We like to pride ourselves on being a humane and liberal society, and that may be partially true.

But what no one talks about is something I would describe as a kind of pitiless inhumanity inflicted on us by both big business and government in the name of shareholder profits and misplaced national bravado.

Do not think for a moment that the government would have performed its dramatic U-turn on health risks faced by British servicemen in the Balkans from exposure to depleted uranium weapons if it had not been shamed into taking action.

Do not think for a moment that British Airways would have announced it would issue warning leaflets to passengers about the dangers of "travellers' thrombosis" without publicity pressure.

And do not think for a moment that Railtrack would have embarked on the huge repair programme it is currently engaged on had public outrage after Hatfield not been so intense - with the Government jumping on the bandwagon too.

The Defence Ministry has known for ten years there are problems with uranium poisoning. Yet it has cynically insisted all along there is no significant risk to UK personnel.

The admission that defence chiefs were aware of risks came after the leak of regulations issued to German troops in Kosovo warning of the potential hazard of exposure to contaminated material.

Only after Nato and the European Union launched investigations following suspicious deaths and illnesses among soldiers from France, Italy, Belgium, Holland and Portugal did Downing St change its attitude. It ordered reluctant defence chiefs to set up a screening programme.

It is difficult to come to any other conclusion than they do not care about the welfare of individual servicemen.

As for the world's major airlines, they have known about the connection between deep vein thrombosis and flying for years.

There are frightening estimates of as many as 2,000 deaths a year from the condition in this country alone.

Airlines are wary of worrying passengers, already concerned about flying. But providing wider seats, more legroom and more research into cabin pressures, cabin air quality and dehydration is expensive. Profits and payments to shareholders would be affected.

So again, one is drawn to the conclusion that there is little concern for the welfare of individuals.

It is precisely the same sort of scenario on the railways. Railtrack was well aware of the parlous state of the track in regular daily use. There is no reason to think they would have launched this expensive programme of repairs without being shamed into it.

They would have muddled along doing patchwork renewal for as long as possible to protect profits and shareholders' dividends.

The safety of individual travellers did not appear to be of primary concern.

So in this humane and liberal society we are so proud of, you may join me in thinking an overbearing nanny state and what has been called the unacceptable face of capitalism can be a lethal combination.