This is too much.... I can't bear it... Somebody else on the radio is agreeing with me... This guy (a french chef) said that the home and the family is a little molecule of society and all the molecules add up to make the whole. So... How we raise our children is important not only for the child and the family but also for soceity as a whole. If our children are raised without respect for authorty (because the powers of parents and teachers have been removed) then this will be reflected in soceity. If support for the family unit is removed, then our little molecules will start to fall apart...
Gary

Do my ears decieve me or did I actually hear someone on the radio say that the problem with soceity today was the break down of authority in the home and in schools. What joy, what bliss, I am not the only person who thinks this... Suddenly I don't feel so lonely...
Gary

My words will never do justice to the horror of recent days...
Gary

I hear that there is a shortage of teachers here in the UK. Well frankly I am not surprised. The government is saying that they must review the teachers working conditions, that they must try to lessen the load of paperwork, that they must examine the pay and benefits. All this should encourage people to become teachers and for existing teachers to stay. This is all well and good, but does anyone in the government have the courage to really say what the real problem is? I doubt it. So what is the real problem I hear you cry. It is this... Today teachers have no authority over the children and they live in fear of prosecution for offences against a pupil. This (and previous governments) have systemically removed the authority of adults to supervise, control and raise children. It started with schools and is now progressing into the home. Soon, a day will come when parents will be afraid to discipline their children for fear of a visit by the police. There has been a breakdown of authority in the family, in the home, in school and in society. Since when does a 10 year old child know better than the adult supervising them? Since when does a child have the authority to lord threats of prosecution over a parent or teacher. The whole moral system of authority is being turn upside down.

Before I hear you cry foul, I am aware that there must be protection for children against cruelty and abuse, but today I heard that a nursery worker is not allowed to put a plaster on a child's finger without express permission from the parents as it counts as assault. How can a plaster put over a cut or grazed finger be assault!

I was recently told a story of a teacher who was was summonsed to court accused of assault after spilling fruit juice on a pupil. By all accounts (excepts for the boys) it was an accident but she was accused of deliberately pouring tangerine juice over the boy, causing him "mental anguish". She was accused of assault. I am no lawyer, but an accidently spillage of juice is not assault.

How can we be expected to raise our children at home or at school when the authority of parents and teachers has been removed and instead the children have authority over the adults!

And then there is the weather. To be British means to be obsessed with the weather. Why is this? Is it because we are an island and that our weather so changeable? Is it because there is a meteorologist trying to break out of every man and woman in this land, or is it because we want to distance ourselves from other members of our society and the only level of conversation with which we feel comfortable is weather!

Talking of Cricket, I see that England have beaten Australia in the Fourth Test. Now I could go on about the British attitude to sport, I could mention how many games we actually invented but we aren't very good at (except snooker and darts, which are both games that people play in Pubs!), but I wont. Instead I will pose this sporting and moral dilemma. As I was making a cup of tea during my break, I saw Hussian being caught out from a ball which he never touched. Now the TV camera clearly showed that he never touched the ball with his bat or his body, but yet he was given out. So my sporting question is this: Should there be a better use of technology when it comes to high profile sports? However before you answer 'yes', note (and here is my moral dilemma) that Hussian should have been out for LWB (according to the commentators) by the previous ball, the TV camera also showed this clearly!

I have been pondering, what makes us British? As I get older and I meet different people from different cultures I have become more aware of what it means to be British. I am going to explore various attributes of Britishness over the next months starting today with fair play.

We have the expressions "But that is not cricket!" when exclaiming that something is not fair. It stems from an idea that a Gentleman should never lie or cheat and that his word is as good as his bond. These are the basic rules of cricket, it is a gentlemen's game. As I survey the world stage I see that fairness, playing by the rules and a destain for corruption is the backbone of a successful society and culture. When I look at countries where corruption is rife and the rule of law is collapsing, I shudder at the stupidity of those involved. Without law there can be no justice, without justice there can be no equality and without equality there will always be war.

What I fear the most is that with every passing day our 'fair play' is being eroded and so is our peace.

Have you noticed how a haircut has become sign for "Please queue up and make jokes about my hair". Why do the British feel that every time somebody has a haircut they have a decree from Parliament to make fun of them! I don't suppose for one moment the Sioux Indians used to poke fun at each other hair, "Oooo look flying-with-eagles has had a hair cut, hey who cut your hair... are you suing?"

And before you ask... No I haven't had a haircut, but I am due one soon and I can't wait for the lawn mower jokes!

Recently I listened to an interview with Iain M. Banks the science fiction novelist. He is famous for a range of books about a society called 'The Culture'. Banks describes the Culture as a Utopia. The interesting point was that Banks said that we 'the human race', would never attain to Utopia because we were all to nasty and fundamentally flawed. Even more interesting was that Banks called himself 'an evangelical atheist'. The 'Culture' was a way to describe Utopia without God, however he could not describe how we could attain Utopia nor could offer a cure for the Human condition.

How often it is that the singers, songwriters, poets and authors of our day see and perceive the problems that face mankind and yet none have an answer.

Now here is something that I find a mystery. This government of ours has a policy of trying to get Mums back to work. I can only guess that they are trying to do this so that they get more tax. It works like this... Joan is a mother of two children, the government want her to go back to work, may be she wants to go back to work or maybe she needs to go back to work to pay the bills (including the child minder). So Joan finds Chole, who is a child minder. Joan goes to work and pays tax to the government. From the money left Joan pays Chole who pays tax on it to the government. Joan doesn't have too much money left because she has had to pay Chole, Chole hasn't got too much money as child minders can't charge a high fee otherwise Joan couldn't afford the bill and so will not return to work.

Before Joan returned to work you had an unemployed person (Chole) and a mum (Joan) doing an excellent job raising her children. Now you have two people in work, tax being paid left, right and centre and Chole looking after Joan's children.

Now call me stupid, but doesn't it make sense that Chole goes and gets a job (maybe even the same one as Joan) and Joan remains caring for her children. Surely it is better for Joan to look after her children rather than a stranger? Maybe even pay Joan what Chole would have earned as a childminder!

I once heard a story of an guy who worked for a large company in the city of London. He worked in an open plan office. He worked in a team and the type of work involved team members sharing ideas and developments. Because of this, team members would often visit each others desks and stay a while to talk. Of course this meant that one would stand or stoop near the other's desk for long periods of time. So our hero asks his manager if he can have another chair to allow his team members to sit together while they work.

His manager replied...

"Sorry. No, we don't have a two chair policy here".

Need I say more!

Welcome to Simo's Sagacity. From dawn to dusk, I never cease to be amazed at the things that happen in this country of ours. Some make us great, some make us small, some make us united some make us fall. There is so much which seems real and yet is just a facade.

How do we fight our way through this jungle of illusion to discover a the true treasures of who we are. With sagacity.

Come on a journey with me as a look at everyday events and try to uncover the truth. This voyage will take us through serious, troubled waters as well and calm and often light hearted places.

Enjoy!