PRIVILEGE PLC

(This article was inspired by the UK government's love of creating a private market for everything even if, as in the case of healthcare, it would seem to be an artificial model. Like trying to pass a cat off as a dog. It is not a criticism of the Royal Family as such - the inbred idiots are quite capable of doing that for themselves. I suppose its also a bit of a dig at the proliferation of pointless technologies that are currently being wafted around - "permanently watch Paris Hilton on my mobiel so I don't miss a thing" - just fuck off.)

An article by James Murray

As mantras go "Privatisation, Privatisation, Privatisation" doesn't really cut the mustard. Nevertheless, since the late 1980's it has certainly been the buzzword within UK politics, a buzzword that has seen many of our institutions, rightly or wrongly, given over to private corporations to be run more efficiently.

Three months ago today it was the turn of the Royal Family to be thrown to the capitalist vultures. According to most they were a dying corpse waiting to be picked to pieces by the ravages of the private market; mere sailors drowning in the Neptunian choppy seas of big business. Yet in reality, how have they coped?

Wild predictions predicting the instantaneous downfall of the House of Windsor have proved to be highly fallacious. As they may say themselves, they've done rather well indeed. Never a family to bypass tradition, the Windsors have grasped the, as yet, meagre traditions of privatisation and clung to them like a determined lobster. Their immediate reaction was to choose a funky new name. Close advisors to the Queen are believed to have advised her that the brand "Royal Family" had become stale and outdated. There were also copyright issues to be thought of – there are after all several other Royal Families throughout the world. Their new name, ‘Privilege’, is thought to be the brainchild of Prince Edward (now known as the Prince Formerly Known As Edward) the Royal Families new director of Marketing.

Along with Prince Phillip, (now known as Phillip McWindsor, an attempt to woo his Scottish following as the former Duke of Edinburgh) the Prince Formerly Known As Edward has been at the forefront of re-branding Privilege; a task which he has apparently taken on with gusto. "A fabulous opportunity to make the Royal Family as popular and relevant to today's society as Take That and the Spice Girls," he announced at the unveiling of the new name. Prince Phillip, the new Director of International PR, has been working tirelessly to transport this new image abroad.

"I have encountered some opposition in the countries our good friend Livingstone found. They don't seem to grasp the idea of re-branding and seemed quite confused when I told the chaps there that I was now to be called Phil McWindsor rather than Your Royal Highness. Very amusing to see such bemused faces and so many bright white smiles... I thought. And as for the Greeks!"

Not all members of the Royal Family have taken to their new roles so enthusiastically. Prince Charles, once previously guaranteed a shot at the top spot, is said to be fuming at the prospect of facing competition for a job he considers his own. A source close to the Queen said that she is now considering applications to be the new Queen and that it is by no means a foregone conclusion that Charles will become the new Queen once she retires to become a silent partner. He is also said to be furious at suggestions that he should now be known as Bonnie Prince Charlie simply stating that this was "Bloody demeaning”. Other contenders for the top job include Richard Branson, Tony Blair (in his autobiography he states that it has been a lifelong ambition for him to become Queen), the surviving members of the Rock Band Queen and there are rumours that a job share proposal has been submitted from the Beckham estate.

The economic impact of Royal Privatisation has been unusual to say the least. Privilege has been set up as a Ltd company as the Queen is apparently unwilling to lose control of the business. However, modernisers such as the Prince Formerly Known As Edward and Prince Andrew (now to be known as Andy Pandy as Privilege's Executive In Charge Of The Youth Vote), are said to be keen to float the Royal Family on the stock exchange. This is a prospect that has city investors twiddling their thumbs with barely concealed excitement. Financial "gentle giant" Alan Sugar recently released a press statement expressing his interest in acquiring Privilege stating that the firm would make an interesting sister company to his main interest Amstrad and that "(he) would love to see Wills and Harry peddling his cheap tat".

However, the greatest threat to the security and success of Privilege comes not from within, but from new-found competition. Under European Competition Law it is now possible for anyone in England to set up their own Royal Family. In fact this is being positively encouraged by Blair's Government. In a recent Prime Minister's Question Time Blair said that "(he wanted) every child in England to have access to their own local Royal Family. For too long having a local Royal Family has been the preserve of those children living in West London or certain remote parts of Scotland. In the name of devolution it is important that every village, every town, every suburb has their own Royal Family so no child misses out." He promptly pledged a fifth of Gordon Brown's budget to achieving this and in the upcoming election it will be New Labour's primary manifesto promise.

George Williams of Newby on Ashe in Sussex was one of the first people in England to start his own Royal Family. Described by locals both as an entrepreneur with an eye for a business opportunity and a conniving pain in the arse, Mr Williams has been a successful businessman in the area for nearly thirty years. I was fortunate enough to interview him:

JM: What made you decide to set up your own Royal Family?

GW: Well, it seemed as if the old Royal Family seemed to have a good old time, it was easy money to be honest.

JM: So what have you called your Royal Family?

GW: The Royal Family, you know the name was just waiting there to be used – it seemed a waste really (laughs).

JM: And what is your role in the firm?

GW: Well obviously, I am Her Royal Highness Queen Elizabeth the Third.

JM: I see, and how does the business work?

GW: Well essentially the local people pay for my food, clothing, holidays and shelter and in return I ride up and down the street twice a week on a horse wearing a robe.

JM: Do people come out to watch you?

GW: Oh yes… but I think most people come for the free plastic flags I hand out.

Although I felt that Mr Williams had slightly missed the Government's point he was indeed running a thriving business and he is now only two hundred pounds away from affording his first throne – a vital asset for any Royal Family business.

This rosy picture, is, unfortunately, not typical for the whole of the country. Many communities have lodged complaints against their localised royal families with the new industry regulator, OFF-TOFF. It seems that many local Royal Families are simply not offering value for money. Mike Nobalding, the Ombudsman for OFF-TOFF, explains:

"Consumers have become used to a high level of entertainment from our old nationalised Royal Family. Divorce, death and scandal always lurked round the regal corner. What many people did not realise when approving the privatisation of the monarchy is that the existing monarchy actually provided very good value for money. It was a case of simple economics – as the monarchy lost power in relation to government it naturally sought out other ways of justifying its existence to a modern audience. Charles I, of course will always be known as the Godfather of "Roytainment" after commandeering his own death. People soon realised that a country without a Royal Family, as proposed by Cromwell, was a very dry place and soon returned to a more familiar state. King George III was an extremely entertaining madman with impeccable comic timing and Victoria was everyone's favourite straight-woman. The current Royal Family were perhaps the most sophisticated arbiters of "Roytainment" and set a very high standard. Unfortunately for new Royal Families, governed by the laws of business, providing such high standards of entertainment is simply not cost effective. They are limited as to how much scandal they can dole out."

I asked Mike Nobalding to give me an example of the sort of complaint that OFF-TOFF received:

"Well… for instance the Royal Family set up in Ellesmere Port, Cheshire have been in operation for six months now. People have paid them money in good faith but they haven't even left their house. There hasn't been so much as an illicit game of golf and the eldest son just received three A grades at A level with absolutely no assistance from his teachers. This is just not acceptable."
If local Royal Families are successful it is thought that Big Business will soon tread in their footsteps'. National energy behemoth, the National Grid, recently announced that it was drawing up plans to offer its own Royal Network service. Ian Lightbolt, CEO of Powergen, was ever so keen to explain this idea:

"The National Grid will set up a national network of Royal Families all linked up by big pipes through which information is carried in the form of blood infused with blue food colouring. Then a plethora of 'middlemen' companies, Dukes or Duchesses if you like, will be able to sell their service nationally. The consumer will be the only winner as Royal Families will no longer be localised and competition will rise –resulting in greater customer benefits for all. A man in Bournemouth could get his Royal Services from a Royal Family in Scotland… the possibilities are endless!"

Endless, maybe, perhaps eternal also – but how did Powergen fit into the picture.

"Well you see… this is where things get even more exciting for the consumer.”

Note; the reporter arches an eyebrow.

"Powergen are looking to offer people the opportunity to buy not just their gas and electricity from us but also their Royal Needs. We feel that only a large faceless company will be able to deliver the high-octane thrills and spills that the modern day royalist thrives on - unlike, small businesses who simply do not have a high enough cash flow."

However, plans to deliver Royal Services via blue blood sent through pipes have been criticised by many as it is estimated that it would take upwards of five years to dig up the roads and pavements in order to install the lines. Even then only seventy percent of the country would receive an adequate service. Mobile phone operators have dismissed the Blueblood method as primitive and instead want to champion their Third-In-Line-To-The-Throne Generation Royal Handsets which will deliver mobile Royal Services to the consumer who likes to be on the move. Hand Sett, Technical Director of Finnish Phone Company NOKIA explained how this mobile system would work:

"First we erect 20 foot metal poles all over the country, about one every square mile and then the information is sent from our virtual castle in which we have a 24hour Royal Family on call. The information is sent by what we like to call the Royal Wave. Users can watch highlights of the Royal Family's day on their handset – you can see the Prince eating breakfast, the Princess talking on the phone – you can even see the Queen using the toilet. We will also be offering customers the chance to chat or text the Royal Family, texts will cost £1.50 and chat will cost £4 a minute – these services will of course be mainly marketed towards children who don't understand the concept of money."

Channel 4 has also jumped on the proverbial Horse and Carriage and is soon to launch Royal Big Brother. Royal Family members from around the country are invited to apply by sending in a short five minute audition tape. Twelve members will be chosen and a Queen will be chosen via an arm wrestling competition. Channel 4 executive Jake Sideburns stresses that Royal Big Brother will be unlike any previously seen reality television shows;

"In order to create a sense of reality there will be no audience voting. Contestants can only be
removed by death, revolution or a change in the balance of international power such as the fall of the pope or the rise of a European Emperor."

Perhaps the biggest dissenters against the privatisation of the monarchy are the British National Party – not because of the inevitable dissolution of a British institution – they are instead worried about a European Invasion. As the law stands in Europe there is absolutely nothing to stop a foreign Royal Family from entering our country (perhaps illegally) and taking a slice of the power fruit-cake. Mike Hunt, leader of the BNP stated in a recent rally;

"Can you imagine being ruled by Germans or Greeks, or Gypsies or Arabs? It would be bedlam... no one would know where we stood and the fabric of society as we know it would stain like a white sheet in a hot wash with a red sock. There would be chaos. We should return to the days when we had one Royal Family, all of them English, all of them blue eyed and blonde and fond of marching. Good decent people, that's what we need, good decent people to rule us. Not muck."

A salient and concise point indeed; it is undeniable that the privatisation of the Royal Family has provoked many an opinion. Yet in many ways it seems to be the natural extension of Royalism in a modern, competitive, new, progressive, computer-literate society. Lets face it as our media needs grow it is almost unfair to expect one Royal Family to be able to meet all our demands. Two wouldn't even be enough. By privatising the whole system we have opened monarchy up to the joys of the competitive market and with all the wonderful initiatives he has heard this reporter is certain that this can only be a good move.

NHS: Clinically Obese

(I wrote this after actually working for the lumbering behemoth that is the NHS. The decision making processes of Europe's largest employer are worryingly not too far off the example below)


Last week the NHS controversially refused itself lifesaving treatment on the grounds that the organisation is clinically obese. The much-debated obesity policy, that has up till now only affected members of the public, was originally intended to act as an incentive for those who have over-eaten to tighten their belts but has now taken on much more serious consequences.
Dr Alexander Simmons, spokesperson for the NHS, attempted to explain the organisation’s position;

“For several years the NHS has run a policy of refusing to help those who do not help themselves. Why on earth should a man who has existed on bean curd for the entirety of his life come second in the queue for heart bypass surgery to a man seemingly addicted to hydrogenated fats? Why should the sober Buddhist play second fiddle to the drunk Irishman in the queue for livers? And why should the Swiss cowgirl who has breathed nothing but mountain fresh air all her life not get treatment for lung cancer when she is trampled in the queue by a horde of wheezing and yellowed nicotine addicts. Its just simple common sense at the end of the day.”

I questioned him further as to why this policy has been extended to the NHS itself;

“Well the government has very much taken the view that the NHS has to help itself before it can be helped by itself. If we are to convert money into food and the NHS into the body of a man, it quite clearly becomes extremely transparently obvious that this man has eaten far too much and done little or no exercise. Consequently, this man has ballooned to quite astronomical proportions.”

I asked how the NHS should help itself;

“Well we must quite clearly and honestly and above all else definitely pledge to eat less and exercise more. Only once we have attained an economically sustainable body mass index (and one must remember that a well paid team of information analysts will come in to play here as we need to make extremely scientific measurements not just pinch the proverbial fat between proverbial forefinger and thumb!), only then will we be able to confidently say that it may well be the right time, approximately but relatively certainly, for the NHS to finally help itself… perhaps with a stomach stapling operation.”

I ask him what a stomach stapling operation may represent.

“Well I suppose, one could make some sort of loosely-linked comparison with job cuts or salary decreases. Perhaps, but only perhaps of course, there may be adjustments, small but large-scale, to pension funds, possibly. But if the NHS, now being described as the body of a man who has eaten too much and run too little, does enough exercise then the job cuts and salary decreases and the potentially possible, yet, if entertained seriously, certain adjustments, here or herewith, to pensions may not need to come about at all, or in some circumstances they may be lessened by a nominal or even substantial degree.”

I ask how the NHS will be expected to lose weight?

“Well obviously, well obvious to the trained eye at the very least or perhaps even that is an extremely obvious statement, obviously people may have to work harder. More efficiently, streamling productivity or somesuch idea so that the overall effect is one of a fat man straining to run a 100 metres in under twenty seconds.”

The spokesperson, turns a subtle shade of pink for a moment and then I ask him, if job cuts are still inevitable after all this exercise, who will be the first to go?

“Well, of course this is a contentious subject, contentious yet strangely palatable when viewed through the correct lens. Of course we value our nurses and our cleaning staff with high esteem but unfortunately it is they who must be the first to go, in some circumstances, though largely and predominantly in all circumstances (with some notable exceptions).”

Why? Why are managers and clerical staff not being considered?

“Another very good question, of course, well obviously to be sacked you need to be sacked by someone who is hierarchically, if not in physical stature, greater than you (of course this isn’t to say that they are a better person although we are unable to not reflect this in their paypacket and the size of their office seat but these are of course trivial items. Especially chairs!). Therefore it would only actually be possible to sack those at the bottom lest we loose a chink in our coil and the whole system comes tumbling down and all we are left with are hardworking, perhaps mythically so, nurses and cleaners. Who would never be able to be sacked under any circumstances as they would, of course, no longer be under the control of a manager. As for clerical staff, well I have only been aware that we employ clerical staff since last week, I thought all my letters were typed by a “PC” not a person but I guess we would be unable to let these people go as managers and doctors would have to either write legibly, or perhaps even in capital letters, or type their own work up, which is obviously quicker in the first place but would leave no room for long-winded phone conversations with understaff detailing exactly what font the letter should be typed in and would, of course loose all the fun of sending documents back and forth covered with an increasing amount of squiggly red pen. So they of course cannot be sacked, especially as they are the only people who know where we get the P45’s from.”

I question the man further about the relevance of bureaucratic work within the NHS.

“Well, it seems to me that at the bottom of all this if someone is sick they need to receive treatment. Bottom line… unless of course they are dead and then of course they’ve got nothing to do with us!”
He lifts his hands up in mock surrender and smiles bashfully while emitting a half-laugh half-spit which wets the lapel of his suit.

“At any rate people certainly come to the NHS to get well and that is an awful lot of people and if all those people were to get in the same queue at once obviously there would be bedlam. So really we need all these people to make sure that the queues or waiting lists, as you may refer to them, are organised fairly and properly. Imagine, persay, that you were at the fairground and you were queuing for a fast ride. There may well be, I am not sure as I have never personally been and therefore cannot vouch for the accuracy of this analogy, some sort of attendant keeping the queue in order. He may perhaps send drunk people and people who are too short for the agreed safety limits to the back of the queue or even out of the queue altogether, if he is particularly good at his job and a man of great resource he will add them to the queue of a ride that would be more suitable to their condition of inebriation or shortness. This man is very much a symbol, here, within this analogy that I am, of course, uncertain as to the actual accuracy of, a symbol of bureaucracy within the NHS. To paraphrase we could say, (I suppose, if I may parenthesis within a paraphrase), that the job, nay worthy occupation of the NHS bureaucrat, or Operational Manager as they are correctly called as bureaucrat is of course anachronous, that the job is really to move short and drunk people from one queue to the um… other.”

James Murray

Sharp Objects Banned From Parliament As Skin Thins Alarmingly

Mps from all parties were relieved today to see all sharp objects removed from Parliament. The move follows several gory incidents involving pens, staples and even sheets of paper.

One politician, who asked to remain anonymous in case anyone laughed at him, described a horrific scene.

“The honourable member only fell asleep for a couple of seconds. His head just glanced his neighbour’s raised copy of the day’s newspaper… and just like that his head split open. His ego went everywhere. It just wouldn’t stop…”.

We have been unable to show footage of this event as it’s just far too funny for the public to understand.

(written in response to New Zealands curiously draconian laws regarding the satirisation of politicians. your not meant to.... on video in parliament at least)

Feral Media Put Down After Eating Blair

At 2pm yesterday a lethal injection was administered to the media two weeks after it had been found guilty of eating Tony Blair.

The move has been widely criticised by Animal Welfare groups as being supremely arrogant and unnecessary as the Media was thought to have been close to death anyway.

“Eating Tony would be enough to kill off any living creature. Post mortems revealed Tony as being mainly made up of Asbestos, straw, smarties, legacies and soap.” Said one activist who wished to remain anonymous.

“Its so horribly ironic,” sighed Cherie Blair at her husbands funeral.. “Tony and the media used to get on so well. He’d take it for walks, throw it bones. Tony would always have a bit of bacon in his pocket to make it look like the media liked him.”

Meanwhile, 30000 unemployed Media workers marched on the capital. They were described as being gay, communist and predominantly from ethnic minorities.

(Written in response to poor little Tony moaning that the media had gotten too big for its boots. Didn't think that in 1997 did you Tony?)

Citizen Journalism

This is an article by Peter Horrocks - head of the BBC news room about the pros and cons of citizen journalism. It also describes how the use of new media and "accidental journalists" has made actual changes to the structure of the BBC newsroom.

I particularly like what he writes about the difficulties in ethically editing comment forums such as Have Your Say - trying to balance the public's right to a forum with the real possibility that that forum can be overtaken with views based on hatred rather than informed debate.

James

PS. It may not be clear but the link for the article is embedded in the title if the blog.

Blog Due To Restart

Hiding In Your Cupboard is due to restart... less of a travel blog and more of a political opinion blog... if you can stand to listen to me blather on.

If any Grad Dips are reading this brilliant... but I apologise in advance for the lack of editing etc. I just write it as i go along and consequently there will be a lot of mistakes - especially with New Zealand names which I always mishear and then have to approximate. A good example would be me using the word Pahoa instead of Pakeha for ages.

To fill in the six month gap I have posted some of the writing I have done over the last six months.

Cheers

James

SHOCK HORROR - CENSORSHIP REIGNS IN NEW ZEALAND

I have finally met the Prime Minister. Frankly it was about time... even then we were separated by a glass door panel. I was three minutes away from a face to face meeting, possibly even a handshake. However, at the last minute I was turfed out of the waiting room (for the second time), to make way for Helen and her “people”. Despite this I managed to catch Helen’s eye – and there was certainly an exchange: an exchange between political rebel and political stalwart.

Why am I referring to myself as a political rebel – I hear you ask? Well, on the same day that I met Helen Clark – I learnt that the New Zealand government had agreed to the filming of Parliamentary sessions but in exchange had outlawed the use of images of parliament or MPs being used to “satirise, denigrate or ridicule”. What a bunch of children! I thought Mr Blair was a bit of a scaredy-cat when he tried to describe the media as a Feral Beast – but this takes the biscuit. The TV companies have said that they are going to ignore this ban but the crime is a serious one – laughing at a politician while using an image of him in Parliament (i.e. actually being a politician) puts a person in contempt of parliament which is an imprisonable offence.

One politician virtually cried when a reporter described him as “examining the insides of his eyeballs” when he was caught asleep. He claimed that journalists weren’t funny and that they should consider a different career if they wanted to be comedians. Ironically enough for the politician if the comment isn’t funny it doesn’t meet the criteria for satire or ridicule and whether such a comment could be said to denigrate someone is fairly dubious. So it seems that as long as journalists remain tacitly humourless they can say anything they like.

I.e. it is permissible to say:

Politician A is a liar who is responsible for the deaths of many innocent people.

But not:

Politician A smells of Poo.

This leads us, prima faeces, to the conclusion that Politicians would rather be known as mass murderers than smell of poo.

This arrogance on the behalf of the politicians makes clear their dim view of the general public. Why are Blair and the New Zealand government so concerned about their portrayal in the media? Essentially, because the message they are trying to communicate via the media is often torn to shreds by the time it gets to the electorate. Blair complains that he has tried to convey the facts via other forms of media (i.e. his website, carrier pigeons, Morse code and smoke signals) but to no avail. This is bollocks – Blair and governments world-wide have made only perfunctory attempts at embracing an alternative media that scares the wits out of them because they struggle to control it (Blair is a famous, and strangely self-congratulatory technophobe – which is fairly shameful for a leader of one of the richest countries on the world).*

When they get upset at the media’s treatment of their press releases they are essentially upset because they want the media to act as their direct mouthpiece with little or no comment. They fear that the general public are essentially too stupid to read through the lines and make their own analysis.

If they are so concerned about straightforward “FACTS!!!” being communicated to the public (which they are strangely reticent about when it comes to issues such as cash for honours, invisible weapons of mass destruction or accurate rates of inflation and unemployment) they should take the responsibility of publishing them themselves and then we can all breathe a sigh of relief and tear them to shreds anyway as they will probably be doctored beyond any sense.

I could write for ages on this subject but I fear a rant coming on so will stop myself here.

I have procured another, slightly better paid job for the next few months. One problem… I have to start at 7am. Starting at 7am is for morons… the sort of people who say things like “you wouldn’t recognise hard work if it punched you in the face” or “twenty pounds!!! You were ripped off mate. If you had driven up to Hastings, got on the 32 bus, got off at Wimpole, swum through a Ford, jogged up a mountain, scratched out your eyeballs with a feather and then eaten your own appendix you could have got that for 19 pounds.”. You know the type – inevitably a bit ruddy in complexion, simple in the eyes and prone to laughing at the wrong bits. They quite often get to work early for seemingly no reason whatsoever except for the fact that they don’t have the concentration span required for sleep.

So I’ve been lumped with that entertaining lot. I can’t wait to become a student again and then get a relatively interesting job.

Jayne’s job however, is much better. She has met a lot of her caseload now and it seems pretty interesting. The lengths that people are able to go here for children who are having difficulties put the UK to shame. I can’t go into too much detail though as most of what she does is confidential.

Jayne’s first school meeting provoked much merriment. After walking in to the room and introducing herself in a professional manner she stepped on what turned out to be the school dog.

In all seriousness the head-teacher said:

“I can see the school dog playing a really important role in the speech therapy you are delivering.”

In what sense?

“I’m very sorry I am unable to make my appointment today but Rover here, he’ll take charge. He can’t fucking speak but that’s no matter nor can the children.”

Anyway – I have to scoot.

Hope everyone is well.

Lots of love

Jayne and James x

* Blair has said that he is going to use his early retirement to learn how to text message. Come on Tony, my Gran can send Text messages it requires the simple skill of pressing a button and reading. Surely you can read and press buttons Tony?