Well, fodfather, I agree with you, to an extent. Hanging the guilty does not prevent someone else taking the same actions (although it can dissuade), and in the case under discussion here may be inappropriate. I have no idea how the RAF deals with a Just Culture, but, if true that the crew in this case were less than forthcoming in their debrief, is the problem with the RAF interpretation or in the integrity of the crew? Not being privy to the machinations I don't know.
What I am fed up with is the constant repetition of the congenitally bigoted rantings of the Airbus detractors. In this case Airbus and it's philosophy took a battering on this thread until the facts were revealed. The aircraft performed as designed, the control laws prevented an increasing pitch rate and set the thrust to idle (if in doubt just read up the normal law protections.) In the man/machine interface the machine performed as designed and as described in the FCOM and in the simulator profiles. Now is the time to address the training (and assessment criteria) of this operator. Airbus have a vested interest in the safe operation of their aircraft, perhaps that may be a good place to start.