Prats of The Week

Methinks that it is time for another of my prestigious "Prats of The Week" awards.

Guess what?

It goes to yet another useless, bureaucratic, "jobs worth" council!

Maybe we should start a little list of all adjectives that apply to our "respected", "helpful" and "efficient" local councils?

Anyhoo, I digress, the good citizens of Utah Close (a cul de sac) in Glenfield Leicester are a tad pissed off with Leicestershire County Council.

For why?

The council had decided that the playing of football in the streets by the children of Utah Close (a practice that has been indulged in for many years) was dangerous, and therefore decided to ban it.

Seemingly it "posed a danger" to the public.

The children were banned from putting temporary goalposts in the street, even "jumpers for goalposts" had to be "removed from the road immediately" because they were classed as obstructions.

Not content with banning football, the council also decided that toys, bikes, and dolls must be removed; as they were a hazard too!

The council issued its diktat (can I use a word containing "dik" in it?) in a letter to the residents, warning them that they face a £100 fine if their sons and daughters flout the ban.

The authority hid behind Section 161 of the Highways Act 1980 which states:

"Any person depositing anything on the highway

or playing football on the highway

is guilty of an offence and liable to a fine."

The ban was imposed even though no one who lives in the street complained about the children playing.

The residents said the youngsters were being robbed of their childhood, and called the ban an example of the nanny state gone mad.

Sales manager Ian Fenton, said:

"They are treating our children and us

as if we are criminals.

We want our children playing where we can see them.

We moved here so that there was a nice,

safe environment for them to play in,

where they could interact with

other children their own age.

Playing in the street is something

that has gone on for generations in this country.

Now the council want to take it away.

It's ludicrous."

It can be clearly seen that Nanny, by denying children the chance to behave like children, hates her own flesh and despises her own origins (she and her minions were once children too). When a society or their government starts to hate its own flesh, that society is doomed.

However, I am happy to report that this is one case where Nanny was forced to perform a humiliating U turn (there's a road/cul de sac joke there if you look hard enough folks!).

Leicestershire County Council has admitted that it was WRONG to threaten homeowners.

A council spokesman confessed:

"We should have looked into the circumstances

more before sending out the letters.

We want people to be alive to road safety

but issues like this should be dealt with

at a local level.

We would not want to fine these parents."

As ever Nanny's minions reacted without thinking. How many times do local councils across this country do the very same thing, act first think later?

Nanny wants to breed a nation of timid, weak, unresponsive dolts; who will do her bidding without question.

Unfortunately those who claim that they are acting in the best interests of the children, by wrapping them in cotton wool (many times the parents can be as bad), are doing Nanny's work for her.

Feel free to drop the council a note letting them know that they well deserved this week's "Prats of The Week" award, at this address: information@leics.gov.uk

By the way, don't forget to come up with some suitable adjectives to describe local councils; here's a few:

-useless
-unaccountable
-inefficient
-wasteful
-undemocratic
-unnecessary

Knock yourselves out!