Why political games make Britain grate

THE FRIDAY THING: WHILE looking forward to the Olympics (the real games not the made-up nonsense to keep sponsors happy) I cannot escape a sense of irony about all the warm, promising words we have been spoon-fed about the legacy of the games, especially for young people.

Politicians do have convenient memories, but have they all forgotten already that for more than two decades they have allowed scores of school playing fields to be concreted over because there was money in it. And what about the rampant loonies of the PC brigade who banned the concept of having losers and winners in sports from the egg-and-spoon race to football, cricket, and the three-legged all-fall down ungainly gallop?

Extend that madness and it would not be gold, silver and bronze medals in London next week but no medals for anyone so nobody can get upset. Is that daft or what?

But sport, like life, is competitive and in sport it is the competitive element that appeals to boys and girls.

There are winners and losers, too. Turning sport into a result-less procession rendered it boring. But it doesn’t stop there.

Over the years schools have enjoyed co-ordinating sports events, linking together to bring the many different sports to their pupils in competition. It was a splendid idea, harking back (well, almost) to the days when teachers used to give up their Saturday mornings to take teams to play competitive sport against other schools.

When I was in school we had an English teacher, Brian Dean, who gave up every Saturday morning and some evenings, too, to take our school teams to play football and cricket against other schools. I am not sure that happens any more.

So when you sit and watch the Olympics and see MPs hogging the best seats remember that any gold-standard results we achieve are, in the main, achieved despite rather than because of them.


SO, hands up at the back there, who has ever had a job done on their home, car, garden or garage etc. and been happy not to pay VAT on top of the cost of the job because it means saving some hard-earned money?
Has anyone ever insisted on paying the decorator, plumber, or odd-job man, VAT, thus adding to the cost of the job? Even a job really well done that was started and finished on time?

According to Treasury Minister David Gauke (no, I’ve never heard of him either, even his family probably don’t know what he does), more than two million wicked folk who have a job done round the house but don’t pay VAT are robbing Chubby Dave’s piggy bank of £2 billion.

Mr Gauke also says the tradesman (plumber, decorator, etc.) is morally wrong, suggesting he is a kind of modern day highwayman, lurking unseen and untaxed in the “hidden economy”. The rascal.

Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (though that’s not necessarily what we call them) is apparently planning an amnesty to encourage cash-in-hand tradesmen to pay their fair share of tax. I can’t see them gaining support from many, if any, of us.

The downside of all this is the cost of we hopeless DIYers taking on these jobs ourselves to save the additional VAT costs. Two billion is a drop in the ocean compared with the billions it will cost the NHS to put us back together.



FINAL WORD: I must say I am a huge fan of the artist’s impression of the new multi-screen cinema and continental-style flagged piazza to encourage a kind of cosmopolitan café culture with its wine bars, cafés, late night socialising and general bonhomie.
What the piazza will need of course is a name and perhaps Charlie Parker and Jim McMahon could challenge Oldhamers, through the Chronicle of course, to come up with an appropriate name for this symbol of the new Oldham. Surely not Clegg Street!


Follow us on Twitter - @OldhamChronicle