How much did this farce cost the tax-payer?

[#1]

Another story that if it wasn't on the BBC news website you would swear was an urban myth:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/8209600.stm

[#2]

£6.12.

[#3]

Could you break that down into an hourly rate for the job,per person, please ?

[#4]

Ever noticed that when money is spent in a way with which the complainer disagrees/thinks is unnecessary it is always the Tax-payer's money. However when the complainer wants money spent on something they feel has value/should be done the money magically transforms into the Government's.
So its the Government who should pay to roll out high speed broadband, and the Taxpayer who is bailing out the banks!!!

[#5]

I must be against all spending as I refer to any spending as Taxpayers money. 

[#6]

@wisty YES!  Glad it's not just me
Also, people from all political persuasions increasingly say "they should do something about it" implying that the Government should intervene in whatever situation is concerned.  But they don't consider that this means spending money raised through taxes; also that it will never be possible to raise enough money through taxes to intervene in everything that needs fixing, so therefore every new government has to prioritise and choose which problems to try to address (so the decision at the ballot box is between different sets of priorities); also that, just because something is wrong doesn't mean it can be fixed through outside intervention, and it certainly doesn't mean that the Government is the best "agent" of change in each situation or should be the "agent" to do the intervening. 
It's most strange when people who are politically Conservative are the ones saying "something should be done" - they don't see that having the Government intervene in another situation means that Government gets bigger and higher taxes are needed, which surely goes against Conservative ideals.  But it is also strange when people who are more traditionally Labour supporters come out with the "they should do something about it" line - they don't see that, however much Government can be a positive agent of change, Government can never take the place of collective action by and within society and people.
Sorry for the essay/rant.

[#7]

Quote from: snozboz

Sorry for the essay/rant.

Well said, summarises nicely something that often frustrates me. (Lack of comprehension of how things actually work?)
e.g. Who are "they" and who will pay and why don't "we" do something too? It's like there's a magic "them" that do all sorts of things for free and absolve "us" of all responsibility........

[#8]

Quote from: snozboz

Sorry for the essay/rant.

No...no...well said. Good piece.

[#9]

This is quite an old story, and it seems it was an old Blunkett 'grace and favour' house. Does seem rather daft though, and nothing on Mark Guard's twitter page about it.

Slow news day for some papers? I think the Mail might have carried it as well.

My bold below.

Link

27 October 2009

Unknown

Dear Freedom of Information Unit,

Thank you for your reponse which states:

"I can confirm that the decision to charge Mark Guard was not a CPS decision but one made by Camden police.

All cases must be referred to the CPS for a charging decision except for specific motoring offences or other criminal offences where the suspect has made an admission of guilt to the offence.

In this particular case, the decision to charge was made by the police without referral to CPS.

After the first hearing the case was reviewed by a Senior Crown Prosecutor who decided the admissions made were insufficient to support the charge. The case was therefore discontinued"

Yours sincerely,

So it would seem that the case was not dropped, rather the CPS refused to carry it forward - so well done them, and a kick up the rear for whoever was the Camden police chief at the time? 

[#10]

@snozboz 

"Government can never take the place of collective action by and within society and people"

Dare I mention the 17.4m people that voted for the word starting with the letter B.