Dodgy siren and Hazardous waste - the woes of the Isle of Grain



LNG plant on the Isle of Grain

There has been quite a stir on the Twittersphere over recent months with local resident Jack Hope (@jacklhope) bombarding local politicians/politicos for help and about the Health and Safety concerns of the village of Grain and the Liquid Gas plant in their proximity. It is something I have been meaning to look into and right about for sometime but time is constantly flitting past me without me being able to do half the things I want to do - It’s now only 4 weeks until my second child is born!

Any way, now I've got some wind in my sails and a couple of articles from Friday's Messenger, which saves me a lot of research time and FOI requests!

Right first off the Siren.

Now as I understand it, there was a lot of pressure from residents, led by Mr Hope, for a warning system for the villagers in case there was an emergency at the Gas plant. Although the chances of there being a problem at the plant are exceptionally low there are indeed concerns for the villagers who live in close to the plant.
The fact that should there be a major incident the residents sit under a blast or gas radius, there's only one road onto the island etc...

That's by the by though and the Council Health and Safety committee has looked into it and I do not know enough to add to the war of words and opinions on this matter so I shan't attempt to.

What can be said is that the Council promised to install it last September and this week it was tested, three loud blasts were sounded.

One minor *cough* snag was that it wasn't audible across the whole area!

Parish Councillor Chris Buckwell (con) said; I spoke to two or three villagers, one of whom didn't hear it
Nor did the local Primary school.

Councillor Mike O'Brien, respected head of Community Safety who was part of a Council team present for the test is quoted as admitting it was Work in progress and We had a whole team of officers out there investigating it and once we have sat down in the cold light of day and looked at the results properly we will know where to go next

The Siren cost £24,000 and as Councillor O'Brien says [It] wasn't legally necessary but I thought it was a good reassurance for the residents. My firm belief is the residents of Grain have absolutely nothing to fear.

I would like to remind Mike; somewhat cheekily that White Star line said the same thing about the Olympic class liners. It was considered that the safety measures in the design were sufficient enough to withstand any collision "likely" to occur and that they had the Legally required amount of lifeboats and a few extras. Cue an Iceberg and the Titanic.
What I mean is, when it comes to disasters it doesn't matter what safety measures are put in! Some one should have looked at the design specs before it was implemented and questioned if it was loud enough. Still, I'm sure its being looked at now.

Next up, a hazardous waste dump?

The Development Company Peel is in the early stages of proposing a 120 acre site right next to the village of Grain. This is not the first time that such a site has been proposed and Parish Councillor Chris Buckwell defeated the last one. Things are different now of course...

The last Government changed the rules of such building schemes saying that if it was of National importance it could over rule elected officials and locals... Well that's not democracy or respecting one's citizens. Good Job Labour.

Unelected planning inspectors will make the decision instead of Medway councillors. We're very disappointed about that. Says Cllr Buckwell.

The site itself well deal with cleaning Industrial Gas burners, using specially created bacteria to eat pollutants, soil cleansing and other measures but will not handle hospital or radioactive waste. There is also an agreement with the company that they will fully consult with the residents at every stage of the process. Ultimately though it will be up to the inspectors rather than the elected Council.

Although it is to be a wide open process and with the company giving exhibitions to the Villagers I would trust that should they truly oppose the site stringently with good cause that it would not go ahead.
Though I would strongly suggest to the people of Grain, Mr Hope and Cllr Buckwell - look at the Localism Act. An awesome bit of Liberal Democrat inspired legislation that gives local neighbourhood groups the power to fight such moves and Councils. I'm not overly clear on the details, as I said at the beginning Time is escaping me but seriously guys... take a look... it may help.

References.

Gas leak warning siren seen - but not always hear - By Dan Bloom, p 21, Medway messenger 29-6-12

Village earmarked for a SECOND hazard-waste dump - By Dan Bloom, p 11, Medway Messenger 29-6-12

Could Starkey be right about Britishness?

David Starkey

I did it again, I saw Laurie Penny glaring out of the cover of Monday's Independent and found myself flicking to the page and reading her comment about historian and right wing enthusiast David Starkey and their spat that occurred this weekend. I gather from a source that it turned quite ugly and almost turned to blows! Obviously I don't (and am sure most people won't) condone this at all.

But what was it all about?

According to the Comment piece that appeared in Monday's Independent David Starkey apparently said;

real British values [are not] entrenched in the foothills of the Punjab.

Well... that's true despite Ms Penny's retort of Xenophobia.

I don't know if there is any more to this statement so I'm writing from what I do know was said.

Briticism is defined in Linda Colley's "Britons; The forging the nation 1707-1837", was forged by many external factors. After all "Britain" was forged by military conquest, aggressive foreign policy by England and royal marriages. In fact many would argue the "Act of Union" with Scotland was heavily forced upon the Scots and stacked well with in England's benefits.
This polyglot of nations with separate cultures were thrown together and had to face a common foe in the form of Catholic Europe and then against Napoleonic aggression.

During this tumulus time the middle mercantile class began to bloom and so capitalism flourished and the enterprising nature that encouraged greater cooperation and global ambition kicked off and combined with Military adventure led to the creation of the Empire and a state of identity for Britons.

Briticism grew from this period and adapted to an Imperial way of life but with it came a certain amount of racial superiority over the peoples of the colonies, the "cowardly" French and the "War mongering" Hun.

In post war Britain this state of identity was lost along with the Empire, greater trade and Industrialism from America and all the nations started to drift apart within the union.

As Europe grew closer together, Britain became suspicious but had no Empire to fall back on. Britain had undeniably lost its place in the world and politically, economically and socially it is still lost, it came from Britain and was moulded by events that happened to Great Britain both internal and external.

In this respect he was right.

There are those who still cling to the old deals of Britishness, some are labelled, as Ms Penny has rightly or Wrongly in this case, as Dinosaurs and in some cases bigots - often deservedly so. The old Imperial British is gone and a new Britishness needs to be forged taking in the multi-cultural society that we find our country in today.

It may seem difficult as Language, culture and religion, once a common factor amongst Britons is now varied wildly and there is a lack of understanding amongst groups. There is also the self divisive nature of some groups who form enclaves within sections of major cities or only settle within certain locales.

However we have been here before, when the Union was first formed Scotland, Ireland and Wales were very different to England and yet in time they moulded and worked together towards a common gain and interest and I am sure that they can do so again it’s just early days.

We White Caucasians need to get over ourselves though and embrace the grand project of redefinition in the same way as others need to.

So where as Britishness was not entrenched in the Punjab it should now start to absorb these new identities and influences. Be it Indian, Jamaican or Polish this ethnicities and ways of life can and should be part of the New Britishness.

Captured U-boat sails up the Medway?

U-570 as HMS Graph undergoing sea trials

I was reading on the Medway Memories website the other day about the possibility of a German U-boat being captured in August 1941 and being escorted by a Short Sunderland up the Medway to Chatham dockyard. This immediatly caught my attention and I went beavering away to Wikipedia and Uboat.net to look into the possibility and to follow up on the lead that the site gave me U-570.

Eureka, I have an answer.

The short answer to whether a captured German U-boat came up the Medway (namely U-570) is no.... The long answer is Yes she did....

Now bear with me on this one as I prepare to weave you a narrative about the ill fated U-570.

On April 15th 1941 the type VIIC U-boat U 570 was launched and commissioned at the Blohm and Voss ship yards in Hamburg where she immediatly began her shake down cruises and tests before reassignment to Norway where she took on her new crew and began training excercises with her inexperienced crew. She was then assigned to Trondheimsfjord and the Lofjord Naval base where she was part of the 3rd Flotilla.

Her Commanding officer Kapitanleutnant Hans-Jurgen Rahmlow was a seasoned naval officer with a history of commanding Coastal batteries and had only recently transferred to U-boats (although having briefly commanded the training vessel U-58), her First officer Bernhard Brandt had only been serving on U-boats for a few months, the Second watch officer had only just been commissioned and most of the crew were new recruits. The only man onboard who really had any experience was the Chief Engineer and three of the Petty officers!

German Naval intelligence picked up a sypher that there was a large convoy of Allied vessels passing to the South of Iceland and the Third Flotilla were assigned to attack them. U-570 slipped out of base on 24th August with orders to patrol the area South of Iceland before turning towards La Pallice base in France with provision for four weeks.

By the 27th August, her Captain ordered her to surface to give the crew some restbite as many were suffering from accute seasickness and a couple had become incapacitated. They were immediatly picked up on radar by an RAF Hudson of 269 sqdn flown by Sqdn ldr Thompson. Rahmlow heard the approaching bomber from the observation deck and immediatly orderred a crash dive. It was too late as four depth charges were quickly dropped and one exploded a mere ten yards from the U-boat.
The resulting explosion nearly rolled the vessel, shattered her instruments, she lost all power and sprang several leaks. The smell that was generated made the inexperienced crew think that water was getting on the batteries and filling the hull with noxious Chlorine gas. The order was given to surface and ten crew raced onto the deck, under machine gun fire, unable to man the Flak guns because of the rough seas they quickly hoisted the white flag of surrender.

The officers quickly reported what had happened to Navy command and calmly destroyed their radio equipment and code books. Donitz orderred U-82 to the area to assist but was kept at bay by Allied air patrols.

The crew were kept onboard, save for the wounded (from the first attack and the subsequent attacks mistakenly made by the Royal Navy warning shots and an aircraft of 330 sqdn) so that the Germans wouldn't sink her on purpose. She was taken to Iceland and beached.

By the 31st August Lieutenant Colvin RN and his team of engineers had restored power and bouyancy and the boat was sailed to Hvalfjorour where she spent three weeks under repair. It was discovered that the damage was not critical and that a more experienced crew would have been able to repair the damage and evade the attack - further compounded by the fact that the Hudson bomber had used all its depth charges in the attack and so would have lost the U-boat had she stayed submerged.

Along with her escorts HMS Saladin and HMS Kingston Agate sailed for Barrow-Foreness and arrived on the 3rd October 1941. There she was renamed and ceased to be U-570. She was rechristened HMS Graph.

HMS Graph went under extensive tests in Scotland to test her capabilities and also for training for boarding crews so that they could become acclimatised to finding their way around U-boats looking for enigma machines and reversing any scuttling damage.

On 25th April 1942 she sailed South to Portsmouth before departing for Sheerness. Then from there she sailed up the River Medway. Whether she sailed under the escort of a Sunderland or other aircraft for her own protection in case any errant gunner feared a U-boat was repeating Prien's attack on Scappa flow, is open to conjecture.

She finished her refit in Chatham on 14th August 1942 and is taken over by Lieutenant Marriot RN before sailing for Sheerness, Portsmouth (under escort of HMS Vesper) and on to Holy loch for training.

On 8th October 1942 she left Holy loch for her first war patrol to the bay of Biscay and on 21st she sighted the German U-boat U-333 and fired four torpedoes. Four explosions were heard and "breaking up noises"
According to the U-333's log she didn't even see Graph only a torpedo track go past her and she dived to avoid any further attack but remained unscathed.

Graph's other two patrols were fairly uneventful, though she was ordered on 29th November to intercept the Italian blockade runner Cortellazzo along with HMS Sealion and HMS Clyde and all three failed to sight her. On her final patrol she fired at a German destroyer and explosions were heard. This destroyer was part of the escort of the Cruisers Hipper and Lutzow however none of the vessels were sunk by Graph, and I've not so far been able to see if they were damaged.

After her final patrol she returned to Scotland. She sailed south once more to Chatham and arrived on 13th June 1943 before finally being handed over to Dockyard control on 21st June and used for training duties.

Sadly, with a lack of parts available (seeing as they were produced in Germany), the short life of the engines and the need to replace the batteries annually the Graph was no longer sustainable and in 1944 she was used for target practise and for tests to see what damage depth charges do, having survived all of this she was assigned for breaking up, towed by HMS Allegiance to Clyde for breaking up. The tow rope broke and the vessel beached near Coul Point. She has been partially scrapped in 1947 but parts were still visible in 1977 at low tide.

Thus ends the tale of HMS Graph/ U-570 and here brief tour up the Medway.

There is, however one last footnote that, personally I find interesting so will bore you all with now. After her capture Officers was taken to Grizedale Hall, a POW camp for German U-boat officers, where they were put on trial in an Honour court by the senior Germans present, including Otto Kretschnerr the U-boat ace. They were charged with cowardice in the face of the enemy and Rahmlow (en absentia) and Berndt were found guilty of cowardice. On the 18th October 1941 Berndt escaped the camp and was supposedly making his way towards Barrow (22 miles away) to destroy U-570 to redeem himself. He was caught by the Homeguard but refused to be taken, even ignoring warning shots and was unfortunately shot dead.
The British then put Rahmlow into a camp with Airmen and Soldiers for his own protection.

Blue Sharks in Captivity and Shark fin soup

As a youth I desperately wanted to be a Marine Biologist and dedicate my adult life to working in the Caribbean documenting the life cycles and behaviours of Lemon Sharks (Negaprion brevirostris) in the mangrove lagoons. Instead, a couple of failed A'level chemistry modules and the adoption of Plan B I'm now as far away from that dream as I could be and now lead an existence writing about Politics and annoying people.

Still, I like to keep touch with my previous Par armore and this is how I stumbled onto a startling fact:

Blue Sharks (Prionace glauca) will not survive in captivity for more than Seven months.

As an oceanic pack hunter, the blue shark cruises literally around the world in temperate areas it is used to wide open spaces and hunting for its prey which are likewise oceanic swimmers. They are quite prevalent during the Squid breading seasons and through large schools of Tuna as well as torpedoed vessels which many a sailor will attest to during the Battle of the Atlantic. Unfortunately they are not so good in tanks.

Blue Sharks seem to struggle with having their movement restricted and often swim into the glass and other obstacles before eventually giving up the ghost and dying after a short time, the record being 7 months.

This is truly awful. Though I have been unable to find any aquariums in the UK that house there does appear to be some kept in Europe (notably Spain). I cannot believe that we can allow this sort of cruelty to go on, capturing these beautiful creatures in the open sea and caging them knowing full well that they will not survive long term. After all the capture of Great White Sharks ( Carcharodon carcharias) which is only one notch up the Environmental protection list, is prohibited because they do not take well to being fed food and prefer to hunt and thus pine and die sometimes in a matter of days! So why is acceptable to do this to the Blue?


A greater awareness of this needs to be raised with Government and the EU as this is an awful practice and moral standpoint that needs to be challenged. Indeed, I'm even tempted to write to my MEP on this. (My word I have got middle aged!!!)


Another awful practice that I've been aware of for many years and which has received a lot of publicity but yet still goes on, is the harvesting of the Dorsal and pectoral fins for Soup and medicines by China.


I'm not a vegetarian and I also believe that the sea has a good stock of food for mankind to life off (responsibly fished naturally!) but the Chinese and other Asiatic nations waste many Shark's carcasses. After catching the sharks, usually whole sale on a large industrial vessel, they have their Dorsal, tail and Pectoral fins cut off and then they are thrown back into the sea.

It was truly the most heart breaking thing I have ever seen on television, the sight of an oceanic Blue without its fins sinking towards the depths, still alive and attempting to swim.


Had the fishermen taken the Shark and processed the whole thing for meat, oils and fins, then that's fine but the whole thing is wasted and left to sink to the abyss. It is wasteful and inhumane and action must be taken against these countries to curb this barbarism.

Snoop laws invading privacy

Chequered internet history?

With the Home office proposals to keep tabs on the emails we send and receive as well as our Internet providers keeping a record of what websites we visit one is forced to ask;

Why?

Also more pointedly; To what end?

I know that the Police etc could keep an eye out for would be terrorists, paedophiles and hackers but lets be honest how many actually indulge in this? I know the tired old argument that if I'm not up to mischief then what am I afraid of but...

What I do in my free time is up to me. It is my Private life.

If I want to sit at home on my laptop reading articles about Medway's past or what Mr Clegg is up to now, or stare longingly at Games-Workshop's latest model is up to me and my personal business and the state have no right to take an interest in it until it can effect the state. It would be the same if I was using the Internet to watch an absolute boatload of pornography or conduct an extra marital affair, why should the state know before my wife? Also my emails correspondence are my own just the same as the post. I don't expect MI5 to monitor my post or MI7 to police what has been said.

Not that I am having an affair nor watching porn - if I was that would be up to me.

What I do look at on the Internet, and could raise suspicion, is my well known interest in the Luftwaffe and the campaigns of the German military throughout World War II. Now all the sites I visit are Military based and have nothing to do with the bloated tumour that is Nazism however to the casual observer who just glances at the pictures on the site and not really read the content, I may appear to be a goose-stepping Nazi.

Which- again, I'm really not but there lies the danger.

I know this will all sound rich coming from me after the long protracted debate with Andrew Emmerson about Civil Liberties and CCTV but this is how I've separated it in my mind and feel free to disagree...

CCTV watches public areas and according to the strict guidelines laid down in the SIA licence individuals cannot be targeted without due suspicion. For example you're walking down the Rochester High street and you spot a CCTV camera, you are but one face in the crowd and no interest will be paid to you.
You draw a handgun and start aiming it at people - the operators may spot you, zoom in and call the police because you are breaking the law and it will no doubt be the first time you've been seen.
Alternately you hang around a post office paying particular attention to OAPs coming out with their pension money, the chances are an operator may zoom in on you to see if you are up to no good and if they're satisfied you're just loitering they must zoom back out.
You also have the right to contact any Public authority and demand a copy of ALL footage they may have of you.

With my emails and web usage it is my Private life not what I get up to in Public.

The basis of law, according to the statute books, is that you are free to do what ever you want so long as your actions do not interfere with anyone else's freedoms or do anything that someone else would consider objectionable. This was one of the legal loop holes that was used to argue for the decriminalisation of Homosexuality - what goes on between consenting people behind closed doors is their own affair.

CCTV is not allowed to look into Private residences or places and neither should the Government.

The hope that I hold, and many Libdems should feel the same, is that the Coalition has assigned Dr Julian Huppert, MP for Cambridge, to the review process. I have a lot of respect for Dr Huppert and he has a proven track record of standing up for Libdem values and beliefs, including voting against the rise in Tuition fees.

So let us hope that Dr Huppert will act as a voice of reason in this affair and the Government will not adopt these invasive measures.

Laurie Penny wrong about Game of Thrones and Kingship

It is true that Laurie Penny annoys me and I thought I had done well not to read anything she had written since her awful article about Remembrance day glorifying war which I wrote about in November. Yet as I read Richard Morris' article on Jimmy Carr's tax avoidance I found myself opening up this article on Game of Thrones and Good Kingship (for want of a better word.)
It has already raised my wrath for two reasons.

1./ I burnt the bacon for my breakfast which I had so been looking forward to.

2./ She is writing a populist pseudo Marxist piece about Medieval Kingship and fantasy fiction and applying modern liberal/socialist beliefs on a period where they aren't applicable.

Day two of my under graduate History we were told:

Do not judge historical events or people by your modern standards

Remember this as it is a reoccurring theme throughout this essay.

Firstly, let’s look at Game of Thrones.

Now the hole in my argument is that I've not seen the series as I am not able to afford sky and I fear if I bought the DVD I'd be watching it after my daughter went to bed and my wife out which doesn't happen often. However a few of my friends who have read the books and watched the Series have told me that there is a lot more graphic sex in the series and even a reoccurring Prostitute character has been developed just for the show. Now I'm not going to comment on the greater rise of graphic sex and violence in TV as I only watch documentaries, Comedies and Kids TV with Sophie.

I will however dispute the accusation of Literary simplicity that has been levelled. Pasternak and Goethe it is not but neither is the "Song of Ice and fire" a trashy popularist paperback with no depth or discernible plot laden with gratuitous sex and violence. If it was they wouldn't be on book Six (book 3 and 5 coming in two parts) each of around 800 pages!

The setting of Westeros does absorb locations and characteristics of real historical groups and peoples. The example she uses of the selling of a thirteen year old Daenerys to the Dothkari horse lord (clearly based on marauding Mongolian or Hun tribes) for the support of his army and the subsequent rape basis of their marriage's early days. This is not a racial stereotype, merely a look at what nomadic eastern tribes at the time of Attila were like.
Well I hate to break it to you but the Middle ages were full of this sort of thing however abhorrent we find this now it is a fact that women were objects to be traded as property for strategic marriages and hostages (in the case of Daenerys) and trained to be courtly good wives for marriages to strengthen alliances (in the case of Sansa). Now I don't like it anymore than you do but that's our modern morals, Edward I would have no qualms with it.
Though to be fair to the series there are some strong female characters. *Spoiler Alert* Danerys becomes queen of the Dothkari and leads her Khal across a continent and conquers the Slave cities, Catelyn struggles with looking after her family through the ravages of the war, Arya fights to survive, Brienne fighting to be seen as an equal in a Man's world as a chivalric Knight. These women are not token characters nor marginalised and despite the Medieval style Social rules these characters rise above.

Ms Penny's article is somewhat generalises the characters and their characteristics. Yes it is true that the Stark's are heavily steeped in the Chivalric ideals and that they don't seem to have any discernible flaws but for that you need to look at the patriarch of the house and the isolation of Winterfell in the North from the Capitol at King's Landing. It is also true that the Lannister's are unscrupulous cunning game players however as you read the books you come across villains and heroes on both sides - *Spoiler Alert!!!* The Bolton's of the Dreadfort have a symbol of the Flayed man as their sigil for a reason. Where as in the South you have Brienne of Tarth, Lord Beric Dondarrion, Renly Baratheon...

The fact is that the Medieval world was full of this sort of brutal politics and vying for power. Look at the War of the Roses with family's like the Percy's backing each side and being courted by different contenders for the throne with land and marriages and people like Earl Warwick the Kingmaker. it was a period of horrific regicide and murder of the populous.
We like that Knights were all chivalric in the same way as the Starks of Winterfell but in reality they were more often the ones you took to war were like Gregor Clegane or Amory Lorch. Brutal murderers who held no respect for another's rank or whether there were civilians or not. There is a scene in "Clash of Kings" where Ser Gregor's men torture and murder an entire village looking for riches and information on the rebel Lord Dondarrion. This is not uncommon - the Black Prince had to intervene whilst on campaign in Spain when the King at the time, Pedro the Cruel, was going to butcher an entire village for having fed and watered the enemy forces as well as all his prisoners. Indeed in the book there is also the observation that when the Lords play their Game of thrones it is the small folk that suffer and this is shown in great detail within the series. For many in the books, as well as in the Medieval period, it didn't matter who was on the throne as the daily life of the "agrarian workers" as she puts it didn't change and was aimed at merely surviving. There is no point in putting on the Marxist structure of the Oppressed and the Oppressor this era. I know that Marx has his theory of the five states of society but it is not much more than a theory. Also the people did not necessarily think of themselves as oppressed, except those from Kent who followed Watt Tyler or Jack Cade and basically tried to survive and the Liege Lords and Monarchs cared naught for them as long as they paid their taxes and tithes as well as answering the call to arms when they were summoned and why should they?

The Warfare is brutal and described as such with loss of limbs, eye gouging, lance shattering, murder of prisoners... All far too common. At the battle of Towton more of the Lancastrian army were slain in the rout and cut down where they fled than during the actual battle! Being Chivalric wasn't always the best way to be.

To quote the Song of Ice and Fire on the highly chivalric Prince Rhaegar;

Rhaegar fought valiantly, Rhaegar fought nobly, Rhaegar fought honourably and Rhaegar died

If anything the series is a grittier (and I want to say more realistic) look at the Medieval world and fantasy rather than the more sterile but equally entertaining "Lord of the Rings" and the old style of Fantasy that romanticised. The "Racist-Rape culture" that she talks about is unfortunately where we, the human race (especially in Europe) have come from and people find that interesting. You cannot judge the past on today's morals, for them that was the norm and behaviour we think is awful was ok.

Medieval Kingship could be a swift and brutal period of one's life. To be a King you had to navigate the tides and eddies and keep your lords under close supervision knowing who was on your side and who was plotting against you. Good kings like Edward I and III had mastered it and were good to the common man through their Lords and knights. Other kings like Richard II, Edward II and Henry VI never coped or ruled with an autocratic belief that "I am King, you will obey my will." All these kings didn't last long and they ended up dead and in the case of Edward (hot poker up him) and Henry (beaten and stabbed before taking a dive down the stairs in the Tower of London) in a very nasty way. To be a successful Monarch was indeed an art form and Machiavelli was very accurate in his writings on the subject.

I'm also a Republican and don't see the need for a constitutional Monarch as ultimately they don't serve a purpose and yes they are descended from those brutal enough or clever enough to navigate the tempest that was Monarchy over the last two millennia but times have changed and now the Monarch is almost like tradition rather than a ruler. Lets not generalise though, had a Monarch survived sixty years on the throne in the Middle Ages and not been killed by disease or more pointedly by his Lords and knights then there really is cause to celebrate.

Carr tax dodge Morally wrong - but Legal

I had the pleasure of meeting Jimmy Carr once, about four years ago now in Kennsington where we had seen his stand up. My wife and I queued up with many others post gig to get our programs signed and where the man himself waited for an hour after the show in casual clothes with a marker pen and traded niceties with fans and the odd joke.

It is fair to say that, although his brand of comedy is not shared by everyone, he is indeed a large figure on the comedy circuit and television and he has indeed made a fair amount of money.

I'm not surprised by the story that was broken by The Times. After all many who have large sums of money and either a canny business sense or the number of a good accountant will often strive to keep their money their money. Jimmy Carr wasn't a name that I would have pulled forth but why not?

It has been suggested that Mr Carr shelters £3.3 million in a completely legal scheme which protects a thousand peoples money, totalling £168m from all but 1% of tax in Jersey. The K2 scheme is completely legal and had been fully exposed to the HMRC.

Jimmy Carr has apologised for the involvement and has now put his money where the HMRC can get a bigger slice.

David Cameron said that:

I think some of these schemes - and I think particularly of the Jimmy Carr scheme - I have had time to read about and I just think this is completely wrong.
People work hard, they pay their taxes, they save up to go to one of his shows. They buy the tickets. He is taking the money from those tickets and he, as far as I can see, is putting all of that into some very dodgy tax avoiding schemes.

This is true. After all taxes hit all of us and we, the majority, pay our fair share - why shouldn't the rich?

Well yes that's true but the whole scheme is legal and above board. I find myself agreeing with Ed Miliband *shudder* for the first time...

I'm not in favour of tax avoidance obviously, but I don't think it is for politicians to lecture people about morality. I think what the politicians need to do is - if the wrong thing is happening - change the law to prevent that tax avoidance happening.

After all we can all tut and shake our heads about how wrong and unfair it may be but at the end of the day it is legal. It is down to Parliament to legislate and for the Police to investigate. The Coalition needs to take steps in this direction and soon. However there will always be a clever accountant who knows where to move money around to protect it - that's how they earn their keep.

So while I think that Jimmy Carr's actions are unfair compared to the rest of us they are legal and thus beyond official rebuke.

Though as a passing shot from the Libdem cannon... How above board are the taxes of News corp the owners of The Times?