Education is far to important to this countries future to allow those who cannot educate to remain within the system.
Did you spot it folks? Son of a schoolteacher, see. Carry a red pen in my pocket…
From this rather wonderful post at Orphans.
Here is a member of the public filming one of Medway Council’s spy car operators.
He doesn’t like being filmed, claims it isn’t allowed(!) and begins to call the police…
I can sort of understand his concerns, after all, here he is, just doing his job driving around the Medway Towns on a huge full-time fishing expedition, filming members of the public at will when a mere prole has the audacity to capture his untouchable boat-race! Must have been quite a shock for him…
(Full story here)
It’s quite well documented that the State just loves to film and photograph us, while agents of the State hate nothing more, but it’s wonderful to see the people actually operating the police state spy equipment getting so hot under the collar up close and personal. Hats off to Mr. Khan.
Mid-Wife Crisis on the new housing benefit-council house system, illustrating
that while politicians may be moving in the right direction they are still congenitally incapable of thinking anything through…
God, all these changes with regard to Housing Benefit and council housing are stressing people out. It’s the uncertainty that’s getting to constituents more than anything else, although some are pointing out how many of the proposals are contradictory, at least in what their effects are likely to be. Mrs Jennings rings up to say that she has been thinking of trying to exchange her council house for a smaller one, now her children are grown up. She wants to know whether, if she goes ahead with an exchange, her tenancy agreement on the new house will be time-limited. I can’t give her a definitive answer, as no-one seems to have addressed this particular issue at all, though it does seem likely to me”They must think people are bloody stupid if they think anyone will move to a smaller house if that’s going to be what happens to their security,” she says”People will just cling on to their houses ’til they die.””It does seem rather ill thought-out,” I say. “But we will have to wait and see.” I don’t say that what we don’t know is what the exact nature of the carrots and sticks will be.
Do read the whole thing.
I’ve mentioned the ‘charity’ that is the NSPCC before, but this post from Al Jahom brings another well-loved charity sharply into focus:
Someone (John Northam) posted a comment on one of my RSPCA threads earlier: Came home from work to see a chitte to say they had taken my cat while i was at work- no explanation. A phone number that after 30 minutes of annoying waiting music and patronising advice on the treatment of snakes(!) turned out to be a fucking call centre and no attempt made to contact me My cat is 18 years old half blind and on his ast legs but still comes to me for cuddles and food (he loves bacon). He is not in pain and I know he will tell me when it is his time to go If the fucking bastards have not put him down already they will have scared the poor fucking creature to death by sticking him in a cage around loads of other distressed animals
And the follow-up comment:
July 22, 2010 at 6:46 am Need to followup on the story above. I have not been charged with anything yet so it is not yet sub judice. The RSPCA did contact me after 7 increasingly angry messages at the call centre phone calls to various vets etc trying to locate my cat. 18 hours after taking my cat they told me that they want to question me ‘under caution’ under this draconian piece of legislation called the Animal Welfare Act (2006) . I told them that I did not recognise their authority to do this so next week at some time I will be cuffed (that’s the loca Police policy), taken to a Police cell and interrogated because I did not have my cat put to sleep 2 weeks ago. Apparently the RSPCA know my cat better than I do. I intend to make a big commotion about this and have already spoken to my local MP. This is an excellent blog and I have spammed FB with the link. Everyone should know what complete bastards the RSPCA are and how much power the Animal Welfare Act givens them
It is worth remembering, although the RSPCA may not receive taxpayer cash (presumably putting out adverts with sad-eyed puppies in a ‘nation of animal lovers’ gets them enough) they nevertheless not only lobby for legislation but they have powers delegated to them from the State. This makes them a State organisation in my view, albeit one that is funded voluntarily.
Goons in uniform that are legally entitled to enter your home without your consent are police, pure and simple: I should (and now have) added them to the list of polices on my previous post.
Don’t give money to these guys: you might live to regret it.
Seeing this morning that the ASA has banned a Tesco advert promising ‘fresh baked bread from scratch’ in its stores my initial thought was “fair enough,” but when I read further down the page this statement from the “Real Bread Campaign working party Chairman” Iain Loe:
We believe that this ruling sends an important message to unscrupulous advertisers: if you plan to hide or distort the facts in an attempt to draw customers away from small, independent bakeries that make an honest living baking honest loaves, the people of Britain won’t stand for it.’
The “People of Britain? Really? It seems to me that if this were true there would be no need for a “Real Bread Campaign” (as opposed to the imaginary bread, presumably phase-shifted 90° onto the j axis, foisted on us by eeevil corporations) as the Great British Public would already be buying all their bread from little (real) bakeries.
Incidentally, the Campaign For Real Bread or whatever it’s called is part of Sustain , a charity with many branches devoted to global warming, organic food and other right-on causes.
I’m going to start this with one big, fat blockquote from the Angry Exile:
But a thought struck me – what if the sort of localism proposed by Hannan and Carswell in The Plan took hold, and maybe went even further. What if people were voting not just for the political flavour of their representative in Westminster but what manifesto they wanted to apply in their area? What if the 59,571 people who voted for other parties, to say nothing of the ≈95,000 who didn’t vote, did not have to abide by the result chosen by the 58,247 people who voted Labour because where the LibDems or Tories won those areas were run according to their manifestos? What if you weren’t just voting for the MP but the policies that would apply where you live for the next few years? To a large extent it would mean an end to national politics since the governing party would not get a say over the whole country except on truly national issues such as defence and foreign affairs, but would have to accept that those areas that had rejected them were going to be run a different way. Of course this is kind of what’s supposed to happen with local councils anyway but since the government controls the purse strings and since some of the services are national – the term ‘local NHS’ has always seemed oxymoronic – there’s not as much local variation as there could be.
The downside is obvious. It would be very difficult for a government to balance income and expenditure since it wouldn’t know how many areas would be paying tax and consuming services at the rates it had in mind and how many would be at the rates suggested by the opposition parties. The solution is equally obvious – one national tax to pay for the truly national services, such as defence, and everything else determined locally. It would be a more libertarian system but not necessarily one that favours libertarianism if most people wanted to live under one or other set of Labial Conservocrat rules. What it would mean is that those who want to live free of unnecessary government intrusion can pick the most libertarian place in the country – which could be just one small town or a single rural seat – and move there. What could be more libertarian than to allow the Lib/Lab/Con voters, and those who don’t object to their policies strongly enough to vote against them, to have half their wealth taken for the privilege of living according to those preferences if the reverse applied and libertarian types could all clear off somewhere that most suited them?
This is something I’ve argued for before, on other forums and blogs. Essentially, a shift to the Hellenic (as I understand it from The Iliad, feel free to correct me) model of independent city states, bound to mutual defence by treaty but free to conduct their own affairs. Or, if you wish to put it another way, introducing the market into governance. Each city-state to produce its own government the way it chooses, may that be capitalistic, communistic, socialistic, monarchistic or whatever and to prosper or fail as each will without interference. If one (presumably libertarian) city prospers exceptionally, persons from other cities will naturally gravitate towards such a place. If one city falters (probably a communistic one where people are paid to breed and drink Stella) then the productive will leave, and the city will fall. Deserted or sacked, I’m ambiguous on this. But the Market will prevail.
Eventually, the most suitable (for humans) and sustainable form of government will prevail, and the groundwork will already have been done.
Long live the Acheans! Pity the country that gave this idea to the world has slipped into socialistic-hangover chaos first, but I’m sure others will follow if that’s any consolation (and I hope it won’t be).