In an attempt to find the "Brainiest kid in Britain", ITV are asking groups of twelve-year-olds lists of multiple choice questions, about such things as the first woman in space, locations of bones in the body, and maths stuff like the cube root of 64. In my view, the show should be renamed "The kid in Britain who is best at multiple choice general knowledge who also has the parents and ego required to end up on TV". Not quite so catchy, even if it is more accurate.

Just because you’re good at general knowledge, doesn’t mean that you’re clever. Lots of people know when the Second World War started, but the why is more important. Degrees as well; although a first class degree suggests that you’re smart, it actually means only that you’re good at your subject. Sometimes it’s easy to distinguish – if you’re rich, it doesn’t necessarily follow that you can handle money, or are good at making it. But some people aren’t able to look at things objectively; some people indeed can’t see the consequencies of their actions.

Just because you have authority, doesn’t mean you know best. Just because you have experience, doesn’t mean you can ignore other people’s advice. Just because you hold a position with power, doesn’t mean you know how to wield power properly.

Congratulations to all who were involved in Friday night’s carnival at the Union – I thought it was really well done. Once again, DramSoc took over in the concert hall, and special kudos to the lighting crew and operators. And a note as to the enthusiasm of whoever had their finger on the smoke machine button all night – I got lost down at one end of the hall, and from talking to others over the weekend, I wasn’t the only one! I thought the setup with the DJs (i.e. keeping them permanently out of the spotlight) was quite amusing – as was commented by someone at the time, "it’s an ego thing.&quot Next time we need to have some DramSoc DJs, leaving only the stewards outwith our control… Mwahahaha…

I’ve never quite made my mind up about zoos, and watching Animal Park on BBC2 just now still makes me feel uneasy. I went to Chester zoo many years back, and it typified the problems I have with the idea – concrete pens, small cages, no fields – I can still remember one of the big cats, perhaps a jaguar or similar, that had worn a groove in the floor of its cage, as it pounded around the perimeter incessantly. The floor was made of concrete.

Animal Park is about a safari park, which to me is just a zoo with big cages. Definitly a step in the right direction, but still there’s something I find wrong about it. I’m not doubting that the animals are well looked after from a physical point of view, the keepers and vets treat them well. But I can’t help thinking that in our society, imprisonment is a punishment, and house arrest is just a nicer version of the same thing.

One thing that I found especially concerning was the trick-performing parrots. From going ‘quack’ when they see a picture of a duck, to raising flags and jumping onto mini roller skates, I wonder what they might think of it – it’s just association learning; they are only looking for some food at the end of it. The keeper said that the parrots have the mental age of a three year old, and so need keeping occupied, and that the educational messages that the parrots can teach youngsters and adults alike are worth it. He has a point, but could Attenboroughs documentaries be a better idea?

It would be nice (but naive) to think that we don’t need to keep wild animals in captivity, and use their freak-show-like money pulling powers to draw cash into breeding and conservation work. But there is more to life than growing old, however healthy and well fed you may be – and I think of that when I look at the pack of lions in an Englishman’s Country Estate.

Like the smell in my toilet the morning after a heavy night of drinking, the Chemicals Saga just doesn’t seem to want to go away. Friday night saw me rehashing the affair to (yet) another group of people, which is absolutely the very last time I’m going through it from scratch. So why am I mentioning it again?

This morning, I finally received the reasoning of the panel as to my guilt. Remember, I was charged with a "Breach of Health and Safety procedures" (although this was actually, perhaps farcically, denied by the Union President in a letter published in Felix – I kid you not), but the real issue was whether or not I knew of a decision by Exec removing my authority from the issue. I was found "guilty of the charges brought", but with no suggestion as to how I was supposed to have found out about the decision. So what was the reasoning?

"It was the decision of the panel that Andrew Allen (sic) was guilty due to wrongful disposal of the chemicals, together with a lack of notification to the union both before & after the chemicals were disposed of. A lack of communication between himself, his club and the union was felt to be apparent, as well as lack of attendance at meetings where decisions were being made."

So basically, I was at fault because I didn’t know about the decision. Perversly, that was also my defence. And I wasn’t supposed to be at any "meetings where decisions were being made", there’s a little issue called representation, and I voted in an election which chose (and the Government of this country pays for) certain people to attend, make decisions, and be responsible for letting relevant people know what’s going on. Which they didn’t, neither verbally, nor by publishing minutes of the meeting (Sen, you know it’s in the rules, and you’ve been mandated repeatedly to do so). But hey, that’s my fault, isn’t it?

Which brings me on to the final part, the recommendations that the panel came up with. After you read them, think of this: If these are the recommendations, how can you possibly state that I was at fault?

1. The ICU Health and Safety policy should be reviewed, with particular emphasis on the interaction between sabbs, ICU staff and student officers.
2. There whenever a club or society is discussed at a union committee, that club or society should be present; or in their absence, the DPCS should be mandated to directly inform the president/captain/chair of the affected club or society of the results of the procedures. If the committee deems it not to be an urgent policy, then in the absence of that club or society the policy should not be discussed.
3. That ICU Council should create a working group to consider communication policy throughout the union.

I have the following words to say on this issue:

Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha.

Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha.

Ha Ha.

Morons.