Loyal readers know that I have written about Kids Company on several occasions. As such it should as no surprise to learn that the National Audit Office has found that Kids Company
received at least £46M of public money, despite repeated concerns about
how it was run.
Financial
concerns were raised as far back as 2002, yet the government relied on
the charity's own self-assessment to monitor its performance!
Would you give £46M to a clown masquerading as a charity helping kids?
What the fuck was going on there, and why did the government kowtow to this organisation and its clown?
Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries
As loyal readers know, and often state, insurance companies are ever "keen" to reduce their requirement to payout when something goes wrong or charge the earth for "peace of mind".
Thus it should come as no surprise to learn that they have come up with a splendid wheeze, whereby driving when it rains will now be counted as a "risk" that requires insurance companies to increase their premiums on car insurance.
Easy money given the UK's weather!
So how will this little "wheeze" work then?
By using data from “black boxes” installed in cars that monitor speed, braking and acceleration; in order to score a driver based on their risk.
The technology,
already offered by insurers Axa, Admiral, LV and Insure The Box, is
about to start monitoring the weather.
Ice, rain hail and snow will all be
seen as risks, because the conditions are more likely to result in an
accident.
The boxes will use data from The Weather Company, an American forecaster
equivalent to the UK Met Office. The technology can create a "scoring
algorithm" by assessing the conditions during a driver's journey.
All very well and dandy, except that:
1 Weather forecasts, even American ones, are generally crap.
2 People tend to need to drive in the rain for such mundane things as going to work, hospital, shopping etc etc.
At this point I can hear you ask, why get these black boxes?
Well at the moment they are voluntary, users are incentivised to have them for a discount to their premiums. However, I am very sure that in a few years' time once there is a critical mass of people with them, the insurance companies will insist on everyone having them.
All in all another means of making money out of those who are honest enough to insure their cars.
Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries
Oh dear, it really does seem as though sugar is bad for you.
Nanny has posted warnings about the dangers of feeding sugar to the Quantock ponies
of Bridgewater, following alleged "rampages" by sugar high ponies intent of satisfying their sugar cravings by stealing biscuits, sweets etc.
A spokesman for the Quantock Pony Commoners Association is quoted by the Telegraph:
"Feeding the ponies is dangerous.
By feeding the Quantock ponies you are changing their behaviour and encouraging them to become aggressive.
There have been recent cases of a pony breaking someone's leg, biting and causing vehicle damage.
Do not add to the problem.
For your own safety, please stay well clear of the ponies and never feed them."
For heaven's sake no one tell St Jamie of Oliver about this, otherwise he might be forced to do another TV special about sugar!
Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries
Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries
Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries
In a display of utter fuckwittery and knobheadedness, the World Health Organisation is planning to declare that bacon, sausages and other processed meat cause bowel cancer.
Red meat is also expected to be listed as being “probably carcinogenic to humans”.
The announcements were
expected to be made on Monday; with processed meat put in the same
category as cigarettes, alcohol and asbestos.
Bollocks!
On the assumption you have a varied diet eg, vegetables, meat, fibre etc your bowels will remain in good nick.
Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries
I see that our old chums from NICE (the the
National Institute of Health and Care Excellence) have decreed that middle-aged people should go teetotal in order to reduce the risk of dementia.
Guidance from NICE, on how to protect
against the condition, suggests that even drinking within Government safe
limits can increase the risk of Alzheimer’s disease.
The new advice says the public should be advised that there is “no safe
level of alcohol consumption” and calls on GPs to tackle the
middle-aged about lifestyle behaviours linked to the condition.
Research has found that one third of all Alzheimer’s disease cases can be linked to lifestyle factors – such as exercise, obesity, smoking and alcohol.
All very well and dandy, except an increase in risk does not mean a causality.
More to the point, as we live longer, so our chances of developing dementia increase; ie it's an age thing.
“Drinking alcohol daily at home has become normal for some people, and this poses a threat to health.”
As noted before on this site any advice that says stop doing something, in order to reduce risks, is pissing in the wind. People will simply ignore the advice, and enjoy what remains of their lives!
Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries
Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries
Ever wondered why the Met's long term weather forecasts are so crap?
The answer lies in the fact that the Met has succumbed to the quasi religion of Global warming.
In a series of recent posts on Notalotofpeopleknowthat blog,
Paul Homewood has been plotting the Met Office’s
predictions against its own recorded data. In one, entitled “Met Office
forecasts contain a warming bias”, he compared all its running
three-monthly forecasts for the first nine months of 2015, made on the
basis of “observations, several numerical models and expert judgment”,
with what actually happened. Seven months this year, they told us, would
be hotter than usual. In fact, six of the nine months were cooler than
normal, and October looks like being yet another botched call.
Against
its frequent claims that we can expect “a general increase in summer
temperatures” thanks to “human influence on climate”, the Met Office’s
own data show that, since 2006, summers have on average become cooler.
Another of its constant obsessions has been with “extreme rainfall”, as
reflected in a report by the BBC’s Roger Harrabin in 2013 headed “Met
Office predicts 'extreme rainfall increasing’. A recent paper by
the Royal Meteorological Society, based on the Met Office’s England and
Wales dataset, found there have been “no significant trends” in the
“intensity of rainfall” over the 84 years since that record began.
The Telegraph notes that Neil Catto,
a former Met Office employee, has
plotted data from a representative sample of Met Office UK weather
stations every day since 1998. On every one of his graphs recording
temperature, rainfall and much else, the trend line over 18 years has
been astonishingly consistent. Despite fluctuations, the overall trend
has been flat. The general pattern of our weather has remained
remarkably unchanged.
The fact is that the data, belies the predictions which are skewed because of the Met's messianic belief in global warming.
Indeed, as loyal readers know, the Met is so bad at predicting the weather that even Auntie has sacked it!
Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries
As loyal readers will recall, in July and August I wrote about Brighton and Hove council's consultation about imposing a ban on smoking on Brighton Beach.
The consultation closed the other day and, surprise surprise, the council say that so many people (1,500 is not that many) responded to it that a report into what they
said has been put back two months.
A report
will now go to the city council’s health and wellbeing board in
February 2016, as opposed to December 2015.
Why delay?
I dare say so that the council can manipulate the results in their favour!
Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries
Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries
Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries
Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries
As loyal readers know, Nanny can be absurd at times.
However, kudos to Nanny's chums in the Lone Star State in the USA for raising the bar on absurdity.
More than 1,000 people have RSVP’d to attend an unusual protest at
the University of Texas. In protest of a law that permits students to
carry concealed weapons on campus, students are going to come to class
wielding dildos.
Nanny's chum, Greg Abbot, signed the legislation into law last
June. The description for the protest’s event page reads:
“On June 1, 2015, Gov. Greg Abbott signed S.B. 11, also
known as the ‘campus carry’ law. S.B. 11 provides that license holders
may carry a concealed handgun throughout university campuses, starting
Aug. 1, 2016. The law gives public universities some discretion to
regulate campus carry.”
More than 160 professors at the university signed a letter speaking
out against the law. One professor even went as far as to resign over
the matter. The organisers of the protest want to point out the fact
that while it would be perfectly fine for a student to carry a gun into
the classroom, bringing a dildo in would get them in trouble. So now
students are calling for people to take up the cry
“The State of Texas has decided that it is not at all obnoxious
to allow deadly concealed weapons in classrooms, however it DOES have
strict rules about free sexual expression, to protect your innocence.
You would receive a citation for taking a DILDO to class before you
would get in trouble for taking a gun to class. Heaven forbid the
penis.”
The protest is scheduled to take place on August
24 2016, so you have plenty of time to select the dildo of your choice!
Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries
Oh dear, poor old Nanny, it seems that newly published research has fatally holed below the waterline Nanny's oft repeated claim that e-cigarettes attract non-smokers.
The
Welsh Health Survey asked regular users of vaping devices if they had
previously been tobacco users, almost every single respondent said
yes.
Of
the 3,565 people aged 16 and older spoken by the Welsh Health Survey,
only 1% of adults said they were e-cigarette users who had never smoked
before.
Suffice to say, because the results do not support Welsh Nanny's preconceived prejudices, Welsh Nanny has rejected the findings!
E-cigarettes are set to be banned in enclosed public spaces and work spaces under the Welsh Government’s Public Health Bill.
A
Welsh Government spokesman is quoted by Wales Online:
“Our proposals are based on evidence
from across the world, including peer-reviewed academic research.
The
BMA, public health professionals and others support our proposals,
while the World Health Organisation and other international bodies have
called for greater regulation of e-cigarettes. 40 other countries have
already taken similar steps. It would restrict the use of e-cigarettes in enclosed public spaces, bringing them into line with conventional cigarettes.”
Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries
Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries
France 3 a French TV station has had to pull an advert
boasting about its feminist credentials, after it met with ridicule and
criticism saying the ad itself was sexist.
The 40-second spot on France 3 was designed to highlight the station's
positive record on female employment, with the tagline:
"The majority of
our presenters are women presenters".
But in a spectacular own goal, the advert decided to illustrate its
point by showing domestic chores that were going wrong without a woman
around.
Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries
Well done Brighton and Hove council for winning Prats of The Week two days running!
This time the council has won the award for decreeing that Rory McCormack, Brighton’s “last beach fisherman”, must take down the
collection of flint statues he’s built on the beach.
For why?
Health and
safety!
Mr McCormack started creating the figures, out of flint and
other bits and pieces he found on the beach about two years ago, in his
fisherman’s store next to the Volk’s Railway.
Council officials say they are a
safety risk, and nearly all are so large they could not be moved and so
would have to be demolished.
Mr McCormack is quoted by Brighton and Hove News:
“Two years ago, it was a particularly bad winter
and I just started pottering about and it went from there. I was
building it for two years, it’s out in the open, virtually in the middle
of the beach.
Members of the public come up and show an interest – at couple to
two dozen people a day. I’m sure there’s people who think it looks
terrible, but I haven’t had a single negative comment made in all that
time.
I worked out the beach patrol has driven past about 2,500 times and
said nothing. But then I got a message passed on by a fairly friendly
beach officer, who said I’m passing on a message from someone in the
office. It was a two minute conversation and I haven’t heard anything
since.
The
fence is 7ft high. Only one person has managed to climb over it. It’s
all tucked away in an enclosure and the only time anyone come here is at
my invitation while I’m here.”
A council spokesman said:
“We have real concerns over these structures because
some are more than six foot high and have been built on council land
without consent so we have to take action before somebody is seriously
injured.”
The only way someone could be injured is if they deliberately enter without permission and start arsing around in there. Hence, it's their own fault!
Brighton and Hove council, well deserving Prats of The Week again!
Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries
I see my local council has yet again found itself on the receiving end of another Prattery Award.
Kudos!
This time it is awarded for the particularly daft idea to have a "voluntary" sugar tax.
Loyal readers will recall that St Jamie of Oliver was prattling on about such nonsense in his eateries a wee while ago.
Brighton council, never one's to miss an opportunity to follow advice from a celebrity, has called upon food and drink shops in Brighton to impose a 10p surcharge on all sugary soft
beverages, with the proceeds to be put into a children’s health and food
education trust.
Tom Scanlon, Brighton and Hove director of public health, encouraged
residents to join in the debate on social media using the hashtag #SugarSmartCity.
Apart from the fact that it is not the role of the state to tell us what we may or may not eat, the "tax" is bollocks:
1 It is voluntary, hence it will not be applied by every eatery.
2 Where will the extra money raised really go?
3 Sugar is in all manner of foods and drinks, why is this only targeting soft drinks?
4 Nanny hates sugar, salt, fat, cholesterol etc. Let her get away with this bollocks, and she will be taxing all foods eventually.
Brighton and Hove council, well deserving Prats of The Week!
Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries
Today sees the imposition of Nanny's 5p (minimum - watch out for retailers trying to screw you) plastic bag tax in England.
Staff at major retailers will ask you to pay the charge at checkouts. At self-checkouts, you
will be asked to declare how many bags you have used and the charge
will be applied (make sure you lie).
The charge applies to “single-use” thin plastic bags – the technical specification is:
unused
plastic
has handles
70 microns thick or less
It does not matter how big the bag is, so even small plastic bags you might be given when you buy your lunch are included.
The law does not actually specify how much the bags should cost, but retailers have been told to charge at least 5p.
If you are getting food delivered from a major supermarket, Asda,
Sainsbury’s, Waitrose and Tesco will give you the option of a bagless
delivery, or a flat rate of 40p. Morrisons and Ocado are charging 5p for
each bag used, but will pay 5p for every bag returned.
The legislation applies to all types of shops, but only to retailers with more than 250
employees. However, watch out for your local shop trying to make extra money.
Where, oh where, does the money go?
Wherever the retailers wish!
Yes, that's right, wherever the retailers wish.
In other words they can keep it!
Nanny "expects" retailers to donate the money to worthy causes,
and will be asking for reports on where the money goes.
Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries
I see that tall people have a greater chance of developing cancer than shorter people, with the risk of some types of the disease increasing by as much as 30% for every four inches of height
That at least is the conclusion of a study carried out by Sweden's Karolinska Institutet.
What does this mean?
Bugger all actually, for you see the study ignores all other factors that may or may not affect the health of those within the study.
Even the lead author, Dr Emelie Benyi, says it's meaningless:
"It should be emphasised that our results reflect
cancer incidence on a population level.
As the cause of cancer
is multi-factorial, it is difficult to predict what impact our results
have on cancer risk at the individual level."
What should we do?
Well, we could chop a few inches of our legs to make ourselves shorter or breed only with short people in order to ensure the human race stops becoming taller.
Failing that, do the sensible thing and ignore it completely!
Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries
Today is the day that Nanny's daft and unenforceable law, banning banning smoking in vehicles carrying kids, has come into force in England and Wales.
In theory drivers
and passengers who break the law could face a penalty fine of £50.
Whenever an under-18 is in the car, smokers will be liable even if the windows are down or sunroof open.
However, the law will not apply to people who are driving in a convertible which has the roof down.
In Scotland you are still able, thusfar, to smoke like a chimney in your car with kids.
Suffice to say this law is daft on so many fronts, not least the enforceability aspect; given that the police can't even manage to do their normal duties of catching criminals.
The BBC quotes Steve White, chairman of the Police Federation, who said it would be "extremely challenging" to enforce the ban.
"The reality of the situation is we are struggling to attend burglaries.
Should we be focusing on people smoking in cars with children in the cars or should we be focusing on burglaries?"
Mick
Creedon, chief constable of Derbyshire Police, said:
"Mobiles, drink driving, speeding, no seatbelts - we know these contribute to fatalities on the road.
Smoking in a car doesn't bring the same danger on the roads. It's a public health issue."
Yet another law introduced by Nanny that will be ignored by both the public and the police!
Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries
