Did you read the other day about the young scrote who was threatening to take his old school to court because he claimed he was bullied when he was a pupil there?

If you didn't I will take the liberty of informing you that the urchin managed to take the school for about £30,000. The school were advised by solicitors acting for its insurance company that they should settle out of court because they thought if they took the matter all the way and lost they could end up paying out considerably more than £30,000.

Good you might think - serves 'em right for not running a tight ship. After all we pay the professionals to ensure that our children are well looked after don't we? Well that's all very well until you hear the headmaster talking about the issue. Hewanted to go to court. He was quite happy that his school was no different from most others in that there could well have been the occasional instance of bullying but for the most part he and his staff dealt with it effectively and he most emphatically denied that long-term abuse of the pupil in question ever took place. So why wasn't he allowed to have his day in court? Because of advice from solicitors who feared that the litigation could go against the school. Why should they fear if they are right and have a good case? Because lawyers, greedy punters and befuddled judges have allowed our judicial system to turn into a seemingly bottomless money-pot for any screwball with a half-baked case, that's why.

If you have an accident and lose the use of a limb for example courts are there to help establish blame and if it can be proven who was responsible it is fitting they should award financial compensation for loss of earnings, etc. However in another case, if I lost through somebody else's negligence for example, I would want those people to be punished and feel the full weight of the law but I would not take a penny piece by way of compensation. It is an insult to say here is a cheque for a few thousand quid to replace your baby daughter. They cannot be replaced with cash and no attempt should be made to do so. Now we have the crazy situation where people are compensated with cash for all kinds of distress - surely this is not what it is all about. It is folly to think you can compensate for distress with cash. Why not plough this cash into proper counselling services so that people in genuine need can benefit. If someone becomes a head-case through abuse then all the courts do at the moment is turn them into a rich head-case and as far as I can see nobody wins. However with the current powerful combination of protest groups, lily-livered judges and unscrupulous people with an eye for a quick book I'm afraid the future looks gloomy.

P.S. Who was the lawyer acting for the bullied lad? Cherie Blair, wife of our Prime Minister designate, that's who. The woman who earns £240,000 a year and whose husband thinks it's okay for them to send their children to schools other than those advocated by their party as good enough for the great unwashed. When queried about this on Desert Island Discs he claimed that this was an issue above politics. "I never would have been able to look at myself in the mirror if I had done otherwise," he claimed.

What about the rest of us Mr Blair?

Converted for the new archive on 14 July 2000. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.