ARCHIVES OF THE BITCH.

Well Darlings,

Just when you thought it was safe to scratch your XXXX in public - I'm back! And what a notable time you've had whilst I've been away, haven't you?

I see Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett was named as Britain's most powerful woman, and the 29th most powerful woman in the world by the business magazine Forbes in its third annual list. Cherie Blair seems to have dropped right out of the running.

In a mouth to mouth contest Margaret was always expected to beat Cherie, wasn't she? Although Cherie may know how to lay down the law, Margaret is really the one who knows how to get her teeth into an argument, isn't she? And I'm betting she comes far cheaper too!

And during my absence Pop star Boy George has enjoyed cleaning the streets of Manhattan as his five-day community service punishment for wasting police time over there. I'm wondering: did he find an irony in every coke can he had to pick up?

George, who is reported as saying, "I think people didn't expect me to actually work, but that's what I came here for. And it's turned into a good experience," has also been attributed with telling us: ""The media has this image of me as this big faggot sitting on cushions all day eating grapes." - No! Really? Surely not? - and for also going on to say: "But I'm a real person - I have a Hoover, I don't have a cleaner. So the idea that I can't pick up a broom and shovel is ridiculous."

Well, I guess we'll just have to wait and see if Hoover bother to make anything out of that last statement. Not a cleaner, indeed! Poor George - he does seem to like putting a foot in his mouth, doesn't he? Whoops! There go those innuendos again! Never mind, we still loves you, darling!

Talking of things in mouths: what fell out of another person's mouth live on air is an entirely different matter. In a faux pas far greater than what any mention of the combined weights of the Weather Girls might produce, during an outside broadcast for ITV's Central News at Stoke's Trentham Gardens, Joanne Malin informed her television audience that it was "p***ing it down".

Apologising for her first serious gaffe in more than eight years, Joanne, who had meant to say: "tipping it down", is reported as saying, "To be on the safe side, next time it rains I am going to call it precipitation."

Careful now, sweetie pie! In your neck of the woods everybody understands exactly what "p***ing it down" means - start firing "precipitation" at them and they may think you're being rude!

Perhaps a precipitation was responsible for what recently washed up around the shores of Rhos on Sea and Shell Island - ambergris! Now, if you haven't met this before, it is quite simply: whale vomit - the puke of a mammal! And, as if to prove how stupid humankind can be, it has started a bit of a gold rush. Ambergris is used in the production of perfume. With this waxy substance secreted by the sperm whale fetching more than £10 a gram, a find can be worth as much as £2,000.

Never mind the thought of it, we splash it all over us to become attractive to (most often) the opposite sex. Oh, Yuk! Knowing this, perfumes and after-shaves will never be the same for some of us - we shall hereafter be looking out for the lumps. If I should see so much as one piece of a carrot . . . ! I have never completely gotten over discovering red food colouring, cochineal, is made from Mexican insects. Oh dear! I wonder how much human puke is worth? I seem to have found some!

There must be a fascination with animal excretions in Wales. Creative Paper Wales, a company in Snowdonia, has won a £20,000 Millennium Award for making greetings cards and gifts out of sheep droppings. As a sheep only digests 50% of what it eats, Welshmen are now running around the mountains with pooper scoopers collecting the animals' excrement. This is then sterilised in pressure cookers, washed, and the undigested fibres reclaimed. We're told the company's plant at Aberllefenni, near Machynlleth, will be able to produce one to two tonnes of paper a year - and that this will be used in a range of stationery and gift products.

What? Dearest, I love you so much I bought you some crap? No! Am I missing something here? They are actually washing sheep sh*t to reclaim some vegetable fibre? So why don't they just harvest some of the vegetation the sheep eat? It would grow back again; it's eco-friendly to do that. I guess sheep and the Welsh go back a long, long way. Ours is not to reason why . . .

And, if we're getting stereotypical, I guess I must mention how amused I was to notice the Irish Times reporting on the world mobile phone throwing championships in Savonlinna, Finland. The winner, of course, received a new phone. How apt!

Do you think humankind will ever see the twenty-second century? Or will we all be totally insane by then?

In an "Insanity rules - okay?" exercise, and as further proof that legal restraint is needed over our councils, Alan Joyce, from Poole in Dorset, was sent a fixed penalty notice telling him to pay a fine of £75.00 within 14 days or else face court action. His offence? A council officer had reason to believe he was "dripping his cigarette" whilst driving his car. In other words: a council officer thought he was littering the town by flicking his cigarette ash out of his car window.

We are talking a small amount of cigarette ash here - something which within seconds would require a team of forensic scientists to find it. More bird feathers and - let's face it again! - crap would litter those streets in a day than cigarette ash would in a month of Sundays! I have to ask: what about the thousands of people suffering from androgenetic alopecia - a common cause of hair loss - and of whom some must undoubtedly visit Poole every year? Are they forever to live in fear of being prosecuted should they choose to visit Poole? Do they need to wear a head covering in the town to avoid prosecution? Whilst cigarette ash will disappear within seconds, hair can survive intact for centuries! Poole council - get a life!

Another council battling it out to be known as the most stupid can be found in Bristol. Health and safety officials at Bristol City Council say mats outside doors could hamper escape routes and so they have sent each one of their 32,000 tenants a letter demanding that they remove any outside mats. They claim outside doormats pose a "tripping risk". I'm beginning to wonder who might be doing the tripping here!

There are few councils, and especially their Health and Safety Departments, that could ever be attributed with having an abundance of common sense. On leaving most buildings one would invariably have to step down onto any outside mat - a deliberate procedure and one not normally in accordance with tripping up. If one were prone to tripping up on a mat, it would more likely be within the home. So what next? No bath mats, rugs or unfitted floor coverings allowed inside people's homes?

And how are we supposed to view those red mats and runners thrown down for dignitaries outside our public buildings - places where by law nothing must be allowed to hamper a mass exit in an emergency? They must be equally as dangerous - perhaps even more so, as they often cover steps unsecured. Under this ruling, they too must be banned. So, should she in some moment of mad abandon decide on visiting Bristol, I don't envy any council official having to tell the Queen: "There's no red carpet for you, M'am. We consider you might be stupid enough to fall over it!"

Annus horribilis she has had. Anus horribilis could yet be to come - for like many, the Queen knows how to kick butt when she has to!

I suspect the cost of producing and posting those 32,000 letters would have been better spent on maintaining even footpaths in Bristol. People are likely to be tripping up and injuring themselves on uneven walkways on an almost daily basis, not just "perhaps" if there is an emergency! Like most towns and cities Bristol will have some serious issues that need addressing - a few outside doormats is not one of them, or something on which to fritter the local taxpayers' money.

Finally, I see a controversial new play about Princess Diana, and one in which the Queen is shown giving a Nazi salute, has opened in Germany and it has been a sell-out success. The German artist responsible, Christoph Schlingensief, is now planning to bring the play, Kaprow City, to the London Fart Fair - sorry, the London Frieze Art Fair - in October. We're told a film version is already being made, with the London filming being done in secret in case the British people should over react.

Princes William and Harry are said to be "distraught" at the thought of a new play being based around the tragic death of their mother, and I'm guessing the Queen being shown giving a Nazi salute won't go down too well with the royals either, or with many British people!

Don't let anyone ever try to tell me again that the 1975 Fawlty Towers episode, The Germans, is politically incorrect!

John Cleese, as Basil Fawlty after a knock on the head, takes the German guests' orders as: “two egg mayonnaise, a prawn Goebbels, a Hermann Goering and four Colditz salads.”
Basil Fawlty: Is something wrong?
German Guest: Will you please stop talking about the war?
Basil Fawlty: Me? You started it.
German Guest: We did not!
Basil Fawlty: Yes, you did, you invaded Poland.

John Cleese, co-writer with fellow star Connie Booth, has always maintained this episode ridiculed a certain type of Briton’s refusal to forget the Second World War, and did not actually poke fun at the Germans - it was a generalisation. However I'm wondering what Christoph Schlingensief's efforts are all about when he tells us, "Diana is considered a saint in England and everyone turns into a nervous wreck as soon as you mention her name. I am very interested in what happened in the hour of her death, it fills me with artistic inspiration."
The film seems as if it will be so much more personal. I do hope Christoph's "artistic inspiration" doesn't translate into "artistic license" on such a delicate subject matter!

See you next week . . .

"The Bitch!" 15/09/06.

Well Darlings,

Do you ever get the feeling that something is about to happen? I know I do. It's a feeling of apprehension, and it comes with a sort of impotence - a sense of knowing that whatever it is that is about to happen, I will be unlikely to be able to do anything at all about it. I'm getting that kind of a feeling now, and it's coming across strongly. I feel like we are all living in the lull before the storm; a mighty storm. However from whence it will come, or even of its constituent elements, I have not the slightest inkling - and that is most annoying.

I have several fears, all that I pray are unfounded. Our armed forces, arguably amongst the best in the world, are performing their duties admirably around the world - although perhaps not so much these days for Queen and country as for the whims of a double act known as George & Tony - and they are doing it against all the odds. There is hardly a week goes by when we don't hear something about some shortfall somewhere encountered by our troops. These shortfalls range from a lack of the correct type of equipment - reliable equipment - right through to a disturbing lack of manpower. Many of our gallant boys and girls are suffering prolonged front-line tours of duty.

We must by now all have seen the commanders in the field on our televisions, brave men and women telling us how much they were over-stretched - performing to new limits of human endurance - but were still holding their own. Lately, in both Afghanistan and Iraq, the words "bitten off more than we can chew" have started to creep into many a politician's repertoire. Today we hear Major Jon Swift, who is serving in Afghanistan, claiming that Britain is sustaining higher casualties than the official figures reveal, and telling us our soldiers are often just patched up and sent back to fight without the injury being recorded. He says: "The scale of casualties has not been properly reported and shows no sign of reducing. Political and not military imperatives are being followed in the campaign." Another British Army major there has condemned the RAF as being "utterly, utterly useless", suggesting that more helicopters and manpower are "desperately" needed.

Needed they may be, but do we have them? If you remember, recently there were not enough spare troops available to even man a few dozen Green Goddesses during the industrial action taken by firemen in one of our cities. It is a situation I find worrying, and to me it poses the question: what if? What if something else were to kick off big style in the world? What if it should be more pertinent to us here in Britain than is Afghanistan or Iraq? What then?

As long as I can remember, and I'm quite long in the tooth, we have had defence cut after defence cut. I may be wrong, but I can't remember any time in recent history when we have allocated more money, substantially more money in real terms, for the defence of our country. From ships to aircraft to manpower, for years we have cut back, cut back, cut back, and just when you believed there was nothing left to be cut anymore some Chancellor of the Exchequer would again slash the armed forces' budgets.

A smaller defence budget may be okay for some - for those who believe it is a move towards more peaceable times - but it is totally inappropriate for a country that still tries to be a policeman for the world. We need either to spend more money on our military capabilities, substantially more, or else to accept our limitations and butt out of other nations' affairs. To ask our troops, those people who know their career might one day call for the ultimate sacrifice, to perform their duties against such bad odds is wrong, and it does nothing to bring peace in the world any closer. All it brings closer is the day when we may have no alternative than to accept a humongous and mortifying British defeat or, God forbid, have to use our ultimate weapons of destruction.

Just to make you all feel safer, did you catch the latest possible (spelt: probable) cuts? Defence chiefs are now looking at Britain's naval bases: Faslane, on Scotland's River Clyde, Portsmouth, and Devonport in a review that, we are warned, may lead to job cuts or even closures. The Ministry of Defence tell us the results of their review will not be known until at least the middle of next year, and that it is far too early to know what any reduction to our surface fleet might have on jobs.

Faslane is the HQ of the Royal Navy in Scotland, and is the home of the UK's Vanguard class of nuclear ballistic submarines armed with Trident missiles. Portsmouth is home to a major part of the Royal Navy's surface fleet, much of it simply moored there because there is little money to keep it at sea, and Devonport, with its 15 dry docks and 4 miles of shoreline, is Britain's largest naval base and the home of 7 of our Trafalgar class nuclear-powered hunter-killer submarines.

With all the unrest there is in the world today, is this really the right time to be looking for more cuts? George & Tony may not be around forever, but the way things are looking at the moment there is every likelihood that long after they've gone our forces could still be fighting and dying for these two politicians' dreams. One day historians will make much of that!

Terrorism is another fear I have these days, and one I guess that now most people must have hidden away somewhere at the back of their minds. Like most people too, I suppose, I don't actually fear so much for my own safety, but I dread the massive carnage that may come some day - will come, we are told by our police forces - and how much that would undoubtedly affect so many innocent people. We hear of some remarkable successes by the police and intelligence services in deterring the terrorists' actions (as well as hearing of their mistakes), but it's the one we won't hear about one day which will be the one that really matters.

When we learn that a businessman, Mark Coshever, after accidentally picking up the wrong passport at home, was able to fly from Luton to Amsterdam on his child's passport without it being noticed, one begins to realise just how vulnerable we may be. Apparently airline staff examined Mark's passport twice, yet they still failed to notice the photo it contained was of his daughter - a toddler! Security? I guess it only happens for beards and suntans!

There are so many things wrong with the world today from which my apprehension may have sprung. Global warming, once thought to be a figment of some crank's imagination, then accepted as possibly going to be harmful to us in a hundred years or so, then found likely to be detrimental to the planet in half that time, and now admitted to be something for which no one can do much more than guess at its consequences, but they may be more imminent than ever before supposed, and far more devastating than previously believed with countries fighting each other for something more precious than gold or oil - drinking water - is another topic that worries me. I may not be around to see it, but I do have kith and kin.

The problems we have in society today (the society with a small 's') worries me too. I come from a time when schoolchildren didn't know where they could buy a gun, and none of them carried knives. A fight was just that - a black eye, and not a killing. Crime happened, of course it did, but nobody feared it. Even our underworld adhered to a moral code. An elderly person could walk down any street in their town, day or night, without a care - today none but a fool would attempt it. It was a time before we had "do-gooders", a time when we looked after each other, and a time before the millions of rules and regulations that are imposed on us today - some of them the very cause of many of our troubles.

Since the late sixties the values and the quality of society has deteriorated. It was a slow deterioration at first, and certainly never one as noticeable as it has been in the last ten years. We have seen some remarkable changes recently, and I fear for where we are heading. Taking the dreaded exponential factor of the decay into consideration, unless a turn-round happens soon, ten years from now doesn't bear thinking about.

Today there are many battles on our planet being lost. I'm wondering which of them it is that might be bothering me at this moment. Perhaps it is none of them I've mentioned here. Maybe it is something entirely different. The rogue asteroid? The expected apocalyptic tsunami from when that bit of the Canaries falls into the ocean? The deadly virus that mutates and goes airborne? I don't know what it is, but something is definitely nagging at me. I feel like a balloon is being blown up in front of me - it will explode soon, but I don't know exactly when, and I am waiting for the moment.

Hopefully I shall see you all next week . . .

"The Bitch!" 23/09/06.

Well Darlings,

It seems to me the world is becoming more confusing by the minute. Across the pond, in New York, a strange phone poll has emerged. The Community Health Survey, an annual telephone survey of New York residents, has discovered that there are more men who classify themselves as being "normal" heterosexual males having sex with other men in the city than there are those who see themselves as being gay. The figures appear to show that three times as many "straight" New York men are having sex with other men than their gay counterparts.

There have been other surveys in the past that have shown that far more US men have sex with men than identify as gay – one found that although 9% said they were gay or bisexual, half as many again (14.3%) had actually had sex with other men - but this is the first time that a study has shown there are more straight men than gay ones doing it with men.

Just when you thought you had it all worked out!

I'm glad to see one young man has it all worked out. David Bridge, a 15-year-old gay boy, put on a tiara and a long dress and became the new carnival queen for a Somerset town. Thousands of Axbridge locals lined the streets to cheer our hero after he beat three girls for the title of Blackberry Queen. Well done, David! And well done Axbridge! Out in the sticks hasn't meant being behind the times for this town!

Here in Blackpool things are kicking off already in preparation for Blackpool Pride 2007. The official website has been launched - http://www.prideblackpool.com - you all pop along there now and have a gander. Do put your sunglasses on first though, it's as camp and colourful as a Pride should be! And next week (Friday 6th October) there will be Press Releases issued and a load of news appearing on the website and in local newsletters etc. I'm bursting to tell you all about it now, but I mustn't - you'll have catch it on the Pride site next Friday!

Something else to put in your diaries: on Saturday 27th January at 8pm Blackpool's Grand Theatre plays host to the audience partici . . . pation Sing-a-Long-a Rocky Horror Picture Show, with their bars open from 7pm till very late. The campest cult classic of all time (not having an airing often enough these days, I reckon) gets what it has always been screaming for - the full sing-a-long-a treatment. Fancy dress is recommended (there's even a competition), and Riff Raff are welcome! Don't forget to bring all the accessories! What a night! Drag it up for the theatre, and then drag yourselves around our fabulous gay scene afterwards! See you there, it's not too far to come - it's just a jump to the left, and a step to a great night!

You must remember how not too long ago Sir Ian McKellen suggested that "Gay" should be superseded by "Gorgeous" since the latest street talk uses the presently adopted word derogatorily, mustn't you? Well, last week the Liberal Democrat Youth and Students (LDYS) launched a campaign to stop homophobic bullying in schools, and at the centre of the campaign are hundreds of pink badges bearing the satirical slogan “Homophobia is Gay”. The badges, which we're told will be available to new students through 150 dedicated LDYS stalls and are also being sent to freshers fairs all around the country, are part of a larger Liberal Democrat campaign which calls for the Education and Inspections Bill to be amended. They want elements of the bill to be changed, and for teachers to be trained in how to tackle homophobic bullying.

It's all commendable stuff, but I'm not too sure about those badges. What do you think? Somehow I can't see the word "gorgeous" working for homosexual males. Gay seems apt, and it has been around now for quite some time. It works. I think we should stick with it. Street slang changes fashion frequently - left alone, the derogatory usage of the word may be gone before we know it, so perhaps those badges weren't such a good idea. The everyday usage of a word can often have a limited lifetime.

The latest "in word" for the UK seems to be: diversity - it's like a plum in a councillor's mouth - but a word that is still bandied around a lot these days, often by some hopefully as a means of being seen to be tackling a serious problem, is: initiative. It's a word that now has no meaning to it - certainly not in its original and true sense - it has been abused. Just about every town and city in our country has had its "initiatives" to tackle various issues. A common one has been binge drinking.

Like Blackpool everyone will no doubt have suffered the obligatory photographs in their local press of senior police officers, councillors, and publicans all wallowing in self-congratulation at some initiative ceremony. And like Blackpool everyone will no doubt have noticed very little change. The promises of those initiatives - a common one: for the licenced premises not to offer stupid drink promotions - are apparently soon forgotten. You realise this as you have to side-step the giant A board standing outside a bar telling you just how much drink you can get for next to nothing should you choose to visit them that evening. The photographs of those grinning faces then leap back into your mind, and you begin to despair.

Licenced premises should survive on how good they are, on what they provide, and on what kind of a service it is that they can offer their punters. Their drinks should be priced fairly, and according to the market. I believe that the main attraction to any venue should never be the price of their drinks, or on how much a person can get down their neck there for the least amount of money. It should always be on how good is the venue. Until that is the case we shall never stop the binge drinking.

We must start believing that any venue unable to hold its own without pouring ridiculously priced drinks down the throats of its punters is not really worth a visit - that is, not unless you truly are a p*ss-artist! When the people all around you are going to get beyond being sociably merry and become a nuisance, a real pain - as they invariably do in these types of cheap liquor places, one is wise to enjoy one's evening elsewhere.

It's a sad reflection on the licenced industry that today so few publicans realise that stupid and regular drink promotions are only a short-term fix, and that they can be the nails in the coffin for many an establishment as their clientele base changes, until one day they find they are surviving only on the dregs of society. They have become no longer the place to go - the place to be seen. It's happened here in Blackpool before, once popular places have deteriorated into merely just surviving, and no doubt it has happened wherever in the world you are reading this. Had those much publicised "initiatives" been strictly adhered to, enforced throughout, then today many venues would be far nicer places to visit - and so too would many of our towns and cities!

Something to consider: there's many a young binge drinker who has never really had a great and enjoyable night out. They truly believe that what they do - getting rat-arsed and ill every night they can - is it. Most of us have been there and done that at some time or another. But for most of us it was very short-lived, wasn't it? We were able to discover that there was better out there. I feel it's such a shame that society today hasn't allowed a whole generation to do likewise, to be enlightened as we were, for it is society as a whole that has created the binge drinker - not the alcohol.

See you next week, Darlings . . . Hic!

"The Bitch!" 29/09/06.

Well Darlings,

I have my serious hat on today. Does the government, or come to that: does anybody, have the right to suggest how individuals should dress? I am, of course, asking because of all the furore that has broken out after it was learned that Jack Straw requested Muslim women visiting the surgeries he holds in his constituency to remove their veils. It is a question that is now being asked by many, including our newspapers, and a subject matter that has certainly sparked a lot of debate. Jack's original intentions with the requests were apparently only in order that he should be able to see the responses that we all look for in another's facial expressions when conducting a conversation with them.

By now you must all know I could never be counted amongst the great fans of Jack Straw, however I do find I have sympathy with him over this issue. I for one would certainly feel at a loss trying to have intelligent dialogue with a piece of cloth, especially over an important matter as no doubt they often are that are discussed in these surgeries. I see asking for a veil to be removed in such circumstances a perfectly reasonable request, and we're told it was just that - nothing more than a simple request. One where all due respect and propriety was being observed by another female being present at all times.

The whole issue of having to wear a veil (hijab) for religious reasons is extremely debateable, even within Muslim communities. As far as I can see from some quick research on the Internet it is not commanded anywhere in the Quran, but has somehow evolved from God's ruling concerning Muslim men with "disease in their hearts" who would wish to take advantage of the position of the prophet's wives. God ruled that any such man who wanted to speak to or ask something of the prophet's wives must only do so from behind a curtain. It seems that like with the Christian Bible, some have taken the words quite literally, whilst others have found a meaning to them. It all depends on where a person is coming from as to how they interpret their faith.

That said, even taking the teachings of the Quran literally, as Jack Straw is neither a Muslim nor is likely to be in the market for taking advantage of the position of a prophet's wife, is a veil necessary at all, even for a devout follower, at one of his surgeries? On face value (aren't puns wonderful things?) I would say it is not. Nevertheless from Jack Straw's quite innocuous request, judging by the readers' responses to this story in some of the national press, it would appear that a Holy war has almost erupted. Muslims are arguing with other Muslims, with Christians, and with those of different faiths or with no faith at all. We are again reminded just how fragile a multicultural society can be at times.

From that one story of those simple requests it has escalated until now it seems every stone that could be thrown at the other's way of life, is being thrown. And more fuel has been added by news of how the Metropolitan Police excused a Muslim police officer from duties guarding the Israeli embassy. Many are reminding us that a police officer's duty should come before anything else. No police officers will have any love or sympathy with a paedophile, a murderer, or a rapist - the crime will be abhorrent in all of their beliefs - but it is still their duty to protect him (or her), and to do that despite any personal beliefs or feelings. Some are questioning why an exception should be made for a Muslim, and idioms like: "Give them an inch . . ." and: "When in Rome . . ." are now being freely batted around in many a conversation concerning our multicultural society. It is not a good time.

Getting back to my first question, I believe the government, and others, do have the right to suggest how individuals should dress. There will be a general consensus somewhere of what is acceptable and what is not. Nudity in public, for one example, is not acceptable to most. We also find that "hoodies" are made unwelcome by people in many of our towns and cities, and are actually barred in some. In fact, in most places people will be in agreement that a person walking around with something like a mask on, or anything that hides their facial features from us, should be viewed with suspicion and maybe apprehended for investigation. That person could easily trigger a panic should they even quite innocently enter (say) a shop or a bank. There are many places that are frequented by the public which will now refuse entry to hoodies, and even to those who refuse to remove their motor cycle helmets, and I can find nothing wrong with that policy.

There is a requirement in our far from perfect society to be able to see the other person - we may want to recognise them later, or sadly these days we may need to recognise them later. To us, the ability to see the other person's face is based on our logic and good sense; on something learned and built up perhaps over thousands of years. A whole section of our society being "excused" from having to accept this, our normal way of life, is never going to do much for promoting cultural harmony, is it?

I could never excuse anyone of our indigenous population who did not adhere to the local way of life when they were visiting or living in another country - few other countries would allow it to happen, anyway - so I find it extremely hard to excuse those who visit or live in this country when they don't seem to want to accept or adapt to our way of life. "When in Rome . . ." does have a lot going for it when you are seeking to achieve racial and cultural harmony - and that is not being racial; that is simply being sensible.

I'm all for a multiracial, multicultural society - I feel it is something to be appreciated, it has a lot going for it. Some may remember my story of the Chinese Dragon and how, not really knowing what the hell was being celebrated because we couldn't understand each other, a group of us were invited to join in the merriment and had such a great time. It was a long time ago, yet even then it was multiculturalism working - two entirely different cultures happy together in respect and enjoyment of one another. Sadly, all this time later, that kind of harmony is not universal across all people from all cultures. Perhaps it is time to thrash out some hard and fast rules. But that might call for some sacrifices being made - and not merely by the host country as many believe has been the case up to now. When people are striving to make a life in a country different to that of their family's roots, I think most us are of the opinion they should at least try to fit in with the local customs - not attempt to change them.

Before anyone picks me up on it, I use the words "host country" loosely for I do fully realise many will have been born here and that this is their country, but surely that only goes to further prove my point? Those born in this country - although they will naturally have been taught and be proud of their history - should have been encouraged by their families to become a part of it, not apart from it.

There are so many today that have managed to become a part of us - just look around you - they have either adopted or adapted to our ways, and they have come from all the races and creeds imaginable - including the Muslim faith. They are the Britain of today: our friends, neighbours, bosses, workmates, and often even our very families. We rejoice with them in good times and we cry with them in bad times, for we are all brothers and sisters in spirit, if not truly in blood. But in spite of all this success, sadly there still seems to be a few, a small minority out there, that just doesn't want to get to this stage - to bridge the gap.

As much as we may wish for them to do so, we need to be resolute that our way of life remains immutable, for there are those who look for a solution to this problem by offering these people even more concessions, and through surrendering some of our long-time traditions like Christmas. I see that as entirely wrong, and seriously harmful to good relations. Such actions can only further widen the gap between us. It can only breed resentment and make matters worse. I think we have already given enough - perhaps too much, and that is the problem. It is time now to be looking for, perhaps to be expecting, something in return.

The idea of having parallel communities hasn't worked - it was a stupid idea - the differing communities have become more and more separate, and the further we have drifted apart the less we have understood each other and the more we have encountered friction. That cannot be good news for a people who represent a mere 3% of our population, for eventually they may lose out big-style. "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few" I may have adapted from Spock (Star Trek) but I think it is extremely relevant here.

It really is time that some of these people woke up, smelled the coffee, and joined the party as so many others have managed to do quite successfully, and without losing their identity or compromising their faith. It can be done, but it is only they that can do it.

I think life is sometimes like trying to scale a mountain. Occasionally you have to stop, to retrace your steps, and to look at the problem again; to seek out an alternative route. Those who find they are unable to do this risk all that comes with failure.

I'll leave this subject with a quotation:

"Justice will not be served until those who are unaffected are as outraged as those who are." - Benjamin Franklin.

And now for some good news. Following the success of Blackpool's first attempt at a GLBT Pride earlier this year, it became obvious to one and all that better than a stony car park was needed for the people to celebrate in after the parade. So, in what some see as a bit of a coup, on the Saturday of Blackpool Pride in 2007 the celebrations are to take place on Blackpool's famous North Pier. This is believed to be the first UK Pride to be held (technically) on water. Fuller details and regular updates can be found on http://www.prideblackpool.com where, on the published feedback page, you may send in and read praises, comments, and criticisms, or just say hello to Blackpool Pride. Gloria Goodtime is waiting for your input! Ouch! Paronomasia gets everywhere, doesn't it?

See you next week . . .

"The Bitch!" 7/10/06.

Well Darlings,

In the age of the Emperor's new clothes the child has finally spoken up. From out of the thronging masses of people, all eager not to look stupid in front of their neighbours, the words we needed to hear have at last rung out: "But he has nothing on!"

It's time now that we all accepted the truth, the real truth and not that of some people with misplaced vocations who would have been better employed selling used cars or vacuum cleaners, and that truth is that we are doing no good in Iraq - we are only making matters worse. We should leave.

Like a breath of fresh air rushing into a stuffy room, General Sir Richard Dannatt, the head of the British army, has called for our troops to be withdrawn from Iraq - and soon! As I write this I am hearing the expected response of "words taken out of context" from Tony Blair and the infamous "Downing Street spokesmen", but they count for little - the words that matter are abounding on the unofficial military internet forums. The forums have been inundated with praise for Sir Richard and his words from serving military personnel - with the words taken in any context you care to name - because they hold the truth, they tell the truth, and they pass the test. They have been widely welcomed by his troops, by opposition MPs, and (as to be expected) by anti-war groups. And I'm betting by the world at large, too!

One of the most senior officers in Iraq when we invaded in 2003 was Colonel Tim Collins. Speaking to the Today programme, he said that Sir Richard had given a "refreshing and very honest insight into what the Army generally feel. That is that the political shortcomings and the shortcomings in the planning for the occupation of Iraq have made the job of the Army very much more difficult. And there comes a time when the realisation on the ground is that the people of Iraq do resent foreign intervention and there comes a time when we have got to look forward to when we can hand it over to the Iraqis for them to sort out."

Colonel Tim Collins went on to say: "I think we have to salute the honesty of the Chief of General Staff and understand that he is reflecting the beliefs of the Army, the people on the ground. He is not a politician and he is not given to spin, so what you hear from him is absolutely ground truth."

Hear! Hear! The absolute ground truth at last, and from people who have nothing to gain - perhaps something to lose - but who better than any politician know the real truth - they have to live with it. It's time the nation now listened to the truth "as it is", rather than "the truth" as spun to us by some to gain political advantage.

The word is spreading fast: the Emperor has no clothes on; the garments supposedly hiding the truth from us don't really exist; the cover-up is over - Tony stands naked in front of us all, and the stories he has told of how much good we were doing occupying another's country are shown to be pure fabrication.

We need to remember that over 600,000 civilians have died violently in Iraq since the invasion in 2003 - figures released by a team of American and Iraqi public health researchers - and that the rate of violence, along with the deaths, continues to escalate. It is inhumane for us to stay there. Our very presence may be promoting the killings by the three main factions making up the country, but the horrifying truth is that 70% of all those civilian deaths to date can be traced to being directly attributable to the occupying troops.

It is time to realise that we are living through one of the most shameful times for our country in living history. From the very beginning, the time of the famous "sexed up dossier", along with the alleged suicide of David Kelly, and all the deceit of how we were allowed to believe our shores were actually being threatened, and through the "knowing" by Tony Blair above all others that Iraq definitely had "weapons of mass destruction", even after no proof was found, the whole saga stinks. It is a disgrace to this country. It's time to wash our hands of this war, to allow others to clear up our mess, and for this country to start demanding the truth from our government, and all our authorities.

Since Tony Blair came to power with his style of government it seems to have become fashionable for the truth to be hidden. The real story doesn't matter any more. It's what you can make from it that matters - what you can spin. It has become sort of acceptable, and now it happens everywhere: from government, through big business and the utilities, right down to our local authorities. When found out, faced with the exposure of knowingly deceiving us, no longer do people slink away and leave office ashamed - they merely smile sweetly, and carry on collecting their salaries.

The stupidity of this whole situation is that all along we sort of know we are being lied to, we sense it, yet we too smile sweetly and allow it to happen. What we need are a lot more people like General Sir Richard Dannatt. If ever a country needed a breath of fresh air, it is ours. There's another one too, a bigger country across a pond. That could do with more than a breeze.

Before I go I shall give you an instance of these fashionable hidden truths. By now we must all have heard of the chips that are being added to the wheelie bins provided for refuse by some councils. These electronic bin tags are about the size of a penny. They are normally placed under the lip of the bin, and can be scanned as the bin is tipped into the refuse collection vehicle. Electronic weighing equipment has been installed on some of these refuse carts which is able to collect, and link to the council, information on the amount (or perhaps more accurately: the weight) of rubbish collected from each owner.

Residents are not happy with this spying on them, and many have ignored the council's warnings that they could be charged with criminal damage should they remove the tags. Despite this, some have posted theirs back to the council offices.
We know all this as fact - but here's the crunch: the director of community and environmental services for one local authority claims the chips simply contain an identity number that identifies which wheelie bin belongs to which house.

Now you might at first find that statement somewhat reassuring. Perhaps by now you are even thinking the implants are solely for the purpose of stopping the bin being lost or stolen. How wrong you would be!
The smiling face that tells you it is only to identify who owns the bin, still smiling sweetly omits to tell you: so that they know who to charge and just how much when this policy is, as it will be, adopted.
Think about it! Were this not to be the case, then what is wrong with a simple house number being stencilled or branded on the bin? Why the expense of a microchip - one that has to be programmed with your details? Do we put microchips on our front doors so that people can find us? No, we don't. We use numbers or names - they are far more sensible and a damn site cheaper!

Deceiving the public, usually done - but not always - without actually having to tell a lie, has become an art. Beware the sweet and innocent-looking smile - it's likely to be coming at some considerable expense. To you!

See you next week . . .

"The Bitch!" 13/10/06.

Well Darlings,

Yes, okay then, I'll admit it. Once upon a time - this really is a fairy story, so you'd better believe it! - I did for a short time in my very early schooldays read Mickey Mouse, the comic. It was in the days when many a comic, including that one, cost around the same price as a chocolate bar - a Mars bar was 3d or 4d (old money - pre-decimalisation). Today, I notice, for the price of some comics you could buy more than half-a-dozen Mars bars, and a few of them can set you back more than six times the price of a newspaper. I hear you ask: Why is this? The answer is quite simple. Today we live in an age of market forces. Few things today cost what they are really worth - they cost as much as can realistically be obtained for them. The modern philosophy of reasoning with children rather than laying down the law (discipline) works well for market forces - mostly the children win the arguments, and they will have their comic no matter what it costs.

But that was not the point of this story, I have digressed. No, the point I wanted to make was that I think we still retain a great fondness for the comics with which we were brought up, and perhaps all the subjects contained within their covers. Many may not have survived the years but a mention of them, or something that reminds you of them, can still produce those pangs of nostalgia: thoughts maybe of a wonderful time in your life - a time of innocence and when everything was an adventure.

So, being brought up on Mickey Mouse in my days of innocence, you can imagine the mixed feelings that engulfed me when I read about the pirate video made at Disneyland Paris showing Goofy grabbing hold of Minnie's boobs, and Mickey having a gay romp - with a snowman, I believe. There has to be a joke here about snowballs, but I'll leave it out. Apparently the risqué footage was shot backstage by another worker using a concealed camera in an area that is inaccessible to guests - so it is all for real! - and it only lasts for a couple of minutes of the otherwise normal film showing the Disneyland at large. Is it funny? Well, I haven't seen it but yes, I guess it is - once you get over the initial shock of your childhood heroes having sexual lives.

A Disney spokesperson has said: "We regret any offence it (the video) might cause. Action has been taken to prevent this happening again."

Now that statement might be a comfort for some people, but for me it has turned my shock into pure horror! Please, someone tell me they haven't castrated Mickey Mouse!

And now for some more political correctness gone mad: For many years Alan & Thomas, the insurers, have like countless other firms and places of work circulated cards for all the other staff to sign when it has been some employee's birthday. However all that has now ended for this company. Why? Because they fear any humorous references to being "past it" or "over the hill" written in a card may be considered ageist and in breach of the new age discrimination laws, thereby leaving them open to prosecution. They say the new law is "a potential minefield", and as insurers I guess they know quite a bit about interpreting the law.

The new laws, which came into effect on Oct 1st, make it illegal for an employer to discriminate against any worker on the basis of age when it comes to hiring, firing, promotion, or retirement. This has led to employer's fears of a floodgate of younger workers who will sue if they are not paid and treated exactly the same as older ones, and vice versa. To further worry them, employers now bear the burden of positively proving they haven't discriminated against a worker in a lawsuit where, should they lose the case, the potential rewards against them are uncapped. And hot on the heels of all this, the Political Correctness Brigade seem to have collared every adjective or description that could be put with age, and you now use it at your peril.

Political correctness is making a mockery of the law by using it to ban many time-served expressions of affection. These people are taking our language and mutilating it. Old, when used in association with people, can no longer mean anything now but something bad. They have taken everything else that might have been associated with this word - things like "wisdom", "liable to be knowledgeable", or "one to be respected" (to name just three that readily spring to mind) - and have trampled it underfoot.

Some terms of endearment you may no longer use without worrying about the PC Brigade: "Old John had to miss the game." - even though in this context old may be suggesting a close long-time friendship. "I'll see what the old man says about it." - even though this refers to the boss, a person who may enjoy this expression recognising his seniority. "I'll get Tom some help, he's not a spring chicken anymore." - even though this might be caringly recognising an actual limiting factor. "I say old boy, wasn't that a great show!" - even though this may be expressed as a term of equality, brotherhood and affection. All my school chums have always been "old boy" to each other, but not anymore, I guess.

At the other end of the scale, don't ever refer to anyone as being "wet behind the ears" anymore without first looking over your shoulder, and even to mention: "I'll see what the younger ones say about it," may now get you viewed with suspicion - why should you be expecting their opinions to differ merely because of their age? (For God's sake - why shouldn't they?) Finally, and relevant to many a shopkeeper, do beware of calling anyone "son" who is not really your son - not only are you being ageist by bringing attention to an obvious age difference (whether you are actually older or not), you could also be seen as casting aspersions on the morality of that person's mother! What a world we live in!

Where will it all end with this political correctness? In utter silence by a nation of hermits? A nation of people who may not be spoken of as fat, thin, tall, short, midget, dwarf, blind, deaf, dumb, mute, retarded, ill, crippled, bald, old, or young (amongst many, many other terms), and where no-one may be referred to as Jock, Paddy, Taffy, or Joe, (to name but a few) or ever pop along to a Packy shop for some fags or visit a Chinky for a curry - no matter how affectionately these terms may be meant or received? A nation where no difference between any of us may be noticed or mentioned, and where all the races, religions and cultures making up our multiracial society shall enjoy absolute equality in all things - providing, of course, we are not referring here to the endemic British people or Christianity?

It's all a little bit like Communism, isn't it? Everybody is equal - except some are more equal than others. The privileged set will, of course, include the politically correct people.

I started this column by referring to my younger days. For some of those days I happened to live with my grandmother in a Guest House on the outskirts of the London Borough of Croydon. A major part of the clientele at this establishment were theatrical performers, and they came in all shapes, colours, and sizes. I particularly remember a young (but not to me at the time - I was about six!) conjurer who stayed for several weeks. He was the first non-white person I had come close enough to, to examine our differences - to touch his black skin, and to query the pink palms of his hands. I can remember sitting on his knee and checking those hands, and the coarse curly black head of hair. I guess now I must have said a lot of embarrassing things, but he seemed not to mind. He was a great guy who played games with me (no, he wasn't a pervert!), amazed me with his magic tricks, and even occasionally took me to the swings in the nearby park. When he had to move on he bought me a present, (a magic set, what else?) and I can remember crying; pleading with him to stay.

The point I'm making here is: that house was full of differences - and nobody gave a damn. There were several Oriental ladies at this time (I don't exactly know what they did); three dwarves (I can remember pulling them apart too!) - and everybody referred to them as just that - dwarves - and they didn't mind, no offence was intended or taken; then there were a couple of other people; and then my friend the coloured magician - again, everybody called him that - coloured - and he was quite happy with it. In those days nothing was wrong with the word "coloured", it wasn't offensive, it was merely descriptive. For a description you need a word, and very often there is nothing at all wrong with that word, it is not offensive - not until some people like the Politically Correct Brigade make it so by convincing you it is.

My grandfather was quite happy to be called old - I used to call him "old daddy". My father, "soldier daddy", had to be away for much of the time, and I never knew my mother, she died whilst I was still a small baby. Everybody knew "old daddy" was deaf - he was deaf in one ear, and bald - he was almost totally bald. He may not have enjoyed any of those conditions, but I'm sure he was sensible enough to know that changing the words for any of them would not have improved his life or those conditions by one iota. As words: deaf, bald, and old were merely descriptions, accurate ones, and there was absolutely nothing offensive in those words.

To call a Pakistani person a Packy (or Packi) should be no more offensive to anyone than calling a Scotsman a Scot (but never Scotch - that's the drink!) It's sad that today some people have been allowed to make it offensive. For years I phoned a local restaurant, the Mayflower in Swindon, always starting off with: "Is that the Chinky's?" I'm sure that had they have minded they would have said so, and they would not have invited me and my partner for the free Xmas Dinner they used to put on for some of their customers every year. Another Chinese guy I know, everybody affectionately calls him Sam because we have no hope of pronouncing his name correctly, used to advertise his chip shop as "the local Chinky". There never was anything offensive in "Chinky", not until some people made it so.

At the hands of the politically correct so many long-standing terms of affection fall foul. One should no longer greet anyone with the likes of: "my love", "dear", or "sweetheart" anymore - not unless they really are that - and something as commonly heard in London as: "Hello me ol' China - 'ow yer doing?" has these PC people positively doing somersaults. I say: Leave us alone! Find something better to do!

"What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet; so Romeo would, were he not Romeo call'd, retain that dear perfection which he owes without that title." - Romeo and Juliet, by William Shakespeare.

People are people, and words are merely words that mean what people make them mean, they are not that important. Important is how we feel about each other and how we treat each other, and busybodies playing around with the language we use does nothing to help or improve anything. I am fully convinced that the day we wake up and outlaw political correctness is the day we will solve one hell of a lot of this country's problems!

See you next week . . .

"The Bitch!" 21/10/06. - With "The Bitch" perhaps being a politically incorrect term for the critical naff old queen who writes this column - and even that description now being politically incorrect in itself too! Oh, dear! What are we supposed to do to appease these PC nutcases? Lie about everything?

Well darlings,

From statistics released by the Home Office each year, a league table ranking the performance of our 43 police forces is compiled by the Press Association. The Government's Police Performance Assessments rate the constabularies for seven different categories and they are: Reducing Crime; Investigating Crime; Promoting Safety; Providing Assistance; Citizen Focus; Resource Use; and Local Policing. For each of those categories a police force is rated as being either: "excellent", "good", "fair", or "poor", and from that assessment marks are allocated to each category which are, in the same order, worth 3 points, 2 points, and 1 point - with a "poor" result having a negative value of minus 1 point. The league table that results, although the Home Office doesn't agree with it, is widely accepted to show the official performance ranking for each individual police force from the worst to the best.

Humberside comes out as our worst police force over the last period (2005-2006), whilst our best is Staffordshire. All the national newspapers I've seen appear to be in agreement with that and have published the top and bottom of the league similarly, whilst the regional newspapers I've visited online have too reported the same statistics, along with those relevant for their own location, all seemingly accurately, and have then either given praise or had a moan about their local force.

All that being so, you can imagine my confusion when I discovered in my local newspaper the headlines to a sizeable article proclaiming: "It's official – county police are the best in the country", with the article going on to tell me: "Impressive figures locally have helped contribute to Lancashire Police being this week named as the top-performing force in the country. In a new report, the Red Rose force tops the tree of all 46 constabularies in England and Wales for the third year running."

Had my local paper got it wrong? Surely not? I found myself becoming more than a little confused. What was the truth of the matter? Which version was correct? Who was the best, Lancashire or Staffordshire? And where had they found three more constabularies?

For a while it was all a little mind-blowing, but after downloading all the documentation and wading through it I think I've found a part of the answer. It's all to do with how you read statistics, or rather which part of them you choose to use. Put simply - and I'm not patronising you, it's just that to elaborate would literally take up too much space on here - the Government's Police Performance Assessments use a lot of data in order to come to their conclusions, those that are then used by the Press Association to produce the league table, but if you take just a part of that data: the regional baseline assessments, and it's a very important part of that data, then the Lancashire Police have for the past three years performed better than all the other forces.

Is it right to be that selective in order to celebrate? Well, why shouldn't it be? Despite coming top in many subjects your child may not be the actual top of the whole class - but would you still not want to celebrate all the excellence they had achieved? Lancashire may not have come top of the whole shebang as seen by the Press Association, but it has done remarkably well and is right up there amongst the leaders - overall leader is only a couple of spits away.

Facts and figures have a way of confusing people. Politicians love them. Very often they contain something for everybody - you just need to look for it. I've given up looking for the other three forces and I'm guessing they may have something to do with the likes of Transport Police.

From the Home Office and Government's Police Performance Assessments, the Lancashire Constabulary very notably scored: Reducing Crime - Good, status improved; Investigating Crime - Excellent, status stable; Promoting Safety - Fair, status stable; Providing Assistance - Good, status stable; Citizen Focus - Good, status improved; Resource Use - Good, status improved but capped due to poor performance in at least one component; and Local Policing - Good, status improved. That's 1 x Excellent, 5 x Good (but with 1 capped), and 1 x Fair. The points awarded for the league table were 14.

Staffordshire, the generally acclaimed best in the country - let's be fair and not try to take anything away from them, scored 4 x Excellent and 3 x Good - with no capping at all (18 points), whilst Humberside at the other end of the scale could only muster 5 x Fair, and 2 x Poor (3 points). Between our score of 14 points and Staffordshire's 18 points there was only Northumbria with 17 points - those couple of spits away!

However you choose to look at the statistics, the Lancashire Police Force deserve our unreserved and heartfelt commendations for all their efforts. Well done, the Lancashire Constabulary! We're proud of you! Keep up the good work!

Er, if you get a mo' could you pass a few tips on to the Wiltshire lot? I know I've asked before, but they seem to be losing it fast. They're way down the list, and I hear not doing too well coping with a 50 strong gang roaming the streets and mugging people in Swindon. You'd think they would be able to find that number of people creating hell in a town centre, wouldn't you? I wonder if the reason they can't has anything to do with the relocation of their police station to the relative countryside of South Marston, a place several miles away from Swindon town centre? Do we want pretty, boys - or pertinent? Okay then, we'll go for pretty! Bah! That was a Titanic decision, wasn't it?

Right, having pretty much got all that sorted, I'll now say hello to those who have skipped over the previous as being, "Too heavy, man!" and have jumped straight to here. You foolish people - it gets no better!

Moseying around the web in search of information on the subject just covered, I came across a poser put by someone on a government-related forum. The person asked: why if crime was reducing overall were there no places left in which to place juvenile offenders, and why were our prisons bursting at the seams when so many offenders these days are being released early or are not actually interned? If crime has really been decreasing, as the government insists it has been for many years now, who the hell are all these people filling up our penal establishments? Where do they come from? Hmm . . . I think I'll pass on that one! But it certainly provokes some thought, doesn't it?

And now I guess it's high time for another one of my despairing "state of the nation" stories. According to the Daily Mirror, from a total of 1,000 six to 14-year-olds who took part in a poll for the National Geographic Kids magazine, one in five of them couldn't locate the United Kingdom on a map of the world, and more than a third were unable to identify the United States. We're told that a spokesman from the teacher's union NASUWT has dismissed the poll as being "statistics" that fail to recognise the "excellent work" of teachers.

Really? Excellent work? Teaching exactly what?

I can remember that at six years old we were taking cans of food to school so we could place bits of the labels on our giant wall map of the world from whence the products came. We also stuck pictures (and sometimes our own drawings) of lions, tigers, kangaroos, elephants, and all kinds of animals (along with Cowboys and Indians, William Tell, Robin Hood etc.) on their respective countries. It must have worked for I'm sure by the time we were eight we could all basically find our way around the globe. We knew all the oceans, the continents, and could name quite a few countries. Don't they do this today in schools? If not - why not? Because it's old-fashioned? Well, so am I - but then I do know where I live, and I can identify the US!

If this is representative of the standard of education today, and I hate to say it but I suspect it might be, then why don't we ship some of our young offenders to far off climes - give them a holiday, but forget to give them the return ticket? With a bit of luck most of them wouldn't have a clue where they lived and would never be able to find their way back home - and that would be a problem solved! On the cheap, too!

Oh, alright then! A funny before I go. A relevant one. Humberside police - remember them, the worst in the country? - claim one of their speed cameras has clocked Martyn Styles, a man who lives in Kent, in his car doing 36mph within a 30mph zone in Hull. They say they have the evidence. However Martyn doesn't drive. He is both deaf and blind. Whoops!

In the police defence, Martyn does own a similar car that his wife Dawn drives, but only locally. She and their young son Chris are both deaf too, and at the time of the alleged offence happening 180 miles away they were all at the lad's school in Tunbridge Wells having lunch.

Oh, dear! Is this going to be another unsolved one for Humberside? There goes next year!

See you next week . . .

"The Bitch!" 28/10/06.

Well Darlings,

It's the end of the Summer Season here in Blackpool as the illuminations go off on Sunday November 5th. The Saturday and the final Sunday will also see the occasion marked by two free firework extravaganzas at the Pleasure Beach. Then once all that is over it would normally be the time for the autopsy - the time when all the local business people discuss how well the season went for them - but not this year. This year it has been such a poor year for so many of the tourist-orientated businesses that we have already held the autopsy, and very publicly too in our local press. It does not make good reading.

The consensus is: it has been the worst year for tourism here that people can remember. Many hotels have been operating at one-fifth capacity, and some of the attractions have had to learn how to re-cut their cloth in an attempt to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. Leisure Parcs may not have suffered so greatly as some since dropping the Summer-long Show at the Opera House this year and being highly selective with the shows that they have put on just a few evenings a week. This, coupled with their well supported pop concerts and some of their other ventures such as the Waxworks and the Tower, which has done very well this year, means that whilst they may not be laughing all the way to the bank, they perhaps aren't crying as much as some others. That can't be said for the Grand Theatre which has been hit badly and made a substantial loss, nor for the the Pleasure Beach which too has suffered notably.

The survey conducted by the Gazette has told us nothing we didn't already know. I saw nothing arising that had not before been vociferously complained about. The newspaper gave both the visitor and the resident a chance to have their say - a chance to reveal what they actually thought of Blackpool - and they did just that. People are appalled at all the dirtiness of the town - a town with a notable lack of a perceivable police presence, but which is heavily infested with drunks, druggies, and a seemingly threatening stag and hen culture.

When I came to Blackpool nearly six years ago the complaints I heard were exactly the same ones. Exactly. They have continued unabated throughout those six years as things have become ever worse, and tourist numbers have fallen year on year. But nobody in authority appears to care (any more than to say a few patronising words), and nobody seems to really see the damage being done to the town and its businesses. There are none so blind as those that will not see.

Street cleaning is the responsibility of the local council. A tourist resort will quite naturally amount considerable rubbish - and it needs to be dealt with continuously, not just suffer a brush-over in the mornings with a little titivation later. Have you witnessed the inefficiency of those motorised sweepers we employ in Blackpool? They merely move a lot of the litter around, whilst noticeably polluting the air - you can hardly breathe if you are standing behind one. I suggest our council take a trip to Soho to see how it's better done, even with the staggering number of people who pass through there in the course of a day. I think a lot of it would be called teamwork. Yes, it is always going to be a losing battle, but there are better ways to tackle it.

People, many of them our visitors, will smoke cigarettes - they are not illegal yet - so if we are to consider cigarette butts as being litter here then we should provide for them. We should not make anyone, especially our visitors who are precious to us, feel uneasy - guilty, even - by threatening punitive action if we do not provide a means for the disposal of their unwanted articles. Unlike a carton or a beaker, a butt would be a danger if put directly into a trash can. Ashtrays should be fitted to ALL the litter bins, not just a few, and they should be emptied along with the rubbish. The cost would not be excessive as the bin already has to be emptied, and in time people would develop good habits. I already plan my smoking between such bins.

One such ashtray has been fitted to the bin outside of Iceland - a good move - and a lot of the people going into the supermarket or catching a bus there do responsibly attempt to use it - myself included. I have to say attempt to use it, because it is always full. Although the rubbish in the bin has been emptied many times, to my knowledge the ashtray hasn't been emptied for over a week. The butts are spilling out of it onto the pavement, but who is to blame - the responsible person attempting to use it, or the council for failing to ensure it is properly cleaned and maintained? Is it unreasonable to expect it to be emptied along with the rubbish bin? I don't think so.

Failing to maintain can sometimes appear to be synonymous with Blackpool council, can't it? Footpaths, roads, road signs, street cleaning, and drains to name just a few items that need more attention. Oh, those drains! I complained about some six years ago, and again (twice) five years ago (finally giving up when a friendly hotelier did his "I told you so," act), but they are still blocked and I notice each year the weeds growing from them look much healthier. I guess when you're so busy paying your employees bonuses for getting to work on time to do the job that they are paid by the public purse to do, then there isn't the time to see to something as insignificant as our blocked, smelly, offensive drains. Those that ensure the tourist truly savours all that Blackpool has to offer in the raw on a hot day, and gets them thoroughly soaked by passing traffic on a wet one. Could it be there's some local Green Policy been adopted here that I've missed? Is Blackpool purposefully doing its bit for the planet by increasing its vegetation?

I believe most of the faults that people, the visitor and resident alike, find with Blackpool can only be laid directly at the door of our council. I hate to say it, but I truly believe that. Our residents, shopkeepers, hoteliers, business people and all of our suchlike, cannot be expected to clean our streets, unblock our drains, maintain our footpaths and road signs, nor police the town to rid us of our drunks, druggies, or unruly stags and hens. This is what we pay our council to do. And in all these things, albeit they may be doing their best, they are failing us miserably. It may appear to be harsh criticism, but that is the reality.

Yes, there are other towns that have similar problems with unsociable behaviour, and all of them to differing extents - it's part and parcel of the modern world; at least in the UK it is! - but when you are a tourist resort you cannot afford to have these problems to the extent that we do. You HAVE to keep on top of such things. At home people may not venture out in the evenings so often now for fear of meeting the yob culture, but when they spend a lot of their money on a holiday at a tourist resort then they DO expect to be able to go out and enjoy themselves in a clean, friendly, and family safe environment. And we do owe all that to the people who come here to give us their money - it is their right!

Year after year we hear the same story being trotted out by our council. It'll all be alright in the future, folks. There's the Masterplan, the Casino and all that to look forward to. The council are treating the general public like a mule; they have everyone trudging along following a carrot on a stick - a carrot that can never be reached. And then ignoring all those for whom things have gotten so bad recently that they may never make it to this marvellous future time, they'll point to some magnificent (in their eyes) piece of an arty thing they've had placed somewhere at some enormous expense to enhance Blackpool and expect us to praise them for all their efforts. Darlings, you can stick the Star of Africa (the world's largest cut diamond) on top of a dog turd - it is still a dog turd! It still stinks! Don't pretty it up - clean it up!

It's time a few people with a bit of clout in Blackpool stood up and told the council they were doing no more trudging until they'd first tasted some of that carrot! Another Casino, Storm City, more mirror balls and futuristic art-farty sculptures won't give Blackpool any future at all if people still see our town as being dirty and threatening. They still won't return for anything more than perhaps just one swift cursory visit - if we're lucky. Blackpool has to be many things to attract the visitors back here - and all of them could be covered with just one word: nice. Nice is one of the most frequently used adjectives we have in our language - it is a grossly over-used word - but sadly, not in Blackpool!

One of the stupidest things I've seen recently was someone happily trying to put a positive slant on the survey by pointing out that eighty-something percent of visitors said they would come back to Blackpool at some time or another. Whoopee? Stop living in cloud-cuckoo-land! That's perhaps nearly one fifth of the lowest number of tourists we've ever known here that have said they wouldn't be coming back. Is the glass half full, or half empty? Forget it - when it's nearly bone dry that question is purely academic! Is this silly person really trying to tell us they are rejoicing because there may be four-point-something million people turning up next year? I won't embarrass Blackpool Tourism by publishing some recent tourist numbers I've seen for the Brighton Marina, but I will say: Wake up and smell the drains! We need a hundred percent of our visitors absolutely yearning to come back here - and all of them trying to bring someone new along with them next time, because they know they'd "simply love the place."

Since I've been here, a lot of the hotels have updated remarkably. Hoteliers sometimes putting their last pennies, and maybe some of them borrowed, into massive improvements. Overall our shops and restaurants have improved too, again often at great expense to the owners and probably at more of a risk to them than they care to think about. The theatres have done their bit and put on the best shows realistically affordable for the prospective audience numbers available, and as the Grand has shown that has not been without risk. All our attractions have soldiered on, penny pinching where they could, to keep Blackpool alive and kicking with entertainment. Despite all the good weather this year it has been hard going for most of them, but everybody has done their bit and this year many have gone that extra mile, and further. We need to congratulate them all - they are all truly troupers in the real Blackpool tradition.

I see it now as the time for the council to put an end to all their stupid propaganda about a better future come the whatever, it is the time for them to stop and to listen to the needs of their troupers, and about high time that they equally did their bit for Blackpool! Paying people extra money, a bonus, to turn up at work on time is ridiculous, they should be ashamed, but to try to excuse their actions when challenged by claiming their staff are low paid is in itself inexcusable - and when you consider the numbers of low paid people there are in Blackpool, it is nothing short of contemptible!

There are many self-employed in this town who work intolerably long hours in order to survive. Has anybody on the council ever bothered to work out the hourly rate achieved by the small hotel or guest house owner - we have plenty of them - the people who many see as being the back-bone of this town? I'm sure they would all love to receive a bonus from the public purse for getting up on time at the crack o' dawn every day to start work on the guests' breakfasts, and to provide for all their other needs throughout the day. They are a lot of people who for little money keep another lot of people happy. Elsewhere it seems we have a few people on a lot of money . . . Hmm . . . I guess it won't come as any surprise next year when the illuminations fund is found wanting! A lot of people have been upset by that revelation - and it's already gone worldwide to make us look the laughingstock!

Storm City and the Mega-Casino (should we get either or both) will do great things for Blackpool - but only if we clean up our act. For the reality is, we should be doing a whole lot better than we are doing even now, and that's long before the advent of these monoliths. Blackpool is a wondrous place, there really is nowhere quite like it. Given a chance, it has everything going for it. It is all still here, the glitz, the glamour, the fun, the excitement, and all those marvellous friendly people, if only you can get to look under all the filth it has through years of neglect been allowed to accrue. Like a Phoenix rising from the ashes, it could once again be the "top of the bill" for family entertainment and leisure pursuits - with or without the casino. There are millions of people out there, literally many millions, with a great fondness for our resort and who wish us well. You can go anywhere in our country and in any small group of people there will always be someone who has a wonderful story to tell about when they were in Blackpool. These people would love to be able to return here, and to be able to bring their children and grandchildren along - those who one day would in turn bring theirs.

Let's do it for them - let's kick some arse!

"The Bitch!" 4/11/06. THIS ARTICLE WAS NOT SYNDICATED.

Well Darlings,

I think the newspaper headline of the week, perhaps of the month, has to go to the Independent for: "IT'S THE WAR, STUPID" in the bottom right-hand corner next to a full front page picture of a troubled-looking President Bush. Four simple words, and yet they told the whole story. Brilliant!

It's been a week of stupid people and stupid stories, I reckon. At a time when our prisons are bursting at the seams and convicts are having to be released into the community early to finish their time in hostels (if you watched the Panorama programme on this, then you're probably frightened to leave your home!) we hear that prisons all across the country are to spend money on having their fences painted dark green so they don't appear as prominent to the inmates, and they don't feel so "trapped"!

Er, isn't that one of the purposes of a prison - to keep offenders trapped behind bars and high walls so that the rest of us may feel safe? Shouldn't they know that is why they are there? What next, designer cells, balm toilet paper, and the latest fashion clothing for inmates? How about some annual leave - you know, a paid holiday? Perhaps they'd like that too!

Anyone not wishing to feel trapped shouldn't offend - it's as simple as that! You may ask who the hell came up with this stupid idea? Well, it's just one of the ideas to be found in the Prison Service's "Sustainable Development Report". A report that also calls for new windows to be fitted to cells, and for solar panels and wind turbines to be installed in order to make our jails "environmentally friendly". Environmentally friendly for who? Not for the planet, that's for sure!

Incidentally, have you noticed how many times that word "sustainable" is popping up these days? It seems to be the latest "in-word" used to relate a sense of importance to something, and I'm sure it must by now have overtaken our hoary old favourite: "initiative". With "initiative" being seen by people today largely as meaning: "prone to failure", I'm wondering what the public's perception might soon be of: "sustainable". Yes, I reckon "stupid" has to be in with a good chance.

The more we make prison life comfortable, the more prisoners we shall accrue and the more prisons we shall have to build to house them. Prison should be an experience that no felon would ever again wish to endure. Only then will we really start to get on top of crime. All this stupid modern talk about human rights and comfort is ridiculous. On conviction every criminal should lose all but the very basic of human rights. Too often the convict, who has already violated the human rights of another, is kept by the public purse in conditions more comfortable than those of their victim. The country has gone bonkers! Utterly! It's those do-gooders again! Personally I'd find it far more environmentally friendly for all prisoners to do hard labour and all our prisons to be fitted with watchtowers complete with searchlights and machine guns. I may not be politically correct - but I'm right for you, for me, and for the planet!

Another institution that never fails to amaze is our National Health Service. I have no more medical qualification than that gained through reading the instructions on an Elastoplast tin - yet not even I would take more than a split second to conclude that any doctor suggesting to a woman patient her mother was a witch, one who with her husband was trying to kill her, was a little unethical. Such are the allegations being made against Dr Joyce Pratt, a London physician, who has allegedly told her patient she was the victim of "black magic" but that with "special powers", along with a visit to a priest at Westminster Cathedral, she might be cured.

A three-day tribunal by the General Medical Council Fitness to Practise panel in Manchester is to decide whether or not this doctor's conduct was irresponsible, unprofessional, or in any way intimidating to her patient and liable to bring the profession into disrepute. Now, we are often reminded about all those years of expensive training, examinations, and hours of hands-on experience that are required in order to become a qualified practitioner, aren't we? So isn't it rather strange how someone like Dr Pratt could go through the system holding such beliefs, if indeed she does, and not be detected? Perhaps even stranger is why any tribunal should need three days to deliberate such a matter. I have to wonder how many Pratts are involved in this case?

I'm guessing there's quite a few Pratts associated with the NHS's new computer system. We've aired this one before, but nothing seems to get any better. A new survey of more than 300 NHS staff in London reveals many of those who are to use the system are angry they weren't consulted before its introduction. They lack confidence in its ability to deliver what they need from it, and doubt it will be of much help to them. Those taking part in the survey included scientists, psychologists and pharmacists - one of whom has come out and labelled the systems as "useless". Once they've finished paying all the bills, that's getting on for £30 billion of uselessness bought out of the public purse. A lot of people could have been treated with that kind of money - a lot who today are refused life-prolonging medications because the finances aren't there to provide for them.

Perhaps a few quid could have been skimmed off to help raise some of the appalling hygiene standards found by the "Which?" magazine in their inspections over the past three years of some 50 UK hospitals. The consumer group reports reveal cockroach and mice infestations in hospital kitchens, dirty cooking equipment, inadequate refrigeration of food, mouldy equipment, out-of-date food, and even a lack of something as basic and necessary as soap and water. All this has been found, incredibly, within our National Health Service. And they have the gall to tell us our NHS is getting better? Better for who - undertakers?

Stupid council of the week was a close run thing between one that I won't mention and Tower Hamlets in East London. The former told a disabled driver, who had parked his car legally in a nearby disabled bay, that they needed his disabled badge in order to renew his permit at the (I believe, for this council anyway, quite stupidly named) Customer First Centre. After a friend fetched the badge for him, at the same time conscientiously paying for a parking ticket and putting it on the car, it was renewed and he returned to his car - only to find a parking inspector had slapped a £30 fine on the car for not displaying the badge.

This worthy of Lemony Snicket series of unfortunate events continued when his appeal against the fine was refused by the council because: "we received very little information and we found no valid grounds for cancelling the ticket." Well, I guess they couldn't have looked very hard for those grounds, could they? Customer First Centre? Bah! First for what?

Following this story hitting the headlines in the press, the council have promised to look at the case again should the person (the victim) write in to them with all the details. It's a sensible decision, but why has it had to take the story appearing in the press before some simple common sense was employed by the council? This particular council desperately needs to win friends and to influence people at this time, but it seems to me their in-built attitude which leaves much to be desired will prevent them from doing so. We are reminded at this time of year that a dog is not just for Xmas, but neither should be goodwill to all men (humankind, to be PC).

The winner of the accolade Stupid Council of the Week - by a mile! - in the end has to go to Tower Hamlets for dumping Guy Fawkes and replacing him with a tiger on Bonfire Night. The council there say that the story of Guy Fawkes and the Gunpowder Plot is too old. Instead their officials spent £75,000 on a celebration centred around a Bengali folk tale called the Emperor and the Tiger. What? And these people are allowed to govern?

Of course there's nothing at all wrong with celebrating the Emperor and the Tiger, especially in an area with such a large Asian population, but it should not be done on this day in place of a great British tradition. Guy Fawkes and the Gunpowder Plot is a massive piece of British history. November 5th (1605) is up there with 1066 and one in the eye for King Harold at the Battle of Hastings, and with 1666 when the baker to King Charles II, Thomas Farynor - own up now, how many of you remembered his name? - the original pudding head of Pudding Lane, caused the Great Fire of London - you simply can't go and replace it with a tiger. It's sacrilege! And above all, it harms community relations.

More stupidity? White poppies. The red poppy is traditional; symbolic. It is to remind us of the fallen, those from many nations who had to sacrifice their lives for others. Its significance to Remembrance Day came as a result of the Canadian military doctor John McCrae's poem "In Flanders Fields". Poppies bloomed profusely across some of the worst battlefields of Flanders in World War I, their red colour a reminder of the terrible bloodshed of trench warfare. Now it is used to remember those fallen in all military conflicts. It is an icon used by the Royal British Legion which helps them to collect money for all the good work they do for ex-servicemen and their families. What it is not is anything political or jingoistic.

The white poppy dates back to 1926 and it is a very political statement. It symbolises the belief that there are better ways to resolve conflicts than through the killing of strangers. It's an admirable belief, one that many will go along with, but it has no part to play on Remembrance Day, a day when we are remembering those that WERE killed by strangers, and it should not be struggling for recognition on that day alongside the traditional red poppy. The red poppy still means so much to so many people, even today. Respect their beliefs. Respect them. Find another day - and preferably find another flower.

Yes, it's been a very stupid week. One that has brought to light some very stupid people.

I hope you'll remember them. It's a time to remember.

See you next week . . .

"The Bitch!" 10/11/06.

In Flanders Fields
By: Lieutenant Colonel John McCrae, MD (1872-1918)
Canadian Army

IN FLANDERS FIELDS the poppies blow
Between the crosses row on row,
That mark our place; and in the sky
The larks, still bravely singing, fly
Scarce heard amid the guns below.

We are the Dead. Short days ago
We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow,
Loved and were loved, and now we lie
In Flanders fields.

Take up our quarrel with the foe:
To you from failing hands we throw
The torch; be yours to hold it high.
If ye break faith with us who die
We shall not sleep, though poppies grow
In Flanders fields.