Veronica Connolly is refusing to pay her BBC licence fee. Her grounds are that Auntie has ‘violated her conscience’ by demonstrating support for abortion. Using an EU Human Rights Court ruling, the leading Pro-Life barrister Paul Diamond will defend Mrs Connolly against a prosecution for non-payment of the licence. Somebody please help me out of this paragraph before I kill myself.
Thank you. As I’m forever being told, we must all check our sources these days, as bonkers becomes not only more prevalent, but also more….bonkers. Yet I am reliably informed by a tame Torygraph hack that this news item is entirely correct: indeed, the lady involved has actually been interviewed by the newspaper.
“We get this Government propaganda shoved down our throats” Mrs Collins told the Seismograph, “And so it’s time someone said ‘no – enough’”.
I for one have had enough already. There are three ripostes which (I humbly suggest) Mrs C should embrace. One, turn the telly off. Two, turn over: these days, 80%+ of what the telly provides for just the one licence fee has nothing whatever to do with the BBC. Three, if you find yourself constantly turning the telly off, sell the bloody thing: being Pro-Telly isn’t obligatory.
And another thing: I’m fed up with names like Pro-Life. For one thing, it suggests the rest of us are Pro-Death. For another, it is akin to McDonalds being Pro-Meat. I reserve the right to be Pro-Life and Pro-abortion, Pro-Meat and Anti-McDonalds, Pro-Women and Anti-Connolly.
The madder things get, the richer will lawyers become. Even if you are Pro-Insanity, surely this is enough reason to seek a cure.
However, in the same edition of the Sunday Telegraph was ample evidence of the fact that you’d have to be bonkers to take everything in the media at face value. No, sorry – I’ll rephrase that: anything in the media at face value.
No doubt like me you’ve been reading about expenses trougher Sir Ian Kennedy, the vile taxi-abuser who diddled us all out of £16,000. Sir Ian would be on a better wicket if he wasn’t in charge of rapping MPs over the knuckles about precisely this kind of wanton approach to taxpayer funds.
But in mitigation, it is worth pointing out that Kennedy’s cabby largesse was related to his previous job. And further, the bloke was supporting London’s private hire sector in lieu of receiving any lucrative pension payments from his then employer, The Healthcare Commission.
Now, one could argue that as a prominent and unproductive Quangoista, Ian Kennedy should’ve been executed a long time ago; and on the whole, such a view would garner much support from me. But sadly for this probably quite well-meaning chap, he will now forever be known as Three-Taxis Kennedy. That is not only unfair, it is also bonkers – punishing the skilled negotiator doesn’t invalidate the Treaty.
To sign off today, I bring you tidings of a bonkers-backlash….from the unlikely quarter of Emperor Sarkozy hisself. On Saturday at the Davos jolly, Sarko suggested that remote, short-term driven shareholders are not the way ahead, and business should perhaps be looking at the 17,209 alternatives to the greedy-investor-barmy-bourse model of capitalism. For a man elected to Thatcherise la belle France, this is a ronde-point of biblical proportions. Zut-alors Nicolas, enfin tu as vraiment compris le bonkers.
*They’re all bonkers, and that’s official!