I RECENTLY caught on television about five minutes of something called Dick and Dom in Da Bungalow.

To be fair, it was a Saturday morning children's show and, like I said, I only caught several minutes of it, (Saturday mornings mean Jonathan Ross on Radio 2 once you're over 30).

But I saw enough to get the general idea -- two wacky lads, presumably sharing a bungalow, and a lot of slapstick involving things like inflatable trousers.

Dick and Dom are no doubt accomplished comic performers, and I'm sure kids love them. But there didn't appear to be much substance to the show.

It confirmed my long-held opinion that children these days get a pretty raw deal when it comes to Saturday morning TV.

What happened to the high quality children's telly that this country was producing a couple of decades ago? Swap Shop, Saturday Superstore, Live and Kicking, even Tiswas -- all were popular programmes designed for young eyes which managed to combine fun with a sense of responsibility.

Sandwiched between the pop videos and celebrity guests were items on things like environmental issues and children's books.

There was a slot on Saturday Superstore that dealt with sensitive subjects, from acne and boyfriends to more serious issues like bullying and family problems.

Presenter Sarah Green was like a capable big sister as she and a psychologist gave advice to young viewers who wrote in with problems.

And it wasn't 1950s-style public information. The programmes were light and fun to watch, the presenters were matey, often a bit wacky, but you knew they had it all under control.

I think children need that safety net. These days it's difficult to tell the difference between the babes and pretty boys passing as presenters (they're more for hungover students tuning in than the pre-teens) and the pop starlets saturating their shows.

Stick-thin models trying to talk "street" are fairly ridiculous role models for children. And self-indulgent TV producers who put these people in front of the cameras to give their shows a tabloid buzz are losing sight of the fact that their programmes are an influence on children in their formative years.

I'm not hankering for the black and white days of Watch with Mother or early Blue Peter.

I'm all for fun on Saturday morning telly; silly comic sketches, cartoons, and custard pies being chucked around.

And yes, pop stars have their place on children's TV.

But these days it offers little else than a manufactured anarchy of daft games, pouting presenters, and pop acts miming badly and writhing inappropriately.

The only guests are conveyor-belt clones plugging records, saying what their publicists tell them to.

And at the end of the day it's pretty poor live telly because it's all so contrived and polished.

Say what you like about the day when Jarvis Cocker turned up on Live and Kicking hungover and dishevelled, or that time when someone swore at Five Star during the phone-in, but at least the programmes had a sense of being live.

What about the kids who, God forbid, are interested in something other than throwaway music? Isn't it patronising and a little sad to feed children a diet of pure pop when their young souls may actually be craving something with a bit more substance?

When you see someone inspiring, like a great explorer, a sportsman, or a wildlife expert being interviewed as a child, it can stay with you for the rest of your life.

Can the same be said of Girls Aloud or that bloke out of Blue?