| |
New
Living Diary
Index
New participatory
democracy
Taming the Corporations
My Welsh socialism
My New
Socialist Settlement
Globalise the left!
Bevan re-visited
|
|
|
item0057B 872, 873
872
17 November 2003
Lawyers, and the Law, have failed...
This is not a good time to be a lawyer,
in the public arena. Because legal institutions
have failed to nail the
greatest illegality of my lifetime, namely the aggression against Iraq.
There is not a single credible international lawyer in the world who
regards the US/UK action as lawful - Attorney
General Goldsmith has shown himself to be no great international lawyer. The remit of the
International Criminal Court has proved too narrow to nail the aggressors,
even Blair (who is formally subject to its jurisdiction). And
no legal action through the Courts, in the USA, UK or other EU countries,
has reached lift-off.
True, diplomatic pressure
and public opinion are gradually wearing Bush down, and the continuing
illegality of the joint Occupation is weakening both Governments.
Naomi Klein hammered this message home last week, in
The Guardian. It
will be a long process of attrition, as those upholding the UN continue to
withhold their support.
- But we cannot escape the stark conclusion.
The Law has failed.
Might has triumphed over Right, with UK blessing and support. And
that is why I am ashamed, both of being British, and of being a
lawyer...
Do you share my disillusionment?
Are you also a lawyer? Drop me a line
<
Back to Home Page
873
24
November
2003
My judgement
as Trustee
This week I have had to confront my own view
of the future. As trustee of a charity which holds trust funds, I am
legally
required to review regularly the investment of those funds, which have
been held in "safe" money market accounts for the last couple of
years, during the bear market. Is this the time, we had to ask
ourselves, to make a move into equities, and re-invest part or all of our
resources in stocks and shares? We deliberated long and hard, with
the best available professional advice. The exercise is a profound
and salutary one, and rightly demanded of all charity trustees.
I realised that I was profoundly
pessimistic about the future, and had to give the answer "No..."
These were my reasons.
I acknowledge that all Stock Markets have shown signs of real revival,
and that the financial press has been talking up the improvements, on both
sides of the Atlantic. There are even reports of marginal improvements in
embattled economies of Japan and Germany. I acknowledge that these
changes are real, albeit feeble, and that share prices are rising in
anticipation of future growth. And if I were a wealthy gambler who
could afford to lose a few £million, I would be reaching for my cheque-book.
But for charity trustees, the question is a different one. The
funds are not our own. It would be a disaster if these "market
improvements" proved to be another false dawn in the revival of global
confidence, and further losses were to be experienced. And the threats
to global confidence are all around.
The US/UK Coalition is still mired in the most awful, destructive,
destabilising occupation of Iraq, with no end in sight. The Coalition has
unleashed a whirlwind of fundamentalist terrorism which still has a long
way to run. And in its preoccupation with military responses
(rather than investing in enhanced intelligence networks), the
Coalition is deploying the wrong methods to deal with the problem.
Meanwhile, the Palestinian conflict continues to fester, destabilising the
key "Middle East" sector and the Arab Muslim world.
There is no sign that either Bush or Blair will be removed from office
within the near future: this is a bleak prospect, because they both lack
depth and substance of character, and are easily swayed by events.
There remains the possibility that an isolated American consumerate will
be cajoled into an ill-informed optimism during 2004 in the run-up to the
Presidential Election, but even that must be in doubt.
The United Nations, the world's best hope of generating a peaceful
order for the successful conduct of world trade, remains weak and
demoralised, continually undermined by George Bush and Tony Blair.
George Bush seems committed even to ignoring the steel-tariff verdict of
the World Trade Organisation.
The Russian economy remains weak, and will not take up a leading role for
many years; the Indian economy is improving but still very, very slowly.
China represents a great engine of global growth, but it is still a
relatively "small economy", and no satisfactory institutional way has been
found of integrating it into the global economy - it is a "wild card".
Europe remains fractured politically by the UK's illegal and
ill-advised Iraq adventure, and will limp towards its great expansion in
enfeebled form. It is becoming increasingly difficult for the UK
consumer to believe in future economic growth: manufacturing employment is
bound to decline further, given the strength of £-sterling and the
attraction of low-wage economies. The UK system of unemployment
benefit is entirely inadequate, and will fail to maintain consumer
spending, in the event of rising unemployment. And with personal
domestic borrowing at a high level, consumers have little by way of a
cushion to survive a weakening employment market.
I can find little , in this scenario, to support an optimistic view of
2004. And so I voted to leave our Trust funds in their "safe haven" of
a money-market deposit fund. My hope is that, by the time of the next
Investment Review in February, some my concerns will have been modified.
- But, with pessimism still entrenched, I doubt it.
What would you have done? Are
you more optimistic than I am? Drop me a
line
<
Back to Home Page
|
|