We've been away for a bit, so there's a fair amount of Wankery to catch up on – idiots don't just stop being ridiculous when there's no one watching, they're idiots ALL the time. We'll start by having not one but two Wankers this Week, both thoroughly deserved we think.
There's a cliché in a certain type of novel – those of Kingsley Amis spring to mind – that the “upper classes” believe that the lower orders (that's us) are ingrates, dependent on their goodwill and unthinkingly careless of their generosity. “After all we've done for them ...” they wail. Just what it is they think they've done for us is not entirely clear. Given us jobs on minimum wage? Allowed us to rent their property? Sent us off to war while they sat at their comfortable desks? Shagged our daughters, and then disowned the resulting little bastards? Yes, I can see how we owe them a tremendous debt of gratitude. We are to a man feckless, idle, incontinent and incapable of leading our lives without their wise and all-seeing supervision. Goodness, how grateful that makes me feel!
That this attitude is not just a literary device, but something our lords and masters sincerely believe, was made plain recently by Lord Bichard, the former head of the Benefits Agency.
He said, deliberately and in public, that retired people should do community work, and get their pensions docked if they refuse. Older people, he said, must “stop being a negative burden on the state”. Pensions “should be linked to contributions to the community as an incentive for people to look after the 'very old'”, thus solving at a stroke two of the most pressing problems facing HM Government at the moment – the enormous cost of state pensions for those who have earned them, and that other enormous cost of caring for the elderly and infirm.
We all know that in their secret heart of hearts the bastards would like to renege on their duty to pay us the pensions we have built up over the years, and skive off their responsibility for looking after those who can no longer do it for themselves. “After all we've done for them,” they sneer, “they have the gall to expect pensions, and a free ride to the Day Centre, and Meals on Wheels – what are we, a charity?”
Lord Bichard is 65 and a member of the Committee on Public Service and Demographic Change (“demographic change” is the polite way of saying “social engineering and making people live their lives the way we want”). He said “Are there ways in which we could use incentives to encourage older people, if not to be in full time work, to be making a contribution?” He suggested that the pension system should 'incentivise' people to do more to help look after the 'very old'. “It is quite possible, for example, to envisage a world where civil society is making a greater contribution to the care of the very old, and older people who are not very old could be making a useful contribution to civil society in that respect, if they were given some incentive or some recognition for doing so. We are now prepared to say to people who are not looking for work, if you don't look for work you don't get benefits, so if you are old and you are not contributing in some way or another maybe there is some penalty attached to that.”
A former Chief Executive of the Benefits Agency, Lord Bichard was the top civil servant at the Department for Employment for six years until 2001 when he retired at the age of 54. Speaking in Parliament, he said the benefits system should be changed to encourage pensioners to not be a drain on the public purse.
The noble Lord is to be congratulated. He's achieved something I would not have believed possible, a depth of ignorance and stupidity that exceeds anything us common oiks will ever manage. He has forgotten (or refuses to acknowledge) that pensioners are not a drain on the public purse: they ARE the public purse! Where the hell does he think all that pension money came from? Does he sincerely believe that it was rich, posh people generously putting their hands in their pockets to care for the feckless proles? We put that money in, mate, week in, week out, from our pay packets. We put some in, and our employers put some in for us. It wasn't you, little Lord Fauntleroy, and it wasn't the Government, it was our jobs that earned that pension pot, and don't you bloody forget it!
Naturally the idea has provoked a furious response. Dot Gibson, general secretary of the National Pensioners Convention, said: ‘This amounts to little more than National Service for the over-60s and is absolutely outrageous. Those who have paid their national insurance contributions for 30 or more years are entitled to receive their state pension and there should be no attempt to put further barriers in their way. We already have one of the lowest state pensions in Europe and one in five older people in Britain live below the poverty line.'
She went on: ‘Lord Bichard’s comments are also extremely divisive – trying to pitch younger people against older people, when the truth is that the real division in our society is between rich and poor. Frankly, Lord Bichard needs to think twice before making such silly and ill-informed remarks.’
Dr. Ros Altmann, director general of Saga said: 'This is a very strange idea indeed. Those who have retired have already made huge contributions to our society and are already the largest group of charity and community volunteers. Lord Bichard’s suggestions smacks of social engineering of a dangerous kind. He seems to be suggesting that if you decide to stop working, even once you reach the age that society determines it is reasonable to stop, civil servants should assess you and decide whether you are fit to be assigned to do work that they decide you should do.'
So, Lord Fancy-pants Ignorant Sod Birchard, think before you speak next time, and if you aren't absolutely sure you're going to talk sense, keep your big mouth shut. Wanker.
Our second Wanker is Tony Kaye, a Buckinghamshire magistrate. He wants Britain’s 38 million drivers to be forced to carry their driving licences at all times so that they can prove their identity.
He says such a requirement will help police and courts prove who was behind the wheel when offences are committed, and stop people caught speeding or drink-driving giving false names and addresses. It would also make it easier to spot those who drive when banned.
If the proposal is agreed by the 28,000-strong Magistrates’ Association, they will write to Ministers recommending its introduction.
Wanker Kaye says “It's a fairly simple, straightforward motion – it’s due to the challenges that arise in court because of a lack of identification. You sometimes get people who want to push the boundaries. They don’t co-operate as one would expect. This is just an effort to say, as in many other countries, if you’re driving this lethal weapon, we should be able to identify who you are.’
Well done, WK. It's that kind of simplistic argument that we've been fighting against ever since the Labour government tried to introduce ID cards, which would among other things, they claimed, enable to police to catch terrorists more easily. It's perfectly true that in America and many countries across Europe, drivers already have to take their licences with them whenever they get into their cars. Does this stop Americans from having accidents or committing motoring offences?
Well, no. Watch any of the many TV programmes that track the work of traffic police in America and you'll soon see that they have there some of the worst, most lunatic, least competent drivers it is possible to imagine. But they do have their licences with them, so I suppose that's all right.
Andrew Howard, of the AA, said: ‘We have already voted against ID cards. This would be an incredible burden on the population. Not carrying a licence could be a crime that drivers commit several times a day.’ And Robert Halfon, the Conservative MP for Harlow, said: ‘I’m absolutely opposed to this. Motorists are being hammered enough without being treated as criminals. The ID card went out in the 1950s and it’s astonishing that these magistrates are trying to bring it back through the back door.’
The GOS says: But if you've done nothing wrong, you've nothing to fear. Right? RIGHT?
either on this site or on the World Wide Web.
Copyright © 2012 The GOS