• Welcome, guest!

    This is a forum devoted to discussion of Wolverhampton Wanderers.
    Why not sign up and contribute? Registered members get a fully ad-free experience!

Jeremy Corbyn

I think the difference is that encouraging BAME is very blatant and more noticeable, where discrimination against isn’t blatant or noticeable.

Concession for younger and older people is there in all walks of life.

I think people have the right moral compass to know which one is worse, mind.

And on your second point, I know mate, I was just making a point that we make concessions for others but on this occasion because we are trying to encourage minorities to attend an event it's a bad thing.
 
I think people have the right moral compass to know which one is worse, mind.

And on your second point, I know mate, I was just making a point that we make concessions for others but on this occasion because we are trying to encourage minorities to attend an event it's a bad thing.

Yeah, I agree. Just giving a reason to why people might pick up on it more.

I don’t have a problem with giving concession to encourage a certain group of people who are not usually represented in something, whether that’s BAME, young, old, gay, lesbian or whatever.
 
Why not just do the whole thing free? Accessible to all with no question of bias.
 
Why not just do the whole thing free? Accessible to all with no question of bias.

Well, I think that would be the most positive solution as Johnny pointed out. But they have charged, and all they have done is make it slightly more accessible for a minority group.
 
Whole thing just seems weird to me, I imagine it's a pretty niche crowd that wants to go and watch a politician speak live anyway so would pricing really make that much of a difference? I mean people on here whinge about ticket pricing at various clubs at times but it doesn't really act as much of a deterrent in general does it? If people want to go then they find means to do so, if people don't then I doubt they'd be swayed by them knocking a bit off the price.

I just don't see it really having the desired effect, but then I don't really get the almost cult like following that politics attracts for people more engaged than myself, they may as well try and sell me a ticket to watch my Nan rimming a Gibbon as watch Corbyn give a speech.
 
Regardless of the rights or wrong, it was naive. There are other ways of encouraging different groups to attend without giving a free hit to the defenders of the oppressed white.

Maybe if the same people falling over themselves to be outraged by this showed a similar passion for eradicating inequality this wouldn’t be an issue anyway.
 
Just out of (dis)interest; how do they propose to test people's ethnicity? DNA test beforehand perhaps? Or is it just based on the colour of their skin? Or maybe their accent?
(divisive) Idiots.
 
Whole thing just seems weird to me, I imagine it's a pretty niche crowd that wants to go and watch a politician speak live anyway so would pricing really make that much of a difference? I mean people on here whinge about ticket pricing at various clubs at times but it doesn't really act as much of a deterrent in general does it? If people want to go then they find means to do so, if people don't then I doubt they'd be swayed by them knocking a bit off the price.

I just don't see it really having the desired effect, but then I don't really get the almost cult like following that politics attracts for people more engaged than myself, they may as well try and sell me a ticket to watch my Nan rimming a Gibbon as watch Corbyn give a speech.

If I could have been arsed to have posted on the subject it would probably have been pretty much this. Apart from the fact I would be first in line to buy a ticket to see your Nan rimming a gibbon. Or my Nan.
 
Over an hour has passed by and we still haven't concluded the nan to gibbon ratio ??
 
It is positive action and it is lawful under the Equality Act. The MP who is complaining about it is a member of the party that was in government when the Equality Act came in.

Positive action is lawful if it can be shown that it "enables or encourages people who share a protected characteristic to participate in an activity in which their participation is disproportionately low." So as long as it can be shown that historically BAME participation is disproportionately low at events like this it is legal and legitimate. I believe young people are also being charged less.

The Resolution Foundation found, in research from last year, that BAME families earn upto £8900 per year less than their white British counterparts.

Austerity/spending cuts also has a disproportionate impact on BAME according to many reports.

So we have a group of people who share the same characteristics, who reports show have less disposable income than their white counterparts and are likely to be disproportionately represented at events like this....and they are offered an incentive to attend and it has been criticised by a Tory MP, Andrew Bridgen, who while an MP was paid over £7000 per month by his own firm for 6 hour work a month while at the same time calling for a pay increase for MPs.

Last night the pricing was blasted by the equalities watchdog who hit out that “charging people different rates because of their race is unlawful discrimination” and demanded an explanation.

The Equality and Human Rights Commission added: “We will be writing to the Labour Party to ask them for their justification for this policy.”

Racism is racism whatever way you slice it.
 
Last night the pricing was blasted by the equalities watchdog who hit out that “charging people different rates because of their race is unlawful discrimination” and demanded an explanation.

The Equality and Human Rights Commission added: “We will be writing to the Labour Party to ask them for their justification for this policy.”

Racism is racism whatever way you slice it.

Congratulations on copying and pasting the above. They were not blasted by the Equalities Commission, that is journalistic licence. They were asked to justify their actions. Justification is a defence in Equalities legislation.

What you didn't copy and paste was what the party are now going to do which is look at other ways of achieving the same aims which is what I suggested they should have done.
 
Loving the faux outrage on this thread. Thought we might see a little less of it for a while, but it's good to see standards being kept up.
 
Congratulations on copying and pasting the above. They were not blasted by the Equalities Commission, that is journalistic licence. They were asked to justify their actions. Justification is a defence in Equalities legislation.

What you didn't copy and paste was what the party are now going to do which is look at other ways of achieving the same aims which is what I suggested they should have done.

Nod and a wink on the door then?
 
Loving the faux outrage on this thread. Thought we might see a little less of it for a while, but it's good to see standards being kept up.

I forgot you were only allowed to question something on this forum if you were a socialist (and not question anything that is socialist). Nothing like being inclusive and not at all defensive and snide. Keep up the good work comrade.
 
Back
Top