This blog has made a regular and justified habit of criticising and lambasting the state broadcaster, the BBC.
However, it has to be said that even a stopped clock tells the right time twice a day!
This report (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c07vn1y2jz2o) happens to be one of those times!
The report about the “illegal migrants” aka “irregular migrants” aka “undocumented military age male migrants” hits many nails straight on the head. OK, the report has a thick seam of liberality running through it but that does NOT detract from the report’s accuracy and objectivity. As such it has to be commended.
The most obvious differential factor between the BBC’s report and one produced by one of the many commentators on what the BBC would describe as the “far right” would venture forth into speculation as to why the “powers that be” (the senior civil servants and the politicians) are pursuing a policy (looking after the migrants very generously [by current international standards]) – that they know are annoying many of their constituents – who understandably complain about the perception that these migrants are being put at the top of the list/front of the queue when it comes to accommodation and these good folk are even more annoyed when the migrants receive NHS dentistry!
Many of these commentators suggest that there is a conspiracy to replace the indigenous population with another population that is culturally, ethnically and religiously different from them.
I am now going to be CONTROVERSIAL: I do NOT think so!
My reason for coming to this conclusion stems from the most unhappy episode of my life.
Those who know me know that this year I will reach the Biblical three score years and ten. They also know that I have never been married. Some of our far left political opponents like to run with the line that I am gay and refuse to “come out of the closet”. The truth however is different.
Although I have never been married, I have been engaged. I would have married but for the fact that my fiancée was killed in a road traffic accident (that was not her fault) shortly before our wedding.
Her parents – my would have been parents-in-law – were completely devastated by the loss of their only child. Their settled world had disappeared in an instant.
Over the following days and weeks the tasks allotted to those charged with dealing with the loss of a loved family member were performed. However, because of the circumstances there had to be a coroner’s inquest and with it a post mortem. The coroner allowed the funeral to take place before the conclusion of the inquest. There was however a delay.
My would have been parents-in-law were naturally very much in the driving seat vis-à-vis the funeral arrangements. However, they very much wanted my input. Our wedding had been scheduled to take place on Thursday 14th February (Valentine’s Day) 1991. I told them that I’d prefer it if that date be chosen for the funeral and that my fiancée be interred in her bridal gown.
They, like my parents, supporters of cremation and supported the scattering of ashes in significant places – for the deceased and their family. They agreed and my fiancée’s father told me that he would contact the minister about the change of ceremony on that date and the undertaker to see if interment in a bridal gown was allowed. It was due to it’s very low man-made fibre content.
As I have written, my would have been parents-in-law wanted to and did involve me in planning the funeral arrangements; which is why they agreed to my suggestions that their daughter be interred in her bridal gown and that the funeral take place on what would have been our wedding day. As mentioned, her parents were supporters of cremation and had planned that for themselves. Their daughter’s youth had meant that she had not discussed any funeral arrangements for herself. Generally, one does not when one is young. Asked about this, I supported their suggestion that she be cremated saying that my parents were going to be cremated when their times came.
There then came a discussion as to what to do with her. I suggested Malham Tarn.
Malham Tarn is a glacial lake near the village of Malham in the Yorkshire Dales. The lake is one of only eight upland alkaline lakes in Europe, having a pH between 8.0 and 8.6. At an altitude of 1,237 feet (377 metres) above sea level it is the highest marl lake in the United Kingdom. Its geology, flora and fauna have led to it being listed under a number of conservation designations. The site is (2025) owned by the National Trust, who used to lease part of the site to the Field Studies Council but this closed as a field centre in 2022. The site was the inspiration for Charles Kingsley’s 1863 novel The Water-Babies, A Fairy Tale for a Land Baby. The catchment area of the lake is 600 hectares (6.0 km2; 2.3 sq mi) and the main inflow is a stream at the lake’s north-west corner. The lake is 14 feet (4.4 metres) at its deepest, with an average depth of 8 feet (2.4 metres). It takes approximately 11 weeks for water to leave the lake after it has entered. The outflow stream goes underground after approximately 1,600 feet (500 metres) before emerging downstream of Malham Cove as a source of the River Aire.
I suggested that their daughter’s ashes should be scattered in the tarn for this is part of the source of the River Aire – the river that flowed through the places where their daughter and my life had been. Rivers are a source of life and her ashes would form part of that.
Her parents thought it a lovely idea. Her father – a diligent accountant – pointed out that I would need to obtain the permission of the land owner who he believed (correctly) was the National Trust and suggested that an alternative should be addressed. We decided that should the National Trust decline our request, their daughter’s ashes would be scattered at Lawnswood Cemetery and that they would pay for a 50 year memorial tablet. It was thus agreed that I would write to the NT.
I did and got a reply. NO. It was the reply I had expected. The National Trust state that generally (meaning never) they DO NOT permit ashes to be scattered upon the waters at Malham Tarn. This because of environmental reasons. It happens to be the case that almost every piece of open land is out of bounds for these same environmental reasons. The authorities and the establishment in these benighted Isles have a firm policy on ordinary folk scattering the ashes of their loved ones: Use the designated places – cemeteries! And: Pay up!
I was expecting a refusal and I used a second class postage stamp as I was not wanting a prompt reply!
Why?
Because I was going to scatter my fiancée ashes at Malham Tarn in any event! It is civil trespass and would be extremely difficult for it to be proved to be an act of criminal damage – to the location. Furthermore, it is widely done and it is very, very rare that a busy body onlooker has the effrontery to ask if you have permission.
Unfortunately this decision was going to have a very regrettable consequence. A consequence that caused me to think long and hard about doing it: The reaction of my fiancée’s parents. They were not present when I scattered the ashes we had from very early on agreed that I would attend to this task alone.
Concealing the fact that I had scattered their daughter’s ashes in contravention to the written policy of the landowner, the National Trust deeply upset them. They were not angry with me but were deeply distressed and upset for me defying the rules. They felt that my actions had removed any legitimate association that their daughter’s memory could have had with Malham Tarn. That scattering her ashes without National Trust consent was a form of fly tipping which had devalued her memory.
They were the last two people in the world I wanted to upset and yet I knew that my action was going to do just that. You see, “following the instructions, following the rules and obeying the law”, were central to the way they lived their lives.
As a chartered accountant, my fiancée’s father was a strong advocate of dotting every “i” and crossing every “t”. The regulations, rules, and law HAD to be followed. It mattered not that those regulations, rules and law were upsetting and inconvenient; they were the regulations, rules and law and HAD to be observed.
My fiancée’s parents very much wanted their daughter’s ashes to be scattered in Malham Tarn; but the NT had refused permission and that as far as they were concerned should have resulted in their daughter’s ashes scattered in Lawnswood Crematorium and the necessary fees paid – by them and not by me. Something they felt was very much their second choice, but in view of the necessity of following the rules was the ONLY choice!
Now Dear Reader, you may think that this is irrelevant but it is NOT!
The Right Honourable Sir Keir Starmer, PC, KCB, KC Prime Minister of the United Kingdom and the Member for Holborn is a human rights lawyer. Disregarding the law is something he would NEVER countenance! The man knows the political difficulties it creates for him and his party but he is completely unable to compromise his principles as a lawyer.