Policies 11-15 Please use

11.  What’s happened to the Unfair Contracts Terms Act – its been hammered. Why?

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1977/50 which appears to be
reasonably drafted.

I then took a look at the new Act in 1999 :
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1999/2083/contents/made

12.          http://news.scotland.gov.uk/News/Action-to-reduce-reoffending-1d09.aspx  The article informs "Between 9-10,000 people serving short term sentences leave custody every year and this group accounts for the highest number of people who go on to re-offend."

I would question this statistic on two premises: why are people going to prison on short-term custodial sentences in the first instance - this has a quantifiable cost burden to the tax payer and the presumption is that if the issue is short-term why are they not being processed as a "benefit" in society. The mantra should be "CRIME DOES NOT PAY" and it costs £31,000 to keep a person in prison for a year in Scotland. Under the Welfare Reforms a person who has committed NO CRIME is processed between £5,000 to a maximum of £23,000 cap – there is therefore an apparent social justice issue - that if you commit crime with a custodial sentence in Scotland it has a value more than that of a person on welfare who have not committed any crime - people may therefore have a reason to commit crime and reoffend - such as three square meals a day, a roof over their head, a wash and lifestyle in Broadstairs Marriott! Or Carstairs Hilton!! The mantra should be if you commit a criminal offence "YOU PAY US" - (a) fines even £3 a week plus; (b) community payback as punishment plus; and (c) asset stripping via the Proceeds of Crime Act - that way the message "CRIME DOES NOT PAY - SO WHAT's THE POINT IN REOFFENDING gets through. We may not be processing crime in a 21st century way but on an 18th century model.

The second point I would make is that I am aware of a statistic which may relate in some part to Scotland - that New Labour (Tony Blair ex-PM) caused 3000 pages of criminal law to be placed on the statute books. Whilst I was aware of this stat concerning England, it may be a UK wide stat. I am therefore questioning what kind of offences are causing short term custodial sentences and why did New Labour criminalise the peoples of at least England and potentially Scotland.   He increased the prison population to 80,000 and John Reid -ex MP even discussed prison ships. Can you therefore take a look at the Scottish Stats and see what exactly was put on the statute books of Scotland, thereby criminalising people in short term custodial sentences: in that regard we don't appear to be criminalising bankers! Or Tony Blair for misconduct in public office – the Iraq war was “unjust”!!!!  Concerning this exercise, if there is an issue that their being a codification exercise to remove criminal offences altogether or to non-custodial measures referred above.

My point of view is that only violent crime should mean prison.  Non-violent crime should never be custodial as there is an issue of social justice concerning people who do not commit crime. It is clear that imprisonment for short-term custodial sentences needs a rethink as 9,000-10,000 people are reoffending and therefore not getting the message to stop criminal behaviour or that certain people are being specifically targeted for certain types of behaviour and are never out of the system or are easy targets for crime stats in specific areas – possibly poverty issue too: so there is a need to look at causation and effect, an eg would be homelessness. So for instance, asking the Judiciary for their sentencing stats might indicate what is actually occurring in Society concerning short-term custodial sentences and what type of offences are causing the bulk of the 9,000-10,000 stats.

The article informs "The Justice Secretary said:

“Reoffending creates victims, damages communities, wastes potential and costs the Scottish economy around £3 billion every year.

“Tackling reoffending is a key part of this government’s justice strategy and we have already made good progress in this area. The reconviction rate in Scotland is now at its lowest level for 16 years and recorded crime is at a 41 year low. We have a vision of justice in Scotland where people are held to account for their offending and are then supported to be active and responsible members of society. "

I agree with the Justice Secretary's representation. A £3 billion spend on people who have committed a crime is to deprive people who have NOT committed a crime of £3 billion in public services. This could be funds to enhance deprived communities; alleviate poverty amongst Scottish children; roads, potholes and gritting, library books, street lighting, play parks; process the Homeless and provide affordable housing measures; enable people to access justice via the Legal Aid fund and my favourite ensure that there are adequate funds and bureaus available via the Citizen Advice Bureau service and that the service is not functioning on a shoestring in buildings that make do and mend.

13.          The Scots do not want Faslane and nuclear issue. I would therefore raise the issue for debate that Faslane be put forward for a non-proliferation treaty with the Americans and Russians and any other country involved in this issue.  It is a drain on resources for all of us concerning something we will never use. I would respectfully suggest that Faslane be turned into an International Cyber Crime Court such that there would be one jurisdiction for all licenced software and hardware, hacking would have an international response, banking and regularity management would be centralised globally when the rule of law fails, mismanagement would feature amongst multi-nationals and subsidiaries and taxation issues, and the FIFA issue concerning the Swiss system would enable criminalisation of mismanagement.  Data Protection would have one legal jurisdiction - how many of you have tried to unsubscribe membership of a website outside the UK/Europe - if you can't then your subject to that countries "host" legal jurisdiction on data protection - needs an international response.  There is a need for an international cybercrime court concerning technology somewhere in the world – I would suggest Japan as it is techy orientated and ASIMO could be a mascot; or Cern in Switzerland as it created the Web and Spider network (I think); or Faslane or Dounreay in Scotland as it is central to the world and has an ideology as a deterrant that needs replaced as not being necessary in the 21st Century and beyond and requires networking  ie the web provides the information which is no use to anyone until it is networked – Faslane deprives communities of funds and is of little or no benefit to the world other than as a deterrent, ie a burden, should or could this be turned around to maximise benefit to the world to ensure that technology is upgraded to the international level where it appears to me to be necessary. This is a significant infrastructure project because it would be removing something to create something else: it therefore needs an international conference to debate the issue as it would be hoped that all countries would come on board if it were to progress and be successful.

14.1        There is a constitutional issue at UK level  - the Access to Justice Act 1999 according to Lord Mackay in Hansard 10/12/98 that history was in the making - this Act was occurring via the Despatch Box and not the Woolsack.  I did not note at the time any constitutional authority for this to occur - therefore this Act may not actually be legal.  As such, there is a raised presumption that any subsequent Acts if made from the Despatch Box, may not be legal either including the Devolution Act. 

14.2        Secondly, Lord Straw became Lord Chancellor.  He is a politician not a judge. Where did the authority come from constitutionally that a politician could hold the office of Lord Chancellor.  Issue is separation of the powers.  Judges are unelected except the position of Lord Chancellor which has dualistic executive function in government.  The same issue affected Chris Grayling who did not even have a law degree.  And Michael Gove as current holder of the office.  I have notified the Constitutional committee – no response received.

15.          Contaminated Food – various shops in Inverness are putting “modified” before certain ingredients – Iceland.  Tesco is selling Arizona Tea with “GM” ingredient. Where did the authority come from to do this in Scotland?