Polar bears 1, Spycam 0

Like this story about the use of cameras disguised as snowballs, ice-floes and such to film the everyday life of polar bears.  Perhaps they weren't quite as well disguised as was thought.  The bears found them, and destroyed them.  One up for privacy!  Perhaps we can introduce polar bears round here to see to the CCTV cameras?

Holy Mastercard, Batman!

I posted a few weeks ago about how I objected to being emotionally blackmailed by charities, particularly at this time of year, and now I learn that the government is considering requiring banks and retailers to ask anybody making a purchase using their bank card, or using an ATM whether they wish to make a donation to charity.  For heaven's sake, leave me alone!

Follow that bottle!

Fascinating snippet in the news about a pilot scheme being run in Dundee whereby bottles of booze are "tagged" in such a way that they can be traced back to the shop that sold them.  The idea is that if an under-age drinker is found (presumably in a public place - under-age drinking in private is not an offence, or is it in Scotland?) the system can be used to determine where the drink was purchased, and then hopefully using the store's CCTV the actual purchaser can be identified, and the appropriate action taken if necessary.  All a bit Big Brother but that's the way things are going these days, isn't it?

Football.

Gloomy days at the Molineux - Boxing Day match was a "must-win" and we didn't.  Wolves now bottom of the table, and history tells us that the team which is bottom going into the New Year rarely survives.  Irony is that we are probably playing better (if only marginally) than last year, but the luck really hasn't been with us as it was on one or two important occasions last season.  So in the words of Sir Alex Ferguson it sure is "squeaky bum time".

Sauce for the goose...

Does anybody else find it ironic that the founder of WikiLeaks is now complaining because details of the prosecution case against him in Sweden are being leaked to the press?

The day after.

In my youth, this used to be known in our house as  "Pyjama Day", because nobody bothered to get dressed.  There was something deliciously decadent about spending the day in your dressing-gown.  Can't do it these days of course - I need to go out and get my newspaper, for one thing. And then, somehow it's not the same when you're on your own.  Oh well.....

Season's greetings...

...to one and all.

Christmas trivia.

Just one item for you this year, but I particularly like the story of the Italian "Santa Claus" who is in fact an old lady riding a broomstick who goes round delivering presents to children on the night of January 5th.  The story is that she was approached by the three wise men (let's assume there were three, OK?) who told her of the imminent birth of the Christ-child, but she was too busy to go with them, and by the time she got her act together the star had disappeared and she couldn't find her way.  So she flies round to this day leaving presents at every house with children in the hope that He will be there.  And because she was late starting out, Italian children have to wait nearly an extra fortnight for their presents.  I think that's a nice story.

Underhand...

As a follow-up to yesterday's post, just what is the position these days when you're talking to journalists?  My recollection is that you could make it clear from the get-go that you were talking "off the record" and then they couldn't directly report anything you said.  And if you were just chatting generally and you said something newsworthy, the journalist might say "Can I quote you on that", and you had the right to say yes or no as you felt inclined, and if you said no, that was that.  But these days we get more ansd more cases where someone is secretly recorded and what they say is then published without even any pretence of asking their permission, and even worse, as in the Vince Cable case, this is done by journalists posing as ordinary members of the public, so you don't even realise that you're talking to a journalist.  So what's the position these days - is it anything goes?  Have you any comeback?  Is there anywhere you can go for redress?

Unwise words.

Hard to believe that as astute a politician as Vince Cable would make the comments ascribed to him recently of threatening to bring down the coalition government by resigning, but it goes further than that.  As far as the LibDems are concerned, coalition government is their Holy Grail.  Proportional representation is at the heart of their philosophy, and PR will almost always produce a coalition government.  So the LibDems have a vested interest in demonstrating to the country that coalition government works, and works well.  If this coalition fails - particularly if it fails as a result of something the LibDems do - then they might as well fold their tents and go off into the night.  They will be finished as any sort of a serious political party.  I'm sure Vince Cable appreciates this as much as anyone.

Ha ha.

Barrister to client:  "Now that you've been acquitted, will you tell me the truth.  Did you steal the car?
Client to barrister "After hearing your amazing argument in court this morning, I’m beginning to think I didn’t."

Information, information, information.

More travel disruption, more flights cancelled, more people having to spend the night sleeping on airport floors, and so on and so on.  And once again, the major complaint you hear is lack of information.  You'd really think that organisations would have learned by now that when things go awry the best thing you can do is to keep the punters informed - even if you have nothing concrete to tell them, the fact that you are talking to them and telling them what you can will help take the heat out of the situation.  I would suggest that you should be devoting a significant part of your resources to doing just that - but it doesn't seem to happen. Time after time we hear the same story - customer desks are unmanned, 'phones are not answered, there's nobody in authority to be seen.  You can't make the problem disappear, but you can sure make it worse!

Here we go again.

I really, really do try not to go over old ground, but the news that rent-a-mob are now targeting Topshop to protest about its tax avoidance policies leaves me little choice.  So once again, can I make the point that TAX AVOIDANCE IS LEGAL!!!  An idea seems to have been gaining ground that it may be legal but somehow it is immoral, so I trust all those who subscribe to this view will be closing any ISAs that they have, and be moving the money into ordinary savings accounts, where they will pay tax on the interest.  Yes folks, an ISA is a form of tax avoidance, you naughty people!  And anyway, if Topshop is forced, by whatever means, to pay more tax, who do you think will end up footing the bill?  Topshop - don't make me laugh, they'll simply pass the cost on to the customers - who are probably the very people who are protesting.  Talk about shooting yourself in the foot!

Unbelievable - again.

Impossible not to feel enormous sympathy for Paul Houston, whose 12-year-old daughter was killed by a hit-and-run driver.  The driver is an Iraqi Kurd, and was seeking asylum in this country.  Mr Houston, not unnaturally, wanted him deported, but he has now been granted the permanent right to live here, on the ground that he now has a family here.  But there's more to this than Mr Houston's tragedy - this man has a string of convictions both before and after the hit-and-run, and seems as undesirable a character as you could imagine, so have we reached a stage where the fathering of a child in this country now overrides all other considerations, and gives you an absolute right not to be deported, however despicable you may be?  And if we have, how on earth did this come about?  Compare this with the story I reported about a month ago of the woman who was threatened with deportation because she was born in Canada and had never become a British citizen, despite living here since she was six months old - and she had a family here as well.  Something's wrong somewhere!

Change of mind.

Well I've bitten the bullet and bought myself a Kindle - my Christmas present to myself.  The main attractions are the relatively low cost of books, the fact that there is such a wide range of titles available and the ease and speed of access - you can see a book you fancy and be reading it within about a minute.  I still miss the feel of a "real" book, but have decided that the advantages outweigh the disadvantages.  I will keep you informed of my progress.

When is a decision not a decision?

I can't quite get my head round this latest Julian Assange business.  He has applied for, and been granted bail, and that decision has been appealed.  So far, so good - but why on earth is he in jail?  He has been granted bail, and unless and until it is overturned on appeal, surely that decision stands?  Assuming he can meet the conditions associated with it, he should be out on bail - so why the hell is he languishing in Wandsworth nick?  Can anybody out there enlighten me?

Policing demonstrations.

The Home Secretary has decided that the use of water cannon is not an appropriate response to the "student" violence.  Quite right I think.  The problem is that you are dealing with three types of demonstrator - the ones who simply want to make their point by shouting slogans and waving placards, the ones who perhaps start out that way, but then get caught up in all the excitement and end up doing things they might later regret, and finally the ones who simply came for a chance to fight the police and cause as much damage as possible.  Water cannon will not be able to differentiate - only police on the ground can do that, and we should support them in doing what is a very difficult job and accept that they will occasionally get it wrong.

Ban him.

We've enough home-grown trouble makers without importing them.  I think the US Pastor Jones (he who threatened to burn copies of the Koran on September 11th) should not be permitted to come here.

Ah, the nostalgia.

Christmas is coming....  Went out at the weekend to buy a turkey crown for Christmas Day.  And that started me thinking - we are now so used to being able to pick up an oven-ready chicken or turkey at any time of year, that it's hard to realise that it's not that long ago that chicken (turkey was almost unheard of then) was just a once or twice a year treat.  And when you bought a chicken, that's what you got - head, feet, feathers, the lot.  I can see my Gran now, sitting on a chair in the kitchen surrounded by newspaper on the floor, plucking a chicken laid across her lap.  Then when you'd got rid of all the main feathers, you would screw up bits of newspaper into spills, which you would light and then burn off all the remaining "pin feathers".  Quite a performance, so perhaps not surprising that you only had a chicken at Christmas, and maybe Easter.  Rabbit was a more common meal, but that wasn't easy to deal with either - you'd hang it up on the back of the door by its feet, cut round the legs and yank the skin down to peel it off - hence the expression (round here anyway) of "skin a rabbit" when you're pulling a tight jumper off a child.  How things have changed.

Top TV.

Can I just put in a plug for "Misfits"?  Now in its second series, it is one of the smartest things on the box at the moment.  It's crude - at times embarrassingly crude - but it's refreshingly different and a very clever and novel take on the "superhero" genre - think "Heroes" sort of crossed with "Auf weidersehen, Pet". My only problem is that I need to have the subtitles on to understand half of what Kelly is saying - just what the hell is that accent?

Well out of it.

Keep hearing that one of the main arguments against the rise in University tuition fees is that it will discourage young people from going to University and "they are our future".  Watched the supposed student demonstration in London on Thursday and kept thinking - this lot are our future?  Glad I won't be there to see it!

Bang, bang.

Birmingham have put in place a system of sensors around certain parts of the city which can "hear" gunshots and by triangulation pinpoint with reasonable accuracy where they came from.  I'm not sure that I find this particularly reassuring - it seems to me to be accepting that the war against gun crime is as good as lost, and the best the police can do is deal with the aftermath.  Certainly better than nothing and it may well result in more offenders being caught, and faster response by the emergency services, but surely we should be putting our efforts into preventing guns from being discharged in the first place?

It's a crazy world.

Did you know that you now have to be over 16 to buy Christmas crackers?  Crackers indeed!

Ha ha.

There is a rumour that the Royal Spanish Academy, who oversee Spanish grammar, are looking at the gender of some words.  Spanish nouns of course are either masculine or feminine.  It is said that one word under consideration is "computer" - should it be masculine or feminine?  The discussion apparently quickly split along sexist lines.  The men decided that a computer should be feminine because (a) nobody really understands how they work, (b) they speak a language which only other computers understand and (c) once you commit to one, you have to spend a small fortune on accessories for it.  The women maintained that a computer was obviously masculine, because (a) to get it to do something, you have to turn it on, (b) they hold a lot of data but still can't think for themselves and (c) as soon as you commit to one, you realise that if you had waited a little longer, you could have got a better model.  The women won the day!

Football.

Newcastle are at it again - unbelievable!

Not a difficult decision.

This business about the LibDems and whether they should vote for or against or abstain over the tuition fees Bill in view of what was in their manifesto seems to me to be missing the point.  A party's manifesto is a statement of what that party intend to do if they win the election and form a government - but the LibDems didn't win the election and have not formed a government so what was in their manifesto is not an issue.  They are certainly not bound by it.  Their allegiance now is - or should be - to the coalition of which they chose to be part.  The agreement which brought about that coalition allowed for them to abstain on this particular matter, so they can do that, but to vote against would be a betrayal of the agreement they entered into.  If they have any honour therefore, the choice is clear - they vote for or they abstain.

Somebody's stolen my snowman!

Item on local news the other night (and we've been here before) asking people not to abuse the 999 system by dialing it for what (in the view of the police) are trivial matters.  So the interviewer asked the police spokesman what number the public should dial for non-emergency enquiries  "0300........." (and I can't remember the rest of it) said the policeman.  And that's it isn't it?  Everyone knows 999, but how many people know - or even know where to look for - the number of their local police?  Whatever happened to that idea of having an easy-to-remember number (101 was it?) for "non-emergency" emergencies?

Slip sliding away.

The main roads are getting gritted, but the side roads and estate roads aren't, and after a few days of being compacted down by traffic, they are now turning into skating rinks.  I can accept that maybe the council doesn't have the resources to see to these minor roads, but whatever happened to grit bins?  Give us the grit and we'll see to ourselves - it seems such an obvious solution.  In my younger days, grit bins were a common sight - where did they go, and why?

Hmmm...

I have four grandchildren who go to three different schools, all local.  We haven't had that much snow round here, but there's a couple or three inches down I would estimate.  Two of the schools are open, the other is closed.  Difficult to see why there should be this disparity.  The reason given for the closed school is the catch-all "Health and Safety", which really tells you nothing.  The grandchild who goes there however tells a rather disturbing story - of course it could be wrong or simply playground gossip - but apparently if a school is open and a child does not attend, this goes down as an unauthorised absence, whereas if the school is officially closed it doesn't.  Attendance levels are one of the criteria by which a school is judged, so if the school thinks that due to bad weather a significant number of children won't make it, shutting the school protects the attendance levels and thereby the school's Ofsted rating.  Interesting...?

Strewth!

The main thing to come out of these WikiLeaks documents as far as I can see seems to be that politicians and government officials are wont to say one thing in public and another in private.  Now there's a surprise!

Votes for sale?

What about this Panorama programme then?  The team bidding for England to host the 2018 World Cup say it will damage their case.  The BBC say the programme was in the public interest.  A couple of points spring to mind.  Firstly, the content may well have been in the public interest, but the timing was a little strange - it seems pretty clear that this programme could have been put out weeks if not months ago, so why wait until the bid is just days away?  The second point is that the whole business reflects rather badly on the bid team who seem to be saying in coded language that they would rather that known corruption remained a secret than that revealing it jeopardised our bid.  On a purely personal level I hope we don't get it.  I may not be around in 2018, but Villa Park, which I assume is likely to be one of the venues, is uncomfortably close to where I live.