The responsibility of the Royalty of Happyland is to look after the people and help them to behave themselves.

Comp Lainer had problems with others and was supposed to be protected by those who worked for the Royalty. Comp Lainer was sometimes looked after well and more often not.

A Happyland worker had money and information which actually belonged to Comp Lainer but would not hand them over. Comp Lainer tried to be reasonable and patient but, after many months, grew tired of waiting and told the Queen of Happyland this.

Unfortunately, the Crown Prince of Happyland became angry and threatened to kill Comp Lainer. The Crown Prince was made an ex Crown Prince. He was not happy because he had to leave Happyland where he had had money to spend and an easy life.

After a time the Queen also grew unhappy with Comp Lainer and let bad people loose hoping they would kill Comp Lainer. She still refused to give the money and information to Comp Lainer and said Comp Lainer would have to wait for it until she said it could be handed over. Bear in mind that this did not belong to the Queen. Hirer and Firer heard about this and was cross so the Queen was banished. (The selection process for the Sovereign had possibly not been the best and the person crowned in that post might not have been the most competent or suitable. The management structure was also not entirely effective. Matters which should have been completed within a reasonable time were left because there were not experienced, competent people who should have picked up the failings.)

A new Crown Prince called Candidate took the Queen’s place and copied what the Queen had said about not letting Comp Lainer have the money which was rightfully hers. Hirer and Firer was cross about this and told Candidate he would not be made King of Happyland if he had an arrogant attitude. Candidate said he would send the money and information without delay. (Privately, he told his brother Princes that he would make Comp Lainer wait.) Oh dear, this is an example of an appointment of an inexperienced person with no prior knowledge of the work of Happyland who simply replicates what they have learnt from an incompetent former ruler. (However, Candidate had dealt with a situation concerning one of his workers in a way which was empathetic when he first became temporary ruler of Happyland and this had shown some initial promise.)

Life sometimes teaches us the lessons we need to learn in order to become the person we are meant to be. The lesson here is that arrogance does not have a place in Happyland or any other land.

I think Happyland needs a King or Queen who is intelligent, fair, abides by the Happyland rules and does not make Royalty matters personal. Alternatively, Happyland could become part of a larger land which is run more effectively. This amalgamation would be a cheaper option than having two separate lands each with their own management structure. What do you think? . . .

Comp Lainer has never wanted to put the incomes of the workers in jeopardy, but she has been waiting for months and months for money and information which is hers and all her requests for it have been ignored. She feels there is no other way to get what she needs to move on with her life. This is her great regret. She has said more than once that she does not want to take action which may affect workers’ jobs and there is documentation to support this.

She has also asked many times for information about where she is to receive a life-saving operation. She is still waiting for that information. Unfortunately, people’s patience eventually runs out.

It seems to me that any organisation is only as good as its managers.  The organisation may have the best possible “front line” employees but will still be affected if it does not have efficient, effective and ethical local managers.

Firstly, one of the quickest ways to harm a business is for its owners or managers to involve themselves in any sort of nastiness towards others. Some clients and business partners tend not to like this type of behaviour and the damage caused to a commercial enterprise can be very difficult to overcome. I know of at least two small businesses which failed for this reason.

A person who has made several attempts at causing me very serious harm was driven past my house recently so now knows exactly where I live. I believe that prior to this she had been heard openly stating that she (still) wants to cause me very serious harm. I have seen the two people who were with her that day outside my house previously and believe they have so far received at least two visits from the authorities.

I moved over 160 miles to get away from a dangerous, very nasty set of circumstances, only for it to be brought to my door. It is likely that further attempts to cause me serious harm could be made by the person this couple were with. They have also repeated what she has been saying about me. Additionally, even though they know that she said she wanted to cause me very serious harm, they were still willing to show her where I live. I believe this means that they would have to bear part of the responsibility for any harm which may be caused to me.

There is also the risk of legal action for harassment and defamation which could of course lead to bad publicity.

Let’s hope that this couple’s wish to involve themselves in a situation relating to someone they do not know without first checking the facts does not put at risk the jobs of decent people who simply want to earn a living. 

Secondly, I have written on several occasions about some “anomalies” in public services in my former home town.

Recently, I was very disappointed to learn that one public service denies any involvement in my situation. I can think of instances where I know for sure that this organisation was involved.

The most likely reason I can think of for this denial is that one or more local managers were playing for time. If matters proceeded along the usual channels there would inevitably have been a time delay. This would give them the opportunity to find other jobs before any decision is made to rationalise services. (There were some “shortcuts” in the conduct of my situation.) 

If I am right, I do hope that the people concerned are taking as much care in protecting the positions of front line employees as their own.

Unfortunately, these are two sets of circumstances where the actions of just a few people could create the risk of long term consequences for a number of others.