I recall reading an article a few months ago – I think it was either in the Guardian or the Independent, I’m not sure which- bemoaning the low standards of British TV comedy.
Neither am I able to remember precisely the conclusions drawn in said article or, indeed, if any conclusion was drawn at all. Personally, my prognosis is that British comedy is failing to inspire because life in Britain has surpassed any attempt at parody:
A convicted murderer who tried to attack a work colleague with an axe, while out of prison on licence, is to receive compensation for unfair dismissal.
James Robertson, 50, learned of the employment tribunal’s decision from jail, where he is now serving two life sentences.
On Wednesday, the tribunal ruled the council was wrong to sack Robertson without notice after the incident, and ordered the authority to pay him £800 compensation.
I wonder what type of ‘notice’ would have satisfied the Employment Tribunal?
“Dear Mr.Roberston,
It has come to our attention that you tried to murder one of your co-workers with an axe. We take the view that such behaviour is inappropriate and not conducive to a happy working environment.
We must ask you to refrain from such activities in the future, failing which we shall have no choice but to consider further disciplinary action.”
Or do you think that such a letter might be construed as too judgemental?
David,
More stories like this,and how the average law abiding Briton (Farmer Martin comes to mind) is being treated as nothing more than a common criminal,is only going to add further comfort to Nick Griffin.
The BNP has just anounced that they are fielding 219 candidates in England,Scotland yet to close its registrations, for the upcoming council elections.A few more of these types of stories surfacing between now and election day will ensure many,if not all,BNP candidates get elected !!
And this may endup being Englands only way of ridding its self of “New Labour” !!
There is also my personal favorite:
A family doctor has been summoned to a formal hearing over his refusal to put a 34-year-old male patient on the list for screening for cervical cancer. …
“My suggestion would be to accede unquestioningly to the patient’s demand and carry out the procedure requested. Provided of course that a representative of the primary care trust could indicate the necessary part of this gentleman’s anatomy, and was able to give the learned medics a clue as to how they could access it.”