The revolution is coming!Wheelie bin revolt: Householders fight back over monster plastic bins blighting our front gardens
To what politically correct end? More money down the drain
Council plans £65,000 'gipsy awareness' month in schools
25 June
Canterbury is sufficiently gay, council inspectors rule
Canterbury is sufficiently gay, council inspectors rule
So there we have it, Canterbury is sufficiently gay! Quite how this is
measured is something of speculation but a government watchdog decided
that Canterbury does ok at promoting homosexual culture. Well great,
although as I am neither homosexual or live in Canterbury you would
think that this would just pass me by, but a bit of digging under the
surface of the Telegraph story gets me into rant mode. What kicked off
an investigation that has taken months to come to a conclusion at the
cost of many thousands of pounds was a complaint letter from two
members of Pride in Canterbury who according to the Telegraph believe
that the council do not want a thriving Lesbian, gay, Bisexual and
Transgender community in the city.
Well I am not taking sides here
in relation to the subject in hand, although I don’t think that Pride
in Canterbury are doing themselves any favours by trying to get the
council to spend money promoting homosexuality while all around the
country there are significant cutbacks to essential services e.g. adult
education. It hardly puts the average person on their side.
My
whinge about this is that on the basis of a letter signed by two people
from a minority group a fairly major investigation takes place. It
takes a lot of time, a lot of money and for what, bugger all (excuse
the pun). Now I am an ardent AFC Wimbledon supporter along with another
five thousand or so and I can just imagine the response If I first
write to the Merton council and then to the ombudsman that the council
are not doing enough to promote football in the borough and that they
are too focused on promoting the other Wimbledon game.
The point
is that officialdom has become terrified of not doing things "right"
for certain sections of the community that over the past decade have
been subject to protective laws including, gay rights, women’s rights,
religious rights, race rights, age rights, and the list goes on. These
were necessary and I believe in the main have changed attitudes,
however it does allow individuals to make officialdom jump through
hoops at effectively the drop of a hat and significant costs to us all.
The pendulum needs to come back a bit.
Just who is the stupid ones
More ‘stupid’ mothers prevented from fighting adoptions
New way of robbing the poor
Pensioner given £70 parking ticket for stopping on own drive
Forcing "Gay is normal" down your throat
Catholic mother launches legal battle after son placed with gay foster parentsRapped it should have been sacked
Traffic warden rapped after parking in disabled bay - while he tickets other drivers
Evicted for not being a turnip headLosing the plot... Gardener's fury as he is thrown off his allotment for not growing enough vegWill they say sorry and here is the money back?
700,000 overcharged in the great council tax 'cover-up' (Read the story)
Boris balls up
Never mind the bollocks… Mayor cleared after swearing at MPsShowboating with your money ... and what essential services have been reduced?
Council spends £135,000 on external publicists for Birmingham library (Read the story)
And no showboatingNo boats or train for Botanic parkEco-warrior evicted from cave dwelling without fire exit (Read the full story)
Man to be
evicted by council because his cave does not have a fire exit. It is
just great watching councils at work, if work is what you can call it.
This old boy who has been living in a cave (quite happily) for sixteen
years and growing his own food has become the focus of someone in the
council who has got nothing better to do with their time. The councils
point is that the dwelling does not have a fire exit, which as we know
is not exactly a feature of most caves and that their concern is for
the safety of the public. Safety for the public in this case is the
chap who has lived in it for years and does not want the council to
consider his safety as strongly as they seem to want to. To be frank,
what this sounds like is that someone at the council does not like the
idea of a cave dweller and has spent loads of money for their own
agenda ... more is to come of course as this may well end up in the
European court. What a load of nonsense from big brother who have tried
every trick in the book to get the old boy booted out. One trick was to
try to have him evicted for using the place as a business by selling
goods from it. However the real story and why the council failed in
this particular attempt was that he had sold and freely admits to it, a
bag of sprouts to a pregnant lady, just one. Now that hardly describes
running a business does it? Although in the average council terms it
probably does. This was followed a number of months later by another
court case because he was keeping chickens! Chickens, chickens I hear
you say, this should be a capital offence, hang him. What a lot of
sheer nonsense. The real irritating thing is that you never get to the
bottom of who the burke in the council is, they are cloaked by
anonymity as it is always reported as the borough council ... lets have
a bit of transparency here .... WHO is the rocking horse brain that is
spending your money on effectively having a bee in his/her bonnet and
not willing to let it go until they have WON. We will never know of
course, or maybe we can find out. I suggest that we all write to
Brighton and Hove Council and ask who exactly is responsible for this.
So off to work Disabled pensioner fined £75 for displaying parking badge upside down (Read the full story)
Reported in the Telegraph is Ron Padwick, 76, a great grandfather, who
has been fined £75 because he placed a disabled parking permit on his
dashboard but with the card facing the drivers seat instead of the
windscreen. So what is the real story here ... The real story is that
Mr Padwick has been robbed. He can of course appeal to Hertfordshire
county council ... oops he has done that already, but they say the fine
stands. He can of course not pay the fine and risk prosecution by the
council, which would cost him more even if he was acquitted, so where
does he go to from here. Well basically nowhere old son, you have been
turned over because you broke the rules. These are the rules that are
made supposedly to protect us and initiated by the people who we put
into office in order to give us a better life. Well sorry just as the
MP's expenses show "they are the masters and we are the servants". They
would like of course to take all your money (perhaps they already have)
to fund the chips on their shoulders and to display their ultimate
power over us the peasants. I can see no other way of describing this
action by the council other than theft.
Off to work
Social services claim mother is 'too stupid" (Read the full story)
Well
here we go again ... Supposedly we have a mother who is deemed too
stupid to bring up her child, who will be adopted in three months and
the mother will lose all rights to ever see her again. Here come the
experts again, on one hand an expert says that she is stupid and
another says she is average. Now perhaps average is thick to an
egotistic psychologist but that would mean that all average children
should be dragged away from their parents and handed over to Mr. and
Mrs. average ... er, ok that means they cannot actually look after the
child because they are average and QED stupid. It would seem that the
only way forward is to siphon off all kids who have parents with
average ability and put them in homes. The problem here is that it
sounds like the stazi state kidnapping the kid. Well I understand that
this is going to the European court of human rights ... good luck.
Local councils' jollies exposed