Antonia Lakatos, of Gladstone Street, Basford, Stoke on Trent, is charged with theft of alcohol and clothing worth £345.15 from Asda in the Wolstanton district of Newcastle under Lyme, as well as going equipped for theft with an item used for de-tagging shop merchandise on 31st March.
Will an interpreter turn up? After all, some of the interpreters working for Capita T&I cannot even be bothered to turn up for a case being heard by someone as senior as the President of the Family Division of the High Court of England and Wales (posts passim).
Yesterday’s Law Gazette reports that senior judge Sir James Munby, who is the President of the Family Division of the High Court of England and Wales, has described the arrangements for providing court interpreters under the contract between Capita and the Ministry of Justice as “unacceptable” after he was forced to abandon a final adoption hearing after Capita was repeatedly unable to provide interpreters for the Slovak-speaking parents.
Sir James ordered Capita to explain why neither of the 2 interpreters booked for the 7th May hearing had attended. He described the response to the points he raised in his judgement (PDF) from Capita’s relationship director Sonia Facchini, as disclosing a “concerning state of affairs”, with 3 points “demanding notice”.
In the first instance he noted: “The contractual arrangements between Capita and the interpreters it provides do not give Capita the ability to require that any particular interpreter accepts any particular assignment or even to honour any engagement which the interpreter has accepted.”
Secondly, he drew attention to the short notice courts were given of any cancellation of a booking by a interpreter (2 pm on the day before the hearing). This gives the court insufficient time to make alternative arrangements.
Thirdly, he noted the lack of suitably qualified interpreters. On the day in question, Capita needed 39 Slovak interpreters to cover the workload requested by the courts; Capita only had 29 suitably qualified Slovak interpreters on its books for court hearings that day, of whom a mere 13 were within a 100-mile radius of London’s Royal Courts of Justice.
Defending his adjournment, Sir James stated: “Anyone tempted to suggest that an adjournment was not necessary might care to consider what our reaction would be if an English parent before a foreign court in similar circumstances was not provided with an interpreter.”
Quite.
When approached for a response to the learned judge’s remarks, both Capita and the MoJ made their usual, meaningless soothing noises that are not worth transcribing, let alone reading.
In political terms, the responses by the MoJ to concerns about its contract with Capita are akin to the “Big Lie“. However, the lies told by its various spokespersons over the years are so preposterous, no-one with any sense is buying their propaganda.
Bristol City Council, those champions of preserving the city’s heritage of past centuries (as long as it fits in with their particular view of what constitutes heritage. Ed.), together with Redfield Educate Together (who’ll be running the school to be opened on the site) and the builders, PPP ‘experts’ Skanska, have submitted a planning application proposing the demolition of the old Victorian school buildings and the building of a box-like, bland, modern replacement.
The existing building has apparently been declared unsuitable by the city council’s Children and Young People’s Service, the trendy, modern moniker for what used to be the Local Education Authority.
A petition has been organised to try and avert its demolition and the information below comes from it.
The Victorian school currently occupying the site was designed in 1898 by the acclaimed local architect, Herbert J Jones, and it is a candidate for local listing. It is a local landmark in St. George, an area with a strong character and the building, in excellent condition, was used by the council until recently (isn’t it curious how the same building can be used and then regarded as unsuitable by the same body? Ed.).
The petitioners believe, as recommended by English Heritage advice on reusing Victorian schools, that the building should be saved and adapted for the new school. If not large enough, other school buildings are available, such as the other school in Avonvale Road in Barton Hill.
The advice from English Heritage is strong: “Where re-use for educational purposes has been ruled out, every effort should be made to find a new use. The aim should be to obtain the best return for the taxpayer consistent with government policies for protecting the historic environment.”
The replacement defeats Bristol City Council’s draft policy DM26 which states that, “Development should contribute positively to an area’s character and identity, creating or reinforcing local distinctiveness.”
The petition, which is addressed to Bristol City Council, concludes as follows:
We acknowledge the urgent and strong need for a new school in the area and we very much support the reuse of this building and the search for more suitable sites, and for a school which is truly inspiring for the future generations of Bristolians.
We believe you should reconsider your plan, looking for the advice of English Heritage’s experts independent from the proposal of a single developer.
One of the jewels of Bristol is Castle Park – a reasonably large green space in the middle of the city.
In times gone by this was partly the heart of the medieval city and contains the ruins of Bristol Castle. It also used to be the city’s main shopping area before World War 2. It lost that status when Broadmead (virtually unscathed by bombing) was developed as the city’s central shopping area. The construction of this bland, uninspiring mid-20th century retail development required the demolition of an area of Victorian, Georgian and Tudor buildings.
The west end of Castle Park, Bristol. Image courtesy of Wikimedia Commons
For most of the past week, Castle Park has been closed to the public for a private commercial event, causing great inconvenience to those who use it regularly, such as cyclists and pedestrians making their ways to and from work or the shops, as well as more casual users wanting a bit of respite in pleasant surroundings in their lunch breaks.
To try and prevent Bristol City Council from closing Castle Park in future for its pure commercial gain and allow citizens access to their parks at all times, a petition has now been started on the 38 Degrees website.
The petition reads as follows:
To Bristol City Council
Following the complete closure of Castle Park (Bristol UK) for the 3rd year running, we propose that public parks should never be fenced off in their entirety for commercial events.
Tens of thousands of people attending a music event can negatively affect local residents and will inevitably cause damage to this small park. Damage which takes time and money to repair, and that can ruin the enjoyment of the park for the general public for weeks to come.
A park should be available for general public use at all times and even more so during School or Bank Holidays.
We request that Bristol City Council only license commercial events to be held at more suitable venues and allow people access to public parks.
Keeping parks open and accessible at all times is important because parks and green spaces have been shown to improve the well-being of local people and attract visitors from further afield.
According to Bristol City Council’s Parks and Green Spaces Strategy, central Bristol Bristol is so lacking in green space that temporary park closures would further deplete Castle Park.
Finally, parks are a public service provided by the council on behalf of the people of Bristol; they should not be exploited to the latter’s detriment as a means of generating revenue.
The report below – written by Heather Howe and reposted from Linguist Lounge – shows that the Crapita/MoJ court interpreting disaster is still rumbling on (posts passim).
Chaos such as this is being repeated in magistrates and Crown Courts in England and Wales every day. Nevertheless, this shambles – as Heather Howe so aptly describes it – and criminal waste of public funds is not getting the attention it really deserves in the mainstream media.
SOUTHWARK CROWN COURT – 23rd May 2014 serious matter listed not before 11am. No interpreter until 10.50 could be found therefore no assistance with conference with client and counsel. Into Court and started lengthy sentence hearing interupted [sic] by Jury returning in another matter and delayed until 12.30 ish. Returned to court and interpreter announces that he has to leave by 1pm. Case started but unable to finish and further interpreter sought. 2.15pm advised that only intepreter available was unqualified and without court experience. Further delays until about 3.30 when Court sat and considered adjourning case. All parties huge inconvenience and court empty for most of afternoon. An interpreter never arrived and we proceeded to sentence in the absence of interpreter and agreement of client. Lengthy conference will be required in prison with registered intepreter and full notes to explain sentence. Additional costs for all concerned. The last hearing at Southwark CC we have already complained that no interpreter arrived. That was simply a mention hearing and we managed after some delay and costs of empty courtroom. I am writing to the MP and the Court about this and lodging a formal complaint.
There was a case I did in Northampton last year with 4 Columbian clients and multiple charges. Two interpreters arrived and refused to attend the cells for conference. Again one had to leave at lunchtime, delayed again and hours spent for counsel and prison staff while clients were seen. SHAMBLES.
All election materials delivered to my home are recycled and those containing my personal detailed are shredded before recycling.
Each election I keep a tally of the number of communications received from each candidate or party, which has acquired the name of the shredder poll over the years.
The picture below (for which Ade Cooper gets a tip of the hat. Ed.) should bring a smile to the face of anyone similarly stricken to me in years who doesn’t share young Nigel’s Little Englander view of the world.
To prevent any further incursion of foreigners and/or Foreigner, perhaps the UK should deploy a squadron of Farage balloons around the coast. Similar to the barrage balloons used in the 20th century’s 2 world wars, these isolationist windbags could soon blow any threat of invasion to the shores of Blighty back to whence it came. 🙂
Will the Staffordshire oatcake be joining Melton Mowbray pork pies, the Cornish pasty and Newcastle Brown Ale by having its status protected by the European Union?
Filled Staffordshire oatcakes. Picture courtesy of Wikimedia Commons
The BBC reports that the the West Midlands Labour group of MEPs is promising to apply to get it protected by the European Union if re-elected.
One of the candidates, Sion Simon, is reported as saying: “They’re part of our heritage and culture in the West Midlands and they should be protected in the same way other European countries protect their food products.”
Conservative and Liberal Democrat candidates are also said to be broadly supportive of the proposal, although UKIP are being curmudgeonly and refusing to support the move (another reason not to vote for Nigel’s Little Englanders? Ed.).
However, I cannot help wondering if this proposal is a local Labour response to the rise of UKIP, particularly amongst Labour’s long-term core voters – the traditional white working class – the people it has taken for granted for far too long.
It is unclear from the BBC’s article which type of protection – PDO (Protected Designation of Origin), PGI (Protected Geographical Indication) or TSG (Traditional Speciality Guaranteed) – will be sought, although my feeling is that it should be one of the first two.
I hope this is not just another manifesto promise from Labour that, like so many others, will be quietly dropped after the election when they have served their purpose.
The historic Ebenezer Chapel, the last remaining non-conformist chapel in the St Philips area of Bristol, is under threat of demolition from its owners, who seem very unconcerned about its value.
As a non-conformist building, it is very interesting architecturally too, looking more influenced by the Romanesque or Norman style (as it is otherwise known in England. Ed.) than the more usual Gothic Revival.
Ebenezer Chapel in its days as an architectural salvage emporium. Picture courtesy of John M (via Geograph)
However, a petition has been started to try and save (some of) it.
The text of the petition reads as follows:
Ebenezer Chapel, on Midland Road, is under imminent threat of demolition. The landowner wishes to destroy this important and beautiful reminder of the history of St Philips and Old Market, to replace it with a modern block of flats.
The chapel was built in 1849, the first Primitive Methodist chapel built in Bristol. Notwithstanding its beauty for local residents and the thousands of pedestrians and cyclists which pass it each day, it is the last-remaining architectural evidence of the education and spiritual support given to the first residents in the area, who settled in the early nineteenth century.
An attempt has been made to get the building listed by English Heritage, while it is a very strong candidate for the Local List. But because it is not listed and is outside of a conservation area, Bristol City Council says it is powerless to intervene and save this beautiful building.
We would like your support for this petition, which aims to show how many people would like this building saved and, at the very least, incorporated into any new development that takes place.
The more public support we receive, the more we can do to persuade the landowner and council to work to save this important historical landmark for future generations, and in so doing create a better development for all.
As well as signing the petition, please consider writing to your local councillor and local media to express your support for saving the chapel, and calling on them to do all they can in the future to protect the heritage of our great city.
On Friday evening the Open Rights Group organised one of a series of nationwide European Digital Rights hustings at St Werburgh’s Community Centre in Bristol. This was a chance for local people to quiz MEP candidates from the South West about their views on digital rights and ask them to sign up to the 10 point Charter of Digital Rights.
Green European Parliament candidate Audaye Elesedy signs the Charter of Digital Rights at St Werburgh’s Community Centre. Picture credit: Brent Longborough
As Chair of St Werburgh’s and having a keen interest in digital rights, I volunteered my services and was surprised to be asked to chair the event.
When I arrived, Ed Paton-Williams from the ORG had already shown up and there was little to organise in the room apart from setting up the wifi, a couple of notices with the wifi details and the last minute provision of water for the top table.
In alphabetical order, the candidates who attended were:
Hadleigh Roberts (Labour) (who, incidentally, is a fellow translator. Ed.).
We were supposed to have been joined by Julia Reed from UKIP, but she pulled out at the last moment. Could this have had something to do with a little Twitter bother?
After a brief introduction from Ed Paton-Williams and a warm welcome to all to the Centre from me, we were off with candidates’ opening statements. All stuck fairly well to the 2 minutes limit for speaking (and many thanks to Hadleigh for the use of his phone with the stopwatch app! Ed.).
As chair I got to ask the first question: has the EU done enough to allow open source software to compete with proprietary products such as Microsoft Office?
Some interesting answers followed: Hadleigh and Jay both raised the cost of licensing for small businesses; Audaye raised the use of open standards such as Open Document Format.
The meeting was then thrown open to questions from the floor. The first concerned data protection and the UK’s government’s desire to make money from selling data provided by citizens. Once again there were some fascinating answers of which I’m reminded of two points in particular: Jay believed people should be compensated financially for the use of their data, whilst Hadleigh stated that companies shouldn’t be buying people’s data. A point made from the floor was that people are very mistrustful of the way the government uses – and loses – data.
The next question from the floor raised the matter of TTIP. Some candidates, particularly those with links to business, favoured TTIP’s implementation; Georgina said it should be given a chance. Other, more wary candidates feared the consequences of TTIP’s proposals to allow corporations to take governments to court for changes to the competitive commercial landscape. TTIP was also seen as a big threat to personal control of data. Snowden’s revelation of US spying on the EU during TTIP negotiations were mentioned by Audaye.
This led neatly into the next matter: surveillance. Georgina thought there was too much scaremongering going on about data collection. It’s there to protect us from paedophiles and terrorism, adding: “States knew perfectly well that surveillance happening… on the internet there’s no such thing as privacy.” Jay responded that we’re struggling with oversight in the UK and that access to communications data shouldn’t be a habitual thing. Hadleigh remarked that the public have to be given a guarantee that they won’t be spied on unless they’ve committed crime. Audaye stressed that Germany has gained a competitive advantage in digital sector because its far stronger privacy culture compared with the UK.
Thangam Debonnaire, Labour’s candidate for the Bristol West parliamentary constituency and a former musician, asked about how the EU should make sure copyright law helps creators protect their income. There was general agreement in the responses that Digital Rights/Restrictions Management (DRM) hadn’t really done anything to stop so-called ‘piracy’, (better known to some of us by its correct definition of ‘copyright infringement’. Ed.). Furthermore, artists deserve better compensation from the likes of iTunes and Spotify. The general impression is that this area still needs attention as the music and film industries are still struggling to come to terms with the internet after a couple of decades.
In one of the final questions, the power of the UK in the EU was raised from the floor. Candidates pointed out that the UK hadn’t really lost any power, but had lost influence due to its attitude. As regards attitude, the behaviour of UKIP in the European Parliament was criticised severely by the candidates. Proceedings in the Parliament were described as generally civilised and polite. However, UKIP’s MEPs were criticised for being rude to their fellow parliamentarians and failing to do any work on the committees on which they are supposed serve.
The hustings concluded with closing statements from all candidates and a vote of thanks to them from the chair.
For me it was a baptism of fire, never having chaired a hustings event before. But the candidates were – apart from a minor bit of mudslinging – models of politeness and made my job in the chair a pleasure. There was none of the two speakers talking at once that I witnessed the previous week at Radio 4’s broadcast from Bristol of Any Questions?
The tenor of the meeting is perhaps summarised by this tweet from local councillor Rob Telford.
Very open debate this evening, lots of audience participation and intelligence, more of a conversation really! #EUDigitalDebate
Monday’s Stoke Sentinel reported that magistrates at the North Staffordshire Justice Centre in Newcastle under Lyme had to adjourn a case until 30th May to allow for an interpreter to be arranged for the defendant.
Yesterday’s 
The report below – written by Heather Howe and reposted from Linguist Lounge – shows that the Crapita/MoJ court interpreting disaster is still rumbling on (
On Friday evening the 