I wonder if Nanny's chum, dear old Tessa Jowell, is feeling that she is getting a little too much press coverage these days?Well, tough, she has some more!
It seems, as is the case with Nanny's hypocritical approach to the law, whatever laws her humble charges must obey they are not applicable to Nanny and her chums; loans for peerages, money laundering, not paying council tax etc...you know the sort of thing.
As the old saying goes:
"One law for Nanny, another for the rest of us".
Anyhoo, it seems that dear old Tessa Jowell (the lady who doesn't understand/know the mortgage arrangements on her own home) broke her own licensing laws.
OOHH!
Tessa was hosting an event for womens' campaigner Emily Pankhurst, on March 8 in Central London, during which a group of MPs and journalists had a jolly old sing-a-long.
Nothing wrong with that, in pre Nanny days. However, you will recall that Nanny introduced a new licensing act; this prohibits all manner of events unless they have a licence.
Guess what?
Tessa, being above the law, didn't apply to Westminster City Council for a licence.
Westminster City Council are claiming that she should have applied for a temporary event notice (TEN) for the occasion.
A spokeswoman said:
"Under their own remit they should have applied for a TEN.
But we are not prosecuting."
They bloody well should, if the event had been held by you or I; they would have prosecuted!
A lackey for the Department for Culture, Media and Sport said it did not believe the event required a licence; well they would say that wouldn't they?
Quote:
"Because the singing was incidental to the memorial service, it does not fall under the terms of the Act
The event was held in private, there was no alcohol consumed and it was not-for-profit."
Liberal Democrat MP Don Foster summed it up rather well:
"This fiasco has shown the government's own MPs and their own agencies don't understand the tortuous new licensing laws.
Worse still,
the government's numerous excuses have shown that even those who drew up the new laws don't understand them either."
Well what would you expect from a woman who claims that she doesn't know about the mortgage arrangements on her own home?
You believe her don't you folks?
Tessa set the law up and, if Westminster Council had the stones to prosecute, faces a £20K fine.
Can we bring a private prosecution?
We deserve something far better than this bunch of lying, deceitful hypocrites running the country.
This is a disgraceful slur on a fine woman doing her best for her country. You should be ashamed of yourself.
ReplyDelete(P.S., Tessa, can I have my £50 now?)
In the article at http://politics.guardian.co.uk/homeaffairs/story/0,,1733277,00.html, it is reported that Westminster city council's cabinet member for licensing, Audrey Lewis, confirmed that Jowell and her fellow singers had breached the law, but said no prosecution was likely for this first offence.
ReplyDelete"We would not, however, expect to prosecute because nobody has complained about it. It wasn't a question of disorder breaking out or indeed public nuisance"
Well Audrey, can I point out that carol singers don't create disorder, nor are they any sort of nuisance, so that makes it alright then?? Funny how you jobsworths seem to pick and choose your parameters for prosecution, isn't it? Either you prosecute everyone who flouts these idiotic regulations, or you don't prosecute anyone, is that simple enough?
And as for "nobody has complained about it" than I would suggest that we all provide Westminster City Council with the required complaints.
Has this woman no shame?
ReplyDeleteWhat next, pictures of her putting rubbish in a litter bin?