DE-CLUTTERBUG

Did we honestly believe that a New Leadership in Government would actually change all that was bad in the previous?

Yet again the lies, the turnabout face, of our 'elected' parliamentarians are proving to be weak, unable to make decisions and the inability to keep to policies proposed on trying to win the electorate. 

No party stands out from the other, perhaps they should all join together and work unilaterally, unified to get the country into a strong position financially, politically, bringing our services up to scratch to meet the demands of the nation.

Instead of all this pandering to the 'do gooders' can we please talk around the table with those who actually know. are involved, in their specialist fields of expertise to bring about changes where necessary. It appears that once you place a person in command they forget to actually learn about the area they are in charge of - perhaps we should consider electing based on knowledge within an area of expertise instead of the nice person who came to the door.      

If we are in such dire straights financially perhaps we should reign in a few loans given to other countries? Perhaps we should start saying to our young, "Save up before purchasing", for future lending and borrowing may be halted if this rule is followed.

Look at history, which we should have learnt from; past recessions how they were overcome, hospitals when best they were run and how. Schools and the best way forward in education. So many essential avenues, too numerous to mention, to be explored and worked with to bring out the best in Great Britain again.      

Ninety year old war veteran/hero murdered by a thug opportunist thief = slapped wrist and returned to society where he can recommit crime.

When are we going to punish accordingly and NOT be such a soft touch?

I was delighted to purchase online a gift for my Mother of a camera. It was great to learn that it would be sent out within the next 24 hours; £5.00 spent for this service.

We went out yesterday for lunch and missed the delivery; a card was left with an 8 digit reference number to refer to when phoning to rearrange delivery.

I telephoned immediately at 10p per minute cost to myself. The telephone number on the card called: Once I had pressed the corresponding key for the required service I was requested by a pre-recorded voice to press the keys in order of the 8 digit reference number; which I duly did but it was not recognised so I did the same again.

My phone pad shows up the numbers pressed so I knew that I had inserted the correct number.

At last a live voice, instead of pre-recorded, who told me that the number relative to the delivery would not be on their system until the delivery driver returned to the warehouse! 'Would I please phone back', and in reply to my query - 'the best time to phone would be 17.10 hours'. So I phoned back at twenty past the designated hour. ..

Went through the whole and exact same procedure again only to be told that I would have to phone back again. I have paid £5.00 for delivery not believing that I should be paying 10p per minute more to rearrange a time for delivery!

Not a good way to treat a customer.

Yet again an example of the ever increasing attitude that the Customer should do the 'donkey' work whilst those in an office not equipped with pen and paper do seemingly nothing.

If De-Clutterbug ran the business in this outrageous way; well De-Clutterbug would not be in business...  

For a non follower of Football, De-Clutterbug soon found that the tide buffed and pulled until caught up in the undercurrent of all the emotions and excitement of 'World Cup Histeria'. No doubt listening to the pundits, experts and media, England were going to raise the cup once again - all the star signs and omens bode well this was our year. The obligatory sales of shirts, flags, cups, napkins supporting the nation and people did not feel stupid painting their bodies red and white.

Whilst we were all prepared to watch our marvellous team play their first game in South Africa, with great expectancy and high hopes, somebody forgot to tell the players that this was their time to prove to the world their prowess on the football pitch. Ah well, all excuses under the sun was not going to make the team gel or play to their obvious capabilities. It soon became patently clear that the team was not going to do well and they proved the case. All games played they are out of the World Cup. Now De-Clutterbug asks:

1. Are these prima donnas paid too much? Does the influence of the overpaid wage packet influence their mind set for team play? Are they too busy preening themselves ready for their next advertisement to dare risk injury on the field of play? Are they worth the money they are paid? De-Clutterbug does not think so for entertainment value - zilch. Their 'work' is a game, sport. I can think of needier hard working people who should be paid £100,000 a year let alone a week.
2. Tired from overplaying through the season, what a wonderful excuse. Playing a game, are they not the chosen few, once or twice a week for their team. Time on the bench to recoup, possibly the night before hangover is still with them! Daily training, keeping fit - whilst there are soldiers fighting a war (need I say more).
3. Are these players actually any good at their job? Are they fit for purpose and were they for the World Cup?

If Premier teams will insist and be allowed to 'bring in' foreign players to boost their team's performance, and primarily their income for the club. How can the selectors possibly choose a team to represent England with so few playing in the premier league. De-Clutterbug thinks that the number of players brought into the premier league clubs should be capped so that more English players can play within this strata.

More time should be given, prior to big football events, for team bonding, off and on the pitch without media intervention with regards to the, may De-Clutterbug say it WAGS.

Finally, there used to be talk of 'fire in the belly' to want something so badly, to play as if 'your life depended on it'! So where was this spirit, true British pride and grit? Not much to ask of eleven men playing a 'game' on a football pitch for their Country.

A patient passes away, dies, in hospital. Should the family have to pay for the following:

1) the cadaver to be kept in the hospital morgue, charged? and,

2) the two doctors assigned and qualified to sign the death certificate an additional payment charged to the bereaved family?

Are not the doctors paid enough? Is it not part of their job description and remit to sign death certificates?

If the patient had died in their own home these charges would not be incurred but as the patient died in hospital whilst under the care, of those who are paid to care, surely these charges are totally immoral.

What if the family have not the money to pay these extra hidden costs? What if there is nobody to pay?

De-Clutterbug says: “It is immoral to charge for the act of signing a death certificate. Being paid additional for this act is only breeding avarice like vultures waiting to get ‘their penny worth’. Doctors should, as part of their job description, be expected to confirm the reason for the ‘patients’ death and to authorise that cremation or burial may commence but not to be paid for this act. No additional taxation should be applied as suggested by the BMA. The time spent in this procedure should surely guarantee that all patients are given the necessary treatment to keep them alive and comfortable for as long as possible. This should be considered part of the service, not additional.”

Blog De-Clutterbug and have your say.

A patient in hospital passes away, dies, under the care of physicians, nurses and all those maintained within the hospital to care for the sick and get paid for doing so. So why is it that the family of the patient have to pay for;

1) the family member's cadaver to be retained by the hospital in the morgue?  and,

2) for two qualified doctors to sign the death certificate, another payment is made by the family?

Surely, the doctors are paid enough and it is within their remit and part of their qualifications to sign without further renumeration being made? Don't families have enough to contend with without these additional expenses which would not, presumably be charged if the patient died at home? What if there is knowone to pay these additional expenses or no money to pay with?

When De-Clutterbug attended school, (way back when) GCE’s were the order of the day. Only 10% of the class stayed on at school to take A Levels and only 2%, at most, were expected to go on to University.

The only true Universities were considered to be Oxford and Cambridge, Polytechnics and Colleges benefited students giving them further education in subjects pertaining to their chosen career or to supplement apprenticeship training.

Nowadays, there are two or three Universities in major cities or counties where degrees can be gained, not decrying the students, whom I have no doubt put in all the necessary training and work to gain their degree but when it comes to employing these newly qualified are they actually fulfilling the requirements of the post? Is it just a way of keeping youngsters off the unemployment lists and off the streets? In having so many Universities have we now denigrated the standards and esteem that was once applied to those that gained a degree? What harm are we actually doing to our children when they are now expected to follow the guidelines set in a) attending pre-school at the age of 3+/- b) sitting tests throughout primary age c) attaining GCSE’s and A Levels, and then d) going on to University to achieve a degree in, for example ‘domestic science’! Every or most parents want the best for their children but at what price? Do the children or parents benefit? Does the Government benefit? What course of action can be made to re-establish prestigious University standards without decrying the work achieved by predecessors and those in University?

Is this a good thing that now every student is expected to stay on at school to take A Levels and most of those should continue to University?

In response, I am sure liberals will say that we now give much more support to the under-privileged. While that is so, the system does seem to have created a mass of such people. I know a number of people claiming benefit and not one of them has any genuine need to do so; they are either bloody lazy, unemployable because of drink or drugs, or just taking advantage of the system.

HAVE YOUR SAY....

De-Clutterbug welcomes to 'De-Clutterbug Guest House' any visitors EXCEPT for the following:

• Non Christians
• Wearing inappropriate dress eg head and face concealment, torn jeans, t-shirts with obscene or grotesque pictures/logos
• Gays, Lesbians, Under-age and Non-married Couples
• Dogs, Cats and other Pets
• Vegetarians and Vegans
• Non English Speaking visitors
• Children and Adults under the age of 25
• Elderly over the age of 90
• Disabled (as facilities are not available to cater for wheelchairs)
• Mobile telephone users 
• Dishevelled, unclean and unshaven
• Early risers
• Obese
• Anorexic
• Farm Workers with smelly overalls
• Ramblers
• Wear Wellington Boots
• Shoot and/or Fish 

This is De-Clutterbug's home and De-Clutterbug is entitled to choose who enters and stays and those who are unwelcome and will not be allowed to stay or  visit! 

However, for all De-Clutterbug's friends and family, who would otherwise be ostracized because they come under any of the Bullet points above, you are still all welcome to De-Clutterbug's hospitality as before,

If you have read within 'De-Clutterbug's World' the article 'Too Inexperienced To Drive!'

You may also have an opinion which you would like to share to further or promote the issue.

Perhaps you do not agree with De-Clutterbug and would like to make your views known.

Should, for example, the age of learning to drive and issue of provisional driving licenses be raised?

Have your say; Blog De-Clutterbug...