Mandarins – they’re at it again but this time it’s worse than you can imagine
We’re nearly half-way through the first month of the new year. There is no sign that government, Whitehall and most of the MSM are keen to address the problems we’re facing. They had better thank ‘Teh Spare’ on their bended knees for having provided such gasp-inducing material with which to fill their pages!
Still, there are a few indications that some in the Westminster newsrooms are daring to take a closer look at e.g. yon Sacred Cow. Firstly, here’s the customary link to the front pages of the print editions this morning: a veritable grab bag of ‘news’, suitable for us peasants to distract us over the weekend.
Illustrating the increasing divide between the ‘have subscription’ and the have-nots, there’s iNews with an ‘Exclusive’: “NHS is too often run for doctors rather than patients and needs a decade to fix, says Labour’s Wes Streeting” – it’s paywalled, so I have nothing to say about this except to observe that it’s odd how none of the other papers which usually copy so diligently from each other have done so in this case.
It’s also strange that Labour seems happy that readers of other papers are being kept in the dark. After all, how can ‘Teh Poor’ afford to subscribe to more than one paper? Shouldn’t they at least be told what Labour has in mind without having to pay extra?
Meanwhile, we hear from the NHS chief who has been so extremely quiet when nurses and ambulance drivers were preparing to and then going on to strike:
“NHS chief Amanda Pritchard: UK must train many more doctors and nursesHealth service boss demands more places in medical schools as she warns that hospitals are ‘over-reliant’ on foreign staff” (link, paywalled)
Oh dear. Speak of regurgitating what a few brave NHS critics have been saying for a long time! Will Labour be happy with providing more people for whom the NHS is being run?
Staying with the NHS, so terribly cash-strapped and so terribly woke, here are two items in the DT which at least ought to lead to questions in the HoC. Yes, they’re also paywalled but since I’m a good girl and have paid for them I can look at them and quote. See this:
“An NHS Trust taking over care of trans children from the Tavistock clinic is being trained by controversial charity Mermaids, […] The charity, which is at the centre of a number of safeguarding rows and is currently under investigation by the regulator, will provide sessions for staff at the South London and Maudsley NHS Trust (SLaM) starting this month. It comes as the Trust takes over specialist mental health support for children questioning their gender identity as part of a regional service set up to replace the Tavistock after it was found that its service was “not safe”.” (paywalled link)
How deeply must this rot have infested the NHS that the same lot being investigated is permitted to peddle their destructive ideology, just under another name! And for this extra ‘training’ the NHS has money …
The other NHS item in the DT shows that there’s at least some sanity to be found. However, one again has to ask: why is money, needed elsewhere in the NHS, being wasted on yet another ‘trans’ issue:
“NHS U-turns on transgender plans for maternity care after midwives revolt – Those who opposed the ‘gender inclusive training’ said it was a ‘watershed moment’ for staff rooting out trans ideology from the inside” (paywalled link)
Words failed me when I read on and saw how far this ideology was being pushed – money clearly no object (my emphasis):
“A tender document offered £100,000 taxpayer funding and also sought online resources, information posters and “best practice examples of how to care for trans and non-binary birthing people”. The scheme was underpinned by taxpayer-funded research by the LGBT Foundation, a charity which ran a session last year on “LGBTQ+ sex toy delights” and called for nephews and nieces to be replaced with the gender-neutral term “niblings”. Some 300 nurses, midwives and psychologists wrote to Lizzie Streeter, the NHS national LGBT programme manager behind the project, warning it had “no evidence base” and put maternity wards “at risk of ideological capture”. Two days after the letter was sent on Jan 9, NHS England backtracked and told bidders that “the contract has been withdrawn early” while officials launch a review into its evidence base.” (paywalled link)
How much of our money is being wasted on these managers and schemes! Where are the teachers who write similar letters to the education department, to the MoD, about funds being wasted on this issue alone?
Speaking of money being wasted: there are our ever so wonderful illegals being ‘sheltered’ in three- to five-star hotels across the country. Well, The Times tell us that:
“Ministers have drawn up plans to move more than 6,000 cross-Channel migrants out of hotels into a disused military site, holiday parks and former student accommodation. The government has approved spending £400 million over two years to place migrants in five new sites, The Times has learnt, after Rishi Sunak decided he wanted to move 40,000 migrants out of hotels, which cost taxpayers at least £2 billion a year.” (link, paywalled)
Don’t applaud this proposal just yet! Here’s the Treasury – hello, Mr Hunt! – putting their feet down:
“However, the Treasury is said to be resisting giving the Home Office unlimited funds to develop new detention facilities because of the department’s huge overspend on hotels.” (link, paywalled)
You really couldn’t make this up! ‘Unlimited’ when the plan is for two years? Ouch. Would the Treasury mandarins rather waste more billions on hotel accommodation for illegals rather than set up such places which will save those hotel bills? Are there perchance some lobby groups which love the hotel scheme because its a nice little earner – for them?
And now for something completely different. It’s about the government’s ‘survey’ in regard to their draft legislation on digital ID. On Thursday, our contributor ‘Norman’ sent me this video which you really ought to watch. It explains the traps embedded in the questionnaire the government has prepared as part of this ‘consultation’. Yesterday morning our commentator Lisa referred to this exercise as well, providing the link to this questionnaire.
Here’s the link to the whole document. Scrolling down a bit you’ll find the “Ministerial Foreword by Alex Burghart MP, Parliamentary Secretary for the Cabinet Office” It’s a brilliant exercise in Whitehall waffle. It bursts with weasel words like ‘secure and trusted’, ‘peoples’ choice, security and control of their data’, to make it easier to ‘access commercial products and services online’. How nice. How caring.
Interestingly enough, the information on which government departments would have access to these data is hidden far down, in Annex 4: “Public authorities who would be able to share data for the purposes of the proposed identity verification services objective”. The list is staggering. Please do scroll down in the link above – this list too long for inclusion here. And then they have added four more ‘bodies’ to that already long list:
“The Cabinet Office – Department for Transport – Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs – Disclosure and Barring Service”
No, I dunno what ‘Barring service’ is – they explain it somewhere but I’ve frankly lost the will to live so didn’t check it out. Why the Cabinet Office needs easy access to my private data is simply beyond me. If you want to fill in that questionnaire, first watch the video ‘Norman’ sent. Me – I won’t fill in anything. Even though one can remain anonymous, I’m sure they can still track the relevant IP address of the anonymous user.
Given the latest hack, of the Royal Mail, I don’t trust any of those departments to keep my data safe. We can be sure that these data will be ‘safe’ in Labour’s hands though, right?
That’s all I have for today. While I rejoice over the principles stance of the midwives I’m disgusted by the doolally attitude in the MSM where efforts is wasted on ‘Spare’ while the government plans to drive us further towards a Chinese solution to all our problems. Enjoy the weekend if you still can …
Just another brick in the wall being built against us. I won’t be bowing and scraping to anyone who is queer but neither would I seek to oppress them if their affliction is real, which I suspect is not the case for many but simply a fashion.
Thank you for the acknowledgement Viv, and I have not filled anything in yet as it all smells too dodgy. What I lack in hearing I have more than made up for in odour. I appreciate the link from Norman as well. A massive rebellion is required but everyone is too pre occupied with some ex royal going “spare!”
I didn’t fill in the consultation which was full of trick questions as is always the case with Gobvt consultations but simply emailed Cab Office saying I thought the consultation questions were skewed , their proposals were appalling ,and any conveniences not worth the price; that data sharing did not have my blessing and I Govt Depts can’t be trusted not to lose/abuse our data.
Many thanks for the link and advice from Norman Viv Lisa
On the trans issue, talk about the tail (so to speak) wagging the dog .
In the most recent census, 94% answered a voluntary question as to whether they identified as their sex registered at birth.
93.5% (45.4million) said YES.
0.5% (262,000) said NO.
Of the latter 0.1% (52,400) said they’re trans men; the same proportion said trans women. The other 0.3% made up the rest of the trans rainbow.
The survey did not encompass the crucial difference of those acting a role and the even smaller number who put their money where their mouth is (well almost) and have surgery for even better effect.
So a population of 65-70million must bow and scrape not to offend a tiny number of people on a hair trigger many of who, rather than just living their life as they wish, seem to want nothing more than unconditional worship for their self-proclaimed difference, and to be allowed to hate normal (as in the numerical meaning of the great majority) people for being, well, regular men and women.
Anyone remember “My Word is a word game, played by people whose business is words”?They would be hard pushed to find a team of four these days.
I have always loved anything to do with words and word games, especially groan inducing puns. The GB News straplines are a rich source that can amuse even when it’s a segment I skip. Beneath yet another interminable discussion on the now seemingly paranoid Prince of Woke, they ran something along the lines “Harry’s going Spare,” which was all they needed to say really.
I hadn’t seem that or your comment Phil O but snap anyway.
It’s interesting that the latest proposals for closer trade ties with the e.u and the changes to the Northern Ireland protocol that the media is so excited about also contain the phrase ‘data sharing’ which as we all know will be one way data sharing only. Just out of interest do we still share all data regarding Driving Licences and Vehicle idendification and ownership details with the e.u. after all Grant Shapps when he was minister of transport or whatever they call themselves these days signed up to e.u style number plates and changed the old post war NATO country designation plate from G.B to U.K with no consultation that I can find just to make it more convienient to travel within the e.u apparently which is why one notices so many e.u registered vehicles not displaying e.u style plates and with no country identifier displayed. It’s almost as if our borders are open to anyone and anything , but that would be silly wouldn’t it.
Another interesting post from elsewhere:
https://www.stopworldcontrol.com/behavior
I cannot see a peaceful way to end what is effectively a war against us. We need people with the necessary skills and equipment on our side to stop the globalists’ evil dreams but where are they?
Jack.
Before we expect others to come forward and do all the spadework shouldn’t we first show some goodwill by having some skin in the game?
Wouldn’t it be lovely if those working in the development of this digital cage deliberately did a bad job !!!
Or the jobsworths enforcing and generally enabling it ditto.
Or failing that, I suppose refusal by ordinary people is the only way