Whenever we are told that the state needs new powers for whatever reason, we are constantly reassured that there will be ‘safeguards’ and ‘accountability’ to protect citizens from the intrusions of powerful government agencies.
You did not have to be a Brazillian living in London to have some doubts about that. And it is not just in such high profile cases that government agencies misuse their powers.
For example, here in Australia, a rather colourful lawyer, one Michael Brereton has found that details of his messy private life have found their way into newspapers after a tax investigation against him failed to provide the state with enough legal ammunition to prosecute him.
Investigator inquiries have appeared to focus on the details of the financial structure behind Mr Brereton’s latest theatre venture, the musical Jolson.
… But Mr Brereton and a number of his Jolson investors maintain it was a bona fide musical and not a tax scam, despite being a flop. He says that in the absence of evidence of any wrongdoing, the ACC moved to shame him.
The original Melbourne newspaper article that fingered him, headlined “Drug, sex claims in tax probe”, described Operation Wickenby’s Mr X and appeared to derive straight from court affidavits provide by his ex-wife.
She declined to repeat her claims that Mr Brereton endangered his daughter but labels him “a nasty and vindictive man”. She said the newspaper leaks must have come from the ACC, which had “subpoenaed a lot of my files”. The ACC has denied being responsible.
A longstanding friend, former cabinet minister Alan Griffiths, said the ACC had “potentially ripped up the rule book in relation to lawyer-client privilege”.
The Australian Crime Commission has suffered a massive blow to its credibility by getting entangled in a domestic spat; but it might also demonstrate just how far government agencies are willing to go to ‘get at’ people its officials take a dislike to.
So much for those ‘safeguards’, hey.
It’s obviously terrible that the state can get away with this kind of thing. However, I found it amusing that the alleged scam seemed to mirror the plot of Mel Brooks’ The Producers. I’m guessing that a musical entitled Jolson would be about Al Jolson, the guy who used to “black-up” and sing about his mammy. I’m sure that would be less popular than Springtime for Hitler in today’s political climate.
Hi there
You could drop a line to my colleague maurice@opendoors-newbusiness.co.uk – he’s been in the business for 20 odd years and is happy to dispense free practical advice for these sorts of situations.
For more info check http://www.opendoors-newbusiness.co.uk
All the best
Antony
If arbitary power is given to people of course they use this power.
The basic point is, of course, not to let people have arbitary power in the first place – not to try and put “safeguards” in place.
As for taxation.
If there must be an income tax (and, after all, the United States only introduced one in 1913 and many other countries only got one in the First World War), the government should decide what proportion of people’s income in wishes to take and then take it.
No different percentages for people on different incomes, no exceptions for this or that (and so on).
Historically 10% (a tithe) was consdered, by reformers, enough for even big government countries like France.
One of Louis XIV Generals (a master of fortification and called by the first Saint Simon the most honourable man in France) worked out that a singe 10% tax without exceptions would provide as much revenue as wildly complicated system of taxation (much of which vanished into the administration) that France had at that time.
Of course, if governments insist on spending more than 10% of the economy they will “need” more money – but there is still no need for administrative compexity.
The late Anglo-Australian economist Colin Clarke argued that if the government of a country (at all levels) spent more than 25% of G.D.P. that country would go into decline in the long term.
Even in the 1960’s (the time of the Vietnam war) Australian government (local, State and Federal) spent “only” about 25% of G.D.P.
Surely it is not beyond the wit of man to go back to that?
Although I should point out that government in Australia does spend a bit less (as a percentage of the economy) than total (local, State and Federal) government in the United States.
Britian is (of course) unworthy of comment.
Hey, if that Brazilian didn’t want to be shot, he should have stayed in Brazilianland, where he would have been so much safer…
The reporter is incorrect here this does not seem to be over … I guess when you behave like a gangster and enjoy a gangster lifestyle with drugs and parties with gangster freinds and celebrities who manage to get away with thinking they are superhuman, then you reap what you sow and you find out in the end if you really are superhuman or not