Villain of The Year

I am more than amused to learn that Nanny, and her lackeys in the government, have been named "Villain of the Year" by a group of the world's largest internet companies.

Marvellous!

We of course knew that ages ago!

Anyhoo, the Internet Service Providers Association held an awards ceremony in London last week; in which they said that the Nanny had used its presidency of the European Union in 2005 to push through EU-wide data retention laws, that will force ISPs and telecoms companies "to retain more data for longer without proper impact assessment".

The association's members, which include; BT as well as Google, Yahoo and Microsoft are already among the biggest repositories of personal data in the world.

Under Nanny's legislation, which was given final approval in Brussels last week, they will have keep details of their European customers' telephone calls and internet use for up to two years.

Previously ISPs in Britain had operated under a voluntary code included in the 2001 Anti-terrorism, Crime & Security Act. The code recommended that subscriber information be stored for 12 months and web activity information, which includes logs of web pages visited, for just four days.

Nanny has argued that such information is a crucial weapon in the fight against terrorism. Its support for the new EU measures followed the London bombings in July.

By the way folks, in case you haven't realised it, unlike a "normal" war where there is eventuality a victory of loss; the "war against terrorism" will never be "won" or "lost", it will simply go on and on and on.

This gives Nanny the "right", in her sad twisted little world, to keep us all under surveillance for the rest of our lives.

An ISPA spokesman hit the nail on the head, and said:

"There are strong concerns that these data retention measures would be used for wider purposes than just terrorism.

There is lot of confusion here, on issues such as data protection and human rights.

It is not simply a matter of costs."

The body has suggested that data could potentially be made available to groups other than the security forces, in moves that could breach people's privacy.

Look what happened with Google, which is arguing with the White House over attempts to have it hand over search data to the authorities.

This surveillance will not come cheaply either, one estimate is that it will cost a large company £26M to set up the system and £9M a year in administration costs.

Nanny truly is a villain, an award richly deserved methinks!

Nanny Bans Romeo

"Romeo, Romeo wherefore art thou Romeo?

Banned!"

That at least is the new revised version of Shakespeare, if Nanny and her chums get their way.

It seems that, following an enquiry into abuse by a South Wales drama teacher, Nanny is worried that love scenes in school plays may pose a threat pupils' safety. Therefore, as with all threats, Nanny seeks to ban what she doesn't like or understand.

Teachers are worried that daft (sorry, I mean draft) guidelines published in Wales, under the remit of the Welsh Children's Commissioner Clywch inquiry, will mean that plays such as Romeo and Juliet would have kissing banned and lose their meaning.

However, Nanny's Welsh Assembly Government has insisted that it would not ban kissing.

The Clywch inquiry came about as a result of the death of John Owen, who taught at the Welsh-medium secondary school Ysgol Gyfun Rhydfelen in Pontypridd. He was found dead, a day before he was to stand trial for child abuse in October 2001.

The report by Children's Commissioner for Wales, Peter Clarke, said that drama teachers needed to "consider carefully what gestures and movements are appropriate to communicate the emotion" and "what gestures and movements are acceptable."

It continued:

"For example, many learners are uncomfortable with kissing in performance because of the physical intimacy that it entails.

In most cases, a peck on the cheek or an embrace can communicate the required emotion".

Mr Clarke's deputy, Sara Reid, said that the media coverage of the draft guidance had been "unhelpful", as it had a "misleading interpretation".

Meaning that the media had picked up what Nanny probably wants to do, but now can't because the cat is out of the bag.

Margaret Higgins, of the National Association for the Teaching of Drama said:

"You can't just cut out scenes like the kiss in Romeo and Juliet.

It is a crucial moment.

If this isn't fit subject matter for children, perhaps they should put on EastEnders after the watershed."

Banning EastEnders would certainly improve the intellectual development of this nation at a stroke. However, it is shows like EastEnders that keep the population docile; it ensures that the population does not start to think, or ask too many hard questions of the political elite.

Nanny Wastes Our Money

Nanny is relentless in her efforts to waste money. She never ceases in her quest to find more imaginative and innovative ways to spend our money.

This week it has been reported that Nanny has spent £32M preparing for the introduction of ID cards; in the last six months of 2005, Home office spending on ID cards went up from £25K per day to £63K per day.

That is all very well.

However, the astute amongst you may have noticed one small fly in Nanny's "oinkment"; ID cards have not been given parliamentary approval.

Nanny has no right to spend money on something that has not been approved.

As a reminder as to why ID cards are bollocks read, the Top Ten Reasons Why ID Cards Are Bollocks.

Nanny's Neds

I am guessing that many of you will fondly remember, from you youth, that fine British comic The Beano?

This noble "organ" gave us Lord Snooty, Minnie the Minx and the Bash Street Kids; it was something that made Saturday mornings worth getting out of bed for, in order to rush down to the newsagents to buy a copy.

Unfortunately The Beano has upset Nanny.

A new set of characters, called the Neds, have been introduced by The Beano; the Neds are a slobbish lazy family, parodying the chav "culture" of parts of Britain.

The Neds feature Ned, Nedette and their teenage children, Asbo and Chavette; they upset their respectable neighbours by playing loud music, shouting abuse and littering their garden with rubbish.

The publishers of The Beano, DC Thomson, say that it is a harmless parody of modern Britain.

Unfortunately, Nanny is not amused; Kathleen Marshall, the Scottish Childrens' Commissioner, has launched a debate about this issue.

Quote:

"Some people will have concerns about this comic strip.

What I hear time and again from young people is that they really do resent being labelled or stigmatised as 'neds' or 'chavs'.

I have to ask young people what these terms mean to them and whether or not they are offensive."

So what?

She goes on to say:

"It's been suggested that this cartoon is a bit insulting to children and young people and their families,

particularly those who choose to dress in baseball caps and tracksuits".

Rosie Kane, the Scottish Socialist MSP, also got in on the act by trying and failing to get the word "ned" banned from use in the Scottish parliament.

Nice to know that the Scottish MSP's are "earning" their wages by pursuing such vital issues!

Stewart Stevenson, justice spokesman for the SNP, said that The Beano portrayed a "grotesque" and "damaging" caricature of modern Scotland.

Quote:

"I am surprised that DC Thomson has chosen to address a subject such as this in a comic aimed at young children.

It serves to reinforce the image of parts of Scotland as being inhabited by individuals who are disengaged, unemployed and anti-social".

I like Scotland very much, and indeed spent a very happy 4 years at Edinburgh University. However, the "misty eyed" chocolate box image that some try to paint of it simply is not reality. It may be worth remembering that Glasgow recently hit the headlines when an 11 year old girl collapsed in class, as a result of regularly taking heroin.

The publishers are taking this in their stride, as indeed they should, saying:

"We have had a very positive response to The Neds.

We have received a number of e-mails from our readers saying how much they enjoyed it and as yet we haven't had a single negative comment.

Originally The Neds was going to be a one-off strip, but their popularity means we are now going to bring them back in the future."

Nanny should stop trying to create a chocolate box image of Britain, much like the Dickensian Snowy Fezziwig Christmas, it never existed.

Nanny Wastes Our Money

Nanny is rather adept at spending your money, in fact some might argue that she is rather a profligate old so and so.

She does, after all, now employ 7 million people; at our expense.

One of Nanny's trolls, Liz Cameron, the Lord Provost of Glasgow seems to have got herself into hot water over her expenditure.

Claims have been made that she has been "junketing", well Glasgow is the "junkie" capital of Europe isn't it?

Oh, sorry, wrong word!

Anyhoo, dear old Liz has been accused of wasting £60K of our money on foreign travel over the last 9 months.

During that time she has visited; Chicago, New York, Nuremberg, St Petersburg, St Etienne, Austria, Dubai, Sri Lanka and Hong Kong.

Nice work if you can get it!

Needless to say, like all of Nanny's lackeys and trolls, when confronted with this she denied that she had wasted money and won't apologise.

Quote:

"I'm taking the city forward and I make no apology for it.

The Lord Provost is an ambassador for the city - am I supposed to be an ambassador from behind my desk in the City Chambers?

When I go abroad I am out there selling the city because our city needs a huge profile."

Adding:

"The £60,000 bill is not just my expenses but includes the expenses for my staff.

I never go anywhere without the council agreeing I should go.

Every trip has to be approved by the hospitality committee and the full council with an estimate of the cost.

I never go alone because that is council policy.

I go with my secretary who deals with all the meetings and my council officer who carries the civic chain which is very valuable

(Ken says excuse me whilst I laugh at that one!!!!).

What I do is no different from other Lord Provosts of the City of Glasgow."

Edinburgh's Lord Provost, Lesley Hinds, took only one overseas trip during the same period, costing council taxpayers £1597. Need I remind Liz that Edinburgh is the capital of Scotland, not Glasgow.

Seemingly Liz is not deterred by facts, quote:

"We are not comparing like with like.

Glasgow is a second city which has to punch above its weight.

Glasgow does not have a palace or a parliament building and MSPs

- it has me.

I am doing a great job for Glasgow,

together with the chief executive and other members of the council, in selling this city."

Quite an ego on this lackey, isn't there?

Nice to know that our money is being spent so wisely!

Nanny Tries To Ban The World's Oldest Profession

Now we all know that Nanny has many bees in her bonnet about oodles of things; smoking, eating, drinking, teenagers and sex to name but a few.

Sex, being something that we all indulge in (on an occasional/regular basis), is certainly something that she can get her "choppers" into. One aspect of sex that has caught her gimlet eye is that of the world's oldest profession, ie prostitution.

Now Nanny has something of a juxtaposition on this (can I say juxtaposition?).

She has campaigned to remove street girls, and put them in "approved" areas and houses; the notion being that Nanny "cares" for the women, and wishes them to have safe working conditions.

However, on the other hand, prostitution kind of grates against her "feminist" instincts; in her eyes it is "clearly" exploitation of women, and must be stamped out.

Good luck Nanny, it has been going on ever since mankind stood upright, quite how your pathetic and incompetent government can change that I don't know.

Anyhoo, it doesn't stop Nanny from trying.

Enter Nanny's old friend Tessa Jowell. She is trying to ban prostitution in Germany (erm...don't think that comes under Nanny's jurisdiction does it?)

Tessa has teamed up with Nanny to urge England's star footballers to use their influence as role models, to campaign against fans using prostitutes during the World Cup finals in Germany.

Tessa sent letters to Sven, David Beckham and the rest of the England team urging them to shun sexual exploitation; in the same way they have campaigned against drugs and racism.

Tessa Jowell, Nanny's culture and sport secretary and minister for women, shrilly cried for "vigilance to protect women from exploitation". It is estimated that 40,000 foreign sex workers will arrive in Germany for the tournament.

At this point I would note that prostitution is legal in Germany, and that it is in fact none of Nanny's business what goes on there.

That doesn't stop dear old Tessa from sticking her nose into the matter; at a recent meeting with the Women's National Commission, Jowell said she was "horrified" when told how many sex workers were expected to attend the finals.

Jowell said:

"The concern is that where there are big global sporting events, large numbers of women are made available for large numbers of visitors.

I support the call to the Football Association FA and German authorities for vigilance to protect women from exploitation."

Someone might like to remind Tessa that Wayne Rooney, England's striker, was accused of having rumpy pumpy with working girls at a Merseyside massage parlour while he played for Everton in 2004.

Needless to say the German football authorities think that the campaign is bollocks, referring to it as a "tiresome issue".

Indeed preparations for the arrival of prostitutes are well advanced, a brand new bordello has been built in Berlin and agencies are busily recruiting girls. In Cologne, the authorities have built a row of drive-in sex booths for motorists.

How very thorough and "Germanic"!

Rolf Gablin, a sex club owner in Cologne, said:

"The sex industry was legalised.

The girls pay taxes and health insurance.

This letter is childish.

I would not have expected it from an adult."

I am surprised that Tessa has the time to meddle in other countries affairs in this manner, given the storm that is brewing over her husband's alleged dodgy dealing in Italy and the possible connections in this matter that are alleged between him, Tessa and Blairy.

Maybe Tessa is trying to look busy, and to divert our attention?

Nanny Bans White Police Officers

It seems that the concepts of political correctness are becoming embedded in some police forces, despite what you may have read about racist emails in the Merseyside police.

Unfortunately, Nanny can take the concept of "PC" a little too far at times. Her chums in the Gloucester Constabulary have been reported to the Commission for Racial Equality, over accusations that it has discriminated against 109 white male job applicants during a recent recruitment drive.

The police claim that the decision was part of its programme to boost the number of minority ethnic officers:

"Because of statutory and Governmental requirements, the decision was taken to give priority to females and applicants from minority ethnic backgrounds."

Gloucestershire Constabulary believe that its recruitment profile for officers must represent the ethnic mix of the community, and therefore from the total number of 301 applicants they received, only 192 could be sent to the police officer assessment centre.

Assistant Chief Constable Michael Matthews said:

"It is essential in a democratic policing environment to ensure that under-represented groups are prioritised in our recruitment drives.

This 'positive action'

will undoubtedly mean disappointment for others

who fall into the categories we never have difficulty recruiting from.

However, this is the only realistic way of ensuring we maintain a diverse workforce that reflects the diverse communities we serve."

Up to a point there is some logic in what he says. However, would not the people of Gloucestershire be best served by having the best qulaity officers on the beat, irrespective of their race and sex?

Nanny Upsets Smoker

As we all know, Nanny has a particular antipathy (there's a big word for a Monday morning) towards smokers.

In fact so incensed is she about the evil habit of smoking that whenever she sees the word, or a derivation of it, she falls into a bulging eyed rage.

That at least is what happened to one hapless resident of my own fair borough of Croydon, who is called Stan Smoker.

Mr Smoker, a 77 year old widower, had the misfortune to underpay his council tax bill. He was then sent 3 letters from our "beloved" and "competent" council, between December and last week, demanding that he pay the shortfall.

How much was this shortfall?

£100?

No

£50?

No

£1?

No

8p...yes 8p!

I know that it is a Monday morning, but the astute amongst you will have noticed that the postage on these three letters cost more that the sum demanded.

Stan is quoted as saying:

"I was very surprised. I thought I'd finished paying my council tax bill in full in December but then I got a letter saying I owed eight pence.

I thought it was a joke at first but then I got two more letters.

I have paid it now but I thought it was a little bit petty to say the least.

Why they couldn't just tack it on the next bill I don't know.

They sent me three letters, all by second-class post.

It doesn't make sense but I doubt I'm the only person this has happened to."

Croydon Council noted that:

"Mr Smoker's council tax benefit was reduced by the sum of eight pence per week from December 5."

Mr Smoker is wrong in one respect, when he says that it doesn't make any sense. It makes perfect sense if you remember three things:

1 This is Croydon council

2 Councils tend to be run by jobsworth's lackeys of Nanny

3 The council tax comes under this man's ultimate control....

How To Protect Yourself From a Suicide Bomber

Nanny has been making much, over the last year or so, of her plans for improved security and ID cards; all of these security "improvements" will allegedly deter the suicide bombers, that she claims are threatening our very existence.

Well I have a much simpler, cheaper and easier solution to face down this "threat"; one that will not affect our civil liberties.

My solution assumes that the suicide bomber is a religious zealot, programmed to believe that on his death he will go the heaven to meet a collection of virgins.

The people who believe this also believe that if they touch an unclean animal or part of a unclean animal (ie a pig) at the moment of death, then they will not get into heaven.

Therefore all we need to do is to carry around a very small sealed container, no bigger than a pill box, of a pig's blood.

In the event that a suicide bomber were to detonate himself in the vicinity of someone with the pig's blood, the bomber would be splattered with traces of the blood and he would not be able to go to heaven.

Fine you say, but you do not want to be blown up merely to prevent the bomber from going to heaven.

This, ladies and gentlemen, is the clever bit.

All that we have to do is to ensure that a statistically significant number of people carry around a pill box of pig's blood, and ensure that this is publicised as widely as possible.

The result would be that the suicide bomber could never be sure that he would not be splattered with pig's blood, on detonation of his bomb. Hence he could never be sure that he would go to heaven, and therefore would not be "motivated" enough to commit suicide.

Is this a plan, or is this a plan?

The Birds

Nanny does seem to be having some sort of problems with animals at the moment, particularly the winged flapping variety. I wonder if she was frightened as a child when watching "The Birds"?

Anyhoo, Nanny's trolls in Rotherham Borough Council have got themselves into something of a strop over the behaviour of George and Janine Cooper.

What was their crime?

Simple, they were trying to feed the birds in their local village of Kiveton Park.

Now Nanny gets very angry about this sort of behaviour, and decided to film the couple as they brazenly broke the law; in fact Nanny filmed them over a period of four days!

They set off each day at 7am, with five bags of bird food, which they make from; bird seed, sultanas, sunflower seed, water and scraps of bread.

Mr and Mrs Cooper used five regular feeding points, including a bluebell wood and a paved area near the village library.

Then, out of the blue, two of Nanny's little "helpers" (wardens) appeared from the shadows and gave them a £50 fixed penalty notice for dropping litter. The wardens said that CCTV cameras had been tracking their movements for days.

Mr Cooper, who is 65, stood up for himself and refused to accept the ticket. He and his wife, who is an RSPB member by the way, continued what they were doing.

Nanny's trolls hate being disobeyed, so Rotherham borough council posted a notice to them, demanding payment within 14 days, with the threat of a £2,500 fine or even jail unless they comply.

Mr Cooper said:

"I couldn't believe it.

The council people had driven there in a car and were hiding behind a building.

They said they had seen us go there four mornings in a row and drop bread,

which they regard as litter.

They said they had video evidence to prove it.

I said, 'You must be joking' and handed the ticket back.

They have posted it to us but we have no intention of paying."

Mrs Cooper, who is also a member of the Wildlife Trust, said that she and her husband were only trying to "do our bit for wildlife and the environment".

She said:

"These idiots are treating us like common criminals.

I can't believe the extent they have gone to for the sake of fining us 50

but they are wasting their time because we won't pay.

We are not litter louts;

we are bird lovers who respect the environment

and I have no sympathy with people who drop litter."

They have been doing the morning feed run for eight years, and have never had a complaint from the residents.

Mrs Cooper said:

"We live in a rural area and the paved area near the library is an open space where nobody walks,

so it does not cause any problems."

How can Nanny foster a "Respect" society when she treats people in this way?

Nanny Bans Owls

Dear old Nanny has something of a thing for our small furry friends, as evidenced yesterday by her Pussy Protection Charter.

Anyhoo, now Nanny has issued an edict banning owls.

This may at first sight seen to be a somewhat contradictory to her animals first policy. However, have no fear, the owl ban is only effective against wooden owls.

Shall I go on?

Or is this really now getting a bit too surreal?

It certainly is for Jeannette Dicks, who owns the wooden owl.

Jeannette, from Oakley in Hampshire, has been having something of a problem with pigeons. Not the sort that wander around Trafalgar Square, but the sort owned by her neighbour Peter Campbell.

Campbell, for reasons best known to himself, chooses to house 42 racing pigeons in the garden of his home in a residential area.

Needless to say, the birds need to go out and have a bit of a flap in the air every day. No problem, if you don't live under their flight path. Unfortunately Jeannette does, and consequently is on the receiving end of their "doings".

Now some people, who dislike these flying crap buckets, would have tried to shoot them or poison them or indeed set a few cats in amongst them. Jeannette is not that cruel, instead she planted a pole in her garden and topped it with an ornamental, but credible, model of an eagle owl.

Eagle owls eat pigeons, aha!

Now the pigeons, naturally, have changed their flight path; Campbell is complaining that the change in flight path means that they take 2 hours to come home.

Being a good citizen of Nanny Britain, instead of accepting the fact that it is a selfish act to keep 42 birds in a residential area, he decided to call the police...six times!

For their part, the police used their brains and ignored this daft complaint.

Unfortunately, Campbell then realised that the council would of course not use their brains, and contacted the antisocial behaviour co-ordinator at Basingstoke council. Campbell was advised to log all anti-pigeon behaviour.

Basingstoke council confirmed that their top ASBO man was on the case:

"We take all reports of anti social behaviour and harassment

seriously

and will advise and investigate where necessary."

There is now a very real threat of an ASBO being issued to Jeannette, in other words Nanny has taken the side of the selfish git.

Seemingly Campbell is not finished, he intends to breed another 50 pigeons this summer.

But let us not forget that this episode has been "stressful" for him too, he has consulted a doctor who has prescribed him a course of anti depressants.

Pathetic!

Nanny Protects Her Pussy

It is reassuring to note that Nanny, in her ongoing crusade to make Britain a "better" pace to live in, has not forgotten her furry friends.

No, I don't mean Prescott and Brown!

Nanny's chum Margaret Beckett, the Environment Secretary, is to produce detailed codes of conduct telling pet owners how to feed their animals and where they should go to the toilet, along with ways of providing "mental stimulation". Owners of "sociable" pets should provide them with playmates, the codes will say.

No, I am not drunk.

There really is to be a code of conduct for the treatment of pets!

Every domesticated animal will have a code of conduct tailored to their species (for goodness sake!), each of which is expected to run into dozens of pages - no surprise there then!

This will form part of Nanny's Animal Welfare Bill, expected to clear Parliament in the next few months.

Nanny's Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs will tell the owners of Britain's ten million cats, eight million dogs and one million rabbits of their new obligations in a series of pamphlets distributed to vets, pet shops, kennels and over the internet.

The first code of conduct has been produced for cats, it is 18 pages long and contains such gems as:

• Dogs should be introduced to cats very carefully



• The dog should be on a lead at first so that it cannot chase the cat



• Keep cats indoors at night to protect them and the local wildlife



• Neuter cats at four months old. Females can produce up to 18 kittens a year, the code says, and motherhood takes a lot out of a cat. Cats advertise their availability by screeching, fighting and wandering off



• Provide areas where cats can hide, such as an enclosed bed or box, or a high ledge where they can escape from children and other pets



• Ensure that cats have enough mental stimulation so that they do not become bored or frustrated



• Use lightweight rolling balls, or toys that stimulate catching behaviour, such as fishing rods



• Make sure that cats do not become overweight, and know their ideal weight at every stage of their life



• Ensure that cats' preference for privacy is met by giving them a hidden away place with cat litter to relieve themselves. This advice forms part of a nine-point guide for going to the toilet

Although any breach of these codes is not an offence in itself, failure to observe elements of the code will count against defendants in court.

There are five freedoms laid down in the Animal Welfare Bill: appropriate diet, suitable living conditions, companionship or solitude as appropriate, monitoring for abnormal behaviour and protection from pain, suffering, injury and disease.

Nanny will create a body of enforcers known as the "pet police"; needless to say they will be our old "friends" council employees, with powers to enter property and seize animals.

Up until now prosecutors have had to prove that a domestic animal was being mistreated.

I, for one, believe that pets should be properly treated; however, the fact that Nanny is devoting so much time and resources into this leads me to conclude that it is in fact just another means for her to regulate and pacify us. The shift in emphasis of proof is one of her favourite tools, eg tax matters, and should be rested at all costs.

Janet Nunn, chief executive of the Pet Care Trust, said that owners should keep all vets' bills and other documentation to prove that they were looking after the animal properly.

It is a snoops' charter, and will be used by neighbours in their own petty vendettas.

By the way, the Bill currently applies to all vertebrates, but a code of conduct for invertebrates, such as lobsters, may follow.

They may one day have a bill for humans too!

Gordon is a Loser

Gordon is a loser
Gordon is a loser
Nah nah nah nah
Nah nah nah nah
Gordon is a loser etc

The nearly man of British politics, Blairy's "friend" and neighbour, Gordon "Smiler" Brown is putting his considerable "personality" behind Nanny's proposals for ID cards.

You will recall last week that "Smiler" managed to lose the Dunfermline by election, by a swing of 16%, to the party that has issues with drink and rent boys.

Quite an achievement!



Anyhoo, today "Smiler" in advance of tonight's vote on ID cards is saying that ID cards will prevent terrorism.

Erm....not quite true Gordon.

The 7/7 tube and bus bombers were British citizens, they would have had ID cards. The useless and pathetic "shoe bomber" Richard Reid was British, and would have had an ID card. Captain Hook, the mad Mullah from London, was known about for seven years yet nothing was done; ID cards would have made no difference in his case either.

In short, ID cards would not have made the slightest difference.

Gordon, my old mucker, you are talking nonsense!

Even Blairy may sense that this is a lost cause, as it seems that Blairy's plane is having some engine trouble; as a result, Blairy will not be able to attend tonight's vote.

Just to remind you why ID cards are bollocks, here are the top ten reasons why they are bollocks.

Safety Devices Dangerous

What a hoot!

It seems that electronic safety systems, designed to minimise human error, could in fact make drivers more dangerous by lulling them into a false sense of security.

This effect has been nicknamed "highway hypnosis", and is a state of mind brought about by reduced stress and drivers having little to do.

A study was carried out at Brunel University, and looked at the effects of two systems: adaptive cruise control (ACC), which electronically maintains a safe distance from the car in front, and active steering (AS), which monitors the white lines in the road and adjusts the steering to keep the car in lane.

Researchers tested 44 drivers in a simulator to see how quickly they would respond to an emergency.

When both safety systems were switched on, their reaction times were considerably slower.

Mark Young, who led the research, said:

"If a driver has little to do the capacity to respond to unexpected events is dramatically reduced."

In other words, Nanny stops you thinking.

This is of course the hallmark of an authoritarian state.

Nuts!

My compliments to Tesco who have decided to take the piss out of Nanny, by "enhancing" their food labelling.

Milk bottles now contain the very pertinent warning that they "Contain Milk", and packets of nuts are emblazoned with the legend "Contains Nuts".

Needless to say, you can never please everyone; David Reading, director of The Anaphylaxis Campaign, said that the "bleedin' obvious" labels undermined the seriousness of the problem of food allergies.

Quote:

"It is utterly ludicrous.

People obviously don't need to be told that milk contains milk or that bags of nuts contain nuts.

That just undermines the seriousness of allergies.

People will laugh."

I think that was the point!

What really troubles me about the "rise" in allergies, that people claim afflict themselves and their offspring, is how on earth the human race managed to survive for the last 150,000 years or so if we are allergic to so many things?

Do you think that it is possible that some of this "rise" in allergies may in fact be attributable to some lazy, indulgent parents who succumb to their childrens' whims; simply because they are too lazy to train their children to eat what is put in front of them?

Just a thought:)

Multi Culturism Works - It's Official!

There are some doubting Thomas's out there who are very skeptical about the value, and effectiveness, of Nanny's multicultural approach to treating minorities.

Even Trevor Phillips, Head of the Commission for Racial Equality, wants multi culturism banned.

Yet, in the midst of all the debate, we can see a perfect example of the success of multi culturism; whereby a member of an ethnic and religious minority has managed to adopt and adapt the customs of "both" cultures, without any real problems.

Our dear old friend Omar Khayam, photographed above centre, proves that you can live in both worlds at the same time.

On the one hand he is a "devout Muslim" attending mosque regularly and supporting various Muslim cultural events (such as the fancy dress party above), and on the other hand he happily dealt in heroin and cocaine.

He also takes a keen interest in international events and politics, especially Danish politics.

Some heartless souls may think that Khayam is a stupid little wanker, with about as much brains in his head as the average amoeba has in their entire body. However, that would of course be rather a subjective judgement.

He has managed to achieve something of a distinction, his actions have managed to ensure that he is ostracised by both the Muslim and non Muslim communities; clearly demonstrating how effective a multi cultural approach can be.

Nanny is in fact so pleased with his progress, that she has invited him back to jail; where no doubt he can help others adjust to living in a multi cultural society.

Of course, it might be argued that it would be a lot simpler and easier for both immigrants and the resident population if multi culturism were abandoned; and people were made to learn the language, leave their isolated ghettos and to adopt the customs and way of life of the host nation.

Postman Pat

Postman Pat
Postman Pat
He's a lazy twat!

Pity the poor people of the peaceful hamlet of Cefn Minog, population: three, who woke up one morning to find that their entire community had been branded a health and safety hazard.

That is at least the conclusion drawn by one of Nanny's trolls, working for the dreaded Health and Safety Inspectorate.

Mr Jobsworth conducted a "risk assessment" of Cefn Minog, and concluded that it presented a clear and present danger to the health and safety of the local postal employees.

Nanny has ruled that the postmen must not deliver post in Cefn Minog again.

Nanny's troll identified three potential ways that a postman would be killed if he tried to bring a sack of letters up the slope. The grassy pastures apparently contain 23 hazards capable of inflicting major injury, six that could cause serious injury and two risking minor injury.

One of the deadliest obstacles, the inspector concluded, was a stile opposite Bettws Farm, near Abergavenny.

Marked as "harm potential", the report states:

"Slip/trip/fall.

Muscle/tendon strains or broken bones, cuts, grazes, bruising.

Hit by moving vehicle."

The "probable severity" was listed as "fatality".

This came as news to William Jackson who is 79 and has a pacemaker, he walks across the same route every day to post his letters. Indeed there have been postmen coming to Cefn Minog since the reign of Victoria, without suffering any major fatality.

Great Gott, a farm, was identified by Nanny's troll as:

"A working farmyard with a muddy surface, loose stones and a raised cobbled area".

The report noted of dangers:

"Collision with farm vehicles/machinery.

Bumping into/striking against injuries".

"Opening gate and climbing very steep footpath...

very strenuous exercise could bring on or worsen a medical condition."

An alternative route would bring the post van along a track bordered by a dry-stone wall. This would cause:

"considerable jolting of driver at very low speed causing cumulative spinal or other back injuries".

Quote:

"The driver could lose control of vehicle

skid, steering thrown by protruding stones or side of ruts causing vehicle to strike a tree or a wall,

or at worst

roll over on adverse camber striking against/bumping into injuries".

Postcomm, the regulator that compiled the report, said:

"What looks like a quite pleasant country walk

could be a lethal stroll for a postman on a dark winter morning.

The health and safety assessor has to look on the bleak side."

Utter bollocks!

How is it then that post is delivered to some of Britain's less than inviting tower blocks and council estates?

I would have thought that the postman would face far more life threatening dangers in those places.

A cynic might suggest that this report is being used as an excuse to avoid making a few deliveries that take the postman a little more time than others.

Nanny's Man of Straw Updated

Nanny's Man of Straw has been updated, follow the link updated.

Nanny Bans Worrall Thompson

Nanny's best friend, Auntie, has got her knickers in a twist over something that one of her very naughty boys has done.

That "loveable" and cheeky chappie, chef, and all round celeb Anthony Worrall Thompson has gone an upset both Auntie and Nanny.

They are very cross with him, and have administered a severe and thoroughly deserved spanking (that phrase will generate few interesting hits form the search engines!:)).

What has Anthony done to so annoy these two bastions of our moral and physical wellbeing?

Simple, one of his recipes has been deemed just too naughty for public consumption. Rumour has it, that if you even read the ingredients you will immediately gain 10 pounds.

Oooh!

The recipe is called Snickers Pie, and is meant as a sweet treat for children. Just one slice of Snickers Pie contains 1,250 calories.

Now the funny old thing was that Anthony's recipe was happily residing for a while on the BBC website (indeed he actually made the pie on TV two years ago), that is until some interfering busybodies from the Food Commission found it and complained about its calorie content.

They labelled it the most unhealthy pudding ever.

So what?

Auntie was so worried that someone would actually make the dish and eat it, that she removed the recipe.

What a bunch of prats!

It is not Auntie's job to censor recipes, just because they are not to her taste.

Having this dish once or twice a year will not kill you. Should you be stupid enough to eat it every day, then that is you look out; as you will of course die, but then that's your business.

By the way, you may be wondering what the "forbidden" recipe is, here it is, but be warned you will gain 10 pounds just by reading it:

Ingredients

-1 packet puff pastry
-140g/5oz mascarpone
-110g/4oz soft cheese
-50g/2oz caster sugar
-3 eggs
-5 Snickers bars, chopped

Method

Preheat oven to 200C/400/Gas 6

Roll pastry to 3-4mm thick and use to line a 20cm/8in fluted tart tin

Beat the mascarpone, soft cheese and sugar together in a large bowl, until smooth

Beat in eggs, one at a time. Add the Snickers bars and fold in

Pour into lined tart tin, and spread to the edges

Place in the oven for 10 minutes, then lower to 180C/350/Gas 4 for a further 25 minutes until golden and set

Allow to cool before serving

Those of you who don't have a sweet tooth, may enjoy my favourite recipe for maintaining body mass; lard.

Ingredients

-1 pound of lard per person

-Parsley

Method

Open the packet of lard

- Place on a plate

- Garnish with parsley

- Serve immediately

I'm happy because I eat lard!



For other lard related recipes, please visit "Accountants Can Cook".

How To Sit In a Reclining Chair

Now I know that many of you happily live your lives, in a care free and relaxed manner, without ever giving a thought to the dangers that lurk in every corner of your existence.

However, don't panic, Nanny spends the most part of her life worrying about these dangers on our behalf.

Thank you Nanny!

Indeed she has recently identified another, previously considered "harmless", activity that urgently needs the "Nanny treatment".

Sitting in reclining chairs, it seems, is very dangerous.

Therefore Nanny's chums in the Greater Manchester Fire Service have drawn up a four-page safety manual to instruct crews on how to sit in a reclining chair.

Firemen, you might recall, are those brave ladies and gentlemen who risk life and limb on our behalf putting out fires and rescuing people from burning buildings.

You would have thought that they had a healthy appreciation of risk; Nanny thinks otherwise.

Those firemen from Manchester hoping for a rest between call-outs are banned from doing so, until they have been trained to use the fireservice's new £400 reclining chair.

This may take some time, however, since Greater Manchester Fire Service employs 2,200 personnel in 41 stations.

The instructions for sitting down are as follows:

Take out their "personal-issue head protector", and place it on the back of the chair.

Then, and only then, can they begin their descent, a process that must end with them sitting "fully back". Those that get this far can "get ready to recline".

The manual then advises:

"To release the mechanism (i.e. to start reclining), simply lift the lever under the right-hand arm of the chair (when seated).

This moves the chair into its semi-reclined position (i.e. feet up, head up)."

To recline the chair fully, they must hold on to the arm rests and push backwards.

To "upright" [sic] the chair, the occupant "should sit up slightly into the semi-reclined position, hold on to the armrest then press downwards with their heels until the action locks the chair flush".

Crews are warned that only "trained personnel" can carry out "lubrication of mechanisms", and that sleeping bags must not be used.

They are also given advice on how to deal with spillages - "tissue should firstly be placed on the stain to absorb excess liquid" - and warned that horseplay involving recliners is deemed a disciplinary offence.

The fire service has spent £130,000 on new Calcot recliners, which will be used as beds during night shifts.

A fire service spokesman said:

"Training will be given for health and safety reasons.

There are moving parts."

I sit on a swivel chair when working, which I constructed myself; am I in danger?

Nanny's Man of Straw

Nanny's man of Straw, Jack, waded into the "cartoon debate" on Friday; by attacking the European papers who printed the offending cartoons.

He said:

"I believe that the republication of these cartoons has been unnecessary, it has been insensitive, it has been disrespectful and it has been wrong.

There are taboos in every religion. We have to be very careful about showing the proper respect in this situation."

A cynic might suggest that his concerns about causing offence may be down to the fact there is a large Muslim community in his constituency.

There are several points that the man of Straw should remember:

1 The cartoons were published by Western media organisations in Western countries. The state does not control the media in the West.

2 We, and the rest of Europe, are not Muslim nations.

3 Muslim media organisations regularly print anti Semitic cartoons.

4 The placards being brandished by the radicals in the London demonstrations called for a repeat of 7/7, that is incitement to murder is it not?

Isn't that a crime in this country?

5 The Western media regularly pillories other religions, which no doubt annoys/offends some of the more fundamental followers of those religions, why should Islam be a sacred cow?

6 The cartoons are now easily accessible on line, does that mean that all ISP's and net based companies are also going to be subject to this campaign of abuse and intimidation?

7 The cartoons were also published in Lebanon.

8 Many in the West may well object to the offensive and derogatory use of the word "infidel" by some Muslims to describe "non believers", yet they do not take to the streets and riot.

9 An Iranian newspaper has launched a competition for cartoonists to submit cartoons about the Holocaust. However, I doubt that (as immature and as pathetic as the competition may be) there will be mass protests by non Muslims in the streets or that the Iranian Embassies in Europe will be attacked.

10 In 2001 an episode of South Park featured an animated all singing, all dancing Mohammed. Why were there no large scale protests then?

11 Whilst it is reasonable to believe that there are piles of British, American and Israeli flags ready to burn in the Middle East; I find it unlikely that there is a such a ready stock of Danish and Norwegian flags.

The fact that the protesters have managed to lay their hands on such a large number of flags, indicates that the "protests" are being co-ordinated and orchestrated by "higher" authorities.

Nanny Bans Meatballs

What a pathetic nation of wimps we are becoming under Nanny's rule.

It seems that the latest threat to civilisation as we know it, turns out to be from the humble meatball.

Yes, I said meatball!

Stow-on-the-Wold primary has banned meatballs from the lunch menus.

Why?

Nanny's lackey, head teacher Rebecca Scutt, is worried that the "precious little angels" under her "loving" care may choke on them.

Mrs Scutt said risks occurred when kids tried to eat meatballs in one gulp.

She conceded:

"Meatballs are popular.

Children love them because they're tasty, in tomato sauce and don't look like meat but they do gobble them down."

Excuse my language, but farking hell!

Has no one ever told the little brats to chew their food?

That's why we have teeth!

As I understandsand it, the good people of Italy have been brought up on meatballs for generations; yet precisely how many thousands of their children die each year from meatballs?

You are as likely to choke on a meatball, as you are any other piece of solid food. The solution, when viewed from Nanny's perpsective would be to simply get us to eat only baby food that has been pulped.

Mrs Scutt should be relieved of her job ASAP, she is clearly not capable of teaching children the concepts of responsiblity and risk awareness.

This Nanny nonsense will simply breed even more self centred, spoilt, lazy, good for nothings.

Doesn't that count as child abuse?

God knows we have enough of them already.

Those of you who fancy a succulent meatball should visit the "Accountants Can Cook" section of my site (see right hand menu). There I have a most unctuous recipe for perfect meatballs...yum!

Please Do Not Adjust Your PC

Farking hell, when things go wrong they sure go wrong!

Sorry for the technical glitches folks and lack of posts, but following on from yesterday's loss of internet connection a few more gremlins appeared today.

My broadband connection was again down today, so I have had to revert to the stoneage and use dial up.

Then to cap it all, the site that hosts Nanny Knows Best fell over!

It seems that it is now back up.

Fingers crossed that both this site and my ISP will revert to normal levels of service in the next day or so.

Ken

Computer Said No!

Sorry for the lack of posting today folks, but my internet connection fell over for most of the day.

Maybe Nanny is after me?

Normal service resumes tomorrow, fingers crossed!

Ken

Nanny's Religious Hatred

Nanny dropped a bit of a clanger (or fumbled a ball, whatever you prefer) last night.

How sad!

Her much vaunted Religious Hatred bill was being voted on in the Commons.

Nanny was seeking new powers to ban people suspected of preaching religious hatred.

Yet she lost the vote!

The proposals, which formed a key part of Nanny's election manifesto last May (some cynics argued that it was sop designed to shore up the Muslim vote), will still become law, but with restrictions imposed by the House of Lords.

One of the most intriguing aspects of the defeat last night was that in one of the key votes, Nanny lost by a majority of one.

Guess who didn't vote?

None other than the head Nanny herself, Blairy Poppins!

I wonder if this "error" was by accident or design?



Fungus Clarke, Nanny's Home Secretary, said of the defeat:

"I regret that on the question of the level of the bar at which prosecutions can be brought ...

that the government lost tonight."

The Racial and Religious Hatred Bill aims to give followers of all faiths equal protection from incitement.

Nanny's critics, including Rowan Atkinson, former Archbishop of Canterbury Lord Carey, and civil rights groups, have said that Nanny's Religious Hatred Law threatened free speech.

Rowan Atkinson has said some of his sketches, and others such as Monty Python's 1979 film "Life of Brian", could face prosecution if the original proposals had been passed.

To my view, if Nanny is sincere in her claim that she wishes to create an equal and tolerant society; where people of all faiths can practice their religions without fear, less is more.

In other words, remove the blasphemy law from the statute books; allow people to openly criticise religions. This will place all religions on the same level.

Healthy religions, that are comfortable with engaging in open and rigorous debate as to the meaning of life and other issues, will flourish. Those religions that attempt to stifle debate, by threatening those who would dare to question the "faith" with violence, will quite rightly die and will be consigned to the dustbin of history.

In fact those religions that currently stifle debate from within, and bristle at criticism/lampoons or cartoons, are already dead.

After all we no longer worship Zeus, Osiris or Wotan do we?