Exaggerated Claims

Cherie Blair hit the headlines the other day - with the news that she is to sue News International over phone hacking allegations.

On the same day the government was drawing attention to the ballooning costs of car insurance - thanks to what are widely regarded as frivolous 'whiplash' claims and other non-existent car crash injuries.

Now I have no problem with Cherie Blair - or anyone else - being compensated if they have suffered some real loss or undergone demonstrable hardship.

But what are we talking about here - was her phone really hacked and if so, to what purpose or end?

Or was Cherie Blair's name just one of the huge list of names recovered from the discredited private investigator - Glenn Mulcaire. 

If Cherie's name was just one of many in a private investigator's notebook, then what's the big deal?

If there's no evidence of damage or harm, then the whole business just a three ring circus - but worse still it simply encourages other people to behave the same way.

So I think we should be told what Cherie Blair's legal case is all about - just as we should know why Lord John Prescott received £40,000 from the phone hacking scandal?

After all this 'money for nothing culture' is highly contagious - even amongst people who should know better.

And if ordinary people see the great and the good working the system - when there's no real harm done - then a pound to a penny everyone else is going to follow suit.