A Nice Little Legacy

As our "beloved" Prime Minister gears up to leave office, you can see how happy he looks these days, he is planning to leave us with a nice little something to remember him by.

Bliary said the other day that he had "got it wrong" when he first came to office thinking that all you had to do was to throw money (our money not his) at social problems, to sort them out. He claims to have had a revelation that some people, no matter how much you "invest" (he means spend, but can't bring himself to use that "unword"), will still behave like animals. Therefore his "solution" is to apply the stick as well as the carrot.

A nice idea, unfortunately as with all of Bliary's "ideas" they are not thought through; and usually negatively impact the decent law abiding citizen, rather than the detritus of society.

Coming soon to your town, here are a few of Bliary's new "initiatives":

• Tesco jails, short-term "jails" are planned for supermarkets in order to ease the burden on police. Seemingly Nanny is already discussing the construction of a jail inside Selfridges. I wonder if they will allow you to take a Selfridges bag with you when you leave jail? The Metropolitan Police is interested in placing units in other stores, and is planning custody units in every London borough.



• Nanny intends to expand police powers to take fingerprints, DNA and other samples from offenders and store them on national databases. The list of crimes that will give the police the right to take DNA etc will include; speeding, failing to wear a seat belt, allowing dogs to foul the footpath and dropping litter.
  
  Nice eh?
  
  Fortunately we have 100% confidence in the integrity/security of Nanny's databases. We do, don't we?



• Police will be allowed to question suspects after they have been charged. Isn't this kind of back to front? After all, if the police charge you, surely they have obtained enough evidence already?



• Nanny also wants to fingerprint people over 10 accused of nonrecordable offences, crimes for which an offender cannot be imprisoned.

A nice little legacy wouldn't you agree?

Prat of The Week

Congratulations to Alcohol Concern who have won, "slam dunk" (if I may quote ex CIA Director Tenet), my prestigious "Prat of The Week" Award; for their absurd suggestion that parents should be prosecuted, if they give alcohol to children under 15 (even if it is only with a meal in their own home).

Alcohol Concern claim that this causes alcohol problems later in life.

Bollocks!

I was allowed alcohol when I was a child, and look at me now!

Aside form that, here is why the suggestion is total and utter bollocks:

1 It is unenforceable (even Nanny's health minister, Caroline Flint, says that!).

2 The state, nor charities, should intervene in the way that parents bring up their children (where there are no child abuse issues).

3 The problem with underage drinking arises not because the "children" are drinking with their parents, but because they are drinking unsupervised. Therefore parents should drink with their children.

4 Let us assume that Alcohol Concern's recommendation was implemented, and booze banned from children under the age of 16/15. Once the "child" passes the magic age of 15/16, he/she is meant to face the world with all its temptations and problems without any experience of how to manage alcohol. How on earth does that help prepare the "child" for entry into the adult world? Surely this counts as child abuse?

5 The continentals allow alcohol with family meals, they seem to manage OK.

6 The root cause of anti social behaviour and binge drinking amongst "youths" is that they are thrown into the adult world without any real preparation. Physically they may well be "adult", mentally (because they have been cossetted, spoilt and kept in cotton wool by Nanny and over protective parents) they are immature, spoilt self centred children. They are not equipped to deal with responsibility or the real world. To ban parental supervision of drinking would exacerbate this situation.

Congratulations to Alcohol Concern for thoroughly earning your award!

Please drop them a note and let them know that they have won: contact@alcoholconcern.org.uk

What a Load of Bollocks II

It looks like that I was right, when I said yesterday that more of Nanny's database would leak. However, I didn't quite expect further data and another database to leak quite so quickly.

Seemingly Nanny forgot some fundamental security precautions when setting up these medical databases eg; passwords and firewalls.

Needless to say, confidential data (even the sexual orientation of some junior doctors) has now been picked up by search engines such as Google.

How can this mess have come about?

Simple, never ever allow politicians to become involved in the design and creation of IT systems. Politicians are not up to the job; they are vain publicity seeking individuals who lack the skills, knowledge and time (2 year managers for 5 year projects) necessary to design and implement an IT system.

The question therefore arises, how secure is the data held on Nanny's other IT systems?

Not very, I would venture!

What a Load of Bollocks

Ignoring whatever concerns that have been expressed about the civil liberties issues surrounding Nanny's penchant for databases, one issue that she has been warned about time and time again is the security of the data held on her databases.

It should therefore come as no surprise to anyone to learn that Nanny's database of information about junior doctors was maliciously leaked yesterday!

Nanny responds that no system has 100% security.

Well that's reassuring isn't it?

I suspect that we will see medical records, criminal records and tax/social security records leaked in the future.

Nanny was warned, but she chose to ignore the warning. Nanny is not fit to be left in charge of such sensitive data.

Nanny's Right of Entry

Nanny is a somewhat passive aggressive individual, by that I mean she expects us to be passive whilst she aggressively pursues her policies of interference and intervention in our daily lives.

However, Nanny is still a little worried that we may be offering some form of resistance to her "brave new world"; specifically, she fears that we may be acting in an "un pc" manner in the privacy of our own homes.

Well, she has come up with a terrific wheeze that will ensure that an "Englishman's home" is no longer his castle (lest there be any complaints, for the purposes of this article "English" encompasses Welsh and Scots..I wanted to use the quote, and therefore for today everyone in the UK is an honourary Englishman).

Anyhoo, it seems that according to Tory MP Henry Bellingham, Nanny is considering legislation that would allow forcible entry into homes by bailiffs for such minor matters as the non payment of parking tickets. Any homeowner attempting to stop the bailiff would face up to a year in prison.

Bellingham is quoted as saying:

"The bill as it stands will overturn two fundamental principles

of our common law on bailiffs' power to enter private property:

that bailiffs may only enter peaceably

and with the permission of the debtor.

Those rights are fundamental.

That force may not be used to effect entry has been

established in law since at least the 14th century."

In 2005, Nanny's Nu Labour announced its intention to create a National Enforcement Service to break into homes to recover unpaid fines.

However, be not afraid (yet!) there have been various amendments offered to the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Bill. One of these "generous" amendments would forbid bailiffs from seizing household pets as well as, "any dog on which a blind person relies."

So that's alright then!

No it's not, Nanny must not be allowed to wedge her boot in anyone's door; once she has done this, you will never be able to get her out of your house.

Message For J Rimmer

Re your comment under "Nanny Bans Ponies", about having once worked for Croydon Council.

As you know I have a great "fondness" for local councils, in particular Croydon Council, and wonder if you or your colleagues from the council have any stories or information about Croydon Council that you would consider sharing with me?

Please feel free to get in touch with me, if you do.

Thanks.

Ken