© Gerald T Elvidge 2010
View Article  Mink fail to thrive in otter water

Jonathan Leake reports that the American mink, a lethal predator blamed for driving water voles to the brink of extinction, is being forced back by the resurgence of the native otter. 

For thirty years mink, the descendants of escapees from fur farms, have been devastating Britain’s fish, aquatic birds and mammals, with conservationists losing hope they could ever be eradicated.

A report from the Wildlife Conservation Research Unit at Oxford University, suggests that when otters return to an area they seem to be attacking the American mink and driving them out.

 

I loved the bit about mink, the descendants of escapees from fur farms.  This conjured a mental picture of mink cleverly building tunnels and gliders Colditz style, to escape their captors.  It is true that some mink escaped from fur farms, but not in such numbers as to have enabled them to inflict such carnage upon our native wildlife.  In truth, these vicious predators gained a hold in this country only by reason of Animal Rights activists liberating tens of thousands of them during raids upon fur farms over a number of years. Eight thousand were released from one farm alone in September 1998.  It curious that none of the news reports I heard or read today made that point. I am sure that angry finger pointing at the moment we learn that our native vole population is not (as had been thought) heading for extinction, was thought inappropriate. It is a point that has to be made, however. Animal rights activists don't know a lot about animals.  They don't know much about the environment either, for that matter.  They do know a lot about hating, threatening and hurting humans, on the other hand.

View Article  Cans of worms and unintended (but very obvious) consequences

Two sisters, Joyce Burden 88, and her sister Sybil 81, are liable for a large bill in respect of inheritance tax when the first dies.  They have brought a test case against the Government before the European Court of Human Rights, claiming discrimination against heterosexuals.  The case is the first of its kind since the law was changed to allow gay and lesbian partners the same inheritance rights as married couples.

 

Property left by one spouse to the other or inherited by a married or civil partner is exempt from the tax. Close relatives, such as siblings and descendants, are not eligible to register as civil partners.  The sisters  claim that the inheritance tax laws breach their right to enjoy their property under the first protocol to the Human Rights Convention and the anti-discrimination provisions of Article 14.

 

The Government claims that,

“Couples enjoy a relationship of choice.  Siblings however, enjoy a relationship of consanguinity. Further, the relationship between siblings is for ever, whereas couples may part.”

Adding,

 “... a couple made a financial commitment by making a personal commitment to each other.  This was not the case with siblings.”

For political reasons, the European Court will find against the sisters but the Government's arguments are nonsense.  When the inheritance tax “breaks” applied only to the special relationship of marriage, there was a clear and obvious difference between marrieds and “the rest”. The only real difference between a married or civil partnership and that of the sisters is that it is presumed that there is or was a sexual element to the former.  Consanguinity is an irrelevance.  Here, the sisters chose to live together (initially to care for their parents) and have made a de facto personal commitment, including a financial commitment, to each other. As with all partners they could, if they wished, separate. Thus, there is no significant, material difference between them and any gay or lesbian couple living together.   In principle, they should win the case.   Once again this Government, in pursuit of its political agenda, has not thought through the blatantly obvious consequences of its legislation and caused considerable injustice.

 

Sisters go to court over 'gay bias' in tax laws

 

View Article  Professional ethics are for wimps

“When we were all younger, we knew who the pillars of our local community were: professional men and women such as doctors, teachers, bank managers and solicitors. Now, though, the cracks start to appear. A firm of solicitors in Wiltshire has decided to tout for business by asking local traders to recommend them when they hear about marital break-ups that might lead to the parties concerned requiring the services of a lawyer. Happily, one dignified local tradesman — a hairdresser — has pointed out that the integrity of his bond with his customers includes not betraying the confidences relayed in the sanctity of the salon, least of all in return for a commission — or should we say kick-back? — from a firm of ambulance-chasers. What is even more appalling is that the firm protests, and I have no doubt it is correct, that all this is being done in accordance with Law Society rules. Doesn't the Law Society appreciate how a majority of decent solicitors are having their reputations dragged down by such spivvery? And does it care?”

 

Simon Heffer

No, it does not care.  It is all part of The Law Society’s Brave New World.

View Article  What a put down

“No man but a fool ever wrote, except for money.”

 

Dr. Johnson

 

What does that make bloggers, then?

This Month
September 2006
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Year Archive
Search
Search all blogs
My Mates
Blogs of a Liberal Democrat Persuasion
Blogs of a Liberal Democrat Persuasion (Not)
Witanagemot Club
Shocking, Politically Incorrect Sites
Putting the record straight
Local Bloggers
Recent Visitors
lizhism - Wed 07 Dec 2011 05:30 GMT 
Macky2024 - Sat 03 Dec 2011 07:30 GMT 
williyamberry - Mon 21 Nov 2011 06:42 GMT 
wangmingjun123m - Thu 20 Oct 2011 04:18 BST 
liang - Tue 11 Oct 2011 07:45 BST 
Recent Trackbacks
Recommended Local Business
Login
User name:
Password:
Remember me