Dimwits

As loyal readers are only too well aware, living in the Nanny state has eroded people's ability to think for themselves and has destroyed commonsense.

A particularly striking example of this was reported by The Sun, concerning Gary Swift's recent visit to ATOS Healthcare which was assessing his claim for an employment and support allowance.

Mr Swift has lost his right arm from below the elbow.

Seemingly, if the report is accurate, the interviewer asked:

“Do you expect your condition to improve? 

Do you expect your arm to grow back within the next two years.”

Mr Swift reportedly replied:

"Well it’s not grown back in the last 30 years, so I can’t see it happening over the next two.”

ATOS Healthcare are quoted:

“That question would never be asked. Staff carrying out the assessment are trained doctors, nurses and physiotherapists.”

Mr Swift claims that he was later sent on a job seekers’ gardening course, and given a spade.

The above story is quite bizarre if it is true!

In the event that this story is BS, then it serves to highlight how people's ethics have been eroded by a state that proactively seeks to take away our self responsibility for running our own lives.

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"

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, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries

Prats of The Week - Her Majesty's Courts and Tribunals Service

Ohh err missus, 'tis the second week of 2013 and most certainly time for the first Prats of The Week Award of the year.

Therefore, without further ado, I am happy to announce that Her Majesty's Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) are Prats of The Week.

For why?

Just ask Tim Green, who was disputing a decision to remove his disability benefits.

Mr Green's ex wife (who helps him with his paperwork because of his poor sight) received a letter from HMCTS saying that he couldn't appeal the decision to remove the benefits.

For why?

Because he was dead!

HMCTS then added further fuel to the fire by writing another letter, one week later, saying that Mr Green was fit enough to work.

HMCTS officials have now issued a formal apology, as per the Mail:

"This letter was sent in error. 

We are taking steps to ensure that proper procedures are followed in future."

HMCTS well deserving Prats of The Week!

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"

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, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries

Dickensian Britain

Lesley Ward, the new head of the Association of Teachers and Lecturers, claims that her members are seeing evidence of deprivation that would be familiar to Dickens.

"I am talking about perfectly healthy children who enter school not yet toilet-trained. Children who cannot dress themselves, children who only know how to eat with a spoon and fingers, and have never sat around a table to enjoy a home-cooked family meal. Children who think that the word 'no' means if you throw a wobbly it will miraculously turn into yes.

Children who get themselves, and sometimes their younger siblings, up in the morning. Children who bring themselves to school at very young ages. Children who sometimes don't know who will be at home when they get home – if anyone. Children who don’t know exactly who the father figure is in the home from month to month.

I know of a pupil who actually saw, from the classroom window during a lesson, his house door being kicked in and his dad being led out of the door in handcuffs – this was during Sats week. He did not achieve the level he should have.

Are we surprised?

Teachers all over the country are working in areas like this. Areas where often more than half the children receive free school meals, where one in ten of the school population is on the at risk register, where 10 per cent, or more, of the children in each class have some form of special need.

These children come from some of our poorest communities, starting school with the huge weight of deprivation on their shoulders, and it can be next to impossible to counteract the effects of such deprivation. I would like to stress I am not talking about the whole of our school population, but a small, significant and growing minority."

She is right to highlight these issues.

However, whilst "poverty" may exacerbate certain issues, she is wrong to blame "poverty" specifically for them:

1 Even animals (our 5 month old cat for example) manage to work out how to use the toilet. The lack of toilet training has nothing to do with poverty, but incredibly abysmal parenting.

2 Poverty does not equate to lousy behaviour. Certain members of the Bullingdon Club have on occasions behaved like yobs in public places, yet the poor of Dickensian Britain tried their best to behave with as much dignity as was possible under the circumstances.

3 Poverty does not compel you to have children.

4 Poverty does not compel you to not read to your children.

5 Poverty does not compel you behave like sub humans.

6 Poverty does not prevent you from using the toilet.

7 Poverty does not prevent you from being able to use a knife and fork.

8 The collapse of "human behaviour" and "social skills" has been mirrored by an opposite increase in the activities and encroachment of the state into private lives. The state is taking away people's self responsibility for the their lives and removing the need for them to worry about the consequences of their own actions.

The state is causing the expansion of the so called "under class".

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!

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

Nanny Bans Vacuum Cleaning

Nanny has surpassed herself on this one, mark my words.

You will all have doubtless in your lives used a vacuum cleaner at some stage, for cleaning or pleasure?

No doubt you felt that the activity was entirely safe, and risk free?

Hah!

Not for Karl Walker!

He was told by Apollo Cleaning, for which he works, that at the tender age of 16 he is not old enough to use hot water, washing up liquid, furniture polish, empty bins or to use cleaning equipment such as vacuum cleaners.

The firm claims that it is following government guidelines by insisting on safety clearance.

I should note that at 16 people in the UK can bonk, join up and play the lottery.

Karl is unimpressed:

"I just don't understand what is going on. How can I be too young to use a vacuum cleaner? It is so stupid.

I want to earn a living."

Nanny doesn't want people to earn a living, as that would make them responsible for their own lives. Nanny wants people to rely on her to support them, thus she will have control over them for the rest of their lives.

Paul Lundy, boss of London-based Apollo Cleaning, said:

"When an employee is only 16 we have to be very careful with the tasks we set them as their bodies are not yet fully formed.

But I am sure once the proper checks have been completed there will be no problem in re-employing these young people."

Snort!

How "fully formed" (a rather odd phrase to use, given the tasks Karl was meant to perform) do you need to be to wash dishes?

Knobheads!

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 champagne. Click and drink!

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

Curfews R Us

It seems that, if reports are correct, Nanny is considering imposing a curfew on 16 year olds being on the streets after 9PM.

Police would take the children home or to a safe place, such as a community centre, where parents could collect them.

On the face of it I would guess that many people would raise a cheer to sweeping the streets clean of the feral yoofs that are rumoured to infest every corner of every town in the UK, striking fear into the hearts of anyone over the age of 20.

However, let us look beneath the surface here and see what Nanny really is proposing and really can do.

For starters the proposal is only going to be used in "hot spots"; ie where crime is considered to be above that which doesn't cause the police too much bother with local residents or the media.

Fine, except that this will simply disperse the "feral yoofs" elsewhere.

One might ask why is that a curfew in hotpsots is required, given that if the police wre really doing their job the criminal elements of these wild packs would have been dealt with and sat on by now.

Secondly, not every 16 year old on the street after 9PM is a criminal or indeed should be treated like one. For that matter not every person over 16 is entirely innocent, eg it has been rumoured that 17 and 18 year olds also commit crimes. What about them then?

Why 9PM, why not 8PM or 10 PM? What about the gangs that strut and loiter before curfew hour?

This is merely a gimmick to make it look as though Nanny is doing something.

I also read that the Sunday Times found that nine out of 10 parents wanted legal restrictions on their children going out after dark.

Here is where I instinctively reach for my sick bag.

Read the above bit again..."parents want legal restrictions on THEIR children going out after dark"!!!

What the fark is the matter with these people?

Their children are their responsibility, not the state's. Parents should not hide behing Nanny's bloomers to try to discipline their own children.

Are parents now so weak, stupid, lazy and fearful of their own offspring that they need the state to hold their hands when dealing with them?

It is hardly surprising some kids who are out of control, if parents are so weak and pathetic.

It is not the role of the state to clean the streets of kids, it is up to parents to maintain discipline and to ensure that they know where their kids are, and who they are with. I was never allowed to loiter and to hang around til the wee small hours, neither should these kids.

That being said, I am not so blind as to not see that there is a hard core element of useless, lazy, selfish parents who couldn't give a rat's arse where their kids are.

Given this, it is hardly surprising that there are wild packs of feral youths running wild in certain parts of Britain.

The solution to this is not a new wave of laws cufewing all kids, but using current laws (goodness knows we have enough of those) to target the criminal youths and their families.

Once you have found the hardcore of useless parents, you make them take responsibility by tagrtetting the things that they like; their housing benefits, and removing their favourite possessions eg pcs, TVs, DVD players, mobiles etc.

Having denuded the family of their toys, you impose a family curfew; forcing the entire brood to sit together night after night in their cave, and confront each others' failings head on (alone - no social workers - and undistracted by TVs etc).

Trust me, once you force them to sit with each other, nature will find the solution to their errant ways! One way or another.

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 champagne. Click and drink!

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

De-evolution

As we all know Nanny loves the idea of devolution, despite the hornets' nest that this policy stirs up.

She has pro actively encouraged Scottish and Welsh devolution, English regional assemblies and created city mayors in certain parts of England (Ken Livingstone being the living monument to Nanny's stupidity) whose role in life seems questionable.

However, Nanny's policy of devolution does not stop there.

She has now started on a policy of de-evolution, whereby the citizens of Britain are proactively encouraged to de-evolve back to a tribal stoneage state.

Don't believe me?

On Monday night there were two programmes on the TV (ITV and Channel 4), covering a similar topic, one analysed why women felt unsafe on the streets at night and the other asked why kids kill.

In a nutshell here's a few select highlights:

• Kids kill because, and this "takes the biscuit", they are bored (this from the mouths of the kids themselves!)



• Kids (8 years and upwards) are reverting to tribalism, via their gangs.



• Kids are imposing territorial boundaries on themselves and others. Those who stray into each others "pissing fields" are attacked or killed.



• One hapless female reporter very bravely approached a gang of "teens" (the youngest being 11) at night, who were hanging around on the street outside a shop. Their faces were completely covered with zip up hoods, you could not even see their eyes.
  
  She asked them to consider that maybe their appearance frightened people. After a few grunts and mumbles, the gang became aggressive and started throwing stones and bottles (how very stoneage!), they then used their mobiles to bring around 20 of their mates into the fray.
  
  Such was the poor quality of the diction of the "kids" interviewed, that the programme makers had to use subtitles in order for the hapless viewer to make sense of what these "kids" were saying.

There are a few blindingly obvious questions, two of which being:

1 Why the hell are 11 year olds being allowed to run around the streets at night like savage animals? Why are their parents allowing this?

2 What the hell has the state been teaching these kids in school, if they are unable to even form a coherent word/sentence without the need of subtitles?

I have already noted on this site my views on what needs to be done, re imposing a form of house arrest for the entire family of these savages (sans TV, mobiles phones, DVD, CD etc) and cutting benefits.

It seems to me that unless this issue is addressed now, both in the schools and via a "house arrest" scheme, we will find ourselves living cheek by jowl with savage stoneage tribes.

Nanny's policy of de-evolution needs to be stopped now.

Nanny Wastes Your Money

It is always reassuring to know that as Nanny's best chum, Gordon Brown, prepares to raise taxes that the money he is taking from us is being spent so wisely.

I was particularly heartened to read the other day that unemployed single parents are receiving free massages and beauty treatments, paid for by the taxpayers.

Seemingly Nanny believes that these treatments, labelled "pamper days", will boost their confidence. To date around 1,000 people, mainly women, have had a "pamper day".

By the way, can you guess what is the name of the overall project that "pamper days" are a part of?

Yes, that's right:

Big Brother

The scheme is currently being tested in Hereford, Worcester, Northumberland, Durham and Greater Manchester. Any single parent over 18 who has been unemployed, or on disability benefit, for at least six months con choose from a range of treatments, including a massage, a haircut, new make-up, a facial, a manicure and even ear-piercing.

On top of that, they can also claim a separate £30 to spend on a shopping trip for new clothes, and are eligible for free lunches and childcare.

The Big Brother scheme is run by Inspire2Independence, a private company based in York.

So, I suppose the scheme is at least keeping some people off the dole?

A Nation of Beggars II

Further to my previous article about Britain being turned into a nation of beggars, those of you who fear that this policy might in some sense exclude those who are newly arrived in this country need have no fear.

It emerged at the end of last year that immigrants wanting to settle in Britain are to be questioned not on British history, but on how to claim benefits.

Doctor John Reid's much "respected" and "world class" Home Orifice, announced that it was extending the scope of the "Britishness" exam. The exam will now include questions on what benefits you are entitled to, and how to lodge a claim.

The subject areas include; the right to housing, healthcare and an education, and equal rights and discrimination. There will of course be no place in the exam for British history.

It seems that the Home Orifice is worried that migrants settling in the UK do not have sufficient knowledge of British law and culture; as noted earlier, we are now a nation of beggars with our arms outstretched from cradle to grave.

Therefore, it is only right and fitting that immigrants be indoctrinated into our ways as well so that they feel that they are one of us.

A Nation of Beggars

Congratulations to Kizzy Neal, from Torbay, who got herself pregnant at the age of 13. She says that having a baby is now regarded as "fashionable" among schoolgirls.

So much so in fact, that four of her classmates have also got themselves pregnant since Christmas.

Here's a radical suggestion, stop paying benefits; that might cure a few people of the delusion of a "fashionable" pregnancy.

We have become a nation of beggars, on our knees with our hands outstretched from cradle to grave.

Get off your knees, and take responsibility for your own lives.

Throwing Money at a Problem

Nanny believes that if she throws enough money at all of life's problems, then they will simply go away.

In theory that might work, sometimes. However, she ignores three fundamental problems with her theory:

1 The money she is using is not hers, it's ours.

2 Money spent, without proper oversight and control is very often wasted.

3 Throwing money at issues more often than not causes inflation and corruption, look at the damage done to Africa by UN and international "aid" programmes.

As it is in Africa, so it is in the North of England. Nanny was informed a few weeks ago that the enormous amount of public money (I love the euphemism "public money"...it's not "public" it's our money!) on northern cities has only made them poorer.

Nanny's 263 page report, the Competitive Economic Performance of English Cities, noted that not one city north of Derby has an economy that is performing better than the national average.

The report went on to note that state efforts to improve business, productivity and earnings in northern regions have only managed to make things worse!

The conclusion of the report is that Nanny's spending, at levels equivalent to the now defunct Soviet bloc, have in fact done more harm than good.

Quote:

"The overt policies followed so far and the unintended consequences

of others have either failed to close this gap or actually made it worse.

This is a major, persistent and long-term problem

for the English economy as a whole."

An initial study for the programme, which was published in the spring, was hailed by the Smooth Talking Bar Steward, John Prescott, as showing "remarkable progress" and an "urban renaissance".

Seems to me Prescott has been telling porkies, or didn't read the initial study too well.

The main author of the report, Professor James Simmie of Oxford Brookes University, summed it up rather well:

"There is not enough private sector expenditure.

The north is far too dependent on public services expenditure."

In other words, a culture of dependency has set in; which in turn erodes and debilitates the region and the people.

Public spending in London is 33% of the economy, compared to over 50% in much of the north. In fact London contributes around £11BN a year to other regions.

State domination of the economy has throttled private business, and increased dependence on the taxpayer and on benefits.

The Institute of Economic Affairs and the Centre for Economic and Business Research showed that 65% of the economy in the North East depends on the state, and 57% in the North West.

The lesson here is simple; the state is destroying the country and its people.

The enemy of the people is the state.

Commas R'n't Us

In the form of a living testament to the failure of Nanny's "Educashun, Educashun, Educashun" policy, it has been revealed that punctuation standards at schools are so poor that pupils taking GCSE English are completing entire exams without using a single comma.

The astute amongst you will have noticed that I have used a few commas in the above...but not necessarily in the right places!

Basic grammatical errors, that used to be "ironed out" of pupils in previous generations, are now common; eg pupils do not understand the basics, such as the difference between "there" and "they're".

Other exam howlers include "been" instead of "being", and using the text message "u" instead of "you".

Impressive isn't it?

No, it's not (ooh, an apostrophe...how very sophisticated of moi).

The Assessment and Qualifications Alliance are none too impressed either, and note that teenagers are able to write entire sentences without the use of single comma.

Rather strangely though, the proportion of A* to C grades rose by 1.2% to 62.4% and A/A* grades increased by 0.7% to 19.1%. This meant that pupils were scoring A or A* in one in five GCSEs, compared to one in ten in 1988.

Clearly educashun standards have improved...haven't they folks?

The Assessment and Qualifications Alliance disagree, and have issued a report that criticises standards in papers, saying that some examiners noted a "decline in technical accuracy".

Standards of grammar and punctuation were worse among pupils who would not go on to achieve high grades.

The report says:

"While the correct use of the apostrophe continues to grow,

the use of the comma (except to differentiate items in lists)

declines.

A high percentage of scripts did not involve a single comma.

The semi-colon is making an attempt at re-appearance,

sometimes used correctly."

Apostrophes are popular, and are seemingly "sprinkled across the page at random". Some pupils even consider capital letters after full stops to be unnecessary.

Educashun?

Pah!

We don't need it cos we have university places, jobs and benefits for life right?

Right?

Risk Free Weapons

Nanny is very concerned about the environment these days; she loves to lecture us about global warming, the benefits of recycling and the environmental impact of heavy industry.

That, I guess, is why she had a rain forest destroyed in the Amazon recently in order to provide the wood for a refit of the fixtures and fitting in Westminster.

Anyhoo, Nanny has turned her attention to the environmental impact of war. She has decided that weapons actually pose a serious health and safety risk, as such she wants to minimise that risk.

Somewhat of a contradiction you would have thought?

Apparently not, according to Nanny's friends in the MOD and BAE Systems (one of the world's largest arms manufacturers).

The latter are designing "green" munitions and lead free bullets.

The MOD (Ministry of Defence) has proposed quieter warheads, to reduce noise pollution, and grenades that produce less smoke.

Dr Debbie Allen, director of corporate social responsibility at BAE systems, said:

"Weapons are going to be used and when they are,

we try to make them as safe for the user as possible,

to limit the collateral damage and to impact as little as possible on the environment."

Needless to say, this green policy has caused some people to take a sharp intake of breath. Symon Hill of Campaign Against Arms Trade said:

"This is laughable.

BAE is determined to try to make itself look ethical,

but they make weapons to kill people and

it's utterly ridiculous to suggest they are environmentally friendly."

FYI Britain has dropped more than 900 bombs in Iraq, and the United States dropped 1,500 cluster bombs.

Nonetheless, BAE are championing bullets with lower lead content because:

"lead used in ammunition can harm the environment and pose a risk to people."

Am I the only one who thinks that the above could be construed as being a contradiction in terms?

Funny old world isn't it?

Nanny is Mother Nanny is Father

I wonder if Nanny is beginning to lose her marbles?

Blairy Poppins has laid out plans for social intervention, reminiscent of those Victorian quacks who thought that you could judge a man's character by reading the bumps on his head.

In a nutshell (that is a most appropriate word for this plan) Nanny (Blairy) has said that it is possible to identify problem children who could grow up to be a potential "menace to society" even before they are born.

Visions of genetic monitoring and selection spring to mind here.

Anyhoo, in Nanny's mind it is possible for the state to prevent babies born into "high risk families" becoming problem teenagers of the future.

Quite who decides what a "high risk" family is I have no idea. Seemingly, in Nanny's "new order", people will not be given a choice about "accepting" state aid; state aid will be compulsory. Bliar said that teenage mothers could be forced to accept state help before giving birth, as part of a clampdown on antisocial behaviour.

Blair went on to say that action could even be taken "pre-birth".

Blairy Poppins said:

"If we are not prepared to predict and intervene far more early

then there are children that are going to grow up in families that we know perfectly well are completely dysfunctional,

and the kids a few years down the line are going to be a menace to society

and actually a threat to themselves."

Sanctions will be imposed on parents who refused to take advice. I assume if the sanctions don't work, then these "refuseniks" will be carpet bombed into submission, just like Bliar does with all his other enemies?

Nanny's plan has been put together with the help of the Joseph Rowntree Foundation and Turning Point; it covers ideas on children in care, teenage mothers and mentally ill people on benefit (defined as those who have been "difficult to reach" in previous government programmes).

Nanny says that there was no point "pussy-footing", she wants compulsory 12 week programmes for vulnerable young parents to improve their skills bringing up children.

Ah, Nanny's favourite word..."COMPULSORY".

The trouble with Nanny's approach to "dysfunctional", let us call it what it really is, scum behaviour is that she does not see that it is her own interventions that are causing it.

Society as a whole has managed throughout the centuries to "manage" and "keep a lid" on scum; simple techniques employed by local communities worked:

• Scum would be "saucepan banged" out of town (local residents would gather outside of a scum house, and bang saucepans lids etc until the scum left).



• Those who behaved so abominably and so out of control that they did not find work, did not eat properly and as a consequence had little energy to breed like rabbits, or indeed to live; ie they died.



• Peer pressure in local communities ensured that anti social behaviour was soon brought to task, as the appropriate punishments were meted out to those who crossed the line.

The state has taken away all of those checks and balances, and in effect caused the problems that we are told are so common place today:

• State benefits and state housing means that the worst and most objectionable people can live and function, without the need to raise a finger.



• Tower blocks and government housing policy have ripped away the fabric of local communities.



• The no smacking ban imposed by the state on teachers and parents have removed an effective means of control over offspring.



• The state has infused some of the population with a "victim" mentality. Believe that your are the victim of injustice, and you most assuredly will be the victim.

In short, state intervention has brought about this problem, proposing more intervention will in effect exacerbate the situation.

I would also make this point, the path proposed by the Prime Minister (if followed) will lead us to genetic monitoring and enforced sterilisations/birth control. This is not the path for a civilised society to follow.

The "solution" to this problem is to lessen state intervention and to cut off the benefits of those who behave badly.

Young MacDonald

Young MacDonald had f**k
Ee aye ee aye oh
And from that f**k he had a kid
Ee aye ee aye oh
With a f**k f**k here
And a f**k f**k there
Here a kid
There a kid
Everywhere, a kid kid
Young MacDonald had a f**k
Ee aye ee aye oh

Congratulations to young Keith MacDonald, 21 of Washington Tyne and Wear, who is the true son of Nanny's Britain. MacDonald has been f**king for Nanny on a truly heroic scale, and has managed to produce 6 kids with 6 different women in the last 7 years (that means he started when he was 14).

The good news is that brat number 7 is on its way, from woman number 7. Doesn't he now have half the cast for a musical?

How can he, and these dim witted females, afford to live in this manner?

Easy, Nanny (well we the taxpayers actually) pay for him and his harem. The cost is estimated to be around 1M per annum.

What does daddy MacDonald do with his time?

Plays the slots in amusement arcades, needless to say he has no job.

Makes you feel proud to be British doesn't it?

What is the solution to this situation?

1 Sterilisation, or

2 Cut off the benefits of the father and the 7 mothers

I do not recommend the first, as it is a very dangerous route down which some very unpleasant regimes have walked.

A Fishy Tale

As we all know Nanny has, over the years, bombarded us with "facts" and advice about what we should and shouldn't eat.

The trouble is, her advice keeps changing; for example:

• We used to be told to drink at least a pint of milk every day, for strong bones and healthy teeth; now we are told that milk contains unhealthy levels of fat.



• Butter and cheese were good sources of protein and vitamin D, now of course they fall under the fat embargo.



• Eggs, great a few years ago; then first comes Eggwina, and next cholesterol.



• Meat, once an excellent source of protein; now an evil source of fat.



• Smoking, this was (300 years ago) taught to children by the state as a means of purifying and cleaning the lungs. Now, well you know the story now!



• Booze, some doctors prescribe drinking in moderation, others council against it.



• Beef was once the meat of choice, then along comes a mad cow and all hell breaks loose.



• Carrots were meant to help you see in the dark, this of course was bollocks. The "seeing in the dark myth" was a piece of propaganda put out in the war designed to make the Germans think that our success at shooting down their bombers was due to better night vision, when in fact it was down to radar (which was classified secret at the time).

Confusing isn't it?

This brings us on to fish, oily fish to be precise. Once we were told by Nanny that oily fish, such as salmon, was good for our bodies and brains. Now it seems that advice may be bollocks.

Analysis of recent trials has found little evidence that eating fish, or taking fish oil capsules, cuts the risk of dying of heart disease, stroke or cancer.

The analysis indicates that it is difficult to show clear benefits. The better the quality of the trial, the lower the apparent benefit.

The findings are published in the British Medical Journal online by a team led by Lee Hooper, of the University of East Anglia.

Why do the findings differ from what was considered to be the perceived wisdom of eating oily fish?

A study by Dr Michal Burr, of the University of Cardiff, found that fish oil may have a short-term benefit, but a long-term disbenefit; because it contains traces of toxic methyl mercury as a contaminant.

The conclusion that we, the punters in the street, must draw from these results is that Nanny and her minions are prone to base their advice and edicts on heresay rather than on irrefutable scientific fact.

A very dangerous policy indeed.

As such the best course of action must be to ignore what Nanny tells you, and eat/drink/smoke in whatever way that makes you feel at ease with yourself.

Nanny Comes A Calling

"You'd better watch out

You'd better take care

You'd better check your underwear

Nanny's coming to town

Nanny's coming to call

Nanny's coming to call on you, today.."

Yes folks, up until now Nanny was just someone you read about and had nightmares about.

Now she's coming to town, possibly to a home near you, in person!

Cue the dramatic "DUN DUN DUN!" music.

Nanny has decided that some people really don't know how to behave. Therefore she is going to send in her own battalion of supernannies to the homes of "problem" families.

This is yet another of Nanny's answers to anti social behaviour.

Nanny will send disciplinarians, no jokes about phone box cards and personal services please folks, to impose order on problem households.

Specially trained social workers will use similar techniques to those used by the Channel 4 series "Supernanny", they will be assigned to individual families for up to 15 months.

Nanny's chums in the Home Office say that there will be "no escape" from them, as they spend "morning, noon and night" with parents and their youngsters.

I thought that house arrest was generally only practiced by third world dictatorships?

The nannies will do the job of the parents, and totally take over every aspect of the family's daily lives; they will arrive early each morning to ensure the household is out of bed and youngsters sent to school. Their tasks will include ensuring children are properly fed and dressed, and encouraging layabout parents to find a job.

It really has come to this, that the state is now taking over the role of the parent!


Once that happens, any last vestige of resistance to Nanny will be crushed.

Nanny's little troll, Hazel Blears the Home Office minister, puts it rather "eloquently":

"What makes this project distinctive and different is that a lead person 'grips' the household and the range of services and professionals that are involved with the families."

Case workers will be ordered to do whatever it takes, within the law, to gain access to the family home every morning. They will stay until the young children are put to bed in the evening, and until they are confident the older children are off the streets.

Nanny's Home Office said:

"These workers will be with the family morning, noon and night.

If they have to shout through the letter box and bang on doors to get through the door, that is what they will do."

By the way, this will cost £15,000 per family.

Nanny has forgotten that the reason that families are behaving like this is because the state, by interfering in our daily lives, has taken away people's self responsibility.

To my view there is simpler solution, stop paying benefits to anti social scumbags and run them out of town.

Less than a hundred years ago local communities would take matters into their own hands when a family was considered to be disruptive. The residents would gather outside the house of the nuisance family, and start to bang dustbin lids and shouting until the family got the message and left town; the family would be literally "drummed" out of town.

We do not owe people a living; PERIOD!

Another "Bright" Idea From Nanny's Bar Steward

Those of you who are worried about the stability of the housing market, may need to turn away from your screens now.

Nanny has decided that she wants to add to the regulatory burden of selling a house, and has selected one of the finest minds in her cabinet to tackle this tricky subject.

Can you guess who that is?

Yes, that's right, none other than Nanny's smooth talking bar steward John Despot.

The very mention of his name in association with the housing market, something that underpins the British economy, should send shivers down everyone's spines.

Anyhoo, dear old John has come up with a real humdinger of a plan.

The benefits or rationale of his scheme, to either seller or buyer, remain unclear; nonetheless that has never stopped him in the past from doing something, and that most certainly won't stop him now.

He wants to introduce home information packs during 2007, which he says will reduce the cost of buying a home.

Really?

The packs would be prepared by the seller, at an estimated cost of up to £1000; theoretically they would provide the buyer with all the information that he/she would need, eg ownership evidence and a property "health report".

However, as with all of Nanny's ideas, this idea has not been thought through.

• Pre implementation there will be a rush of property sales, to avoid the £1000 cost and huge administrative burden; this will undoubtedly destabilise and inflate the already highly sensitive housing market.



• The regulations will spawn a whole new class of "property cowboy", people and firms who will charge exorbitant fees for preparing these packs; needless to say they will operate without any form of regulation.



• The fact that a seller prepares one of these packs, will be in no way a guarantee of the condition of the property; buyers will still have to pay for a survey. So how exactly does this reduce the cost of buying a property John?

The Bar Steward of course doesn't care about any of these problems, as he already has use of several homes (one for each of his Jaguars).



Buy a selection of "Bollocks To The Bar Steward" T shirts and thongs here.

Nanny Bans Novelty Pigs

Nanny is always concerned about ensuring that people are not unnecessarily offended by the actions of others; not that she is very concerned about offending us herself, she is after all perfect!

Anyhoo, it has come to her attention that novelty pig calendars and toys are being displayed in Dudley council offices

This of course, to the untrained eye, represents no problem at all.

However, Nanny has a very special training and looks for offence where there is none.

As such, her lackeys in Dudley Council have banned the display these items, lest they offend Muslim staff.

Workers in the council's benefits department have been told to remove, or cover up, all pig products including; toys, porcelain, calendars and even a tissue box featuring Winnie the Pooh and Piglet.

This sudden attack on the world of pork by Nanny, comes after a Muslim worker said that they were offended by pig-shaped stress relievers delivered to the authority.

I am sure that tolerant countries such as Iran, are equally sensitive to the feelings of non Muslims.

The thing is, these pig items have been in Dudley council for years. Needless to say the banning has caused something of an atmosphere.

No doubt the ban has aided and improved inter religious understanding!

The council were asked what was the specific reason, given by the person, for asking for the removal of these item. The council replied:

"It did not matter why it was considered offensive".

There you go folks, you now have carte blanche to complain about anything you like; no reason is required.

Nanny will ban whatever you want.

Go ahead, let yourselves rip!

Nanny Gets Cold Feet

In a rare bout of candour, one of Nanny's chums has admitted that Nanny may have over-egged her pudding in respect of her hardsell of ID cards.

Tony McNulty, the poor sap of a Home Office minister responsible for the project, has told a left-wing think tank that ID cards are not the cure all panacea for terrorism or fraud.

Er, haven't we been saying that for months now?

See Top Ten Reasons Why ID Cards Are Bollocks

However, dear old Nanny stubbornly refuses to give way on the issue; instead she will cleverly allow the Lords to stop this daft scheme, then blame them.

McNulty knows this, and admitted that a battle between the Commons and the Lords about whether the cards become compulsory would end in deadlock.

McNulty is quoted as saying:

"Perhaps in the past the government, in its enthusiasm, oversold the advantages of identity cards.

We did suggest, or at least implied, that they might well be a panacea for identity fraud, for benefit fraud, terrorism, entitlement and access to public services."

Adding that in its "enthusiasm", Nanny had over-emphasised the benefits to the state rather than for

"the individual in providing a gold standard in proving your identity".

"There are now so many almost daily occasions when we have to stand up and verify our identity."

The money spent on these worthless documents would be better spent on the police and other value adding services.

By the way, although the current push for ID cards is coming from Nanny and her cronies, let us not forget who started the ball rolling on this issue back in the 90's.

None other than dear old Michael Howard!

His continued support for ID cards cost the Tory party a good few votes in the last election.

Pity now, after the election, that they have only just realised what a bad idea they are.

Nanny Bans Beer Goggles

Nanny is really worried about the media's obsession with beauty and good looks.

She agonises that ordinary looking mortals, such as you and I, are not given a fair "crack" in this media obsessed age.

Therefore Nanny has decided to intervene in that most image obsessed industry, the drinks industry.

She has ordered drinks companies to stop using attractive people to advertise their products; instead they must now hire paunchy, balding men for advertisements.

Nanny's sleepy old watchdogs at the Committee of Advertising Practice (CAP) have issued a list of undesirable male characteristics that advertisers must abide by, in order to comply with tougher rules designed to separate alcohol from sexual success.

Lambrini is the first drinks company to come under attack from Nanny. Watchdogs rejected its latest campaign, because it depicted women flirting with a man who was deemed too attractive.

The poster featured three women "hooking" a slim, young man in a parody of a fairground game scene. Harmless fun to lead its summer campaign, Lambrini argued.

CAP said:

"We would advise that the man in the picture should be unattractive, overweight, middle-aged, balding etc...

We consider that the advert is in danger of implying that the drink may bring sexual/social success, because the man in question looks quite attractive and desirable to the girls. If the man was clearly unattractive, we think that this implication would be removed."

What a bunch of prats!

As anyone with half a brain knows, around 75% of sexual liaisons in the UK would not occur but for the effects of drink. People viewed through beer goggles are infinitely more attractive than when viewed in the cold light of day.

Drink is the glue that brings people together, and ensures that they stay together.

Let's raise a glass or three this evening to the benefits of beer goggles, I know I will!