thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-08-30--Nursery Workers Reveal The Devastating Stories Of Children Hard-Hit By Lockdown

Dancing in a classroom during a Zoom workshop, there’s nothing about this group of toddlers that immediately reveals what they’ve been through in the last six months.
Ask them about their memories of lockdown, and many of the children – who attend a nursery school in Barking, east London – want to talk about the time they spent playing.
Advertisement
But last month, a simple tweet laid bare a reality that many had warned was coming.
June O’Sullivan, chief executive of the London Early Years Foundation (LEYF) group of nurseries shared a public appeal for support:
We are seeing lots of children without suitable shoes. Can you help? Please. https://t.co/yE1OPZEhsR — June O'Sullivan (@JuneOSullivan) July 19, 2020
“We were hearing things like ‘mummy says I must eat a lot at nursery today’,” O’Sullivan told HuffPost UK.
“We asked ‘have you had breakfast’ and would often hear ‘no’, and when we suggested having breakfast we would hear ‘yes please, I’m very hungry.’
Advertisement
“We had already had that before lockdown, but now we were beginning to see a pattern of it. And then nurseries started having children back who were still wearing their welly boots or their winter boots, so it was clear that some families were really tight in terms of finance.”
A play kitchen at Eastbury Nursery. HuffPost UK
LEYF is a social enterprise, running 39 nurseries across the capital and focusing on subsidising nursery places for children who would not otherwise be able to attend.
Fifteen nursery hubs were kept open during lockdown to support the city’s most vulnerable children – tightly defined by the government as including only children with social workers or EHCP plans in place.
But much of the work early years providers so as LEYF do actually revolves around trying to prevent children falling into the category of ‘vulnerable’ in the first place, via early intervention. Therefore, while nursery staff usually work with at-risk children, many of them fall outside the ‘vulnerable’ status and weren’t eligible to go attend their usual day centre sessions.
Advertisement
O’Sullivan said: “We were quite worried about their isolation, and we were also mindful of the fact that some parents who are really struggling with poverty and everything else often aren’t very confident, so they took the government’s messages on board at a very literal level.
“If you say ‘stay at home’, we knew they would literally stay at home – some families never left the house for almost the entire 12 weeks.”
Tina Georgiou, manager of the LEYF Eastbury Nursery and Pre-School in Barking explained how months of isolation had impacted young children, particularly those who had spent lockdown in particularly confined spaces.
She said: “I did a show-around recently with a little girl who was two, and her mum and dad said that prior to the lockdown she had been really sociable but they’d been in their flat for three months.
“During that three months the only person who had come in and left was dad, they didn’t leave at all.
Advertisement
“When they came to the nursery the two-year-old was wearing a mask, she came in so anxious that she couldn’t even look at anybody, she literally covered her eyes the entire time because she was so unused to being in any environment that wasn’t just with her two parents.”
Tanya Sawyer (left) and Tina Georgiou, pictured at Eastbury Nursery. HuffPost UK
Deputy manager Tanya Sawyer added: “I think it was like that for many children. They went from being in here five mornings, five afternoons a week – whatever they attend – to literally being stuck in their house or flat, not able to go anywhere or do anything. It was really difficult for a lot of them.”
As lockdown and the debate around schools reopening wore on, it was the parents who had strictly followed the lockdown advice who were most anxious about sending their young children back to nursery. By mid-July, only around 30% of LEYF’s most vulnerable children had returned.
““We knew the inequality was there, but now you couldn’t really avoid it. We knew it was there in the shadows because we work with it every day.”” - June O'Sullivan
Advertisement
Early years workers were able to stay in touch with some parents through the three foodbanks operated by LEYF throughout lockdown – but it was clear that something had to be done specifically to reach out further to children from the most deprived backgrounds.
As a minority of at-risk children began to return to nursery, it quickly became clear that the home situations of many had worsened through lockdown. Children were hungrier, were turning up in winter boots despite the mid-summer heat, and many had lost months of progress they had achieved prior to the pandemic.
In response, LEYF managed to secure funding to run two free summer schools catered towards promoting the health – physical, mental and emotional – of their children.
Georgiou explained that while some children had come back having developed their skills, a gap had emerged where others had regressed in their learning.
“I’m not going to lie to you and say they’ve now gone down to a one-year-old and they were at a three-year-old’s level, but there is definitely that gap,” she said.
Advertisement
“The boundaries and behaviours of children have changed – they’ll be more anxious and easily upset whereas they were maybe a lot more robust before.”
The children at Eastbury come from a broad spectrum of backgrounds – some more affluent than others. The relentless nature of the lockdown, particularly in its earlier stages, and the abrupt severance from their daily routines saw children struggle to cope.
Father-of-two Tony Savage works as a cook at Eastbury Nursery, where his two-year-old son Aidan also spends two days a week. He was furloughed for part of lockdown, but returned as the summer school scheme began.
“I can’t even remember how long I was at home, eight or 10 weeks – it was very difficult,” he said. “I’ve got a nine-year-old as well and they were both getting really frustrated.
Tony Savage with his son Aidan, 2. HuffPost UK
Advertisement
“It was the start of lockdown when you couldn’t go anywhere, couldn’t even really go to the parks so I had them both trapped indoors the whole time. It got to the point where at about two o’clock in the afternoon my two-year-old would just throw his shoes and shout ‘walk’ at me.”
But while some families from deprived areas suffered more through some elements of lockdown, Georgiou explained, the extent to which children were able to continue developing throughout lockdown couldn’t solely be determined by how affluent they are.
“When we’re talking about vulnerable children we’re not just talking about children on child protection registers, we’re talking about ‘vulnerable’ right across the board and missing those three months – that gap in their education and social experiences.
“Some of our parents are in a position where they’re less affluent or technology-based, so they’ll turn on the TV or give them a tablet. While they’re at nursery the children really get used to not having that.
“We sent home lots of things to enable them to play as they would in nursery – even recipes for play dough for the kids to use.”
Advertisement
Nursery staff didn’t just fill the educational gap left by Covid-19. LEYF runs several foodbanks, which help parents facing a huge – and growing – strain on their finances, and workers even stepped in to help parents buy staples like pasta and toilet roll that became difficult to find in the early days of the pandemic.
O’Sullivan said: “We saw a lot of resilience, a lot of joy and a lot of joyful children – but that’s just one side of it. On the other side are these children who have been locked up for 12, 14 weeks who haven’t got access to good nutrition or additional learning activities and are therefore at a disadvantage at every level.
The garden area at Eastbury Nursery. HuffPost UK
“It’s not because of what they are, it’s because they’ve been born into a family in poverty. All it has done for me is just highlighted the inequality.
“The thing with working with small children is they’re like a litmus test for society. You can see all the problems in society manifested in small children and it touches on everything – health, the economy, emotional wellbeing, family dynamics, the workplace. It’s really sad to see the division between the rich and the poor becoming so evident.
Advertisement
“We knew the inequality was there, but now you couldn’t really avoid it. We knew it was there in the shadows because we work with it every day.”
But summer schools won’t fix the huge crisis facing the early years sector as a whole. Research published by The Sutton Trust in July showed that some 36% of nurseries in the country’s most deprived areas could close as a result of Covid-19, with parents finding themselves unable to manage notoriously expensive childcare costs amid the steepest recession on record.
Both leaders in the childcare sector and parents alike have long called for an overhaul of the UK’s approach to early years care and education, but Covid-19 has called the need into even sharper relief.
O’Sullivan said: “There needs to be a national strategy around childcare, and get people to understand the benefits to society if we all invest in early years provision. Whether you have children or not we all depend on the next generation to some extent.
“The funding structure needs to be looked at because currently the universal offer goes all the way up to people who earn £150,000. I would cap that and redistribute it to those people who earn much less.
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-08-30--How The UK’s Broken Asylum System Fails Channel Migrants And Creates Public Backlash

HuffPost is part of Verizon Media .
We and our partners will store and/or access information on your device through @ @ @ @ @ similar technologies , to display personalised ads and content , for ad and content measurement @ @ @ @ @ development .
Your personal data that may be used • Information about your device and @ @ @ @ @ IP address • Browsing and search activity while using Verizon Media websites and apps Find @ @ @ @ @ use your information in our Privacy Policy and Cookie Policy .
To enable Verizon Media @ @ @ @ @ your personal data select ' I agree ' , or select 'Manage settings ' for @ @ @ @ @ your choices .
You can change your choices at any time by visiting Your Privacy @ @

A Border Force vessel assist a group of people thought to be migrants on board from their inflatable dinghy in the Channel on August 10 2020. ASSOCIATED PRESS
“I was reading about the Windrush generation and tears came into my eyes, because when you know the truth, and you see it happening to someone else, you get really upset, really emotional,” says Nas, who fled Afghanistan for the UK aged 13 after his father, brother and sister were killed by the Taliban.
In many ways, his story encapsulates Britain’s broken asylum system – perilously smuggled overland from his home country across Asia and Europe to the UK, finally arriving in the back of a refrigerated lorry he was forced into by people smugglers in Calais.
Advertisement
After turning 18, Nas spent six years battling through the byzantine and hostile British asylum system, which at one point left him so low that he was losing his hair and contemplating suicide.
It is a story of desperation and a system which fails people fleeing war and persecution before they even reach the UK, and then grinds them down when they are here, only making it harder for them to integrate and undermining public confidence.
Home secretary Priti Patel has responded to this summer’s upsurge in Channel boat crossings by suggesting the Navy should be sent in and reportedly promising an overhaul of the system which will “send the left into meltdown”.
Here’s everything we know.
Why are people coming across the Channel?
It’s important to distinguish here between asylum seekers, like Nas, who are fleeing war or persecution, and economic migrants who are simply seeking a better life.
Advertisement
According to the UNHCR’s Laura Padoan, most of the people arriving on boats are from Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Sudan, Eritrea or other countries in conflict or where there are human rights abuses “so they are likely to be granted refugee status”.
How many people are making the journey?
Many people still question why these people are coming to Britain instead of claiming asylum in other safe countries, such as France, where many spend time in camps.
UK Border Force officials transfer migrants in a patrol vessel after they were intercepted while travelling in a RIB from France to Dover, at the Marina in Dover on August 14, 2020 BEN STANSALL via Getty Images
But as an island nation isolated from the mass migration flows into eastern and southern Europe, the UK takes in far fewer asylum seekers than the likes of France or Germany.
There were 35,000 or so in the UK last year, and with about five applications for every 10,000 people compared to 14 across the EU.
Advertisement
Padoan says the Channel crossings are a “relatively new” phenomenon partly driven by the coronavirus-enforced reduction in lorry traffic, which offers a far less visible but still dangerous route for those seeking sanctuary in the UK.
More than 4,000 have arrived by boat this year, but Padoan says: “Essentially people aren’t really coming to the UK in big numbers.”
Jeff Crisp, of the Oxford University Refugee Studies Centre, adds: “The numbers might look big on the front page of the Daily Mail but in a global perspective they are tiny.”
Why the UK?
Experts almost unanimously stress that asylum seekers often pick the UK because of cultural, family and language ties.
Some, especially unaccompanied children, some of whom are currently being held by Border Force in Kent as the council has reached its capacity for proper care, may simply be brought here without having a say.
Advertisement
But Crisp warns that the UK is seen as a “relatively easy place to live in the shadows” even if your asylum claim is refused.
“You can find work in the informal sector, in ethnic minority economies, we don’t have an ID card system,” he says.
“In a country like Sweden it’s virtually impossible to live as an irregular migrant because your documentation and ID is demanded at every step of the way.
“The UK has moved to some extent in that direction but there still seems to be a sense that it’s a country in which you can just about survive without having documented status, more so than in other countries.”
For Nas, he spoke no English and had no idea where he was going when his mother told him to follow a people smuggler away from his village in Afghanistan following deadly night raids by the Taliban which claimed his families’ lives.
Advertisement
He was simply passed from smuggler to smuggler until he reached Calais, and then forced into a refrigerated lorry bound for Dover.
“I didn’t want to go in but this guy just grabbed me and took me in by force, hit me over the head,” he says.
So has the UK got its response right this summer?
Many experts are scathing of Patel and the Home Office’s suggestion that the Navy could be sent into the Channel.
Home secretary Priti Patel. PA
“That was deeply concerning,” says Padoan. “Because first of all the suggestions were [to use] these 42m long cutters to meet a small dinghy in rough water, that could result in further loss of life, you are making a situation more dangerous.”
Advertisement
Colin Yeo, a leading immigration barrister and author of Welcome to Britain: Fixing Our Broken Immigration System, says it does not even make sense.
“People just aren’t thinking this through,” he says.
“Is the Navy going to tow a dinghy into French waters and effectively invade France and take these people back without French agreement?
“Are they going to barricade so people can’t get through and then they just drown?
“Some people who are advocating this are just not thinking at all about this, it’s just soundbites and jingoistic nonsense really.”
The Home Office, however, stresses that the UK’s armed forces have good experience of dealing with humanitarian situations, and have previously worked to save migrants crossing the Mediterranean.
“Are they going to barricade so people can’t get through and then they just drown?” - Colin Yeo, a leading immigration barrister and author, on the threat to send in the Navy
Advertisement
The wider response by politicians and the public has also drawn criticism.
Tory MP Sarah Atherton was singled out for describing those travelling across the Channel as “economic migrants” who should stay in France and seek asylum there.
Crisp described Atherton’s claims as “ridiculous”.
“On the one hand the idea there’s a queue that people can join is a fallacious one in the first place and secondly there are good reasons why people would prefer to come to the UK rather than remain in France,” he says.
Nas, who now earns £900 a month working for KFC, describes the political response as “absolutely unacceptable”.
“People are commenting saying they are only coming here for benefits,” he says.
“Let me tell you about myself – since I got status I haven’t taken a single benefit, I haven’t taken anything, I am working hard here – I pay £400 for my flat, I pay £70 for my council tax.
“I work hard, I come home, I rest, then I go back to work.
“What those people are saying is absolutely shocking.
“They are not coming for benefits, they are coming for safety here.”
So what needs to be done?
Momentum is growing behind demands for more safe and legal routes for genuine refugees as a way of helping to reduce the number of dangerous journeys.
Advertisement
Padoan stresses that the Syrian vulnerable person relocation scheme which brought in around 25,000 refugees directly from their home region between 2014 and 2019 was a success, and the Home Office is planning to expand it to other nations from next year, while keeping numbers capped at around 5,000 a year.
But despite that scheme running, dangerous crossings have still been made and there are calls for the establishment of new routes.
“It is certainly one way of addressing the problem of people having to resort to smuggling networks and paying huge amounts of money and making very dangerous journeys,” says Padoan.
Isabella Mosselmans, a lawyer for the charity Safe Passage, meanwhile warns that existing safe routes will be closed down once the Brexit transition period ends on December 31.
The UK has been trying to negotiate an agreement with Brussels for a mutual system of returns of asylum seekers but is struggling to get anywhere amid faltering negotiations.
Advertisement
A failure to reach a deal would see another existing safe route – under so-called Dublin regulations – closed down.
“They are criticising people and attacking people for using unsafe routes to cross to the UK while they are simultaneously closing down one of the only safe and legal routes at the end of this year,” Mosselmans says.
“It’s disgraceful and hypocritical.”
But safe routes may not be the answer
The logic behind the drive for safe and legal routes is clear to see – it essentially disrupts smugglers’ business model.
But some experts do not believe it is a silver bullet.
Yeo warns that “the reality is we are never going to take all the people who do want to come”.
He suggests the creation of safe routes, for example allowing asylum seekers to apply while in France, could encourage dangerous journeys across the Mediterranean and continental Europe.
“I haven’t seen research and evidence it would really put people off risking their lives unless you are talking about taking a very substantial number of people by those safe and legal routes, but I don’t think that’s really on the cards,” he says.
Advertisement
Crisp also has reservations and says there must still be a decent and humane way of dealing with people who arrive in the UK spontaneously and claim asylum.
“There’s also a risk that you go down the Australian line,” he says. “That you set up a very small programme for safe and legal routes and then you demonise anyone who arrives spontaneously by saying they should have joined the queue.”
Ultimately, Yeo says Patel is right “in some ways” to make it “undesirable” for people to make dangerous journeys across the Channel.
He suggests that safe and legal routes could be combined with an agreement with France to return people crossing in boats.
“All this stuff about ‘take back control’, ‘strengthen our borders’ – our borders are much more complicated than that in the modern world and it requires cooperation with other countries to enforce it,” he says.
Advertisement
What about when people get here?
Patel is also looking to make substantial changes to the way asylum seekers are treated once they reach the UK as part of what Home Office sources are calling a “reset moment” on immigration when the Brexit transition period ends on December 31.
The home secretary is understood to be frustrated with the growing delays and backlogs in the system, with more than 43,000 cases outstanding at the end of 2018, the highest number since 2010.
Home Office sources blame “activist lawyers” and “economic migrants” for trying to game the system, causing delays and undermining confidence in the system.
And HuffPost UK understands that Patel will look to ensure asylum seekers cannot enter new claims for protection on different grounds to their first attempt, if that has failed.
But last year the department dropped its own target for making decisions on asylum claims within the first months.
Advertisement
Padoan, of the UNHCR, blamed the Home Office for making poor initial decisions, which appear to be backed by statistics which show around a third of appeals were successful in cases resolved in 2018.
She says the asylum system is not “fair and efficient” as people are “left in limbo for years and years waiting on a decision”.
“If that improved people wouldn’t need to resort to the appeals system and judicial review,” she says.
“It’s about investment in Home Office decision-making.”
Either way, delays can undermine confidence in the system as asylum seekers are largely unable to work and often rely on state handouts while their claims are dealt with.
It can also drive them into exploitation and the shadow economy, and the situation may be partly to blame for polls which suggest nearly half the British public has little or no sympathy with asylum seekers who cross the Channel.
Advertisement
A more hostile environment is not the answer
While all sides agree reform is needed, many experts believe the hostile approach taken towards asylum seekers creates a “toxic” atmosphere that harms both them and the country as a whole.
Yeo says: “Asylum seekers in the UK get treated really very badly, they get put through this demanding, hostile asylum process, in the meantime they get very limited support – £39 a week now, a fraction of income support.
“They get put in squalid accommodation, they are not allowed to study, they get fractured around the country away from their communities and it’s pretty traumatic for them.
“That’s kind of okayish if you decide their claims really quickly but if you spend ages deciding their claims it just becomes completely unacceptable and they get really badly traumatised by what goes on.
“And then actually they get allowed to stay at which point they are expected to successfully integrate.
Advertisement
“But their lives have already been ruined by the experience of what they have been put through and they are permanently handicapped by the way they got treated when they first arrived.”
Nas was forced to wait six years before eventually being given his status, eating up Home Office time and taxpayer money in interviews, claims and appeals.
He found court hearings he had been waiting months for adjourned on the day for another few months, and said the questions he was asked in some of his interviews with officials were “unbelievable” – such as being asked to recall specific events from nearly a decade prior.
At one interview, he remembers having to correct an official’s report on his answers because it was “completely wrong”. Fortunately he had a recording of the interview to prove his point of view.
And he felt judges were biased towards Home Office lawyers.
He says of his battle for legal status: “What they put me through affected me in various ways and I didn’t know what to do.
Advertisement
“Even if they get here it’s not going to be easy for some of them, it’s going to be years and years.
“It makes people mentally and physically tired, they can’t even support themselves financially because they can’t get a job, they won’t be able to pay tax to contribute to the country, so they won’t be part of the community.
“I felt I wasn’t part of the community because the Home Office treated me very badly.”
“It makes people mentally and physically tired, they can’t even support themselves financially because they can’t get a job, they won’t be able to pay tax to contribute to the country” - Nas, who waited six years to be granted asylum, on the lengthy and hostile process
What about those who aren’t genuine asylum seekers?
Patel is also keen to speed up and increase the number of deportations of people who are not genuine asylum seekers.
Crisp agrees that the government’s failure to remove people is “quite a big issue”, while Yeo says the 6,500 or so deported last year is a “tiny number compared to an overall unauthorised population that is estimated to lie somewhere between about 600,000 and 1.2m”.
“The fact that you claim asylum and even if you lose your case you are not removed, that’s not helpful for public confidence,” Yeo says.
Advertisement
The government should look at periodic amnesties for illegal immigrants, as happened periodically under New Labour, as a way of at least bringing these people into the system, Yeo says.
At the moment, the hostile environment, with lawyers, banks and others being asked to check immigration status, is in fact “a tacit admission people aren’t being removed and they are actually being allowed to stay in the UK but with no status and no access to services”.
“There’s no evidence it actually drives people out, it’s a way of tolerating their presence in the country, which is not a very desirable public policy,” he says.
“Having a lot of people with no status – they are very vulnerable to exploitation and modern slavery and it is just not good for society.”
Ultimately, Patel needs to show leadership.
“Part of the toxic political culture is a lack of political leadership,” Crisp says.
“It’s far easier for politicians to come out with outrageous statements about how these people are really economic migrants and exploiting the system, rather than taking a lead and trying to offer constructive alternatives.
Advertisement
“Because it’s toxic it’s very difficult for any politician to step outside that framework and say: let’s take a rational look at this and come up with some constructive proposals.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-08-30--I'm A 73-Year-Old Black Woman. Here's How I've Kept Hope Alive For A Better Future

The author in 2020 Courtesy of Pearl Alice Marsh
Witnessing recent police violence and racial strife swallowing our cities and towns, I’ve been tempted to cave into feeling like we’ve all been duped by the so-called promise of America. Once more in history, reactionary white supremacists and their allies have risen to crush African American aspirations.
With all of my accomplishments, I’m still compelled at times to feel tired and hopeless. I have both a master’s degree in public health and a doctorate in political science from the University of California, Berkeley. I’m retired from a great professional career in public health and foreign policy. And yet, I’m still tempted to discount not only my own personal accomplishments, but at times those of my people and the nation under the crushing weight of hatred. It has taken a long time — over a century and a half — for a Civil War and social activism to get us where we are.
Advertisement
Because of that continuous agitation, I can still muster some hope. My life has included participation in the civil rights movement, anti-war movement, Black students movement, farmworkers movement, feminist movement, anti-apartheid movement, and Central American solidarity movement. I learned that as long as good people rise to resist hate, the promise of America, rooted in the Constitution and rule of law, lives. I also learned that proponents of racism and white supremacy reinvent their ideologies and organisations and (re)perpetrate hateful resistance to change. So the struggle does not end ― even with significant political and social victories.
As a Black girl, my “American dream” was filtered by my parents through a realist prism. They raised me to aim for my highest potential, but, they were pragmatists. They cautioned that striving to reach the American dream would not be a cakewalk for a Black girl. It required navigating the unjust gauntlet of racism and female vulnerability. Discrimination had to be fought and, with each victory, the wounds allowed to heal and fade as I readied myself for the next confrontation.
“You will have to work twice as hard to get half as far as a white child,” I was told.
What white child born in 1946 was so instructed by her or his parents?
The author (third from the right) with her primary Sunday school class at the Assembly of God Church in Wallowa, Oregon, in 1950. Courtesy of Pearl Alice Marsh
They also schooled me that, regardless of what I achieved, it was my duty to uplift my race. A powerful binary choice guided my journey: “You can only be one of two things ― a credit to the race or a disgrace to the race.”
Advertisement
Beginning in the early 1950s, in the sawmill town of Wallowa, Oregon, my parents — a log cutter and his wife — and working class neighbors and friends, both Black and white, started me along my journey through painful encounters with racism and celebrated my triumphs.
In 1953, when I was in second grade, my classmates were invited to join the Brownies, the Girl Scout group for girls ages seven to 10. When I showed up to join with my 50-cent fee in hand, some white mothers objected and I was turned away. But one mother fought them. She formed a new 4-H club chapter for girls, came to our home and personally asked my mother if I could join. When white mothers complained, she told them if I was the only girl in 4-H, that’s how it would be. They grumbled but let their daughters join.
In the summer of 1958, when I turned 12, we moved to Grass Valley, an old all-white mining town in northern California historically inhospitable to African Americans. To find a home, my father had to rent a house from the state that was due for demolition some years out, since no local white person would rent to us. When the demolition time came, a local Quaker family purchased and resold to us a home to live in. The house had a historic racial covenant in the deed but by that time was unenforceable under California state law.
After graduating from high school in 1964, I enrolled at Sacramento State College. I was the only African American girl in the dormitory. My second year, several white friends and I decided to rent an apartment. Because of housing discrimination, landlords would not rent to the group if I were included due to the color of my skin. After a number of attempts, my friends apologised and move on with their plan to move off campus. One of them, who knew better, moved in with them but invited me to meet her mother, an activist in the Democratic Party working on housing discrimination under the Rumford Fair Housing Act. That was the beginning of my political life.
As a political science graduate student at Berkeley in 1975, I was counselled by peers on which professors to avoid. Some were aggressively anti-affirmative action and derided every minority student’s enrolment as a diminution of their merit system. But thankfully, there were also decent faculty mentors who guided me on the path to earn my degrees.
Advertisement
The author when she was a graduate student at the University of California, Berkeley, in 1984. Courtesy of Pearl Alice Marsh
Ensuing decades in various workspaces had highs and lows. When I was first hired in 1973 as a mental health planner in Alameda County, California, one of the supervisors told me I was the most qualified but a young white man, given a lesser job, was told I got it instead of him because of affirmative action. I went ahead and did my job well in spite of the claim.
Through 50 years of activism, there was intramovement racism and sexism to contend with. At Sacramento State College, my undergraduate school, women held the Black Students Union together while men took the lead with bullhorns in front of the marches and cameras.
During the height of the Black Student Movement, we invited the Oakland Black Panthers to speak on campus. We pooled our student money and made reservations at a fine Italian restaurant. They were in no mood. When we had to translate the menu for them, they railed at us as “bougie bitches” and “educated fools.” And there was Ron Karenga’s group, Us, that in part blamed Black women for some Black men feeling inferior.
Throughout all of those years, I celebrated both personal and national victories that had a positive impact on my community. Discriminatory housing was banned in California, federal civil and voting rights legislation became law, California farmworkers were unionised, South Africa and El Salvador were liberated, Black studies became a college major across the country, and women entered formerly all-male spaces to break the gender barrier.
Advertisement
The author with United Nations peacekeeping forces in Guinea, West Africa, in 2000. Courtesy of Pearl Alice Marsh
The lessons I learned from all of my experiences with racism and discrimination is to find allies and never give up. Through struggle comes change, as slow as it may seem. I also learned that changes that may seem small today were transformational when they happened. Ultimately, all change depends on never giving up.
And so, in 2020, as we move into yet another round of resistance, I will continue to fight for change. I have taught the next generation and the baby generation after them in our family that it’s their duty to agitate while opening doors for themselves and others. After all, with permanent struggle, over the past 155 years since the legal end of our enslavement ― when we were declared property and not human ― there has been “progress,” though incomplete and insufficient.
At this point in my life, my hope is limited by the urgency of time. I know I will not see the America I was promised. But my hope, based in racial pragmatism and American idealism, is a legacy of clear-eyed optimism I will pass on to keep future generations of my family and my community striving until we get there.
Pearl Alice Marsh is retired with a distinguished 30-year career in public health and U.S. African foreign policy. She is the first African American woman to earn a doctorate in political science from the University of California, Berkeley. This article first appeared on HuffPost Personal.
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-08-30--The Pandemic Put Our Grief On Hold. Here's How We're Coping

LOADING ERROR LOADING
We’re here to guide you through the coronavirus pandemic. Sign up to the Life newsletter for daily tips, advice, how-tos and escapism.
For most of us, lockdown paused life as we know it – but for Kelly Penny, it was yet another devastating blow.
Advertisement
Just weeks before the prime minister’s landmark announcement on March 23, Kelly’s husband Steve had been diagnosed with terminal cancer. He had no real symptoms other than a lack of appetite and weight loss, which the couple put down to stress. But worsening abdominal pain took them to hospital. Not long after, they were told Steve had oesophageal cancer – and it had spread.
“It was completely out of the blue,” says Kelly, 41, who lives in Poole and is an emergency care assistant for the ambulance service. She was signed off work and the couple – who met nine years ago and married in 2014 – spent a few weeks ticking off activities on Steve’s bucket list. They held a house party with friends, went to Liverpool to watch the football, and attended a Francis Rossi talk (with Steve a massive fan of Status Quo).
But all of that came to a grinding halt with lockdown – their remaining plans were cancelled and they were alone in their home, aside from the odd visit from a healthcare professional and their parents popping by. “I felt like we were left to our own devices,” she says. “It was almost like Steve was left waiting to die.”
Steve passed away at home on April 9, six weeks after his diagnosis. He was 47 years-old.
Kelly Penny Kelly and Steve.
Advertisement
The nation was only three weeks into lockdown at this point, and months later, Kelly says it feels as though her grief is still “on hold”. The pandemic changed almost every aspect of our lives – and that includes the way people mourn.
It’s been a busy period for bereavement counsellor Nora Allali-Carling, who runs the counselling practice Your Life Matters. For some people, she says, the stages of grief have been “amplified”. Others haven’t even felt able to begin.
This may be because many didn’t get to say goodbye to the person they loved – especially if they died in a care home or hospital. “There are real issues with denial,” she says. “They don’t feel they can mourn their loved one yet because it’s all so abnormal. It doesn’t feel real.”
The sense of loss is “really, really extraordinary”, she stresses. “because they’ve also lost their last minutes, hours and days with their loved ones. They’ve lost the opportunity to begin grieving and the farewell – they didn’t get to say goodbye.”
““Normally, when you’ve lost your husband – especially being quite young – you’d have your family and friends swarming around you."” - Kelly Penny
Advertisement
At the height of lockdown, councils limited the number of mourners at funerals, there were delays to memorial services, and people weren’t able to see their support networks until weeks or months after their loss. “While grief is challenging at any time anyway, being in lockdown with Covid-19 has hugely impacted the process of people’s mourning,” says Allali-Carling.
Kelly found the isolation of lockdown particularly challenging, saying she feels like she’s “been kept at arms length” in terms of support. The grieving process has been “drawn out” by not being able to see all her family and friends – let alone her colleagues – since her husband’s death.
“Normally, in that sort of situation where you’ve lost your husband – especially being quite young – you’d have your family and friends swarming around you,” she says. “Losing somebody in normal days, without a pandemic, is probably the worst moment of your life. But there’s almost been a cruelness to it, not being allowed the normality of grieving where you have the people around.”
Natalypaint via Getty Images
“The coronavirus pandemic has made it an incredibly distressing time to be bereaved,” says Andy Langford, clinical director at Cruse Bereavement Care.
Advertisement
“For many, their grief will have been put on hold. This can have a profound impact on the grieving process. When you feel you have no control over how you can grieve, and over how you can experience those last moments with someone, that can complicate how you grieve.”
Rebecca Cooper, chief executive of Widowed and Young (WAY), agrees that the isolation of bereavement has been made worse by lockdown restrictions.
“Many of our members who have been widowed during the pandemic have struggled with not being able to see friends and family,” she says. “Many have told us that not being able to have a hug from friends or family is really difficult.”
Cathryn Hugill, 50, knows this all too well. Her partner Jay Thompson died by suicide in February this year, after suffering with his mental health. He was 49.
Hugill, who is based in the north east of England and worked as a tutor prior to the pandemic, struggled in the aftermath of Jay’s death – particularly when lockdown hit. “It was hard getting the GPs’ support,” she says. “They were preparing for lockdown and most of their contact was via the phone.”
Advertisement
“No one else lives in my house, so I didn’t have a ‘bubble’. Counselling also had to be remote – no more face-to-face contact.” - Cathryn Hugill
Cathryn and Jay’s sister relied heavily on each other for comfort in the aftermath of his death – each knowing the pain the other was in. But when lockdown happened, they could no longer see each other. All communication moved to phone calls or text messages. “I felt that I was facing the whole thing on my own,” says Cath. “No one else lives in my house, so I didn’t have a ‘bubble’. Counselling also had to be remote – no more face-to-face contact.”
The alienation of lockdown was intense and meant she had nowhere to hide from her feelings. She couldn’t channel her focus into anything else other than the way she felt. “I was a mess,” she says. “I’d do as much as I could, which was normally just sorting my dogs out, a shower, trying to connect with the world through Facebook.
“I drank far too much. I would drink until I cried and cried, screamed and, at some point, I would pass out. Just thinking about how hard that was and the pain and hurt I felt and still feel, still makes me cry.”
Cathryn Hugill Cath and Jay
Advertisement
Reflecting back on that time, she now sees aspects of lockdown in a more positive light. “I’ve realised that facing my grief and my pain has been helpful, although it scared the life out of me – at the beginning I didn’t know if I’d survive it or not. I’ve realised that hiding from it, whether that be going to the gym or getting drunk, doesn’t help. It’s still there.”
Her counsellor has helped her to face her grief head on, she says. “I couldn’t distract myself or my thoughts – I had to face them. I would make notes, we would talk about how the week had been, ways to cope and things to read too.”
Following Steve’s death, Kelly Penny went to stay with her parents despite the strict lockdown restrictions, and after three weeks, her mum came back to stay with her in their house. “I have had the odd friend sleeping over since we’ve been allowed a social bubble,” she adds.
Steve’s funeral was tough because they were only allowed limited numbers and couldn’t hold a wake. “I feel blessed that we could have 30 [people there] but it still wasn’t the 150+ people that I expected to be at his funeral,” she says.
“It upset me Steve couldn’t have the proper funeral procession. His coffin came in the hearse for one last journey from our home address. I wanted the whole procession where they walk in front of the car, but that wasn’t allowed,” she says, her voice wavering.
Advertisement
“They weren’t allowed to carry his coffin into the crematorium so I managed to get my family to do that for me. It’s the little things you would take for granted on a normal funeral, but those little things aren’t able to happen.”
Supplied Kelly and Steve on their wedding day.
These have been two of the hardest parts of grieving during lockdown, says Allali-Carling – not being able to say goodbye to loved ones in person, but also not being able to give them the send off they deserve,
Clients have described to her a sense of letting down the person they lost: “How could I not send my dad off? How wasn’t I able to give my sister the funeral she deserved?” Lockdown meant people had to do the best they could with what they had – but that doesn’t take away the guilt they might be feeling.
“The whole ritual of the funeral is quite an important part of the grieving process, so having limited numbers, having social distancing, not being able to be physical with people at the end, the lack of flowers – it all feels quite cold,” says Allali-Carling “If you’re burying a loved one, it’s someone that everyone’s loved, and lived to love. It’s very difficult to reconcile that cold, inhumane process with losing a loved one.”
Advertisement
Allali-Carling has spoken to other counsellors who have all noticed an increase in symptoms of poor mental health among bereaved clients .Sometimes the grief has come out as anger (breaking and smashing things is common) or depression. In some cases, it’s manifested as physical pain.
For people with an existing history of mental health issues, it can trigger alcohol and substance abuse, as well as eating disorders, she adds – a lot of clients will say they eat to comfort themselves.
Kelly is signed off work until October but she’s made a decision that she has to go back by then for the sake of her mental health. “If I leave it any longer, I’m going to be quite anxious about going back,” she says.
But she’s already apprehensive. “I think in a way, I’m delaying the grief,” she says, “because when people see me at work, I’m going to have the sympathy looks, and it’s almost like you’re opening up a wound again.”
Cath is also struggling with this. She took redundancy so she wouldn’t have to go back. Instead, she’s looking to start her own business. “It’s like I’ve got to face a lot of things all over again – or a lot of things that didn’t happen initially because lockdown came so soon afterwards. I’ve healed a little through lockdown, but also hurt a lot again now too,” she says. “I know I’m not ready to face the job I had.”
Advertisement
While both women have been been having phone counselling, Kelly says she would have felt more comfortable with face-to-face support. But Covid-19 made this impossible, too.
She’s had five sessions so far. “I don’t find they necessarily give me a coping mechanism or any strategies as such, but it does allow me to talk about what’s happened,” she says. “I’m almost like a pressure cooker – in between my counselling sessions things bubble up and I manage to release the pressure by having a good cry and a rant down the phone to my counsellor.”
The normality she desperately craves still seems miles away. And even when there is some semblance of routine to return to, she realises that for her it won’t be normal without Steve. “You can’t get back to normal because normal isn’t out there at the moment,” she says. “I’m never going to get my normal back.”
In absence of the funeral she hoped her husband would have, she is planning a memorial service so that extended friends and family can pay their respects. Her hope is that it will be able to go ahead next year – but even the process of planning it is up in the air as we wait for news of a Covid-19 vaccine.
“I wonder once it’s gone past a year of his death, will people still want to come to his memorial service?” she asks. “Will he still be in their thoughts that far on? I wonder if I’ll be holding a memorial service that not as many people come to because time has moved on.”
Advertisement
Supplied Kelly and Steve
In the sea of sadness, there are glimmers of hope. Kelly was able to see some of Steve’s friends recently – they went out for a meal and swapped memories. She finds talking about her husband comforting, even when it gets her upset.
Cath started going back to the gym and even went on holiday with her family. “Although I know I’ll never be the same person – I know I’ll always miss Jay and love him as deeply, if not more, than I ever did – I’ve got to try now to recreate myself,” she says. “I’ve been on holiday last week with my brother and his family and for the first time this year, I found myself starting to relax and I surprised even myself when I heard myself laughing.”
One of the simplest things people can do to help their grief is to create a ritual at home that honours the person lost, says Allali-Carling. This could be playing their favourite music, lighting a candle for them, cooking their favourite food, digging out a photo you like and framing it, or even just saying ‘goodnight’ to them each night. The aim is to make space to remember them at home.
She also urges people to try and exercise outdoors at least once a day – even if that’s just going for a walk – and to keep in contact with close family members and friends. It might be helpful to plan a memorial with them for a later date when restrictions on mass gatherings ease.
Advertisement
Bereavement counsellors can help to provide support to those struggling, as can online bereavement groups – WAY’s 3,500 members have been meeting up virtually via Zoom, holding weekly online pub quizzes and bingo sessions. Andy Langford at Cruse says, “the most important thing is to keep in contact with others as you’re going through this unprecedented and upsetting experience.”
Kelly is now looking to the future. She hopes that when restrictions ease a bit she’ll be able to scatter her husband’s ashes at his favourite football ground and give him “the proper memorial service he deserves”.
No matter how much it hurts or upsets her, she’ll continue to share his story. “I’ve got to keep talking about him because I’ve got to keep his memory alive,” she says. “He needs to live on through me, now.”
Covid-19 is more than a news story – it has changed every aspect of life in the UK. We are following how Britain is experiencing this crisis, the different stages of collective emotion, reaction and resilience. You can tell us how you are feeling and find further advice and resources here.
How Are You Feeling?


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-08-30--How Long Can The NHS And Queer Community Share The Rainbow Flag?

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Sophie Harvey, 18, from Greater Manchester, did a double take as she walked along her local high street last month. Three, six foot rainbow letters had been erected outside Bury Town Hall, displaying the word “NHS”. Last year, the town hall hosted a similar display with towering rainbow letters. They read “Pride”.
“Every time I pass the building I get more annoyed about it, especially because it’s the exact same design on both displays,” Harvey tells HuffPost UK.
Advertisement
Since then, she’s noticed a growing number of rainbow flags displayed by shops and pubs in her area, often alongside the slogan: “Thank you, NHS.”
Sophie Harvey An NHS display outside Bury Town Hall.
The fact that Bury Pride was cancelled this year due to Covid-19 – along with most other nationwide Pride events – adds salt to the wound.
“I first came out in 2016, and the gay flag became a huge part of my life because it was something that represented me and my struggles, and the struggles that the others in my community go through,” Harvey says.
Advertisement
“Seeing a flag that holds so much pain and passion be used for something entirely different is heartbreaking. It’s not just a rainbow to us, it’s the story of our people and our history.”
Sophie Harvey Sophie Harvey says the cop-opting of the flag is "heartbreaking".
Harvey is one of many LGBTQ+ people who feel concerned, and in some cases, unsafe, due to this recent co-opting of the rainbow flag. Another vocal critic is the human rights campaigner Peter Tatchell, who has been on the front line of LGBTQ+ campaigning since the 1970s.
“The rainbow flag is a global symbol of the LGBTQ rights movement,” says Tatchell. “As Oscar Wilde once said: ‘Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.’ But to adopt the exact same six-colour LGBTQ rainbow flag for the NHS looks like blatant cultural appropriation.”
Tatchell feels the LGBTQ+ community has been “robbed” of its symbol and is calling on the NHS to “devise their own unique symbol and flag”.
Advertisement
Alongside its history, he believes the mixed messaging around the flag’s multiple uses is confusing – to the queer community and the wider public.
Yui Mok - PA Images via Getty Images Peter Tatchell leading a march through London to mark the London Gay Liberation Front's 50th anniversary
“When businesses display the rainbow flag, are they celebrating the NHS or the LGBTQ community?” he says, describing corporations that have co-opted the flag as an NHS symbol as “cynical and exploitative”.
Rainbows are used as a symbol of hope within other communities, such as the baby loss community, which celebrates the ‘rainbow babies’ born to parents after miscarriage or stillbirth. The issue with the NHS flags during the pandemic, says Harvey, is that they mostly feature the six-stripe rainbow.
“I think a common misconception with the LGBTQ community is that we just claim anything with rainbows on it,” she says.
Advertisement
“There’s a huge difference between any old rainbow and the six-stripe flag, as the flag’s colours have individual and very important meanings behind them – the community values, if you will.”
The Pride flag dates back to 1978, and originally had eight stripes, when it was created by San Francisco-based queer artist Gilbert Baker, who purposely didn’t copyright the flag because he wanted it to be “owned by everyone”.
The design evolved over time and there are many variations, seen at Pride events and LGBTQ+ venues globally. But the best-known, six-stripe version of the rainbow Pride flag is thought to have been established in 1979, with the meaning of its colours largely recognised as red for life, orange for healing, yellow for sunlight, green for nature, blue for harmony and purple for spirit.
The association between rainbows and the NHS grew alongside the pandemic.
Back in March, Kezia Roberts, 42, from Leeds, posted a “rainbow trails” idea on Facebook. The idea was to display rainbow artwork in your window as a sign of community, in the midst of lockdown. Speaking to HuffPost at the time, Roberts said she got the idea from seeing a similar project launched by mums in Italy.
Her intention was to bring local children together, rather than celebrate key workers, but the drawings soon became a celebration of those on the frontline, with many people waving their creations during Clap for Carers on Thursday nights – and adding messages of thanks to the NHS.
Advertisement
It’s unclear how this morphed into the co-opting of the six-stripe flag, but one theory is that it may be linked to NHS Pride badges. Launched in 2019, these are worn by LGBTQ+ workers and allies within the NHS. Health Secretary Matt Hancock wore one at the height of the pandemic during the Downing Street daily briefings.
DANIEL LEAL-OLIVAS via Getty Images Health Secretary Matt Hancock leaving Downing Street after a daily coronavirus briefing in April.
The conflation continued, with high profile public campaigns such as ‘Rainbows for NHS Nightingale’, which called for the public to submit photos for a display at the seven newly-built hospitals, designed to help with the pandemic. The campaign was started by members of the public, not the hospital itself.
Before long, ads appeared on sites including eBay, with companies selling so-called “Thank You NHS Flags”, with no mentions of LGBTQ+ Pride.
eBay A flag currently advertised on eBay.
Advertisement
Simon Blake, 46, and based in Clapham, London, momentarily thought a new gay bar had opened in his neighbourhood when he spotted a new rainbow banner on a familiar street.
He was disappointed when he realised the banner was actually for the NHS, particularly at a time when so many queer spaces are under threat of closure. Flags are a symbol of safe spaces, he adds.
“We LGBT+ folk don’t often talk about, or perhaps even acknowledge to ourselves, how much of our lives are spent hyper aware of our surroundings. I have been beaten up and bottled in the past,” Blake tells HuffPost UK.
“A Pride flag meant a place of sanctuary. A place that welcomed us, perhaps a place where you could hold your partners hand or kiss in public if you wanted to. It is a symbol of love and solidarity in a world that is often unsafe and unkind for LGBT+ folk, even in London, even now.”
Advertisement
Simon Blake Simon Blake believes the LGBTQ community should transition to using the Progress Flag.
When contacted by HuffPost UK, an NHS spokesperson acknowledged the importance of the LGBTQ+ community and its connection with the Pride flag – but couldn’t confirm if the NHS had plans to encourage supporters to move away from using the flag or to develop an alternative symbol in future.
“The rainbow has been a positive symbol of hope for a long time and was used by members of the public to send messages of support to NHS staff during the Covid-19 pandemic,” said the spokesperson, “and while it is of course possible for the rainbow and the Pride Flag to exist side by side, it is important that the significance of the Pride Flag to the LGBT+ community continues to be recognised and respected.”
The statement continued: “We take pride in the diversity of our NHS workforce and the fact that our health service is there for everyone, whatever their race, gender or sexuality, and every part of our NHS must be a place where LGBT+ people are respected – including both staff and patients.”
NurPhoto via Getty Images Rainbow drawings and messages of support for the NHS cover windows of a college building opposite St Thomas' Hospital in London
The dual use of the flag provokes mixed feelings in healthcare professionals who belong to both communities, such as trainee GP Dr Hannah Barham-Brown.
Advertisement
“The rainbow is a symbol of inclusion, so I don’t fundamentally have a problem with it being used by the NHS, so long as the LGBTQ+ community are genuinely supported throughout the organisation,” says Dr Barham-Brown, 33 and based in Leeds. “Our community will keep using it regardless, whereas I’d expect the NHS will slowly stop using it over the coming months and years.”
Dr Barham-Brown doesn’t want criticism to discourage NHS workers from wearing the rainbow badge. “The badge is so important, not just for my colleagues, but for my patients,” she adds. “We know that LGBTQ+ patients are more reluctant to seek healthcare due to negative attitudes they may encounter, and so the badge worn by NHS staff symbolises a safe space for them.”
Dr Hannah Barham-Brown Dr Hannah Barham-Brown "doesn't have a problem" with rainbow flags being used within the NHS.
Simon Blake, who is deputy chair at Stonewall, the campaigning charity for lesbian, gay, bi and trans people, says that one solution would be the LGBTQ+ community transitioning to the ‘Progress’ flag instead of the six-stripe rainbow.
This flag was created by designer Daniel Quasar, who launched a kickstarter to get his idea off the ground. The flag includes a triangle with light blue and pink stripes for trans allyship, as well as black and brown stripes to support marginalised LGBTQ+ people of colour.
Advertisement
Use of the Progress flag would mean LGBTQ+ people could more easily identiy safe spaces, Blake suggests, especially during a period when the UK public is still widely using the six-stripe rainbow to celebrate the NHS.
“I love that the rainbow flag is being used to support the NHS. The workers and the institution so deserves our full respect,” he tells HuffPost UK.
“For me an inclusive anti-racist, trans inclusive LGBTQ movement now needs to adopt the Pride Progress flag. It makes more people feel included and welcome, and that for me is so important.”
Paul Christian Gordon/ZUMA Wire/Shutterstock The Progress flag displayed during the All Black Lives Matter march in Seattle.
Amelia Vidler, 22, from Herne Bay in Kent, agrees that the Progress flag is a good idea, but doesn’t see why the queer community should have to change their flag right now just because of the NHS – but that, they should be free to change and evolve in their own time. “It’d be weird to wish for us to change instead of the newcomer in the scenario,” she says, “considering the lozenge logo was the foreground of NHS branding for years!”
Advertisement
She adds: “It would definitely be nice if either the NHS as a whole could acknowledge the queer community whilst continuing to use the rainbow or perhaps evolve their symbol.”
HuffPost UK Amelia Vidler
TV doctor, columnist and former Strictly Come Dancing contestant Dr Ranj Singh believes there may be space for both flags, provided the roots of the rainbow flag are always acknowledged.
“Just as this pandemic will change people’s behaviour and outlook for some time to come, I think the rainbow will continue to be a symbol of unity, hope and thanks for a while still,” he says.
“It’s nice to be reminded of that resilience, especially for the younger ones in society, but we must never forget why and where this symbol originated and how it is different from other similar imagery.”
Advertisement
Karwai Tang via Getty Images Dr Ranj Singh
Jade Anouka, a bisexual actor whose feature film Her & Her was part of the Last Frame Queer Womxn Fest, agrees with Peter Tatchell that it’s incongruous to conflate the values of the NHS with the queer community, even though there are parallels.
“I don’t think I could trust what the flag stands for anymore,” she says. “Seeing a rainbow flag outside of a pub [was] a sign that LGBT people are welcomed there. Let’s not pretend that we are welcomed everywhere – so the rainbow flag can be really important.”
Anouka has heard reports of openly homophobic people with rainbow flags outside their houses in support of the NHS, and says this makes her fearful.
HuffPost UK Jade Anouka fears queer people may not be able to trust what the flag stands for
Advertisement
Her issue isn’t with the NHS, Anouka says, but with the culture of appropriation that has developed. “I have so much respect for the NHS and the NHS staff who have worked on the front line through Covid and are still doing it, putting their lives at risk to save the nation. But who decided to take the Pride flag and make it an NHS thing?” she asks.
So, what next? The rainbow flag has had more exposure during the pandemic than ever before. Some are hopeful this has made the public more familiar with its use in an LGBTQ+ context, too – and that it might be creating more allies.
“Because of the pandemic use of the rainbow symbol, and the positive reaction that little ones have when they see it, I think it’s lovely that they react the same way to the Pride symbol,” says Dr Ranj. “That’s got to be a good thing.”
The question of the Progress flag hangs in the balance – a live issue the queer community continues to grapple with. But if we are still living through the pandemic in a year’s time, will the NHS still be associated with the vibrant multicolours of the six-stripe rainbow too?
“In all probability, the use of the rainbow flag for the NHS will dissipate over time and we can fully reclaim it,” suggests Tatchell, who reckons it’s a compliment that the six-stripe rainbow has become so commonplace. “It has made the UK feel very LGBT-friendly, even if many people were displaying the flags to express solidarity with the NHS, rather than with LGBTs,” he says.
Advertisement
“Many of them must have known that the rainbow flag is a LGBTQ symbol. So the fact they displayed it regardless suggests that they feel no embarrassment with being potentially mistaken as supporters of the LGBTQ cause. That’s progress.”


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-08-30--The Psychology Behind Why Some People Hide That They Have Covid-19

Paul Biris via Getty Images It's incredibly important to inform people when you've been infected with the virus.
If you test positive for Covid-19, there are guidelines you should follow to protect your health and the health of others. One important step is to notify anyone you may have exposed to the coronavirus about your test results ― either personally or through a contact tracer.
“It is crucial to tell others if you test positive for Covid-19 due to the highly contagious and lethal nature of the virus,” said Becky Stuempfig, a licensed marriage and family therapist in Encinitas, California. Noting that it has been called the “invisible enemy,” she added, “By not informing others, innocent lives are being placed at risk, which can have an enormous ripple effect on entire communities.”
Advertisement
Yet there are many stories of coronavirus-positive individuals waiting hours or days to inform others of their diagnosis or opting not to share the information until after recovering.
Each individual may have their own reasons for not sharing their test results or diagnosis with others, but there are some common explanations for keeping quiet. Below, Stuempfig and other behavioural experts share some of the reasons people may not tell anyone they tested positive for Covid-19 ― and how we can encourage more transparency.
It’s an emotional diagnosis.
“When a person tests positive for Covid-19, they may experience a wave of emotions ranging from shock or disbelief to anger, uncertainty, guilt, shame, confusion, panic, fear, sadness, concern for their future, worry for their family and so on,” said Stuempfig. “Since many people that test positive for Covid-19 are asymptomatic, that only adds to the uncertainty and confusion when receiving positive results.”
This range of feelings may leave people frozen as they struggle to process what’s happened. It can be tempting to avoid reality and simply do nothing, even knowing that giving in to this temptation could be harmful.
Advertisement
“Even someone who has been taking the necessary precautions might feel like they will be judged harshly and blamed for their actions or inactions, and therefore be hesitant to tell others they tested positive.” - Zainab Delawalla, a clinical psychologist in Atlanta
“No matter what one’s initial reaction may be, the important thing to do is focus on the steps needed to move forward to protect their health and the health of those around them,” said Laura Boxley, a board-certified clinical neuropsychologist at Ohio State Wexner Medical Center.
There’s a fear of judgment.
Another big factor that may lead some to avoid sharing their diagnosis is the fear of judgment, which can add to the stress of having Covid-19.
“In an environment where not everyone takes the spread of the virus seriously and some refuse to comply with mask mandates or social distancing recommendations, there is a sense that some people are contracting the virus due to their own carelessness and therefore have only themselves to blame,” said Zainab Delawalla, a clinical psychologist in Atlanta. “In this atmosphere, even someone who has been taking the necessary precautions might feel like they will be judged harshly and blamed for their actions or inactions, and therefore be hesitant to tell others they tested positive.”
While you may be doing your best to abide by public health guidelines, perfection is an unrealistic standard, and there are still risk factors that are out of your hands. Yet amid the pandemic, it can feel like almost all of our behaviours are subject to scrutiny from others ― whether it’s what type of mask you wear, how well you wash your hands, where you stand on school reopening, if you’re having social visits with friends and family, how closely you stand to others when you talk, if you’ve returned to your physical office, and on and on.
Advertisement
Thomas Tolstrup via Getty Images
“All of these areas are heavily judged and debated by others all day long, much of it done on public forums such as news channels and social media,” said Stuempfig. “Unless you are willing to go completely ‘off the grid,’ it is quite difficult to escape the judgment factor and can be overwhelming to navigate.”
Stuempfig believes we all need to let go of the “just world” fallacy ― the cognitive bias that a person’s actions result in fair and well-deserved consequences.
“Covid-19 does not follow that rule,” she said. “We can do everything right and still become infected without even knowing it. We need to stop judging others for their behaviour because it only serves to further the stigma and fear surrounding this virus. The bottom line is we do not know what is going on in someone’s personal life, and chances are they are doing their best to get through this very difficult time.”
They may feel a sense of shame.
When a person tests positive for the coronavirus, they may unhappily begin to associate the public’s view of the virus with themselves, said Saniyyah Mayo, a licensed marriage and family therapist in Los Angeles. “Seeing themselves as dangerous, harmful and/or deadly is not an idea that a person wants to have about themselves.”
Advertisement
Public scrutiny may also lead people to blame themselves for their positive test results and feel shame about their behaviour, even if they followed public health guidelines fairly well.
“This experience has unfortunately created a strong stigma associated with testing positive for Covid-19,” Stuempfig explained. “It is not unusual for stigma to be associated with infectious diseases, but due to the long-term nature of this pandemic, the associated stigma will sadly have a lasting impact on our mental and physical health. It can deepen anxiety, depression and isolation that is already so prominent during this pandemic.”
It’s common to feel embarrassed about having been exposed to the virus and possibly exposing others, Boxley said. But the benefits of sharing diagnostic information to protect people’s health far outweigh those feelings of shame.
“It would be far worse to withhold this information and contribute to the potential spread of disease,” she said. “It would also be far more damaging to one’s relationships if it became known that they had a positive test and withheld that information from others.”
“Many people experience a moral dilemma about needing to return to work or take care of their family members.” - Becky Stuempfig, a licensed marriage and family therapist in Encinitas, California
Advertisement
We all have the power to break down some of the shame and stigma surrounding a Covid-19 diagnosis. Stuempfig advised showing support for people who receive a positive test result and being mindful that it’s not easy to share this information.
“We can still reach out to neighbors and friends while maintaining physical distance,” she said. “We can send supportive text messages, cards, drop meals off and, most importantly, instill hope for the future by letting them know we look forward to reconnecting when they feel better.”
There are financial implications.
Not everyone has a job that allows them to work from home or take days off when they’re sick, and many people cannot afford to miss pay cheques. This has created some very dangerous situations as some workers continue to report for duty even after they’ve been infected.
“Many people experience a moral dilemma about needing to return to work or take care of their family members,” Stuempfig said. “They may be unsure on how to approach that after they test positive. Additionally, they may not have the financial resources to put their life on hold for a week or two while they self-quarantine. This can be particularly true for asymptomatic individuals because they feel fine physically so it can be hard to even believe that they can be a threat to others.”
halbergman via Getty Images Some workers face a dilemma as they grapple with the possibility of missing much-needed paychecks while self-isolating.
Advertisement
“Corporate leaders can help by assuring their employees that they will receive appropriate time off and sick pay if they need to stay home after receiving a positive test result,” Stuempfig suggested. “They can also establish clear methods for employees to confidentially share their test results without fear of losing their job.”
Denial is tempting.
As the saying goes, ignorance is bliss, so it’s tempting to retreat to a state of blissful ignorance when faced with tough information.
“We all have the tendency to want to avoid things that provoke negative thoughts and feelings, so it’s normal that people who test positive would want to simply continue about their daily lives, especially if their positive test doesn’t correspond with active symptoms,” Boxley said. “Covid is a complicated, invisible enemy. However, in these situations, it’s important to be mindful of the long-term benefits associated with knowing your test result and having the ability to make informed decisions about your health.”
Stuempig noted that testing delays can lead to confusion. Many people have reported waiting several days for results or even weeks in extreme cases.
“If you are someone who experienced a long waiting period and then received a positive result, you may be tempted to keep that information private and simply move on with your life because you have already been functioning in the world with a positive diagnosis and the thought process may be: ‘What’s the benefit in changing things now? I’ve already exposed those around me,’” she explained.
Advertisement
It’s not a medically sound response, but it’s human.
They’re misinformed.
There’s a lot of misinformation about the coronavirus, especially on social media. Many people latch onto false narratives, picking and choosing which public health guidelines to follow.
“In our current environment, it can be difficult to differentiate high-quality and low-quality Covid information,” Boxley noted. “Covid is also a complicated disease that we are learning about in real time as physicians, researchers, and government officials work hard to address the pandemic.”
But we should “remember that there are individuals who have spent their entire careers studying and preparing for pandemics and that medical science is not as capricious as politics or media,” she added. “It is in our best interest to look to our scientific institutions such as [the National Institutes of Health] and the [Centers for Disease Control and Prevention] for medical guidance, even as advice can shift as we learn more about Covid.”
Educational, science-backed campaigns from trusted local officials could help cut down on the confusion and stigma associated with the virus, said Stuempfig.
“It can be helpful for leaders in our community to announce publicly when they receive a positive Covid-19 test and discuss the appropriate steps they took afterward. Many famous actors, athletes, musicians and government leaders have gone public with their experience testing positive, which has helped normalise the experience and decrease stigma surrounding the virus,” she said, pointing in particular to Tom Hanks and Rita Wilson’s announcement early in the pandemic that they had tested positive and were self-isolating.
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-08-30--Jeremy Corbyn's Brother Piers Fined £10,000 Over Trafalgar Square Anti-Mask Protest

NurPhoto via Getty Images
Jeremy Corbyn’s brother has been fined £10,000 for breaking newly introduced coronavirus laws.
Piers Corbyn was arrested at an anti-lockdown protest in Trafalgar Square on Saturday where he appeared on stage alongside conspiracy theorist David Icke and X-Factor loser Chico in front of a crowd that numbered in the thousands.
Protesters displayed anti-mask and anti-vaccination placards and attendees and speakers described Covid-19, which has killed more than 40,000 in the UK alone, as a “hoax”.
Advertisement
Under new changes to regulations, those attending a gathering of more than 30 people may be committing a criminal offence.
Speaking to HuffPost UK, the 73-year-old climate change denier who set up controversial weather forecasting business Weather Action, confirmed the fine and the arrest.
He added: “There was no justification whatsoever for this fine. The order for my arrest appears to have come from on high, nothing to do with local police. When I asked the police, they said to me it came from on high.”
When asked what he meant by “on high”, Corbyn said: “Well who controls the Metropolitan Police? It was either the Greater London Authority or the government that indicated that me or somebody had to be arrested because they were clearly annoyed that we were getting so much success and publicity through the mainstream [media] such as [Russian state-backed media channel] Russia Today.”
Advertisement
Thousands of anti-mask protesters gather at Trafalger Square against lockdown restrictions, mask wearing and vaccine proposals on Saturday. NurPhoto via Getty Images
Corbyn also said he would be refusing to pay the fine, saying: “I don’t have £10,000 but what will happen is they will send this fixed penalty notice demanding the money through the post and we then refuse to pay.
“Then they will chase us for the money so we’ll have a court case or we appeal it and refuse to pay.”
More than a thousand protesters are thought to have assembled in central London, describing the virus as a “hoax” and demanding restrictions are brought to an end.
Corbyn told HuffPost UK: “There is no justification in any terms for any of the anti-Covid measures. They are not to control Covid, they are there to control the population.”
Advertisement
We have rules in place to keep people safe.
You could face a fine if you decide to break them.
⬇ — UK Prime Minister (@10DowningStreet) August 30, 2020
Face-coverings were near non-existent at the rally, with banners with slogans such as “masks are muzzles” and “stop 5G” – a reference to baseless links between the technology and coronavirus – on display.
On Saturday, the Metropolitan Police said a 73-year-old man had been arrested in Trafalgar Square at 3.25pm on suspicion of breaking the new Health Protection Regulations 2020.
He was informed on Sunday that a fixed penalty notice would be issued for £10,000 for the offence of holding a gathering of more than 30 people in an outdoor place, according to the force.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-08-30--My Government Must Do More To Help Working Poor Cope With Covid

Chancellor Rishi Sunak and Prime Minister Boris Johnson arrive for a coronavirus press briefing. ASSOCIATED PRESS
Although there are reasons for cautious optimism about the UK’s economic recovery, the emerging picture when it comes to the impact of coronavirus on employment and family incomes looks grim.
The full extent of the damage to the labour market won’t be clear until later this autumn when the furlough scheme is due to end. But recent data showing dramatic falls in company payrolls, hours worked and job vacancies point to a prolonged period of higher unemployment.
Advertisement
For millions of families across the UK, this will mean reduced incomes and an increase in hardship. It is clear that some of the worst impacts will be felt in communities that were previously experiencing deprivation. Dozens of local authorities with the highest levels of child poverty have already seen some of the biggest rises in unemployment post-coronavirus.
“Low-income households have experienced five years of real income stagnation.” - Stephen Crabb MP.
The government deserves enormous credit for the huge scale of assistance that has already been provided during this pandemic and for how quickly vital parts of the safety net were put in place as the crisis unfolded.
The financial support provided to families through the Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme, Self-Employed Income Support Scheme and enhanced universal credit has been more comprehensive than that provided by any other government.
Advertisement
But many individuals and families will require ongoing financial support to prevent them falling into financial crisis and poverty.
Following the last recession, the recovery was characterised by record employment. Yet despite this, in-work poverty rose significantly. A key driver of this was weakened social security support which left families struggling to cope with the low pay and fluctuating hours that characterise the jobs that many low-income parents hold.
It is important for Conservatives, who rightly hail the boost to pensioner incomes as a result of the triple lock, to recognise that the other side of that coin was a prolonged squeeze on benefits for people of working age. Low-income households have experienced five years of real income stagnation, largely due to falls in income from benefits which offset growth in employment incomes.
Our efforts during this recovery should be focused squarely on supporting working age people on low incomes.
As a first step, the government should make permanent the additional £20 per week for the universal credit standard allowance that it brought in to strengthen social security during the crisis. Removing it next spring, as currently planned, will amount to a painful cut in income for many people still struggling to come to terms with the loss of their jobs and who have found the transition from furlough to benefits a very hard landing indeed.
Advertisement
In parallel, the personal allowance of so-called legacy benefits like JSA, ESA and IS should be raised to match the universal credit increase. This is particularly important for those with disabilities, and their carers, who make up most of the people remaining on these benefits. It’s just not right that some of the most vulnerable people have not seen equivalent protection.
The government should also look at targeted extensions to the furlough scheme beyond October. A definitive end point was seen as vital for getting the country back to work. But there are still many firms in different sectors that simply cannot operate in the current scenario.
Some of these sectors are of enormous strategic importance to the UK. With aerospace, for example, there is a real danger that the unwinding of furlough will lead to the loss of thousands more high value jobs and a permanent dissipation of skills and expertise. Germany, which knows all about retaining domestic industrial strength, has just decided to continue its furlough scheme for another 12 months.
The costs of all this are very substantial and there are many who would rather invest instead in re-training and new apprenticeships. But it’s not either/or. A stronger safety net to protect families makes a successful recovery more likely, not less.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-08-30--Exclusive: PM Warned Not To Cut Furlough Scheme By Ex-Work And Pensions Secretary

LOADING ERROR LOADING
A former Tory work and pensions secretary has warned Boris Johnson against blanket scrapping of the furlough jobs scheme and urged him to ditch plans for a “painful cut” in universal credit.
Stephen Crabb called on the government to keep the current Job Retention Scheme (JRS) for key sectors of the economy, a key demand made by Labour and unions who fear mass unemployment this autumn as support is withdrawn.
Advertisement
Writing exclusively for HuffPost UK, the senior backbencher also said that the prime minister deserved praise for increasing universal credit by an extra £20 a week during the pandemic, but said plans to reduce it again next spring would force many people into hardship.
He added that so-called “legacy benefits”, such as jobseeker’s allowance, employment support allowance and income support, should also be increased in line with the universal credit rise.
And in a further challenge to the government, Crabb also backed suggestions that the Treasury was looking at ending the “triple lock” that has protected well-off pensioners from any cuts in recent years.
The Job Retention Scheme uses state cash to pay 80% of the wages of workers who sign up, although it will be cut to 70% in September, 60% in October and be pulled completely from November 1.
Advertisement
Ministers should “look at targeted extensions to the furlough scheme beyond October”, Crabb said. “A definitive end point was seen as vital for getting the country back to work. But there are still many firms in different sectors that simply cannot operate in the current scenario.
“Some of these sectors are of enormous strategic importance to the UK. With aerospace, for example, there is a real danger that the unwinding of furlough will lead to the loss of thousands more high value jobs and a permanent dissipation of skills and expertise.
“Germany, which knows all about retaining domestic industrial strength, has just decided to continue its furlough scheme for another 12 months.”
Former Work and Pensions Secretary Stephen Crabb PA
Crabb – who served as Welsh Secretary and Work and Pensions Secretary under David Cameron – said that ministers should make permanent the additional £20 per week for the universal credit standard allowance that was brought in to strengthen social security during the crisis.
Advertisement
“Removing it next spring, as currently planned, will amount to a painful cut in income for many people still struggling to come to terms with the loss of their jobs and who have found the transition from furlough to benefits a very hard landing indeed.
“In parallel, the personal allowance of so-called legacy benefits like JSA, ESA and IS should be raised to match the UC increase. This is particularly important for those with disabilities, and their carers, who make up most of the people remaining on these benefits. It’s just not right that some of the most vulnerable people have not seen equivalent protection.”
As MPs prepare to return to parliament for the first time since their summer break, Crabb is the first senior Tory to break ranks over the issue of welfare support cuts.
But with many experts predicting job losses as the furlough and other schemes are withdrawn, he could be followed by other rebels who fear the damage to the party’s standing this autumn and winter.
One opinion poll this weekend put Labour at level pegging with the Conservatives for the first time since Johnson became leader last summer, and senior Tory Charles Walker said a string of U-turns had sapped “morale”.
Advertisement
Recent figures showed that around one in eight workers remains on furlough as the job retention scheme began to be wound down.
In his HuffPost UK article, Crabb pointed out that “weakened social security support” was a “key driver” of in-work poverty after the last recession of 2009. And he contrasted the Tory defence of the “triple lock” on pensioner income with a lack of similar protection for those on welfare.
“It is important for Conservatives, who rightly hail the boost to pensioner incomes as a result of the Triple Lock, to recognise that the other side of that coin was a prolonged squeeze on benefits for people of working age.
“Low-income households have experienced five years of real income stagnation, largely due to falls in income from benefits which offset growth in employment incomes...A stronger safety net to protect families makes a successful recovery more likely, not less.”
Speaking on BBC Radio 4′s Today programme, Crabb expanded the pensions criticism and said newly elected Tory MPs in former ‘Red Wall’ seats also wanted change.
Advertisement
“We have many more MPs representing constituencies with many more poorer voters in it. As a party we are engaging increasingly with this issue of people on low incomes, working-age families,” he said.
“To finance that [the triple lock] we have actually been squeezing incomes for working age families and during this whole COVID pandemic there’s been a lot of interesting interesting discussion about social cohesion and solidarity and intergenerational fairness and I think that there probably is a moment for the government to use that to have an honest discussion about the economics of the triple lock.
“It was four years ago that the Work and Pensions Committee in parliament warned that the pension triple lock was becoming increasingly unsustainable and unfair for younger, working age families and I think probably there’s a moment for the government to be looking at this and talking about it.”
Shadow Treasury minister Wes Streeting said: “Businesses, unions and the Labour Party have all warned the Chancellor that his plan to withdraw the furlough scheme in one fell swoop is a recipe for a jobs disaster.
“Now even his own backbenchers say he is making a historic mistake. What will it take for him to listen and change course?”


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-08-31--Airline Launches 'Full Investigation' After Reports Of 'Selfish Covidiots' Not Wearing Masks On Flig

Airline Launches 'Full Investigation' After Reports Of 'Selfish Covidiots' Not Wearing Masks On Flight

LOADING ERROR LOADING
An airline has launched a “full investigation” into claims that masks were not enforced on a flight between Greece and Wales which has been linked to 16 confirmed cases of coronavirus.
Almost 200 passengers on a flight from the Greek island of Zante to Cardiff on August 25 have been told to self-isolate and officials have said seven of the Covid-19 cases were infectious or potentially infectious whilst on the flight.
Advertisement
One passenger on the Tui flight 6215 described seeing people “disregard the rules” and not wear face masks.
Speaking on BBC Radio 4′s Today programme, Stephanie Whitfield said: “Many passengers didn’t seem to know how to wear the masks correctly or they seemed to just disregard the rules really.
“Lots of the people were wearing the masks underneath their noses or even underneath their chins. They were taking the masks off to talk to friends and they were going up and down the aisles to talk to their friends without their masks on.”
When asked how the flight crew responded, she said she saw one crew member ask a passenger to put their mask on.
Advertisement
She continued: “But the vast majority of people weren’t being spoken to, and there was a chap sat next to me who had his mask around his chin for the full flight, and the stewardess was talking to him and she didn’t say anything to him.
“The flight was full of selfish ‘covidiots’ and an inept crew who couldn’t care less.”
Whitfield added that she and her husband have both experienced mild symptoms of the virus since returning to Wales and are due to take a test on Tuesday.
An airline has launched a “full investigation” into claims that masks were not enforced on a flight between Greece and Wales which has been linked to 16 confirmed cases of coronavirus. picture alliance via Getty Images
Dr Gwen Lowe, a consultant in communicable disease control for Public Health Wales, told the programme 30 cases in Wales in the past week had been linked to the Greek island.
She added officials are still in the process of reaching all 193 people on the flight and said the number of infections is expected to rise.
Advertisement
A spokesperson for Tui said: “The health and safety of passengers is always our priority and we are concerned to hear of Mrs Whitfield’s claims. Our crew are trained to the highest standards and in line with European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) guidelines.
“Passengers are informed prior to travel and via PA announcements on the flight that they have to wear masks throughout and are not allowed to move around the cabin.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-08-31--Chadwick Boseman's Last Post Becomes Most-Liked In Twitter History

LOADING ERROR LOADING
A tweet posted to Chadwick Boseman’s account announcing the actor’s death is now the most-liked post in Twitter’s history, surpassing a 2017 tweet from former President Barack Obama.
“A tribute fit for a King,” Twitter said in an announcement on Saturday, referring to the late star’s iconic role as King T’Challa in the groundbreaking Marvel superhero film Black Panther.
Advertisement
The tweet announcing Chadwick’s death had been liked more than 7.3 million times as of Monday afternoon.
Most liked Tweet ever.
A tribute fit for a King. #WakandaForever https://t.co/lpyzmnIVoP — Twitter (@Twitter) August 29, 2020
Chadwick, who also played pioneering Black figures such as baseball player Jackie Robinson, singer James Brown and Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall, died at his home in Los Angeles on Friday after a private four-year battle with colon cancer, according to the statement his representative and family posted Friday.
“A true fighter, Chadwick persevered through it all, and brought you many of the films you have come to love so much,” the statement said.
Advertisement
“From Marshall to Da 5 Bloods, August Wilson’s Ma Rainey’s Black Bottom and several more - all were filmed during and between countless surgeries and chemotherapy. It was the honour of his career to bring King T’Challa to life in Black Panther.”
Obama’s 2017 tweet in the wake of the deadly white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, was liked over 4.3 million times.
In it, he quoted a remarkable passage from the autobiography of Nelson Mandela, the first Black president of South Africa.
"No one is born hating another person because of the color of his skin or his background or his religion..." pic.twitter.com/InZ58zkoAm — Barack Obama (@BarackObama) August 13, 2017
Obama and former first lady Michelle Obama were among the thousands of people who paid tribute to Boseman over the weekend. They hosted the actor at the White House in 2013, where he met with students and discussed his role as Robinson in the biopic 42.
Advertisement
“To be young, gifted, and Black; to use that power to give them heroes to look up to; to do it all while in pain – what a use of his years,” Barack Obama wrote.
Chadwick came to the White House to work with kids when he was playing Jackie Robinson. You could tell right away that he was blessed. To be young, gifted, and Black; to use that power to give them heroes to look up to; to do it all while in pain – what a use of his years. https://t.co/KazXV1e7l7 — Barack Obama (@BarackObama) August 29, 2020
Only Chadwick could embody Jackie Robinson, Thurgood Marshall, and T’Challa. He, too, knew what it meant to persevere. To summon real strength. And he belongs right there with them as a hero—for Black kids and for all our kids. There’s no better gift to give our world. ❤ pic.twitter.com/t2tjZDMxNT — Michelle Obama (@MichelleObama) August 29, 2020


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-08-31--The VMAs Went Virtual, But The Stars Dressed Up Anyway: See All The Looks

The show’s primary broadcast aired live from New York City, with some celebrities IRL and many others serving serious looks on social media.
Here’s what our favorite artists brought to the unconventional VMAs...
Miley Cyrus


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-08-31--Olivia Colman Reveals Her First Meeting With The Queen Didn't Exactly Go Smoothly

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Olivia Colman has admitted she didn’t exactly put her best foot forward when she met the Queen for the first time.
The British star – who won a Golden Globe for her portrayal of Queen Elizabeth II in the Netflix drama The Crown – has revealed she met the royal for the first time while attending a film event at Windsor Castle.
Advertisement
However, she said she wasn’t aware that she’d actually be in the presence of the Queen until she and other guests found themselves being rounding up into a queue formation.
Speaking to Variety, Olivia said: “I didn’t think she’d be there and suddenly we all ended up in a big queue.”
Olivia Colman pictured at this year's Oscars Amy Sussman via Getty Images
She continued: “I thought somebody was using the rooms for the bash and then suddenly we looked down the corridor and went, ‘Oh fuck’.
Advertisement
“This man in epaulets was telling us what to do, ‘Just a little bow, don’t overdo it,’ and sort of scuffled us forward.
“So you might just meet your royal highness and just keep moving, keep moving because she had hundreds of people to get through. And that was it.”
Olivia in character as Queen Elizabeth II Netflix
Still, although it was a little chaotic, it sounds like Olivia’s meeting with the Queen went more smoothly than the time she bumped into Prince William.
Speaking to Graham Norton shortly before making her debut in The Crown last year, she recalled: “I met Prince William at a dinner and he asked me what I was doing at the moment, before he quickly added, ‘actually, I know what you’re doing’.
Advertisement
“I was so excited and asked, “Have you watched it?” His answer was a firm, ‘No’.”


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-08-31--Price Of Single-Use Plastic Bags To Double Next Year

LOADING ERROR LOADING
The fee for plastic carrier bags is set to double next year and will be extended to all shops across England, the government has announced.
From April 2021, single-use plastic bags will cost 10p – up from the current 5p – and smaller shops will no longer be exempt from the levy.
Advertisement
The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) said the announcement followed a public consultation last year in which the “vast majority” of respondents welcomed the changes.
The move was welcomed by environmental campaigners, but Greenpeace warned carriers bags were only “part of the problem”.
The levy on plastic bags was introduced in England in 2015, and recent figures showed the number of single-use bags distributed by large supermarkets has fallen by more than 95%.
The average person now buys just four single-use bags a year, compared to around 140 in 2014.
The UK’s beaches have also seen a 60% fall in the number of plastic bags, according to the Marine Conservation Society.
Advertisement
Environment secretary George Eustice said: ”The UK is already a world-leader in this global effort, and our carrier bag charge has been hugely successful in taking billions of harmful plastic bags out of circulation.
“But we want to go further by extending this to all retailers so we can continue to cut unnecessary waste and build back greener.
“I hope our pioneering track record on single-use plastics will inspire many more countries to follow suit, so we can take on plastic waste together and implement lasting change.”
Sam Chetan-Welsh, political campaigner at Greenpeace, said: “By raising the price of plastic bags again the Government is taking a small step in the right direction, but by now they should be taking great strides.
“Reinstating the previous price of carrier bags, but not taking action on bags for life, is only looking at one part of the problem.
Advertisement
“And it could be construed as tokenism when there are so many ways ministers know they could be driving fast and substantial reductions on plastic pollution.
“If they’re increasing costs for shoppers, ministers really have no excuse not to increase costs for the companies that are responsible for the escalating volumes of single-use plastic packaging in the first place.”
The supermarket giant Morrisons has said it plans to scrap its plastic ‘bags for life’ if a trial scheme offering customers stronger paper bags instead runs smoothly.
By removing the bags from shops, the supermarket chain said it would stop 90 million plastic bags being used each year, the equivalent of 3,510 tonnes.