Well, it is a bizarre thing to do, because nobody, especially not me, thinks that such a complaint will be acted upon or even taken seriously.

But it is interesting, which is why I went along to see what would happen.

The issue is, when the government acts illegally, cheats, lies, steals or even kills people, is there anyone who can do anything about it? It is an interesting point.

Technically, the police could chose to do something about it, but we all know they won't.

We had an example of this recently, with the case of alleged billion pounds Saudi arms deal bribes, that the police refused to investigate.

Then there is the war in Iraq – we know the government lied, and no doubt broke the law, killing hundreds of thousands of people as a result, but who will do anything about it?

People have tried to bring the government to trial over that, and we can all see how far they got – or rather haven't.

Or we could consider the issue of suspicions about many PFI contracts, where costs have become ridiculously inflated over previous levels, but we are denied information about the terms of contracts on spurious grounds of "commercial confidentiality", which should not apply to contracts already signed.

Unknown amounts of £ multi-billions have been signed away in our names – debts that we will be held to honour, with our taxes – under extremely questionable circumstances.

And people are already asking questions about the role of the government in the current banking crisis, which is costing us all unimaginable sums of money, where some people have got very rich, and the rest of us will be asked to pay.

So, with all of these big issues, why the hell complain about something so out of date as the government lying and deceiving everyone a long time ago?

Because the information was concealed by the Official Secrets Act until only recently.

Because the government, with this move, substantially swept away the constitution and opened the door for a string of abuses that followed.

Because, having got away with this, they moved onto more blatant abuses, year by year.

And because it is a big deal financially, bigger than any of the issues above.

I have a great deal of sympathy with the police. Most policemen join to uphold civilised values.

They end up very often assaulted, kicked and with faces scratched trying to arrest some minor shoplifter, or noses broken arresting some pathetic drunk, and yet, when somebody steals thousands of pounds from everyone in Britain, they are forced to stand back and let it happen.

We are all familiar with the phrase "we live in a democracy", repeated like a mantra, as though democracy in itself confers some kind of protection.

Of course, democracy is a very broad term, embracing a wide spectrum of conditions.

Pakistan is a democracy, but the majority of people live under feudalism, and millions in actual slavery.

Brazil is a democracy, but police death squads kill street children like abandoned dogs.

Mexico is a democracy, but the underpaid police frequently practice kidnap for ransom, and the people live in more fear of the police than they do of crime.

Democracy is a dynamic condition – we can move from a free society, to an effective tyranny, and yet still be a democracy.

So the question should not be "are we a democracy" but, do we live under an honest government, do we have a transparent government, do we have government under the law?

So, what happens if we cease to enforce the law on our government? What happens if we allow our government to become a tyranny?

This is why people have to keep on insisting that the law must be applied, especially against the government, to protect the government and to protect us all.

There may not be a prosecution, but we may make the government less blatant in its abuse of the law.

NATHAN ALLONBY
Percy Avenue
Cullercoats


All correspondence should be e-mailed to Your Say
It should also include a full name, address and daytime telephone number