Showing posts with label daft Ideas Barnet. Show all posts
Showing posts with label daft Ideas Barnet. Show all posts

Wednesday, 6 October 2010

Mrs Angry's Index on Censorship: Broken Barnet

Ok: so one of two things has happened. Big Brother has given up wielding his blue pencil, or has decided that idiotic suggestions for the Ideas Barnet website are preferable to sensible, but politically deviant, contributions from free thinking residents.

Mrs Bottomley's sewage recycling idea not only is still in place, but appears to have found some support: there is a comment agreeing that the idea should be given consideration, and that this method is very efficient and with no odour. Evidently this earnest citizen is unable to detect a whiff of irony, so may not be best placed to comment on the success of such schemes.

Mrs Bottomley has further contributed, suggesting that valuable staff work time could be saved, and the success of the scheme might be enhanced, by the provision of chamber pots for each member of staff (two for senior officers) - and a commode for the Chief Executive (if he doesn't already have one).

Most gratifyingly, her somewhat retro Future Shape Workhouse idea, despite its blatantly politically deranged foundation, is still in place too, and apparently rather popular. In fact, it appears to have struck a chord with Barnet residents: 14 endorsements!

Again, encouraged by this support, the formidable Mrs Bottomley has suggested that disadvantaged and/or anti-social families would, in such institutions, would be properly monitored and offered support for their needs. A diet of plain but nourishing gruel and some light industrial activities such as stone breaking, rope picking etc will provide a firm but charitable regime. The savings made from housing & social care budgets might, she thinks, in part be awarded as a bonus to our oft mocked councillors, who do such a difficult job for so little reward.

Let's see if these comments make it to publication.

The correspondent who had submitted the suggestion about the unnecessary number of PR people has contacted me to say that now at last his idea has been published. Also, gratifyingly, there are (or were) some good comments rebutting the idiotic 'Refresh and Rebuild Staff' idea. Wonder how long they will last.

Sadly, Mrs B's suggestion about compulsory electricity generating treadmill sessions for staff appears to have been ignored. I suppose those troublemaking unions would have stuck their oar in, the spoilsports.

Finally, Mrs Angry has attempted once more to raise the issue which must not be mentioned: the - ssh - allowances, suggesting in 'Reflect 25% budget cuts in councillor allowance rates', that the extra £40,000 just given to eight lucky councillors, ie a 54% rise for each, could pay for a couple or more care assistant posts, so desperately needed in order to look after out elderly and most vulnerable residents.

I wonder if Big Brother will let that one through?