Two fine examples of not answering the question

From today's proceedings of the House of Commons:

"Mr. Baron: Will the Minister address this matter seriously and urgently? Answers to written questions show that between 1997 and 2000, for each page of primary legislation, there were 14 minutes of debating time on the Floor of the House. In the three Sessions ending in 2006, that figure had halved to seven minutes. We need either to increase the amount of time we have to scrutinise legislation, or to introduce less but better legislation.

Barbara Keeley: Averages are perhaps not the best way to look at this matter. I looked at recent Bill Committees, including the Equality Bill. It had six hours of debate on Second Reading, seven hours of evidence taking and 38 hours of scrutiny sessions in Committee—a total of 51 hours—and it will have further time on Report. Before that, there was extensive written consultation, which brought in 4,000 responses. It is an excellent Bill, and there has been a great deal of scrutiny."

"Averages are perhaps not the best way to look at this matter." but they are more informative than bare total time figures.


From later in the same document:

"Sir George Young:... When will the Chancellor present his pre-Budget report? In 2007, it was on 9 October. When he does so, will he be as open with the public about the tough decisions that lie ahead of us on public spending as my party was at our conference last week, and will he confirm that there will be 9 per cent. cuts in departmental cash limits as recently revealed? Can the Leader of the House also give an indication of when the parliamentary calendar for next year will be published? The arrangements around Easter will be of more than usual interest.

Ms Harman:... The right hon. Gentleman asked, too, about public spending, and there will be a debate on the economy next week. No doubt, the Economic Ministers leading for the Government in that debate will make it clear that, although there are encouraging signs of recovery, the economy remains fragile, and that although the recession is abating, we are not yet out of the woods. To pull the plugs, therefore, on important capital investment and support for people who become unemployed will not, I am sure, be part of the agenda to be set out next Monday."

And answer came there none. One might be forgiven for thinking that the Labour government were putting off the pre-Budget report for as long as possible...

Trust the government - a fine example

I blogged earlier that 53% of those polled did not trust the government to tell the truth over recent "issues". I wasn't going to go back over all of the examples of this government fiddling figures or lying to us but then I considered the matter of unpaid fines.

In March 2002 it was reported that "More than one-third of financial penalties handed down last year went unpaid, says a report from the National Audit Office today. Across the 42 magistrates' court districts in England and Wales, penalties totalling £385 million were imposed but less than two-thirds of this was collected." The report included some examples of how fines came to be unpaid "In Cheshire, between 1996 and August 2000, magistrates imposed eight fines on a man for fraud and various motoring offences. Last year, he still owed £1,100 despite 60 enforcement actions and 26 enforcement hearings against him.

A man fined £80 plus £50 costs for criminal damage in south Durham in 1998 accumulated further fines totalling £500 by the following year. A series of enforcement notices were returned marked "Gone away". Eventually he was arrested in April 2000 and an order made for the money to be deducted from his wages. The fines were eventually paid off in May 2001.

In inner London a man failed to pay £1,000 compensation for damaging a car in a "road rage" incident. Eventually a warrant was issued for his arrest only to find he was already in jail on another offence. Magistrates asked the victim if he would waive the compensation, something he refused to do. Seven years later he is still waiting for his payment.

In 1991 magistrates in Cheshire imposed a fine of £160 and a compensation payment of £1,782 to the victim of a deception. In the intervening 11 years the court has taken 120 actions against the defaulter, including cancelling the fine in 1994. These include summonses, arrest warrants, committal to prison (suspended), changes of instalment plans and attachment of earnings orders. The victim is still waiting for the money to be paid."

In May this year, it was reported that "Almost half the fines imposed on offenders remain unpaid six months after they were handed out by the courts, according to Whitehall's spending watchdog.

In a critical report, the National Audit Office said that in some parts of the country the proportion of fines collected is as low as one in three. Last year alone, magistrates' courts imposed fines totalling £352 million but only £222 million was collected.

Of the remainder, around £75 million of fines were cancelled because they had been set at the wrong level, while the remaining £55 million were unpaid."

This article finished thus "The NAO's conclusions contrast with the Government's claim that the national payment rate for fines has risen from 55 to 80 per cent over the past three years."

In July this year, it was reported that "The amount of uncollected court fines has risen despite a high-profile Government campaign to improve performance.

Ministry of Justice data released today shows £486 million in fines was outstanding at the end of March in England and Wales, up £12 million on the previous year."

So there is a clear problem that a high percentage of fines were not being collected so this glorious Government had to do something and they did... According to a report in today's Telegraph (which I cannot find on-line, please assist...) what the Government have actually done is to write off millions of pounds of fines a year. "Around £50 million of unpaid fines are simply being cancelled or discontinued...The practice has allowed ministers to claim a dramatic rise in the rate at which fines are being paid...As a result, the official proportion of "paid" fines has shot up from around 60 per cent a few years ago to 98 per cent now."

Listen out for Labour claims that the "proportion of paid fines has increased from 60% to 98% and listen out for the complete lack of questioning of the figures by the Main Stream Media.

Now ask yourself this, what other "official" figures are being fiddled?