'G'day, Baby Cameron' @ No 10

Arturo giggled to himself then said:

"G'day, mi old mate! Let's yabber in Oz talk, shall we?"

"Whatever for?" I asked. "Don't know any Oz talk."

"You'd better get used to it. We've got a spunky sheila coming to live here." He tossed a paper at me.

As usual Arturo is, as they say, ahead of the game! The Guardian had an article about this 'spunky sheila' though that was not what they called her.

There was a headline David and Samantha Cameron should have hired a British nanny: The Camerons' decision to hire an Australian nanny shows contempt for the million unemployed young people in the UK. The article was written by Tanya de Grunwald who wrote:

So the prime minister David Cameron and his wife have hired a 24-year-old woman named Sammi Strange to be their children's nanny. If we believe the various reports in today's papers, it seems she is no Mary Poppins: she has a CV that includes drinking, smoking and shoplifting. She's young, and therefore perhaps this is to be forgiven. What interests me much more is that she is Australian.

The article continued:

If this government had shown that it had a proper, workable plan to for tackling the appalling level of youth unemployment in this country, I wouldn't mind. But the employment minister Chris Grayling expects our own young people to work for nothing for months before they amass enough "experience" to be worthy of a paid job. Those who criticise his work programme we are told, "just don't get it," or we are "job snobs".

Now therein, or thereon, lie the horns of the dilemma for 'Boy David' Cameron. Why on earth didn't he contact a good old fashioned UK Nanny employment agency and get a pure-blooded English rose to 'nanny' in the nursery? One answer might be that various daughters of his erstwhile Eton schoolmates would have felt slighted! Parents would have crowded the famous Downing Street kitchen dinners saying: 'Why didn't you choose, Imelda?', 'What's wrong with Geraldine?', 'We thought you adored Camilla!'

Imagine the uproar! Samantha wouldn't have known where to look! Perish the thought! One has to be careful, doesn't one, not to show favouritism amongst one's pals!

So what would have been the alternative? A sweet, demure rosebud of a girl from glorious Devon murmuring: 'What be the matter with 'ee, ma little darlin'?' Maybe it could have been a sturdy Lancashire Lass, a strong-willed Scouser, a beauty from Birmingham! But then, of course, regional jealousy would have set in. 'There's enough unemployment in Cornwall!'; 'Not enough work in Norfolk!'

Pity poor old 'Bagpuss' Pickles, Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government. How would he have coped with adjudicating the pros and cons amongst a myriad mass of deprived communities in the UK? No doubt he would have selected the girl with the best faggots and chips cooking skills. Not an edifying thought!

The Guardian article continued:

Young British people need proper, paid jobs – not endless schemes, training and low-paid apprenticeships which help fudge the figures so it looks like they're doing better than they actually are. They need actual jobs paying actual money that they can actually live on. Given that this is the case, why on earth couldn't Cameron have found a British nanny to look after his children? Did he try – or has he no faith at all in our nation's own young people being worthy of such a role? His actions set a dangerous example. If it's OK for him to write off British-educated and trained youth, why shouldn't every other employer do the same, as we are frequently told by the likes of the CBI that they do.

Tanya de Grunwald ended by saying:

If this government truly wants to give young people a sense of belonging in Britain, and a "stake in society", it needs to show that it has faith in them. In failing to hire one of the million young unemployed to be his children's nanny, Cameron has shown only contempt.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/apr/27/david-samantha-cameron-australian-nanny

Maybe, for once, our PR man of a Prime Minister considered his actions carefully. Isn't his former old pal Murdoch an Aussie? Is this a subtle way of saying; 'Please don't take your vengeance on me, Rupee, I never thought that Leveson bloke would be so thorough! I really, really do love Australians!'

And so, my friends, Arturo and I say:

This new sheila will be fair dinkum!

Meanwhile we're are off to get some grog and have a yarn!