On punishment and presents.

I read today that Scotland is banning the smacking of children. Well, good for them, say I. I have always been against smacking, which in the end serves to show children that might is right, that the strong rule and having the ability to lash out physically is better than making a rational argument about things.

The article I read said that England is one of four EU countries where corporal punishment is not forbidden. I tried to find a list of countries that forbid smacking but could only find a list of about eight or ten EU countries, nowhere near the number you would expect of we are one of the only four who still smack kids.

Spain was not on the list. I mention this because recently as I walked through St. Ann's Square in Manchester I saw a small child, a very small child, no more than 15 months old, do that thing that tiny people do, pull off her hat and casually drop it over the side. The mother, young and smart, leaned round and said to the child, "¡Olivia! ¡Dame la mano!", grabbed the proffered hand and delivered a sharp slap. I almost intervened. After all I could tell her quite clearly in Spanish that smacking a baby is wrong. However, I was not in busybody mode and refrained.

 It is worth noting that the child was in an outward facing buggy. Phil and I have a thing about buggies; we firmly believe that small children being pushed around in buggies should face the adult pushing them. It's hard to ignore a child if you are making contact with him/her and conversation takes place which is much better for language development. Had little Olivia been facing her mummy, then Mummy would have known that she was pulling her hat off before things went far enough for it to be dropped. Instead she was busy talking to her friend and ignoring the child. Of course, it is quite possible that little Olivia would have received a smack anyway!

On the subject of punishment, I was rather pleased to hear that a couple had been jailed for making false insurance claims. Twice they claimed to have suffered from food poisoning on holiday and wanted compensation. Unfortunately for them they also posted lots of pictures on social media, letting all their friends know what a good time they were having. You have to be careful what you post. Social media is a fickle friend and sometimes turns round and bites you in the leg. Now someone needs to sort out the whiplash claimants and perhaps insurance premiums will reduce a little.

Apparently Theresa May once baked brownies for the BBC team when she went on Test Match Special. Did she really bake them with her own fair hands? I suppose it's quite likely - a little bit of domestic relaxation. Anyway, on a second appearance recently, asked about these treats, she commented that Geoffrey Boycott still had her Tupperware. He has made amends by sending her a gift of plastic boxes embossed with gold labels reading "Property of Theresa May". I lose plastic containers all the time - they migrate to my daughter's house - and I have never yet received personalised boxes in return. What usually happens is that she turns up one day with a bag full of the borrowed Tupperware.

It is much more common for Theresa May to receive gifts of shoes rather than plastic boxes. As female politicians' choice of attire is much noticed and commented on, she has become well known for her love of shoes with kitten heels, or so I have read. Consequently fashion designers such as Stella McCartney send her shoes. But these gifts come at a price; government ethics rules mean the prime minister, ministers and special advisers must declare gifts received above the value of £140 – and pay for any of the gifts they wish to keep. So when these fashion designers send gifts which are well received they benefit twice: the items are paid for and presumably they are able to say "as worn by the Prime Minister".

I wonder if this also applies to the personalised Tupperware.