Nanny Knows Best

Monday, October 31, 2011

Prats of The Week - Shepway District Council

Good morning everyone!

Another week dawns, and what better way to start the week than by awarding another one of my prestigious and internationally renowned "Prats of The Week" Awards.

This week it goes to Shepway District Council.

For why?

For their bizarre decision to install "shouting lampposts".

Eh?

The lampposts (£4K each) are designed to photograph fly tippers (and are located near set of industrial bins behind The Old High Street in Folkestone). In addition, whilst the photo is being taken, the lampposts issue a loud verbal warning about not fly tipping and warning people that the lamppost is taking a picture.

Now the theory behind all of that sounds perfectly fine, if it really does deter fly tippers.

However, there is one small fly in the oinkment here.

For reasons that are pretty obvious to all but those in the council, the lampposts cannot distinguish between fly tippers and anyone else who happens to walk near the vicinity of the bins.

The result being that the lampposts take pictures of everyone, and shout (like a drunk waving a vodka bottle) at all and sundry!

Shepway District Council, well deserving Prats of The Week!

Visit The Orifice of Government Commerce and buy a collector's item.

Visit The Joy of Lard and indulge your lard fantasies.

Show your contempt for Nanny by buying a T shirt or thong from Nanny's Store.

www.nannyknowsbest.com is brought to you by www.kenfrost.com "The Living Brand"

Celebrate the joy of living with booze. Click and drink!

Visit Oh So Swedish Swedish arts and handicrafts

Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries

Friday, October 28, 2011

Nanny Bans The Second World War

When you do something, you should always do it "large".

That is my motto and, seemingly, Nanny's as well.

What has Nanny gone and done?

Well blinkey, blonkey, blimey she's only gone and banned the Second World War!

Rod Tinson has written a Halloween play which was to be staged at Pendennis Castle in Falmouth. The play featured scenes from different periods in the castle's history (including World War II, when it was a coastal defence position against the threat of German invasion).

Unfortunately for Mr Tinson, he had to get his script approved by English Heritage.

Can you guess what happened next children?

Yes, that's right, they took exception to a number of things and wanted him to make adjustments; eg to the part where a young Jewish character expressed fears about his family in occupied Poland.

For why?

English Heritage were concerned that people would be "offended" by the material, and that it would be "inappropriate" for an English Heritage audience.

Aren't Polish or Jewish people allowed to be part of our heritage then?

The censorship is rather odd really, given that Mr Tinson wrote the play for adults (it was for an adults only evening), many of whom would remember the War or know people who were involved in it.

English Heritage also had other issues:

- any references to sex (including buggary (sic)....their misspelling, not mine)
- swear words, including 'bloody' (a fine English swear word, used in "In Which We Serve")
- references to Poland, Jews and Nazis

Given the number of brave Poles and Jewish people who joined the RAF, RN and Army and the number of Polish war memorials in the UK, I would think that they would be more than "offended" at having references to their country/religion removed from the play.

BTW, the castle is also home to a collection of wartime cartoons of Hitler and Mussolini by illustrator George Butterworth.

Anyhoo, Mr Tinson did what any self respecting writer would do, he told English Heritage to stuff it (not literally) and withdrew his services as a writer.

Good for him!

Thursday, October 27, 2011

Prats of The Week - Mole Valley District Council

A large roll on the drums ladies and gentlemen, for today I award my prestigious and internationally renowned "Prats of The Week" Award twice...to the same organisation, Mole Valley District Council.

For why I hear you ejaculate (can I say "ejaculate" before 9PM?).

For the following two reasons:

1 Mole Valley District Council is attempting to dictate to people what they may plant in their hanging baskets and floral displays.

You don't believe me?

Read this then on www.olympicsdiary.com

2 My thanks to a loyal reader who tweeted me a link to a site that is campaigning for the Gatwick Aviation Museum.

"Built up, preserved and funded over decades by one gentleman (now elderly) and his team of enthusiastic volunteers and WWII airmen heroes, this Aviation Museum has a unique collection of rare British Aircraft, engines and models from the "golden age" of British aircraft manufacture. It is a national treasure and a perfect example of David Cameron's "Big Society" at work." --- Howard Smith.

Unfortunately for the museum there is one small fly in its oinkment wrt its plans for improvement.

Can you guess what that is children?

Yes, that's right, Mole Valley District Council!

The museum has been [is] in dispute with Mole Valley District Council concerning planning permission, as despite its co-location with Gatwick Airport, the council has refused permission for a permanent museum site, citing it as being an inappropriate place for an aircraft museum.

You couldn't make that up could you?

So there we are, Mole Valley District Council well deserving Prats of The Week!

Wednesday, October 26, 2011

Nanny Bans Leaflets

In July I warned that Nanny was bringing her guns to bear on "leafleteers":

"Nanny's local councils have come up with another wheeze to keep themselves in the luxury to which they have become accustomed. This time they have hit upon the idea of using legislation (the Clean Neighbourhoods and Environment Act 2005) to force people who hand out leaflets in the street to buy licences.

Clever eh?

Now, I know that corporations who hire people to hand out gazillions of leaflets advertising their unwanted products can be deemed to be a nuisance (given that most of these leaflets are thrown into the bin). However, the legislation will also apply to anyone who hands out leaflets, even those who are looking for their lost cat.

Let us not forget that the origins of the "free" press (a scourge of governments throughout the ages) were the Pamphleteers.

Today the modern "Pamphleteers" are the small-scale organisations eg; Women's Institutes, comedy clubs, student societies and political campaigners. These organisations (eg if operating in Basildon) are forced to pay £350 to hand out leaflets on a Saturday, those who operate in Wolverhampton are being charged £262 per distributor.

Approximately 45 local authorities in England now insist that people have to buy a licence to hand out leaflets.

The councils claim that this is a litter related issue.

Errmmm..if people throw the leaflets on the street then surely it is for them to be fined, not the pamphleteer?

The reality in fact is that it is a great way to make money, and to restrict the freedom of speech of their hard pressed citizens.

Ker Farking Ching!

Councils are the enemies of the people."

Following on from that, The Manifesto Club have stated that in certain towns (including that bastion of liberty and wonderfully louche behaviour, Brighton - my home town:)) have banned unlicensed leaflets altogether:

"It has become almost impossible to hand out leaflets in many town and city centres. Local councils including Brighton, Leicester and Leeds have introduced leafleting zones, within which you have to pay a fee (and often wear a badge) if you want to flyer.

These rules have been catastrophic for grassroots organisations, including village halls, comedy clubs and nightclubs, who rely on leafleting to inform local people about their events."

As I have stated many times (repeating the same message with the depressing inevitability of an unloved season) councils are the enemies of the people!

Tuesday, October 25, 2011

Prats of The Week - Councils

Ooh err missus!

Tis time methinks to award another of my prestigious, and internationally renowned, "Prats of The Week" Awards.

This week it goes to our "beloved" and "respected" local councils in general.

For why?

Well my old muckers it seems that, despite the recession and the new age of austerity, councils across the land cannot resist spending bucket loads of our hard earned cash on worthless shite.

A Freedom of Information request has brought to light oodles of daft expenditures (is that English?) eg:

- Hillingdon paid RADA £2,700 to give a Cabinet Member "executive coaching" sessions
- Lewisham spent £300 on a "using social media" day for one person
- Kensington and Chelsea and Brent spent money (at "no cost" to the taxpayer) on in-house Blackberry courses for councillors
- Ealing sent someone to Chichester for a "Fruit and Vegetables in Public Gardens" conference
- Kingston-upon-Thames spent money on an internally-run "key fob training seminar"
- Richmond sent someone to Cardiff for a training course on sex licensing establishments etc

I dare say that were we and the councils earning bucketloads of cash (and a portion of that bucketload was put away for a rainy day) then spending money on such courses etc may be beneficial (or at least harmless) in a growing economy. However, we are in a recession and during the times of plenty Broon and his chums in the councils never put anything away for today's rainy day.

Therefore I would conclude that councils simply do not get it wrt the financial state that we are in.

Councils are the enemies of the people, and well deserving Pats of The Week!

Monday, October 24, 2011

Booze Matters - Drink Breaks

I see that Nanny, or rather one of Nanny's chums, has got on a high horse again over Nanny's pet subject of how much we drink.

This time The Royal College of Physicians (RCP) has muddied Nanny's advice about what constitutes "safe drinking", by saying that the current advice by Nanny (21 units for men and 14 for women) implies that it is safe for people to have alcohol every day of the week.

Seemingly "experts" from the RCP now say that people should in fact take a "booze holiday" (no, not to Benidorm), and abstain from booze for 2-3 days a week.

Yawn!!

You can bet your bottom dollar that the "experts" do not want you to drink all your allowance in one go either:)

Anyhoo, to further add to people's misery, the "experts" also say that elderly people should drink less than the recommended daily allowance.

For why?

Because it damages them.

Surely, by the time one is in one's 70's/80's it matters not one jot if one cuts one's life expectancy by a few months by drinking, rather than living to a miserable incapacitated and boring old age?

These limits are bollocks; as every individual has a different capacity, body mass, food intake, general level of health, lifestyle etc etc.

One size does not fit all, and "experts" should stop trying to use the "one size" argument as an excuse for imposing their lifestyle views on the rest of us.

"In Germany they came first for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.
Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.
The they came for the Catholics,
and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant.
Then they came for me,
and by that time no one was left to speak up."

Martin Niemoeller

"The best way to take control over a people and control them utterly is to take a little of their freedom at a time, to erode rights by a thousand tiny and almost imperceptible

reductions. In this way the people will not see those rights and freedoms being removed until past the point at which these changes cannot be reversed."

Adolf Hitler