Gong With The Wind

Well, the New Year's Honours list has been released; for reasons that escape me, I am not on it!

Now I know that you have all been writing to Nanny; asking her to give me a "gong" for my services to the nation, in alerting Britain as to the dangers of the nanny state.

I can therefore only conclude that she has deliberately vetoed my name's inclusion on the list.

I kindly ask that you redouble your efforts in 2005, and write to Nanny's Gong Award Department; telling them to give me an honour in 2005.

Thanks and Happy New Year.

Ken

Hams

Dear Nanny,

I have a small request. Now you, and the regular readers of this site, know that I am the last person on the planet to request that you impose more regulations.

However, I must draw your attention to the following most disgraceful occurrence that took place in my local Sainsburys yesterday.

I will set the scene.

I popped in to my local Sainsburys, eschewing the fact that Sainsburys with its bare shelves and missing product lines attempts to emulate the Soviet shopping experience, in search of a gammon for New year.

FYI, I do a very decent baked gammon (pineapple, cloves etc); see Accountants Can Cook for the full monty.

Anyhoo, making my way past the ever empty shelves, I found the gammon fridge; this was surprisingly well stocked.

Unfortunately, to my horror and disgust, a child of about 8 years old was sitting in the fridge with her backside planted firmly on the gammons; hams upon hams, so to speak! Her mother, seemingly blissfully unaware of this, was in a heated discussion with the contents of her trolley or a mobile phone (I couldn't quite tell).

I was put off having the gammon, call me old fashioned but I really find food to be less than appetising if it has been sat on, we at Frost Towers will be having roast beef instead (see Accountants Can Cook for the recipe).

Therefore in view of this food contamination, and disgraceful behaviour, I would like to ask you to ensure that supermarkets in future display signs that clearly warn people not to sit in the refridgerator!

Thank you.

Ken

Tinsel Trasher

Nanny's friends at Chipping Sodbury school, in Gloucestershire, managed to ruin their pupils' Christmas this year.

The school decided that the traditional wearing of tinsel, around the necks, by the pupils was in fact dangerous; and therefore banned it, citing "health and safety grounds".

It seems that, according to Nanny's friends there, the tinsel presents a strangulation risk.

If that is the case, why does the school uniform include a tie?

The Stain of Nicotine

Nanny, as we all know, absolutely hates smoking; she never ceases lecturing her "charges" about the damage that smoking does to peoples' health.

However, in rather a bizarre bout of "forgetfulness", Blairy Poppins seems to have been a tad amnesic when remembering to register the fact that she holidayed with a leading figure in the tobacco industry.

Dear old Blairy Poppins is very fond of foreign holidays, and even more fond of them when they are at other peoples' expense. Therefore Blairy must have jumped at the chance, two years ago, when Alain Dominique Perrin offered Blairy and his cost conscious wife the chance to stay at a French chateau.

Nothing wrong with that at all, Blairy always makes a point of taking holidays in other peoples' homes; it's cheaper that way!

Unfortunately Blairy forgot two things:

• Monsieur Perrin was chairman of Richemont, the French luxury goods company, which owned 21% of British American Tobacco.



• Blairy forgot, I am sure it was an innocent mistake, to declare the holiday in Parliament’s register of members' interests..oops!

Fortunately the Tories have reminded him of this "error"; Blairy's spokesman helpfully told reporters that if it needed to be registered, then it would.

Poor old Blairy must be getting a little forgetful in her old age, it was not that long ago that she had another "problem" with the tobacco industry. Then she had to return £1M to Bernie Ecclestone in 1997, after it emerged that Bernie had lobbied Blairy to delay a ban on Formula 1 being sponsored by the tobacco industry.

Poor old Blairy needs to learn that nicotine stains are like semen stains; very persistent, and difficult to remove.

A Christmas Carol

Nanny and her friends have not been asleep during the festive season. One of her friends, the Very Reverend John Lewis Dean of Llandaff Cathedral in Cardiff, has decided that the carol "God Rest Ye Merry Gentlemen" is offensive to women.

As such, he has decreed that the words be changed to the rather catchy "God Rest Ye Merry People" instead.

He decreed that this version be sung on Christmas day.

Those of you who have time to spare, between the mince pies and cold turkey, may like to submit your own versions of Christmas carols that would be suitable for singing to Nanny.

There is no prize, other than the kudos of seeing your name and carol appear on this site.

We Have a Winner!

Ladies and Gentlemen, we have a winner in the Christmas competition.

Duncan emailed me this morning, with a link to the article that the "Blairy Poppins" cartoon relates to.

Rather bizarrely it was attached to an article about "split caps", published on the 11th of December http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,630-1398674,00.html.

I have written to the Times asking them about their "inspiration" for this cartoon.

In the meantime Duncan, if you can let me know your size and address, a T shirt will be winging its way off to you.

Congratulations!

Ken

Winterval Greetings

Christmas Competition

www.nannyknowsbest.com is pleased to announce that it is holding a special Christmas competition.

A couple of weeks ago I received an email from a visitor, who had seen a cartoon of "Blairy Poppins" (see left). He found it on The Times website at the following address http://images.thetimes.co.uk/TGD/picture/0,,165989,00.jpg

Now the eagle eyed amongst you will notice that it bears a distinct similarity to the logo of this site, even the title "Blairy Poppins" is the same.

What is odd is that I cannot find the article, or story, which the cartoon refers to on the Times website. Additionally, I wrote to the Times asking them about it; they replied that they could not trace it, and that it was not drawn by any of their cartoonists.

A real mystery, don't you think?

Therefore I would like to ask for your assistance in tracing the origin of this cartoon, and the article/story to which it relates.

The first person to correctly identify the source of the cartoon, and the story to which it relates, will win a fantastic Nanny Knows Best T shirt from Nanny's store.

The decision of the judges is final, and any attempt to argue with them will be ignored.

Top Ten Reasons Why ID Cards Are Bollocks

www.nannyknowsbest.com went down the pub last night, for pre Christmas drinks; and it is fair to say that, in the spirit of annoying Nanny, an elegant sufficiency of booze and cigarettes were consumed.

During last night’s celebrations, we mused on the top ten reasons why ID cards are bollocks (how sad is that?). Here is our top ten:

• ID cards are the tools of choice of dictators, during peacetime. Don’t take our word for it ask Churchill, Bush or Thatcher; all of whom have said the self same thing.



• ID cards can easily be forged, eg visit www.myoids.com



• The alleged purpose of ID cards is to prove someone’s identity, this can already be done with ease via eg; passports, NI numbers, driving licence or birth certificates to name but a few. Therefore ID cards are unnecessary.



• Foreigners passing through Britain do not have to hold ID cards.



• Proof of identity is no deterrent to terrorism, the determined “loon” is perfectly happy letting the world know his/her real name in a suicide bombing.



• Whilst we may be “waging war” against others, we are not “at war”; there is no external threat to the existence of this nation, aside from the internal threat posed by Nanny.



• The cost of implementing, and managing, ID cards is prohibitive.



• The IT requirements, necessary to effectively manage the huge database envisaged by Nanny, are not feasible. No IT project implemented by politicians, of any party, has ever worked properly or met budget.



• ID cards do not have to be carried by individuals, therefore their purpose is negated.



• ID cards will not be issued to every citizen of Britain until 2014. Nanny claims that we are all in danger, yet she is taking 10 years to address that threat. Do you not think that Nanny is being a little slow here? Could it be that we are actually not in as much danger as she would have us believe?

This list took us around 5 minutes of alcohol fuelled deliberations to create, ie it was not very difficult to pull Nanny’s arguments to shreds.

If it is that easy for us “ordinary mortals” to pull her logic to threads; why does Nanny still persist in her plans, and why has the “Leader” of the “Opposition” committed political suicide by supporting the introduction of ID cards?

Wanted

The Day Freedom Died

Request To Nanny

Dear Nanny,

I would like you to address the following issue, relating to those warning cones and signs that are liberally erected whenever some water is spilt onto a floor.

They are bloody dangerous!

I almost tripped over one in Sainsbury's on Saturday, whilst buying my Christmas pudding.

Please can you ensure that, in future, there are warning signs erected; warning us about the slippery floor warning signs.

Thank you.

Ken

Nanny's Sloppy Law Making

There are two comments that best sum up Nanny’s botched anti terror laws, which were introduced in haste and without due care and attention post 9/11.

Lord Hoffman noted, in the Law Lords ruling on Thursday, that:

“The real threat to the life of the nation….comes not from terrorism but from laws such as these..”

Another public figure, also had a few thoughts on the subject of detention without trial:

“The power of the executive to cast a man into prison without formulating any charge known to the law, and particularly to deny him the judgement of his peers, is in the highest degree odious it's the foundation of all totalitarian government, whether Nazi or Communist..”

Who spoke so wisely?

A political pundit?

A lawyer?

None other than Sir Winston Churchill, in 1943.

It seems to me that Churchill’s words are as valid now, as they were then.

The case Nanny has to address, and frankly it was as obvious as when she passed the terrorism act, as it is now; is what do you do with the people who are incarcerated under this law?

Incidentally, where were the “opposition” parties when these half-baked laws were being passed?

The detainees cannot be held forever, as appealing a prospect as that may sound.

Nanny needs to ensure that one, or all, of the following take place:

-Put them on trial for terrorist offences

-Put them on trial for other crimes

-Deport them

-Release them

The above actions may not be easy, and indeed were rejected as being too troublesome by Nanny’s old chum David “trial without jury” Blunkett, but nonetheless are necessary.

The trouble with Nanny is that she is intellectually lazy; she acts before thinking and she likes to play to the populist gallery, she does not do “difficult”.

Nanny Trashes History

You will recall an earlier article on this site, Nanny’s Titanic, about the forthcoming Freedom of Information act. This act allegedly enables Nanny’s “charges” to access government records.

Nanny put her trusted and “respected” friend Lord Falconer of the Dome in charge of this; Lord Falconer duly pleased his mistress (Nanny that is), by ensuring that access to information would only be allowed if the government felt that it was appropriate.

However, Nanny was still feeling a little worried that people would be able to access some of her secrets. Therefore she has issued a decree, which orders her underlings to trash all emails more than 3 months old. This mass trashing will take place this coming Monday.

The operation will be unsupervised, how convenient!

We can therefore safely assume that everything, no matter how important, will be erased.

The pretext for this “Orwellian” purge of history, is saving space.

However, it should come as no surprise to the more cynical of you; that the decree comes hot on the heels of David “trial without jury” Blunkett’s resignation, and Sir Alan Budd’s ongoing enquiry into the alleged cover up of the affair by the Home Office.

Those of you who think the Nanny is “taking the piss” out of her “charges”, and the Freedom of Information Act, are right.

Nanny has no intention of presenting a transparent government; were she to do so it would expose to the world just how incompetent, chaotic and dishonest she and her friends really are.

Under such regimes, Ladies and Gentlemen, dictatorships flourish.

My Father's View

I would like to share with you the personal view of my father, about Nanny and her friends.

He spent World War II, in the Atlantic merchant navy convoys, dodging U boats; he knows a bit about history.

In his view, Britain is rapidly turning into the very thing that he and his contemporaries fought against all those years ago.

This time the enemy is winning, because the British people are sleepwalking towards dictatorship.

My father, by the way, is usually right on most things; so I suggest that you pay heed to his comments.

I'll Be Back

Those of you who have been celebrating the demise of the Home Secretary, may need to take heed.

David "trial without jury" Blunkett has let it be known that he will be back.

However, in the meantime, his reduced salary and status means that he will find it a little difficult to make ends meet.

He does, after all, have a number of children to look after.

He there asks that you help him out, by buying his new book David Blunkett; which was given some very good publicity, by his good friend Michael Howard, in the Commons the other day.

The book contains all sort of interesting observations about David's colleagues, and Nanny's friends.

Nanny Bans Hunting

Nanny is spitting blood today, her best chum David “trial without jury” Blunkett was forced to resign yesterday. This has left Nanny feeling a little exposed.

Dear old David, you will recall, has been the “master brain” behind some of Nanny’s favourite new laws:

-Religious Hatred

-ASBOS

-Civil Contingencies

-Terrorism

-ID cards

In fact you name it, and Mr “trial without jury” has had his finger in it; so to speak.

Now Nanny has lost her chum, all because of a little fuss over an affair and a few fast tracked visas. Nanny is beside herself; she thought that her friends could only be pushed out if she wished it so.

You see, Nanny had begun to feel that she was invulnerable:

• She has neutered the “opposition” parties; they no longer register with the public, and now do exactly what she wants them to do.
  
  Indeed the Tory party came out in support of Blunkett’s’ ID card scheme, but a few days ago. I would conjecture that had they opposed it, with Blunkett’s departure, they might have had a chance to defeat it under the new Home Secretary. Unfortunately, because they came out in favour of it, they no longer have that opportunity.
  
  I would imagine that they are feeling pretty stupid today!



• She disregards parliament, by communicating directly with her “charges” via the media



• She manipulates independent reports, into Nanny “cock ups”, by setting the parameters of the investigation so narrow that the report ignores the real issues



• She rules by diktat, ignoring the advice of her colleagues



• She is destroying the constitution; by allowing her “well respected and competent” chum Lord Falconer to do to the constitution, what he did for the Dome



• She bribes the electorate, by kidding them that they are fully employed; in fact, as over 20% of Britain’s population now work for Nanny, they are in reality on State benefits

Yet, despite all of this, her chum was still forced from office.

How was this possible?

Surely she had all the angles covered?

I am afraid not Nanny, there is still one last vestige of resistance to your will; the media (aside from the BBC). They pushed Blunkett out; not our proactive “opposition” parties, nor Blunkett’s conscience.

Therefore, since her friends are being stalked like “game” by the media, Nanny will be introducing a second anti hunting bill. She will do to the media, what she has done to fox hunting.

In future the following will be offences, punishable by imprisonment:

• It will be an offence for more than two members of the media to congregate together in any public place



• Nanny’s friends are now officially designated a protected species



• It will be an offence for members of the media to stalk, hunt or track the movements of Nanny’s friends



• It will be an offence for members of the media to talk to others, or indeed communicate with others, about the movements or activities of Nanny’s friends



• Those found to be keeping “packs of the media”, who have breached the above rules, will have their media packs put down

You see, Ladies and Gentlemen, Nanny will not tolerate any form of resistance to her rule. Now with the above rules in place, and no effective “opposition” in parliament, Nanny will continue to do exactly what she wants to do.

Calling All Accountants

My apologies Ladies and Gentlemen if I wander "off topic" for a minute, I know that you are all desperate to talk about Mr "trial without jury".

However, I would like to ask all of you who are accountants, or who know accountants, to visit and spread the word about www.stopthemerger.org.

My professional accounting body, the ICAEW, is planning to merge with two other bodies.

This must be stopped!

Therefore, I have set up www.stopthemerger.org to fight the Council of the ICAEW on this issue.

Please can you help me, and get as many accountants as you know to visit the site and post their views on the merger there.

Additionally, please can the members of the media (particularly News International and the BBC) who I know read this site put the word out about www.stopthemerger.org.

Many thanks for your time, and help, normal service will now resume.

Ken

Nanny Bans Christmas

Following on from yesterday’s post about Nanny’s friends in the TUC and RoSPA trying to stop people enjoying themselves at Christmas parties, it seems that Nanny’s friends in local councils and other organisations around Britain have been conspiring together to ban Christmas.

Here is a seasonal line up of some of the Nanny nonsense that threatens to spoil Christmas:

• My own borough of Croydon have managed to snuff out any vestige of Christmas cheer in the borough this year, as they have banned Christmas decorations in the main shopping centre (see this site’s post "Croydon’s Crappy Christmas”). Those of you who wish to see how bad Croydon really is to live in, are cordially invited to visit www.croydoniscrap.com



• The Red Cross have banned Advent calendars, and Christmas decorations in their shops, as they deem that they may offend non Christians



• Luton Council have given their Christmas lights the sinister sounding “Orwellian” name of Luminos. In their sick and perverted view of the world, the word Christmas is offensive to minorities



• Nanny’s friends in Camden Council followed suit by renaming their lights, Festive Lights



• Bury St Edmunds banned lights this year in case one fell on someone’s head.
  Jobsworth bosses at Jobcentres have banned Christmas decorations, they are a safety hazard!



• Tower Hamlets Council have banned their staff using the word “Christmas”, when they attend their “Ch***tmas” lunch



• Nanny’s Fourth Reich Council of Birmingham have banned Santa, as Santa is very offensive to non Christians

Now here’s a few radical thoughts, Ladies and Gentlemen:

• We do, do we not, live in a Christian country



• Our Prime Minister claims to be a practising Christian



• Christmas is a Christian festival



• We do not force non Christians to participate in Christian festivals



• We do not suppress other religions, unlike some countries

Therefore we, as the residents of a Christian country, are perfectly entitled to observe a Christian festival; without Nanny’s Gestapo, and Council scumbags, trying to ban it.

There will come a time, and seemingly that time is close at hand, when we the citizens of Britain will come to regard Britain as a foreign land; ie we will feel that we are strangers, and outsiders, in our own country!

Bah Humbug

As expected, whenever people try to enjoy themselves, Nanny cannot resist sticking her unwelcome nose into other peoples’ business.

Christmas, needless to say, offers her ample opportunities for lecturing her “charges” about their behaviour and lifestyle.

Seemingly this year Nanny has been sucking on an exceptionally large humbug; as she and her friends in the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents (RoSPA) and the TUC have issued a particularly long list of prohibited behaviour, aimed at those attending office parties.

On Nanny’s list are the following activities:

-No candles, flaming puddings or cigarettes

-Avoid excess contact with Christmas trees

-No mistletoe, kissing is sexual harassment

-Don’t drink to excess

-No dancing on the desks

-Use paper cups, not glasses

-No indoor fireworks

-Don’t photocopy your butt

-Keep food in the fridge

Roger Bibbings, Nanny’s friend in RoSPA said somewhat half-heartedly:

“We are not being party poopers….”

Oh Yes You Are!

In the spirit of Christmas, and in order to ensure that we stick two festive fingers up at Nanny, this site recommends that you eat and drink yourselves to death this Christmas.

Visit The Gourmet’s Pantry for a stonking selection of food and booze, from around the world; which will help you to achieve Christmas Nirvana.

Nanny's Pirelli Calendar

Nanny has decided that the traditional Pirelli calendar needed to be updated, to suit her vision of a "brave new world".

Therefore Nanny has got together with her chums in the media, and come up with a new version of the famous calendar.

It can be downloaded here Pirelli Calendar 2005.

2004 Weblog Awards

The polls have closed on the 2004 Weblog Awards.

I would like to thank all of you who voted for this blog, in the Best UK Blog category; www.nannyknowsbest.com came in at number 8 in the polls.

The full results can be seen at 2004 Weblog Awards.

Next year we will aim for first place, and world domination!

Skol!

Ken

Spanks a Million

I would just like to welcome the visitors who “come upon” this site by accident.

In particular, I would like to extend a very warm welcome to the handful that pop in each day using search engines to desperately seek out strict nannies and disciplinary services.

I am sorry to disappoint you, but as you can see this site does not offer those services.

However, you are welcome nonetheless.

Please feel free to visit again, when you are feeling less randy.

Binge Exercising

Nanny is beginning to get a little confused in her old age, she has now started to contradict herself.

You are all doubtless aware, and heartily sick, of the fact that Nanny has been haranguing us for some time over our lazy lifestyles and lack of exercise.

Now some people have got so fed up with this, and scared by Nanny’s constant nagging, that they have actually taken up regular exercise.

Is Nanny happy with this?

Is she hell!

Unfortunately, Nanny is now worried that we may be “binge exercising”.

The Institute of Sport and Recreation Management (ISRM) is warning that Nanny has laid a “guilt trip” on us; and that some guilty people may be indulging in "binge-exercise", without realising the potential consequences.

Over-exercising, as well as being de-motivating, has real physical dangers including exhaustion and damaged joints.

There you have it ladies and gentlemen, whatever you do, you will never satisfy Nanny.

My advice is simple, get on with enjoying your life as best you can; don’t bother trying to please her at all!

Nanny's Scumbag Friends

Well, quite a scandal has erupted in the media. It seems that despite all these years that Nanny and her friends have been lecturing us about “family values”, and respect for others, some of her scumbag little friends have not been listening to her message.

No I don’t mean David “trial without jury” Blunkett; this case refers to a mystery man.

The new sex scandal was revealed on Wednesday, by Oona King a Labour MP; she claims to have been offered £10,000 to have sex with a British Labour Euro MP.

Ms King, quite rightly, told the man to "go to hell"; yet, oddly enough, he faced no disciplinary action.

Ms King said the approach by the Labour MEP took place some 13 years ago, when she was a political assistant in Strasbourg.

Needless to say the story is even more sordid than it first appears. Our dear Labour MEP was not, of course, going to use his own money to purchase Ms King’s company; he was going to use his cost allowance.

That means he was going to steal the money that you, the taxpayers, give to Nanny through your taxes.

I remind you again, this scumbag did not receive any disciplinary action.

Nanny, if you are reading this please could you tell us why no action was taken against him?

Nanny is always lecturing her “charges” about respect for others, tolerance and the evils of theft; yet her own friends in the Houses of Parliament are noted for their boorish behaviour and sexism. Furthermore, this scumbag presumably happily continues to draw a more than generous salary and allowance; which he doubtless embezzles to satisfy his own desires, at the expense of the taxpayer.

Unfortunately with Nanny; it is a case of do as I say, not do as I do.

I have some simple advice for this scumbag, and others of his ilk:

• If you are going to pay for sex; then for heavens sake conduct your business with professional prostitutes, not your co-workers.



• Make sure that the money that you intend to use, to obtain your sexual gratification, is yours; ie don't steal it!

Now the hunt is on for the mystery man.

Please drop me a line if you know of the man’s identity. Any information leading to his identification, will of course not be treated in the strictest confidence; and will be liberally splashed across this website.

Nanny Bans Boris

Nanny finds certain individuals very irritating, and sometimes she gets so cross with them that she enacts special laws banning them.

One such hapless individual, who has really got under Nanny’s skin of late, is Conservative MP Boris Johnson.

Now Boris Johnson is exactly the sort of person that really “pisses off” Nanny (can I say “piss off” on a public blog?).

Boris, you see, is a free spirit; who says what he thinks, without worrying about Nanny’s strictures on whether the comment is possibly going to annoy someone or some vested interest.

Boris not only speaks his mind, but dresses and styles himself in a somewhat “free spirited” manner. Of particular concern to Nanny is Boris’s hairstyle. This is something that Nanny really disapproves of, as she believes that people should have only “sensible hair”.

Boris is also responsible for the Spectator magazine; which, as we all know, has really upset one of Nanny’s close chums in the last week or so. Nanny, hold grudges and would dearly love to shut that magazine down; not to mention punish those responsible for hurting her friend.

Finally, Boris, owing the limited office space at the House of Commons and the offices of the Spectator; has had to resort to conducting most of his business dealings and constituency work on a bicycle, with a mobile phone.

Nanny hates these “free spirits”.

Boris’s cycling was the final straw for Nanny. Now the time had come to nail Boris once and for all. She therefore had a word with some of her “sensible haircut” friends in the Conservative party; and has persuaded them to table an amendment to Nanny’s Road Safety Bill. This will make cyclists liable to the same £60 mobile-phone fine as motorists.

Boris is rumoured not to be happy at this bit of Nanny nonsense.

Two years ago he wrote:

“Just as I will never vote to ban hunting, so I will never vote to abolish the free-born Englishman’s time-hallowed and immemorial custom, dating back as far as 1990 or so, of cycling while talking on a mobile…Among the many political tasks I have set myself is to prevent the practice from ever being outlawed by Parliament.”

He has pledged to:

“Defend the right to cycle and phone while there is breath in my body”.

When asked in an interview with the London Cyclist magazine this month whether he still used his mobile while cycling, Mr Johnson said:

“I do. And to hell with it! It’s not against the law..If I was a one-armed cyclist you wouldn’t kick me off my bicycle, and I’m just doing something with my free arm, aren’t I?”

Unfortunately for Boris, and other free spirits, Nanny has taken her revenge; it, like many other things that we take for granted, is going to be against the law.

The Soup Nazi

Be warned, unless we make a stand against Nanny’s constant intrusion into our eating habits we will end up like the USA; with food fascists dictating what we may, and may not, eat.

Don’t believe me?

Take a look at this, the soup nazi is coming!

Soup Nazi

Nanny Resorts to Theft

Nanny is in a really bad mood, she is very very displeased with her “charges”; our eating, drinking and smoking habits have irked her for some considerable time.

However, she has now broadened her scope of attack on the lifestyles of her “charges”; and started to look at our spending habits.

She is most displeased, we are not spending enough money!

Nanny’s “economic miracle” only works if people spend an ever increasing amount of money, thereby further inflating the consumer bubble. Simply put, the consumer bubble may run out of steam; and the "economic miracle" will be exposed as the sham that it is.

Well Nanny is not going to tolerate that; therefore if her “charges” won’t spend their money, she will do it on their behalf.

Nanny will be stealing (let us be frank, that is what she is proposing) the alleged £15BN lying 'dormant' in Britain's bank accounts. She claims that she will spend this “nicked” money on raising enterprise and skills in some of Britain's hardest-pressed areas.

That of course is bullshit, revenues drawn into the Treasury pot are never “ring fenced”; they are treated as one lump sum, which Nanny and her chums dip into as they please.

Seemingly, Nanny’s definition of “dormant” means assets that have not been used for 1 year. In my humble view, that is not very long at all.

Nanny’s chum, Gordon “Smiler” Brown, has threatened to legislate to force banks to hand over cash.

Is this the Third Reich or what?

Nanny's Bad Language

Nanny has many friends around the country, people and organisations only too happy and willing to "do her bidding"; and impose yet another layer of suffocating rules on the citizens of Britain.

Today we travel to Merthyr Tydfil, in Wales, where Nanny's lackeys in the council have decided that the use of the word "brainstorming" is offensive to people with head injuries.

This word has now been placed on the Orwellian banned list.

The council proscribes the following alternative phrases to be used instead:

1 "Blue sky thinking"

2 "Ideas cascade"

How very elegant!

Remember children, by controlling the language Nanny effectively controls what you can and cannot think.

Counter revolutionary ideas cannot be constructed, if you do not have the vocabulary to construct them.

Nannying Nanny

Nanny, as we all know, loves to tell people how to live their lives.

She never tires of haranguing us about our eating habits, our drinking habits, our smoking and our sex lives.

However, it has come to this site’s attention that Nanny has taken her eyes off the ball recently.

Maybe the burdens of Nannying an entire country are becoming too much for her?

You see ladies and gentlemen, one of Nanny’s special friends has been ignoring Nanny’s advice about sex (can I use the word sex in public?).

I won’t embarrass the poor chap by naming him here; that would smack of trial without jury, which is something that we don’t do in Britain.

However, Nanny’s chum has been having a bit of “rumpy pumpy” with a married lady. Something that Nanny doesn’t really approve of, as it goes against her strict religious beliefs.

Anyhoo, Nanny’s chum clean forgot to use a contraceptive; and inevitably there was a baby. No, my mistake, there were in fact two pregnancies during the relationship.

Remarkably careless of this person!

Now this may strike you as a little odd, given the fact that Nanny and her chums are always lecturing teenagers about having sex “responsibly”. Teenage pregnancies, and sexually transmitted diseases, are an anathema to Nanny; her shrill voice repeatedly reminds hormone fuelled adolescents to use a condom.

Unfortunately Nanny’s middle aged friend ignored her advice, and look where it got him.

Not a very good example to set the kids, is it Nanny?

Therefore this site, in the interests of setting a good example to the children, would like to offer Nanny and her friends a small piece of advice.

If you are going to shag someone else’s wife, for heavens sake use a condom!

To The Polls Ye Sons of Freedom

I am pleased, and flattered, to see that www.nannyknowsbest.com has made it to the top 15 Best UK Blogs in the Weblog 2004 Awards.

It is time to show what you think of the nanny state and tweak Nanny's intrusive nose, by voting for this site; putting it in number one position in the Weblog 2004 Awards.

They are still taking votes; so if you like this site, please vote for it.

Remember you can vote on a daily basis.

Please encourage others to vote as well.

Many thanks.

Ken

Nanny's Monster Database

Those of you who may be thinking that Nanny’s ID card scheme is “no big deal”, may have a change of heart when reading this.

As noted in an earlier article on this site, Nanny’s Loyalty Programme, Nanny is very impressed with the loyalty card schemes used by the private sector. So much so, in fact, that she is working with the private sector to determine how to use ID cards to monitor her “charges” commercial transactions.

Her masterplan is to create a central database, which would store citizens’ major transactions with both government and business.

Her plan is outlined in the Regulatory Impact Assessment (RIA), which was quietly released with David “trial without jury” Blunkett’s ID cards Bill published this week. The RIA says that the ID card Bill allows the National Identity Register (NIR) to record when, and from whom, any checks on the database take place.

The RIA then goes on to give examples of database access, including:

• Banks and other finance firms combating money laundering and identity fraud



• Employers checking a job applicant's immigration status



• Retailers protecting against credit card fraud

So much for the idea that the data stored would be used only for state security measures (a sinister enough purpose).

In addition to granting seemingly unlimited access rights to the database, Nanny is working on using chip-and-PIN technology for checking ID cards at point of sale.

Nanny will make on line checks whenever anyone makes a “larger than normal transaction”. Precisely how will she know if the transaction is larger than normal?

Mike Rodd, external relations director at the British Computer Society, noted:

“The potential to connect and collate information about people that may be commercially sensitive will make the population at large very unhappy…

To create this huge database of information starts smacking of some sort of authoritarian state. This could really cause an outrage…”

Nanny may in fact be creating a monster, which would be beyond even her power to control. Professor Jim Norton, a senior policy advisor at the Institute of Directors, says the government would be inundated with data.

“Recording every high value transaction doesn't sound like a great idea to me…

..The idea of having a huge database and sucking vast amounts of information into it seems to me to be remarkably naive on one hand, and a potential major burden on business on the other..”

As usual with Nanny, she seeks to involve herself with the minutiae of peoples’ lives.

Whatever your views on an ID card scheme per se, it is very clear that Nanny cannot be trusted to run it.

Nanny's New Health Warning

Nanny loves to issue health warnings, it seems nothing is safe from her warning messages these days; food, fags and booze have all been stamped with her warning signs.

Now, in a sign that all is not well in the nursery, Nanny has even placed a health warning on one of her own creations.

Nanny’s Department for Transport is warning travellers not to place too much faith in its £50M internet journey-planner project, Transport Direct, because it may be unreliable.

The Transport Direct scheme, which should have been launched two years ago, is undergoing a second phase of trials. It seems that the information it provides is either inaccurate, or simply a duplication of online material available elsewhere. It also has a tendency to crash on a daily basis.

Guess which hapless individual Nanny put in charge of this little “cock up”? Why our old friend, the smooth talking bar steward himself, Mr John Despot.

When Mr Despot was first given the project by Nanny, back in 2000, he was delighted; being put in charge of “an integrated transport policy” was an incredible opportunity.

It did sound a very important task to our Mr Despot. Unfortunately his brain was not firing on all cylinders, the day that he accepted this poison chalice.

Those of you with long memories may recall that most excellent TV series, “Yes Minister”. In one episode, Jim Hacker was given the task of creating “an integrated transport policy”; he was delighted. Until that is Sir Humphrey reminded him that the task was impossible, and that he had in fact been handed the “shitty” end of a particularly smelly political stick; that seasoned politicians knew well to avoid.

Poor old Mr Despot, if only he had watched that episode of “Yes Minister”, clearly Nanny had seen it!

Anyhoo, it did not take Mr D long to realise that the task was impossible. He then came up with a brainwave, why not create a virtual integrated transport policy; in other words let the internet do the work.

Brilliant!

People could access the system, via the net, and tell it the details of their journey. The system would then provide them with the optimal journey logistics car, train, plane etc; all of which would ensure that the traveller would reach their destination as easily, and speedily, as possible. He would call this system “Transport Direct”.

That is an integrated transport system of sorts, isn’t it?

There was only one small problem with this master plan, it was bollocks!

You see, and maybe not everyone has appreciated this point yet; politicians are useless, absolutely useless, at projects and system implementations:

• The costs go over budget



• The designs don’t work



• The politicians “running” the project change jobs



• Politicians are unskilled, unqualified and stupid

All of the above are guaranteed to totally screw up any project that they are involved with.

The same happened here, Transport Direct does not work.

Therefore Nanny has had to issue a health warning about her precious system; users are told that Transport Direct does not guarantee the:

"accuracy, timeliness, completeness, performance or fitness for a particular purpose of the site or its content.The content is provided on an information basis only and should not be relied upon. Where the timing of a journey is of particular importance to you, we advise you to check the information before you travel with the transport operator directly..”

It seems that one test, carried out, showed that Transport Direct was recommending that a trip from the Derbyshire town of Matlock to Perth in Scotland would take more than 16 hours. This included a three-hour, late-night wait at Manchester coach station.

Spiffing!

Nanny had planned an official launch, and advertising campaign early in the New Year. However, ministers are nervous about risking a high-profile public flop so close to the expected spring election campaign.

Nanny believes that Transport Direct will:

"enable the traveller to make an intelligent choice”.

Quite so Nanny, the intelligent choice is to not use Transport Direct; and to vote you, and your idiotic friends, out of office!

Trust

"I have spent 34 years building peoples’ trust. I do not intend to throw it away."

Far be it from me to doubt the judgement of one of Nanny's chums, but I think you have thrown it away David.

Nanny's Bright Spark

Nanny, as we all know, loves to put her nose into every aspect of her “charges’” lives. She has been busy recently, creating a whole host of special regulations which will further intrude into the daily lives of her “charges”.

In the New Year one of Nanny’s new regulations, covering electrical work in the home, will come into force. The good news is that these rules come under the remit of her “trusted” and “respected” smooth talking bar steward, John Despot.

Mr Despot is concerned about the literally thousands, well ten actually, of people a year who die because of botched domestic electrical work.

Therefore in order to rectify the situation and to “zeroise” the risk, Nanny so hates risk, Nanny has forbidden DIY electrical work. The new rules will ensure that most electrical work, carried out in the home, can only be performed by qualified and registered electricians.

It seems that the days of the DIY electrician are numbered.

As from January, if a householder decides to do the work himself, it will have to be checked by local authority building inspectors.

Oh good, yet another body of much needed inspectors!

Needless to say this new level of bureaucracy does not come for free, the inspectors will charge for their work.

The rules are far reaching, and will cover ALL work carried out in the bathroom and kitchen (this means that, in theory, you can’t change a light bulb in the kitchen!); plus most electrical work elsewhere in the house.

The good news is that Mr Despot will allow the DIY enthusiast to do the work; however, the work will then have to be reported to the local authority which will send a team of inspectors around to certify the work (for a small fee of course!).

Mr Despot realises that some people may have a little trouble understanding these regulations, especially since they emanate from his department; don’t despair, a website will be launched on January 1.

This will provide details of the new rules, and put householders in touch with approved electricians. Mr Despot will even be mounting a publicity campaign.

So that’s clear everyone is it? You will still be able to do the work yourself, so long as you report it.

You will all be reporting it won’t you? Otherwise that would make a total mockery of Nanny’s plans.

Nanny's Titanic

Nanny, as we all know, believes in an open society; she believes that ordinary people should open up their private lives, and that their activities should be scrutinised by the state.

Now some of you may feel that this is a little one sided, and unfair; do not despair, Nanny has thought of that.

In January 2005 her new freedom of information laws will come into force. These laws will allow the ordinary citizen to inspect Nanny’s activities both past and present.

Now these new laws are very important, Nanny does not want their introduction and operation to be “messed up”. She therefore needed someone with impeccable credentials, someone who has the respect of his colleagues, the media and the public to handle their introduction and operation.

Nanny immediately thought of Lord Falconer, her own dearly “respected” Lord Chancellor, as a very safe pair of hands to guide this tricky piece of legislation through the system.

You will of course recall that Lord Falconer has had many “successes” in “managing” contentious political issues:

• He had to apologise to peers for misleading them about the financial state of the Dome, his pet project. It seems that he was mistaken in denying that it was insolvent



• He tried to abolish his own post of Lord Chancellor, then found he couldn’t



• He is involved in Nanny’s pet project for introducing a Supreme Court in Britain, some people have unkindly suggested that this plan is being worked out on the back of an envelope



• He managed to persuade Nanny to exempt members of the judiciary from the £1.5M tax threshold on pension funds, that everyone else is subject to. It was not too difficult to persuade Nanny; she is, as we all know, quite friendly with lawyers and the judiciary

Given these previous successes, Nanny gave Falconer the Freedom of Information Act.

Now, as I mentioned, in theory this will allow ordinary people to ask Nanny and her chums what they have been up to; over 100000 public bodies will be covered by this act. However, it seems that Lord Falconer has other ideas.

He says that the freedom of information laws will not signal a "free for all", because some Government deliberations must remain secret.

He then compared it to an ocean liner, the Titanic in fact; rather an unfortunate comparison don’t you think Lord F?

Lord F went on to say that some aspects of ministers' decisions were “rightfully” exempt from the Act. It seems that to expose some information would “hinder” good government; now you know why Nanny chose him!

"Cultural change in Whitehall is exactly like turning round the classic ocean liner...Opening up Whitehall and introducing freedom of information is a titanic task..”

"The Act does not signify a `free for all'."

It seems that the new measures will not cover the security and intelligence services, the Special Forces, courts and tribunals.

Additionally, other areas such as; defence, international relations, the economy, law enforcement, health and safety and the Cabinet's collective responsibility for Government decisions are subject to a public interest test.

In other words Nanny will still have the final say as to whether you are entitled to ask a question, and receive an answer.

Nanny's Child Catcher

Nanny’s Children’s Minister, Enver Hodge, is currently recruiting for her much heralded position Children’s Commissioner. The function of this role is apparently to enable children to get their views across to government.

This role will bring in a stonking £100K a year to the post holder, doubtless worth every penny!

It seems that, despite the fact that children neither vote nor pay tax, Nanny feels they have a right to say how the country should be run. Needless to say that by flattering them that their opinion actually matters, which of course it doesn’t, Nanny turns them into loyal future supporters.

Nanny’s friend Enver will be overseeing the recruitment of this new position, and has stamped her own “charming” personality on the recruitment process; by making the prospective candidates face an interview panel of children.

Key personality traits for this “vital” role are that the post holder must not “get stressed out or yell”, nor must he/she “make promises which are then broken”.

Well that rules out all our elected members for sure!

This love and concern for children, being displayed by Enver, should come as no surprise. Less than 20 years ago, Enver was in charge of Islington Council during the period that some 32 council staff were found to be systematically abusing children; some were even running brothels for paedophiles, being “staffed” by children from the council’s children homes.

It has taken a while for Enver to really face up to this problem, even as recently as last year she had to be reminded by one of her victims of the true horror of the situation.

In 2003 she wrote to the BBC; claiming that one of the victims, Demetrious Panton, was “extremely disturbed”. Needless to say this dim-witted outburst backfired, and Enver had to apologise and pay £10K to a charity.

Now that this sorry episode is behind her, who better should be in charge of children’s welfare and selecting the candidate for the new role of Children’s Commissioner?

Blunkett's Bonkers

Oh dear, it seems that the pressure of living up to Nanny’s expectations is beginning to get to one of her lackey’s.

Her dear friend, David “trial without jury” Blunkett seems to be on the verge of a political nervous breakdown and a career implosion.

Need I remind you, that this is the man who claims to value the probity of the law above all else; yet, if the accusations in the press are to be believed, he seems to have taken leave of his senses and has used his office for the benefit of his mistress (Mrs Quinn, not Nanny) rather than for the benefit of the public.

Among the accusations, flying around this weekend, are reports that during his affair with Spectator publisher Kimberly Quinn he:

• Used his position to help Mrs Quinn's former nanny (another Nanny, good grief they are everywhere!) to obtain permission to live in Britain.



• Shared confidential information with her, advising her to tell her parents to avoid a US airport hours before a security scare and telling her in advance about a police raid in Manchester



• Ordered a policeman to stand guard outside her Mayfair home during a May Day anti-capitalist demonstration



• Gave her a first-class rail ticket assigned to him for his work as an MP, and used his government chauffeur to drive her to meet him at his Derbyshire home



• Put pressure on the US Embassy to issue a temporary passport for her son in 2003
  Took her to Spain for a wedding accompanied by four bodyguards and a driver paid for by the taxpayer

As if to pour salt into his own wounds, clearly a man of great moral backbone, he is also seeking to use his own laws to prove the paternity of Mrs Quinn’s two children (a toddler, and her yet to be born child). Mrs Quinn insists that they are her husband’s; however, Blunkett knows best and believes that they are in fact his.

This will get very ugly, and Nanny is going to be highly embarrased.

The question is, do you believe that a man who has clearly taken leave of his senses should be making the law up as he goes along?

As ever with Nanny, it is a case of do as I say not do as I do!

Never mind David, Nanny will kiss it better!

PEOPLE OF BRITAIN WAKE UP!

Those of you who doubt that Britain is becoming a police state, should read the article in this week's Spectator entitled New Labour's Police State.

It scared the hell out of me.

Unless the British people wake up, and throw Nanny and her apparatchiks out, the forthcoming general election in 2005 will probably be the last free elections in this country.