Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2005 13:40:42

From: Steve Hedley

Subject: UK Compensation Bill Published

Why the Government should be bothered with this isn't entirely clear, but possible answers are (a) [this is the stated reason] they wanted to send a clear message to those who perceive themselves as at risk of being sued that they can't be held liable if they take reasonable care, bearing in mind the social utility of their activity, and (b) [more cynically] they'd backed themselves into a corner where they had to be seen to be doing something about "compensation culture", but didn't want to actually do anything ....

Indeed. The government want to give the tabloids the impression that they are cutting back the compensation culture, while giving the lawyers the impression that they are leaving matters as they are. Note particularly the way the problem is defined, which in non-technical contexts is always "the problem of the compensation culture" but in more legal contexts is always that the public THINKS that there is a compensation culture. Very often the same speech will be reported in quite contrary senses in different media: "Blair tackles compensation culture" vs. "Blair tackles compensation culture myths".

As the great British public seems to be against tort liability as a general matter, but in favour of it when the personal opportunity to sue arises, I'm not sure that any great moral can be drawn from this, except perhaps that politics is a messy business. Which might also be deduced from other data.

Steve H

<<<< Previous Message  ~  Index  ~  Next Message >>>>>