Caring For The Aged     From the second Long Johns tape

This is a transcript of a spoof political interview by two comedians called 
John Bird and John Fortune, collectively known as The Long Johns. They work 
with Rory Bremner, an English impressionist, on his Channel 4 programme, and 
I personally think that they are the highlight of the show.
A small number of these interviews have been released on audio tape. This 
was taken from the second cassette.
This transcript was produced by me, and I would appreciate any corrections.

Before you read this, you need to know the background. This was written a 
few years ago when the UK Government decided to impose VAT (Value Added Tax, 
which is known in the US as Sales Tax) on fuel. This was felt to be unfair 
on elderly people, since they had more need of fuel than younger people. The 
Government raised the old age pension by 70p/week ostensibly to offset the 
tax for old people, but the tax was more than 70p/week.


JF: George Parr, you're the director of a well known independent think-tank, 
    and you've been struggling with the problems involved in an ageing 
    population. In the Budget this week, of course, the most controversial 
    aspect of it was the imposition of VAT on fuel oil. This is going to hit 
    the pensioners very hard, isn't it?

JB: Very hard.

JF: And yet the Chancellor has offset that increase, hasn't he, by putting
    up old age pensions by, what is it, 70p a week?

JB: (Laughs)

JF: So, what do you think of that?

JB: Well, it's pathetic really, isn't it? Absolutely pathetic. Outrageous, 
    frankly. The government just keeps throwing money at this problem, 
    without any thought, really, of cost - what these old people should 
    cost, and why should we go on automatically heating up these old people? 
    Does it make them more efficient? Do they contribute more to society 
    when they're hotter?

JF: So what you're suggesting is some kind of cost-benefit analysis of 
    elderly people?

JB: Yes, I think we need that. We need to know, like any other resource, 
    how much it costs, and what use are they? Are they any use?

JF: Well, the traditional view has been that old people represent a
    reservoir of wisdom in society - somewhere where young people can go and 
    benefit from their vast experience.

JB: Yes, yes, yes, that would be all right in old societies where nothing 
    changes very much over the years, over the generations, but in the 
    contemporary world the old people's knowledge of society changes so fast 
    now and young people need to know things that will help them to prosper 
    and flourish in the contemporary society. What do old people know about 
    Pulp, and Blur, and glue-sniffing, and stacking shelves at Safeway? They 
    know nothing about that, you see. They're completely useless.

JF: Hufty.

JB: Hufty. Yes. They know nothing about Hufty. Well, I don't know very much 
    about Hufty.

(Hufty was a bald lesbian "comedienne" on trendy youth TV show The Word.)

JF: No. I can't say that I do. So what you're saying, in effect, is that 
    elderly people have nothing to contribute, is that it?

JB: Well, I happen to know that because I'm a director of a chain of old 
    people's homes in the North of England, so I have experience of these 
    things and old people just talk nostalgically about the blitz, and 
    sharing each other's ration cards, and not locking their doors at night 
    and how wonderful it was in the old days, and that sort of thing. 
    Mucking in. Young people don't need to know that. Young people need to 
    know how to *compete* with their neighbours. Not how to go around 
    lending them cups of sugar, and things of that kind.

JF: Doing the dirty on them?

JB: Yes. So, as far as I can see, all old people do is sit around in old 
    people's homes dribbling, and constituting a fire hazard.

JF: Although, in some senses, the fire hazard would be helped by the 
    dribbles. It would be a sort of primitive form of a sprinkler system.

JB: Yes. Well, in our old people's homes, it would be the only form,
    primitive or otherwise.

JF: And I suppose incontinence would come into play here as well?

JB: In extreme emergencies, yes. In fact, I've often heard, "Mrs Hopkins! 
    Come down, there's a conflagration in the basement, and we'd be very 
    grateful for your input. And even more for your output."

JF: Yes.

JB: Yes. Sorry, we've rather lost track here.

JF: Yes. What I was going to ask you, really, is that what is your proposal 
    going to involve here? Are we talking about taking measures of some 
    kind?

JB: We have to take measures. We need to have young people who are adaptable 
    to changing circumstances. I mean, the New Testament shows us that. 
    Christ, for example - Jesus Christ, I'm talking about - he was very 
    adaptable. He was trained as a carpenter, and when the bottom fell out 
    of the carpentry trade he diversified into the service industry - he 
    started with a few loaves and fishes and built himself up into a 
    medium-sized catering company. 

JF: And of course, he didn't go on to be old, did he?

JB: No, he didn't, you see. He died at thirty-three.

JF: And of course being God, he could decide when he was going to die, 
    presumably?

JB: Yes, yes he could.

JF: So you think there is a sort of message in that, that old age is not 
    necessarily a good thing?

JB: Well, Christ is a role model in many respects, I've always admired his 
    work. I've always wished he looked a little more like Peter Lilley and a 
    little less like Gerry Adams. Let me put this another way. How many 
    drooling old crones have you seen in the VIP lounge at Heathrow Airport? 
    Not very many, is the answer to that.

JF: Sorry, I can't quite see what this is ...

JB: Well, you see, the people you see in the VIP lounge at Heathrow Airport 
    are the people who are valuable to society. They're the wealth-creators. 
    The top businessmen, you see. And the irony of it is they have a lower 
    life expectancy, because of the pressures on them.

JF: They're making all these corporate decisions?

JB: The average executive, you see, by the time he gets to Heathrow Airport 
    has already had a harrowing time worrying about whether his chauffeur's 
    going to get there on time, whether he's going to have to kick his heels 
    in the bar for two and a half hours waiting for the next plane. 
    Once he gets on the plane, is there going to be enough room in his first 
    class seat, is the stewardess going to be attractive enough, is the 
    champagne going to be cold enough? When he gets to the other side, is 
    his hotel swimming pool going to be of an adequate size? Is his suite 
    going to have a decent view? Is the executive trouser press going to be 
    functioning? All these myriad decisions which weigh upon the top 
    businessmen.

JF: Whereas what you're saying is that the elderly don't have these intense 
    pressures.

JB: No. Exactly. The working class elderly are fed and watered by the
    Welfare State - nothing wears out. They don't have any sense of stress, 
    and so, in a way, the wrong genes survive.

JF: Sorry, isn't that getting a bit close to eugenics?

JB: No, I don't think so. That's an abhorrent idea, eugenics. The state 
    shouldn't intervene in that way. But the state shouldn't intervene in 
    the opposite way either, prolonging these rather pointless lives, by 
    heaping these handouts on them.

JF: 70p a week.

JB: 70p a week.

JF: Yes, I can see that. So, is there something that can be done, in your 
    view?

JB: Well it's not an easy problem, and I don't pretend to have the answer. 
    I do think there is an answer, somewhere, floating around, but I've 
    never been able to quite put my finger on it.  It's a very difficult 
    problem.

JF: Well, I'm almost relieved there isn't a solution, because it almost 
    sounded as if you were talking about culling the elderly.

JB: That's it! That's the idea I think I have been looking for all this 
    time.

JF: One can't imagine the idea of bands of DHSS death squads, roaming around 
    shooting people.

JB: Oh no, you couldn't. They'd bungle it, they're civil servants. No, this 
    should be left to market forces, along with everything else, you see.

JF: In what sense?

JB: A choice should be offered to people. Not to the old people of course, 
    I'm talking about their families. Their families should be given the 
    choice.

JF: I see. So let me summarise. What you're saying is the State should no 
    longer be responsible at all for elderly people. They should be the sole 
    responsibility of their families.

JB: Yes. The families must balance their priorities. They must ask 
    themselves fundamental questions. Do we want the new Mondeo, or do we 
    want Granny hanging round leaving her colostomy bag on the hostess 
    trolley?

JF: Yes. Well, that is a very personal view, Sir George.

JB: I remember my own mother saying to me, 'George, I do not want to be a 
    burden on the public sector borrowing requirement.'

JF: Very public-spirited of her. Might I ask you, Sir George, since you're 
    not yourself in the first flush of youth, what is actually going to 
    happen to you in ten or fifteen years?

JB: Well, I can promise you this, I myself am not going to be a burden on 
    future generations.

JF: You're talking about euthanasia?

JB: No, I'm talking about Greece. I have a property in Greece, and I shall 
    go and spend my retirement there. Greece is a country which respects the 
    old, which is of course why it's so pathetically backward economically.

JF: Sir George Parr, thank you very much.

JB: That's a pleasure.