Sunday, 13 January 2013

Follow the Money

From the Scotsman

MORE than 50 victims of ­Jimmy Savile’s decades of sexual abuse plan to bring compensation claims against the BBC, the NHS and the former DJ’s estate, their lawyer has said.

That's "alleged victims"
Liz Dux said the number of people coming forward is still growing. “All the victims that we are representing are wanting to pursue civil claims,” Dux said. “Compensation is the only thing we can really do for them but that is not their particular motivation for doing this.”
Oh, of course. By the way, Liz Dux is working for a legal firm that's bringing these cases.
“It is for getting their stories out there to get them believed and to prevent it from happening again. You don’t do it for the money. All of them have claims against Savile’s estate, and in addition the BBC and various hospitals and so on where the abuse took place.”
Well, that isn't going to happen, is it. If the BBC or ITV cough up, it'll have a gagging order so that the victim can't tell anyone, The last thing the BBC want is grubby stories coming out about them, and they'll pay for it because it's not their money. In the unlikely event of the BBC or ITV calling their bluff the cases will probably collapse as the evidence ain't going to be there.
The full scale of the late presenter’s abuse was revealed in a report published on Friday. His crimes spanned six decades, from 1955 to 2009, his entire career at the BBC, and included sexually touching a teenage girl at the final recording of Top of the Pops in 2006.
"alleged abuse", "alleged crimes."
Meanwhile, Mark Williams-Thomas, who presented the ITV documentary that first exposed Savile, has said the number of victims could yet double, with current figures “a mere drop in the ocean”.

Unlikely as Savile is dead.

Wednesday, 2 January 2013

Rail Fare Rises

From the Guardian
Rail fares have risen again above inflation, sparking protests nationwide. The government claims it's a 'complicated issue'
Really, it's not. It's a simple matter of maximising revenue. If you can fill a train with people paying £120, why would you fill it with people paying £110? Arguably, it would be better to allow the companies to remove the cap and just find the right price they want to charge.

Well, There's a Shocker

From the FT

Hotel occupancy rates suggest the Olympics also failed to act as an advertisement for London as a tourist destination after the games. Jeremy Hunt, the then culture secretary, said in August that the games would “turbocharge” the tourism industry on the back of “a globally enhanced reputation”.
Yet in both London and the regions, occupancy rates in September and November have been flat year-on-year, according to hotel consultants PKF.
So, are any of the supposed benefits still standing or is that it?