Juggling Judges

Baroness Deech

There has been much discussion, not least at the Lords Select Committee on the Constitution, about judicial appointments and how to ensure a diverse judiciary.  One of the less practical suggestions made to widen the pool from which judges may be selected is to institute part-time judging.  This, said the Lord Chancellor, would enable more women to consider becoming judges and balance their judicial work with family life. This idea is far off the mark.  By the time a woman is old enough to consider applying to become a judge, it is very likely that the most demanding years of childcare will be behind her.  It is the younger women who need help to be able to continue with their careers as solicitors or barristers.  We will never achieve the admirable aim of an equal gender representation in the most demanding professions, such as law and medicine, until childcare is made affordable, available and eligible for tax relief.  This observation will bring out the commentators who are stay-at-home mothers with partners able to support them, and who are anxious to defend their lifestyle.  But there are professions which need to serve the public at all hours, and there are women who strove for higher education and want to use it, and we have to make it possible for them to do so.  There are no short cuts to diversity in some occupations.

17 comments for “Juggling Judges

  1. Tini
    23/11/2011 at 3:21 am

    Surely there are better areas to spend money though than on tax relief and child care for those earning a relatively substantial amount?
    I have no problem with my taxes going to help the lowest earners, but I can’t really be expected to subsidise those earning much more than myself as well as those earning less?
    By slimlining the welfare state and cutting costs it would follow that we can put more money back into everybodies pockets, allowing them to save and have their own safety net.
    If even a doctor or solicitor has trouble affording childcare we have big big problems with the way the system is being run. Doesn’t it get to a point where we have to stop patching a broken system, and reassess how the whole process is managed?

    • Lord Blagger
      23/11/2011 at 9:19 am

      Consider this scenario.

      Mother wants to go back to work. The tax she would earn is higher than the average government spend. In other words she pays tax so you get services or pay less tax. Lets say she is a Cherie Blair, and that tax is 100K.

      Do you accept a 2K a year tax subsidy to get the 100K?

      Or do you give the 2K in childcare to someone who is taxes 3K

      • Tini
        23/11/2011 at 11:21 am

        Reductio ad absurdim. If their tax bill is 100k I doubt that their decision to go back to work is made on the basis if subsidised childcare.

        The post refers to people establishing themselves in these professions so your examples are too skewed.

        Someone earning £50k a year plus should not NEED help returning to work- I stand by my point, that if they require assistance then we have big problems.

  2. Gareth Howell
    23/11/2011 at 8:06 am

    The noble baroness is certainly dealing with those she knows most about, women with careers in the higher professions.

    There may not be that many men who are capable of caring for the kids all day long while the goes out to work, especially in an occupation which demands a high level of argument and debate, easily brought home and regrettably continued there.

    There may be, as I have mentioned some couples who get along sufficiently well, and are well enough organised to hire a nanny, cook and housekeeper, and probably have some capital
    in bricks and mortar at the very beginning of their lives together. They may have been
    sweethearts since the age of 12.

    The woman barrister of that duo is capable of becoming a judge equal if not better than any man. her thoughts and judgements will be no different in any way from those others, named men, who wear pin stripe and trousers, and robes, in the high courts.

    She will have as little to do with her children as any male counterpart, so to suggest that she would have any better insight in to family life, or the minds of children would be a mistake.

    The nanny might have, and roundly condemn, in private, the indifference of her mistress to her own children.

    If both she and her husband are employed, him as an accountant in the city earning say £200,000 and her earning say £130,000 , they are part of a fairly exclusive upper middle class, which relies not on inherited capital, although they might have quite a bit of it,
    but on intellectual capital, which they are rapidly realizing, and which the Baroness has helped the woman to accrue.

  3. MilesJSD
    23/11/2011 at 9:13 am

    What we need is people permanently experienced in living within our means
    and, of course, within the Means of this Finite Earth;

    so if that means major quantum paradigm-shifting, physiological-habits-improving, lifestyles-leaning, and thrifty-rationing, then make it now to be by planned peaceful Movements; not by the ongoing population blood-letting and environmental-destruction daily haemorrhaging onto our TV screens from all around the ‘civilised’ world;

    and reduce – reduce – reduce these ongoing regular-cum-spasmodic Wars, Blood-Letting civil-strifes, and Lifesupports Market-Crashes, that we are now so evidently and historically locked-into and throwing all our human and Earth-resource energies, timeframes, possessions, infrastructural-locations, and monies at, as futile band-aids.
    —————–
    Once again I urge you to read and begin to proactivate

    “Six Thinking Hats” & “Peaceful Revolution”
    by Edward de Bono (school);

    “Self-Theories” & “Mindset” by Caroline Dweck (school);

    “Perceptual Control Theory” by William Powers (school)
    NB pre-understand this title as if it were “Perceptual SELF-Control Theory”);

    [Also pre-understand “Everyone Can Win” by Cornelius & Faire (network) cooperative conflict-resolution
    as if it were “Every – one Can Have Their Real-life Needs Met” (to truthfully distinguish it from “The Whole 7-Billion Milling-Mass Pulling-Together”;
    and “Awareness Heals” by Steven Shafarman as “Self-Parts Awareness(ing) Heals”];

    and the friendly Method III win-win-win cooperative problem-solving steps, either from
    “P.E.T/ L.E.T/ T.E.T” by Thomas Gordon; or
    “People Skills” by Robert Bolton.
    ———————-
    Lastly, because not only does a wholesome all-round-healthy lifrestyle require it, but here especially do all Governance places, people, workers and situations need to be able to use honest argumentation and to detect dishonest argumentation, start learning from
    “How To Win Every Argument” by Madsen Pirie.
    ==============================

    And God-Be-With-Ye;
    for once you get the Judges, as well as all other Overpaids, living within our means, there will be less need for “Juggling”, Baroness Deech.
    JSDM

  4. Lord Blagger
    23/11/2011 at 10:57 am

    Miles, if you cut down on your personal jargon, you might get your message across.

    It’s actually quite simple. The Tories will get what they want and Labour will too.

    The Tories will get small government delivering fewer services.

    Labour will get what they want, which is higher taxation.

    It’s a win-win for the politicians, but a lose lose for the electorate.

    It’s a low service, high tax, high debt economy that has been built.

  5. Twm O'r Nant
    23/11/2011 at 7:44 pm

    If you could copyright human diction there is no doubt that Miles would copyright it.
    I feel as though the hyphens and the win-wins are no longer part of a common language, but belong to somebody else who charge a fee for the use of it, in future, and if possible, retrospective, in view of his declared interest in Bill and Law.

    • MilesJSD
      25/11/2011 at 11:15 am

      It’s nice of you to give this linked-issue some attention.

      The reason I use so many hyphens is simply to try to convey at a glance a mind-concept, non-dissembable, so to speak.

      Yet I prefer to omit single hyphens from such not-yet-dictionaried words as “sustainworthy”, “ecolonomics”;

      but to deliberately hyphenate such traditional-colloquial-English-jargon as
      “like farts-in-collanders” (please see a nearby Lord Norton blog for an instance).

  6. MilesJSD
    24/11/2011 at 2:17 am

    Blagger, et tu Brute, falling into fallacious undermining on top of the multi-corrupt over-enriched, over-empowered and under-capable;
    your strawmanning focus upon my choice of terminology does not satisy the seconmd principle Charity (you need to appreciate and respond to the good intention in what I submit, objectively).

    Did you not grasp Norton when he clearly reports that ONLY correctly-written & specific submissions, delivered to the right top-desk by the Directorates small-print dealines, ever get both read and counted ?
    and the imnplication that even then they don’t truly count, because there are far too few of them ?

    did it not occur to you that the vast majority of the “messages” we submit for publication are getting across, and to a much greater number of honest People than the blatantly foxy relatively few self-centreds who run this E-Site ?

    did it not occur to you that “ethnic-persecution”, “harmed-by-own-troops”, “sacked”, “sustainworthy”, “Lifeplace (versus) Workplace”,”job-efficiency (versus)personal-efficiency”
    and other objective terms cleaner and more honest than the directorate’s dictated ‘politically-correct’ loads of leering nonsense
    are far from being the “personal jargon” that you disparage them as ?

    and that are getting-across to the real and sustainworthy “Earth-citizens” all the way around this and tomorrow’s World ?
    ———–
    The rest of your submission, tacked on behind your foolish sheep’s-clothing guise of offering me advice for my self-correction, is independent stuff to that which I put forward –

    Look, if you could only accept the real humankind leaders whose publications I have listed, I could accept your negativising ad hominem bite-in-the-back-my-leg
    (PS now THAT lot of hyphenation is “persona-jargon” I would admit)
    as being at least partly “positivising”.

    Your proffered alternative-reading of the Situation, whilst to my mind being utterly true, nonetheless comes across as if from one ‘defeated and disgruntled’, whose constructive-concordance has run out.
    =========
    I nonetheless accept, in the name of the first and third of the of the three principles of good-communication & honest-argumentation, that there is sufficient clarity, and self-corrigibility suggestion in your “Miles, cut down on YOUR personal jargon, YOU might get YOUR message across” to warrant my acknowledgement and thanks thereto, in fulfilment of the second principle Charity on my part.

    Now may I wonder where is the Charity on yours ?

    • Lord Blagger
      24/11/2011 at 12:58 pm

      It’s hard reading your posts because of the Jargon. Now you have jumped to the conclusion that because I’ve said that I must be anti the message you are putting across. Far from it, I’m in agreement with most of your points.

      • MilesJSD
        24/11/2011 at 11:15 pm

        ok pax for re-grouping ?

        • Twm O'r Nant
          26/11/2011 at 9:10 am

          “like farts-in-collanders” (please see a nearby Lord Norton blog for an instance).

          Now THAT is witty!

          How could he? He never goes in the kitchen!

          hyphenation is “persona-jargon” I would admit)
          as being at least partly “positivising”

          I put it all down to background noise, but not of the elitist kind mentioned above.

  7. maude elwes
    24/11/2011 at 8:02 pm

    I am aggressively against women being manipulated by the politically correct lobby into a lifestyle that is unbearable to them and their children.

    I find it difficult to write this without becoming overly passionate for the tone of this website. This issue severely affected my life on a personal level, when my closest friend committed suicide as a direct result of being persuaded into a career, as a modern woman, rather than be able to happily take the option of being a mother who stayed home with her dearly loved and wanted children.

    So, with the importance of this in my mind, I decided to put up this link to say it for me, as I am uncontrollable.

    http://www.moxiemag.com/moxie/articles/perspectives/womenwhowant.html

    I hope you read it. It is far more important to women and their children than the Marxist politically correct movers and shakers would have you know or believe.

  8. MilesJSD
    25/11/2011 at 8:38 am

    A propos “judging” “juggling” and “jargon” (above – but also practically=relevant to other LotB Blogs e.g. Only Communicate, above where Lord Blagger and miles jsd are having a bit-of-a-set-to over “language” viz “Jargon”)

    let me recommend all participants to place among their site-favourites
    http://www.audioenglish.net and find Jargon.

  9. MilesJSD
    25/11/2011 at 10:54 am

    (Linked sub-issue)
    Just seen big error in http://www.audioenglish.net under >Accounting English: Depreciation
    “Land is not depreciable because it does not have a limited useful life”, which is false:

    Land does have a limited useful life – in fact we need to account more than one kind of useful-life, and for different kinds of Land;
    this needs to be done for a number of reasons, one being that agricultural and horticultural Land worldwide is being quite rapidly devoided of its life-essential micro-minerals –
    a major depreciation factor if only because of its insidiously-creeping-stultifying effect upon human health and mind-functioning, and ‘whatever’.

    (Therefore) Hansard Citizenship Education and the House of Lords (lordsoftheblog) need to get together and give us a reference list of approved Educational and Reference e-sites; please.
    =========================

  10. Twm O'r Nant
    26/11/2011 at 9:22 am

    agricultural and horticultural Land worldwide is being quite rapidly devoided of its life-essential micro-minerals –

    If MJSD had ever lifted a finger to dig a garden, I would be one nano-byte nearer to accepting the remote possibility of it being so.It ain’t. 20% of our food now comes from inorganic sources.

    did it not occur to you that the vast majority of the “messages” we submit for publication are getting across, and to a much greater number of honest People than the blatantly foxy relatively few self-centreds who run this E-Site ?

    Deluded. A thousand hits a week with MJSd pressing his LotB button 999 times, minus a dozen or so. In the words of the old folk song “One thousand years of sorrow!”

  11. maude elwes
    29/11/2011 at 5:46 pm

    The Chancellor Osborne, that guy with the picture in a nightclub, with a woman not his wife, has decided to double nursery places for two year olds. And he wants to extend it to the most ‘disadvantaged’ children of them all. My goodness these people are so out of touch with the population it is enough to make you nauseous. Th return to the life and times of dickens comes so fast to mind.

    I almost had to laugh out loud as I read it. This is supposed to help those ‘poor’ kids do well. Have you read about the dreadful situation children and mothers find themselves in when the nurseries are looked at by an unannounced overseer? Would he place his kids in one of them?

    The real message behind this ‘gift’ to the poor is, women have to work and leave their babies to be raised by someone other than their mother. And if they don’t they succumb to this practice, where we can decide on what is right for your family, you will starve, as there is no reason to say you cannot find child care and be off welfare.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/3337272/My-warning-to-parents-is-simple-one-in-five-children-put-into-nursery-early-will-develop-mental-health-problems.html

    Politics is delving too far into the family environment. Which is a direct result of too many women in politics with little else on their mind, and feminist lobbies. These ideas bear little or no relationship to the genuine needs of women and children in this modern world. And will serve only to create another mess that government will want to keep hidden from the public eye. Mothers do not bond well with their child if they are absent from home.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/dec/15/vanessa-george-jailed-child-sex-abuse

    And this kind of story is rampant in the USA where they have been pushing women to leave their kids with the ‘good child care’ helpers a lot longer.

    http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/innocence/etc/other.html

    Add this to the horror of this grisly show and ask why the public are not being balloted on this practice that is now rampant throughout the UK.

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/dorothypomerantz/2011/11/26/what-if-our-daughters-dont-want-to-work/

Comments are closed.