A museum is a place where you display items of historical, anthropological or scientific note. It's where one goes to explore the way things were and generally get in touch with objects, people or events that are no longer a part of mainstream life.
For the last few weeks, Not so Flash Gordon has been banging on about the need to emphasise and celebrate "Britishness". He has recently published a book extolling the bravery of British Forces during the second world war. He has asked the great unwashed to share with him their view of what constitutes this elusive quality of being British. And when Lord Baker suggested a Museum of Britshness, Brown jumped on the band wagon so quickly it hadn't even had a chance to start rolling.
The reason for his sudden love affair with Great Britain became clear when he slid into Lisbon on the 13th December for the signing of the Treaty that isn't a Constitution (even though it shares 98% of the same same objectives as the failed Constitution). By putting pen to this document, Brown ceded power in key areas such as immigration, security and justice to the European Union and reduced our own Parliament to the role of second fiddle behind the, unelected, EU Commission. According to the EU web site, this process will improve democracy for us all. What it actually does is reduce Great Britain from the status of a sovereign nation to that of an outpost on the fringes of the Greater European Empire.
So, now we all know why Brown was so keen on the Museum of Britishness. He knew it would be necessary once he had he so recklessly consigned Great Britain and all things British to the dustbin of history.
Tuesday 18 December 2007
Tuesday 11 December 2007
Recycling rubbish is old hat
All over the world, groups of people with qualifications in ologies the great mass of humanity didn't even know existed spend their lives discussing topics of great moment. Most of these discussions occur in locations that the rest of us have to save up to visit for the holiday of a lifetime. I believe the theme of the latest conference is the effects of carbon emissions on Global Warming. It is taking place in South East Asia and has attracted 3000 delegates from all over the globe flying in Business Class and staying in four and five star hotels. Since this is a politically important conference to be seen attending, most of the delegates, of course, are spending other people's money to attend it. But, hey, what's the point of being the world's leading authority on the effect of regular baked bean consumption on the atmosphere if you can't parly it into the odd trip to the South Seas?
Anyway, many of these self-declared experts will spend much of their navel fluff collecting time trying to work out new ways to get us to recycle just about everything and anything we can. This is entireley laudable snce we should spend the planet's resources with a little more care than a drunken sailor on a wekend pass. But, what gts my goat is the patronising, lecturing, hectoring attitude they adopt when laying down the law to the rest of us.
For anyone over the age of about fifty there is nothing remotely new about reccycling - except for the name of course.
When I was a street urchin growing up in Central London virtually everything I had to wear had already been worn by many other people before reaching me. We didn't know the clothes were recycled. They were simply hand-me-downs.
In an era of large families and meagre budgets, it was the only way that most mums could keep their kids clothed. Most children I went to primary school with wore clothes that had been broken in by several older siblings before they got to wear them
Waste of any kind was not merely frowned on but almost a criminal offence. Much of our regular pocket money came from collecting empty lemonade bottles and returning them to get back the deposit they carried. Sometimes, in our enthusiasm for recycling, this involved swiping a crate of bottles from the backyard of the off licence and then returning them in dribs and drabs to the front counter to get the deposits back
Rag and bone men were a regular feature of street life. When they came around with their horse drawn cart calling out " Old rags and lumber", the housewives would trade old bits of furniture, bundles of old bed clothes and the like for money or goods in kind. It wasn't that rare for over-enthusiatic kids - encouraged by the totter - to drag out their mum's best, and probably only, coat and swap it for a gold fish or a balloon. Two streets from where I grew up there was a totter's yard run by a man called Arthur Allen. There, we did a regular trade in bundles of old newspapers, rags, lead ( don't ask where we got that!) and other recyclables including bike frames and wheels. In fact, our regular visits to Highbury to watch Arsenal play on a Saturday afternoon were funded by our newspaper and rag collecting activities.
So, there is nothing remotely new about recycling. In poor countries around the world people still have to do it not out of any sense of moral duty but simply to stay alive. Unfortunately, none of them will ever be able to afford to fly half way around the world to tell a posse of climate change experts how to go about organising it.
Anyway, many of these self-declared experts will spend much of their navel fluff collecting time trying to work out new ways to get us to recycle just about everything and anything we can. This is entireley laudable snce we should spend the planet's resources with a little more care than a drunken sailor on a wekend pass. But, what gts my goat is the patronising, lecturing, hectoring attitude they adopt when laying down the law to the rest of us.
For anyone over the age of about fifty there is nothing remotely new about reccycling - except for the name of course.
When I was a street urchin growing up in Central London virtually everything I had to wear had already been worn by many other people before reaching me. We didn't know the clothes were recycled. They were simply hand-me-downs.
In an era of large families and meagre budgets, it was the only way that most mums could keep their kids clothed. Most children I went to primary school with wore clothes that had been broken in by several older siblings before they got to wear them
Waste of any kind was not merely frowned on but almost a criminal offence. Much of our regular pocket money came from collecting empty lemonade bottles and returning them to get back the deposit they carried. Sometimes, in our enthusiasm for recycling, this involved swiping a crate of bottles from the backyard of the off licence and then returning them in dribs and drabs to the front counter to get the deposits back
Rag and bone men were a regular feature of street life. When they came around with their horse drawn cart calling out " Old rags and lumber", the housewives would trade old bits of furniture, bundles of old bed clothes and the like for money or goods in kind. It wasn't that rare for over-enthusiatic kids - encouraged by the totter - to drag out their mum's best, and probably only, coat and swap it for a gold fish or a balloon. Two streets from where I grew up there was a totter's yard run by a man called Arthur Allen. There, we did a regular trade in bundles of old newspapers, rags, lead ( don't ask where we got that!) and other recyclables including bike frames and wheels. In fact, our regular visits to Highbury to watch Arsenal play on a Saturday afternoon were funded by our newspaper and rag collecting activities.
So, there is nothing remotely new about recycling. In poor countries around the world people still have to do it not out of any sense of moral duty but simply to stay alive. Unfortunately, none of them will ever be able to afford to fly half way around the world to tell a posse of climate change experts how to go about organising it.
Wednesday 5 December 2007
Forget schoolchildren - they can't even make money count
The news on the education front just gets better and better. In recent weeks we have learned that English schoolchildren have slipped from 4th to 14th in the International Science understanding stakes. Then we discovered that their use of English as a native language places them somewhere lower than Upper Volta. Today, the icing was added to the cake. Now, we discover, we are worse at maths than virtually the whole of the developed world.
Since the last set of similar statistics were compiled in 2000 and since we are regulalrly assured by Not so Flash Gordon that we splurge the best part of 50 billion per year on education, everyone - except our numerically-challenged children ofcourse - can work out that we have spent the grand total of 300 billion to date. And what do we have to show for it?
A generation of victims of child-centered education that is barely literate, and is so innumerate that it probably can't work out what the total lack of shool-based exercise has done for its obesity rates compared with preceding generations.
Yet, as usual, the response of Ed Balls and his cohorts was a precise echo of his unfortunate name. It wasn't that we were actually slipping down the international league tables. it was more a case of the statistics being wrong. If you did the calculations the same way as the British educational establishment, why we are still the nest educated country in the world. And we have the the continually improving exam results to prove it.
Strange that, isn't it. Six years ago when the OECD ranked English pupils comfortably in the top 10 in each of the core subjects, the Educational establishment was keen to puff itself up and bask in its pupils' reflected glory.
The bright side of all this for our Gordon of course, is that the people likley to be set the task of investigating the current illegal funding crisis will have, for the most part, have been educated under his watch as Chancellor and PM. So, the chances of their actually making anything add up, let alone stick, are very remote.
Since the last set of similar statistics were compiled in 2000 and since we are regulalrly assured by Not so Flash Gordon that we splurge the best part of 50 billion per year on education, everyone - except our numerically-challenged children ofcourse - can work out that we have spent the grand total of 300 billion to date. And what do we have to show for it?
A generation of victims of child-centered education that is barely literate, and is so innumerate that it probably can't work out what the total lack of shool-based exercise has done for its obesity rates compared with preceding generations.
Yet, as usual, the response of Ed Balls and his cohorts was a precise echo of his unfortunate name. It wasn't that we were actually slipping down the international league tables. it was more a case of the statistics being wrong. If you did the calculations the same way as the British educational establishment, why we are still the nest educated country in the world. And we have the the continually improving exam results to prove it.
Strange that, isn't it. Six years ago when the OECD ranked English pupils comfortably in the top 10 in each of the core subjects, the Educational establishment was keen to puff itself up and bask in its pupils' reflected glory.
The bright side of all this for our Gordon of course, is that the people likley to be set the task of investigating the current illegal funding crisis will have, for the most part, have been educated under his watch as Chancellor and PM. So, the chances of their actually making anything add up, let alone stick, are very remote.
Wednesday 21 November 2007
Misplaced identities
The loss of 25 million items of personal data should not be used as an argument against the issue of Identity Cards for all.
It merely clouds the issue.
The reason why we should not have ID cards is much simpler than that. We don'tneed them. I, you and the great massof people living in Great Britain know perfectly well who we are. Our friends, workmates and family know who we are. Judging by the frequency with which I receive communications from them so do the Tax Man, the Passport Office, the Pensions people, my bank, mortgage provider, local council, my dentist, doctor and car dealership. Ergo, ID cards are a complete and unecessary waste of time if their sole purpose is to ensure that we all know and can prove exactly who we are.
Stick to that argument and don't try to embellish it with tales of the usual government incompetence when it comes to running a databas with more than two names on it. Don't even harp on about basic freedoms from State interference. It only provides politicians and their groupies with another opportunity to bore for their constituencies.
We don't want them because we don't need them. It's as simple as that.
It merely clouds the issue.
The reason why we should not have ID cards is much simpler than that. We don'tneed them. I, you and the great massof people living in Great Britain know perfectly well who we are. Our friends, workmates and family know who we are. Judging by the frequency with which I receive communications from them so do the Tax Man, the Passport Office, the Pensions people, my bank, mortgage provider, local council, my dentist, doctor and car dealership. Ergo, ID cards are a complete and unecessary waste of time if their sole purpose is to ensure that we all know and can prove exactly who we are.
Stick to that argument and don't try to embellish it with tales of the usual government incompetence when it comes to running a databas with more than two names on it. Don't even harp on about basic freedoms from State interference. It only provides politicians and their groupies with another opportunity to bore for their constituencies.
We don't want them because we don't need them. It's as simple as that.
Monday 19 November 2007
The low impact Olympics
Sir Clive Woodward is currently assembling a team of elite performers to represent the UK at the 2012 Olympics in London. Lord Coe has already done his bit by winning us the Games in the first place. A logo – of sorts – is in place and we have now seen the first artist’s impression of the main athletics stadium. Plus another artist’s impression of the additional cash we are going to have to pay for the privilege of staging the Games.
That’s assuming that they will actually happen, of course. There’s a long way still to go and the ElfinSafety industry has been strangely quiet so far. Do we really belive it will stay that way? Or is this a more likely scenario?.
It’s 2013 and, precisely a year late, the London Olympics are about to start. In the studios of the EBC (European Broadcasting Company), Natasha Kiplinski, Head of SportRecreation for the Western Offshore Europe (WOE) Region is about to talk to Radio SportActivity Reporter, Beryl Davies.
Natasha: And now, we’re going live to the Lea Valley Olympic Park to join Beryl Davies for the Plunging competition, the first event in these much-delayed Olympics. So, Beryl, a new date, a new event and, in many ways, a new look Olympics?
Beryl: That’s right Natasha – and welcome everyone to EBC’s live coverage of the new Olympic Plunging event.
As you say Natasha, the XXXth Olympiad is starting a year later than planned but, looking around this magnificent new Aquatics Centre, even the most cynical listener would agree that it has been well worth the wait. As…
Natasha: Beryl, for the sake of any new listeners not familiar with the delays perhaps you could bring us up to speed?
Beryl: I’ll do my best Natasha. It really started with the unfortunate incident at the Beijing Olympics.
Natasha: Wasn’t that when one of the Synchronised Diving judges suffered a heart attack?
Beryl: Yes. Two competitors in the Women’s Synchronised Diving competition collided in mid-air and one of them - a rather statuesque natural blonde as I recall - lost her swimming costume in mid-air and, well, it was all a bit too much for the poor Russian judge. His untimely demise brought the Games to a fairly abrupt end.
Natasha: And that’s when European Health & Safety Commissioner (EHSC) Blair stepped in?
Beryl: Yes, although the International Olympic Committee ordered an immediate investigation, Commissioner Blair insisted on a separate in-depth Risk Assessment of Synchronised Diving.
Natasha: It turned out to be one of the most exhaustive Risk Assessments in history didn’t it?
Beryl: Absolutely, Natasha. Blair widened the scope initially to all diving events and, then eventually, to all sports. Work on the London Games’ site was suspended pending the outcome of her investigations.
The exercise involved 1500 experts, cost €100 million and took 18 months to complete. Her report ran to 18,000 pages and its recommendations were implemented by the EU Federal Unification Commission (EUFUC) in the Spring of 2011. London started building again as soon as it received the All Clear..
Natasha; So, what impact has all this had on the Olympic events we’ll be watching today and for the rest of the week?
Beryl: Well, as you touched on in your introduction, Natasha, its impact has been significant – especially on the event we are about to see. Both the EHSC and the IOC agreed that diving head-first into a pool is, in itself, an inherently dangerous thing to do. Tossing in a few mid-air twists and turns, of course, just adds to the risk factor.
So, Commissioner Blair helped the IOC devise this new event of Plunging. It’s straightforward and much less risky.
Natasha: Diving was consigned to the Olympic history books along with other high-risk sports like hockey, football, wrestling, boxing, fencing, running and jumping?
Beryl: Precisely, Natasha. They have all being replaced by less dangerous versions. As European SportActivity Commissioner, Ed Balls, commented just the other day - and I quote - “While the SportActivity Commission remains committed to the Olympic ideal, it applauds Commissioner Blair for devising these low-impact activities. Requiring relatively few skills and low fitness levels, they deliver the prospect of Olympic participation to a wide prospective audience irrespective of race, gender, sexual orientation, educational attainment or background. Since most of them are designed to be carried out in the safety of the home, they also free up essential building land for desperately-needed new homes.”
Natasha: And who can argue with that? Well, thanks for putting us in the picture, so to speak, Beryl. How long before the Plunging competition begins?
Beryl: Almost immediately. In fact, it looks as if all three competitors are entering the Plunge Pool Hall now.
Natasha; There doesn’t seem to be much crowd reaction?
Beryl: There is an eerie silence but that’s probably because the spectators are watching from a special, glassed-in viewing enclosure. Some of the spectators, by the way, have complained that the protective ponchos and heavy-duty goggles they have to wear are a bit over the top, especially as they are 50 metres from the actual plunge pool.
Natasha: Well, it’s surely better for them to suffer a little discomfort now than go home later tonight with chlorine red eyes. Did you say there are only three competitors, by the way?
Beryl: Yes. Most of the poorer nations have withdrawn because they couldn’t afford the special safety flotation suit, emergency breathing apparatus and two EHSE-certified Plunging Assistants (PAs) per entrant that the new rules call for.
Still, on a brighter note, it does guarantee at least a bronze medal for Lliam Blunkett, who carries the hopes and wishes of all of us in Western Offshore Europe (WOE) on his broad, if slightly chubby, shoulders today.
Well, this is exciting; young Lliam has been nominated for the first Plunge of the competition. He’s walking forward now in the stooping, bow legged gait most plungers have adopted to stop their heavy duty flotation suits chafing their thighs. Liam’s Chief PA, Ken “Nobby” Clarke, is carrying an Emergency Flotation Device (EFD) which he is trained to inflate at the first sign of trouble in the water. The other PA carries a back-up flotation suit and EFD as well as a whistle and assortment of flares.
All three of them have now entered the Aquatic Recreation Safety Elevator, which will whisk them to the top of the High Plunging Platform. The boffins among you will be interested to know that the rate of ascent of the A.R.S.E. to the Plunging Platform has been carefully calculated to keep competitors’ pulse rates within the bounds specified by the EHSE SportRecreation Advisory Team (EHSEPRAT). No danger of minor myocardial infarctions here!
Well, Lliam’s now attached to his three point safety harness. His flotation suit is inflated and I think we are almost there. I should point out at this juncture that the safety harness is not a performance aid. Its only function is to keep the competitor vertical as he goes, feet first, into the Plunge pool. Marks are awarded for the speed of entry which tends to favour the more corpulent competitors, so young Lliam is definitely in with an excellent chance of gold or silver.
Right, you can almost taste the tension in the Aquatic Hall as Lliam reaches the lip of the Take-off Zone. He’s hovering on the brink, the harness is creaking. The crowd is hushed and there; he’s gone….
Oh! That’s horrible. Dreadful…It’s almost impossible to describe.
There’s no water. Poor Lliam has plunged straight into AN EMPTY POOL. Blood everywhere. Liam’s mother’s screaming. Two paramedics are trying to get to him. They’re being restrained by Health & Safety officials. There’s pandemonium in the hall….How could this happen? Where did ….
Natasha: Beryl, apparently the Plunge pool is empty for safety reasons. Last night a team from the UK Region Health &Safety Executive made a spot-check on the pool and found it had been left with more than 4 metres of water in it. Concerned that anyone breaking into the hall could fall in and drown, they ordered the pool drained, intending to get it refilled this morning.
On the way here, a security camera caught the team’s car exceeding the 20 KPH limit. They were taken into custody and had their biometric details checked. And, that’s where the problems began, I’m afraid. According to an official spokesperson, the driver recently lost an eye in a raid on an unlicensed pole-dancing club – something to do with an exotic dancer and a cocktail twizzler apparently - and had an artificial eye fitted as a temporary measure. The newly-introduced FaceReader Biometrics software couldn’t verify his identity so the police had no option but to detain him under the Prevention of Terrorism Act (London 2013).
By the time they finally managed to fetch the driver’s mum to identify him the Plunging competition had begun…and, well, you know the rest.…
That’s assuming that they will actually happen, of course. There’s a long way still to go and the ElfinSafety industry has been strangely quiet so far. Do we really belive it will stay that way? Or is this a more likely scenario?.
It’s 2013 and, precisely a year late, the London Olympics are about to start. In the studios of the EBC (European Broadcasting Company), Natasha Kiplinski, Head of SportRecreation for the Western Offshore Europe (WOE) Region is about to talk to Radio SportActivity Reporter, Beryl Davies.
Natasha: And now, we’re going live to the Lea Valley Olympic Park to join Beryl Davies for the Plunging competition, the first event in these much-delayed Olympics. So, Beryl, a new date, a new event and, in many ways, a new look Olympics?
Beryl: That’s right Natasha – and welcome everyone to EBC’s live coverage of the new Olympic Plunging event.
As you say Natasha, the XXXth Olympiad is starting a year later than planned but, looking around this magnificent new Aquatics Centre, even the most cynical listener would agree that it has been well worth the wait. As…
Natasha: Beryl, for the sake of any new listeners not familiar with the delays perhaps you could bring us up to speed?
Beryl: I’ll do my best Natasha. It really started with the unfortunate incident at the Beijing Olympics.
Natasha: Wasn’t that when one of the Synchronised Diving judges suffered a heart attack?
Beryl: Yes. Two competitors in the Women’s Synchronised Diving competition collided in mid-air and one of them - a rather statuesque natural blonde as I recall - lost her swimming costume in mid-air and, well, it was all a bit too much for the poor Russian judge. His untimely demise brought the Games to a fairly abrupt end.
Natasha: And that’s when European Health & Safety Commissioner (EHSC) Blair stepped in?
Beryl: Yes, although the International Olympic Committee ordered an immediate investigation, Commissioner Blair insisted on a separate in-depth Risk Assessment of Synchronised Diving.
Natasha: It turned out to be one of the most exhaustive Risk Assessments in history didn’t it?
Beryl: Absolutely, Natasha. Blair widened the scope initially to all diving events and, then eventually, to all sports. Work on the London Games’ site was suspended pending the outcome of her investigations.
The exercise involved 1500 experts, cost €100 million and took 18 months to complete. Her report ran to 18,000 pages and its recommendations were implemented by the EU Federal Unification Commission (EUFUC) in the Spring of 2011. London started building again as soon as it received the All Clear..
Natasha; So, what impact has all this had on the Olympic events we’ll be watching today and for the rest of the week?
Beryl: Well, as you touched on in your introduction, Natasha, its impact has been significant – especially on the event we are about to see. Both the EHSC and the IOC agreed that diving head-first into a pool is, in itself, an inherently dangerous thing to do. Tossing in a few mid-air twists and turns, of course, just adds to the risk factor.
So, Commissioner Blair helped the IOC devise this new event of Plunging. It’s straightforward and much less risky.
Natasha: Diving was consigned to the Olympic history books along with other high-risk sports like hockey, football, wrestling, boxing, fencing, running and jumping?
Beryl: Precisely, Natasha. They have all being replaced by less dangerous versions. As European SportActivity Commissioner, Ed Balls, commented just the other day - and I quote - “While the SportActivity Commission remains committed to the Olympic ideal, it applauds Commissioner Blair for devising these low-impact activities. Requiring relatively few skills and low fitness levels, they deliver the prospect of Olympic participation to a wide prospective audience irrespective of race, gender, sexual orientation, educational attainment or background. Since most of them are designed to be carried out in the safety of the home, they also free up essential building land for desperately-needed new homes.”
Natasha: And who can argue with that? Well, thanks for putting us in the picture, so to speak, Beryl. How long before the Plunging competition begins?
Beryl: Almost immediately. In fact, it looks as if all three competitors are entering the Plunge Pool Hall now.
Natasha; There doesn’t seem to be much crowd reaction?
Beryl: There is an eerie silence but that’s probably because the spectators are watching from a special, glassed-in viewing enclosure. Some of the spectators, by the way, have complained that the protective ponchos and heavy-duty goggles they have to wear are a bit over the top, especially as they are 50 metres from the actual plunge pool.
Natasha: Well, it’s surely better for them to suffer a little discomfort now than go home later tonight with chlorine red eyes. Did you say there are only three competitors, by the way?
Beryl: Yes. Most of the poorer nations have withdrawn because they couldn’t afford the special safety flotation suit, emergency breathing apparatus and two EHSE-certified Plunging Assistants (PAs) per entrant that the new rules call for.
Still, on a brighter note, it does guarantee at least a bronze medal for Lliam Blunkett, who carries the hopes and wishes of all of us in Western Offshore Europe (WOE) on his broad, if slightly chubby, shoulders today.
Well, this is exciting; young Lliam has been nominated for the first Plunge of the competition. He’s walking forward now in the stooping, bow legged gait most plungers have adopted to stop their heavy duty flotation suits chafing their thighs. Liam’s Chief PA, Ken “Nobby” Clarke, is carrying an Emergency Flotation Device (EFD) which he is trained to inflate at the first sign of trouble in the water. The other PA carries a back-up flotation suit and EFD as well as a whistle and assortment of flares.
All three of them have now entered the Aquatic Recreation Safety Elevator, which will whisk them to the top of the High Plunging Platform. The boffins among you will be interested to know that the rate of ascent of the A.R.S.E. to the Plunging Platform has been carefully calculated to keep competitors’ pulse rates within the bounds specified by the EHSE SportRecreation Advisory Team (EHSEPRAT). No danger of minor myocardial infarctions here!
Well, Lliam’s now attached to his three point safety harness. His flotation suit is inflated and I think we are almost there. I should point out at this juncture that the safety harness is not a performance aid. Its only function is to keep the competitor vertical as he goes, feet first, into the Plunge pool. Marks are awarded for the speed of entry which tends to favour the more corpulent competitors, so young Lliam is definitely in with an excellent chance of gold or silver.
Right, you can almost taste the tension in the Aquatic Hall as Lliam reaches the lip of the Take-off Zone. He’s hovering on the brink, the harness is creaking. The crowd is hushed and there; he’s gone….
Oh! That’s horrible. Dreadful…It’s almost impossible to describe.
There’s no water. Poor Lliam has plunged straight into AN EMPTY POOL. Blood everywhere. Liam’s mother’s screaming. Two paramedics are trying to get to him. They’re being restrained by Health & Safety officials. There’s pandemonium in the hall….How could this happen? Where did ….
Natasha: Beryl, apparently the Plunge pool is empty for safety reasons. Last night a team from the UK Region Health &Safety Executive made a spot-check on the pool and found it had been left with more than 4 metres of water in it. Concerned that anyone breaking into the hall could fall in and drown, they ordered the pool drained, intending to get it refilled this morning.
On the way here, a security camera caught the team’s car exceeding the 20 KPH limit. They were taken into custody and had their biometric details checked. And, that’s where the problems began, I’m afraid. According to an official spokesperson, the driver recently lost an eye in a raid on an unlicensed pole-dancing club – something to do with an exotic dancer and a cocktail twizzler apparently - and had an artificial eye fitted as a temporary measure. The newly-introduced FaceReader Biometrics software couldn’t verify his identity so the police had no option but to detain him under the Prevention of Terrorism Act (London 2013).
By the time they finally managed to fetch the driver’s mum to identify him the Plunging competition had begun…and, well, you know the rest.…
At last – something we lead the world in
Anyone connected with business is familiar with the term “world-class”. An essential element in any self-respecting corporate Mission Statement, it is also much loved by CEOs eager to convince shareholders and employees of their company's ambition and vision . Most recently, it has been appropriated by politicians equally keen to state the bleedin’ obvious while demonstrating their business savvy.
Think back to the early days of the Blair administration – I know it’s painful but just give it a try. Our brave new country was going to be blessed with, at various times, a World Class police force; a World Class NHS and certainly, because He said it thrice, a World Class education system. We believed it would be so because, blessed with the world’s fourth largest economy, there was no reason why it shouldn’t have been.
The reality, of course, is some way short of World Class: unless we use the Third World as our benchmark. The administration of justice, the health service and education has been characterised by serial mis-management, incompetence and, in the case of the NHS and our principal police force, downright criminal negligence. Comparisons with other developed countries show us routinely lagging behind in every one of these key areas.
Now, the boot is on the other foot. Now, we can take justifiable pride in topping at least one chart. Because, when it comes to detaining innocent people without charge, nobody else even comes close to us.
Forget the wimpy Yanks. In spite of Bush’s assault on civil liberties post 9/11, the US authorities can still only hold suspects for 48 hours. The Canadian police have just 24 hours to file their charges while even the Turks have to cut people free after seven and a half days. Our boys in blue, on the other hand, can already detain innocent people without charge for 28 days: And, if Jacqui Smith gets her way that will rise, very soon, to a world beating 56 days.
Makes you proud to be British, doesn’t it?
Think back to the early days of the Blair administration – I know it’s painful but just give it a try. Our brave new country was going to be blessed with, at various times, a World Class police force; a World Class NHS and certainly, because He said it thrice, a World Class education system. We believed it would be so because, blessed with the world’s fourth largest economy, there was no reason why it shouldn’t have been.
The reality, of course, is some way short of World Class: unless we use the Third World as our benchmark. The administration of justice, the health service and education has been characterised by serial mis-management, incompetence and, in the case of the NHS and our principal police force, downright criminal negligence. Comparisons with other developed countries show us routinely lagging behind in every one of these key areas.
Now, the boot is on the other foot. Now, we can take justifiable pride in topping at least one chart. Because, when it comes to detaining innocent people without charge, nobody else even comes close to us.
Forget the wimpy Yanks. In spite of Bush’s assault on civil liberties post 9/11, the US authorities can still only hold suspects for 48 hours. The Canadian police have just 24 hours to file their charges while even the Turks have to cut people free after seven and a half days. Our boys in blue, on the other hand, can already detain innocent people without charge for 28 days: And, if Jacqui Smith gets her way that will rise, very soon, to a world beating 56 days.
Makes you proud to be British, doesn’t it?
Tuesday 6 November 2007
Noo Labour is to democracy what Hitler was to Jewish welfare
So Musharaf has done what all tinpot dictators do when threatened with relegation to "normal" status - rounded up as many opponents as possible and stuck them in prison.
Predictably,our world-famous Foreign Secretary, Davis Millimetre I believe his name is, has piped up and condemned this latest assault on democracy. In this he undoubtedly has the blessing of Brown Bottle who bangs on about his love of liberty and, more specifically, of his belief in the tradition of personal liberty that is so central to the elusive quality of BRITISHNESS he is so anxious to recover..
What total bloody hypocrites he and the rest of the chattering classes truly are.
Great Britain - wait I'll change that because a lot of what I am going to say doesn't apply to Scotland - England is now the most spied upon, monitored and controlled country in the developed world. Not only do we have more spy cameras than any other nation but we have a Police Force that is determined to fingerprint and DNA swab as many of us as is humanly possible as quickly as possible: Probably to match that information with the prints and bodily fluids we will have to provide to qualify for the dubious honour of carrying an ID card.
While all of this is going on, eroding our personal liberties even faster than the rate at which the government can draft new bills, the nonentities that represent us to the rest of the world tut tut and shake their heads at perceived breaches of the democratic principle in other countries. .
If it wasn't so tragic, it would be laughable.
The only thing that stops this country sliding into a dictatorship is the fact that the people running the show are so totally incompetent. Give them a computer system to develop - for whatever purpose - and they'll spend a couple of billion but still cock it up so magnificently that it , in most cases,it just gets quietly abandoned. Ask them to create an integrated Transport system and we end up with sclerosis on most main roads and trains that struggle to match journey times from the steam era.
Unfortunately, the same brand of incompetence is evident in their attempts at enforcing national security. Can you imagine a private enterprise with the CCTV cameras, DNA and fingerprint databases, electronic eavesdropping and the other paraphernalia available to the modern snooping society , screwing up so comprehensively that an innocent man ends up with seven bullets in his head? Neither can I.
So, while I believe that Brown is to democracy what Hitler was to Jewish welfare, I am quietly confident that I will never see ID cards introduced in my life time. It won't be the once-famous English stubborness or love of privacy that will save us. Just the inability of this current crop of politicians to run anything more serious than a bath.
Predictably,our world-famous Foreign Secretary, Davis Millimetre I believe his name is, has piped up and condemned this latest assault on democracy. In this he undoubtedly has the blessing of Brown Bottle who bangs on about his love of liberty and, more specifically, of his belief in the tradition of personal liberty that is so central to the elusive quality of BRITISHNESS he is so anxious to recover..
What total bloody hypocrites he and the rest of the chattering classes truly are.
Great Britain - wait I'll change that because a lot of what I am going to say doesn't apply to Scotland - England is now the most spied upon, monitored and controlled country in the developed world. Not only do we have more spy cameras than any other nation but we have a Police Force that is determined to fingerprint and DNA swab as many of us as is humanly possible as quickly as possible: Probably to match that information with the prints and bodily fluids we will have to provide to qualify for the dubious honour of carrying an ID card.
While all of this is going on, eroding our personal liberties even faster than the rate at which the government can draft new bills, the nonentities that represent us to the rest of the world tut tut and shake their heads at perceived breaches of the democratic principle in other countries. .
If it wasn't so tragic, it would be laughable.
The only thing that stops this country sliding into a dictatorship is the fact that the people running the show are so totally incompetent. Give them a computer system to develop - for whatever purpose - and they'll spend a couple of billion but still cock it up so magnificently that it , in most cases,it just gets quietly abandoned. Ask them to create an integrated Transport system and we end up with sclerosis on most main roads and trains that struggle to match journey times from the steam era.
Unfortunately, the same brand of incompetence is evident in their attempts at enforcing national security. Can you imagine a private enterprise with the CCTV cameras, DNA and fingerprint databases, electronic eavesdropping and the other paraphernalia available to the modern snooping society , screwing up so comprehensively that an innocent man ends up with seven bullets in his head? Neither can I.
So, while I believe that Brown is to democracy what Hitler was to Jewish welfare, I am quietly confident that I will never see ID cards introduced in my life time. It won't be the once-famous English stubborness or love of privacy that will save us. Just the inability of this current crop of politicians to run anything more serious than a bath.
Sunday 4 November 2007
Don't discuss or debate - just stick a label on
So, we're meant to be entering a " new" era of grown-up debate when it comes to immigration, are we?
That would explain why Harriet Harman and the carotenous Peter Hain busied themselves doing the rounds of TV and radio studios to condemn Nigel Hastilow, the Tory candidate who invoked the memory of Enoch Powell in an article for his local paper.
In this they were rapidly joined by various Lib Dems and Tory functionaries, including the Party Chairwoman, galvanised into action by Harman and Hain's liberal (?)use of the word racist.
My point here is not to discuss whether what Hastilow said was right, wrong or, indeed, whether it had any merit at all.
What exercises me most is the fact that no one tried to refute what he had to say or posit an alternative viewpoint. As soon as it became obvious that his article wasn't going to genuflect in the general direction of mulit-culturalism, they joined forces to put Hastlow back into the box as quickly as possible, before he had had a chance to frighten the servants.
They achieved this in the manner perfected over a decade or so by our old chums Mandelson, Campbell and Blair and which has now become the default debating style adopted by our supposedly liberal elite. It's a very simple technique. Choose a suitable catch-all pejorative - Little Englander, racist, Daily Mail Reader - and pin it to the offending target as often as possible until you bully them and others who might harbour even faintly similar views into, if not obeisance, at least a form of disgruntled silence. By applying the appropriate label it is possible to stifle any view which deviates from the received wisdom on the EU, democracy, civil liberties, national security and global warming.
Chief among such circumscribed topics is, of course, immigration. Any view of immigration that does not include frequent references to the economic benefits, cultural diversiiy and cheap labour bestowed upon our our ungrateful and unworthy society by a constant stream of incomers is not just unwelcome but actively to be discouraged. Insert the name of the anti-Christ, Powell, into the discussion and grown men and women of a certain persuasion clap their hands over their ears and run around screaming show tunes at the tops of their voices, like kids who refuse to believe it's time for bed.
Anyway, as usual, the tactic worked. Nigel Hastilow emerged from his meeting with the Tory party chairwoman and immediately withdrew as a candidate. David Cameron was able to sigh with relief and we could sit back once more and listen to David Millimetre giving other countries the benefit of his well-founded views on democracy. Not once as the silencers went into action, did anybody point out that:
That would explain why Harriet Harman and the carotenous Peter Hain busied themselves doing the rounds of TV and radio studios to condemn Nigel Hastilow, the Tory candidate who invoked the memory of Enoch Powell in an article for his local paper.
In this they were rapidly joined by various Lib Dems and Tory functionaries, including the Party Chairwoman, galvanised into action by Harman and Hain's liberal (?)use of the word racist.
My point here is not to discuss whether what Hastilow said was right, wrong or, indeed, whether it had any merit at all.
What exercises me most is the fact that no one tried to refute what he had to say or posit an alternative viewpoint. As soon as it became obvious that his article wasn't going to genuflect in the general direction of mulit-culturalism, they joined forces to put Hastlow back into the box as quickly as possible, before he had had a chance to frighten the servants.
They achieved this in the manner perfected over a decade or so by our old chums Mandelson, Campbell and Blair and which has now become the default debating style adopted by our supposedly liberal elite. It's a very simple technique. Choose a suitable catch-all pejorative - Little Englander, racist, Daily Mail Reader - and pin it to the offending target as often as possible until you bully them and others who might harbour even faintly similar views into, if not obeisance, at least a form of disgruntled silence. By applying the appropriate label it is possible to stifle any view which deviates from the received wisdom on the EU, democracy, civil liberties, national security and global warming.
Chief among such circumscribed topics is, of course, immigration. Any view of immigration that does not include frequent references to the economic benefits, cultural diversiiy and cheap labour bestowed upon our our ungrateful and unworthy society by a constant stream of incomers is not just unwelcome but actively to be discouraged. Insert the name of the anti-Christ, Powell, into the discussion and grown men and women of a certain persuasion clap their hands over their ears and run around screaming show tunes at the tops of their voices, like kids who refuse to believe it's time for bed.
Anyway, as usual, the tactic worked. Nigel Hastilow emerged from his meeting with the Tory party chairwoman and immediately withdrew as a candidate. David Cameron was able to sigh with relief and we could sit back once more and listen to David Millimetre giving other countries the benefit of his well-founded views on democracy. Not once as the silencers went into action, did anybody point out that:
- What Hastilow did was express not just his own opinion but that of members of his constituents.
- Notwithstanding the efforts of the new Stalinists,it is still perfectly legal to have and express an opinion about thorny subjects, even if none of us feels really truthful anymore saying "It's a free country; I'll say what I like".
Because, of course, this is no longer a free country. Not in the sense that anyone over the age of fifty would recognise it. And,if this is what Cameron and Trevor Phillips would like to characterise as grown-up debate, the sooner we reduce the voting age to 12, the better.
Thursday 1 November 2007
Think of them not as immigrants, but New Voters
Someone has just done an approximate count of the number of foreign nationals granted work permits for the UK. Apparently, there are 800,000. No, on second thoughts it's more like 1,100,000. Or, perhaps it's 1,500,000. Well, anyway, it's an awful lot. And that is official.
By the way, if you're not remotely interested in:
By the way, if you're not remotely interested in:
- A grumpy old bugger doing a lot of moaning
- UK politics
- Natural justice
- Un-PC topics
Look away now. Because that's all this site is about.
Back to the figures relating to foreign nationals working - perfectly legally - in the UK. Well, back to the last figure in fact. What makes it interesting is that it just about matches the number of British-born people currently claiming unemployment benefits. So, here's the first conundrum. Why would any country allow 1.5 million of its own people to be out of work while welcoming the same number of foreigners to come and settle here?
According to Jacqui Smith, the Home Secretary, over 52% of all the new jobs created in the last decade have been hoovered up by immigrants. Where's the logic in that?
Before anyone starts yelling racist, fascist or any of the other rent-a quote synonyms for a right-winger let me make it clear that my beef is not with the immigrants. If we are prepared to let them in, why should anyone blame them for coming. Given a choice between no hope in Bratislava and a chance to start afresh in Balham, anyone with an ounce of drive would jump on the next coach to Victoria Bus station.
The question is, why has the government not merely welcomed these people but gone out of its way to encourage them? A succession of Home Secretaries has stood up in the Commons - or more correctly appeared on TV - to promise they were getting to grips with the problem. Jack Straw (was anyone ever given a more appropriate name?), Blind Blunkett, Clarke, Reid have all talked tough about controls and repatriation while, simultaneously throwing open the doors as wide as they could get them.
Is there another agenda at work here? I believe there is. In another age it was called gerrymandering. All the parties indulged in it, moving boundaries to try to change voting patterns in their favour. Now, the current administration has taken it to a more sophisticated level. No label has yet been created for this particular practice. But, the motive is the same; to manipulate the vote.
The logic is inescapable. There are certain areas of Great Britain that have always voted Labour and will always go on voting Labour - whether the old or the New variety - because every wave of economic success passes them by. Equally, there are bastions of Tory support which catch all the waves for the simple reason that they create them in the first place. Noo Labour knows this. No matter how pathetic they may be as administrators, the Blairs, Mandelsons and Browns of this world understand politics. Equally, they know that the more prosperous people become, the more conservative ( with a small c) they tend to become in their habits. Owning a property in common with a bank has a way of concentrating the mind and stimulating an interest in economics that may have, hitherto, lain hidden. Consequently, with the British economy enjoying the longest sustained growth in living memory, more and more people have climbed onto the property ladder and, thus, have also taken the first, tentative steps towards small c conservatism. In fact, all that has limited the numbers jumping aboard the property bandwagon has been the astronomical inflation of house prices. ( One of the Laws of Unintended Consequences that we can discuss at a later date).
So, here's a conundrum. We ( Noo Labour) naturally want the country to be prosperous because it enhances our prospects for re-election. On the other hand, the better off the country becomes, the further away from our core values the electorate moves. This is particularly true in the engine room of the economy, in the South East where home ownership is at its highest; as is, surprise surprise, the level of support for the wretched Tory party. Even more worrying is the fact that the benefits of the economic miracle are also being enjoyed in our traditional working class heartlands where the same shift towards middle class values is clearly discernible. There are only so many times we can move to the right to maintain our appeal to "Middle England" before we alienate the Unions and there are only so many new government jobs we can create. So, where else can we look for the voting fodder we need to win the next election and keep ourselves in a manner to which we have become rapidly accustomed? The answer, my friends, lies some where else in a place known as Abroad.
Let us welcome the huddled masses, yearning to be free that the US, Australia, Canada, South Africa and most of the developed world - and virtually the whole of Europe, apart from Sweden - don't wany darkening their doorsteps. Let's remove all border controls and issue entry visas as if they were library tickets. If people swarm in illegally, let's pretend that we hadn't noticed even if, by doing so, we encourage slave labour in the form of Chinese cockle pickers or Romanian child prostitutes. We'll claim to be building a truly multi-cultural society. If people complain, we'll brand them racist. If they say we are destroying British culture, we'll label them Little Englanders. And, if they persist with their protests, we'll introduce a raft of new laws that make it illegal for them to do so. We'll deny, cavill, argue and prevaricate while, all the while, encouraging the largest continuous migration in British history. Because, while the rest of the country looks on the newcomers as immigrants, foreigners and threats to their jobs we see them in a totally different light. To us, this multi-coloured rainbow of cultures and religions represents the future. Our future, handed to us on an electoral plate by hordes of grateful Poles, Somalis, Albanians and Slovaks so different in their origins but united by one pure and beautiful emotion; undying gratitude to the party that gave them the keys to the Kingdom.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
