More privacy stuff …

Our PM says that he’s “uneasy” about judges granting privacy injunctions to protect powerful individuals.

Now, I’ve no sympathy with Slebs who sell their lives (and weddings … and their children’s births … and everything else) to the gossip mags, then want to cut out when it doesn’t suit their image.

But I do think those who are looking to do a job, and who haven’t courted the limelight for their public life, should be allowed their privacy.

I also hate hypocrisy, and wouldn’t be happy if abuse of our legal system meant that someone holding themselves as a role model could use it to (for example) protect a lucrative sponsorship deal.

But, really, maybe the courts are making law because Parliament has signally failed – and at the very time that the News of the World (for one) has been hacking into mobile phones. Apparently it would have been “inappropriate” with an election looming.

And because it looks as though our police forces may well also have turned a blind eye to this gross abuse of civil rights – as it might have “jeopardised their relationship with the press”.

FFS – How absolutely dim can you be ? The courts are apparently the only arm of governance which is giving any of us a slim chance of privacy. Sorry if it doesn’t suit your pals at News International though, Dave.