Stockwell: controversially uncontroversial

The outcome of the Jean Charles de Menezes inquest late last year was an utter travesty and an injustice. And now we have the docudrama from ITV1, Stockwell, which follows that critical day of the 22nd July 2005.

There’s the preamble about the failed London bombings the previous day, the hunt for the bombers and the emphasis on Hussain Osman (‘Nettle tip). The pressure and tension on the cops to find the bombers, combined with public fear. In the background in the beginning and the end is the judge’s summing up from health and safety trial.

The programme went through the critical day of the 22nd July from the various briefings with John MacDowall and SO 19 Trojan 84 (‘might be required to use unusual tactics’).Again, the script came from the health and safety trial. Surveillance teams outside Scotia Road, with ‘Ken’ taking a piss while Jean Charles de Menezes leaves the multiple occupancy flat. The incompetency, no visible chain of command, technological failures, and no positive ID, which exposed a gigantic botched operation where an innocent man was shot and killed.

The programme displayed a formulaic approach. Dialogue is based on transcripts from a trial which makes watching very flat and the cops were portrayed sympathetically (dialogue based on their evidence and the veracity has since been thrown into doubt) but at the same time cops who couldn’t/wouldn’t think for themselves and desperate for orders from the chain of command.

It was haunting watching the final journey Jean Charles took without knowing anything that there was massive activity and surveillance determining his fate.

Towards the end you got the dramatic tension, radio silence where Cressida Dick is waiting anxiously while firearms teams vault over ticket barriers, racing down the escalators, and the surveillance team already on the tube. The slo-mo style where frantic firearms teams were heard shouting, ‘armed police’ (well, the inquest jury didn’t believe that was shouted!), running onto the tube where a calm Jean Charles de Menezes was sitting.

He was shot 9 times in the head, 7 bullets entering his head. The officers used 9mm 124 grain hollow point bullets (dum-dum bullets). At the end we see Sir Ian Blair peddle the lies about Jean Charles de Menezes at the press conference after the man’s death.

Politically, this docudrama paints a picture of incompetency and human error. A mere accident, a lawful killing. The cops under enormous pressure are sympathetically drawn yet don’t think beyondt heir orders. The top brass are depicted as standing around at New Scotland Yard. Technological faults, no positive identification, breakdown in communication. Why couldn’t there have been reenactments of people actually giving evidence, along with the legal proceedings and then juxtaposing it with the ongoing narrative of the 22nd.

It’s an uncontroversial programme that looks no deeper than at police incompetence and breakdown of command. No exploration of the cops attitudes such as their readiness to make assumptions, racism, poor briefings, ‘shoot to kill’, lies, and cover-ups …add all that and there could have been a more controversial potent mix that gave a much more honest and political account about why an innocent man was shot dead.

The establishment can sleep easy as regards to Stockwell.

Workers’ rights: some good news…..

Well, the bosses are not pleased…and in my books that is a positive result. Why the sudden despair and indignation?

Workers from HM Revenue and Customs brought a groundbreaking case that argued the right to paid holidays while on long-term sick.

The trade union, PCS, argued that the HMRC was in breach of the EU’s Working Time Directive. They originally took it to the Court of Appeal where they lost:

In April 2005, the UK’s Court of Appeal decreed that workers absent on long-term sick leave could not claim holidays or holiday pay for the time they were absent from work, nor could they expect compensation for lost holiday if they left their job before returning to work.

The case was then taken to the the European Court of Justice (ECJ) which ruled in favour of the workers. The ruling states:

A worker does not lose his right to paid annual leave which he has been unable to exercise because of sickness. He must be compensated for his annual leave not taken. Lawyers said that the law lords were likely to overturn the Court of Appeal’s earlier ruling in light of today’s guidance from the ECJ.

 But as you might have guessed the employers aren’t impressed and see it as a ‘severe blow to business’….

This is a real blow to firms trying to keep jobs alive during the recession. Businesses themselves also suffer when staff take sick leave, and we had hoped that a compromise could have been achieved over unused holiday time.

When the workers win a striking victory around pay and conditions it’s a ‘blow to business’ yet bosses only too happy to shaft workers. And employers should think long and hard about why people go off sick especially in regards to the increase in stress related illnesses, along with changing work-place environments and attitudes.

Well done HM Revenue and Customs workers and the PCS union.