Rules come first, commonsense comes last.
That's Nanny's golden rule, and she is not changing it for anyone.
Therefore it should come as no surprise to learn that a charity bingo event in Misterton, a village in Somerset, recently came a cropper when it tried to advertise its existence by putting up some flyers on lamp posts.
The event, to raise money for children, was to be held down a rather off the beaten track lane; and the organisers wanted to make sure that people could find their way there. Therefore putting up a few flyers on lampposts seemed to be a good idea.
Wrong!
The local council were informed by someone with too much time on their hands about the fliers, and immediately ordered that they be taken down.
Paul Bradly, treasurer of the village hall committee, wrote to South Somerset District Council to complain.
Nanny's trolls on South Somerset District Council responded thus:
"It is not our intention to deprive the village of community events. It is just our duty to enforce legislation in regards to anti-social behaviour."
Ah yes, the old "I'm only obeying orders" response!
Mr Bradly was quite rightly unimpressed:
"The fliers drum up interest in an event. The more people find out about it the more will come and the more money will be raised.
How is that anti-social?
This is all just completely ridiculous. I personally don't understand the problem with it as long as they are taken down afterwards which they are.
It would be different if it was a profit-making business. But a local charity is not the same as a travelling circus putting up large banners.
How else would people find out about fundraising events?"
However, Mr Bradley has made the mistake of assuming that Nanny and her jobsworths in local councils use commonsense...they don't!
Rigid application of the petty rules and regulations is all that matters to these people.
For good measure, the council threatened to fine the village hall £75 for fly-posting.
A spokeswoman for South Somerset District Council said that charities should not consider themselves exempt from the law.
Quote:
"We have recently had a complaint from a resident about signs littering the countryside so we had to act upon it.
Putting signs up like this without gaining permission is illegal.
I'm afraid littering and acting illegally is considered a form of anti-social behaviour."
I can't say that I am particularly impressed with the sad individual who complained about this, but the council should have used some commonsense.
Commonsense, unfortunately, is in rather short supply these days in local councils.
One can never expect common sense or the ability to make an independent decision from Nanny's monkeys at the local council.
ReplyDeleteI have had to deal (sadly) with many over the years and all are form fillers, pencil sharpeners and paper clip counters of the first order.
I would say few, if any, could get a real job outside of Nanny's apron strings and they seem to resent anyone else who has.
Hence, their delight in enforcing bullxxxx rules that make life miserable for everyone else.
It appears to me that Nanny attracts the worse types of people to work for her.
ReplyDeleteThese are sad little people that are unable to deal with the power in a sensible way that comes with the job. Any questioning of Nanny's "rules" will always result in a fine....Kerching.
I would like to see a return of the Jobsworth award on TV. Perhaps you could ressurect that award Ken.
Makes you proud to be British doesn't it.
Nanny's jobsworths at the council are the heirs to the jobmeisters or whatever they were called in Nazi Germany who filled in the forms that counted the gold teeth, that got the trains to run on time, that logged all the 'untermench' businesses in the area.
ReplyDelete"I vos only doing mine job mein herr, naturally I do not approve of gassing der women und children, but it vos on mine job sheet for der day und so..."
"Putting signs up like this without gaining permission is illegal."
ReplyDeleteFunny, I don't remember giving my permission for the council to have such authority....
Anon,
ReplyDeleteYour permission for Nanny to do as she sees fit is not required. You are only required to do as you are told under threat of fines, court orders, etc etc.
Now that you fully understand that, do not be cheeky or get out of your place in Nanny's presence again.
As regular reader
ReplyDeletes here will know it is not in my nature to be contrary ... BUT in this case I have to say I don't think that charities, whatever they are these days, should be allowed to get away with flyposting.
It's all very well thinking of them as homespun organisations in remote country villages but, on a level playing filed (as they say) would we want Greenpeace (a registered charity) or any number of other pressure groups working for and authorised by Nanny under a 'charity' umbrella, to claim the same rights?
Perhaps we should have two types of charity. Separate the multi-natioanls and quangos into a separate entity list of business organisations that, for some reason, are allowed not to pay taxes and allow the genuine charity as we historically understand it to operate under the more relaxed rules that we would wsih to see applied.
Grant
I think your reference to the resident who complained to the council is significant. I’ve always suspected they’re the 1% whose complaints trigger 99% of the hassle the rest of us have to put up with on a daily basis.
ReplyDelete-------------------------------------------------
I know this is off topic but while driving through central London at the weekend I almost reached breaking point.
Motorists in London have contended with speed zones and their associated cameras, roadwork zones and their cameras, the Congestion Zone and its cameras (plus some strange road cameras whose purpose has always been a mystery to me) but yesterday I discovered signs for the Emission Zone and its associated cameras!
Yes. Yet more “Automatic Number Plate Recognition” cameras with more penalty charges for non compliance.
Surely London must be running out of posts for mounting any more surveillance cameras.
I’ve since found that my car is probably compliant, however, the impact was heightened by the fact that 20 minutes earlier I was flashed by a camera just past Fleet Street. I don't remember there previously being a camera at that spot. It wasn't a traffic lights camera or a road junction camera or a City of London camera or a Smart Car camera or a police car camera or a bus-mounted camera or a hand-held enforcement camera, and the CCTV traffic cameras don't flash. There's a possibility it was one of the new wireless Portable Enforcement Cameras that report back to the controllers who hide just out of sight. I'm clinging to the forlorn hope it was a tourist's camera but I suspect the worst - just 13 more days to wait to find out.
Anon. 6:35am
ReplyDeleteGood Point even if off topic somewhat.
Mr Livingston has completely lost the plot on his latest money raising scheme; the low emission zone.
If I ran a business I would just black London altogether. I would not run my lorries into the capital.
The few that complain about emissions are making life more difficult and expensive for everyone else. The juxta position or irony is that, these same people that want to cut emissions also want to buy the goods being shipped in.
One large lorry can carry 28 Tons of goods, if you put those goods into smaller vans as Nanny Livingstone likes, it would take 20vans....The 20 vans produce more exhaust gases than the one HGV....Silly Silly Nanny.
Perhaps business' should stop delivering to the capital and not play Ken's silly games, it would be like an old fashioned seige. A few days without food or other items being delivered, would soon change the minds of those in county hall.
£200 per day or £1000 fine....kerching...I can't see how paying to pollute will make it alright. The way to improve the air quality is through the use of technology, not fines. I can say as someone that grew up in the 1950s and 1960s in East London that the air now is far better than it was back then.
Alas,
ReplyDeleteLondon has has had it as a city with any quality of life. The slide was underway a while back, Ken Livingslime has merely accelerated the collapse.
Whenever I return on business, and that is whenever I simply can't avoid it, I cannot wait to get out again.
My brother in law runs a carpentry firm they won't work in London anymore as it costs too much to do business there with parking c charge and wardens ready to slap a ticket on the van for being 2 seconds overdue.
Maybe when more and more plumbers etc give up they might get the message, but as Ken is a dyed in the wool Commie who hates business, I doubt it.
Re ".. but as Ken is a dyed in the wool Commie who hates business, I doubt it."
ReplyDeleteThe author of course is referring to Ken Leninspart Mayor of London, not Ken Frost author of this site:)
Ken