Who exactly comes up with job descriptions these days? I ask because to say that the bin collections in my area have been erratic of late is something of an understatement. So imagine my joy at the announcement in the local paper last week that the council has decided to act – it has appointed “the Waste Wizard”. (Notice the capital letters and definite article; not just any old waste wizard.)
Alas, the identity of this force for positive change is top secret, but I’m reassured that they “will ensure the district’s waste services get back on track as soon as possible”. I await a magical transformation with bated breath.
Colin Armstrong wrote to me recently: “Whenever a political party announces a leadership contest, the press start to speculate about ‘the runners and riders’. I get ‘runners’, but who on earth are the riders?” I fear that trying to shed light on this cliche would be a futile exercise but I’d gladly see the back of it.
Not so this from John Hopkin: “Simon Tisdall’s column today on dynastic succession (‘George HW Bush unhappily begat George W Bush’) put me in mind of my sister-in-law, who discovered one long-dead but commendable West Country parish clerk had recorded her ancestor born out of wedlock as ‘lustily begat’. How delightful is that?”
Alison McAuslane is worried about politicians (she’s not alone in that but her complaint in this is particularly heartfelt). She’s been in touch with her MP. “He writes in response to my concerns about the EU reform bill that ‘the bill will also include a sunset date by which all remaining retained EU law will be repealed or retained’. In the next paragraph he asserts that ‘there are no plans to change the sunset deadline for any government departments’.”
Given this sort of nonsense and abuse of the language, I think she’s right to be concerned.
Email jonathan.bouquet@observer.co.uk
• Jonathan Bouquet is an Observer columnist
