oday I lodged my second-ever complaint with the local Council (Town Hall). I’ve lived in Manchester for over 25 years, so that makes an average of one complaint every ~13 years, which I don’t think is too much of a burden on them. I’m not some vexatious complainant.

My complaint deals with feeding of nature [1, 2]; it would be immoral to prohibit or forbid that, more so without disclosing any relevant laws or selectively enforcing alleged rules.

I ticked the following boxes in my complaint:

• “has done something that compromises or is likely to compromise the impartiality of those who work for, or on behalf of, the Council”
• “has prevented another person from gaining access to information to which that person is entitled to by law”
• “has conducted themselves in a manner that could reasonably be regarded as bringing their office or the Council into disrepute”

A short or preliminary (can be expanded upon later, elaboration upon demand) of the complaint:

I am hereby filing a complaint, without any undue discrimination or ill intent. It is a short complaint the premise of which is, the local authorities are issuing contradictory instructions regarding the feeding of birds in open spaces with grass and trees, as well as providing plenty of fresh water during heatwaves in summertime. Not only us but also neighbours provide food to the birds, which we acquire at personal expense and distribute responsibly so as to avoid remnants being left on the ground. We are receiving contradictory instructions and and those are not based on any law, just ad hoc statements like “please stop feeding pigeons immediately.” (28/08/2025)

Based on official Web sites of the Council and the national authorities alike, there is no legal basis upon which to demand this. Public servants ought not be used for harassment by proxy, more so is the complaints have been doing drugs in their back yard for over a decade (and we never complained). While the issue withstands assessment and scrutiny we shall not refrain from doing the moral thing, which is to feed nature responsibly, just as neighbours do. I already discussed the matter in great length over the telephone on 28/08/2025 (call answered by [redacted]).

To avoid retaliation I prefer for the matter not to be disclosed at this time. The submission reference is #6025138, but I will not disclose any names.

want to explain my position as expressed (or politely, amicably explained) to local authorities.

Animals need water and food, more so in summertime. Especially the water. Water is life, life is water. We bought several stainless steel bowls to nourish the local cats, dogs, birds, and occasionally other animals. We change the water at least once a day to ensure it’s never stagnant. The government and the media actively encourage doing so, more so when there are heatwaves.

In dry places, animals tend to hang out not far from water. It’s an instinctive tendency.

For over a year we had birds in our back yard. This year, to appease thin-skinned people, we moved them to the front, to a public space, an open space with lots of grass and trees.

The queens and kings of Britain have protected wild birds, which they saw as almost equal to humans. The government encouraged people to offer food to birds, e.g. in their back gardens. And because as a society we are governed by rules, not by men, what matters is policy. What it boils down to is the universal rule, so I checked the official .gov sites, just to ensure we feed the birds correctly while complying with whatever it says there.

Over time we reduced the frequency of the feeding (we try to buy them the best seeds available), but not the quantity (once day in large quantities instead of 10-20 times a day in smaller doses), which is fine as long as more people do this. Our neighbours feed them and like them, but there is a resistance from one very malicious couple that does drugs in the back yard, forcing other people to inhale bad stuff for over a decade already. Apparently the birds are “dirty”, but drugs being smoked is not. I recently saw articles about bans on bird-feeding in India (specifically in Mumbai), despite such bans being highly immoral, resulting in actual hunger strikes, albeit mostly by Jains.

We need to resist people who hate and antagonise wild animals, more so knowing that the animals cannot speak to humans (for themselves) and they have feelings too. An act of resistance, wherein you protect the lives of non-human creatures, is nothing to be ashamed of or afraid of.

The pretext that bird-feeding will attract vermin is not supported by any evidence and it also discriminates against some particular animals, who do no harm. If policy changes are to be made, then evidence is needed. While policies remain unchanged it’s not OK to apply any on an ad hoc, improvised basis. When council workers issue contradictory instructions, it then necessarily means somebody is lying.

e all love to joke about buzzwords like “AI” spinning out of control.

Sometimes some of us joke about hypothetical “AI” products.

I thought I had seen it all.

Today in the Sunday Market there was an entire stall devoted to AI glasses.

What does this mean?

I did not ask.

I didn’t even need to ask.

Seeing it was enough.