Football's coming home?

It's happened to me again - I've gone from being ambivalent at best about the World Cup to being an avid viewer. 

If you recall, this also occurred with the Olympics, both summer and winter, and other sporting events to which I claim to not have an interest.  It's making me think that perhaps I do care more about sport than I would like to admit?

Anyway, having said that, I only watch the England matches in full, and then dip in and out of other games depending on what else is on the television, but as this is something I've taken to doing entirely voluntarily, it's a bit of a turnaround.

You see, the problem is I vividly remember Euro 96.  I knew the words to Three Lions, and my friends and I used to sing it loudly - maybe in tune, who knows? - and for a moment in time we truly believed that football was indeed coming home as promised.

Then it didn't, and it hasn't since 1966 - which I don't remember before anybody cheekily suggests that I do!

But now we've started to dream again.  Watching the Panama game on a very sunny Sunday afternoon, we started to believe that maybe, just maybe, it's going to be our year.

The players are younger and seem hungrier for victory.  They're not mentally-scarred by the penalty shoot-outs that we never seem to win.  They actually look and act like they could be winners.

But whoa there, I should try to rein in my enthusiasm at this point.  This is what we always do.  We all start hoping, then put too much pressure on the players' shoulders, and that's when it starts to fall apart.

We've got quite a way to go yet, let's not get ahead of ourselves and dare to dream.

But with Harry Kane's penalty taking skills (as demonstrated against Panama), who knows, perhaps Gareth Southgate's got a team that can win actually win a penalty shoot-out.

I'm not sure my nerves - and Gareth's, let alone the rest of the nation's - will stand it though!

Northamptonshire's unitary authority proposals

I suspect there are more people with knowledge about the latest Love Island exploits or World Cup final matches than there are those who have been given information about the plans for local government in Northamptonshire.

In summary, central government has proposed that the failing county council - and the district and borough councils - all be abolished and replaced with just two, one-tier unitary authorities, responsible for everything from pot holes to caring for the elderly and vulnerable.

Arguably, it seems unfair that successful district and borough councils are being punished for what's happened at county council level, and the proposal leaves far more questions than it answers. 

For example, what is going to happen to the debts left behind from the county council - do the two new unitary authorities inherit this and start life from negative positions?

What about existing council house stock, particularly in Corby and Kettering?  Where will the new authorities be based?  Will there be job losses?  Will council tax rise throughout the county?

As far as I'm aware, and from attending the public meeting at the Corby Cube recently, Corby Borough Council is the only one holding a public consultation with every household in its borough, and sending out information and a questionnaire to ask what people think about this huge change.

Surely they shouldn't be unique in doing this?  This major decision affects everybody in the whole county.  It's not an exaggeration to state that this is probably the biggest change to local politics in our lifetimes.

An online questionnaire is available at www.futurenorthants.co.uk, but this is reliant on people being aware of it and being able to access it.

The Secretary of State's guidance states that 'there must be a good deal of local support for the proposals'. 

However, it's very difficult for people to give their support or otherwise if they haven't got the relevant information and been asked the question in the first place.

Why not carry out a postal consultation with every household in the county - surely that is the only fair way to ensure that everyone in Northamptonshire has the information they need to give their informed opinion?

Competitive life events

Now, I could tell you that I'm not a competitive person, but anyone who knows me would straight away shout 'that's just not true!'.

As I make a habit of always being truthful in my columns, I will confess to being a smidgen competitive, but only with important things like quizzes, air hockey, and computer games like Mario Kart or the motorcycle simulators you get in arcades at the seaside.

But not when it comes to major life event celebrations - for example, my wedding was a simple affair, ditto daughter's Christening.  I don't agree with spending large sums of money on one day, admittedly a fairly important day, but just one day in your life nonetheless.

That's why I just can't get my head around the latest life-event competition - funerals.

Why on earth would anyone compete over funerals?  I know it's a 'thing' because there's loads of TV adverts now dedicated to ensuring you've got enough cash for a good send off.

For example, the endless over 50s life insurance ads, and the lady who liked stargazer lilies, her friends commenting what a lovely funeral she had, but they couldn't possibly afford one like it unless they take out insurance.

What?  Who cares?!  I hate to break it to you, but because you'll be dead when it happens, you won't know what your funeral's like.  Or I suppose depending on your religious viewpoint you will perhaps be able to view it somehow, but even so, what does it really matter?

Honestly, when did we become a nation of folk who partake in competitive dying and subsequent send-offs?

Without wishing to destroy an entire industry and make coffin craftspeople unemployed, wouldn't it be better for the environment if we were dispatched in strong biodegradable cardboard coffins or similar?  Why use the finest oak on something that will either be cremated or buried six feet under?

Surely death is our chance to stop keeping up with the Joneses' - why not keep it simple and just rest in peace?

Be more Simon Cowell

I've been giving it some thought, and I think we should all be more Simon Cowell.

I'm not suggesting that we become incredibly successful multi-millionaire music moguls - although that would be good - and don high-waisted black trousers, Cuban heels and wear a white shirt open to the navel to display our hairy chests.  But if that's what you'd really like to do, go ahead, I won't judge you.

No, what I'm musing on is whether we should try to give up our mobile phones.  Simon made headlines recently when he admitted he hadn't switched his on in ten months.

My first thought was 'ooh, what if his partner wanted to reach him in an emergency?' but then I realised he probably has an assistant or two with multiple devices between them and they could pass on the message.

Is it feasible for the rest of us though?  Could we revisit a world where the only phone we had was anchored to a cable and sat proudly atop its own designated table, probably in the hallway?

OK, even a Luddite like me has a digital handset I can walk about the house with, but you get the idea.

Now the genie is out of the bottle and in every pocket in the land, how would it work?

Having said that, my parents haven't used their mobile in over ten years.  When I upgraded mine I gave them the handset and a new SIM card, showed them how to use it etc, thinking it would be handy in case of emergencies.

It promptly disappeared to the bottom of my mother's handbag, never to see the light of day again. 

So they along with Simon Cowell - not a phrase I ever thought I'd say - are proof that you can live quite successfully without a mobile phone.

Could the rest of us?  I think a reduction in use would certainly be possible, but to give mine up altogether - how would I check the BBC weather app?!