The Politics Thread 3.0

[Squinty]

I'm thinking all note worthy journalists must be on holiday because yeah, that is a huge thing to miss.

[BID0]

Where is the "dementia tax"?
Where is the fox hunting vote?
Where are the school breakfasts?
Why did they commit to keeping free TV licences for pensioners but have now said it might be scrapped in 2020?
Where is the guarantee to the pensions triple lock?
Where are the grammar schools?

That's just off of the top of my head.

But no, let's concentrate on non-commitments that were made by the party that isn't in power.

Going back to this, I just remembered another promise made by the Tories before the election.

Energy prices to be capped

Still it's not like that'll bite them in the arse, eh?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-40787555

Oh.

That's all very well but you need to hold other people to account to. Like that time Jeremy Corbyn said but didn't that he would write off all historical student debt. It even wasn't printed in the manifesto in black and white.

[Moggy]

Where is the "dementia tax"?
Where is the fox hunting vote?
Where are the school breakfasts?
Why did they commit to keeping free TV licences for pensioners but have now said it might be scrapped in 2020?
Where is the guarantee to the pensions triple lock?
Where are the grammar schools?

That's just off of the top of my head.

But no, let's concentrate on non-commitments that were made by the party that isn't in power.

Going back to this, I just remembered another promise made by the Tories before the election.

Energy prices to be capped

Still it's not like that'll bite them in the arse, eh?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-40787555

Oh.

That's all very well but you need to hold other people to account to. Like that time Jeremy Corbyn said but didn't that he would write off all historical student debt. It even wasn't printed in the manifesto in black and white.

It goes without saying that the real criminal here is Corbyn for not having the power to deliver something that he didn't promise.

[KK]

Amber Rudd opens a new Best One C-Store



https://www.thegrocer.co.uk/channels/co ... 65.article

All the important stuff.

[Squinty]

I think it's more likely that she's attacking ethnic minorities with a big pair of scissors.

[Lagamorph]

What the hell is a Best One C-store?

[PatSharpsMullet]

What the hell is a Best One C-store?

It's either a covienience store called Best One, or it's the place where Best One staff have to work if they aren't deemed good enough for their main stores or B-stores.

[Squinty]

What the hell is a Best One C-store?

It's either a covienience store called Best One, or it's the place where Best One staff have to work if they aren't deemed good enough for their main stores or B-stores.

So I guess they aren't the best ones for the job eh eh.

That was gooseberry fool. I'm sorry.

[KK]

This story from the Eastern Daily Press sending Mail readers into a tizzy over their cornflakes this morning...probably.

Volunteers at Felbrigg Hall have described their “heart break” after being forced away from their volunteering posts following the revelation that their beloved benefactor was homosexual.

Following the Prejudice and Pride campaign which saw the National Trust revealing more about the private lives of the former residents of their properties, volunteers at Felbrigg Hall have taken objection to the exposure of their benefactors’ sexuality.

When volunteers said they would not wear a badge and lanyard supporting the campaign, they were told “they would not be allowed face to face interaction with the public”, and so many went home.

Mike Holmes has volunteered at the Hall for 13 years, he said: “Wymondham-Cremer would’ve turned in his grave to know what’s happening. He was an intensely private man, he was never open about his sexuality.

“The National Trust looks after grounds and buildings, they do not have the right to research their benefactor’s private lives to suit the needs of a marketing campaign. It’s abhorrent.”

Mr Holmes, 72, continued: “This is not about the squire’s sexuality, I am not homophobic and that’s not what this is about,

“I have volunteered for 13 years at Felbrigg, I love it and I think nobody could say the volunteers aren’t the greatest advocates for the place.

“There’s a group of about 10 of us that have volunteered for more than 10 years, and we’ve now been told that if we don’t toe the line, we can’t do our jobs.

“People are getting ill over this, they’re losing sleep because they’re missing out on a big part of their daily lives and doing something they love so much.”

A spokesman for the National Trust said: “We are proud to share a fuller portrait of Robert Wyndham Ketton-Cremer and do not attach shame to his sexuality. The people we interviewed were clear that we weren’t ‘outing’ Robert Wyndham Ketton-Cremer because amongst those who knew him, this was widely accepted.


The south front of the Hall at Felbrigg Hall, Gardens and Estate, Norfolk. It was commonly known that Robert Wyndham Ketton-Cremer preferred to use the backdoor instead.

Annabel Smith, Head of Volunteering & Participation Development at the National Trust said: “All of our staff and volunteers sign up to our core ambition when they join us – we are an organisation that is for ever, for everyone. “Relating specifically to the Prejudice and Pride programme, we do recognise that some volunteers may have conflicting, personal opinions.

“However whilst volunteering for the National Trust we do request and expect individuals to uphold the values of the organisation.”

http://www.edp24.co.uk/news/felbrigg-vo ... -1-5132308

The humanity of it all.

[Moggy]

Everyone knows wearing a gay badge turns you gay.

[Squinty]

OMG this badge is so gay. This is not what it is about!!!!!

[captain red dog]

It's a bit of a fuss about nothing but I do feel it's an unnecessary way for the NT to be running that campaign. It should be entirely optional without forcing people to work behind the scenes.

[Moggy]

It's a bit of a fuss about nothing but I do feel it's an unnecessary way for the NT to be running that campaign. It should be entirely optional without forcing people to work behind the scenes.

Im stunned you feel that way.

The NT have backed down now.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-40837709

[KK]

I guess they didn't want to get bogged down in this whole gay hornets nest.

[captain red dog]

It's a bit of a fuss about nothing but I do feel it's an unnecessary way for the NT to be running that campaign. It should be entirely optional without forcing people to work behind the scenes.

Im stunned you feel that way.

The NT have backed down now.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-40837709

Not sure what you are implying, but I don't feel comfortable seeing people forced to support campaigns, even the campaigns I support. Just like I'd defend people who choose not to wear a poppy, that's their right to do so.

I support equal rights for LGBTQ, I support the poppy campaign, I support save the rain forests etc but I don't think people should be forced to show that support by wearing a badge or whatever is mandated. To me it cheapens the campaign if it's just a corporate mandated thing.

[Green Gecko]

I do kind of understand the idea of flaunting a private aspect of somebody's life (even when they're dead), if they chose to keep it private at that time. But it's still obviously "this badge is gay, I won't wear it" if it goes so far as to cause people to "lose sleep".

I think that's more likely to be a mix of inner turmoil than anything to do with the deceased. Is it even possible to respect somebody's private life after they are dead and become only fact and history?

"You shouldn't discuss things like that which are facts about what happened, as they are dead."

"Don't talk about the holocaust, those people are dead, it's disrespectful to talk about what really happened to them."

[Errkal]

I'm cool with them having posters up or a badge on infor signs and things, but you shouldn't force staff to wear a badge if they don't want to. It should have been optional for staff.

[Moggy]

It's a bit of a fuss about nothing but I do feel it's an unnecessary way for the NT to be running that campaign. It should be entirely optional without forcing people to work behind the scenes.

Im stunned you feel that way.

The NT have backed down now.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-40837709

Not sure what you are implying, but I don't feel comfortable seeing people forced to support campaigns, even the campaigns I support. Just like I'd defend people who choose not to wear a poppy, that's their right to do so.

I support equal rights for LGBTQ, I support the poppy campaign, I support save the rain forests etc but I don't think people should be forced to show that support by wearing a badge or whatever is mandated. To me it cheapens the campaign if it's just a corporate mandated thing.

I wasn't calling you a homophobe.

You tend to not see any "isms" or "phobia" when it comes to anything like this. So I'm not stunned that you are on the side of the people that don't want to wear a big gay badge.

I tend to actually agree with you that people shouldn't have to wear the badge, although the fuss they are making is a little silly.

[Hexx]

It's very simple.

Anyone who cares that much (Lodi g sleep!) about being forced to wear a Rainbow is a banana split and should have been ignored.

[Denster]

The Conservative Manifesto changes should surprise no one and are actually changes that there was a clamour for.
The manifesto was predicated on a majority (large one) being obtained. Now this hasn't been achieved - changes had to be made to allow for the fact that several unpopular facets of the manifesto would simply not have been passed or been practical/workable. It seems strange to me that those who have such a dislike for the very Tory policies they opposed are now complaining that they have had to change them. The election results moved the goalposts. The Tories have had to accept this new reality and what it entails.
Criticising Corbyn for something he alluded to is perfectly legitimate. Did he say explicitly that he would remove all Student debt. No.
Did he allude to the fact that he would attempt to do so or at least look at this issue - possibly.

Has he now backtracked a little. Yes he has.

But let's face it - it's not about that. Manifesto promises are often broken or changed as and when the governing party see fit. labour have done it and so have the Tories. That is how the world works. But that's not what people are bothered about. It's just another stick to beat the Tories with.

We'll never know how costed and wondrous the Labour Manifesto promises were because labour didn't win. Thankfully.