But Ladbrokes think it an unlikely eventuality, offering me odds of 10,000-1. Although I find myself asking, why not 1,000,000-1?As the son of a bookmaker – albeit a notably unsuccessful one, who single-handedly demolished the old canard about nobody ever seeing a poor bookie – I rather enjoy the way that life unfolds in Britain accompanied by a series of odds It is a phenomenon unique to these shores The Australians enjoy a flutter, but not like we do There is no culture of odds-making in America. The French do not offer spread bets on the number of truffles dug up in the Périgord. Yet here the bookmakers spring into action at the least provocation, perhaps because they know there are plenty of punters daft enough to hand over their hard-earned readies.

In other words, which came first, the chicken or the egg? Evens the chicken, 11-4 the egg.There is no over-estimating the lunacy of the British public when it comes to gambling. For instance, on 1 January this year, bookmakers were able to pocket substantial bets placed on the following things happening during 1999: that the world would end (a no-lose bet for the bookies, considering how tricky it would have been to collect the winnings); that the Archbishop of Canterbury would confirm the Second Coming; that Michael and LaToya Jackson would turn out to be one and the same; that a man would give birth; and, my personal favourite, that weather forecaster Michael Fish would lose his job to cricketer Shane Warne.At the same time, however, Ladbrokes shelled out £194,000 to a chap who bet £30 in December 1989 that by the end of the next decade, Cliff Richard would be knighted, both EastEnders and Home and Away would still be going strong on television, and rock group U2 would still be together. Heaven knows why he felt so strongly about that particular turn of events.It is easier to admire the similarly lucrative prescience of one David Threlfall, who entered a William Hill betting shop in the early 1960s and asked for the odds against an astronaut walking on the moon by 1 January 1970. The William Hill man, who has sensibly remained anonymous, offered him 1,000-1.

Mr Threlfall bet a tenner.The list of daft bets placed, and daft prices offered, is a long one, getting longer by the day. Meanwhile, there are odds on everything, from sport to politics to literature to fashion to industry to Elvis landing a UFO on top of the Millennium Dome It is all, you might say, very odd. So what does it tell us about the British psyche?Actually, I think it reflects a fundamental schizophrenia. We are eternal optimists, handing over our precious dosh in the hope of it multiplying, yet eternal pessimists, knowing that there is no other blinking way to get rich quick. The same applies in spades to the National Lottery.But now, if you’ll excuse me, I’m off to back Terry Venables. I reckon he has a decent outside chance of winning the Booker Prize.. The welfare state was founded on the principle of “universality”.

The theme is resilient, but it has not proved untouchable, and it has meant different things to different people. It is now time to re-examine how the principle of “universality” should be interpreted to meet the needs of people in the coming century. The welfare state was founded on the principle of “universality”. The theme is resilient, but it has not proved untouchable, and it has meant different things to different people. It is now time to re-examine how the principle of “universality” should be interpreted to meet the needs of people in the coming century.
Collective provision did not start from a fully formed social-security system. The major religions all included support for those in need as a key part of religious practice.

The Elizabethan Poor Laws were in large part a response to the collapse of the traditional local welfare system that depended on charitable foundations swept away by the Reformation and the sale of Church assets.The Industrial Revolution inspired early examples of collective provision such as goose and burial clubs, the embryo craft trade unions, mutuals and friendly societies. All this was patchy and involved only a minimal role for the state. The collective spirit generated during the First and Second World Wars forged a more modern welfare state, supporting people from cradle to grave.Of course, the modern welfare state has always had its opponents. Early in July 1948, the Daily Mail told its readers: “On Monday morning you will wake up in a new Britain, in a State which ‘takes over’ its citizens six months before they are born, providing care and free services for their birth, for their early years, their schooling, sickness, workless days, widowhood and retirement.