ways and means

More like ends and means, but...

There was a bit I meant to add last night but forgot. Just as well I don't get paid for this...or I wouldn't be.

It was about the Natwest Three case. In a mean-spirited mood, I kind of hoped that the Yanks banged the three up 'real good', because that would at last open Blair's eyes about the calibre of people he is dealing with, and hopefully a few more eyes might get opened as a flow-on effect. A bit harsh on the three bankers, perhaps...the magnitude of their crime aside. I mean it's just thieving from the employer, right? Should they bear a disproportionate burden just get that part of the world that hasn't woken up to Bush and co to do so?

What's worse about this story is the apparent suicide of another Natwest employee after a visit from the British security forces. I'll be watching this one closely. I loathe official bastardry in all its forms.

Similarly, the James Hardie case. There's no reason why the Australian taxpayer should bear any of the cost - the fate of those dying of mesothelioma because of their exposure to Hardie products means that Hardie should be paying up. But if the legal implications of that mean that the recipients don't get the money...where's the justice? There was a Hardie victim in the ward where the old man was. This feller seemed about 70 or so and told me he didn't know how long he had to go - he had a hole in one lung about the size of Jatz cracker. He was bitter but not angry, and somewhat whimsical that he would be getting money for the first time in his life and he wouldn't be able to enjoy it.

So, do the ends justify the means? Even though Hardie moved operations offshore and set up a bogus trust, do we bail them out so the victims at least get something? And do three Pommy crooks endure the delights of the US penitentiary system rather than a Pommy gaol?