You’re Telling Us What We Already Know…

What is justice for Grenfell? After seven years of public inquiry we have a 1,700-page report and a cost of more than £200m. We have had investigations, books, plays and more than £100m spent on an ongoing police investigation. Yet so far we have no closure, no prosecutions and no convictions. The word ‘“justice” does not appear in the recommendations of this week’s Moore-Bick report of the inquiry’s findings. Ask any lawyer why, and you will get a knowing smile. Justice means trials, more delays and more fees.

Well I never! You don't say, Simon? And yet, they roll on and on and on. With the bereaved always hoping for change as a result.

The answer is that the “judge-led” public inquiry has become an embedded institution in British democracy. By postponing blame, it somehow softens the guilt and gets a generation of politicians and regulators off the hook. When the Institute for Government (IfG) in 2019 looked back at the 68 public inquiries held in the previous 30 years, it found they had cost a total of £639m.

And why worry about that? After all, it’s only taxpayer’s money. As long as it produces results, right?

The give-away in the IfG report was that one in seven inquiries took more than five years to report, while only six cases produced evidence of a parliamentary follow-up. The public inquiries had served what seemed their hidden purpose, which was to delay blame until those responsible had passed out of sight. That is the only reasonable conclusion for the seven-year Moore-Bick Grenfell enterprise.

Well, they aren’t quite out of sight yet, should Starmer wish to flex his political muscles against a worthy target for once.  

Last month came a breath of fresh air from the new prisons minister, Lord Timpson, with his company’s long record of aiding former inmates. He reckoned that only a third of prisoners should have been locked up. The rest needed the sort of remedies adopted by more progressive regimes such as those in Norway and Germany. In the cases of Grenfell, the Post Office and infected blood, this should surely mean heavy fines, dismissals and restrictions on office-holding. In most non-violent crimes, this should be coupled with various forms of restorative justice.

We’ll have to see if justice is a thing Starmer’s mob really care about as much as they claimed when in opposition, when they never had to actually do anything but snipe from the benches. 

How Much Are You Slashing Your Appearance Fee By, Andrew?

Actor Andrew Scott has suggested cheap theatre tickets should be put on a “sale rack” so that young people can see West End productions without having to spend £150.

Put your money where your mouth is then! 

Scott, 47, told BBC Radio 4’s Broadcasting House programme: “No matter how zeitgeisty or how modern you think your play is, if you are having to spend £150, no person between the age of 16-25 or beyond is going to be able to afford that. That is frustrating to me.

“Hopefully, there is some night or two nights a week when you can get something like a sale rack, you have to be prepared to rummage a little bit. It is important that it doesn’t remain an elitist art form,” he said.

Theatre is expensive because there's a lot of people involved - directors, stagehands, musicians, costumiers...they all need to earn a living. 

Last November The Crown star Dominic West called West End ticket prices “crazy”. David Tennant, the former Doctor Who star, said some tickets had become “ludicrously” expensive and warned that young people would be deterred from going to the theatre.

Funny, neither of them offered to take a pay cut either... 

We've Seen How Other Economies 'Succeed', Julia And Winsome...

The cost of living crisis affects all of us, but it doesn’t affect us equally. One of us struggles to afford the spiralling price of the weekly shop, while the other can shop as before, unaffected by rising food prices. One of us fears turning on the heating to keep her house warm, while the other can heat her home and travel for some winter sun without a second thought.

This isn’t how an economy succeeds.

...and while it might be good for the wall-building trade, I don't much fancy it in my country.

Instead of squeezing low earners, the chancellor should have matched his actions to his rhetoric and taxed wealth at the top.

Here you go, Julia! If you don't think you're taxed enough, the nice people at the Treasury will gladly accept your voluntary payment at that link.

Do be a dear, though, and come back to the 'Guardian' and tell us all when you've done it, eh?