I don't shop at Sainsburys but if I did this might persuade me to stop

I don't shop at Sainsburys but the news that they are to use motorbike-riding traffic wardens to patrol its car-parks and fine customers £50 if they misuse the disabled and parent and child parking spaces would be a factor in deciding me to shop elsewhere if I did. That and their alcohol sales policies speak of a Supermarket who wouldn't want the custom of a childless, able-bodied customer, preferring those with children. Fine I will continue to take my above average weekly shopping budget elsewhere.

Even more totalitarianism at the checkout

This is yet another in the long line of stories that I have published on supermarkets and their weird over-application of bans on selling alcohol to minors. You can see the last such of my postings here. This latest story is from a Sainsburys in Melksham in Worcs, where a 43 year-old RAF squadron leader was prevented from buying three bottles of wine with his shopping because he was accompanied by his 17 year-old son. As is often the case, the store manager backed his member of staff. A Sainsburys spokesman now says that the cashier asked for identification because the teenager had "presented" the wine by placing it on the conveyor belt, thus making it looks as though it was the teenager buying the wine. Now I rarely go to supermarkets but when I do it seems commonplace for children to help their parents by helping take the shopping form the trolley and placing it on the checkout conveyor.

These storied are not just about the application of licensing laws they are also about controlling the public. We can't be allowed to assume that we can buy what we want, we have to be allowed to do so by the store and the government. One final thought, and it is just a thought, I wonder if Squadron Leader Mark Giles was identifiable as being in the military and if this was some sort of anti-war stance taken by the cashier... Just wondering.

The ability to believe something in the face of overwhelming facts to the contrary

The ability to believe something in the face of overwhelming facts to the contrary is the key to explaining many of the decisions taken on our behalf. Governments and quangos just know that something is right and then take evidence, consider it but give the verdict that they were always going to give.

Here's a prime example, earlier this year the Competition Commission ruled that supermarkets posed no threat to independent retailers. This seems somewhat at odds with common sense economics and also the facts. Common sense tells you that for a new supermarket store to have any customers come through its doors they must have been shopping somewhere else before . Common sense also tells you that they cannot all have been shopping at other supermarkets. The facts show that 2,700 butchers and fishmongers have closed since 2001 and that 3,000 greengrocers have closed since 1997.

Ah but supermarkets are cheaper and more convenient say the supermarket lobby. Not true, recent research by the Daily Telegraph showed that a basket of six fruit and five vegetables from Tesco and Sainsburys cost £37.20 compared with £21.01 from four independent greengrocers. As for convenient, I walk to my local greengrocer and fishmonger but would need to drive to a supermarket and this is still the case for many people; it would be the case for many more had not so many independent shops not already have been forced to close.