« Record Temperatures | Main | GM Crops. »
July 21, 2006
Phil Woolas
RESTAURANTS and shops should “grow up” and let the public use their lavatories, Phil Woolas, the Local Government Minister, said.
Ever heard of private property?
Mr Woolas was announcing a government strategy this week to shift responsibility for public conveniences to the private sector.
Too busy spending the money on disabled lesbian outreach workers perhaps?
He said that businesses should follow the example of McDonald’s, which
had a reputation for allowing non-customers to use its facilities. “Why
should they be the only ones,” he said. “And why does it have to be a
furtive affair?”
No. Businesses may follow the example of McDonald’s if they should so wish. They can follow that example. But should?
Not your business matey. They are private businesses operating in a competetive market and how they wish to do so is up to them, who they allow into their private property and for what purposes is precisely fuck all to do with the Minister for Local Government.
Capisce?
July 21, 2006 in Scams and Frauds | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c2d3e53ef00d834652b0b69e2
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Phil Woolas:
» At Your Convenience from Longrider
Master Worstall appears to have grabbed the wrong end of this particular stickand as a consequence, wades into Phil Woolas, the local government minister over the latters suggestions regarding public lavatory provision. In a speech yesterd... [Read More]
Tracked on Jul 21, 2006 3:01:09 PM
Comments
"Too busy spending the money on disabled lesbian outreach workers perhaps?"
This might be the moment you finally lost it.
Posted by: Matthew | Jul 21, 2006 9:02:21 AM
Or perhaps they could do something to encourage public toilets owned by private companies (and wherever I've lived there have always been some) to be reopened or kept up to a decent standard?
Posted by: Coffee and PC | Jul 21, 2006 9:05:48 AM
Wow Matthew, you must be the only person in the country who can't laugh at right-on political correctness.
Posted by: Andrew Paterson | Jul 21, 2006 9:40:24 AM
"disabled lesbian outreach workers"
I see what you mean. It's comedy genius. You can't read it and not burst out laughing.
Even genius can be improved though - how about "disable lesbian black outreach workers"?
Tim adds: Why would we want to disable them? I’d be happy enough just not employing them.
Posted by: Matthew | Jul 21, 2006 10:03:27 AM
He said that businesses should follow the example of McDonald’s, which had a reputation for allowing non-customers to use its facilities.
It's called a McShit, and if you get challenged by a Jonny-No-Stars and say you'll buy some food after, it's called a McShit with Lies.
Anyway, I'm sure restaurants would love their businesses to become synonymous with public toilets. A steady stream of people, or even a queue, running past you on their way to the toilet when you are sitting down to a romantic dinner with your wife adds to the ambience no ent I'm sure.
Posted by: Tim Newman | Jul 21, 2006 11:12:13 AM
"Capisce?"
Sadly that single word encapsulates the whole problem. Socialists have absolutely no understanding of the concept of private property.
In their world view everything belongs to the state. All that stuff you think you own Socialists consider to be theirs (as the only true and just arbiters of how the state should be run). They are just letting you look after it until they can dream up a more "socially equitable" way to use it.
RM
Posted by: The Remittance Man | Jul 21, 2006 11:14:03 AM
Fond memories of holidays in major cities in Italy where there are no public toilets and you have to just run into a restaurant's (usually quite horrible) toilets as there is absolutely nowhere else.
Anyhow - there's hundreds of free museums and galleries in London and throughout the UK all with quite decent bogs, so what's the big problem there? doing your business in a house of culture - what could be better? at least there's no smell of frying oil to disturb you.
I can see this going right to the European Court for Human Rights myself...
Posted by: angry economist | Jul 21, 2006 11:44:12 AM
Having listened to the minister on Jeremy Vine today, he isn't saying anything different to you. Pub landlords and restaurateurs may wish to provide the service, for which either they make a small charge to the customer or the local council pays them for providing the service. The point being; it is entirely voluntary.
For once, I find myself coming to the defence of a minister of the crown... must be the weather or something...
Posted by: Longrider | Jul 21, 2006 2:13:10 PM
"he isn't saying anything different to you"
It seems to me that he is saying something different because he is a government minister. Coming from him, "businesses ought to do x" is a lot further down the road to an order rather than a request or an opinion, as the same sentiments would be if they were said by a private person.
Our ingrained knowledge that trial balloons like this one have a way of eventually becoming orders after "the voluntary option has failed" in itself makes the request take on some of the character of an order.
Posted by: Natalie Solent | Jul 21, 2006 4:02:44 PM
This hurts, but I'm also defending said minister; from what Longrider has highlighted, it looks like a good idea; private sector involvement in the provision of facilities to replace godawful council controlled public loos.
And I see nothing coercive about the whole thing at all. Unlike you Tim to dislike the idea the state should stop providing something and let the private sector do it. heat getting to you down there? ;-)
Posted by: MatGB | Jul 21, 2006 4:05:20 PM
Natalie, may I recommend reading his speech rather than doing as Tim has here; relying on third party (mis)representation of such? He is not saying "business ought to do x" Not even close.
If as you suppose, this is the first step to some sort of compulsion - which from the transcript it seems to be nothing of the sort - may I suggest crossing bridges as we reach them rather than jousting with imagined dragons; if you'll forgive the deliberately mixed metaphor.
Just because he is a government minister, it doesn't necessarily mean that he can't come up with a good idea... it does happen occasionally.
Posted by: Longrider | Jul 21, 2006 5:34:21 PM
You have a point there, Longrider - the Times's lead sentence "RESTAURANTS and shops should “grow up” and let the public use their lavatories" as a paraphrase of "We need to grow up and invite the private sector to be part of the debate" is extremely misleading.
Posted by: Natalie Solent | Jul 21, 2006 7:18:52 PM
On the dragons, though, as I always say, just because you're paranoid doesn't mean a dragon isn't out to get you...
Posted by: Natalie Solent | Jul 21, 2006 7:20:27 PM
Nothing wrong with a guarded approach. It's the strawman I really objected to. And, as anyone who has been reduced to "toilet mapping" will attest, this is a very good idea.
Posted by: Longrider | Jul 21, 2006 7:48:54 PM
Is the public allowed to use toilets in government offices? Maybe we should use the ministers office as a test case
Posted by: 1skeptic | Jul 21, 2006 7:49:20 PM
I meant the toilets in the ministers office, of course. Lest I provide inspiration to the more adventurous of Mr Worstall's readers
Posted by: 1skeptic | Jul 21, 2006 7:50:42 PM
