Silk Cut

Peter Reeve, himself an experienced lawyer, says that the whole process for selecting and appointing the UK's top barristers -- Queen's Counsel -- is both antiquated and against the public interest. The legal profession is one of the country's poshest but most effective trade unions, and its top echelons have proved skilled and successful at protecting their restrictive practices through the assaults of various governments. But their monopoly restricts the numbers of those with access to this spurious qualification, and in effect sets up a pricing ring that raises the costs of the court system and prices many people out of access to justice.

Read it here.

Simply No Mistake

'Simply No Mistake' outlines "the biggest pensions boost for women and carers since the creation of the welfare state" in which every pound put into a stakeholder pension would be topped up with another pound contributed by the chancellor, up to £20,000 each year. The report suggests that rules on pensions should be streamlined, scrapping limits on contributions and allowing people to save into company and personal plans at the same time.

 

Read it here.

Competition or Regulation?

Simon Read's report anticipated much of what Ron Sandler came up with in his official government review of long term savings. Read proposes that products rather than the advice process, should be regulated - as they are in every other market. He argues for a simplified and standard tax structure covering all sorts of savings and investments, and simpler products that will allow charging structures to be simplified and charges reduced.

Read full paper. 

Who Owns the Past?

Archeology has suffered from an increase of state intervention and subsidies since 1973. Moves away from the traditional treasure trove solution to wipe out looting will only serve to promote it. The answer is to 'amateurize' archeology and resist all temptations to nationalise Britain's heritage. The report advocates 'Independence Impact Statements' before government funds are channeled into projects from archeological digs to operatic productions. It offers solid proposals for a more cost-effective and consumer friendly Arts, Heritage and Culture policy.

Read it here.

None of the Above

With the funding of political parties hitting the headlines, suggestions have been made for the state to contribute to campaign costs. Such calls are misguided. Confidence in the UK's political system can be restored through the provision of information about funds, rather than through costly, bureaucratic measures paid for by the unwilling taxpayer. This paper urges the Neill Committee to reject all forms of state subsidy and to avoid premature answers to an important question.

Read it here.