Ellee Seymour

I wonder if the Labour Party has returned the £1 million loaned to them by the benevolent Cambridge entrepreneur Sir Christopher Evans, who waits to hear whether charges will be made against him in the cash for honours row.

He has hotly denied any wrong doing and believes there was a witch hunt against him, and has been waiting for Labour Party to repay his loan.

Of the police investigation, he sounded like he had more than enough:

“I haven’t done anything wrong and I am sick of playing ball with these people.”

According to Sir Christopher, it was Lord Levy who over the years kept suggesting he deserved an honour, though he says he was never actually promised anything.

Obviously, courts of law need more evidence than a “nudge, nudge, wink, wink” type conversation that is open to interpretation. Let’s hope the CPS get it right; this could drag on for several years if appeals follow.

And remember, defendants have absolute privilege in court, meaning they can make allegations and slanderous comments and cannot be sued; the Jeremy Thorpe scandal which led to his downfall first came to light during a criminal trial.

What can of worms could this trial open if witnesses, and defendants, so choose?

Are you familiar with consumer protection law in Lithuania or Romania? What about Spain or Greece?

This may be a new requirement of EU legislation, which SmallBizPod highlights today - and could have a significant impact on small businesses who trade online.

In a nutshell, it is all very well if you’re a multinational with an international legal department, but quite a different matter if you’re a sole trader, eBay entrepreneur or small business trading online and find you must understand and comply with consumer legislation in 27 different member states. 

Let’s nip this this ridiculous proposal in the bud - and soon. The regulation is to be decided by the European Parliament and Council of Ministers.  It’s therefore vital that the issue is raised with MEPs, please contact your local MEP now, and further advice is available from the Federation of Small Business.

  My MEP Robert Sturdy has a letter in today’s Times challenging the reasons for Tony Blair’s refusal to hold a referendum over the EU treaty. With Gordon Brown widely predicted to be Blair’s successor, I wonder if  Blair wants to push this through quickly as he knows  Brown has a much cooler approach to Europe - and we don’t even know what it says.

Maybe Brown will hope other countries will vote against it again like the previous draft EU constitution, and thereby make decisions about this easier for him. This is Robert’s letter:

Tony Blair seems determined to force a new European Union treaty on us without holding a referendum, knowing it will lack public support (report, April 20). We are surely entitled to know the wording of this new so-called treaty and the framework it is modelled on after the collapse of the previous draft constitution in 2005.

Bearing in mind Gordon Brown’s cooler approach to Europe, I wonder if Mr Blair wants to push this treaty through quickly so he can secure his European legacy by agreeing to a new treaty which will, in his eyes, help to reform the EU, while leaving his predicted successor to unravel the problems it creates. Mr Brown may have a different agenda on this, but his hands would be tied if an agreement had been reached.

I agree that reform is needed, but with the focus on good governance, less regulation and greater inter-governmental cooperation. By disregarding the democratic rights of the British people, in pursuit of his own political agenda, Mr Blair is doing nothing to reduce the growing public apathy towards politics.

What are your views about a referendum, and how do you think Gordon will deal with the treaty and Europe?