Once upon a time we had selective education which gave kids from poor areas as much chance of going to grammar school as anyone else. I should know - I was that soldier.

That was knocked on the head in favour o comprehensives which was one of those great ideas in theory but a different animal in practice. It made everyone equal.

For the past few years the main effort in education seems to have been directed towards fudging exams so that even the caretaker's cat gets five A levels at A grade as the results get better and better.

It might give ministers something to puff out their chests about as they roll out the usual world class, policies working, new initiative cobblers and platitudes as soundbites but the rolling 24-hours TV news stations but it is an Emperor's clothes job, the figures do not stack up.

Anyone who questions them though is immediately pounced on - the usual New Labour response to a hint of criticism - being accused of demeaning the efforts of thousands of hard working children and dedicated teachers.

The fact many leave school barely literate or numerate is ignored. The truth is hat we are letting youngsters down. They can only take the courses and exams put in front of them and making them less challenging for political gain is hardly education.

The meddling continues though as does New Labour's mission to punish the middle classes. Latest scheme is to give those from poor areas - for poor read predominantly Labour - a head start in applying for courses such as medicine. They call it positive discrimination which is a term that is both nonsense and offensive.

There is no such thing as positive discrimination. Discrimination by its very nature means that someone or some group is being disadvantaged in favour of another. And if you are one of the poor souls being kicked on the ground then there is nothing very positive about it at all.

Now don't get me wrong, I have nothing against children born in the most abject poverty and deprivation becoming doctors - if they are up to it.

But when I am putting my life into the hands of some surgeon I want to know he - or she - is there because they were good enough and are not just a token medic to fulfil quotas and targets.

I see there is another pop at drinking going on with more calls for a minimum price for alcohol.

The pub chains want it because it will put up the cost of drinking at home and they hope that will encourage some people back to pubs where the price for everything is already well above any possible minimum.

No one has yet said where the extra money from this minimum price will go but I suspect the treasury, supermarkets and brewers will carve it all up between them and the vast majority of the population who drink sensibly and responsibly will end up paying a hefty chunk more for one of the few pleasures left while the ale and cider heads will continue to get trolleyed and pebbledash pavements with carrot tarmac as if nothing had happened.

A survey by the charity Drinkaware has found a significant proportion of youngsters drink because they are bored and they fear the school holidays will make it worse because there is nothing for them to do. The fact youngsters go off binge drinking for want of something to do is more a reflection on us rather than them. Somewhere, somehow we have failed them.

For those of us brought up on a diet of the likes of William and The Outlaws the idea of being bored in school holidays is barely credible. The days were hardly long enough to cram everything in.

We seem to have produced a generation who need everything provided for them on a plate including interests and activities. They seem to have no imagination or be able to show any initiative. I have no idea where it all went wrong although discouraging marriage and families has certainly not helped but I am sure that putting up the price of booze is more likely to increase levels of petty crime and shoplifting than levels of sobriety.

Booze is much cheaper in most parts of Europe than here yet we have the drink problem, which means the answer is much more complex than the call to stick yet another extra tax on drinking - which is all a minimum price really represents. The problem is social not fiscal.

If anyone has any thoughts about changing the drinking habits of those who only think they have had a good time if they can't remember or how to ensure the next generation of youngsters have more to fill their young lives than a bottle then chuck them in the pot.

I have been to a friend's funeral today and it just struck me that you reach an age when you suddenly realise that although journey's end is not yet in sight - at least you hope not - there is a lot less road ahead then behind. Not quite over the hill but you have a pretty good view of the other side.

The point is driven home when you realise that the good suit is coming out of the wardrobe more for funerals than for going out for a good time and that the funerals more and more are for contemporaries rather than those who have racked up their allotted three score years and ten and often more.

Anthing over 70 meant you had had a few years belonging to someone else according to my father and someone must have taken quite a few which belonged to my friend as he finally lost his long and remarkably cheerful battle against a dibilitating illness.

I am not making any point, or moaning, just making an observation. When you are young you are going to live for ever. As you get older forever starts to become less of a concept and more of an appointment.

If ever you wanted to explain to a non-sporty type the difference between a Premiership footballer and Premiership rugby players this week might be one place to start.

Way back in 2003 Manchester United's Rio Ferdinand ended up being banned for eight months after he missed a drugs test.

In May this year three rugby players, Michael Lipman, Alex Crockett and Andrew Higgins, failed to take a drugs test and this week the now former Bath trio were banned for nine months.

Ferdinand, the footballer, forgot to turn up for the test after morning training and left to go shopping.

The rugby players refused to take the tests after an end-of-season party because, according to the RFU disciplinary tribunal, the players believed there was a risk of positive results.

According to His Honour Judge Jeff Blackett,"This was either because they knew they had ingested drugs or they had drunk so much alcohol that they could not remember whether or not they had ingested drugs."

In other words it seems the trio, who are considering an appeal, were so blathered that their recollection of the party was . . . should we say . . . less than complete.

I am not making light of drugs in sport and missed tests but you must admit the reasons for missed tests does nicely sum up the two games.

The BBC was long ago politicised with top jobs going to mates of Blair and Brown and supporters of the New Labour creed. By happy coincidence they were often also people who had put their hands in their pockets when the New Labour collection plate came around.

The fact BBC1 controller Jay Hunt also works for a firm which has some healthy contracts from the same BBC that employs her should surprise no one. Nor should the fact that Britian's largest broadcaster should send presenters to an outside firm for media training, after all it is not as if the BBC would know anything about television.

Hunt is not the first BBC executive to be found with links to firms with contracts with their employer nor will she be the last in a corporation which has become just as tainted as everything else New Labour has touched.

The concept of public service seems to be something the BBC and its executives have lost. They want the trappings of a private firm with bonuses, lavish expenses and high salaries except they are immune from mistakes because anything they do is backed by a guaranteed income from the licence fee. So let's give them what they want. We have flogged off everything else soe why not sell the BBC to the highest bidder and then we can save ourselves a TV licence fee.

I have always thought that the lop-sided extradition treaty we signed with the USA - the one where our rights are regarded as being much less important than those of Americans - was just part of Tony Blair's job application ready for the time when being Prime Minister had served its purpose.

Latest victim is Gary McKinnon, the bloke with Asperger's Syndrome who hacked into the most sensitive US defence and intelligence computers from a cheapo PC in a back bedroom using a dial up modem. Remember? Those whistling things that took a day and a half to download a half meg photo?

The safety of the free world does not seem quite so secure when you find you can get into the innermost sanctum of the US defence and security systems with a cheap PC from the local computer shop and a ten quid modem does it?

Anyhow despite the fact the crimes were committed here the US wants to try him there using the extradition treaty signed supposedly to aid the fight against terror (the only ones not extradited seem to be terrorist suspects but that is another tale) with a 70 year jail term looming.

This is a guy who, let us be honest, is not quite the full shilling. Remember, he was hacking into the US secret super computers to find proof of aliens.

The Government, as usual, are happy to jump through hoops if the US snaps its fingers, so poor old Gary is being thrown to the wolves, despite the fact the crimes were committed in the UK and discovered three years before the extradition treaty was signed. As I understand it the US have yet to ratify the treaty but are still quite happy to use it if it suits them.

As it stands if we want a US citizen we have to prove in a US court that there is a strong case to answer. If the US want one of our citizens they basically have to just chuck us a name and we put them on a plane - unless of course they happen to want a suspected terrorist living on legal aid and benefits in the UK when the rules seem to change but that is New Labour for you.

The Daily Mail, always quick to jump on a bandwagon, is claiming it is behind the campaign to try him here, despite the fact others, including Private Eye, had been fighting long before the Mail took an interest, but no matter, at least they have raised awareness and are driving the cause onward.

After running out of legal moves to prevent a US trial it now comes down to either shaming this spineless Government to stand up for one of its own citizens or convincing the Americans that justice will not be served by extradition.

If you want to express some concerns to the US then start with the top man, President Obama. You can email him by clicking here. Meanwhile it might hurt a little - but not as much as 70 years in a US jail - but you can also help by signing the Daily Mail petition here or by signing a petition to the US Congress by clicking here.
- .

You can also help by contacting your MP, you can find a list of all MPs and links to send an email by clicking here. If you have other moans stick to Gary first and then send a second missive - keeping it civilised please - about any other points you want to raise.

No one is saying Gary is a hero and he does have a case to answer but let's keep it in proportion and let him answer his case in this country.

This idea of a tax on parking spaces has been kicking around since the Transport Act of 2000, just waiting for a council with a death wish to try it. It comes down to a tax on jobs and industry which will either put prices up for all of us as firms pass on extra costs or, much more likely, will result in redundancies with costs taken from the wages of remaining staff who use a parking space.

It will encourage firms to dispense with parking spaces which means staff will be parking in nearby streets or firms will move to areas where they are not taxed for trying to provide employment.

This is just another way of raising revenue with claims it will encourage public transport just a smokescreen. Public transport in this country is a shambles. The public it serves are the shareholders and owners while prices are the highest in any civilised country despite being paid subsidies that would have virtually financed British Rail as a free service.

So how about picking a date, let's say Monday, October 5, and calling it National Public Transport day. And on that day everyone in the country leaves their car at home and travels to work by public transport. Then Ministers can tell us all just how good and efficient our transport system really is.

Back in April the old Met Office told us we were in for a barbeque summer - which they revised this week to a barbeque summer as long as the barbeque was under cover and you wore wellies and a life jacket.

The interesting thing was that the fact they got it so woefully wrong surprised no one. It was just accepted that weather forecasting is like that. If they tell you it will be sunny then take a brolly. All of which begs the question why do so many people stand in awe of all the pseudo science cobblers spouted under the umbrella of global warming.

If our scientists can't even predict the weather five months ahead why do we think that they are going to be accurate when they tell us what we are in for not five months but five decades hence.

There is no proof whatsoever that CO2 production has any measurable effect on global warming yet stick green in front of anything these days and it is an excuse to up prices, create new professions and industries - with yet another explosion of parasitic consultants - fund endless, mindless research projects and, most attractive of all to those in power, create a new derivative market in carbon emissions trading along with a new raft of environmental taxes which we can be told are all for our own good. The fact they swell treasury coffers is merely a happy coincidence.

So next time some scientist tries to justify his research grant or puts down his marker for a knighthood by telling us we are all doomed unless we mend our ways and pay our green taxes - remember the barbeque summer.

So if the Government's Food Standards Agency has pronounced that organic food is no healthier and no better for us than non-organic - so what is in it for Gordon's lot?

The current Government never does or says anything without some cunning stunt lurking in the background so you have to wonder what policy, favour or promised donation to party funds is lurking in the shadows.

As for the report itself it is rather like telling us that the sun comes up in the morning. Anyone who knows that plants should be planted green side up should be able to tell you that plants do not care if their nutrients come from specially imported fermented Peruvian Llama droppings composted with fruit bat guano or from a smelly chemical factory in Widnes.

Complex organic feeds break down in the soil while industrially produced chemicals are already in the simple form, or close to it, that plants need to be able to absorb them as a solution.

Anyone knows you can produce a decent crop of veg hydroponically, without any soil or organic matter at all feeding the plants a stream of chemicals. So to tell us that organic and non-organic veg contain basically the same amounts of nutrients is hardly earth shattering. Plants take what they need and if they run short you have a poor crop.

Missing from the FSA study though was any figures for levels of trace elements, residual pesticides and any environmental impact not to mention any differences in taste.

Many of the fruit and veg on supermarket shelves have been bred and grown to produce a heavy yield of uniform, attractive fruit or veg with a long shelf life. Flavour never enters the equation. They are routinely sprayed against pests and fed according to a timetable rather than need and they are then picked to order.

The method produces cheap and plentiful food with bland flavour - keep it bland and there is not a lot for people to like, or more importantly, dislike.

The cheap food though is likely to contain residual pesticide and fungicide, which was not measured in the study, while the excessive use of fertilisers washes off to pollute rivers and watercourses, which again went unrecorded.

In addition heavy production is turning the soil in many fields into infertile deserts which now need dosing with chemicals to grow anything.

Organic growing with green and animal manure, organic feeds and so on produces a healthy soil full of bacteria, fungus, nematodes and humus. The soil is fertile and a healthy population of everything from worms to bacteria break down soil particles to release nutrients and trace elements.

So just to tell us that organic and non-organic produce contain the same nutrients is hardly earth shattering so we will have to wait to see why it seemed so important to tell us.

One of my readers - Andrew - wondered if I had any idea about where winding treacle on bobbins comes from - the phrase that is, not the occupation? It seems the only two entries on Google (now three of course) come from moi!! Which I suppose makes me the world expert on treacle winding.

It was just one of those phrases I grew up with in Oldham, one of the last mill towns in Lancashire* before the Pennines resisted any further human development. Oldham does lay claim to some words unique to the town, such as slippy curry for an ice slide, but whether treacle winding originated there or in the area of towns and villages nestled on the edge the Pennines in both Lancashire and Yorkshire I have no idea.

It came with other descriptive phrases such as "a nose like a blind cobbler's thumb" for someone with an injured snout or just a plain old ugly nose, or "one eye's a lolly and the others trying t'lick it" for someone who was cross eyed or boss eyed as it was up t'North.

Anyone daydreaming or not paying attention was likely to be asked "are you wi us or wit' mission?" - a reference to the many outings by the non-conformist churches, missions and brotherhoods which occupied every other street corner in Northern towns. Any local beauty spot, fair or day tripper destination would have its fair share of visitors on mission outings with any frineds you met there likely to be part of some group or other.

My parents were members, on the committee no less, of Higginshaw Brotherhood where my mother ran the Sunday School for a while. The brotherhood was an offshoot of the Methodists, a part of the Christian religion which had more varieties then Heinz in Northern towns.

"You'll end up winding treacle on bobbins" or "end up wheeling daylight into dark rooms" were favourite phrases of Dubby Barlow who was an elderly chemistry teacher at Counthill Grammar School, an establishment that tried hard to educated me.

Another of his favourites was "you'd be better off sitting eggs than sitting exams" aimed at anyone having a bad lesson. This was in the days of course when science had not been neutered by 'elf 'n' safety and still involved real chemicals, explosions, horrendous smells, naked flames while physics still used mains electricity and we played with high voltages making sparks shoot from our fingers and hair stand on end.

We even had a visiting Prof who used to come round once a year with flasks of liquid nitrogen and oxygen along with a bag of gunpowder to give us a lecture on explosives. 'Elf 'n' safety would have had a real attack of the vapours over that one. Happy days.

Meanwhile, if anyone else has any odd but apt sayings from their home towns or their youth then let us know.

"Lancastrians don't have Greater Manchester - that's just a place for politicians and bureaucrats to ponce about in - in the real world Manchester is merely a city in south east Lancashire.