Nanny Knows Best

Nanny Knows Best
Dedicated to exposing, and resisting, the all pervasive nanny state that is corroding the way of life and the freedom of the people of Britain.

Saturday, October 28, 2006

Tuck Off!

Tuck OffNanny's hatred of individual liberty and freedom knows no bounds, as Ryan Staples found to his cost the other week.

Ryan, who is only 10 years old, was in the habit of taking a packed lunch to his school (Lunsford primary in Larkfield). At least he was, until the school's Gestapo intercepted his lunch box.

Ryan's crime?

The lunch box broke Nanny's rules on what we are allowed to eat.

The result?

Ryan has been banned from eating with the rest of his mates in the school dining room, until he learns to bow his head to Nanny's superior wisdom, and until he brings only "allowed" food in his lunch box.

Whilst he weighs up the pros and cons of bending to Nanny's authoritarian rules, he has to eat alone in the headmaster's office. That really is cruel and nasty.

How pathetic is this?

Child abuse wouldn't you say?

By the way, in case you are wondering what was so evil about the food within his lunchbox (drugs maybe?), it contained two snacks, instead of one.

Specifically Ryan's lunch consisted of a sandwich, fruit, fromage frais, cake, mini cheese biscuits and a bottle of water. The cake and the biscuits broke the snack limit.

They were "discovered" when a teacher checked his lunch box.

Why the hell are teachers inspecting lunch boxes?

That is an invasion of privacy, all the more so because Ryan is not old enough to fight back.

Malcolm Goddard, the headmaster, said:

"We take healthy eating very seriously and everyone is aware of our new policies."

Breathtaking arrogance!

As a child I took a lunchbox to school, it contained all manner of weird and wonderful oddities; banana sandwiches, chocolate cup cakes, hot soup, home made crisps etc.

The teachers never ever tried to inspect the food, or interfere with what we ate (they were down the pub). I am now 44, and in good shape (oh yes:)).

Nanny quite clearly intends to break the will and spirit of every citizen in Britain, she starts with the children so as to make her task easier.


  1. I would have though there would be more concern about those with NO food?

    Perhaps as us parents cant be trusted to feed OUR kids, The State would provide school lunches- oh- wait...

  2. Anonymous4:24 PM

    Had Ryan's parents revealed that they were Muslim, or Sikh, or Wicca, or something, and insisted that the eating of both cake and biscuit at lunch was an explicit dietary requirement of their faith community, not only could little Ryan have carried on rotting his teeth or bloating his belly or whatever it is that Nanny is hellbent on stopping him from doing, his parents could have sued the school for insult to his religious identity, and they probably would then have been awarded enough money to secure young Ryan a university degree in media studies, and thus, of course, safe passage into to a rewarding and lucrative career. Another opportunity to screw Nanny lost due to the failure to think as Nanny does.

  3. Anonymous8:07 PM

    I don't recall what I did for school lunches at that age - I think I went home for lunch.

    I do recall that when I was a coupld of years younger and living in South London I usually went home for lunch - on the bus for 2d as there was a steep hill to get home and time was tight. Walked back down the hill though usually.

    Sometimes I attended the school lunch. I distinctly remember some utterly inedible green liver one day and other stuff on the plate that I think was reported as mashed potato but could have been anything. Utterly, utterly disgusting.

    The school system in the mode4rn age, if it sets itself up to be the arbiter of what is or is not a suitable lunch, should offer such good fare at such a reasonable price that nobody wants to take their own lunch. If they can't do that they should butt out. If they can't butt out they should be sued and the parents should be offered full legal aid irrespective of income. The cost of this should be additionally dedicted from the eductaion department's budge for the following year. That should make them stop and think and is unlikely to make any difference to the mediocre teaching standards generally offered.

  4. Anonymous9:37 AM

    Any chance of an email address for Lunsford Primary school? Or the LEA in charge of it?

    An irate email is brewing....

  5. Here are the snail mail details:

    LEA: Kent
    Telephone Number: 01732 843352
    Fax Number: 01732 871402
    Address: Swallow Road
    Post Code: ME20 6PY

  6. Anonymous3:20 PM

    Most bullies only pick on those smaller than themselves and, as Nanny is the worst type of bully, this explains why she picked on a ten year old child and treated him in such a disgusting manner. Now, I do not condone violence, except when necessary for self-defence, but I would not have blamed Ryan's parents if they had gone around and given the person responsible for their son's disgraceful treatment a knuckle sandwich! I hope they remove Ryan from that school and send him to one not ruled by Nanny's gestapo without delay and, moreover, the other parents should do likewise.

  7. Anonymous8:02 PM

    Lord of Atlantis said...
    " I hope they remove Ryan from that school and send him to one not ruled by Nanny's gestapo without delay and, moreover, the other parents should do likewise. "

    Ah yes, but is there a school which is not ruled by Nanny's Gestapo?

    Nanny controls the media - even to the level of Jamie Oliver.

    Things are serious.

  8. Anonymous10:09 PM

    Can I get an web link to a news story of this?