My thanks to a loyal reader who forwared me the text of a letter that appeared in the "Eastern Daily Press" the other day, wrt Dwile Flonking:
"BRIAN HANNAH
Chairman of North Norfolk
District Council Licensing
Committee
Just like Mr Potter ( Letters, June 2nd) I am very pleased that the Dwile Flonking Festival at Ludham was a great success. But Mr Potter describes as a "jobsworth" the person who said the event might contravene laws on drinking games.
It is worth noting that officers of the North Norfolk District Council were concerned when they were made aware of plans for an event which may have threatened to contravene new national laws introduced in April, to reduce the impact of over-consumption of alcohol, laws we strongly support as a council. A visit was made to the publican involved to offer the best advice as to how she could continue to hold the Dwile Flonking event without breaking the law.
There were no thoughts of spoiling legitimate enjoyment and entertainment, but we wish to ensure that the law was upheld - otherwise the publican would have been putting her licence at risk.
The result of our officers timely intervention was that the event was held successfully, it provided enjoyment and entertainment for many people, the publican was able to boost business and everything was undertaken within the law of the land.
I have to ask - what's wrong with that?"
"May have threatened"???
In oither words they didn't know, or care, but banned it anyway.
Useless!
Visit The Orifice of Government Commerce and buy a collector's item.
Visit The Joy of Lard and indulge your lard fantasies.
Show your contempt for Nanny by buying a T shirt or thong from Nanny's Store.
www.nannyknowsbest.com is brought to you by www.kenfrost.com "The Living Brand"
Celebrate the joy of living with booze. Click and drink!
Visit Oh So Swedish Swedish arts and handicrafts
Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Toys, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries
He starts out indignant that the council lackey was described as a "jobsworth", then he goes on to describe and condone the activities of a jobsworth.
ReplyDeleteOh well...
I am a robot,,,,I must obey....The law is the law....Obey, Obey.
ReplyDeleteOh yes Mr Jobsworth, the event did go ahead but you changed British tradition did you not?....Ginger beer instead of proper beer.....A good time had by all?..Yeah right....You just can't help sticking your jobsworth nose in can you?...This event has been running for years without incident....Give someone a hi-viz jacket and a clipboard and the power goes to their head and their commonsense flies out of the window.
"A visit was made to the publican involved to offer the best advice as to how she could continue to hold the Dwile Flonking event without breaking the law."
ReplyDeleteAdvice, Ken? No doubt if the "advice" hadn't been followed to the letter a prosecution would have followed.
As the Borg (from Startrek) who also sought to destroy any individuality used to say, 'You will be assimilated!'
My Lord;
ReplyDeleteLet's hope the rest of the Borg's message is not true; "Resistance is futile."
I have found that most often "Advice" is not advice, but commands or orders....With advice, one can choose to take it or not but,with council officers and police officers, failure to comply will usually lead to a fine...Kerching...
There appears to be new type of law making in our country, which is made outside of parliament, it is law by copper or law by Hi-Viz jacket wearer, they increase the scope of their powers and because most people can't afford to challenge it in court, they get away with it......What we need is an organisation to take up cases such as this one and the towing of cars with items on display etc and test the powers the jobsworths/modern day Dick Turpins claim to have.....Any lawyers out there fancy helping out the drones to re-take their country?
"Any lawyers out there fancy helping out the drones to re-take their country?"
ReplyDeleteVery doubtful - it would be like turkeys voting for Christmas.....
It really is time that we stopped putting up with this crap and called the jobsworths' bluff. "May have threatened to contravene a law" is not clear enough to be a direct threat but also not clear enough not to be one, and it sows feelings of unease and confusion that result in the jobsworths being able to do what they like. Does the event contravene the bloody law or doesn't it? We shouldn't be relying on these cretins to know the law because half the time they don't - it's time to take responsibility for finding out for ourselves. Locate it online and look it up. If it contravenes the law, so be it. If it doesn't, tell them to take a hike.
ReplyDeleteAnon at 9.29 - OK, go for it, check out the legislation yourself - see if you can make any sense out of it. I suspect thats why the council said what it did. And, if the council hadn't "advised" the landlady, what would your stance be if the cops had gone in and prosecuted the landlady? Yep, you'd have criticised the council for NOT warning her that she "might" be breaking the law.
ReplyDeleteSheesh, some people....
Oh FGS … the council did not merely “warn” the landlady in this case … they actively prevented an event from taking place because it “may have contravened the law”. What's to stop any council drone preventing any member of the public from doing anything at all, on a whim, on the grounds that it “may contravene” some or other law? Only vigilance, and the certain knowledge that the council – and even the police – can disregard or be ignorant of the law themselves.
ReplyDeleteYou do not need a law degree to download & peruse an Act of Parliament. You only need to set aside an hour or so for the purpose and to scan/read with brain engaged. Yes, I've done it, more than once. No doubt many cannot be bothered, or whinge that they don’t have time, but nannyism thrives on apathy, passivity and lack of motivation.
Some months back I and other local residents (none of us legally qualified) prevented our council from implementing badly-planned waiting restrictions on surrounding roads that would have worsened rather than alleviated current parking/traffic problems. A FOI request (took 5 minutes to do on the council’s website) established that they had bypassed their legal obligation (in accordance with the Local Government Act 1999) to consult with stakeholders on actions/policies that affect them. Upshot: the council had to shelve their plans pending a proper consultation, and they know we are watching to ensure that they do so by the book.
Similarly, our neighbour recently made an official complaint against a police officer and a council truancy officer who removed her son (who was on GCSE study leave and was on his way with his textbooks to a lesson with a tutor) to a police station without due cause and in an unmarked car, citing “truancy regulations” as justification. A couple of questions and a small amount of research confirmed that the regulations they were quoting did not apply in her son’s case and this was something the police and truancy officers could have verified with ludicrous ease had they been willing to listen to what he was trying to tell them. The family received an apology and the officers concerned underwent re-training in the law they had had insufficient understanding of to enforce properly.
The council – and the police for that matter – are public servants, funded by taxpayers … they are not our masters.
Quote:
"OK, go for it, check out the legislation yourself - see if you can make any sense out of it."
Eh? See above. I do my share for the prevention of nannying. I have no inclination to engage in nannying activities myself by doing for other people what they are quite capable of doing for themselves.
Quote:
"Sheesh, some people...."
Backatcha