Sense of proportion?

Anybody else think that if bovine TB was spread by rats, or crows, or snakes, nobody would give two hoots about trying to eradicate them.  The fuss about culling badgers is simply because they are seen by some as cuddly, friendly animals (which they are not) and the economic harm they do to the dairy farming industry is conveniently overlooked or underplayed.  I've said it before - Walt Disney has a lot to answer for!

Ding dong

Bishop's Castle is a pretty market town in Shropshire, close to the Welsh border in what is known as the Welsh Marches.  I've been there a few times - my wife had friends in Craven Arms and when we used to visit it was one of the places we would go to.  I can't say I remember the town hall clock but apparently it chimes every quarter-hour and this is now causing a bit of a local ruckus, with the town's main hotel asking that it be silenced during the night as it is disturbing its guests.  Seems reasonable to me, but in places like this tradition is very important, and the locals are queuing up to oppose such a move.  Given that the town depends heavily on tourism I would have thought that that should be the primary consideration - after all, most public chiming clocks are switched off between midnight and dawn.

Missing a trick?

As someone who is well aware than I drink more than is healthy for me, but who enjoys a bottle of wine, I was interested to hear that a couple of well-known wine makers are bringing out a range of 5.5% ABV (alcohol by volume) bottles of.....well, that's the problem - under EU law you can't call it wine unless it's at least 8.5% ABV. Mind you, I haven't tried any, mainly because it costs the same as the real stuff, and if I'm going to pay that price I might as well get maximum bangs for my buck.

Closing down - everything must go!!

"Was £750 - now only £350" - does anybody really take any notice of such adverts? Does anybody really think "Ooh, what a bargain - I can't pass that up!".  I find it difficult to believe, but the fact that the Office of Fair Trading is demanding that six (unnamed) high street stores justify these sort of statements, or stop using them, suggests that there are those who are taken in by them.  Surely the only question is - am I prepared to pay £350 for it (whatever it is).  What it may or may not have been on sale for previously is of no consequence.  This is the here and now.

Do they have an away strip?

We're used to the idea of football teams changing their kit every year as a money-making exercise, but it seems that schools are now getting in on the act. My local primary has advised parents that as from the new school year, their uniform will be changing, and all pupils must turn up in the new uniform or face disciplinary action. And of course it goes without saying that the uniform must be bought from the school's approved supplier, who just happens (surprise, surprise) to be the most expensive shop in town!  What a con!!

Somebody sure seems to have got it in for them.

I'm sorry to come back to the story of the teacher and the young girl who ran away together to France, but I think I must be missing something.  He is now in gaol, she is now 16, and clearly wishes to go on seeing him.  She has not, as far as I have been able to ascertain, been taken into care, and indeed it is difficult to see how there could be grounds for doing so, and yet the local authority have apparently decreed that she should not be allowed to see him until she is 18.  By what authority?? Like I say - am I missing something?

Beware crossing the bridge.

When is a troll not a troll?  I think a distinction can, and should be made between someone who is saying "I know this may upset you, but this is the way I see it.." and someone who is saying "I am saying this because I know it will upset you".  The second is a troll, but what about the first?  I've said before that in my opinion true freedom of speech must necessarily include the right to upset and offend, but where that becomes the primary objective then that is where I feel the line is crossed. Problem is that the line can at times be very vague and indistinct.

Bloody and unbowed.

I like a piece of steak - not that I can afford it that often today with the price of beef being what it is, but when I do have it, I like it rare.  As my wife would say I "like to see the blood following the knife".  But it seems that health inspectors are advising restaurants that they should not serve beef (or duck, or liver or kidney) pink because of the danger of food poisoning.  How have we managed to survive all these years?  What about steak tartare?  What sort of a wimpy, milksop society are we turning in to?  God, take me home - I've had enough of this.

R.I.P.

Marian McPartland - like George Shearing, born in England, went over to the US and made it as a top class jazz pianist.  I've said it before, but thank God for recording technology, which means that, although she is no longer with us, her music lives on.

Got it wrong?

Stonehenge in the news again following a court action taken by one King Arthur Pendragon, a Druid leader to have human remains which were excavated there re-interred.  It is of course less then two months ago that Druids and other assorted types gathered there to celebrate the summer solstice.  Leaving aside for the moment that any connection between Stonehenge and the Druids is tenuous to say the least, it always strikes me that if in fact the site was created as some sort of solar calendar, then they are celebrating the wrong solstice.  Think about it - if you are primitive man, you have experienced the way the days gets longer and warmer and then shorter and colder, but you have no understanding as to whether this pattern will continue - you just hope it will.  So which are you more likely to celebrate - that it's the middle of summer and the days will be getting shorter, or that it's the middle of winter and they will be getting longer?  No-brainer, isn't it? So if the site was in fact used in this way, I am confident that it would be the winter solstice that it would have been used to celebrate. Mind you, it's a bit chilly to be standing around in the middle of a field in December so perhaps that has something to do with the fact that modern Druids choose to gather there in mid-summer.

Aaaargh....!

Pub quiz question the other week - which film actor has died the most times in their movies?  Our team decided that the answer would most probably be someone who had made his name playing "baddies" in horror films - and Vincent Price was the name which sprang to mind. Wrong - but good guess apparently.  Price holds third place, but is beaten by another horror film actor of a previous generation - Bela Lugosi. Both of them however have to give way to John Hurt who has apparently "died" no less than 40 times in his films.

What were the chances?

Well - what a co-incidence!  When I published yesterday's post (which was actually written a few days ago) I did not know about the case of the Guardian journalist's friend who was held for nine hours at Heathrow under the authority of Schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act 2000, but it just goes to show, doesn't it?  What makes that case even more deplorable is that, if I read it right, this man was not seeking to enter the country (which is what Schedule 7 was designed to cover) but was simply passing through - in transit between one flight and another.  I really hope his unfortunate experience results in a fundamental rethink of the law - but I'm not holding my breath.

Big Brother? Meet even Bigger Brother!

If you're a regular reader of this blog (are there any?) you will know that I am critical of the way the police use (or I would say, misuse) their right to search your property and examine your computer, mobile 'phone etc. following your arrest.  But at least they have to arrest you first and (at least in theory) have to have reasonable grounds for suspecting you of having committed some offence in order to do so.  So you can imagine my horror on finding out about Schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act 2000 which gives the same powers to those policing our borders, but without any need for an arrest, or indeed any need for suspicion, reasonable or otherwise, that you are a "wrong 'un".  So you can be searched, your belongings can be searched, your computer and 'phone can be examined and the contents downloaded and copied, all because some border control officer is having a bad day, or doesn't like the way you looked at them, or even just on a random basis. Welcome to Great Britain!

Which is worse?

I wonder which the inhabitants of the sleepy little West Sussex village of Balcombe find the more disturbing - the fact that they have an exploratory drilling site in their back garden as it were, or the fact that the village has been over-run by Rent-A-Mob protesters from outside intent on disrupting said drilling.  Talk about being between a rock and a hard place. 

Ha ha

You probably need to know something about computer programming  to appreciate this one -
                A computer programmer's wife sends him to the corner shop - she tells him to get a loaf of bread, and if they've got any eggs to get half a dozen.  He comes back with six loaves of bread.  "Why have you bought six loaves?" she asks him.  "They had eggs" he replies.

E or not-E?

Electronic cigarettes have been banned on many trains and also in Wetherspoon's pubs it seems.  Well, it was only a matter of time, wasn't it?  Firstly, there are those who object to the idea of people getting pleasure from the ingestion of nicotine, however obtained, and maintain that it must pose a health risk to others, but I think the main problem is that it is difficult to tell - particularly from a distance - whether someone is smoking an e-cigarette or a real one - so do you challenge them and risk making a fool of yourself, or let it go and become complicit in a breach of the law? I'm not sure what the answer is, but I think there needs to be some way of being able to positively identify an e-cigarette and then most of the problem goes away.

Couldn't make it up.

For the benefit of my mate from Mars, a "99" is an ice-cream cone with a chocolate flake stuck in it - very popular. So the story is that an ice-cream kiosk owner in Bognor Regis has been told by the council that he can't sell 99s because this would breach the terms of his lease.  He can sell ordinary ice-cream cones, but not with a flake in them. This is not perhaps as petty as might first appear, as the council have to have regard to the rights of the other shop and kiosk owners in the town and try and establish a balance between what is sold where.  But what makes this a "couldn't make it up" candidate, is that he is allowed within the terms of his lease to sell chocolate flakes - so he can't sell you a 99, but he can sell you a cone of ice-cream, and then separately sell you a flake, which you can then stick in yourself!

More number fun

Just remembered another of my maths teacher's little tricks (he was a really good teacher who always kept us interested).  How to prove that 0.9999... (the dots mean the 9s go on for ever) = 1.

x = 0.9999...

10x = 9.9999...

10x - x = 9.9999... - 0.9999....

9x = 9

x = 1

So there you are - or are you?  You may remember the reductio ad absurdum approach which says that if you come up with an absurd or impossible result, then there must be something wrong with your reasoning.  And the tendency is to say that x cannot be both 0.999... and 1 and therefore there must be something wrong.  But in fact this is just a quirk of the way our number system works - irrational numbers (like 0.999...) don't behave the same as "ordinary" numbers and if you do "ordinary" maths with them you are likely to get apparently weird results.

Is it an advert?

So what's your take on this van with the "In the UK illegally? Go home or face arrest" billboard on the side which has been touring immigrant areas of London. The Advertising Standards Authority (why them of all people?) are considering whether it breaches any laws or regulations, after receiving 60 complaints.  I would have thought that, given the number of people who must have seen it, 60 is a very small number, but there you are.  I find it useful when considering anything of this nature, to turn it round and look at it the other way.  So what are these complainants saying?  If they are saying that the "go home or face arrest" statement is somehow wrong or unacceptable, they are presumably saying that those immigrants who are here illegally should (a) be allowed to stay - i.e. not go home, and (b) not face arrest.  So like I say - what's your take?

It's black or it's white - no greys.

It seems to me that we in this country are undergoing a subtle shift in attitude, moving from an American-inspired "compensation culture" (if something bad happens to me, someone must pay) more towards a "victim culture" (if something bad happens to me, someone must be to blame). Those few voices suggesting that people should take at least some responsibility for their own actions are being shouted down by those who have a mind-set which is not interested in anything other than a simplistic predator-prey relationship.

Who's for Mickey Mouse on the fiver?

Perhaps I live a sheltered life, but I find it hard to understand why anybody would get worked up over whose picture appears - or doesn't - on a banknote.  But if you are such a person, then you would do well to remember Newton's third law - for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.  If you don't want to get trolled (I understand that's the technical term) then don't provide the ammunition. On the other hand, if you feel strongly about something and make your views public, accept that there will be those who will object to what you say - and maybe won't be too polite about it.

Nurse? Nurse??

I find it strange that (whether they are adhered to or not) we have official ratios of teachers to pupils in schools, but the idea that we should have similar set ratios of nurses to patients in hospitals is likely to be rejected by the Government, who say that levels of staffing should be for individual hospitals to decide.  I have to say that that doesn't fill me with confidence.

No offence intended (sorry about that!)

The other week I painted my fence which separates my back garden from my neighbour's.  Except that it's not actually my fence.  The deeds state that that boundary belongs to my neighbour, and therefore the fence belongs to them and is their responsibility.  Not that I have any problem with my neighbours who are as nice as you could wish for.  But the question has arisen as to whether you are entitled to paint your side of a dividing fence which does not belong to you.  A woman in Nottingham has been charged with criminal damage for doing just that. Clearly there is history here between the neighbours, but it will be interesting to see what the courts make of it.

What???

You occasionally get these stories in the paper that you read, and then go "No, that can't be right" and you read them again but they still make no sense.  Here's one - young girl off for a holiday in the Balearics is stopped at the airline check-in desk and told that her denim shorts are too revealing, and that she must change before she will be allowed through.  Now you can argue whether this is a proper exercise of the airline's authority - they say they have a "dress code", but I've never heard of such a thing - but that's not what makes this story so unbelievable.  They insisted that she changed there and then, at the check-in desk, in front of all the other queuing passengers!  So if she was revealing too much flesh in her shorts, imagine what she would be revealing with them off??  Like I say, I kept re-reading it and thinking - that makes no sense.

Is it or isn't it?

Around here there are stretches of motorway where, at times of congestion, the hard shoulder is opened up as a fourth lane.  But the police are now getting concerned that motorists are using the hard shoulder even when it's not officially open.  Ambiguous signing is partly to blame I think, but then there's the question of why, if the hard shoulder can be opened when it suits, it cannot be open all the time.  It's either safe to use or it isn't, surely? The confusion only arises because it's open at some times but not others.  If it were open all the time - no confusion.

Number fun.

As a schoolkid, I was always fascinated by the story of the "Indestructible Nine".  If you take any number and multiply it by 9, the digits of the answer will always add up to 9.  Think of a number - 5,726 say.  Multiply it by 9.  The answer is 51,534. Add those digits together: 5+1+5+3+4 = 18.  Do the same again: 1+8 = 9.  And there you are - works for any number you care to think of.  The other thing I remember our maths teacher amazing us with was that 111,111,111 multiplied by 111,111,111 comes to 12,345,678,987,654,321!

Music Man

Many of Haydn's symphonies have nicknames - perhaps the best known are the "Farewell" and the "Surprise".  The Farewell was composed as a broad hint to his boss Prince Esterházy that it was time for them all to go back home after some months spent at his summer residence - the symphony ends with the players one by one blowing out the candles on their music stands and leaving the stage until there are only two violins left.  The Prince apparently took the hint.  The Surprise has an unexpectedly loud chord in the middle of a soft passage - it is said to wake up those who had dozed off.  But one I hadn't heard of until recently is The Palindrome - so called because the theme to the third movement is the same played backwards as forwards.  I think I would have liked Haydn.

Going once...

Isn't this story of Jane Austen's ring a bit weird?  It was bought at auction last year by an American celebrity who I imagine few people in this country have ever heard of - but that's beside the point. She outbid everybody else, so now the ring is hers surely?  Well, yes and no, it appears.  The Culture Minister (did you know we had such a thing?) has stepped in and forbidden her from taking it out if the country - in the hope it seems that some UK buyer will come forward and "save it for the nation". Several questions spring to mind - why was it allowed to be put up at auction if this was always the intention, should it be bought by a foreigner, or at the very least should it not have been made clear that it was being sold with this condition attached to it, which might well have resulted in it commanding a much lower price. And suppose a UK buyer is found - what if the lady doesn't want to sell? Can she be prevented from taking it home on a permanent basis?  Can the Government override basic contract law?

The Lazy Cook

This is about Crashed Eggs - I just love the title.  There are umpteen versions of this - I think it was originally a Spanish dish, but needless to say I've pared the idea down to the basics.  So, you will need -

• sliced onion - Spanish for pref.
• sliced potato
• a green and/or red pepper - deseeded and sliced
• garlic
• a couple or three eggs

I've not bothered with quantities - you know how hungry you are.  Fry the onions and potatoes for about 10 minutes.  Add the garlic and pepper (optional but adds colour) and fry for another couple of minutes.  Season well, and now - where the dish gets it's name - break the eggs and drop them in from some height, so that they "crash" into the mixture, and then continue to cook until they're set.  And there you are!

Can't have it both ways.

You may remember Vicky Pryce - she was the wife of MP Chris Huhne, and was convicted of taking speeding points for him and sentenced to eight months in prison. Several years ago she was made a Companion of the Order of the Bath in recognition of her work as Head of the Government's Economic Service.  In view of her conviction, that honour has been taken from her.  I find that strange - or perhaps to me it points up the absurdity of the honours system.  She wasn't given the honour because she was a nice person - even an honest and law-abiding person - but presumably because she was a good economist and had done a good job as Head of the Department.  So does a prison sentence suddenly cease to make her a good economist, or in any way alter the value of the work she did?  It is said that she has brought the Order into disrepute, but if it is to be a pre-requisite of being given an honour that not only have you done something worth-while, but also that you are morally and ethically squeaky-clean, then future honours lists will be able to be written on the back of a postage stamp.  Either she was originally worthy of recognition, in which case she must still be, or she shouldn't have been offered it in the first place.

Two bob a pahnd - they're lovely!

My wife was a very tolerant person - she had to be, married to me (!) but she did have a few hobby-horses she was wont to ride, and one of them concerned British apples.  Come this time of year, she would go round the fruit and veg section of the supermarket bemoaning the fact that there was rarely a British apple to be seen - those on display would mainly come from France or the USA despite us living not that far from the fruit orchards of the Vale of Evesham.  So is this the supermarkets dictating what we are offered, or is it that British apple growing has not moved with the times and public taste?  Speaking for myself as now, sadly, a singleton, I buy Braeburns which come from New Zealand, simply because they are good keepers - in deference to my wife I did used to go to the local market and buy British apples, but found more often than not that I was having to throw half of them away because they'd gone bad before I got round to eating them.  So - principle versus practicality. Always a difficult balance.