Curly's Corner Shop, the blog!

South Shields premier political blog

Ryan Giggs named in House of Commons

with 6 comments

John Hemming MP challenges super injunction by naming Ryan Giggs in House of Commons
Vodpod videos no longer available.

1st collector for Ryan Giggs named in House of Commons
Follow my videos on vodpod

How does the government really intend to deal with the issues that these super injunctions have thrown up?

With “contempt” being shown by many thousands across the UK and the rest of the world, The Scottish Sunday Herald publishing Gigg’s picture on its front page yesterday, and now every newspaper, the BBC and other media outlets rightly reporting the proceedings in Parliament, the law has really been made to look an “ass”. Any law which does not have the popular consent required to legitimise it, or which fails to be adjusted in line with the national character, must be seen as a bad law. Let us be clear, nobody is denying that there are good uses for injunctions which prevent certain actions, but there must be clarity, openness, honesty and transparency, the courts must be open in the majority of cases for the press to report freely. A “super injunction” is little more than a gagging order sought by those with very deep pockets, who now look increasingly silly as they enrich certain legal firms in the sure knowledge that they and the courts have no power at all to stop people openly gossiping. Our journalists, newspapers and broadcast media deserve to be able to report freely, we are NOT supposedly living in state controlled conditions just yet!

Dominic Grieve’s response to John Hemming’s question was as flaccid and powerless as the decisions made in the High Court, the government’s Law Officers need to find a far more responsive approach which fits with what a modern society requires.

add to :: Add to Blinkslist :: add to furl :: Digg it :: add to ma.gnolia :: Stumble It! :: add to simpy :: seed the vine :: :: :: TailRank :: post to facebook


Written by curly

May 23, 2011 at 6:56 pm

6 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Excellent letter from a Peter Clelland in today’s “Journal” on this subject. Beg, borrow or steal a copy of USA Republican Politicians book “All Politics Is Local” worth a read by anyone who is interested in local politics; wonder how Tip would handle tweets and blogs? He tells of an ill advised mildly satirical comment that he made about Nancy Reagan that got into the public arena, and for which he apologised by writing a personal letter to Nancy; a gentleman.


    May 24, 2011 at 10:21 am

    • Apols unreserved Tip, sadly deceased, was a DEMOCRAT…


      May 24, 2011 at 3:26 pm

  2. Keith Hann, bloke in the north, also writing some “wise words” on the subject in the “Journal” today, what an excellent local paper it is.


    May 24, 2011 at 1:45 pm

  3. Ironic that the hunt for the marsupial has not yet been criticised on ConHome, who take great delight in having a pop at alleged jobsworthery and spendthriftery. Perhaps it is because it is a legitimate exercise, albeit, a relatively expensive one, given the circumstances.What I find remarkable is that some of the alleged protagonists keep tweeting and counter tweeting about it,along with other legal matters, no doubt to the chagrin of the lawyer’s involved. Right to silence not only applies to criminal matters, but, is also best exercised when serious civil litigation is being pursued.


    May 26, 2011 at 7:38 am

  4. Gazette “Geordie Shore” story 4 critical comments “U Turn” story 11.


    May 27, 2011 at 7:34 am

  5. There are a couple of issues to do with the relative powers of Parliament and the Courts, but in a lot of ways, I support the injunctions.

    A footballer having an [alleged] affair is not a ‘public interest’ story in the legal sense of the word. It will not affect how we live, vote or work, but will hugely affect their personal lives. Even if his family already know, the added pressure of everyone knowing and asking is not going to be easy.

    But rather than ever more draconian privacy laws, can we not, as a society, deem these things not newsworthy, not interesting, and not good journalism, so the reason for these exposes is gone?

    Mr Angry

    May 28, 2011 at 10:39 am

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: