I Bet Their DEI Training Was Up To Date Though...

A driving instructor was rescued from 4ft of floodwater by a couple, as firefighters stood-by, because they weren't trained to go into water at such depths.

Filmmaker Jamie Price and his partner Danielle waded into the thigh-high water to help the motorist in Ingatestone, Essex, on Sunday morning. Crews from Essex Fire and Rescue, as well as an ambulance and police were at the scene, but Mr Price told The Telegraph he was shocked to see the emergency services were not doing more to help.

I don't know why that would shock anyone, frankly. We have police who can't bring themselves to deal properly with dangerous animals, NHS staff who neglect basic biology and retail shops who care more for woke claptrap than for making a profit.

This latest nonsense is par for the course...

When he asked them why they were not going in the water, they told him they were 'waiting for some specialist crews' because the water level was over 4ft and 'they were only allowed to go in waist-high.'

The sci-fi authour Robert Heinlein had something to say about that:

"A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects."

*Rummages For Tiny Violin*

The Oxford Bangladeshi Islamic Centre and Mosque had been due to mark the religious holiday Eid al-Adha in Leys Pool and Leisure Centre's main sports hall yesterday, but instead had to squeeze 300 people into three sessions at its Cowley Road building.

It came after frustrated organisers spent more than a week trying to sort out booking problems with the Blackbird Leys leisure centre, which is owned by the city council and managed by Fusion Lifestyle, only to be told a full event management plan including 'anti-terrorism measures' was required at the eleventh hour.

Welcome to England, where overwhelming paperwork must be completed in triplicate before the council will let you do what you need to do.

What's that?

'But you're Muslims', you say..? Well, so what?

The operations manager added if the information, including a safeguarding policy, stewarding/security plan, medical plan, waste management plan and anti-terrorism measures, as well as public liability insurance confirmation and employers liability insurance confirmation, was not provided by 2pm the following day the event could not go ahead.

Mr Hoque said he was 'shocked' as the mosque had never been asked to provide this level of detail before, and it had not been mentioned when he had made the booking initially.

Times change, Mt Hoque. We need all that now. I wonder if you know why?

The Blackbird Leys resident added the mosque had been holding events at the centre for years, with the last Eid booking in 2016, but their treatment by leisure centre had left them feeling 'unwanted'.

Gosh! How to sum up my concern with your feelings?

That'll do it!

Consequences Coming Home To Roost Again!

Angry residents want Southend Council to fine hospital staff for dropping cigarette butts near their homes.

Trevor Murray, of Hillborough Road, said he has watched the litter build up over the years - and enough’s enough.

He said: “It’s not just outside my stretch of road, but across all the roads around the hospital. Recently I have just been trudging through the cigarettes but nothing is done about it. No one is fined.”

The image of Trevor battling gamely through a huge drift of discarded cigarette butts like a Canadian mountie determined to get his man in the frozen Yukon will stay with me a while...

But why are hospital staff dropping cigarette butts in roads anyway?

Southend Hospital has a no smoking policy on its grounds, which often leaves those workers who smoke the options of either stopping or resorting to nearby roads.

Ah.

Mr Murray, 78, claims it has become a health hazard. He said: “I can actually smell it. I think the hospital has got a big problem. A lot of their staff smoke.”

You mean, they can't even persuade their own staff to give up? Despite the millions of pounds they spend?

Yvonne Blücher, managing director of Southend Hospital, said: “We have been made aware of issues with staff littering cigarette butts off of the hospital site.

“The trust maintains a no smoking policy on site. We have increased our no smoking signs in key areas and introduced a tannoy system to remind people that we are a no smoking site.”

Yes dear. That's the point. That's why they are dropping them everywhere else. I don't suppose you'd consider changing the policy?

“Whilst we can’t stop our staff smoking off site, they do have an obligation to dispose of their own rubbish responsibly. Although there are already lots of litter bins with ashtrays at the entrances to our hospital site, we are looking to manage the problem better. One thing we will be doing is cleaning in those off site areas.”

No, of course not. You'll just spend more taxpayer's cash on non-medical issues, after all,. it grows on trees, doesn't it?

A Bit Of A Flaw?

A taxi driver told a blind woman she was not welcome in his cab – because she had a guide dog.

Disability campaigner Diane Marks said she felt “totally humiliated” by the refusal, which happened outside Brighton Station last week.

 There's no description of the driver. Well, there wouldn't be, she's blind!

As she waited for a cab home after a trip to London, a driver pulled up and wound down his window. But when he saw her guide dog Thomas, he said he was allergic to dog hair and refused to carry the pair.

Ms Marks said: “I wanted to see his exemption certificate but he wouldn’t show it to me.

“He shut both doors, locked up his windows and locked himself in. Then he just drove off. Nobody standing next to me at the taxi rank said anything.

They might have made a few gestures that she couldn't see, because she's blind.

...taxi bosses said it would be difficult to find the culprit because Ms Marks had not been able to record his registration number.

 Ummm, wait a minute!

Andy Cheesman from the Brighton and Hove Taxi Forum said similar incidents were “extremely rare”.

He said: “It’s not nice when it happens and of course it’s horrible for the person involved.

“When this sort of thing happens we suggest that they take a registration number – but of course that’s very difficult if you are blind.

/facepalm

Let's See Them Enforce The 'No Peeing In The Pool' Rule Too...

Compulsory canine life jackets at pet day care and boarding facilities across Colorado could become reality under rules being drafted by the Pet Animal Care Facilities Program, a division of the Colorado Department of Agriculture.

Seriously?!

Yes. And not just lifejackets, there must be a doggy 'Baywatch' too!

The draft rules state that "every dog must wear a personal flotation device while in or while having access to a pool area whenever the pool water is deeper than the height of the dog at its shoulder."

They also stipulate that the pool must have at least one lifeguard on duty to watch over the bedraggled barkers.

I'd say they jumped the shark here, but, well...

The Mystery Of The Missing Meat!

Thousands of Muslim children have been left without meat in their school meals after the county council suddenly axed its contract with a halal products supplier.

Education chiefs admitted it could take months before a replacement for KQF Foods is found – prompting the Council of Mosques to warn that youngsters’ diets could suffer.

What, by not having meat at school? Feed 'em it at home!

Confusion surrounds why KQF lost its contract, which started in May 2009 and was renewed in April.

Oh?

The move follows an unexpected county council food standards inspection into the composition, labelling and quality of the meat on October 9.

Hmmm....

The company, based in George West Street, Blackburn, said it had not been given full details of the justification for the decision but believes it relates to paperwork. A spokesman added the firm was seriously concerned about damage to its reputation.

The county council has refused to disclose the reason but stressed it did not relate to the meat’s Halal accreditation or health and hygiene.

So, if it's not hygeine, and they aren't passing off non-halal as halal, what's the ...errr... beef, then?

It is understood that the decision to end the contract concerns the precise legal terms between the two parties over the proportion of meat as opposed to water and other bulking products in the halal products following a complaint.

Ah! So, it appears they haven’t been getting that much meat in their diets anyway!

Tom Bensted - 'Big Society' Candidate

"First of all the police came along towards Round Hills. They stopped at the lights there and turned around and drove off," he said.

"They came around 15 minutes later, pulled up and asked what I was doing and why I was doing it.

"They said 'you shouldn't be doing that' and I said 'what else is supposed to happen?'

"I guess I'm not supposed to direct traffic - I haven't got the training."

The officers told the former Davenant Foundation School pupil they would 'make some calls'.

"They made some calls and then they drove off," he said.

"I guess they hadn't got the training either."

Heh! That just about says it all, doesn't it?

Childcare Is Expensive SHOCK!

A mile separates Lullabys and Little Ann day nurseries in South Norwood – yet one charges nearly £300 more than the other to look after a child.

Well, that’s London for you. Hugely expensive places sitting cheek-by-jowl with the most rundown slums. These sort of price differentials are, therefore, hardly surprising…

Pockets of South Norwood are in the ten per cent most deprived areas in the country. According to official statistics, one in three children in the ward live in poverty and more than 700 people are out of work.

Against this backdrop, Lullabys, in Ross Road, charges parents £875 a month for full-time childcare for a two-year-old. This does not include a £25 registration fee for, effectively, filling in a few forms.

Complaining about the registration fee seems pointless – many service organisations charge such a fee.

And if ‘a few forms’ need to be filled in, it’s no surprise, given the plethora of council and central government regulations and registration bodies these services now need to comply with, mostly driven (of course!) by media campaigns, where they are not directed by the EU.

Operations manager Theresa Staunton believes comparing prices is unfair. She said: "Before parents decide where their child should go, they should visit nurseries and see what they are getting for their money.

"Most of the nurseries that charge less aren't as good. Given the amount they are charging, they couldn't be.

"We provide high end, high quality childcare, and there are huge costs associated with that. "

Because people are willing to pay them. So, why is this a problem?

Our sample also shows that high prices are not confined to the affluent areas of the borough, with nurseries in Thornton Heath, Selhurst and South Norwood asking for more than £850 per month.

Ah. Once again, it’s that ‘inequality’ business, I suppose?

Seriously, of all the things for a Croydon local newspaper to run a campaign about, this is the best they could find?

Of the 30 nurseries surveyed by the Advertiser, the cheapest was Little Ann, based in St Albans Church Hall in Whitehorse Lane. Little Ann charges parents £600 a month, at least £200 cheaper than three other nurseries in the area.

Manager Malarrosa Murugaiah recently dropped her fees by £50 after several parents could not afford to pay their monthly bill. Unlike some of her rivals, she doesn't believe that price dictates quality.

Well, she wouldn’t, would she?

"Yes we're a business but we must also consider what is best for the parents," said Mrs Murugaiah.

"People who live here have very little money. I know there are nurseries which ask for £800 or even £900 a month, but if I charged that much, we wouldn't have any children."

And yet, others do, and seem to be well-subscribed. Strange, that…

Some of the most affordable childcare can be found in New Addington, yet it is still out of the price range of parents like Lisa Booth.

"I have looked at childcare but as a low income family we can't afford it, even with government help," she said.

"My son starts school this month, and I will use that time to find work, but I don't know what I will do in the holidays, as I feel like I can't leave a child with friends or family because they aren't registered minders."

The Statist brainwashing is working, then? I mean, twenty years ago no-one would have thought twice about leaving their child with relatives or non-working friends – I myself was looked after by my grandmother while my mother went to work, and it was so unremarkable an arrangement that most of my classmates were in a similar position.

But now, it’s regarded as odd, strange, something to be remarked on and considered an inferior arrangement to paying over huge sums of money to a total stranger with a fancy logo and a paper certificate!

But Mrs Myatt fears she will have to raise charges when work place pension reform is introduced next month.

She said: "If you think that wages are at least 50 per cent of our outgoings and now we have to find an extra five per cent, that's a significant sum of money."

So…how will Mrs Murugaiah cope? I wonder…

Vital Safeguarding Of Post Office Shoppers

Thank god shoppers are protected from the menace of a post office selling eggs, jam and honey. Who knows what might have happened otherwise?

The ban comes after the Essex County Council spent £10,000 converting the library on The Green into a double-purpose self-service library and village post office.

"I'm very angry about it," the postmistress said. "I've been selling eggs, jams and honey for a long time.

"They don't make me much money but they're part of the reason people come into the shop.

"There won't be many more reasons for anyone to come in here anymore."

Now, I can remember holidays in Yorkshire where every little village had a post office-cum-everything else. You could get anything there – not just stamps and postcards home, but comics, sweets, toys, home-grown produce, etc.

And you may say that things change, and with huge supermarket conglomerates on the doorstep, why should that remain the same?

Well, equally well, why should it not?

According to Ms Rollason, the council told her solicitor that they did not think it was "appropriate" for the post office to continue to sell the products after it moved in to the library.

Is this one of the new-type libraries? Sorry, multi-media centre?

Still, maybe if she speaks to her local representa…

Oh:

Essex County Councillor John Aldridge, who helped Ms Rollason secure the move to the library, said he sympathised but stressed if the terms of the lease said no food then there was not much that could be done.

He said: "We're really happy to have the post office there, but if it was not part of the deal, it was not part of the deal. A few eggs are not worth falling out over."

Falling out with whom?

Are you afraid to do the job you’re elected to, Mr Aldridge? That of representing the wishes of your constituents?

Mind-Blowing Petty Control Freakery? Must Be The RSPCA Again…

When a cat appeared in Gary Sherman’s garden in June he cared for it for a week before he discovered it had hurt its leg and took it to the vets.

But when the cat, which he called Buster, was handed to the RSPCA, Gary and his wife, Jeannie, were shocked to find that even if they paid the cat’s vet’s bills they could not take him back home with them.

Wha..?

Earlier this week, the Adver revealed that 24 cats are being cared for by the local charity, but, because they do not have any on-site facilities to house them, the animals are being put up in private catteries – which is costing £6 a cat a night.

/facepalm

“We have already got four cats, we know what we are doing,” said Gary.

“My point is if they are desperate for homes why don’t they let us have that cat?

“We offered to pay all the bills incurred. All this time, if the cat is still alive it is taking up room, it is costing them and there is a home here waiting for it.”

But you see, it’s not the right home, according to those jumped up little petty bureaucrats fearless animal defenders.

Gary has written to the RSPCA headquarters but has still not had any luck.

That’ll be the huge, well-staffed building they spend all their money on, right?

RSPCA committee member Alison Toop said: “We don’t rehome cats to the area they were found. A lot of cats get injured and we have had people try and scam us and pretend it is not their cat and try and adopt it back when its had the treatment.

“Also, if he adopted the cat and the other owner lived two streets down the old owner might take it back. ”

Yes, that’d be terrible, clearly, if the original owner found his or her lost pet, wouldn't it, Alison?

And did you miss the bit where they said they'd be happy to pay all the bills, and so clearly don't fall into that tiny minority of irresponsible pet owners out to scam the RSPCA out of some of it's precious political campaigning...err, sorry, animal-saving money?

“We have got a lot of cats, so if he wants to take one of the other cats by all means he can do.”

Oh, how good of you, you patronising cow!

Except he doesn’t want any cat, he wants this one. The one that he’s probably now wishing he never handed in to the soulless machine intelligence of the RSPCA, when rules and guidelines are there to ensure no-one ever does any thinking outside the box.

If Mr Sherman has any money to leave a charity in his will, I bet it won’t be to you.

The Three ‘S’s Come In Here, Surely..?

As the American Midwest ranchers say ‘Shoot, shovel and shut up’.

Sadly, Neil Froggat hasn’t heard about the ‘shut up’ bit:

A father who removed a pigeon nest from his balcony over concerns for his childrens’ health fears he could now face prosecution.

Oh, why?

Neil Froggatt approached Kingston Council, who own the New Malden flat, for their help after living next to inches deep of bird droppings and flocks of pigeons for months.

But the council, who axed their pest control service from April 1 this year, could only offer information and no practical help to Mr Froggatt and his family, who have lived in the flat for nine years.

On the council’s advice Mr Froggatt spent £100 on deterrents and regularly cleaned the first-floor balcony but after little improvement took matters into his own hands and removed the nest.

Well, since he’d exhausted all options, surely there’s nothing else anyone could expect him to do?

The nest and pigeons have since returned and Mr Froggatt has found out that under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 removing the nest is illegal.

So, just don’t go blabbing to anyone about what you’ve done, and you’ll be fi…

Oh. Right…

Emma Haskell, director of the Pigeon Control Advisory Service, said Mr Froggatt and professional pest control companies should deal with the problem.

She said: “I don’t think councils should have to deal with it, it’s a complete and utter waste of time, councils have spent millions and millions in the past and now with cuts they realise it’s not worth it.

“You need to target the source of the pigeons…”

The 'source of the pigeons'..? Surely, that’s other pigeons?

And isn't that just what Mr Froggatt has done?

Saying It With Flowers!

Mr Blyth, 28, of Wick Lane, Ardleigh, commissioned the display to promote a website for his company, the Boot Group, which runs car boot fairs off Old Ipswich Road, Ardleigh.

It was the advert for his company, picked out in daffodil bulbs on a hillside. Pretty innovate, no? Who could possibly object?

Council officials originally ordered Robert Blyth to dig up 13,000 flowers planted on his land in Ardleigh claiming they amounted to illegal advertising.

Oh. Right.

Now Tendring Council has backed down and apologised for demanding he remove his 150ft floral display.

Wait, what?

Mr Blyth said: “I have not long been off the telephone to a senior enforcement officer who has decided the council would like to retract the enforcement action it was planning to take – and get the officer to write to us personally with sincere apologies.”

This is pretty unprecedented!

Nigel Brown, Tendring Council's communications manager, confirmed officials had contacted Mr Blyth and apologised for the way it dealt with the matter.

He said: “We have held our hands up and will not be pursuing this any further.”

Wonders will never cease...

Colchester Council: ‘”We’d Rather You Were Robbed, Frankly…”

And they wonder why they can’t attract business?

A jeweller says he will close his business this month because Colchester Council has refused to let him use his shutters.

OK, he’s in the wrong for putting them up and then applying for planning permission, though just why you should need to have planning permission for an anti-theft device is anyone’s guess…

Hosh Slar plans to shut Hosh jewellery store in Crouch Street after two-and-a-half years of trading and move to London or another town or city in East Anglia.

He says the valuable goods displayed in the shopfront mean he needs shutters.

That’s what we call a ‘no brainer’, Colchester Council…

He insists they do not make the surrounding conservation area look rundown.

The commenters to the article are a little sceptical that the area is considered a ‘conservation area’ in the first place, and with good reason.

The inspector recognised Mr Slar was the first tenant at the shop since travel agent Thomas Cook had moved out, and had improved its appearance. But he said Crouch Street was a conservation area and described the shutter as an “unsympathetic change”.

Would it be better if he painted a nice landscape on it?

Mr Slar said the council had told him alternative shutters may be acceptable, but he said they were not appropriate and would cost a further £3,000.

And Colchester Council is quite happy to see businesses either pay over the odds for security fittings, or f**k off, it seems.

It’s really no surprise that they are going downhill rapidly, is it?

I Guess Someone At Durham Council Has Seen ‘Caddyshack’…

Durham County Council has invested in more mole traps after complaints about an infestation in Weardale, County Durham.

But before the traps could be deployed, officers insisted on organising a health and safety assessment.

/facepalm

Councillor Shuttleworth said: “This is health and safety gone totally mad. How can you carry out a risk assessment before catching moles?

“They’re not going to bite you if you know what you are doing.

“There is a local man I told the council about, who has been catching moles for 30 years but, apparently, he doesn’t have the necessary paper qualifications.”

OMG!” An unlicensed moletrapper! He must feel like such an outlaw in Durham, the mole equivalent of Captain Quint from ‘Jaws’...

The council, of course, takes this seriously, and refutes arguments that this is plain bonkers:

James Bennett, the county council’s Streetscene manager, said: “We have to ensure we have adhered to legislation and have a rigid system in place for the control of moles.

“As a minimum qualification, all our pest control officers are trained, or receiving ongoing training, to give them the knowledge of all legislation , guidelines, animal welfare and health and safety issues they need to adhere to.

“However, we believe the gentleman referred to by Coun Shuttleworth uses methods which are not recommended under the legislation.

He was not able to confirm that he had the required knowledge of the pest control legislation.

“If he could do this then we could review the situation.”

*sigh*

If he could do that, no-one would bother to hire him, other than the council, who has money to waste…

Heartless And Soulless….

When Anthony Cotter’s last dog Scrappy died in 2008, he got permission from Oxford City Council to have a dog from Oxfordshire Animal Sanctuary, provided it did not annoy or intimidate neighbours.

But now the council has said Charlie, a doberman-German Shepherd cross, is too large for Mr Cotter’s first-floor flat. It wants him to swap the dog for a smaller breed.

It….what?!?

It wants him to swap his pet? Like it was a too-large TV, or faulty microwave oven?

Oxford City Council spokesman Louisa Dean said: “We gave this tenant permission to have a dog which was suitable for the property.

“This would have been a small or medium-sized dog.”

Oh, really? Because the only conditions he claims you placed on his choice were behavioural ones, not size-related ones…

Still, I’m sure you’ve got a record of your instructions to him to prove him wrong.

Haven’t you?

“However, the tenant decided to get a large dog which has caused problems for his neighbours.

“He was asked to exchange the dog for a smaller, more manageable breed, but refused.”

Dear god, just imagine the utter carbon-dense piece of shrivelled coal that must occupy the space in Louisa Dean’s chest cavity, where any normal person’s heart would be, that she could even consider suggesting such a thing…

This is why local councils are held in such contempt by most of the population. They either attract creatures like Dean, or they convert normal people into creatures like Dean after a period of time.

One Of Life’s Universal Truths…

…if no-one misses you when you aren’t there, your job is not important:

Parking wardens refused to go to work this weekend because the panic buttons on their radios stopped working.

And why was that so important?

They said problems with their radio sets put their health and safety at risk because they could not raise the alarm if they were assaulted.

I suppose they could always try doing their job in a manner that doesn’t make people want to assault them? No?

The implications of this haven’t escaped notice, either. From the comments:

Rostrum, Hove says...

So.. No traffic wardens on Saturday and most of Sunday and no Parking Tickets handed out..

Were there any problems with the Traffic-flow? No

Were there any incidents of emergency vehicles not able to get to where they were needed? No

So the two main reasons for the whole scheme were unaffected.

This that the parking policies of our great city are all about raking in cash and NOT about traffic-flow, access and safety which is what the relevant laws are all about.

Quite!

Recession And Local Councils: Helping, Or Hindering?

It’s a question that cropped up when I read three local news items.

First, it’s the business-unfriendly Colchester Council in the news yet again:

Business representatives are concerned at the growing number of empty shops in Colchester.

They called for help to stem the problem and accused the council of putting obstacles in the way of the town centre’s economic recovery.

Well, they do indeed have a reputation for doing just that.

Remember this story?

Keith Brown, regional organiser of Essex FSB, said: …“It’s definitely the recession causing the problem. But Colchester Council is not helping.

“It’s taking a very harsh line against things like companies giving out leaflets promoting their business or putting up signs saying where they are located, like the Cowdray Centre.

“We are trying to meet with the council and we have certainly made our views known. An empty shop in the High Street brings down the whole street and has a domino effect.”

And more to the point, an empty shop means a lack of business rates coming in, which means a lack of income for the council. You’d think a council employee would see that.

Hell, anyone who’s ever played ‘Sim City’ knows it!

Iain Wicks, chairman of north-east Essex FSB, added: “It is important for the future of Colchester town centre that this move is reversed as quickly as possible and Essex FSB will be looking to work with Colchester Council and other partners to actively encourage more retailers to choose Colchester and open stores in the town.

“A key part of that offer to retailers is for Colchester Council to be seen as business friendly and supportive of retailers trying to attract new customers into their stores. Sadly that is not the current image that Colchester Council projects.”

Indeed. Of course, they don’t agree with that assessment.

Nick Barlow, councillor responsible for economic development, said: “I think we’re doing all we can to help businesses.”

You might think so, but if you aren’t, and if businesses are saying so, and if shops are closing and nothing is taking their place…

Meanwhile, in another Essex town:

A restaurant has been dealt a blow after councillors vetoed retrospective plans to use a shop next door as a bar and waiting area.

Oh, really?

The Estuary restaurant, in Leigh Broadway, has been using the adjoining linked premises as an area for its customers to wait for a table.

The business was threatened with enforcement action after Southend Council received a complaint in February last year that the wall had been taken down and the business had expanded.

Well, I’ve a tiny bit of sympathy with the council here – this sort of ‘encroachment by degree’ is precisely the sort of thing that we hate to see in disputes with travellers, after all.

On the other hand, since this is clearly a booming business that is bringing in revenue, wouldn’t a hefty fine be more sensible?

At a council development control committee, Jim Clinkscales (Lib Dem, Blenheim Park) disagreed with the proposals and said it would open the floodgates to other businesses facing enforcement action.

Ah, I see. Got to treat everyone equally, eh?

Does it not occur to you to fine them too?

John Lamb (Con, West Leigh) said he felt the permission should be granted and expressed concerns about the effect on business.

He added: “A lot of investment has gone into the establishment.

“I believe we should be encouraging some of these. We have to allow some to develop because we need this type of business in the 21st century.

“Let’s not refuse it and make it close down.”

I doubt it’ll close down. There’s no need to reach for the hyperbole…

Graham Longley (Lib Dem, Blenheim Park) supported Mr Lamb and said it was the wrong decision.

He added: “I think we have an unrealistic approach to this. It is perfect for where it is.

“I just think we are being draconian in not allowing this sort of activity to take place.

“It is essential in terms of cafe society and cafe culture. It improves the ambience in the area. If it was closed we would have an empty shop.

“It is a clean, well-run facility which should be available to everybody. I think it would be totally wrong to close it down.”

It seems to be catching…

However, the application was refused with members voting ten against and two for.

Bet I know who they were!

The owner is understandably miffed:

Mr Bailey said: “Leigh Town Council hasn’t got a problem with us, none of the public have a problem with us. Who is the council actually working for? ”

That’s a very good point, Mr Bailey. Whom indeed?

Also in Essex, this time at Canvey Island:

A laundry boss says he has been left high and dry after his plans to expand a business were knocked back by the council.

Simon Bannister, who runs Canvey Island Ironing and Laundry Services, wanted to expand his business by creating a new laundrette in an empty shop at 326 Long Road on the island.

He wanted to reopen an existing empty shop and they turned him down? Why?

His proposals were turned down by Castle Point Council’s planning department due to a lack of parking provision.

But if the lack of parking is an issue, what can be done with the empty shop?

Mr Bannister, who has owned the Charfleets Industrial Estate-based business for 18 months, said: “I’m completely gutted.

“I would have thought the council would be backing local businesses, given the country’s economic problems.

“Their general attitude is you’re just a little man and what we say goes.

“The business is going well, but I wanted a shop front so we could get more passing trade.

“I’ve wasted £2,000 on this application and got nowhere.”

And there’s another part of the problem – if it costs a business money to place an application which might get turned down on a whim, where’s the incentive?

Norman Smith, councillor for economic regeneration, said: “I can understand the officers’ concerns because that spot has been an accident blackspot and the pedestrian crossing has only recently been put in.

“I certainly don’t like to see an empty shop anywhere.

“Perhaps we could try to support him looking for a suitable shop elsewhere.”

Why would he want to go elsewhere when there’s an empty shop right there..?

And if lack of parking is an issue, what business are you EVER going to allow to open that shop? Will it stay empty forever?

These three seem to sum up the dilemma of just what 'civic good' local councils do.

The Unspeakable In Pursuit Of The…Really Quite Delicious, Actually

A pie shop owner may have to stop selling hare and pigeon pie in summer because of a 108-year-old law – which was devised before invention of refrigeration.

PJ's Pie Pub serves a variety of meat-based pies – but one particular recipe has led to an investigation involving Trading Standards, the Department for Environment, and local officials.

And reading on, you clearly see that the problem is not the law (for once).

It’s the interfering busybodies that iDave fondly assumes will only do ‘good works’ as part of his Big Society…

The furore began when the pub's hare and pigeon pie caught the attention of the Hare Preservation Trust, which has asked for enforcement action be taken.

And why?

Well, because in an attempt to preserve the hare, this law was passed:

The legislation in question, outlined in the Hare Preservation Act of 1892, stipulates: "It shall not be lawful during the months of March to July to sell or expose for sale, in any part of Great Britain, any hare or leveret."

The law was passed before commercial freezing was invented and designed to ensure that people caught with hares during those months could be prosecuted for having shot them in the breeding season.

A sensible law. One that, like many bylaws (no, not that ‘taxicabs must carry a bale of hay for their horse’ one!) has never been repealed because, well, it’s clearly not intended to meet 21st century life:

Owner Mike Pichel-Juan said: "A modern interpretation of the Act would have to take into account the fact they didn't have freezer technology in 1892 to preserve meat which was legitimately purchased from a game dealer. We only use hares which have been killed within the correct game season and then frozen.

"Nothing we do is contravening the spirit of the Act – which is about the safeguarding of brown hares during their breeding season."

Indeed.

Sadly, that reckoned without the sheer vindictiveness and maliciousness of the single-issue fanatic…

John Rimington, spokesman for the Hare Preservation Trust, said: "We are disgusted by the activity of this outlet. There were six times as many brown hares in Britain when the Act was passed as there are today.

"Not surprisingly, the brown hare is listed in the current UK Biodiversity Action Plan for declined species at risk of possible extinction."

They weren’t shot out of season, you immeasurable cretin, they are frozen!

And the hares aren’t declining because we are all suddenly eating them in pies!

A fact which – unless you are truly a grade A moron – you must know, and know well. So that makes you a cretin who will do anything for publicity for your cause.

Which though it might be a good one, is now tarnished by its involvement in another example of ‘Britain’s Stupidest Laws’…

A spokesperson for Boston Borough Council confirmed they are currently investigating the matter with Trading Standards, although an outcome is not expected for a few weeks.

Sounds to me as though they are now keeping their heads down, and hoping none of the opprobrium coming the trust’s way spreads to them.

Pity they didn’t take the opportunity to tell publicity-chasing John Rimington to do one at the time…

Mr Pichel-Juan concluded: "If the authorities tell me I'm breaking the law, I will take hare pie off the menu until after July. If I don't, according to the original 1892 Act, I could be fined 20 shillings."

Personally, I’d laugh, pay the 20 shillings in pennies and then walk out of the court eating a hare pie, one of a size that would make Desperate Dan salivate…

So what will the Hare Preservation Trust have achieved if he’s found guilty? Will the frozen hares be magically restored to life? No, of course not.

All they’ve succeeded in doing is making themselves look like small-minded, petty morons.

I bet they are collecting a nice set of comments on their blog too…

It Seems We’ll Have To Revise That Old Ronald Reagan Quote…

..it should now be ‘The nine most frightening words in the English language: I’m from the government a charity and I’m here to help’:

Patricia Faulkner and Dave Armitage built a run in their Colchester back garden for the squirrel they have named Squeaky.

Although he cannot climb trees, he is able to run about.

Squeaky has been with them for about seven years, but they are moving from Hazelton Road to a smaller home in Norfolk and had to call in the RSPCA as they will not have room for him.

And that’s when they first hit a snag…

The animal charity told the pair they had broken the law by keeping a wild animal without a licence and said Squeaky would have to be put down.

Bet they weren’t expecting that, if their only experience of the RSPCA was those heartwarming ads and ‘Rolf’s Animal Hospital’…

If they defy officials, they could face prosecution.

Well, naturally! The RSPCA aren’t going to look a gift horse in the mouth, are they?

This couple came to them for help, but who cares about that, when there’s a target to reach…

Ms Faulkner, 50, who works as a medic on film sets, said: “I can’t believe they would want to get rid of him.

“It’s like they are the Royal Society for the Protection of Cruelty to Animals, except squirrels.”

I wouldn’t assume, going on their past history, that they are necessarily any better with other creatures.

RSPCA spokeswoman Katy Geary confirmed the couple had unwittingly broken the law by keeping a grey squirrel, as a licence was required under restrictions laid down by Natural England.

She said it would also be illegal to release Squeaky, in the knowledge that he was not fit to survive in the wild.

That means the RSPCA’s only option, other than to put him down, is to find a sanctuary which does have a licence to keep squirrels.

And god forbid they try to do that. It might eat into their bereaved-relative-hassling time and money…

The restrictions are tougher than for many other species as moving grey squirrels into certain areas of the country could put native red squirrels under threat.

Ms Geary said: “It is a bit of a legal minefield.

“It is one of these cases where people are doing what they think is best to care for an animal, but technically they are breaking the law.”

Well, after all, we wouldn’t want to encourage people to start thinking they could care for animals themselves, would we? No, that sort of thing’s best left to the profressionals.

Not All The Dumb Creatures Are Behind Bars...

...quite a few of them inhabit Sevenoaks Council offices:

Eagle Heights owner Alan Ames has been told he needs to upgrade his wildlife park’s perimeter fence because he has potentially dangerous animals on site such as cheetahs and a camel.

Fair enough. What's the problem, cost?

Well, no:

Sevenoaks District Council met with Mr Ames on Thursday (Mar 25) following a routine Defra inspection which concluded his current fence needs upgrading before his zoo licence expires in two years time.

But the council has told Mr Ames he is unlikely to get planning permission to put up the type of fence required, as the zoo falls on green belt land in Eynsford.

/facepalm Even Yossarian would be hard put to believe that one.

Still, never let it be said that the council can't come up with a solution:

However it says he would not need a fence if the animals were no longer on the site and the park reverted to its original use as a bird of prey centre.

Aha! I think I see the reason for this intransigence. Some animal rights anti-zoo nuts on the council, perchance? Ones who are not keen on animals in captivity?

Ones who are only too happy to let this bureacratic foul-up remove the problem?

Mr Ames, who visits around 100 schools each year lecturing on his work, says he has no idea where the animals would go if the park lost its licence.

He said: "This is incredulous, it's come out of the blue.

“The will to carry on is slowly being beaten out of me.

“I’ve spent the last 14 years trying to do something useful and educate people and now I don’t know what to do.”

He added: “I’m an expert in my field and I’m treated like a cretin.”

I think anyone reading this is going to see who the cretins really are, don't worry about that, Mr Ames...

A council spokesman said: “The council is keen to see this valuable tourist attraction continue in the district and will work closely with the owners to try and secure the centre's ongoing viability within the limits of the legislation applicable to zoos.

"If Eagle Heights failed to comply with conditions specified within its Zoo Licensing Act, then ultimately the council has the power to direct that Eagle Heights or parts of it be closed to the public, but it is hoped that the council and the owners of Eagle Heights will continue to work together to ensure Eagle Heights complies fully with the licence conditions."

Allow me to translate that: blah, blah, blah...

Local councils: gradually strangling all businesses they don't have full control over.