Nanny Knows Best

Nanny Knows Best
Dedicated to exposing, and resisting, the all pervasive nanny state that is corroding the way of life and the freedom of the people of Britain.

Friday, August 11, 2006

Nanny Bans Armbands

Nanny Bans ArmbandsOh dear, Nanny has got her bloomers in a right old twist again over swimming.

Funny, she does really seem to have a downer on that particular activity. Given that it is good exercise, and indeed may one day save your life, you would have thought that she would support it.

Hey ho!

But no, she doesn't.

Anyhoo, Nanny's chums who run swimming pools in East Herts have stopped giving out armbands to children, seemingly Nanny believes that the arm bands aren't 'armless...'armless get it? (come on folks, doing my best here!)

Please yourselves!

Nanny thinks that armbands present a clear and present danger to the health and safety of those who wear them.

East Herts Leisure Trust, which runs the East Herts Council owned pools, has decided it is not safe to give out armbands.

Nanny's spokesman said:

"Customers can understand that not every buoyancy aid can be checked on a regular basis.

We have looked at the recommendations given by

Government bodies.

We take health and safety very seriously
."

It is reassuring to know that Nanny takes health and safety so seriously. However, rather oddly, the trust is happy to sell new armbands to parents for £4.99.

Julia Whitting, a risk management expert who takes her son swimming, summed up the nonsense of Nanny rather well:

"It's aggravating for parents.

It's the responsibility of service providers to manage risk,

not to eliminate it.

I say that as a risk management professional.

You wouldn't say that the pool should be closed


in case people drown,

but that's the logical conclusion
."

Seemingly the leisure trust needs to save £500K a year to stay liquid.

A cynic might conclude that the "health and safety" measure is about making a nice little earner of £4.99.

However, we are not cynical are we ladies and gentlemen?

7 comments:

  1. Grant2:03 PM

    A risk assessment professional said:

    "You wouldn't say that the pool should be closed in case people drown, but that's the logical conclusion."

    Well I would. Save more than half a million in one shot I reckon. Why should the majority of council tax payers subsidise the few who use the facilities anyway?

    What's more I think rivers should be fenced in and ponds and reservoirs drained. Thank heavens the drought is helping in that respect!

    Old quarries full of tempting stagnant water should have armed guards with a shoot to kill policy for anyone who they think might be contemplating the water. It's the only way to save people from themselves.

    Water fountains should be disconnected. Any puddles should immediately be encircled by a 1 km exclusion zone and civilians instructed to stay indoors, especially if it is raining.

    There, now, what have I missed out?

    ReplyDelete
  2. view from the solent3:33 PM

    '... what have I missed out?' Erm, the sea. Nasty, dangerous thing. Electrified fences and armed guards all round the coast are essential.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anonymous3:48 PM

    You forgot baths as well - you can drown in a couple of inches of water you know! Ban baths immediately! And sinks too....

    But you'd never get away with putting armed guards round the coast. The asylum lawyers would have that stopped in no time.

    ReplyDelete
  4. And soup. Ban bowls of soup immediately. If you fell asleep during dinner you could drown in a bowl of soup. It's not so bad in a cup or mug.... unless you've got a really, really, small head (or a very big cup).

    ReplyDelete
  5. Grant7:24 PM

    I knew I could rely upon the NKB faithful to fill in the gaps I left.

    Many thanks to one and all.

    Is there any truth in the rumour that the airlines are going to install dry toilets ojn the basis that the amount of hydrogen in the flush water of the present systems represents a clear and present threat should any (recently educated) nuclear physicists on a flight decide to rustle up a hydrogen bomb?

    Or is averting such possibility the reason that physics is hardly taught in schools any more?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Grant, you have clearly not been listening attentitively to any of the media over this latest terrorist scare (political scam more like).

    These 'terrorists' don't need to make anything like a nuclear bomb, they simply had to mix their toothpaste, nail varnish and hair gel together, according to the frenzied media self-pronounced 'terrorist expert talking heads'!! It is little wonder that the public are sceptical and simply do not believe the claptrap put out by Reid and his crony colleagues anymore.

    Still, I suppose it will give Nanny the ideal excuse to permanently ban our dangerous books and newspapers on every flight from now on. At least we won't be able to whack the Captain around the head with our rolled up copy of the Sun when we try to highjack our planes in future!!

    ReplyDelete
  7. Thank you spiv. You're right, I do tend to switch off from the BS after a while.

    It is interesting how quickly it has been assumed that the ban on hand baggage and particularly liquids is likely to become permanent. I guess it is what people expect these days - even invite perhaps?

    Sooo - the cheaper carriers will now have a captive market for their trolley sales and perhaps can sell 'entertainmment' as well. Plus faster load and unload times with nobody having cabin bags to worry about. If they can get the graound crews mobilised that is.

    The higher end carriers will be able to re-introduce rental of headsets and charges for refreshment.

    Of course they could also install cameras in the toilets and so put an end to several notorious activities in one go.

    Sorry, we seem to be drifting well off topic here - except that similar developments in Leisure Centres might have the same basis of policies for risk prevention otherwise known as revenue balancing.

    ReplyDelete