The Dangers of Trees!

It may be advisable to warn your children that Naughty Nanny is on the prowl again. This time she is looking for those children who have the cheek to build tree houses.

Tree houses, you see ladies and gentlemen, are the work of the devil and are banned!

Sam Cannon, Amy Higgins and Katy Smith (12-year-old friends planning to build themselves a den in a cherry tree) from Halesowen, West Midlands, found this out to their cost recently.

The kids climbed the 20ft tree, then found themselves frogmarched to a police station and locked in cells for up to two hours.

Nanny's ever vigilant police then removed the childrens' shoes, took mugshots, DNA samples and mouth swabs.

Funny that gangs of yobs, criminals, drug dealers and other assorted scumbags are not treated in the same way isn't it?

Nanny's police told the children they had been seen damaging the tree, which is in a wooded area of public land near their homes.

The police interrogated the children, who admitted that they had broken some loose branches because they had wanted to build a tree house.

Hardly worth a DNA swab is it?

Nanny felt otherwise, and seriously considered charging the children with criminal damage. However, very graciously for Nanny, she eventually decided that a reprimand (the equivalent of a caution for juveniles) was sufficient.

The hapless children will now have their details will be kept on file for up to five years.

Is this a police state or what?

Sam's father, Nicholas, said:

"The children did not deserve to be treated in the way they were.

A simple ticking-off by officers would have been sufficient.

The children didn't realise they were doing anything wrong,

they didn't deliberately set out to damage the tree.

Sam's eyes were swollen and red when they let him out of the cell

as he had been crying.

He is a placid child and has never been in trouble before.

When I got the phone call from the police to say Sam was in custody

I thought he'd done something-like steal something from a shop.

I couldn't believe it when he said all he had done was break some loose branches off a tree.

To detain them,

DNA them and treat them that way was simply cruel and an over-reaction by the police.

Generations of children have played in that tree

and my son and his friends won't be the first to have thought of building a tree den."

Superintendent Stuart Johnson, operations manager at Halesowen police station, said:

"I support the actions of my officers who responded to complaints from the public about kids destroying an ornamental cherry tree by stripping every branch from it,

in an area where there have been reports of anti-social behaviour.

A boy and two girls were arrested

and received a police reprimand for their behaviour.

West Midlands Police deals robustly with anti-social behaviour.

By targeting what may seem relatively low-level crime

we aim to prevent it developing into more serious matters."

You will note that he happily ignored commenting on why the police needed DNA samples.

I assume then that the crime statistics for drug offences, assaults, robbery, knife crime etc in the West Midlands area are at an all time low?

Please can residents of the West Midlands comment on this.

Rod Morgan, chairman of the Youth Justice Board for England and Wales, said:

"It's my opinion that too many children are being criminalised for behaviour that could be dealt with informally

by ticking them off and speaking to their parents."

Doubtless the police will log this as a success in their records, which Nanny uses to judge the efficiency of the police.

After all, it is easy to arrest a 12 year old; seemingly not that easy to break up a gang of yobs, terrifying a council estate, or crack down on scumbag drug users/pushers.

It's not the quality of crime prevention that counts in Britain, it's the quantity!

Nanny Bans Conger Cuddling II

Following on from yesterday's article about conger eel cuddling, I would like to make it absolutely clear that no conger eels were harmed during the writing of that article.

Ken

Nanny Bans Conger Cuddling

Nanny strikes again, this time she has decided to ban the fine art of conger cuddling.

What the F is conger cuddling Ken?

Patience my dear friends, I will reveal all.

The fine town of Lyme Regis in Dorset has practiced this noble art for the last 32 years. It takes place annually on the harbour, and the money raised from the practice is used to fund the RNLI (lifeboats).

Now alas, thanks to some interfering busybody with nothing better to do with their lives, Nanny has stepped in and banned this fine old tradition.

But what is it Ken?

Patience please, I am coming to that bit.

Contestants pair off, and take it in turns to hit each other with a 5 foot dead conger eel suspended from a rope.

The event has raised thousands for the RNLI.

Nonetheless, one sad individual has decided that the game is "disrespectful to dead animals". Please note that the eel is well and truly dead before the game starts!

Death it seems, is not enough for Nanny, she has pulled the plug on the game and banned it.

Nice to know that one person with one agenda can affect the lives of many. Rather odd though that when many try to lobby the government, eg over sacking Prescott, they are ignored.

The complainant, seemingly with a grudge against the town, also threatened to film the event and create a nationwide campaign; ie bring in all the sad losers that hang around Britain with nothing better to do than look for trouble.

Richard Fox, founded the tradition in 1974, said he was 'livid' the event had come to an end.

"It is the most ludicrous thing I have ever heard.

How can you be disrespecting an animal's rights when it is dead?"

Conger cuddling derives from an old West Country tradition of mangel dangling which is a similar game involving a mangelwurzle.

What is a mangelwurzle when it is at home?

The eels are not caught specifically for the event, but are caught accidentally by local fishermen.

Good grief, they will be banning bare knuckle boxing, cock fighting (can I say cock on a website?) and dog fighting next!

There is something rather sinister in all of this, which is indicative of the "style" of the Nanny state. Instead of Nanny basing her "judgements" as to what is acceptable or not acceptable by listening to the majority, she bases her judgements on the bully boy tactics of a small minority of "shit stirrers" and single issue losers. These people have no interest in the democratic purpose, but seek to achieve their goals via intimidation, mob rule and violence.

In other words, the majority is subjugated by the minority.

Nazi Germany was run in exactly the same way.

You have been warned!

Nanny's Special Friends

Nanny has a rather schizophrenic view on life at times, at times she pretends to be compassionate and caring and on other occasions she administers firm punishment and discipline (that phrase will get this site some interesting hits from the search engines!).

Anyhoo, Nanny's latest wheeze was to pay for Yusuf al-Qaradawi (a Muslim cleric who has defended suicide bombers) and his wife to fly from their home in Qatar to Istanbul for a two day conference called "Muslims in Europe", which was held in the 5 star Ceylan InterContinental Hotel.

By the way, when I said that Nanny paid, I should of course have said that we the taxpayer actually paid for this.

Al-Qaradawi is considered to be the spiritual leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, a militant group with offshoots around the world which acts as the ideological engine room of Islamist extremism.

As if that is not enough, al-Qaradawi has also called for the execution of homosexuals and opposed equal rights for women.

He has also defended Palestinian suicide bombers who attack Israel as "a weapon which the weak resort to".

Nanny's chums in the Foreign Office confirmed that it had covered al-Qaradawi's expenses as part of its support for the conference, which took place earlier this month.

Nanny's special chum, Frances Guy the FCO civil servant in charge of the "Engaging with the Islamic World Group", met al-Qaradawi at the conference.

This of course kind of looks rather odd, given the fact that Nanny has called for an end to tolerance for so-called "preachers of hate".

Indeed, two years ago, Blairy Poppins herself said:

"Let me make it absolutely clear.

We want nothing to do with people who support suicide bombers in Palestine,

or elsewhere or support terrorism."

The FCO issued a memo last July which noted that some diplomats are keen to promote links with al-Qaradawi, describing him as "a highly respected Islamic scholar".

Nanny's chums in the FCO defended the decision to pay for al-Qaradawi to attend the conference:

"It is our view that you have got to engage in discussion with individuals with whom you don't necessarily agree."

Is this the same policy then being practiced at the moment in Lebanon, as Israel wages war by proxy against extremists for the UK and the US?

It all sounds a little schizophrenic to me.

Maybe Nanny needs to be institutionalised before she inflicts harm on someone?

Tunes of Glory

I spent four happy years as a student at Edinburgh University, and as such have a certain fondness for the sound of the bagpipes.

That being said I know that some people find the "skirl" of the pipes to be a tad "grating" on the ears. However, I find Nanny's recent attack on the bagpipes to be an overreaction to say the least.

Nanny's Army Medical Directorate environmental health team have issued a dictat to soldiers learning to play the bagpipes, telling them to limit their practice sessions to only 24 minutes a day, or 15 minutes when indoors.

Pipers will also have to wear ear plugs under the new dictat.

What do they say, I wonder, about soldiers fighting in Iraq and other places where guns, bombs and shells are banging and whizzing around?

Do they ask the combatants to limit their activities to 20 minutes a day?

Bagpipes have played a crucial role in Scottish regiments, which have traditionally been led into battle by kilted pipers for centuries.

Davy Garrett, who played the pipes in the Army for 12 years and now runs a piping school, said:

"This is just another example of the Nanny state

and one that I am very concerned could ruin the future of piping in Scotland."

Bill Lark, 85, a Black Watch piper who led his comrades into action against the Japanese in 1944, also thinks that the rules are bollocks:

"The pipes should be played loudly.

That's how they inspire soldiers and scare the enemy."

I feel suitably inspired to watch my copy of "Tunes of Glory" (starring Alec Guinness, John Mills and Gordon Jackson), I recommend you all do the same.

A Straw In The Wind

Well well, what do you know?

It seems that dear old Bliary Poppins is trying to wriggle himself free from being associated with Labour's "Nanny state" approach to life, and the universe as we know it.

Bliary will state that we should take more responsibility for our own health.

Yawn...haven't I been saying that all along for the past two years or so?

Bliary is claiming that his speech is a major move away from Nanny's record of interference in every aspect of our private lives.

Downing Street are rumoured to be prepared to admit that the "Nanny state" approach is bollocks, and doesn't work.

Yawn again...I have been saying that on this site for the last two years as well.

Can't these dickheads read?

Bliary will state that there is a limit to how much the state can do to shape the lives of those who elect it.

The new buzzwords from the Labour bunker are "informed choices".

In other words people will be told what might happen to them if they choose to eat 20 portions of fries a day, then they will be allowed to get on with their lives and die.

Can it be that after the two years or so of www.nannyknowsbest.com being in existence, that Labour and its acolytes are finally beginning to take notice of what this site has been saying?

As with everything that Bliary says, I will believe it when I see it!

Useless Bastards

In order for Nanny to hope to exercise any authority over her charges, she must at least seem to be competent and capable; even if her views are vile and repugnant.

Judging from the accounting shambles in the Home Office, it seems that Nanny cannot even achieve the slightest degree of competency.

It is reported that when the gross transaction value of all debits and credits were totalled, the sum came to £26,527,108,436,994.

In case you are thinking that this is a tad high, you would be correct. The figure is in fact 2000 times higher than the Home Office's expenditure for 2005, and 1.5 times higher than the GDP of the entire planet!

Way to go Nanny!

Nanny and her acolytes are without doubt a bunch of useless bastards, who cannot even be trusted to sit the right way on a lavatory.

As such, she has absolutely no right to exercise any authority over us at all.

Nanny Bans Lennon

Oh dear, it seems that Nanny's puritanical feelings from the sixties have been reawakened.

In the sixties, you will recall, Nanny was very upset by all that dope smoking, free love and general disrespect towards God.

I was a mere child at that time, and missed out on all the doings.

Ho hum!

Anyhoo, in a sort of flashback, Nanny's teaching chums at St Leonards Primary in Exeter have decided that a John Lennon song ("Imagine") is anti-religious.

The pupils had spent weeks rehearsing the song for an end of term show. However, the head teacher and governors decided that it was anti-Christian and unsuitable for the school.

The dangerous lyrics include:

"Imagine there's no heaven... and no religion too."

Seems to me the world would be a much better place without religion. However, as my 3 miserable years in a Catholic school taught me I will undoubtedly burn in hell for that comment.

Head teacher Geoff Williams said a teacher approached him, because she did not think the song was appropriate.

The Rev David Harris, a school governor, said:

"The song expresses longing for a different world and for eternal happiness

but it says you can have this without religion."

I would have thought that, if God exists, he doesn't give a stuff about your religion but how you behave towards others.

That being said, what do I know?; I am going to burn in hell.

Anyhoo, "Imagine" was replaced by "The Building Song".

Labour's CIA Links

Here is an amusing little story for you:

Labour's CIA Links

Start the week as you mean to go on, with a conspiracy!

What a Load of Crap!

It seems that Nanny's recent "customer" satisfaction survey, examining the impact of OFSTED letters to children, has highlighted a few "issues".

Some children have objected to the "patronising" letters they receive from inspectors, outlining Ofsted judgements about their schools, whilst younger children did not understand some of the language Ofsted used.

Ofsted said that its inspectors needed more advice about "appropriate styles of writing for different ages".

The Ofsted research covered 55 schools and 1,500 pupils.

The report said:

"Although jargon was unusual,

the meaning of some words and phrases such as 'monitoring'

and 'teachers with management responsibilities'

was lost on some of the younger pupils.

Some pupils were confused by the mix of formal and informal styles within the same letter.

Due to the formal layout of the letters and absence of colour,

they were unattractive to younger pupils."

This helps improve the quality of education how?

What a load of crap!

This Old House

You will recall that earlier this month I wrote about Nanny's much derided Home Seller Information Packs (HIPS), which were due to be introduced next year.

Nanny had in mind that all sellers of homes would pay £800 to have one of these prepared.

These would of course have totally "f**ked up" the housing market, and doubtless brought our precarious economy crashing down to earth with a big bump.

Now it seems that following a major outcry, Nanny has been forced into a humiliating public retreat. HIPS are no longer going to be compulsory.

One small victory in the ongoing war against Nanny.

Nanny's Sick Little Mind

In Nanny's sick little world, all adults are paedophiles. As such they must be kept at arms length from children. Indeed so fixated has she become on this issue, that she has managed to whip the media and the dimmer sections of the public into a frenzy over the issue during the last few years.

Those of you with long memories may recall some two or more years ago, that there was an outburst of "Salem like witch burning" in various council estates across Britain; as suspected paedos (as Nanny likes to call them) were ritualistically harangued and attacked.

One poor bloke found his offices trashed.

For why?

Simple, he was a paediatrician and advertised as such on his office sign; so thick were the scumbags who were rioting, that they assumed this to be an illegal activity and duly "punished" him for it.

Now we see the recent story of the Reverend Alan Barrett, the vicar of St Editha's church in Tamworth, who has had to stand down as a school governor after innocently kissing a primary school pupil on the cheek to congratulate her on passing a maths test.

He kissed the 10 year old girl, in front of fellow pupils and a maths teacher, when he presented her with a certificate at the end of the class.

Needless to say in Nanny's paranoid Britain the girl's mother was having none of that, and complained.

Following on from investigations by Nanny's thought police in the police, social services and the Church Rev Barrett was cleared.

However, this being Nanny's Britain, innocence is not enough to protect yourself from hatred, bigotry and the state's desires to make people confirm and bend to its will.

Rev Barrett had to resign from the school governors, even though he was found innocent.

Gavin Drake, a spokesman for the diocese of Lichfield said that after an investigation conducted by the archdeacon, the Ven Chris Liley, formal disciplinary proceedings were not justified, but he did deem Mr Barrett's behaviour "inappropriate".

In a very sinister interpretation of modern Britain he noted that the finding did not mean that Mr Barrett was guilty or negligent but it was "recognition that, in today's climate, previously acceptable innocent behaviour is now subject to misunderstanding and suspicion".

Quote:

"As the complaint and subsequent police investigation demonstrates,

the simple act of a kiss on the cheek

a common greeting throughout the world

has potentially damaging consequences."

Needless to say, the girl's mother has not yet had her pound of flesh; for reasons that only she can understand, she wants him removed from his church position as well.

Phillip Noyes, director of public policy at the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children, said that such physical contact in a school was "inappropriate".

Quote:

"Everyone should be aware of changing attitudes towards physical contact with children.

Children can be left embarrassed and or upset by such contact,

even if innocently intended."

There you have it ladies and gentlemen, children can no longer be touched by adults. Nanny's message is clear, touch a child and you are a paedo.

This message of course gets through to the children as well.

The result?

A nation of children will grow up, untouched and untouchable, distressed and mentally damaged; unable to form normal human relationships, as the mere thought of physical contact will make them shudder.

No wonder there are so many disturbed children in the UK nowadays.

Nanny has a very sick mind, and is passing her sickness on to the rest of us.

Scumbags Come First

It is good to know that Nanny cares so much for the welfare of the young that, not only does she ensure that they are not touched in any inappropriate way (since all adults are paedophiles), she also makes sure that when the "little rascals" misbehave they do not suffer the consequences of their actions.

Unfortunately for the rest of the population (ie the adults) this can make life a tad tedious, especially when violent scumbags are allowed to run amok without due punishment.

Liz Jones, a headteacher at Abbey Manor College in Lewisham, realised the imbalance in the law recently when she suffered a shattered cheekbone after one of Nanny's "darling little angels" punched her in the face.

Liz's crime was to tell 16 year old (an adult by most people's standards) Dexter Hungwa to close a door. He then punched her so hard that she was sent flying across the room with a shattered cheekbone, he also shouted obscenities at her.

Hungwa escaped a jail sentence, despite admitting causing grievous bodily harm.

Instead he was given a 12 month community punishment and rehabilitation order, electronically tagged and ordered to keep a curfew at his South London home between 8.30pm and 7am.

Needless to say, Ms Jones said the failure to send Hungwa to jail was "like being punched again".

Quote:

"It has no regard for either public safety or the safety of anybody else in my position.

Any teacher, any head, anybody working with young people is vulnerable.

It leaves me with very little faith in the criminal justice system.

It undermines our work, the work of the police and the work of crime prevention generally.

When there is a serious offence,

it is not being treated seriously and so, as the victim,

it's like being punched again."

Seemingly, Hungwa sniggered when interviewed by police about the incident.

One union claims that a teacher is attacked or verbally abused every seven minutes.

Some might argue that scumbags like Hungwa should be given a sound thrashing, until their violent streak is well and truly broken, but as we all know folks Nanny does not permit violence in her "perfect" world. Unless of course the violence is being perpetrated by "young" adults or children.

Nanny Bans George

Poor old Saint George, I don't know what he has done to Nanny but she certainly doesn't like him.

Nanny's chums in the rapidly declining and decaying Church of England are considering banning him, on the grounds that his image is too warlike and may offend Muslims.

Some of Nanny's clergy have started a campaign to replace George with St Alban, a Christian martyr in Roman Britain.

How very inspiring!

Anyone ever heard of Alban?

The proposal has been put forward by the Rev Philip Chester, vicar of St Matthew's, Westminster, he is under the impression that the use of St George as patron saint is 'dotty'.

If St Alban replaced St George, the red cross on a white background would have to be replaced as England's flag by Alban's symbol, a diagonal yellow cross on a blue background.

Hang on a minute, isn't that Scotland's flag?

What a waste of time and energy. Hardly surprising that the Church of England is in terminal decline.

Useless

You may recall an earlier article in which I lambasted Nanny's ever efficient and helpful chums in HMRC (the tax man), re their request for a P60 (statement of earnings) for the tax year end April 2005.

The trouble with this request was that the P60 had been supplied twice to them before.

Now the issue has arisen again.

We received a communication from Nanny's HMRC stating that the P60 "could not be traced", ie they have lost it!

I rang to find out what the hell was going on, and pointed out that said P60 had first been sent in July 2005 (returned by HMRC) then resent at their request (they had lost the copy they made of it!) April 2006.

Nanny's jobsworth informed me that we would have to supply a statement of earnings, in other words we would have to waste more of our time sorting out their mess!

Not once did I receive an apology for their error.

After some pointed discussion with the jobsworth, some common sense prevailed and HMRC have graciously allowed me to send a photocopy of the missing P60.

Totally useless!

I would like to put together a list of people's experiences of dealing with HMRC, and would be very grateful if you could contribute to this list.

In order to keep them in one place, I would be very grateful if you could post them on the Forum rather than on this site.

Please ask your friends and family to contribute.

Thanks.

Ken

Ooh The Irony Of It All!

I love a bit of irony me, yes I really do like irony. Therefore, I must really thank Nanny for providing us all with the most wonderful piece of irony to be seen in a long time.

What irony would that be then Ken?

None other than the arrest, and Nanny's reaction to the arrest, of Lord Levy (fund raiser extraordinaire to the Labour party, and close friend of Blairy Poppins).

Not only was the arrest an utter hoot, but the bleating reaction and hysteria from Nanny and her lackeys a sight to behold.

Seemingly Nanny doesn't think that the arrest was a nice thing to do to one of her own. Nanny has said that the police were not acting in a professional manner, and had overreached themselves.

I find this somewhat ironic given:

• Nanny gave us ASBO's



• Nanny allows British citizens to be rendited (have I spelt this right?) by the CIA



• Nanny allows British airports to be used by the CIA for illegal renditions



• Nanny allows British citizens to be extradited, without sufficient evidence and without reciprocity, to the USA



• Nanny allows British citizens to be shackled in leg chains at Gatwick airport by the FBI



• Nanny allows the FBI to hound/break a British citizen to such an extent, on British soil!, that he commits suicide



• Nanny wants to detain people without trial for 90 days or more



• Nanny and all her friends are lawyers

Seemingly the law is there to be used against the people of Britain, but should never be used against Nanny or her personal friends.

Oooh the irony of it all!

You can smell the fear oozing out of Number 10..lovely ain't it?

The Cost of Housing

Nanny claims that she is trying to help more people afford homes of their own, she bleats daily about the housing market and the shortages of suitable property.

Yet in one fell swoop she will add another £800 to the cost of buying a home in a year's time.

Nanny's much derided Home Information Packs (HIPS) require the production of a plethora of expensive paperwork which, if a home is taken off the market for more than 28 days and later placed back on the market, will have to be updated at a cost to the seller of hundreds of pounds.

Despite these packs, buyers will still have to commission and pay for valuations, particularly if the Loan to Value ratio of the mortgage is over 80% (most first time buyers), or if the buyer has a poor credit rating.

Packs will still be required for low value homes or low demand areas, adding a significant additional cost to selling a home in such circumstances.

Another cost and another layer of bureaucracy. Some companies will of course do very well out of "helping" people prepare these packs.

Such is life in Nanny Britain.

Nanny Bans Glass

Full marks to Nanny's chums in Kingston Council, who have banned the use of glass outside of pubs.

Yes I am being sarcastic!

Eva and I were paying an evening visit recently to one of the waterside hostelries there, whose barmaid asked me if I was intending to drink outside or inside.

I said outside.

She advised me that I would have to have a plastic cup for my beer, as the council were worried about yob behaviour.

I noted that a yob was just as likely to do damage inside as well as outside with glass, and she agreed.

Rather ironically Eva's wine was served in a glass. I asked about this, and was told that they had run out of plastic wine glasses.

I noted that this rather made a mockery of the rules, a point that was fully agreed with.

Next week Nanny will be banning knives, forks and plates.

Nanny Bans More Smoking

Nanny's obsession with smoking never ceases. She is gathering her forces for another assault on this most "evil" of vices.

This time she is planning to extend the ban on smoking in public places, to encompass those who are bystanders.

This means that Nanny will ban smoking in bus shelters, football grounds, the entrances to office buildings, train platforms and concert venues.

Nanny's Health Minister, Lord Warner, said it would protect more people from secondhand smoking.

What about protecting people from knives, guns and violent assault?

Lord Warner said recently:

"There will be places that will not be enclosed

where there is a risk of harm from secondhand smoke

due to the inevitable close grouping of people.

Examples might be sports stadiums,

bus shelters

and entrances to public buildings or workplaces."

There is of course no scientific evidence to prove that people can be harmed by passive smoking outside. However, lack of evidence has never stopped Nanny in the past.

Lord Stoddart said:

"I don't know of any study that says a whiff of somebody else's smoke out in the open air is dangerous."

Nanny's Health Secretary, Patricia Hewitt, claims it will save thousands of lives. However, scientific evidence shows that 95% of smoking-related deaths are caused by lighting up at home, not in the workplace.

As with all of Nanny's spurious half baked policies based on dodgy science, it's all bollocks!

Nanny's Charitable Inclinations

Nanny loves charities, nothing gives her more pleasure than helping the needy and the poor. As such we should not be surprised to hear that Nanny's special little friend, the Smooth Talking Bar Steward, made a generous donation to charity last year.

The donation was to cover the cost of the freebie accommodation in the States provided to Prescott by Philip Anshutz, the owner of the much maligned Millennium Dome.

Being a modest sort of chap Prescott has not revealed how much he donated.

Oddly enough, he also neglected to mention that fact that the donation did not come out of his pocket, but out of the taxpayers'.

Twat!

Tuck Off!

Full marks to William Guntrip (13), an enterprising lad who has become rather fed up with Nanny's lectures on healthy eating.

He set up a playground sweet shop to counteract Nanny's 'overpriced health food'.

Master Guntrip was raking in more than £50 a day, selling chocolate bars and fizzy drinks to other pupils at Sponne School Towcester during break times.

Good to see that we are still breeding entrepreneurs in this country.

Unfortunately, Nanny does not approve of individualism or entrepreneurs. The school, which has banned sweets from vending machines and filled the canteen with healthy options, says he will be expelled if he does not shut up shop.

Twats!

William had set up shop after his father, Glyn, promised to give up smoking if he could make £1,000 through his own business.

Master William said:

"I can't believe it;

I don't see what I've done wrong,

it's not illegal.

Even some of the teachers have been buying from me.

The food at lunchtimes is rubbish.

It's all pasta and vegetables, there's no meat.

I don't mind some healthy stuff

but it costs too much money and there's not enough choice.

Now they've taken away all my stock."

I think he should raise the matter of theft of stock with the police, that is after all a criminal offence isn't it?

Feel free to drop the school a line with your thoughts on the matter: Info@sponneschool.northants.sch.uk

Nanny Bans Bollocks

Those of you with long memories, may recall that Nanny's police force got themselves into rather a tiz last year over a certain T shirt that said "Bollocks to Blair".

Would you believe it, they are at it again?

This time a Leicestershire trader has been fined for displaying shirts bearing the same slogan.

Seemingly Norfolk police apprehended Mr Wright when he was flogging the shirts at the Royal Norfolk Show. He was told that they could "cause alarm or even distress".

Have you ever heard anything more daft?

Well yes you have, last year in fact!

Anyhoo, he was given a £80 fixed penalty notice for causing harassment, alarm and distress; which he intends to challenge.

I assume Nanny's henchmen will soon be knocking at my door over the Prescott Thongs etc.

Big Brother

1984 was not just the pigment (yes I know!...just me amusing myself with a play on words) of George Orwell's imagination, it seems to be becoming reality.

Nanny has decided to formalise the surveillance of all children, including information on whether they eat five portions of fruit and vegetables a day.

The new Big Brother monitoring system comes in the form of a £224M database, which will track all 12 million children in England and Wales from birth.

Nanny expects that the system will go live within two years; given how crappy Nanny is at implementing IT systems, we can safely assume that this deadline will slip somewhat!

The system will require doctors, schools and the police to alert Nanny about a wide range of "concerns". Two warning flags on a child's record could start an investigation.

There will also be a system of targets and performance indicators for children's development. Children's services have been told to work together to make sure that targets are met.

God only knows what they are!

Dr Eileen Munro, of the LSE, is not happy and notes that if a child failed to make progress towards state targets, detailed information would be gathered. That would include subjective judgements such as "Is the parent providing a positive role model?", as well as sensitive information such as a parent's mental health.

Dr Munro said:

"They include consuming five portions of fruit and veg a day,

which I am baffled how they will measure.

The country is moving from

'parents are free to bring children up as they think best

as long as they are not abusive or neglectful'

to a more coercive

'parents must bring children up to conform

to the state's views of what is best'."

Dr Munro makes a very good, and indeed obvious point, how the hell do you measure if children are eating 5 portions of fruit and veg?

Bowel exams maybe?

The Children Act 2004 gave the Government the powers to create the database.

Arch, the children's rights organisation, put it succinctly:

"Government databases have a dreadful record."

Nanny's lackeys in the Department for Education and Skills said:

"Parents and young people will be able to ask to see their data

and make amendments

and will retain full rights under the Data Protection Act."

By then it will be too late, their child will have been carted off by Nanny's child catchers.

Young MacDonald

Young MacDonald had f**k
Ee aye ee aye oh
And from that f**k he had a kid
Ee aye ee aye oh
With a f**k f**k here
And a f**k f**k there
Here a kid
There a kid
Everywhere, a kid kid
Young MacDonald had a f**k
Ee aye ee aye oh

Congratulations to young Keith MacDonald, 21 of Washington Tyne and Wear, who is the true son of Nanny's Britain. MacDonald has been f**king for Nanny on a truly heroic scale, and has managed to produce 6 kids with 6 different women in the last 7 years (that means he started when he was 14).

The good news is that brat number 7 is on its way, from woman number 7. Doesn't he now have half the cast for a musical?

How can he, and these dim witted females, afford to live in this manner?

Easy, Nanny (well we the taxpayers actually) pay for him and his harem. The cost is estimated to be around 1M per annum.

What does daddy MacDonald do with his time?

Plays the slots in amusement arcades, needless to say he has no job.

Makes you feel proud to be British doesn't it?

What is the solution to this situation?

1 Sterilisation, or

2 Cut off the benefits of the father and the 7 mothers

I do not recommend the first, as it is a very dangerous route down which some very unpleasant regimes have walked.

Scumbags Come First

Heh Hoh!

What a funny old country we live in. There was I thinking that criminals are meant to be apprehended by Nanny's police, when in fact that is not the police mission at all.

Their mission, in fact, is to safeguard the health and safety of scumbags.

Max Foster discovered this to his cost on Tuesday in Bath. He is an 18 year old person, not a criminal (contrary to what Nanny would have you believe about teenagers) but a law abiding member of the public, who saw three scumbags steal his moped.

Needless to say, Max called plod, who amazinglyu turned up in time to be able to give chase. Max expected plod to give chase, and apprehend said scumbags.

Big mistake!

Plod refused to give chase.

Why?

The scumbags were not wearing helmets, and plod was worried that if said scumbags fell off the bike and injured themselves they would sue.

Nanny's chums in Avon and Somerset Police said the safety of both the offenders and the public had to be considered.

Mr Foster was unimpressed:

"They said:

'If they haven't got a helmet on,

we can't pursue them.

We can't risk a law suit.

We'd get sued if they fell off and hurt themselves'".

He went on to make the following very astute observation:

"I can't believe it, to tell the truth,

because all the bike thieves know that,

so that's what they do and they're laughing at the police.

They've found a loophole in the law that means they can do exactly what they want."

Inspector Tim House of Avon and Somerset Police said:

"We must first consider the safety of the public at large,

the time of day,

number of people around,

are there any pedestrians or young children playing nearby?"

What the hell has that got to do with the scumbags wearing helmets or not?

Farking stupid!