Parlez~me~'n~Tory

Rightly Wry, Satirically RIGHT

Update on Legal Case: Application to the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR)

Following the announcement from the Supreme Court that it would not be accepting the application made by Northern Rock shareholders to appeal the earlier decision of the High Court, the legal case continues to make its way into the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, although it could take up to 3 years for the case to be heard and a decision known.

The submission of the Small Shareholders case has now been presented to the ECHR in Strasbourg in a document totaling some 90 pages. This is a complex document detailing the legal case which argues against the Government’s Compensation Order. That Order laid down specific instructions to the Independent Valuer which dictated terms that were artificial and meant he had to assume circumstances that were non-existent.

These brought about the announcement earlier this year from Andrew Caldwell that no compensation is payable to the former shareholders of Northern Rock.

We will continue to support the small shareholders, headed by lead plaintiff Dennis Grainger, who are now to progress their case to Strasbourg, arguing the case “afresh” (as opposed to an appeal), in a court where the judges have historically had no compunction in making EU-member governments such as ours accountable for the violations of the human rights of EU citizens.

This action is being taken as we believe this to be the last step required to overturn the Governments Compensation Order and therefore the Independent Valuers claim that your Northern Rock shares were worth nothing at the time of nationalisation.

The Group believes that they were worth between 350p and 650p per share, these figures being based on the offers made to the Government from Lloyds, Virgin, Olivant and the Northern Rock Management Team prior to nationalisation, and also the inherent true net asset values, where market value convention would suggest at least 125% of said net assets.

We will however maintain updates on the Northern Rock page of the UKSA website as further action is taken, information gained and decisions heard. This web page can be found at:www.uksa.org.uk/NorthernRock.htm

Note that as this will be a lengthy process, you may receive less frequent newsletters in future from us.

Support, funding and donations
The Northern Rock Shareholders Action Group wants to raise £30,000 to fund the legal action being taken which now sees the submission being made to the European Court of Human Rights.

In addition to the fighting fund target, the Group needs to cover all the costs of contacting shareholders and to pay for office staff time to facilitate the campaign. The office facilities are made available by the UK Shareholders’ Association (UKSA) – a voluntary body funded by its members’ subscriptions – but UKSA does not have the funds to support the campaign financially. For effective collective action, please give generously.

Thank you to all those supporters who have donated to support this campaign. More than sixteen thousand supporters have now generously donated, and we are very grateful for their financial help that not only helps fight the legal battle but also covers some of the costs of keeping you informed of progress.

There are many former shareholders that we haven’t yet been able to reach. To this end, we would ask that you forward on this update to any friends, family and work colleagues who you feel may have an interest in the case or may know someone who would.

Whilst the Government has significant resources to defend our case against them, we are operating on a voluntary basis and still need donations and financial support to continue the fight on your behalf and any donations are gratefully received.

Donations can be made directly to UKSA at the following link:

http://www.uksapay.org.uk/donation.cfm

Further Action Being Taken
In the interests of maintaining communications with the new Conservative/ Liberal Democrat Government and in alliance with its pledge of fairness for all, this Committee has prepared a submission, with significant input from committee member Pradeep Chand.

The basis of this letter which is intended primarily for Chancellor, George Osborne and Treasury Select Committee Chairman, Andrew Tyrie, sets out our beliefs:

Our Appeal – Fair Value, Going Concern
The Legacy of Regulatory Failure and Value Destruction by Labour
The Contradictions and Blatant Discrimination of Labour Policy
Valuation and Compensation
Proposals for Resolution

This letter can be read in full at:www.uksa.org.uk/NorthernRock.htm entitled “UKSA Open Letter to Chancellor and TSC”
Please advise address changes
Please advise any postal or email address changes to UKSA3@btconnect.com (telephone 0208-468-1027). It is particularly important to do so for email address changes otherwise we may lose touch with you altogether. And please include some other identification such as your postal post code and your name so we can identify you in our database when sending us such communications.

On-going Chairmanship
Chris Hulme and Shum Ghumman are continuing to act as co-chairman of this action group and their contact details are:

Shum Ghumman Chris Hulme

T: 07872 617 737 T: 07775 794 291

On behalf Northern Rock Shareholders Action Group

Email: uksa3@btconnect.com

Web: www.uksa.org.uk

Note that all previous “Update” notes on Northern Rock that we have issued are present on the following web site page:
www.uksa.org.uk/NorthernRock.htm .

PLEASE DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL TO NOTIFY CHANGES OF EMAIL OR POSTAL ADDRESSES OR FOR ROUTINE INQUIRIES. THOSE SHOULD BE SENT TO: uksa3@btconnect.com, Tel: 020-8468-1027

In my recent post Gordon’s Northern Rock fiasco comes to an end I addressed how Northern Rock shareholders have been dealt their final blow.

Work still progresses on this issue and here is an update:

Northern Rock Valuer’s Final Assessment Notice
You will no doubt now be aware that on the 30th of March, Andrew Caldwell announced his unsurprising decision to value our former shareholding in Northern Rock as worthless.

In his Final Assessment Notice, he quotes the artificial valuation assumptions on which he is bound by law to base his valuation. He is not bound though by moral or professional standards to accept such terms but has chosen to accept them nonetheless.

This latest statement is no different to that given by him in December 2009 where Mr Caldwell requested representations to be made to him, representations on behalf of well over 130,000 small shareholders that appear to have fallen on deaf ears.

As invited by Mr Caldwell, we will be seeking reconsideration of the nil valuation with the hope that such requests receive the required consideration although it would seem that, as long as the Governments artificial terms of reference are allowed to stand in law, Mr Caldwell having accepted the appointment of valuer, may have no choice but to choose law over moral obligation.

You can also take action to further represent your views to Mr Caldwell, which we have detailed below.

Only the day before Mr Caldwell’s statement, the Chancellor stated that Northern Rock had enough Capital: the Special Liquidity Scheme announced only weeks after Nationalisation of Northern Rock would have provided the liquidity required to continue as a “Going Concern”. This key assumption required to arrive at a fair value was not allowed under the Compensation Scheme Valuation Order.

With over £500 Billion available under the Special Liquidity Scheme and Inter Bank guarantees from April 2008 Northern Rock would have continued as a solvent, liquid, profitable entity, therefore supporting the small shareholders claim that their Human Rights have been violated firstly by the Compensation Order and finally now by Mr Caldwell’s report.

Did investors have the correct information on which to base their decisions?
Only two weeks after Andrew Caldwell valued the former shareholding in Northern Rock as worthless, the small shareholders now find the information on which they based their investment decisions was flawed.

The FSA announced their fines of Mr Barclay and Mr Baker for their part in manipulating figures on the performance of Northern Rock’s mortgage book but as yet we have to hear the involvement of Mr Applegarth. So far, Mr Applegarth has been legally gagged and prevented from commenting, but did he and his fellow Directors also know about this manipulation or were Mr Barclay and Mr Baker really alone in this decision-making?

Where were the regulators in analysing their information? Or have we forgotten the regulators involvement, or lack of, in the lead up to the financial crisis. Or the legislators, including Gordon Brown, who as Chancellor changed the limits applicable to the borrowing capacities of banks and building societies 12 years ago.

Where ‘fairness’ now appears to be a political buzzword in campaigning, the small shareholders would like to see evidence of fairness in practice, not just in a manifesto for votes.

It would seem that the government would lay the blame solely at the door of ‘greedy bankers’. Whilst this may be true in part, the outgoing Government bred the said greed in pedigree conditions.

These latest fines fully vindicate the small shareholders claims of ill treatment not only by the governance and regulatory framework but also by the institutions in which they invested. Such governance turned a blind eye and failed miserably to protect the rights of investors large and small.

What action can you take?
As with his December statement, Mr Caldwell has invited former shareholders to make share their views and thoughts through written representations to him on why he should reconsider this assessment.

To reiterate from our last update, it is important to recognise that this news completely vindicates our assertion that the terms of the compensation order were manifestly unfair, and the fact that this valuation has finally been released will remove much of the uncertainty that the government and its lawyers have hidden behind in their (now demonstrably false) allegations that the terms of their compensation order adequately allow for the payment of fair compensation to shareholders.

To this end, former shareholders should write to Mr Caldwell as he has invited them to do so, by the 5th of May 2010. Former shareholders should also make representations to their MPs who sanctioned the legislation that brought about the demise of our assets.

To assist, we have prepared template letters for the valuer. Please feel free to edit this template and include your own thoughts, comments, frustrations and anger in your own letters.

The template can be found on the website at: www.uksa.org.uk/valuerletter

Your letters can be also be emailed to Mr Caldwell at:

northern.rock@bdo.co.uk

You can locate the contact details for your MP at: http://findyourmp.parliament.uk/
Update on legal case: Application to European Court of Human Rights (ECHR)
Following the announcement from the Supreme Court that it would not be accepting the application made by Northern Rock shareholders to appeal the earlier decision of the High Court, the legal case continues to make its way into the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, although it could take up to 3 years for the case to be heard and a decision known.

We will continue to support the small shareholders, headed by lead plaintiff Dennis Grainger, who are now to progress their case to Strasbourg, arguing the case “afresh” (as opposed to an appeal), in a court where the judges have historically had no compunction in making EU-member governments such as ours accountable for the violations of the human rights of EU citizens.

Back on 25th March I blogged about Ed Balls and the privacy policy on his Website that breached the Data Protection Act.

I made comment that I would seek to report this infringement by 11th March. It is perhaps encouraging that today (2 days before the deadline) I have received the following via e-mail:

—–Original Message—–
From: Ed Balls
Sent: 09 March 2010 11:11
To: Gary Stuart Wicks
Subject: RE: Feedback from Ed’s Website

Dear Gary,

Thanks for your email. We are currently reviewing the site content, and will update it where appropriate.

Best wishes,

Kate

Kate Williams

Office of Ed Balls MP

________________________________

From: Gary Stuart Wicks [mailto:xxxxxxx@gmail.com]
Sent: Fri 26/02/2010 08:18
To: Ed Balls
Subject: Feedback from Ed’s Website

This mail comes from the http://www.edballs.co.uk/index.jsp?t=contactEd page of the website.

Name: Gary Stuart Wicks
Email: xxxxxxx@gmail.com
Telephone No.:
Comments: Good morning.

Last evening whilst viewing your Website I noticed a number of discrepancies within your Privacy Policy and, I believe a number of areas whereby your site breaches the Data Protection Act 1998.

I took the liberty of writing a blog post to highlight the said discrepancies and areas I believe that may cause you problems.

It is extremely important that ALL (especially Government) websites, businesses and those gathering personal data do so with a full commitment to the DPA and that they fully understand their legal obligations.

This is not a partisan witch hunt but the beginning of research to discover how many government affiliated sites fail to meet their own legislation in an endeavour to bring EVERYBODY up to the same standard.

My blog post that relates to this issue can be located at the following URL:

http://www.wicksie.com/blunder/ed-balls-mp-plagiarised-his-mates-homework/

You will notice the 14 day deadline prior to any action being taken such as reporting the issue to the DPA and the ICO to facilitate your work to correct this “oversight”

If you wish to contact me with regards this issue then please do so via the address given or comment directly on the blog post.

I look forward to a swift resolution of these breaches.

Best regards
Gary Stuart Wicks

It would seem we have a partial success on our hands for common sense and more importantly for what is RIGHT.

I am not counting my chickens just yet but rest assured I shall continue to monitor the situation and report back accordingly.

I do cede that Ed’s office has taken the first positive step to rectification of this matter.

Today Dr Liam Fox MP has written to Sir John Chilcott requesting that Gordon Brown be recalled to clarify his evidence.

Dear Sir John,

Since Gordon Brown’s session last Friday (5 March 2010) two former Chiefs of the Defence Staff (Admiral Lord Boyce and General Lord Guthrie) and a former Chief of the General Staff ( General Sir Richard Dannatt), all highly respected men of great integrity, have made public statements completely contrary to, and directly challenging, what Gordon Brown said during his session regarding resourcing and equipping our Armed Forces.

‘There is a strong case for you to recall Gordon Brown for further testimony in front of your inquiry after the upcoming General Election.

‘I fully understand why you do not want your inquiry to be involved with party politics but I do think that it is important to get the truth in this matter even if this cannot happen until after the election.

Yours Sincerely
Dr Liam Fox MP
Shadow Secretary of State for Defence

The case for seeking this clarification?

Lord Guthrie

‘The military wanted to do many things but because of his attitude they were unable to fund properly the Strategic Defence Review (1998) which the Cabinet had approved, especially at a time when other departments were being showered with money.

The Ministry of Defence received the bare minimum from the chancellor, who wanted to give the military as little as he could get away with. The increases that we had in budget were small and did not take into account the above-inflation cost rises of defence….He ‘cannot get away with saying, “I gave them everything they asked for.” That is simply disingenuous’ (The Daily Telegraph, 6 March 2010).

Lord Boyce

‘He’s dissembling, he’s being disingenuous. It’s just not the case that the Ministry of Defence was given everything it needed. There may have been a 1.5 per cent increase in the defence budget but the MoD was starved of funds’ (The Times, 6 March 2010).

General Dannatt

‘In front of Chilcot, he did not address the issue of the underlying underfunding of defence that has been endemic since the Strategic Defence Review of 1997/98.

Implementation of that otherwise excellent Review was hobbled from the start by the Treasury under Gordon Brown not only not fully funding the outcome of the Review, but imposing a three per cent year on year efficiency savings target. To that deficient baseline needs to be added the reopening of the MoD’s budget in 2003, a re-examination of the rules and the effective removal of a £1 billion year on year – what Sir Kevin Tebbit referred to as “guillotining” of the defence budget… Furthermore, despite the Government increasing the headline figure of the defence budget on an annual basis, the uplift to match general inflation was below that of defence inflation, which habitually runs at several percentage points higher.

So the net effect over recent years has been that the real value – the purchasing power – of the defence budget has decreased every year, and the pressure on the MoD and the Armed Forces has increased’ …no amount of rewriting history can compensate for the years when he neither understood defence properly nor was persuaded to pay for it fully’ (The Sunday Telegraph, 7 March 2010).

Seem pretty clear to me!

UPDATE at foot of post:
Whilst waiting for #bbcqt to begin this evening I was wandering around the darkened corners of the Web and settled upon the Website of Ed (I am a bully) Balls – edballs.co.uk.

It’s not a riveting read to be honest so I do these things so that you don’t have to and if you wish to buy me a beer sometime for that gesture then I shall be most grateful. Anyway, I digress…

Whilst considering Ed’s arrogance and his outright refusal to answer any of my 42 questions I have posed him on Twitter I decided to visit his Privacy Policy to see how “robust” [his favourite word of late] it actually was. What I found is below:

Privacy Policy

IP addresses and log file data

The Labour Party site does not automatically capture or store personal information, other than logging the user’s IP Address or the location of your computer or network on the Internet, for systems administration and troubleshooting purposes. (If you are connected to the Internet you have an IP address, for example an IP address might read “154.198.99.9″). We also use IP addresses in the aggregate to track which pages people visit in order to improve the quality of the site.

Data collection and use

You may be asked for personal information if you complete one of the forms on this site. Please see below the information we ask for and what this information is used for.

In each case we will only use the information about you for the purpose for which you provide it. The Labour Party does not sell or disclose this information to outside organisations or individuals, nor transfer it outside the United Kingdom. You may remove or change your details at any time. You have right of access to your personal information held on our files by written request to the data protection officer (address below) and on payment of an administration fee.

Site registration and email service (to receive Ed Balls newsletter)

When you register onto the site or subscribe for Labour eNews we ask you for contact information (such as your name and e-mail address), geographic information (such as your postcode and constituency), and other details about you and your interests. This is used to help us provide you with information to match your interests. We may also use it to alert you of campaigns you may be interested in and events happening in your area.

You can remove your name at any time from our e-mail subscription list by sending an unsubscribe request.

If you are registered onto the site, you can edit your registration and enews subscription details at any time through your personal on-line form. If you have not registered on the site and you wish to change your contact email address you need to unsubscribe from our mailing list and sign up again using your new information. If you are registered on the site as a member and you use the site to change your registration details (eg. address or email address) this information may also be used to update your membership record on the Party’s membership database to ensure it is up-to-date and accurate.

Cookie

A cookie is a tiny text file that is stored on your computer. We may use cookies in order to tailor your experience on our site according to the preferences you have specified. However we will only access the information that we stored in your cookie file. We will not access any information stored in a cookie by other websites. Our cookies do not contain any personally identifiable information.

Information on children

We do not knowingly collect personally identifiable information from children under the age of 16 without permission.

Links to other sites

Our site contains links to other sites and servers. The Labour Party is not responsible for the privacy practices or the content of such websites.

How we protect your information

Our website has security measures in place to protect against the loss, misuse or alteration of the information under our control. Our server is located in a locked, secure environment.

Choice/unsubscribe

We provide you the opportunity to opt-out of receiving communications from us easily and promptly. Our unsubscribe requests are processed weekly.

Correcting your information

If you need to correct the information you provided us with when you subscibed to our e-mail list, you can do so through your personal form provided on-line. If you need to change your e-mail address, you can unsubscribe from our mailing lists and sign up again using your new information. Or if you have registered with a username and password you may change your details at any time via the login page without needing to re-register.

Contacting us about privacy

If you have any questions about our privacy policy, the information we have collected from you online, the practices of this site or your interaction with this website, send an email to: ed@edballs.com or telephone us on 01924 898158.

You can also contact us at the address displayed on every page of this site.

We will continue to evaluate our efforts to protect your information and will update our privacy policy whenever necessary.

I won’t blame you for not bothering to read that but I shall pull out a few snippets for your delectation:

IP addresses and log file data
The Labour Party site does not automatically capture or store personal information

The Labour Party does not sell or disclose this information to outside organisations or individuals, nor transfer it outside the United Kingdom

When you register onto the site or subscribe for Labour eNews

We may also use it to alert you of campaigns you may be interested in and events happening in your area.[what Normanton???Come on Ed]

If you are registered on the site as a member and you use the site to change your registration details (eg. address or email address) this information may also be used to update your membership record on the Party’s membership database to ensure it is up-to-date and accurate.

Links to other sites
Our site contains links to other sites and servers. The Labour Party is not responsible for the privacy practices or the content of such websites.

Our server is located in a locked, secure environment.[no Ed, it isn't!]

In case you haven’t understand from the above Ed is either pretending to be the Labour Party as a whole or he has stolen the Privacy Policy from the Labour Party Website.

Is he equal to the Party? He may think he is…

I have reproduced the LabourParty.org.uk original Privacy Policy below so you can compare for yourself.

IP addresses and log file data
The Labour Party site does not automatically capture or store personal information, other than logging the user’s IP Address or the location of your computer or network on the Internet, for systems administration and troubleshooting purposes. (If you are connected to the Internet you have an IP address, for example an IP address might read “154.198.99.9″). We also use IP addresses in the aggregate to track which pages people visit in order to improve the quality of the site.

Data collection and use
You may be asked for personal information if you complete one of the forms on this site. Please see below the information we ask for and what this information is used for.

In each case we will only use the information about you for the purpose for which you provide it. The Labour Party does not sell or disclose this information to outside organisations or individuals, nor transfer it outside the United Kingdom. You may remove or change your details at any time. You have right of access to your personal information held on our files by written request to the data protection officer (address below) and on payment of an administration fee.

Site registration and email service
When you register onto the site or subscribe to our emails, we ask you for contact information (such as your name and e-mail address), geographic information (such as your postcode and constituency), and other details about you and your interests. This is used to help us provide you with information to match your interests. We may also use it to alert you of campaigns you may be interested in and events happening in your area.

Joining the Party and renewing your membership online
We collect the required information in order to check you meet the conditions of and help you fulfil the opportunities provided by membership of the Labour Party. At your option, we ask for additional information such as gender, date of birth and trade union membership to help us provide a better membership service to you.

To volunteer (pledge your support)
We ask for your contact details, postcode and information on the type of volunteer work you are interested in. This information helps us identify suitable volunteer opportunities for you within the Party. Your details will be forwarded to the appropriate local or regional party officer who can then contact you.

Donating to the Party
The information we ask for is used to process your donation and, if you donate more than £200, to check that you are on the electoral register. If you donate more than £1,000 to a Labour Party unit (eg. Constituency Labour Party) or more than £5,000 to the Labour Party nationally in the course of a calendar year, your name and the amount of your donation will be reported to the Electoral Commission for publication on their public register of donations to the Labour Party. Donation Information will be stored on our membership database and used to keep you informed of Labour news, campaign and other opportunities to support the Party.

Cookie
A cookie is a tiny text file that is stored on your computer. We may use cookies in order to tailor your experience on our site according to the preferences you have specified. However we will only access the information that we stored in your cookie file. We will not access any information stored in a cookie by other websites. Our cookies do not contain any personally identifiable information.

Information on children

The Labour Party does not process any personal details from individuals under the age of 15 without parent/guardian consent. Details of under 16s are processed for membership purposes only.

Links to other sites
Our site contains links to other sites and servers. The Labour Party is not responsible for the privacy practices or the content of such websites.

How we protect your information
Our website has security measures in place to protect against the loss, misuse or alteration of the information under our control. Our server is located in a locked, secure environment, with a guard posted 24 hours a day. When you contribute online, we use a secure server to protect your credit card number and other personal information during transmission. The details are transmitted through Thawte to ensure absolute security.

Choice/unsubscribe
We provide you the opportunity to opt-out of receiving communications from us easily and promptly. Our unsubscribe requests are processed weekly.

Correcting your information
If you need to correct the information you provided us with when you subscibed to our e-mail list, you can do so through your personal form provided on-line. If you need to change your e-mail address, you can unsubscribe from our mailing lists and sign up again using your new information. Or if you have registered with a username and password you may change your details at any time via the login page without needing to re-register.

Contacting us about privacy
If you have any questions about our privacy policy, the information we have collected from you online, the practices of this site or your interaction with this website, please contacy us by clicking here or telephone our call centre on 08705 900200.

You can also contact us at the address below:
E-campaigns team
Labour Party
39 Victoria Street
London
SW1H 0HA

Our data protection officer can be contacted at the following address:
Melanie Onn
Labour Party
39 Victoria Street
London
SW1H 0HA

We will continue to evaluate our efforts to protect your information and will update our privacy policy whenever necessary

Quite simply Ed Balls has stolen this text and used it on his own site.

Even if he attempts to claim he had permission to use this then it shows that anybody who has given information such as e-mails etc via edballs.co.uk has no legal assurance that their information will be held and used correctly.

I put it to you, Ed Balls, Sir that you MUST change your Privacy Policy to correctly reflect the Website content you present.

Your failure to do this in a timely fashion (and I suggest that timely fashion is 14 days from today so I am putting a deadline of 11th March 2010) will result in both you and your Website administrator being reported to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) under a breach of the Data Protection Act (DPA).

I welcome your suggestions as to how you propose to do this.

—–
UPDATE: After writing this last night I was amazed when I logged into Twitter this morning to find a number of people seemingly unaware of how important this little find is and how little awareness of the Data Protection Act there is out there and what you can expect of how your data is held and used.

The “Tweets” that awaited me this morning ranged from “when will you get a life” through “a moment to tedium” to “get back to fighting the good fight on the issues that matter” and “absolutely spot on, but what does the DPA do”.

Well, as for fighting the good fight and getting onto the issues that matter, this does matter, this matters a great deal. There are millions of businessmen and women, businesses, civil servants and the like out there slushing around on a daily basis having to ensure their wares meet the regulations set out within the DPA and further constraints set out by the ICO so why not expect that a Crown Minister complies with the law of the land?

If you have given your details via the Ed Balls Website I repeat you have no assurance of how that data is treated, the DPA exists to protect you and your data.

The Privacy Policy on the site is misleading and incorrect. I am prepared to bet good money on the fact that Ed Balls uses a standard commercial host and to make the statements he is making I would like very real proof of evidence, or at least I would had I been churlish enough to give my data over to his site.

I have contacted Ed Balls via his Website to inform him of his non-compliance and await a reply.

Why do I need to speak when the good people of Redditch (apart from that last chap) says it all!

This post is not going where you think it is, please read on.

Note: There are several versions of the name Gadaffi potentially used within this post deliberately, please see this citation.

A couple of weeks ago I suggested in my Lockerbie bomber al-Megrahi home for Ramadan! post that Mr al-Megrahi would be released, nothing dramatic there as it was widely reported to be a possibility.

I also asked the question

Were this man to be released would he recover dramatically in a Ronnie Biggs style fashion within days of his freedom?

Well, I believe the images that were broadcast of al-Megrahi both boarding the plane and leaving the plane could not be more contrasting, surprise, surprise eh?

I further suggested that

he be paraded on Libyan television as a permanent reminder that British Justice does not mean fairness…

…again, guess what? We’ve all seen the pictures, the mass waving of flags, the huge homecoming support! Simply wrong by anyone’s standards.

There has been much debate as to whether Mr al-Megrahi was actually innocent or whether he was a stooge given up by the Libyan Government in an attempt at satisfying international demands.

There will be further talk in the coming weeks as to whether the decision to release him was part of a trade deal so that British intererests could be dealt with favourably with upcoming oil field contracts.

If either of these things is true then we have the making of a Political scandal that will dog Britain for years to come.

However, there is another scandal that far outweighs the gravity of either the release of Mr al-Megrahi or the potentially seedy manner in which it was orchestrated.

The unsolved murder of WPC Yvonne Fletcher by an unidentified Libyan on 17th April 1984.

WPC Fletcher was on duty in St. James’s Square along with 30 of her colleagues to monitor a demonstration of dissidents opposed to the Libyan leader Colonel Gadaffi; among her colleagues on that fateful day was her fiancé.

It is a day I remember well, when you’re 17 years old major events hit hard and impact on your mind, this was one of those moments in my life.

The protest itself was voicing concern against the execution in Tripoli of two students who had heavily criticised the Libyan leader and for the two months prior to the protest the embassy had undergone a dramatic change from the diplomatic system that would normally staff it instead seeing Revolutionary Committees in charge; all with the quiet nod of the Libyan Government.

It is estimated that approximately 75 protestors arrived on the scene having been transported in whilst the police attempted to keep them separated from the loyalists staffing the embassy.

In the furore of the protest and at 18 minutes past 10 O’clock on the morning of 17th April, several bursts of shots were fired at the group of protestors, striking eleven people, including WPC Fletcher. In those days officers were unarmed and did not have body armour, consequently WPC Fletcher died of a stomach wound within an hour of arriving at hospital.

There has been much debate over the years as to whether the shots were fired from within the embassy though that is the general acceptance.

For the next 11 days the embassy was under siege by armed police with the most poignant reminder being beamed across the world of 5 police officer’s hats on the ground for the duration of the siege, one of those hats belonged to WPC Fletcher.

Colonel Gaddafi made much of his disgust that Libya’s diplomats were not given immunity and in a tit-for-tat act Libyan soldiers surrounded the British embassy in Tripoli.

After 11 long days finally the British Government allowed the embassy staff to depart the embassy and promptly expelled them. From this moment on all diplomatic relations with Libya were suspended. There was some bad planning on the timing of the release of the staff as it coincided with the day of WPC Fletcher’s funeral, I would suggest that was another diplomatic mistake.

10 years ago in July of 1999 the Libyan government formally accepted general responsibility for the murder and agreed compensation for the family.

As I have previously alluded to there are claims and counter-claims that the shots were fired from elsewhere and there has even been conspiracy theorists stating that the CIA amongst other agencies were involved with the shooting. Whilst these have been given much publicity over the years including a televised documentary I believe we have to go with what we know and what the facts can tell us.

There has also been several claims that the murderer was himself executed upon his return to Libya though this is likely to be a smokescreen spouted by the Libyan government.

With the recent release of Mr al-Megrahi it seems that Queenie Fletcher, mother of Yvonne now has even less chance of attaining that justice that has eluded her for over 25 years.

I make an impassioned please to the people of Britain, Please, you have the power to change the ending to this very sad story. DO IT!

On 21st December 1988 exactly 38 minutes after take-off from London 259 passengers who were on board Pan Am Flight 103 were murdered.

Moments later a further 11 people on the ground also died as the wreckage wreaked havoc on the Scottish town of Lockerbie.

Total: 270 men, women and children killed. Countless individuals affected forever.

Since 15th March 2002 Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi has been a prisoner at HMP Barlinnie, Glasgow after being found guilty of the atrocity.

24th November 2003 Megrahi’s sentence was increased to a minimum of 27 years in jail after a change in Scottish law.

Less than 6 years after this change and just 7 years after the initial sentence (leaving 20+ years still to serve) it appears that Mr al-Megrahi will be home with his family and a free man in time for Ramadan, just a few short days away.

The Scottish Government are currently denying that any agreement is in force, and whilst that may have been true at the time they made their statement, watch this space. What if that were to change dramatically over the next few hours or days?

On 25th July 2009 after failing to gain the release of al-Megrahi by claiming the evidence was wholly circumstantial al-Megrahi’s legal team have requested he be released on compassionate grounds due to his illness; he is suffering from terminal prostate cancer.

Where was your compassion Mr al-Megrahi when you murdered these people?

Where was your remorse when you were convicted?

Were this man to be released would he recover dramatically in a Ronnie Biggs style fashion within days of his freedom?

Would he be paraded on Libyan television as a permanent reminder that British Justice does not mean fairness?

Britain would once again be portrayed as an easy option, a soft target despite the rhetoric that she shall not negotiate with terrorists. That’s right, she won’t! {Unless it’s a little unfair to them and might hurt their feelings}.

As for Mr al-Megrahi, as a consequence of this announcement today and in the coming days he can begin to pack his bags safely in the knowledge that he will have served less than 9 days per death in prison!

That, by anyone’s reckoning is a national disgrace.