IT IS not quite as bad as the apocryphal EU ruling (a little
joke by British tabloids) that bananas must be straight. But the
European Court of Justice ruling on sex discrimination in
insurance is pretty bonkers all the same. Companies cannot
discriminate, the court has ruled, in favour of young female
drivers who tend to have fewer accidents than their boy racer
counterparts. The result will be that women may have to pay a
lot more for their insurance (perhaps 25%) whereas men will pay
a bit less (10%). But why shouldn't insurance companies be
allowed to reward women for their better habits? And why
shouldn't they be allowed to discriminate on grounds of risk
which is what insurance is all about; after all, they reward
people for having burglar alarms and penalise those who use
their cars for more dangerous jobs?  For Britons the knock-on
effect of this ruling is that men will no longer receive higher
annuities than women. This piece of "discrimination" was based
on the undeniable fact that women live longer