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.
Last week I was deeply saddened. Staying for a few short days at the home of my Son and Daughter-in-Law (both of whom are in their mid 30's bringing up a young Nannied family!!), the inevitable discussion came up of Blair and his Nanny state, the inexorable slide towards the 'Orwelian' police state, and such things as ID cards.
ReplyDeleteBoth offspring informed me that they had no worries at all about ID cards as they had nothing to hide and that they would feel more protected by the use of such information. I realised, much to my shock and profound sadness, just how much the younger generation have been indoctrinated by the state and Blair's Government.
Why are we, as a nation, sleepwalking into this state which has come about as a result of being lied to and decepted by Blair, Bush et al?
To think, three National Westminster Bank employees were extradited to America this week to face fraud charges, but the insidious thing about this is that anti-terror legislation was used for the extradition. To think that Blair wants us all to be locked up for 90 days without charge, to combat terrorism!!!
Who am I more afraid of, fanatical terrorists, or Blair, Clarke and this shower in Government. Answers on a postcard please...
spiv,
ReplyDeleteMy daughters are just at the University stage so no family to be fulfilled with and though there are occasional signs of the messages of repetitive indoctination creeping through it seems that, on balance, they have a healthy disrespect for things political and all that they lead to.
I am not sure it will stay that way. But I hope they will retain some form of independent thought.
Thing is I sort of recall around the thirties age band things were around to distract one from thinking too long and hard about the long term and camouflaged intent behind much of what was going on. One went with the flow of the 'new' being unconcerned by the consequences because they probably wouldn't happen and even they did, so what. The effect could not be so bad. Things always balance out reasonably ...
Which may indeed be true of recent decades by and large. But one day the checks and balances will fail and the results could be very ugly. Maybe that time is fast approaching.
It certainly seems like it to me. But then we are 'of an age', you and I, where our energy has not yet deserted us but our life experiences and hindsight, together with having the time to think about 'things' (and post our observations on Ken's blog) may seem to give us new insights.
It was only a few years ago, shortly after I obtained unrestricted access to the internet and, working away from home regulalry, plenty of time to us it, that I began to question what was real and what was a charade of the information presented to us. And with that came a change of heart about many subjects.
I don't think my socio-political beliefs have changed much. But I do think the events and influences around them have changed quite dramatically and left me in an area of moral instability in a social sense.
The current political regimes seem to be so full of legal types that we can pretty much guarantee that any laws they pass will be slightly worse than useless. There seem to be no effective checks and balances.
In another 10 or 15 years, if I make it that far, I probably won't care much. I console myself that the problems will be for others (sadly my kids probably but at their ages they now have the opportunity to choose to become involved or let things slide past, so it's not really my problem any more, if it ever was.) Perhaps all sociaties have to pass through or collapse under such cathartic excercises periodically.
Anyway, once humankind has completed its alloted task and liberated all the sequestered carbon that the planet has been missing for a few million years, there will be no more purpose for it and the species will finally be freed from all tyranny (Or should that be freed from tyraNanny?) permanently.
That would seem to be a win-win situation from where I am sitting.
;-)
A young friend of mine from Britain recently told me he was okay with the ID cards and thought they would help crime. I was shocked, as he is normally against more government nannying. I asked if he'd even researched anything about it and he said no - therein lies the problem many a time.
ReplyDeleteI gave him my reasons (pretty much the ones you just listed) and he seemed a little more convinced. I told him to look these things up before you judge!
There's a professor in the UK, University of Reading as I recall, who did the same thing a few years ago. Kevin someone - I forget his surname at the moment.
ReplyDeleteSo anyway, given the in the mind of the masses a small lump in the body = cancer = death and anything to do with 'radiation' = cancer = death and we all know that inserting things in the body = infection = msra/flu/any other nasty thing we have been told about = death ...
... how are they now going to persuade us otherwise?
Perhaps we could come up with a list of suggestions and then run a book on the top 10 or 20 and, when the time comes, the pot is shared by those who opted for the idea that comes closest to what they end up doing?