What are courts for?

Feminists fight the Budget in court, and lose ... Freezing weather turns people beastly ... Protesting students have never had it so good ... Aussies, The Ashes and racism ... Leverhulme's London Calling  

Sometimes you wonder what the courts are for.

Last week, the Fawcett Society applied unsuccessfully for a judicial review of the Budget which was handed down on the June 22.

The Fawcett Society is homonymous and does what it says on the tin. It campaigns for "gender equality in the UK, looking at women's rights in issues such as equal pay, pensions, poverty, justice and politics".

The nub of their case was that Chancellor George Osborne had not considered the gender equality laws when he framed his budget.

Ceri (have you noticed how crusaders invariably spell their first names a tad unconventionally) Goddard, the Fawcett Society's chief executive, later said she was "obviously disappointed" with the outcome of the case. "We will study the judgment and may well appeal." 

"But taking court action had led to the government conceding that gender impact assessments did apply to the budget and should have been carried out in two key areas: the public sector pay freeze and certain benefit changes."

Monaghan QC: too much delayKaron (there we go again) Monaghan QC, representing the society, told the judge that, of the £8.1 billion in savings raised by the budget, £5.7 billion was being borne by women – "72 percent as against 28 percent for men".

Monaghan said:

"Top-line analysis demonstrates a grossly disproportionate and devastating impact so far as women are concerned." 

She argued that the chancellor, the Treasury and HM Customs and Revenue failed to comply with the government's duty under the 1975 Sex Discrimination Act "to eliminate unlawful discrimination" and promote equality of opportunity between men and women.

They failed to carry out gender equality impact assessments and act in accordance with the government's own gender equality scheme, said the QC.

The judge, Mr Justice Ouseley (a man) said the society had delayed too long in making its application.

Anyone who has ever had to wait for a woman will know what the old boy was driving at, but it was a terribly risky thing to say.

Don't worry, it works both ways. I heard a man calling his wife from the pub the other night. In a lilting Welsh accent he said, "My dear, I'm in the very early stages of being late". 

A feminist from the Fawcett SocietyThe judge also ruled the application was "unarguable", and there was "no prospect" of a court declaring the budget unlawful. Gee! Philip Larkin said: "Courage is not scaring others," but I'm not so sure.

It must cost a bomb to run these cases.

If you make a regular donation to the Fawcett Society you get a free t-shirt emblazoned: "This is what a feminist looks like."

I must say I'm glad the lass in the advertisement was wearing the t-shirt because I'd never have known.

*   *   *

It has been a disturbing fortnight in Blighty. Having to battle snow and sub-zero temperatures has been bad enough. But it turns to despair when you read how beastly people can be to each other. Name-calling is rife.

Stephen Jones, a former deputy district judge and member of the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal called Saleca Faisal-Parkar, a Muslim barrister who wore a headscarf, "Tent head".

Steve said it was an attempt at humour which was wrong. His firm, a Brummie shop known as Shakespeare's fined their head of litigation £62,000 and satisfied Saleca's claim for constructive dismissal with 75 big ones.

In another case, a young lady was on trial for allegedly demanding £3 million from her tycoon employer to stop Fuk Wu: a top dogher going to the press and telling the world he'd got her pregnant. 

Miss Fuk Wu, 39, (a name that shouts defiance) had so impressed her boss with a talent for business that he gave her £50,000.

The alleged victim, who is in his seventies and cannot be named said Wu had proved herself a "top dog" in the business.

That's also not a very nice thing to say. The trial continues.

*   *   *

I don't think Camilla was scared the other day. I think she was uttering a spray of good old Anglo Saxon.

The students are protesting because their fees are going up. It's a particularly selfish protest. They're not part of some great humanitarian cause like the Franklin Dam or the Vietnam War. Anyway, what do we care? Gough paid for us in Oz.

But one wonders if fighting for a university education is worth defacing Churchill's statue or peeing on the Cenotaph.

The Sun wheeled out a member of a boy band to give his considered view. JB of JLS (whose real name is probably Cedric) was qualified to speak because he has a BA in Theology.

He said, "I don't understand what the increases are for. I don't see what sort of a difference they'll make.

"I spent less time at university than I did at school. To pay triple the price to go when you're not there that much, and leave after three years, £27,000 in debt - that's harsh." 

*   *   *

Norman: Pommy scribblerMatthew Norman is usually an entertaining journalist who does restaurant reviews and loves excoriating. Recently, he has been racist. In fact, the whole country has been racist and it's all because of The Ashes.

"The peculiarly upsetting thing here" writes Norman, "is that winning at games - and I hope this doesn't sound condescending - is all Australia has.

"For a country without a shred of history or a soupcon of culture, and geographically distended (with apologies to New Zealand) from the developed world, sport is the only route to international relevance.

Their economy may have nimbly sidestepped the global downturn, and even be booming, but sporting success is all they care about. And with excellent reason. Without it, Australia is nothing. 

In The Telegraph, a weedy looking chap called Jonathan Liew stuck his oar in too.

"Almost exactly four years ago, I met an Australian in a pub in Edinburgh. Upon discovering I was one of the few people in the city who had an interest in cricket, he exclaimed: 'Five-nil, mate!' in that irritating colonial twang.

The first couple of jibes I was able to handle with good grace, but two hours later, several soggy sheets to the wind, he was still going. Eventually, I simply had to kick him in the chops." 

Liew also had a crack at Sir Ian Botham, so he'd better watch his own chops fairly soon.

McCririck: Australians are patheticThen last Saturday on Channel 4's Morning Line, the understated septuagenarian, John McCririck told viewers of his first trip to Australia.

"Australia is not a proper country. They're still dependent on the nanny (England) to look after them. Mummy will come and save you. Pathetic people ..." 

If these English reptiles had pressed the "replace" button on their computers and substituted Pakistan for Australia, the old Bill would have been fingering their collars before they'd got to "save".

But McCririck went further. He described the Prime Minister Julia Gillard as a "bit of a tasty old bird" and advised her to get down on her knees and beg Shane Warne to make a comeback.

Ah, I think Shane's a bit tied-up at the moment.

*   *   *

Happy Christmas, Justinian readers as you quaff your Sauvignon Blancs in the sunshine. We're bracing ourselves for yet another blast from Siberia and not even the Fawcett Society can save us.