Council Runs Text Message Course

A government-funded (that should probably read 'tax-payer funded') course is teaching adults how to send mobile text messages and download ringtones.

The two-hour course in Birmingham is run by the Learning and Skills Council, as part of its Bite Size Intros scheme.

The course organisers say it covers all aspects of using mobile phones, including sending text messages and creating an address book.

IT lecturer Maggie Fitzpatrick-Jordan, who launched the course, said it served a real purpose. She told reporters: "Lots of people are really scared of mobile phones, particularly the older generation. They're not happy with using it, they'll often prefer to call or something, and in order to save money quite often we can text."

Critics have called it a waste of taxpayers' money, with the Campaign for Real Education branding it a "disgrace", but they're both wrong;

It's An Outrage!!

Why didn't they just run a course called 'How To Read an Instruction Manual'? (Or RTFM, as real IT insiders know it!)

Or better still, spend the money teaching the younger generation how to read and write and string intelligible sentences together... now that is a crazy idea!

Y'see, if you encourage this sort of this amongst the older generation, pretty soon we'll have double the problem of Text Speak in Daily Life.

Road Tax Collection

Road Tax - well, it's not an outrage in itself, not at all. My gripe is with the method via which it's collected. And even that isn't an outrage. But what is, in my mind, a bit outrageous, is the way that governments have never publicly stated the reasons why they collect it so inefficiently and inequitably. But, to be fair, the UK government has always collected it in the same way, and so have presumably all other governments, and nobody's ever whinged about it, so perhaps I'm alone in thinking this way.

The government knows how much total revenue it obtains per annum from Road Tax. Presumably it also knows how much total revenue it ought to be obtaining per annum from Road Tax, if the tax dodgers paid up too.

And the government also knows how much total revenue it obtains per annum from vehicle fuel tax. So it knows how many litres of car fuel are sold per annum.

So let's assign some symbols as follows:

A = Total revenue per annum that ought to be obtained from road tax
B = Litres of car fuel sold per annum

If Road Tax were scrapped, and vehicle fuel tax were increased by A/B per litre, then

• Everybody would pay it, nobody would be able to dodge it
  

• It would be fair - the more miles you drove, the more you'd pay, the more efficient your vehicle was, the less you'd pay

Of course, we'd also need a separate system for registering vehicles, but that would involve a nominal charge, or no charge at all, so there would be no disincentive to registering. And we already have that system in place - it's the system that we currently use for collecting Road Tax.

Yes, I know, there'd be exceptions such as agricultural vehicles and electrical vehicles, but methods can be found for dealing with such exceptions.

Now the government doesn't do this 'cos (I presume) industry would have a hissy fit about it. The average person, driving 10000 miles per annum in his privately owned/taxed/insured car, would gain (slightly). And the company car driver and the lorry driver would lose. And governments always do what industry wants.

Now here, at long last, is my gripe. They don't tell us why they do it inefficiently and unfairly. They should do it efficiently and fairly, or they should come clean about it.

It's An Outrage!!

Police Protect Criminals

A crimebuster who made a video of crack dealers operating outside his home has been banned from filming by the police, and warned he is breaching civil liberties.

Darren Gibbet bought a £250 video camera soon after the people moved into the flat opposite his and started dealing crack. Despite numerous complaints to the police, they failed to deal with the problem.

On one occasion as he filmed, one of the dealers entered Darren's property, assaulted him and tried to smash the camera against a wall. The police were called, but when they arrived Darren was told that he was breaching their civil liberties, and that the man was entitled to retrieve the film. In addition, if he persisted in filming he would face arrest and prosecution.

It's An Outrage!!

How many times do we hear the police extolling the virtues of neighborhood watches, or bemoaning the fact that they can't get ordinary citizens to stand up against and help prosecute criminals?

But when somebody actually has the courage to do exactly what they're asking, they plump to protect the criminals!!

Darren Gibbet should be given a medal, and control of London's CCTV system; the man's a hero, not a villain.

Hypocritical Manufactured Pop Band

Manufactured pop band GirlsAtPlay are just about to clog up the bottom of the charts with a remix of the classic 80's song by Mel & Kim, Respectable.

Now some of my favourite pop bands have been well and truly manufactured, but by that I mean pulled together from a large crowd and honed into a unit (Take That springs to mind).

But when I say 'manufactured' in relation to GirlsAtPlay I mean so totally fake that Trading Standards ought to be locking them up.

If you are unlucky enough to stumble across their website, you'll find that the group is made up of the following highly unlikely mix;

• Lisa-Jay, an incredibly successful business woman who owns the biggest and hippest club in London - Fallulabub's (try this on a search engine, there's only one entry...)
  

• Rita, the owner of an all-women chain of garages (there must be a Kwik-Fit pun in there somewhere; answers via emailplease!)
  
• Lynsey, an NYPD motorcycle officer who won a Medal Of Honour for "an act of heroism above and beyond the call of duty" (going out without make-up on perhaps?)
  
• Shelley, an Air Force One Pilot who flies the President around whenever he needs her
  
• Vicky, a cow girl who was left a ranch by her 18 year old Native American cowgirl penpal who died of an unspecified cause (handy, that)

Hmmm....

Some of the text on there is just so laughable you'd swear it was straight out of Monty Python or The Fast Show ("I bumped into the Prez at a club in Ibiza when he was in drag, and asked if he needed a pilot" - I'd have been asking for about $50million in used notes and a City named after me!!)

(I've emailed Lynsey and Shelley to check what exactly they've been doing to help in the wake of the terrible World Trade Centre attacks, but so far no answer.)

So that's bad enough, but what makes it worse is the song they've chosen

It's An Outrage!!

How can a bunch of Spice Girl wannabees possibly have the nerve to take on this tune?

Firstly they murder it. Secondly, and more importantly, hasn't anyone pointed out to them the irony of the lyrics?

They'll always be respectable, because every word they say is scripted, everything they do is planned, they are mindless drones controlled by people with both eyes on the bottom line.

What are the chances of any one of them dropping in a swear word into a kids TV interview? Or being photographed buying large bottles of gin from the local offie? Or being caught by police in a drug-fueled sex orgy?

Fairly slim I'd say... and more's the pity; it might make them slightly interesting and give them about another week in the spotlight than they're going to have.

The Price Of Chips at Robbie's Concert

We went to see Robbie Williams play at Manchester the other week, and whilst we were waiting for the support bands to come on, we decided to get something to eat.

Chips seemed to be the best option, so we found a stand and ordered a tray to share.

We got them, and handed over £1.50, only to see about 20 chips sat in the smallest tray you've seen!

If you work out how much they were charging per chip, you'd be looking at 7.5p per chip!!

It's An Outrage!!

Good grief - you could buy a sack of potatoes for £1.50 and stuff yourself full of chips (like this chap here...).

I bet he didn't pay £1 bloody 50 for that tray, only to waste them by stuffing them up his nose and in his ears!!

When I buy a tray of chips, I want it to look more like this and cost about 90p. And be smothered in red sauce and vinegar too.

Stupid Astrological Marriage Query

In the Daily Express newspaper every Saturday there's an advice column run by an astrologist called Claire.

Mostly the people who write in are your normal, everyday run of the mill idiots who believe in this sort of nonsense and ask mindless questions like "My hairdresser is an Aquarian, and I'm a Scorpio with Mars rising, so should I have highlights or just a cut and blow dry?", or "My foot is on fire, when would be the best time for me to call for an ambulance given the current phase of the Moon against Sagittarius?"

But every now and again you get a real corker, like this one (taken word for word, I kid you not!);

Dear Claire
I have been married for two months and love my wife very much. She is a great girl in every way.
But she is a vegetarian. I am not, and she refuses to cook meat meals.
This is getting me down as my mother is a great cook and I miss her steak pies and mixed grills. What can I do?
I am a Taurean born May 14 1971, and my wife is a Pisces born on March 12 1972.
David

It's An Outrage!!

I almost don't know where to start, but the most obvious question has to be;

What the hell did you talk about before deciding to get married?

Her vegetarianism never came up once? Not even when you took her to meet your mother and she cooked half a pig on a stick for lunch? (You did take her to meet your mother didn't you...? Doh!)

Your love of meat and meat related foodstuffs was simply skimmed over was it, mumbled under your breath just as Emmerdale started?

During your courtship, did you ever actually eat together, even sandwiches from a corner shop? "Bacon, sausage and egg do you my love?" says he. "No thanks, I'll have a cheese salad" says she. That would have been one clue!

And are you such a momma's boy that you can't either cook for yourself, or pop round to see your old mum and get her to knock you up a pie of some sort? You sound like a real wuss to me.

Especially if you think this has anything to do with your time of birth and the vague position of stars in the vast universe that had probably been dead for millenia before you were even conceived.

They are simply hydrogen burning furnaces, just like our own sun. Huge, chemical reactors whose only effect on inhabitants of planets is to warm them up and stop them freezing to death.

To David I would say, get a grip, get a griddle, and next time you pick a girl to marry, try not to use a catalogue!!

(Don't you just love it when people start to describe their partners by saying "I love my wife/husband very much. She/he is a great girl/guy in every way." You just know there's a huge but due in the very next sentence! Of course, I love my girlfriend very much, she's a great girl in every way....)

Teachers Want 35 Hour Week

Teachers in England and Wales are expected to vote for industrial action on Monday unless the government begins moves towards a 35-hour week.

The unions are all demanding a maximum working week of 35 hours, maximum classroom time of 22.5 hours and a salary structure which would allow most teachers to reach a wage of £35,000.

The Government's Education Secretary, David Blunkett, has said the public was unlikely to sympathise with teachers wanting to work a 35-hour week when they got such long holidays.

It's An Outrage!!

Damn right we'd unlikely to sympathise!!

Teachers in England get the following holidays;

• 1 week in February (Half Term)
  

• 2 weeks at Easter
  
• 1 week in May (Spring bank Holiday)
  
• 6 weeks in Summer
  
• 1 week in October (Half Term)
  
• 2 weeks at Christmas
  

• this equates to 13 weeks of holidays!!

So, with most other workers getting 4 weeks of holiday across the WHOLE YEAR, they are already 9 weeks up on the rest of us.

And, doing a quick bit of maths, a 35 hour week means 7 hours per day, which means starting at 08:30 and finishing at 15:30.

Isn't that exactly the length of the children's school day? And isn't it 1.5 hours less than office workers? And when will they do their marking, lesson preparation, extra-curricular activity?

Stretching my maths skills to their limit (it has been after all, over a dozen years since I left school!), you get the following;

• 52 weeks minus 13 weeks of holidays = 39 weeks at work
  

• 39 weeks of 35 hours = 1365 hours at work per year
  
• £35,000 across 1365 hours = £25.64 per hour at work

Now that seems like a mighty fine hourly rate to me!!

Unions say that some teachers are already doing 50 hour weeks, and that this will combat that problem. I say, rubbish. My working week is 37.5 hours a week, but I almost never do that few hours. Just like most other people I know, I do the hours that the job dictates.

I have every symathy for teachers who have to deal with disruptive, unruly, dangerous children, but that's one of the hazards of the profession and they know that before they go into it. Teaching is a vocation, and not just a job.

Do it right, or don't do it at all.

(My dad's fully in favour of a 35 hour week for teachers though - he says anything to increase the number of hours they currently work must be a good thing...)

192.com Promotes Illegal Book

Having once used the 192.com service to try and locate somebody, I seem to be forever on their emailing list.
One morning this week I got the following email from them;

ORDER THE BIG BREACH NOW FROM 192.COM

192.com has over 50% of the total printed copies of The Big Breach and will be flying the books into the UK on Tuesday. It will be the first company in the UK, online or otherwise, to stock the controversial MI6 book which will be available to it's 650,000 registered users as well as the public at large.

The inner workings of Britain's intelligence services are revealed in the book. The Foreign Office has warned that publishing the information could put National Security at risk.

The Court of Appeal ruled on Thursday that the Sunday Times could serialise the book once it was in the public domain. The book's official launch is on Tuesday in Moscow after which it will be widely available across Russia, Europe and the US.

192.com champion the cause for Freedom of Information, and firmly believe that details on National Security widely accessible in other countries should be available to UK citizens.

It's An Outrage!!

It's called National Security for a fecking reason!! I don't believe anyone, anywhere should be able to read this sort of thing. Just because a disgruntled ex-low level MI6 operative wants to make a quick, easy pile of money, does not mean he should be allowed to put lives at risk.

If Government documents were used in a poker game, The Freedom Of Information would not beat The Official Secrets Act. So why should it be this way when money is involved?

Every police or military or security service action now seems to be open to the lottery of public scrutiny. Do you think we'd have won WWII if Churchill had to answer to the media every time he made a decision? Or do you think we'd all be speaking German now?

As the general public, we do not have the appropriate moral or intellectual capacity to pass judgement on how these things are carried out. Neither do we have the bigger picture, or the balls.

The man who wrote this should be paid a 3am visit by his ex-colleagues.

It's Another Outrage!!

192.com claim to be championing the cause of the public, and as such you'd think they themsleves would be beyond reproach.

Funny then that their own operating practices have been called severely into question by the Office Of Fair Trading.

They do not make it clear that they have no affiliation to BT's Directory Enquiries service (who are 192 on the phone).

They contact businesses and 'advise' them that their business name has been deleted from the 192 CD-ROM, and ask for a payment to ensure it goes back on. Except that they've never actually produced one copy of this CD so far.

Perhaps they're also in line for a 3am visit...?

Wilkinson Sword's Razor Con

I bought some new blades this week for my disposable Wilkinson Sword razor, and chose their newly launched ones.

Supposedly they have a diamond coating bonded to the cutting edge to give a better shave.

They're in the same packaging as the old ones, but were 50 pence more expensive. Well, I thought, for a closer, smoother shave, that's a price I'm willing to pay.

So I bought them, took them home, and the following morning opened the packet to use them.

To my horror, there was one razor missing. Or, to be more precise, instead of there being two lots of five blades, there were two lots of four blades. The picture above shows what I mean.

On the right is the old design, on the left is the new one. Wilkinson haven't even bothered taking the effort to disguise this with new packaging - they've just left one out.

It's An Outrage!!

Packaged exactly like the old style ones, you'd expect to get the same number, but you don't!! That's just downright out of order!!

Alright, it does say on the bottom left of the packet 8, and not 10, but men are just too busy thinking of higher level, more important stuff to notice that....

Safeway Brand Gingerbread Men 'Non-PC'

Safeway supermarket in Grantham, Lincolnshire, is to rebrand Gingerbread Men as Gingerbread Persons.

They claim this is because they are due to introduce a Gingerbread family complete with children (and perhaps a cat, though personally I can't see those selling very well - but I could be biased!!) and consequently labelling their shelves with the individual gender descriptions will become too cumbersome.

However, the more cynical amonst us, including the store manager Tom Lax, assume it is yet another assault by the Political Correctness brigade.

It's An Outrage!!

Gingerbread Men are clearly different from Gingerbread Women (or Ladies), as they don't have skirts or long, flicked hair.

And how many Gingerbread 'persons' have actually complained about their gended specific labelling to warrant this move?

Are we to see them lobbying Parliament in the near future with angry slogans neatly iced onto those big, flat, round lollypops you only see in comics and at funfairs?

I'd have though that the prospect of having their limbs bitten off one by one before having their heads munched (or worse, in the case of younger children, simply being gnawed into a soggy mess) would be their first concern. But as I'm not a thing of sugar, oats and ginger I guess I'll never know.

Anyway, Safeway should stick to the traditional, descriptive names given to these pieces of confectionary several hundred years ago, lest they fall foul of the famous Gingerman's fate.

For those of you who don't remember the fable, the Gingerbread Man ran all round town causing mischief, thinking he was cleverer than anyone else. Until he ran into a VERY clever fox who tricked him and gobbled him up.

Okay, it's a tenuous link, but try and make the leap with me...

Mobile Phones in the Gym

I go to a gym a couple of times a week, and I'm becoming increasingly bewildered by the number of people that come straight out of the showers, open their lockers and stand there buck naked whilst they check their mobile phones.

Most of them even answer or make calls before they get a stitch of clothing on them and I have to wonder - just HOW important is that phonecall??

I am not a mobile phone hater, as I have one for work and one for personal use; I think they're an invaluable asset.

But, not so valuable as to knock getting dried and dressed down a place on the list of 'Things To Do After A Shower'.

Even if, God forbid, it was a call to say something dreadful had happened to one of their nearest and/or dearest, they'd still have to towel off and put some pants on wouldn't they??

It's An Outrage!!

Even worse are the one or two very, VERY strange people who actually take their phones INTO the gym with them.

Perhaps it's a cutting edge personal trainer, who works from home, manages twenty or more clients, and just rings each of them up now and again to say "Go on my son - one more set!", or "No pain, no gain!", or "Push it to the max, big fella!".

Then again, it's probably the other-half, reminding them to bring some milk home... just like every one else.

Bonkers Conkers

I reported some time ago about schools banning the game of Musical Chairs for being too violent. (go here for that Outrage!)

Well, I can proudly tell you that that has now been beaten hands down for stupidity.

Keele University has undertaken a study of Primary Schools in Britain which shows that some have banned the age-old game of Conkers for fear of being sued by the parents of injured children.

Furthermore, some schools have banned playground football for it's anti-social tendencies (like teamwork, cooperation and organisation, not to mention exercise, coordination and dexterity...), and one was even reported as having outlawed skipping after, and I quote, "some girls fell down".

It's An Outrage!!

Conkers and skipping are games that every child should have the opportunity to play. Conkers is like golf, in that it evens the playing field - all you need is a good conker and you're a winner - even if you're small and weedy and have asthma. It pays no heed to the size of player - it's all about your skill, and how hard your conker is (oo-er!).

Also, I don't know if anyone else has noticed, but our national football team is completely pants - though I'm sure stopping kids playing it at school is just how France, Italy and Brazil go about nurturing their talent. The FA must be so proud...

And as for banning skipping because "some girls fell down" - isn't that what childhood is all about? Falling down, getting scrapes, grazes and bruises?? Perhaps we should make all skipping surfaces out of feathers in future, or insist on some sort of protective padding for the skippers.

Or perhaps we could all just get a grip. Don't schools have better things to do than this - like teach children stuff? Sums, writing, joined up speaking - that sort of thing.

Or are we supposed to find it reassuring that whilst our future generations will grow up illiterate, enumerate, lacking in social skills, fat, lazy and introverted, at least their knees will never have known the cruel sting of cold Germolene or the harsh tear of Elastoplast??

Somehow, that just doesn't do it for me...

Fuel Stockpilers Should be Shot

I didn't have much to say about the fuel crisis that hit Britain during September (mostly because I was working from home due to a broken ankle, and it all sort of passed me by...), though I was Outraged that no-one seemed to be able to see the futility of the protests.

The current Government is committed to improving the national infrastructure, and as such will use high taxation to raise the necessary funds.
If the tax on fuel is lowered, tax on something else will be raised to compensate. That's simple math's, and I for one would rather be taxed on a commodity that I have a choice about using, rather than on my basic income where I have no options.

Anyway, we're now approaching the protestor's deadline for when fuel tax had to be lowered or they'd be out blockading fuel depots again, and those tax cuts have not been made (though try asking yourself how Shell made earnings of £2.24bn in the last three months, yet the blame is still with our Government...).

So what do the general public do? Panic, and start stockpiling fuel in case there's a shortage later this month. But hang on; if everyone buys twice as much fuel as they normally do, won't this in itself start the shortage? And then, seeing the start of a shortage, won't everyone go out and stockpile more fuel just in case a shortage becomes a drought??

Ever hear of a vicious circle?!

It's An Outrage!!

An emergency law should be passed for filling stations to be policed by the Army, who should be on the lookout for;

• anyone with their tank already more than one quarter full
  

• anyone filling up any sort of container

and upon catching either of these two types of people, would be legally obliged to take them behind a wall and shoot them in the face.

These people are morons, soft-brained sheep, who read the tabloid press and believe everything they see with a terrifying gullibility. They bring about misery and discomfort for the rest of us who are rational, and should be removed from society at the very first opportunity.

The Fuel Crisis - nature's way of suggesting we thin out the crowd.

Donor Card Fiasco

There is much debate at the moment about how to run a more successful Donor Card scheme.

People awaiting transplants are missing out on potentially life-saving operations due to a shortage of organs.

Hospitals have for many years been telling us that, during the trauma of a bereavement, many families either don't know the wishes of the deceased, or just over-rule those wishes, which is apparently legal.

And because in most cases, no-one actually carries their donor card with them, it can be hard to determine their wishes anyway.

To me it's simple; make organ donation work on a 'presumed consent' basis, unless you are carrying an opt-out card.

Although only 30% of us have donor cards, over 57% of the public shared this sentiment in a recent survey carried out, so why don't we just do it??

It's An Outrage!!

Public apathy is a blight on the face on many campaigns designed for our benefit; recycling, voting, energy conservation, driving slower - the list goes on.

Requiring a mandatory expression of your preference NOT to donate organs would make things much easier for the Health Service, and families of both the deceased AND those in need of transplants.

How can helping to save a life be a bad thing?

BBC's Watchdog Twists The Facts

On the whole, I like the concept of the BBC programme, "Watchdog". It does a good job of exposing scams, shams and flim-flams, and fighting for better customer service. But every now and again it seems to me that they are just looking for a target to frag.

Take Friday October 13th's edition, and the story on the Airtours Travel company.

It would seem that earlier in the week their Chief Executive had said that he wanted to rid his company of "... the whinging customers.".

What he meant was that small minority without genuine complaints who are just out to get something for nothing, and enjoy complaining. Having worked with customers for the last 13 years, I know what he means!!

However, Watchdog went to town on them, using their regular bag of stats, which showed that 47% of complaints received by the programme about Airtours were to do with accommodation or resort issues. And that sounds a lot, doesn't it boys and girls?

Hang on though... Airtours ferried approximately 3 million people on holidays last year, yet Watchdog had received just under 500 complaints in total.
Even if we're generous and estimate that only a quarter of disgruntled holidaymakers chose to write in, that gives us 2000 people.

Against 3 million, that's 0.07%, meaning that Watchdog's accommodation complaints amounted to just 0.035% of the people Airtours dealt with last year. Which doesn't sound a lot anymore, does it boys and girls??

It's An Outrage!!

Now I'll admit that 2000 unhappy customers is nothing to be proud of, but the way Watchdog presented it, you'd think that Airtours were packing everybody into galleys, using whips and a fat man on drums to make them row across the Med, only to give them a two week stay in a Turkish Gulag, before parceling them in crates and posting them home by camel-mail.

Get a grip Watchdog, and deal with the real threats to consumer society. Like the EU for a start...

Disney Travels In Time

Disney Channel in the UK (available through your local cable or satellite provider...) has just launched it's new package, containing three new channels, AT NO EXTRA COST !!

One of these is called "Disney+1", and is exactly the same as the main Disney channel, but running one hour later...

This, apparently, is in case you missed your favourite Disney programme first time round but still want to see it. And don't forget, it's FREE!!

It's An Outrage!!

What kind of chumps do Disney think we are?? Showing the same programmes one hour later does NOT constitute a new channel, and it damn well ought to be free - so no incentive there then!

But what concerns me is, what happens if you miss your programme on Disney+1? There seems to be no provision for this, such as Disney+1+1 (or is that +2?), surely a massive error on their part?

And what about really busy people who just can't wait for their favourite programme on Disney? Where is the Disney-1 channel? I mean that'd be a real time-saver; you need to see Sabrina The Teenage Witch, but also have a hot date to get to. No problem - just tune in to the channel that screens the main channel's shows one hour ahead of time!!

Or could you achieve the same effect by treating Disney+1 as Disney, therefore making Disney into Disney-1...??? Where's the Doctor when you need him?

The other two alternatives of course are;

1. get a video recorder
   

2. get a life...

(The BBC have been doing this for years of course, except in their case it's called BBC+20years, it runs on the same channel as their main programming, and costs £104 a year whether you want it or not.....)

Schools Ban 'Too Violent' Musical Chairs

What is the cause of violence in society today? This is a question that has vexed ministers, scientists and theologians for years, and has produced some interesting answers. The lack of National Service, a decline in moral values, abolition of corporal punishment, the rise of single parent families, Hollywood trends. All have been suggested as caused, and each has it's merits.

But now a new Government-backed booklet, entitled Towards A Non-violent Society, has lain the blame squarely at the door of Musical Chairs. Yes, the party game.

It would seem that a group of charities formed after the James Bulger murder have concluded that violence in children can be linked to the teaching of strongly competitive games. As such, it is recommending that schools do not use the game, lest we breed a generation of maniacs (okay, that last bit isn't in there, but it might as well have been!).

They say that in Musical Chairs, the strongest and biggest children always win, and thus shows that violence is a favourable trait.

I don't know what rules are being used today, but I seem to remember it was always the quickest or sneakiest children that won, not the big lumbering farmers' sons I played it with.

What concerns me more is that we are seeing a gradual removal of all competitiveness in schools, it being replaced with the ethos of 'everyone can win'. And I'm afraid this just isn't true.

In the big real world of adults, full of careers, bosses, love, sex and money (sometimes all rolled into one convenient package!), there are clearly winners and losers. Just look at your own friends and colleagues. Are there not some of these that are better and more successful than others, yourself included?

It's An Outrage!!

What we need to teach children is that competition is a natural part of life and should be embraced. We need to help them find their own particular field of success, and then support them in it. Not everyone will be a sprinter, or a mathematician, or a solicitor or a jet pilot, but we will all be something. Ad we need to be the best we can at it.

Look at America, where the divide between success and failure is more pronounced than it ever will be here, and what are they concerned with? Winning.

If we remove the concept of winning and losing from children's early development, they are going to have a hell of a tough time coping with it when it jumps up and bites them on the ass for the first time. Plus, we'll all still be crap at sports that we invented.

Musical Chairs has as much to do with breeding a violent society as doing exams - leave it be.