Home » Posts tagged 'Jeremy Hunt' (Page 3)
Tag Archives: Jeremy Hunt
As Jeremy Hunt gives his Conservatives Party Conference speech today, the NHA Party goes live
To follow on Twitter, go here.
The statement from the NHA Party reads as follows:
As Conservative health secretary Jeremy Hunt prepares to give his conference speech today (9thOctober), we should reflect that for generations the National Health Service (NHS) has cared for everyone according to need. When NHS patients and staff took centre stage at the London Olympics opening ceremony it highlighted its treasured place at the heart of our society. But commercialisation and increasing privatisation – policies being pushed through ever more rapidly by the Conservative-led coalition – are threatening the very survival of our much-loved health service. We’re launching a new political party, National Health Action (NHA), to stop the destruction of the NHS.
NHA’s website went live this week (w/c 8th October), and we want people from a wide range of backgrounds to join our party, to reflect the diversity of all who use the NHS and work in it.
The website is here.
Founded by a group of health professionals, our party strongly opposes the Health and Social Care Act. We believe the Act is wrecking the NHS in England by allowing it to be broken up and sold off. We intend to put up around 50 candidates in carefully chosen general election constituencies, and we will urge the Labour party to repeal the Act. We’ll also field candidates in local council elections.
Party co-leader and cancer specialist Dr Clive Peedell said: “For generations we’ve trusted the NHS to be a safety net for everyone in times of need. Putting the values of business and the markets ahead of those of patients and communities will ruin the NHS. This destruction is being fast-tracked by Tory and coalition policies. We hope our new party will halt this process.”
NHA co-leader Dr Richard Taylor is the former Independent MP for Wyre Forest. His victory in 2001 was based on a campaign to reopen accident and emergency services at Kidderminster General Hospital. He said: “We know the NHS and its values represent much of what’s best about the people of the UK. They realise instinctively that it’s only by supporting each other, particularly the most vulnerable, that we can hold onto our shared values of compassion and fairness.”
National Health Action: www.nationalhealthaction.org.uk
Jeremy Hunt's 'big plan' for #Leveson doesn't add up
In what seemed like a bold, inspiring statement, Jeremy Hunt commented to Robert Jay QC that the business model of the print newspaper did not make sense.
Actually, anyone with a reasonable understanding of management will understand that the way to get around declining sales of newspapers would be to diversify your product, if in a mature market which is not growing much; this would be easy to do, if Hunt were able to invest in the infrastructure to support high speed broadband. However, being a true free marketeer, one assumes that he can rely on big corporates such as Virgin, who are largely supportive of the Tories, to enter into a mutually beneficial strategic alliance. So, taken as a whole, Jeremy Hunt’s statement does make sense.
Jeremy Hunt then went to elaborate how the people were looking to these problems to be solved, but there existed solutions in existing law. He described how there could be a new PCC, but Hunt did not at any point opine whether there should be any further laws. Ideologically, the concern is that Hunt’s new PCC would not have any ‘teeth’, in much the same way a replacement for the Human Rights Act would not be legally enforceable. Perhaps, the new PCC could ‘nudge’ principal stakeholders into action, such as reasonable behaviour. Reasonable behaviour would almost certainly in this definition encompass *excluding* illegal behaviour such as phone hacking of celebrities and other citizens. Unless of course you believe in absolute shareholder primacy.
One half of Hunt’s model so far therefore appears to support sustainability. It would make sense if the other half of Hunt’s model could also embrace sustainability. Corporate social responsibility – or acting with a concern for people and planet, as well as profit. I take this to mean including all members of society in what you’re doing. Where Hunt is clearly correct is that a corporates with pending or active litigation, where its Directors could even be brought under the auspices of foreign legislation such as the FCPA, should indirectly be punished by market forces. It is still uncertain whether corporates of their own accord can do this with a bit of nudging – the behaviour of some companies such as ENRON suggests perhaps not. The question as to whether the UK should introduce direct legislation – making widespread disclosure and transparency targets of CSR information available for investors – to give teeth to bodies such as the new PCC.
I think Jeremy Hunt doesn’t understand CSR. His concrete thinking of money prevents him from understanding how the News International crisis began in the first place. To this extent, I have grave doubts about his solution, or lack of it thereof.
How our statute law affects the #NOTW fallout
All law students doing the GDL have to demonstrate competence in statute analysis, so this article will be particularly interesting to them.
This article gives an account of the confluence of various statutes in UK law which are likely to affect the shutdown of the #NOTW reported on 7/8 July 2011. In a document entitled, “Ofcom guidance for the public interest test for media mergers”, clear help is given where the Secretary of State for Culture, Media, Olympics and Sport (currently Jeremy Hunt) can intervene in a media merger.
Where the Secretary of State intervenes in a media merger, Ofcom has a duty to advise the Secretary of State on whether the merger is in the public interest via the application of the public interest tests under the merger control regime set out in the Enterprise Act 2002 (the Act). The Secretary of State will then decide whether to refer the merger to the Competition Commission.
John Whittingdale MP has represented Maldon in Parliament since 1992. In a comment made by John Whittingdale in the Emergency Debate in the House of Commons on Wednesday 6 July 2011, OFCOM can get involved at any time. On 14 July 2005, he became the Chairman of the Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee. In this role he led the Committee’s 2009/2010 investigation into libel and privacy issues, including the News of the World phone hacking affair. The precise clause in the Enterprise Act is as follows,
42
Intervention by Secretary of State in certain public interest cases
(1) Subsection (2) applies where—
(a) the Secretary of State has reasonable grounds for suspecting that it is or may be the case that a relevant merger situation has been created or that arrangements are in progress or in contemplation which, if carried into effect, will result in the creation of a relevant merger situation;
(b) no reference under section 22 or 33 has been made in relation to the relevant merger situation concerned;
(c) no decision has been made not to make such a reference (other than a decision made by virtue of subsection (2)(b) of section 33 or a decision to accept undertakings under section 73 instead of making such a reference); and
(d) no reference is prevented from being made under section 22 or 33 by virtue of—
(i) section 22(3)(a) or (e) or (as the case may be) 33(3)(a) or (e); or
(ii) Community law or anything done under or in accordance with it.
(2) The Secretary of State may give a notice to the OFT (in this Part “an intervention notice”) if he believes that it is or may be the case that one or more than one public interest consideration is relevant to a consideration of the relevant merger situation concerned.
The Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2003 could also be helpful in establishing the criminal liability of directors, if RIPA does indeed apply to the specific issue of phone hacking in the #NOTW affair.
79 Criminal liability of directors etc.
(1) Where an offence under any provision of this Act other than a provision of Part III is committed by a body corporate and is proved to have been committed with the consent or connivance of, or to be attributable to any neglect on the part of—
(a) a director, manager, secretary or other similar officer of the body corporate, or
(b) any person who was purporting to act in any such capacity, he (as well as the body corporate) shall be guilty of that offence and liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly.
(2) Where an offence under any provision of this Act other than a provision of Part III—
(a) is committed by a Scottish firm, and
(b) is proved to have been committed with the consent or connivance of, or to be attributable to any neglect on the part of, a partner of the firm, he (as well as the firm) shall be guilty of that offence and liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly.
(3) In this section “director”, in relation to a body corporate whose affairs are managed by its members, means a member of the body corporate.
The issue of phone hacking could be a possible avenue for a legitimate public enquiry. The involvement of the individuals within the Police, concerning the allegations of acquisition of confidential data, may be further investigated through analysis of Prevention of Corruption Act 1916. The Inquiries Act 2005 may then kick in at this point, which gives guidance on the power to establish an inquiry.
1 Power to establish inquiry
(1) A Minister may cause an inquiry to be held under this Act in relation to a case where it appears to him that—
(a) particular events have caused, or are capable of causing, public concern, or
(b) there is public concern that particular events may have occurred.
(2) In this Act “Minister” means—
(a) a United Kingdom Minister
(b) the Scottish Ministers;
(c) a Northern Ireland Minister;
and references to a Minister also include references to the National Assembly for Wales.
(3) References in this Act to an inquiry, except where the context requires otherwise, are to an inquiry under this Act.
According to s. 3, the inquiry panel, an inquiry is to be undertaken either— (a) by a chairman alone, or (b) by a chairman with one or more other members. According to a recent report in the Telegraph, there is an increasing sentiment that this panel should be ‘judge-led’.
James Naughtie summed up what I feel about the BBC – here's the clip!
Relive the moment! It couldn’t have happened to two nicer blokes, Jeremy Hunt MP and James Naughtie, but it sums up exactly what I feel about the smeartastic BBC.
I am glad James Naughtie is doing his best to raise the happiness index of the UK. The slow car crash in full is here.
But lightning never strikes twice? Well…..!
Happy xmas.
