You can tell when the cheaper end of the Fourth Estate has
reached the rock bottom of desperation: they start taking their cue directly
from the perpetually thirsty Paul Staines and his rabble at the Guido Fawkes
blog. So it was that The Great Guido put out another un-researched slice of
nudge-nudgery today, and was duly followed down the pan by both the Sun and the Mail.
“Leveson
Lover’s Large Bill Blows Brian’s Bluster” trumpeted the Fawkes blog
triumphantly at its amazingly arch and anodyne alliterative abilities. The
great discovery was that Junior Counsel Carine Patry Hoskins had been paid just
over £218,000 for her 18 months’ work on the Leveson Inquiry, which works out
at £146,000 per annum. The conclusion? “It
does not add up”.
What does “not add up”?
Perhaps The Great Guido missed “Inquiry
Protocol relating to Legal Representation at Public Expense” which sets
out the maximum rates that may be paid for work done and invoiced. These, as
far as is known, are standard rates for public sector work, and had a “senior junior” like Ms Patry Hoskins
been working in private practice, she could have expected to do rather better.
How news that is not news is "breaking"
That thought, though, is not allowed to enter as the press
has jumped on the figure, aided and abetted by lame MP Rob Wilson, who might
find time between bouts of attention seeking to represent the electorate of
Reading East, although that looks to be taking a distant second place at
present. Sun Politics has deemed the
matter worthy of a “Breaking News”
tag, even though there is no news.
And the Mail’s Tim
Shipman, someone who knows all about shipping stuff – much of it prefixed with “bull” – asserted “It is an obscene amount of money and the explanation is suspect”.
The explanation, Mr S., is available, and you haven’t so much as bothered to
read it (see above), which tells you all you need to know about the standard of
investigative journalism coming out of the Daily
Mail.
Investigate? Stuff it, just bluster instead
Instead, Mail Online
has already passed judgment, with “'One
hell of a payday': Leveson barrister who began affair with celebrity lawyer
paid £220,000 for 16 months' work”, quoting freely from the clueless
Wilson, who whinged “Surely someone more
junior could have undertaken these junior tasks at a fraction of the cost”.
I dunno, Rob, why don’t you do some research and find out?
Otherwise, Wilson, like Shipman and the Fawkes rabble, is
just carping for the sake of it. The rates payable to counsel for public sector
work are set down (and referenced in the link above), and the amounts paid are
known. That hacks, pundits and supportive hangers-on have come to this so late
in the day is for one reason, and one alone: putting the boot into Leveson in
an attempt to discredit his report.
It won’t work, but keeps them all off the streets. No change there, then.
No comments:
Post a Comment