need to teach our babies Mandarin” and claimed “China will not dominate the globe”.

Eight years on, the London Mayor has performed a volte face, declaring that British schoolchildren should now learn to speak the Chinese language and gain a better understanding of the culture and history of China in order to prepare them for the global battle for jobs.

He is not alone. Education secretary Michael Gove says the teaching of Mandarin in UK schools will “help to encourage mobility between the two countries”.

With the language fast dominating the world of business, it would certainly be beneficial for the next generation to learn it – which is why the Government announced in 2010 that 1,000 Mandarin teachers would be trained to work in secondary schools.

Yet, while this is undoubtedly a worthy ambition, perhaps it would be better to first concentrate on improving pupils’ levels of competency in English – especially given the fact that domestic employers consistently point out that it is in core subjects such as this and maths where potential employees are so often found wanting.

Schools must ensure students have got the basics right first before they are 
set the challenge of 
tackling one of the hardest languages in the world 
to master.

Plight of bankers

GIVEN the lingering impact of the financial crash on so many people’s everyday lives, public sympathy for bank workers is unlikely to be particularly heartfelt, to say the least.

Yet a new report looking at bankers’ health concludes that many employees are suffering as a result of increased pressure in terms of meeting targets and coping with bigger workloads caused by a drop in staffing numbers.

Again, those working in other sectors will argue they have to operate under very similar conditions for much less pay.

There is an important distinction to be made, however, between those extravagantly remunerated bank chiefs whose recklessness precipitated the economic crash and those ordinary employees who did not cause the crisis but are suffering the consequences.

Bank employees often have to face angry customers while working in a climate of fear created by a pressure to cut costs and sell more products, which has left them too worried about their jobs to speak out or admit they are struggling to cope.

The sizeable contribution made by the financial services sector in Yorkshire, not least in terms of employing nearly 150,000 people in the region, 
means this is an issue that should not be lightly dismissed – either by banking bosses or the 
public at large.