Money was an issue, but the king had lost lands in France and had an unsuccessful military campaign in 1214, so his competency was also in question – the barons also disliked the fact that he didn’t consult with them.
King John, for his part, simply saw kings (divinely appointed remember) as above the law, and so ruling with the principle vis et voluntas (of force and will) was perfectly acceptable. This of course led to an impasse, military force and the signing of Magna Carta – the document which many see as the birthplace of the modern rule of law.
Is it possible to find some common thread between 1215 at Runnymede and the recent judicial review? A fight against despotic rule? A quest for fairness? How asking for money can rile people? Given how similar charters existed before, and revisions occurred shortly after, is it something of questionable significance? Then of course there is ambiguity - did King John actually sign Magna Carta?
When the judicial review ruling was announced it was met with uncertainty, no one was really sure how to understand it. On page 22 of this issue Alex Hall reviews the case in detail and explains in laymen’s terms why the judge reached his decision and why the fee remains in place regardless (hopefully it will help to make sense of it all).
A reference to King John’s struggles with the barons and question marks regarding the nature of the legal system immediately makes me think of Tony Hancock’s immortal line: “Does Magna Carta mean nothing to you? Did she die in vain?”
Was the whole JR process in vain? On page 28 we have an in depth Q&A with the BDA’s Peter Ward. Peter defends the decision to take the GDC to court and argues that it was always about so much more than the money. Is this shifting the goalposts following the decision or a fair reflection on events? When asked directly if the JR was a waste of time and money he answers that that will be for others to judge. So, what do you think? Was the BDA right to pursue JR? Was the judge correct in stating the fee increase was not profound? As always we want to hear your view so please email your comments to emackenzie@georgewarman.co.uk
Thought for food
From food for thought to a thought for food – February is a notoriously difficult time food and fi tness-wise. The bulge left over from Christmas is in danger of becoming a permanent midriff fixture if action is not taken, but Winter does little to encourage activity. In this issue we have a number of food and weight related articles. On page 50 Sarah Bradbury discusses the impact of type II diabetes for practitioners, before Lloyd Price takes on the subject of a healthy diet’s effect on oral health (page 54). The third course is Ian Smith’s look into surgery equipment in which he asks if it is fit for use with obese patients. Hopefully that should help with motivation if anyone is falling off the New Year resolution healthy food wagon!