£20 Well Spent, I Think…

The cost of evicting travellers from Europe's largest illegal camp will be around £3.5million, a council admitted yesterday.

You can see why some councils just give in, can’t you?

Taxpayers will have to pay up to £2.5million to forcibly remove 90 families at Crays Hill in Essex and return the land to its former greenfield state.

A further £1million will have to be found to pay for a massive police operation amid claims that any attempts to evict the families will result in a 'bloodbath'.

Of course! Make it difficult and expensive enough to stop you, and you can get away with a hell of a lot…

The bill for Basildon Council, which also includes removing 15 families from another site at Hovefields in nearby Wickford, represents 11 per cent of its annual budget - or around £20 for every person in the area.

If I lived there, I’d consider it a bargain…

Or, since it’s an illegal action, we could look at the confiscation orders so beloved of NuLabour to help pay for this – most of these ‘poor travellers’ have a lot of high end 4x4s etc.

Sauce for the goose, after all…

The Prime Of Miss Jean Brodie Crystal Defanti

Oooops!

Ms Defanti, a teacher at Isabelle Jackson Elementary school in Elk Grove, California, only realised her mistake when one particularly concerned parent called to inform her what happened.

She called parents the day after the DVD was distributed, crying and apologising for her actions.

'All she could say was that it was a horrible mix-up,' the unnamed father said.

But they're a forgiving lot in the California education system:

The Elk Grove Unified School District says they are investigating, but legal experts say it's unlikely that the teacher - who is well-liked at the school - will lose her job.

'It's ... stupid, but it's not a crime,' said expert Ken Rosenfeld. 'Is it something that she should be disciplined for?

'Absolutely, but fired for? She didn't intend for this to happen.'

Well, that's ok then...

Call-Me-Dave Is Out Of Step Again...

It seems that not everyone is enchanted with identity politics, now that some have finally realised it isn’t likely to win them more votes than they lose:

Harriet Harman's new equality laws risk alienating middle-class voters and could condemn Labour to defeat at the general election, a Cabinet minister has warned.

John Denham hinted that legislation aimed at closing the social gap could cost the party support in Middle England.

If there’s any left, that is…

The Communities Secretary risked a clash with Miss Harman by dismissing the 'egalitarian' approach to helping the needy that has dominated left-wing thinking since the 1960s.

He argued that Labour's traditional emphasis solely on the poor was 'badly out of step' with the majority of the population.

His comments fuelled speculation that he fears disaffected middle-class voters would desert the party at the ballot box and cost it a fourth term in office.

I think you can write off that fourth term now, no matter what you do. You could probably burn Harman and her coterie at the stake on the Parliament steps and it wouldn’t have much effect.

Of course, if you feel like taking a chance, don’t let me stop you…

His speech to the left-wing Fabian Society will be interpreted as a warning to Miss Harman, Labour's deputy leader, who is pushing the Equality Bill through the Commons.

And a sign of further splits and infighting in an increasingly punch-drunk party…

Mr Denham, one of the Cabinet ministers who has repeatedly warned the Government not to ignore the concerns of the south, said most people were not obsessed by 'disparities of wealth'.

He said: 'There is much greater acceptance where they think that wealth is the outcome of talent or effort rather than luck.

'People do not make judgments about how fair things are by only looking at outcomes. They differentiate between those who are disadvantaged despite the effort that they have made, and those who have not made that effort.'

Indeed.

It’s only the die-hard class warriors that can still be pandered to with sops like hunting bans and Tory-baiting. The vast majority don’t care that much, and are sick of seeing identity politics used to garner favour for a small section of society at the expense of everyone else.

There’s no votes in it anymore…

Meanwhile, Call-Me-Dave hasn’t noticed any sea change in society, and it’s full speed ahead and damn the torpedoes…

David Cameron has issued an extraordinary apology on behalf of the Conservative Party for legislation banning the promotion of homosexuality in schools.

He said the party had 'got it wrong' when it introduced Section 28 in the late 1980s.

Or, to translate ‘Pleeeeaaase vote for me!’

Former party chairman Lord Tebbit said he suspected the apology had been driven by 'focus group findings'.

The gay vote - estimated at 2.65 million people - will be a key political battleground ahead of an election expected next May.

Great! That’s just what we want, more focus-group driven politics.

We didn’t learn our lesson after Blair, did we?

Mr Cameron insisted he was making his apology because the legislation had been 'offensive to gay people'.

'I'm sorry for Section 28. We got it wrong. It was an emotional issue. We have got to move on and we have moved on,' he said.

He insisted that under his leadership the party was embracing gay rights and predicted it would produce Britain's first gay Prime Minister.

I’d like them to produce a PM that brings the public sector under control, sticks two fingers up to Europe and starts dismantling the fakecharity apparatus of off-the-books government and social change. And doesn’t kow-tow to identity politics.

I could care less if they are gay, straight or neuter. It isn’t what I look for in a PM. It won’t buy my vote.

You won’t get my vote, Dave….

It’s The Right Attitude For Once, Mark…

The BBC has been accused of being stuck in a '1950s mindset' and portraying women in passive or 'fluffy pink' roles.

Equal opportunity activists claim the corporation has failed to properly implement legislation aimed at driving out inequality from the workplace.

They have pointed to children's programmes in particular, claiming the young girls that are watching are exposed to too many examples of weak women.

You’re kidding me?

Virtually every new BBC drama has a cast that looks like an advert for the UN – a full complement of strong females, gays and ethnic minorities. In fact, pretty nearly everything now looks like ‘Torchwood’.

And still these harpies aren’t satisfied:

There are also claims that females are represented as stereotypes, including in what they wear, on many programmes for youngsters.

Characters such as Upsy Daisy from the hit children's show In The Night Garden have been accused of being overly-feminised.

Ahem. This is Upsy Daisy:


That’s right. A rag doll…thing. Not even a real person. I didn't even know it was supposed to be female.

These womyn have lost their minds…

Critics say service provision should include the BBC's programmes.

Katherine Rake of the Fawcett Society, which campaigns for sexual equality, was reported saying she had met BBC director general Mark Thompson but his attitude to gender duty was 'grudging'.

Suddenly, I don’t begrudge paying my telly tax quite as much as I did before…

”It rubs the lotion on its skin…”

…or not:

Teachers have barred children from bringing sunscreen into school for fear that they will share it with others who are allergic.

*sigh*

Parents have been told that in order to protect their children from the sun they will either have to apply a 12-hour sunscreen before school or come in at lunchtime and re-apply the cream.

Well, of course, everyone’s got time to do that, haven’t they?

And employers will be quite happy for mothers to nip out for a long lunch to apply suncream to their nine year olds, I’m sure…

Catriona Hoy, 45, was amazed when she heard about the ban from her nine-year-old daughter Kiera.

'I think it's absolutely ridiculous. I understand some children could be allergic but surely the danger of skin cancer and sun damage outweigh allergies,' she said.

'Surely they could just tell the children not to share their sunscreen, or keep it locked in a cupboard, clearly labelled with the children's names.'

Yeah, but that would be too simple, obviously. Far easier to just slap a blanket prohibition on something.

It’s the parental equivalent of ‘I don’t know (or am too lazy to find out) who wrote ‘Miss sucks!’ on the notice board, so I’m keeping you all in after school…’

Mrs Hoy, a children's author and chemistry teacher whose other daughter Caitlyn, 11, also attends the school, added: 'Some children may be allergic to wheat but they haven't banned sandwiches in case the children share lunch-boxes.'

Oh, great! Now you’ve given them an idea….

She added: 'I'm a working mother - I don't have the luxury of time to be able to come to school and apply it. I do not expect the teachers to apply it either.

'Both my daughters are old enough to be able to apply it themselves and that's what we should be teaching our children - to protect themselves.'

Strewth! Teaching children to be self-sufficient and able to do things for themselves?

What kind of a school do you think this is….?

Headteacher Gayle Mawson today stressed the school's concerns about allergies and cross-infection but said there was not enough time for staff to apply sun-cream to 550 pupils.

She added: 'We take the health and well-being of our children very seriously. We believe that if parents apply sunscreen at home then they are in control of the situation and we feel that that is what most parents would want.'

Have you actually asked them?

Or have you just assumed this is what they want, because it suits you to do so?

The expected charities and groups are up in arms:

The ban drew sharp criticism today from David Longman, director of charity Killing Cancer, based at the University College Hospital, London.

He said: 'It's insane. Of course children should have sunscreen and learn how to apply it.

'I have not yet come across anyone who is allergic to sun screen but I have come across a lot of children who are allergic to the sun.

'It is absolutely lunatic of any school, head teacher or set of governors to think they should ignore this ticking time bomb.'

Mmm, bit strident there, but I get your gist.

And this idiocy isn’t confined to schools. This related issue shows the real reason for the ‘elf and safety gone mad aspect:

Royal Mail bosses have stopped supplying postmen with sun cream - for fear the company could be sued if staff fail to use it and develop skin cancer.

Norwich staff have been given factor-15 lotion for their rounds over the past two summers but company lawyers have called a halt.

Melly Hill, of the Communication Workers Union, said: 'The legal people looked at it and said that if Royal Mail provided sun cream and then people didn't use it and got skin cancer then they would be liable.'

Yup, it’s the ‘Oh my god, we might be sued!’ factor yet again, which I suspect is driving the schools issue too.

But are they right? If you issue employees with safety equipment, but they don’t use it, as long as you’ve issued it, trained them correctly, deal with repeated breaches where possible, etc then surely you can’t be held liable?

Flowers For Algernon Fido...

I think everyone's blood was boiling when they heard this awful story on the morning news:

Lessons will be learnt from the deaths of two German Shepherd dogs left in a hot car, a senior Nottinghamshire police officer has said.

The animals were found dead in the private vehicle outside the force's headquarters in Nottingham on Tuesday.

And while I'm sure that the handler will be beside themselves, that should not be used (as it certainly wouldn't be if a civilian had done this) to excuse him or her from the punishment that must surely be coming their way.

And when that's decided, can they please also apply it - tenfold - to the idiot responsible for this display of mawkish sentimentality:

The police laid a bunch of white lilies, chrysanthemums and gypsophila outside the force's headquarters today. Members of the public were told they could also lay flowers outside the HQ if they wished.

Has the heat got to everyone? Or is this a cynically-judged PR attempt to dispel the well-deserved critiscism heading their way?

Not A Good Idea, People...

The Inimitable 'Daily Mash', on the new phenomenon of 'swine flu parties':

The British Medical Association said that any parent who was tempted to hold a swine flu party should remember the last birthday party and then smack themselves in the face with a pot for being so stupid.

Sadly, the reality isn't a joke. Parents are actually doing this...

Across the UK parents have been throwing parties hoping their children catch the virus before it mutates, as GPs said they may as well pack up and go home as everyone seems happy to be treated by the fucking Daily Express.

Heh!

'The Voice Of The Resistance' Launches...

Accessed via 'Resources' on the right.

I've got a good feeling about this one...

Gentlemen! Always Offer A Lady* A Lift Home...

Or else:

Alex Warren was arrested and locked up for 22 hours after Tracey Knowles made her bogus complaint, the court heard.

He had not seen her for six months after ending their relationship because he feared she was becoming too serious about him. They had, however, been in touch through a social networking website and on the night in question, met up in a bar.

Afterwards they went back to Mr Warren's house, where they had 'some very uninhibited sex indeed', Lisa Hennessy, prosecuting, told the court.

You can see where this is going, can't you?

But the next morning the atmosphere soured when Mr Warren refused to give Knowles a lift home, she said.

They parted on 'less than friendly terms' before Knowles told her boyfriend and a friend that she had been raped. When she told her parents, they contacted police.

Odd phrase, that: 'contacted police'.

You see, her father was the police:

A policeman's daughter who had a sordid one-night stand with an ex-boyfriend cried rape the morning after, a court was told.

The unfortunate Mr Warren is lucky he didn't 'fall down the stairs' at the local nick...

Mr Warren, a car firm worker, said he was 'very upset' when officers arrested him and locked him up after arriving at his home with three cars and a van.

Overkill...?

She confessed at a second interview, and is now on trial:

Knowles, 20, of South Cerney, near Cirencester, denies making a false allegation of rape with intent to pervert the course of public justice in June last year.

I'd love to know what her defence is going to be...

* Or at least, make sure she is a lady...

If It's Really True...

...that 'chubby celebrities' are encouraging obesity, as Michael McMahon, an 'obesity expert' claims, why the hell are the only ones mentioned people I've barely even heard of?

The high profile of larger stars such as TV presenter Eamonn Holmes, comedian Johnny Vegas and singer Beth Ditto has shown that being plump is no barrier to success.

Heard of the first two, though I wouldn't call Eamonn Holmes 'obese'.

James Corden and Ruth Jones, of award-winning sitcom Gavin and Stacey, are also of generous proportions.

Nope, never heard of these two. Is the tv show popular with da youf, then..?

Professor McMahon, of the Nuffield Health private healthcare chain, said: 'The increasing profile of larger celebrities means that being overweight is now perceived as being 'normal' in the eyes of the public.

'We talk about the dangers of skinny media images but the problem actually swings both ways.'

Unfortunate choice of phrasing there...

But it seems McMahon is on a mission:

Professor McMahon said: 'If people continue to turn a blind eye to their weight problems, they will see their life expectancy considerably shortened.

'The new research suggests that if the rise in obesity continues at this rate, the majority of the British population could be obese before the turn of the century.

'Clearly this is a situation that cannot be allowed to happen.'

What do you suggest, doc? The Fat Police? Compulsory dieting? No 'celebrities' over 8 stone?