Prats of The Week

Oops, it has been a wee while since I have presented my prestigious "Prats of The Week" Award.

This week it goes to the staff of Mr Cheap, in Havant, who have clearly been living in a Nanny state far too long; and displayed all the petty minded jobsworth attention to "rules" that one has come to expect from Nanny's minions.

Frank Dineen, 75 years old, innocently went to Mr Cheap to buy some Christmas cards. Unfortunately, he was reckoning without the jobsworths working in the store. Mr Dineen was wearing a trilby, and as we all know Nanny (who loves CCTV) hates hats.

Therefore Mr Dineen was told to remove his trilby by staff, as their CCTV system would not be able to id him.

The fact that he was 75 and no doubt could be recognised by staff, in the unlikely event he created some form of loutish behaviour, was of course ignored by the staff. This being Nanny Britain, common sense has long since being consigned to the dustbin of history.

Mr Dineen refused, and of course has now been banned from the shop.

He is quoted as saying:

"I will take my hat off in the presence of royalty,

but never in a shop."

Quite right!

The jobsworth numpties at Mr Cheap, well deserving Prats of The Week.

Prats of The Week

It has been a while since I have awarded my prestigious, and much sought after, "Prats of The Week" Award. The time is now right to make another award.

This week it goes to my old friends at Croydon Council (I seem to recall awarding them this a while ago, once in August and once in June, something of a hat trick now).

Anyhoo, what have they been up to this time I hear you ask.

Well they have created an online site that is truly barking mad, and a complete waste of money.

The venerable citizens of my fine borough can now report a barking dog to the council online, yes that's right, online!

Just pop along to the special website (Report a Barking Dog), click on the location of the dog by entering co-ordinates or using the map, and Bob's your uncle!

You then have a number of pages to fill in; where you can attach pictures, log barking times etc etc.

A snoop's paradise!

Needless to say, I can guarantee that nothing of any consequence will happen. After all, will not the annoying mutt simply have moved on by the time the dog barking patrol arrives?

I would also venture to suggest that this is a very nice entree for the council to start other online "report your neighbour" sites eg; noisy neighbours, arguing neighbours, smelly neighbours the list is endless.

Nanny wants to encourage us all to start reporting on each other, a very dangerous road to travel.

Croydon Council, well deserving Prats of The Week

Those of you who would like to learn more about my borough, should visit:

-www.croydoniscrap.com

-www.catarena.org

Nanny Bans Donkey Derby

Oh dear, another summer treat for the kids has been kybosched (spelling???) by Nanny.

That ancient seaside/rural summer ritual of the donkey derby has been banned by Nanny's minions in Llandudno.

The donkeys were due to be ridden by around 40 children the other week at a series of races organised by Llandudno Rugby Club, a regular event in Llandudno.

Well, it was regular until Nanny stuck her size tens into the matter. The donkeys were replaced by blow-up sheep and a toy monkey...yes, you did read that correctly!

For why?

Our good old chums related to the health and safety Gestapo felt that the event was just too dangerous.

I would observe that it is the same type of people from the health and safety Gestapo that accredited a certain animal vaccine lab in the South of England with a safety certificate...this would be the same lab that is now suspected of leaking the foot and mouth disease...oh, and it is the same lab that is now being paid by Nanny to produce the vaccine to cure the disease...lucky it has a certificate then, otherwise we would all be in a right old pickle!

Anyhoo, I digress.

The harmless 30 second races, organised by Llandudno Rugby Club, have taken place in North Wales for the last 39 years without nay serious incident. Unfortunately, Nanny's ultra caution now means that the event has to be covered by public liability insurance.

Have you noticed how, when a local authority wants to ban something, it simply trots out the tired old mantra of "public liability insurance"?

This has become the catch all excuse for banning all manner of events and activities.

Funny that isn't it?

Anyone suspect that this excuse is in fact a load of old bollocks, dreamt up by our useless and interfering local councils to stop us living our lives in the way that we want to?

Has anyone actually bothered to take the insurance companies to task, and get them to explain clearly how they come up with their often ludicrous quotes for insurance relating to public events...it usually revolves around the sum of £5M.

The councils, had they a mind too, have the time and the "skills" (I never thought that I would use that word in relation to a council) to do just that. Yet they don't...why is that then?

Robin Holden, the rugby club chairman, said:

"We asked insurers if they could give us cover

for kids racing on donkeys – but they wouldn't touch it."

Tossers!

Seemingly the insurance company excuse is that if a kid falls off the donkey, his/her parents would sue.

Brian Bertola, who helps organise the donkey derby, said:

"The donkeys are used to having children on them,

the speed is negligible,

the kids wear helmets and it's over a short distance.

It's crazy."

We as a society do have ourselves to blame here:

1 We allow insurance companies to screw us royally

2 We sue for the slightest little thing at the drop of a hat

3 We allow local councils to lord it over us.

Although it seems, on the face of it, the local council were not directly involved with this; I can't but help feel had they been a bit more "helpful" (eg ask the insurance companies some pointed questions) a solution could have been found.

Mea Culpa

Ladies and Gentlemen,

I have a confession to make...

Whilst trying to safeguard the rest of the UK from the encroachment of Nanny, I have neglected my own doorstep so to speak.

I wear many hats in life, one of them is director of our apartment block management company.

Imagine my surprise yesterday when on entering our lift, I allowed my eyes to wander around the walls; and realised that, over the past month, the number of notices in the lift telling you not to smoke had increased from one to four!

For farks sake!

How absurd is that?

How the hell did that happen on my watch?

Needless to say, I will be rectifying this ASAP.

Sorry about that lamentable lack of attention, it won't happen again.

Ken

The Dangers of Mince Pies

It seems that in some parts of the country people celebrate Christmas in rather unusual ways.

In the Paisley Centre shopping mall, Scotland, the resident Santa Claus has been forced by his employers to wear a hard hat for health and safety reasons.

Why?

Youths pelted him with mince pies from the upper level of the shopping centre, as he was handing out treats to customers.

Santa now has to wear a hard hat, decorated with antlers, to protect him.

Santa was not injured by the flying pies.

It's a funny old world!

Merry Christmas everyone!

The Password Is "Bollocks!"

Nanny's paranoia and hysteria over paedophiles knows no bounds. I am more than sure something unpleasant must have happened to Nanny when she was young, the trouble is she is now making everyone else pay for that trauma.

Anyhoo, a grandmother encountered Nanny's paranoia last month when she went to pick up her granddaughter from Boredom Busters play scheme in Bournemouth.

Unfortunately, she inadvertently took hold of the wrong child's hand because the girl was wearing the same yellow and pink hat as her own grandchild.

The grandmother quickly realised her mistake, only walking 10 yards with the girl not leaving the building, and apologised to the child and to the supervisors.

Needless to say, Nanny went into a fit of hysteria over this mistake. The local council received a complaint from another parent, and called in Ofsted. As a further precaution the council asked every parent in the scheme give a password before collecting their children.

The boundary of the scheme had now been roped off, and families now have to give a password and sign in and out.

Crazy, paranoia at its worst!

What kind of an impression does that give children about adults?

A Maritime Nation

Around 1906 or so, my grandfather ran away to sea and joined the Royal Navy at the grand old age of 8.

In 1914 he was serving onboard HMS Pegasus off Zanzibar, in the early months of the war, and found himself on the wrong side of some shrapnel from the Koenisberg; which wounded him, and eventually sank the Pegasus. Note, he still had the shrapnel in him when he died in 1972.

Honourably discharged he joined the Merchant Navy, and spent the rest of that war in the convoys. He was once spotted in civvies one day by a particularly daft female, who gave him a white feather (the symbol of cowardice); he wore it in his hat for the rest of the war.

You can imagine how "pleased" he was to find, in 1939, that he would have to go through the whole nonsense again. He was still in the Merchant Navy and ended up in the convoys again, this time my father was also drafted into the convoys (he had just turned 16 when the war broke out).

You see folks Britain, being an island nation, has strong connections with the sea.

Now why am I boring you with this mini potted history of my family?

Let me see, oh yes I remember.

Earlier this week it was reported that the crew of the Golden Vanity, a restored Brixham trawler, had to quit the Tall Ships Race.

For why?

Sailing north through the Bay of Biscay from La Coruna to Antwerp, the crew of 16 to 25 year old volunteers became seasick and gave up!

Pathetic!

My grandfather would be turning in his grave, and my father (who is still alive) will regale me with his views on the matter tomorrow when we go out for my mum's birthday.

Nanny has turned our young men and women into spineless selfcentered wimps.

On The Buses

Sometimes even I am surprised, and stunned, by how daft Nanny is becoming in her senile old age.

We have seen her ban; Hot Cross buns, fags, fat, religion, hoodies, hats, conkers, hot water you name it...now it seems that paint is on her list of banned products.

Nanny's trolls who run the bus service in Cardiff have taken it upon themselves to designate paint as a dangerous substance, which should not be carried on the buses.

Brian Heale, who is 73, got on a number 9 bus the other day and wanted to be taken from Heath Hospital to Prospect Place in Cardiff. Unfortunately for Mr Heale he was carrying a tin of paint, antique emulsion to be precise; he was taking it home to do a spot of painting.

The jobsworth bus driver, who clearly has been trained at Nanny's special school for jobsworth cretins, decided to strictly adhere to the rules issued by the bus company; these rules have placed paint in the same category as swords, guns and cans of petrol.

The driver caught Mr Heale in the act of carrying a can of emulsion, and ordered him off the bus.

Mr Heale is quoted as saying:

"When he told me I couldn't take the paint on the bus I thought he was joking.

But he parked the bus and called head office.

He told me carrying the paint was against new health and safety regulations and told me to get off.

It's crazy and hysterical.

Next thing, you won't be able to take a wet umbrella on in case it drips water on the floor.

Health and safety rules are one thing but this is just daft;

it was a No 9 bus not a dangerous building site."

Mr Heale was thrown off into the rain, and took shelter in a cafe. There the manager took pity on him, and his paint, and gave him a lift home.

Nanny's new health and safety rules governing public transport list paint as a "hazardous article". It can be taken on the bus only if it is "carried in two containers, ie, a sealed pot and a bag, and is not left unattended on a parcel shelf where it could slide and tip, burst open and spread across the floor".

Cardiff Bus when confronted with their stupidity, admitted that they may have been a little hard on Mr Heale.

A spokesman squirmed:

"We apologise to Mr Heale for the obvious inconvenience caused.

The safety of our passengers is our No 1 priority, which is why the company takes regulations on health and safety very seriously."

The company admitted, however, that there were times when it needed to display a little more flexibility when enforcing the rules. In other words they admitted that they didn't think, and were happy to let Nanny do their thinking for them.

For shame!

Nanny is destroying society, people no longer think about what they are doing and are now happy to mindlessly obey her daft over prescriptive rules.

It is time that we started to think for ourselves again.

Send your thoughts on this matter to Cardiff Bus via this link Knobheads.

Nanny Bans Granny

It seems that not only does Nanny hate teenagers, but she also hates the elderly.

That at least is the experience of Betty Wilbraham, an 82 year old grandmother, who was going for a quiet drink in her local pub - the Hereward in Ely Cambridgeshire.

Betty, as per the custom of a lady brought up in a more genteel age, wears a hat when she goes out. Unfortunately the Hereward has imposed a "No Hats" policy, in order to allow their CCTV system to identify trouble making scumbags.

Now this policy, if applied in a sensible manner, is perfectly reasonable; there are trouble making scumbags who use hoodies and hats to hide from the camera. It is not unreasonable for the pub to ask "likely looking lads" to reveal their acne and pox ridden faces, lest they start to "kick off".

Unfortunately we live in the age of Nanny, where the state has taken responsibility for every aspect of our lives.

The result?

We no longer take responsibility for any aspect of our lives, and we have stopped thinking and using our common sense.

Needless to say Betty's hat caused the jobsworth morons running the pub some form of seizure, they asked her to remove it for security reasons.

The staff were of the opinion that there was a risk she would not be recognised on CCTV cameras if she started any trouble.

I would point out that the hat had maroon ribbons, I am sure that she could have been tracked down by our ever resourceful boys in blue in the event of her "kicking off"; after all if they have the nonce to record the Attorney General on the phone, then they certainly can track down an 82 year old.

Betty, towering above many at just over 5 foot, is none too impressed with the pub and vented her spleen:

"It is ludicrous to think that a little old lady like me could cause trouble in a pub.

I don't consider myself a threatening person.

It just shows the ridiculous nature of some of these rules and regulations.

Everyone is obsessed with security these days.

The girl told me that the pub was a hatless zone.

I did what she said because I did not want to make a fuss and I don't like to disobey orders.

I'm a hat person.

If I am going out to lunch I always wear a hat.

My mother wouldn't have set a foot outside the house for a loaf of bread without her hat.

She would have been horrified if ladies went to lunch without their hats."

Tony Love, the manager and evident lackey of the Nanny state, said:

"We put up the new signs

because we were finding it difficult classing what was a cap.

All customers and staff are treated the same.

In this day and age you don't know who are the troublemakers.

It is pointless having CCTV to protect people if those who cause trouble hide their faces.

I do understand Mrs Wilbraham's point of view but it is for her protection as much as anything else."

Love has clearly fallen under the dubious spell of Nanny, he misses the essential truth that is vital to the harmonious interaction of a mature and vibrant society; namely that people should apply common sense and use their judgement when interacting with people.

Relying on the state to act as arbiter will simply turn us into a nation of mindless automatons, destined to decay and wallow in our own filth as we wait for Nanny to wipe our bottoms.

Nanny Bans Christians

Nanny's nutters in Birmingham never cease to amaze me. Usually it is the council doing something daft, such as calling Christmas "Wintervall"; now Birmingham University Students' Union, keen not to be left out of Nanny's nonsense, has thrown its hat into the ring.

The Students' Union has frozen the assets of the Evangelical Christian Union, and banned the Christian Union from holding meetings at Birmingham University.

Why?

It seems that the Christian Union has refused membership to non Christians.

Seemingly, in the small world that the Students' Union inhabit, this is discrimination.

Wiser souls might point out that this is just common sense, after all why would a non Christian wish to join a Christian society?

What possible added value to either party would there be from such an occurrence?

Anyhoo, common sense never really plays a part in Nanny's thinking nor in the thinking of her trolls and goblins.

Birmingham University's Student Union Guild has demanded that the Evangelical Christian Union (ECU) amend its constitution to allow people of all faiths to become members and, this is the killer point, sit on its leadership body.

Needless to say the Christians think that this idea is bollocks, and have refused, although I am sure that they put it in a far more polite way!

In retaliation the Students' Union have frozen ECU's assets of £5,500, and blocked it from using student union facilities until it complies.

ECU has been around for 76 years, and has no intention of turning the other cheek (I'm on form today folks!), it has threatened legal action to gain access to its funds ahead of a major religious awareness drive.

Andy Weatherley, a staff worker for the ECU, said:

"Christian unions should be permitted to restrict membership to only those people who profess faith in Jesus Christ.

It is a fundamental right of any organisation to be able to include in its membership only those who abide by the ethos and focus of the organisation.

We believe this to be true for all organisations within the student union, not just religious or ethnic ones."

Pod Bhogal, communications director for the Universities and Colleges Christian Fellowship - an affiliation of Christian societies - said:

"In all our years of working with hundreds of higher education establishments, this action by Birmingham's guild is unique.

It is over-the-top and looks like political correctness gone mad.

We would not dream of telling a Muslim group or a political society how to elect their leaders or who could or could not become a member.

That's entirely a matter to them, based on their own faith principles. The same applies to a Christian Union."

The guild believes that ECU must open its executive positions to people of all faiths.

Another weighty problem that the guild is wrestling with, in respect of ECU, are references in the constitution of ECU to "men" and "women".

Seemingly these references discriminate against transsexuals.

Birmingham University's Student Guild claims that it is merely enforcing the 1994 Education Act, which states student societies have to be open to all.

So why has it taken them 12 years to get round to doing this then?

I suspect that there is more to this than meets the eye.

The good news folks is that one day some of these young men and women (sorry, "persons") will be in positions of power and authority in this country, something to look forward to eh?

Nanny Bans Trilbys

It seems that we have all been living in the Nanny state for so long now, that some of us are now even beginning to behave like Nanny.

That certainly would seem to be the case when looking at the behaviour of the staff at the Monument Pub in Hereford, part of the Greene King pub chain.

Colin Osborne, a trilby wearing great-grandfather, was happily going for drink there when he was ordered to remove his hat by Nanny's trolls who are working behind the bar.

His crime?

The hat obscured his face from CCTV cameras.

Pub chain Greene King has introduced the policy for security reasons. It applies to all hats and hooded tops.

Mr Osborne said:

"I was an elderly man having a non-alcoholic drink but I was told there are no exceptions."

He added:

"When I started as a journalist it used to be de-facto to have a belted coat and a trilby and in those days I had both."

"I was annoyed, I was put out and I was surprised. I couldn't understand why my poor old trilby should offend anyone."

Nanny's manager explained to him it was a pub rule, to enable CCTV cameras recording any incident in the pub to see people's faces.

Mr Osborne quite rightly noted that there is a world of difference between an elderly man and a scum bag thug.

Quote:

"But on the other hand I think pubs and breweries should ask themselves who is under the hat

individuality must retain some significance

even in this nanny state in which we live."

Adam Collett, marketing director at Greene King, issued this bland and contradictory statement:

"CCTV is sensible and welcomed by customers, residents and licensing authorities alike.

To make it useful we do have to ask all customers to remove their hats, but of course we have sensitivity to individual needs.

In order to remain consistent and fair

we ask all customers to observe this policy (editor's note: this sentence contradicts the previous one).

Generally this policy has been welcomed at the Monument and our customers have cooperated with us."

In other words, they don't give a fuck!

The trouble with the Nanny state is that it has conditioned us to accept petty rules and regulations without question, and to apply them 100% without using common sense.

Now I own a particularly stylish fedora, I wonder what Nanny would make of that?

Nanny Bans Knitting Needles

When I was a little kid, pre school, I used to be dragged off by mother to the shops from time to time.

One of her regular stops would be a knitting shop, which was bulging to the seams with brightly coloured yarns and a vast array of fearsome knitting needles.

Now at this stage, I guess you think that I am going to engage in some misty eyed self indulgent reminiscences about my childhood and the simple pleasure that I took in looking at the colours of the yarns etc.

Er no!

I found the whole experience totally tedious, and wished only instead to be at home watching Top Cat.

Sorry folks!

Anyhoo, tempus fugit, now the knitting shop is long since closed (although I can still watch Top Cat on Cartoon Network) and my mother can only buy her knitting needles from charity shops these days.

At least that was the case until Nanny, not much of a knitter (more of a nit...Ha!Ha!), came along and stuck her hooter (for the benefit of my American audience hooter=nose not booby) into it.

It seems that Nanny has decreed that knitting needles are in fact dangerous, and has therefore placed them on a list of proscribed products that cannot be sold at charity shops.

This was highlighted on Radio 4's You and Yours last year and is still happening, that is at least according to one of my trusted sources.

If you want knitting needles, you have to find an assistant and ask if they have any for sale "on the sly", much like you would buy beef on the bone a few years ago (which I did regularly during the mad cow scare).

Other proscribed items include; gas appliances, oil heaters, riding hats, glasses, ear rings etc

I normally don't bother putting links in, but the report is a hoot so here it is knitting needles ban.

We truly live in a very odd country indeed!

Nanny Bans Brunel

Nanny seems to be getting above herself; not only does she assume that she has the power to mould the way that we act and think in the present, but now in a display of pure ego she is trying to alter the past.

Nanny's friends at Heinemann, the publishers, have decided to don the mantle of "Time Lords" and try to alter the past.

Specifically they are very concerned about Isambard Kingdom Brunel, one of Britain's finest engineers, and his habit of smoking 40 cigars a day.

That's an impressive input!

Anyhoo, we all know what Nanny thinks about smoking, Heinemann have decided that photos of the Brunel with his trademark cigar are simply not acceptable anymore.

Specifically they are gunning for the photo taken by Robert Howlett of Brunel, standing in front of the SS Great Eastern with a cigar in his mouth.

Heinemann have recently published an educational book called The Life of Isambard Kingdom Brunel; the photo on the front is Howlett's, yet is it s "sans" cigar.

Heinemann have adopted the old Stalinist trick of editing out parts of photos of which they disapprove. They claim that the cigar has been erased, because teachers and school librarians will not buy books for young children if the covers picture people smoking.

Andrew Kelly, director of Brunel 200, a body organising celebrations of Brunel's life in 2006 to mark the bicentenary of his birth, said:

"The publishers say they feel the image could offend some teachers of young children.

This is ridiculous. It's daft. They have even had to change the shape of his mouth to do it."

I dare say there will come a time when stove pipe hats will be considered to be a danger as well, and as such Brunel will lose his.

You can no more disinvent your past, than you can disinvent the wheel.

Nanny Bans Hoodies

Nanny's chums at the Bluewater Shopping Centre have got themselves into a right old funk, can I say funk?

What has caused this funking outbreak?

Well, it seems that the media have been reporting that they are about to ban hoodies.

Hoodies are the latest fashion accessory for the feckless youth of Britain. So lacking in self esteem are our youth, that they choose to hide themselves away under shapeless and ugly hoods; rather than expose themselves to the public gaze.

Now, the media have been running a story that the Bluewater will ban this street attire as, so the story goes, customers are frightened by the sight of spotty faced feckless idle youths congregating in the shopping centre.

I can exclusively reveal that the media have got this story totally wrong.

The hoodies that the Bluewater want to ban are not those worn by teenagers, but the plastic rain hats worn by OAPS.

You see Bluewater know that the highest spending group are in fact teenagers, so spoilt and idle are this group that they have nothing better to do with their money than waste it on overpriced crap; such as mobile phones and the latest five minute fashion "must have".

In effect they are a shopping centre's dream customer.

Don't you find it rather scary that the UK economy is underpinned by the spending habits of teenagers?

On the other hand, elderly shoppers are a veritable pain in the butt.

• They don't spend money



• They moan and complain about prices and quality



• They block the walkways, as they go round in groups complaining and intimidating the young



• They pose a clear and present danger to those on foot, as they recklessly speed around the walkways in those electric buggies; at speeds well in excess of 5 mph

Well, enough is enough.

They are banned, and the easiest way to ban them is to ban the wearing of plastic rain hoods.

As we all know, elderly people cannot go anywhere without these!

Nanny's Dose of The Clamps

Nanny, as we all know, loves to regulate all manner of activities; ranging from our eating and drinking habits to pancake tossing.

This site is dedicated to making people aware of the increased level of state interference in our daily lives.

Yet, on some rare occasions, a regulation and a slap on the wrist from Nanny is a good thing.

Nanny has, for sometime now, been promising to regulate the activities of the cowboy wheel clampers; rouge organisations who make a fat living out of extorting money from people who have parked illegally.

One such "naughty little boy", who needs a sound spanking, is Costas Constantinou.
He is the boss of a London based wheel clamping firm, that has been named as the UK's worst clamper for the second time running by the RAC.

Costas, whose company Vehicle Clamping Securities (VCS) operates across London, won the RAC Foundation's "Dick Turpin" award for charging a stonking £423 for clamping and towing away and £35 a day for storage.

Costs claims that the charges were necessary to ensure "the job was done properly".

Seemingly, in order to ensure that the job is "done properly", one of Costas's employees allegedly threatened to break the windows of a motorist's car when he protested about the £423 fee for the return of his car.

As Edmund King, executive director of the RAC Foundation, said about cowboy clampers:

"they have been getting away with legalised mugging for too long."

Now dear old Nanny was meant to make the clamping vehicles on private land, without a Security Industry Authority (SIA) licence, a criminal offence on Monday.

Unfortunately owing to her incompetence, too few have completed a training course, this legislation has been postponed indefinitely.

Nanny is happy to pass countless ill thought out regulations at the drop of a hat, and at break neck speed, yet something as useful and as simple as this is beyond her.

It's a funny old world!

Queen Upsets Nanny

Oh dear, it seems that even royalty is not outwith the scrutiny of Nanny and her acolytes.

Nanny's chums in the British Horse Society, which incidentally is patronised by the Queen, have criticised the Queen for riding the other day without a hard hat.

Surely what the Queen chooses to wear, when out riding, is her business?

It looks like Nanny is starting off 2005 as she means to go on, namely by putting her nose into matters that don't concern her.

The Sly Old Fox

Those of you reading the British newspapers, and watching the news bulletins, over the last month or so may be forgiven for thinking that Nanny has become obsessed with fox hunting.

She certainly has kicked up quite a fuss over the issue; professing, as she does, to have the best interests of animals at heart.

Oddly enough I see no legislation coming forward to ban shooting or fishing. Doubtless that will come.

In fact Peter Bradley, the parliamentary private secretary to Alun Michael, admitted that Nanny’s friends in Labour don’t “give a stuff” over the fox hunting issue at all:

“We ought at last to own up to it: the struggle over the Bill was not just about animal welfare and personal freedom: it was class war…

This was not about the politics of envy but the polities of power. Ultimately it's about who governs Britain..”

Nanny meanwhile has stayed above the fray, in fact she has been almost invisible.

Maybe I am tad cynical, “surely not!” I hear you cry, but maybe Nanny has other fish to fry?

Does it not strike you as a little odd that a government so obsessed with media manipulation and spin has allowed, what in theory is a minority sport, to dominate the domestic agenda and media headlines?

The truth is that Nanny does not give a stuff about foxes, one way or the other. However, she has studied their wily ways, and is a sly old fox herself.

You see, ladies and gentlemen, whilst the media, the public and the “opposition” parties’ attentions have been diverted by the hunting issue; Nanny has quietly introduced, and passed, a most dangerous piece of legislation.

The Civil Contingencies Bill became law last Thursday, oddly enough the same day as the fox hunting ban went through with all that fuss.

The Civil Contingencies Bill allows Nanny, at the drop of a hat, to suspend the constitution and impose whatever restrictions on individual liberties and civil rights that she chooses.

Nanny can invoke her right to suspend liberties whenever there is an emergency.

Now, dear reader, what is an emergency?

Simple, anything Nanny says is an emergency is in fact an emergency.

This includes an event or situation, which threatens serious damage to:

• Human welfare in a place in the United Kingdom



• The environment of a place in the United Kingdom



• The security of the United Kingdom or of a place in the United Kingdom

Damage includes:

• Loss of human life



• Human illness or injury



• Homelessness



• Damage to property



• Disruption of a supply of money, food, water, energy or fuel



• Disruption of an electronic or other system of communication



• Disruption of facilities for transport



• Disruption of services relating to health

In short, Nanny can now do whatever she likes when she likes.

You should now be afraid, be very afraid!

You may well ask where the media and the “opposition” parties were, when this “rule by dictat” bill was being put through parliament.

Ermm, that’s simple, they were chasing Nanny’s fox.

In truth the media and the "oppositon" parties failed the people of the United Kingdom, I trust that they will hang their heads in shame!

Nanny, I have to hand it to you; you are a sly old fox!