Ellee Seymour

The service personnel who pocketed cash for their stories after returning from Iran should donate the money to charity, it is the only way they can retain the credibility and respect of their peers – and that is priceless.

They were faced in a difficult situation, they have had no media training and were made cash offers they couldn’t refuse. It was a terrible position for them to be placed in and they are now paying the price for Des Browne’s department’s gross error of judgement. No wonder a petition has been launched on the Downing Street website calling for the person responsible to be sacked.

Not only have these personnel been vilified by the press, they have been subjected to a barrage of contempt by fellow servicemen on the Internet, which the Daily Mail reports today (can’t find link). A couple of examples are: “Mr Bean was a numpty wimp who blubbed when they took his iPod,” and “Faye will realise what she has done, will be unable to return to face her shipmates … stress card will be played and an out of court settlement looms.”

I wouldn’t want to be in their shoes when they return to normal duties…

Update: 17 April, one of the sailors is banned from giving his story away for free.

Share on Facebook

I enjoy a glass of red wine, but I couldn’t if I knew it had cost £5,000, I would be thinking what else I could have spent the money on.

That’s the price charged at The Dochester Grill for a 1964 Petrus Pomerol Bordeaux, while Gordon Ramsey charges less than half for the same wine.

A Dorchester spokesman expressed surprise when told of the price difference:  â€œHe must have bought it a long time ago: you would not now be able to buy one on the open market for that price.â€?

So it’s hardly surprising that there have been calls for a wine-cap, £10 has been suggested by Superplonk’s Malcolm Gluck, though at the end of the day, consumers are free to make their own choice. Maybe it suits them to be flash because they want to impress. But if they were really astute, they would surely know the correct price to pay. If they had a blindfold test, could they really tell the difference between a cheaper bottle?

What’s the most you’ve ever paid for wine or a drink in a restaurant/bar? Do you think it is fair restaurants can seemingly charge what they like for drinks? Btw, The Dorchester does offer 30 bottle of wine priced under £30.

This is how some big spenders have splashed out:

•  Six City dealers at Barclays Capital spent £44,000 on a dinner at Gordon Ramsay’s Petrus restaurant in London in October 2001. They ordered a 1982 Montrachet costing £1,400, and three bottles of Petrus Pomerol: the 1945 at £11,600, the 1946 at £9,400, and the 1947 at £12,300. A dessert wine costing £9,200 completed the refreshments. Mr Ramsay let them have their £400 meal for nothing
• In February the world’s top chefs and wines were flown to Bangkok for a meal described as the most expensive ever. The 30 people, who each paid £15,272 plus tax and service, were served a £5,000-a-bottle claret, a 1995 Krug and a 1961 Chateau Palmer described as “one of the greatest red wines everâ€?
• At the Movida basement club off Oxford Street in Central London a “premium customerâ€? spent £89,000 on drinks in one night, including two rare methuselahs of Cristal champagne costing £24,000 each. The unnamed customer gave one to the former England rugby captain Lawrence Dallaglio, who was in the club
• One night last year at the same venue London’s super-rich Russians and Germans engaged in a battle for drinks supremacy with their English counterparts. Eamonn Mulholland, the bar owner, described it as being “like the World Cupâ€? as the competing nations bought jeroboams of Cristal champagne, costing £4,500 a bottle. Each bottle was brought out accompanied with a ceremonial musical fanfare: Kalinka for the Russians, Rule Britannia for the British and the Star Wars theme for the Germans. Unusually, the Germans lost
• Last year the Chelsea captain John Terry, left, ran up a £30,000 bar bill at the Elysium nightclub in the West End after hosting a party for teammates.

Share on Facebook

Unless you come before the beak, you are unlikely to know that your court appearance will result in you becoming a victim yourself – of a new government stealth tax introduced 1 April. And Ely magistrate Alan Williams has resigned in disgust, describing it as “immoral”, accusing the government of abusing the criminal justice system.

He was one of the first magistrates in the country to refuse to impose the £15 victim surcharge when recently sentencing a man for possessing cannabis.

The levy has been ordered by the Home Office to fund support services for victims of crime, particularly victims of domestic violence. The scheme is expected to raise £16 million a year and is aimed at helping tip the balance of the justice system in favour of the victim.

But motorists’ groups have called the surcharge a stealth tax. They point out that while speeding drivers who are fined in court will have to pay the charge, murderers and rapists who are jailed will not.

Alan, with 14 years experience on the bench, was summoned himself to appear before magistrates’ authorities to explain his actions and resigned afterwards, saying he would never impose a charge he considered immoral.

“Discussions in Parliament made clear the surcharge should not be a tax on motorists, yet this is effectively what it will be. The surcharge relegates the role of magistrates to that of taxcollectors. That is nothing for which I submitted myself when I became a magistrate.

“I have absolutely no problem with increasing money for victims of crime, but that should come out of general taxation. It should not be imposed arbitrarily on totally unrelated matters.

“The government is abusing the criminal justice system to raise money for other purposes.”

Let’s hope a few more magistrates will make a stand for common sense and justice. Surely this is a case of robbing Peter to pay Paul, and it doesn’t seem legal to me ….

Share on Facebook