thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-08-29--Extinction Rebellion Accuse Met Police Of 'Trying To Crush' Protests

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Extinction Rebellion has accused the Met Police of “trying to crush” protests after it received a copy of an open letter from the force warning against mass gatherings – despite political protests being exempt from the legislation.
The letter, which Scotland Yard said was sent to a number of organisers planning gatherings over the bank holiday weekend and beyond, “strongly advises” against attending large gatherings and states that those who organise or attend could be committing a criminal offence.
Advertisement
But Extinction Rebellion have fiercely criticised the letter, highlighting the exemption of “political bodies” – as set out in the Health Protection Regulations 2020 – and have accused the force of attempting to shut down their protests.
The environmental group on Friday launched a bank holiday weekend programme of non-violent, disruptive protests taking place across the UK, with airports, oil companies and HS2 sites all set to be targeted by protesters.
From September 1, thousands will gather in London, Cardiff and Manchester for further protests, specifically targeting seats of power such as Westminster.
Martin Marston-Paterson, a member of Extinction Rebellion’s legal team, said: “This letter is, in reality, an attempt to shut down planned peaceful protests by Extinction Rebellion with the threat of criminal liability.
Advertisement
“We think that is wrong. The right to assemble and protest is an enduring one, and the current regulations clearly permit supporters of Extinction Rebellion, as a political movement, to gather, provided that care is taken to do so safely.
“XR is well aware of the regulations, and this attempt by the police to draw attention to them seems to be directed at creating anxiety about being involved in protest. The police should focus on supporting and facilitating peaceful protest, rather than wasting everybody’s time and effort by trying to crush it.”
The letter from the Met Police states that organising, attending or encouraging others to attend could constitute an offence, adding that fines could be imposed on those breaking the rules. On Friday, new legislation introducing fines of up to £10,000 for event organisers was brought in.
The letter does state that “certain types of body” are exempt from the rules, provided they cary out full risk assessments and limit where possible the spread of the virus. The examples of exempt groups they provide are businesses and charities, but public and political bodies – which are included in the legislation itself – are not included in the letter.
As an organisation campaigning for a change in governmental policy, Extinction Rebellion have said they have a legal right to be regarded as a political body and therefore exempt from the restrictions on gatherings.
Advertisement
The legislation itself specifically states that political body refers either to a political party or a political campaigning organisation – which “promote[s], or oppose[s], changes in any law applicable in the United Kingdom or elsewhere, or any policy of a governmental or public authority.”
Paul Stephens, a former officer and member of Extinction Rebellion’s police liaison team said: “The exceptions they [the police] list are businesses and charities and they didn’t mention protests. Of course in the regulations, political protests are actually in there.
“So it’s really an empty letter which is a vague threat against coming out to protest such a serious thing as extinction.
“I don’t think it’s very helpful not to tell the truth completely, it’s playing a political game and we’re going to challenge that as we go forward.”
Expert lawyers have also weighed in on the letter, highlighting the fact that the regulations specifically permit political gatherings and adding that police should not be “attempting to deter protest by sending letters out to political groups containing vague threats”.
Advertisement
Jules Carey, of Bindmans Solicitors, who represents Extinction Rebellion, said: “The right to protest is a key aspect of a democratic society and a fundamental right.
“The coronavirus regulations restricting gatherings specifically permit gatherings by political groups, although they require assessments to be made and measures to be taken to limit the risk of transmission of the virus. Police forces should be using their best endeavours to facilitate protest and ensuring that they take appropriate precautions when approaching protesters in order to protect the protesters health as well as their own.
“Police forces should certainly not be attempting to deter protest by sending letters out to political groups containing vague threats of sanctions under the corona virus regulations”.
Extinction Rebellion’s case bears similarities to that of Ken Hinds, a community activist based in London who was told he could face police investigation after going to the force to ask for help facilitating an antiracism march from Notting Hill on Sunday.
The Guardian reported that even just by publicising the protest he was at risk of investigation, according to the Met, despite the fact that his event – like Extinction Rebellion’s protests – were being lawfully held as a political protest.
Advertisement
The police have since retracted their warnings of an investigation and have admitted that the protest met the criteria of a political body, meaning the protest can now take place.
Solicitor Lochlinn Parker, who represented Hinds, said: “Mr Hinds is obviously pleased that the protest can now go ahead without the threat of prosecution, but protesters should not have to have to instruct lawyers to help them exercise their rights to freedom of expression and assembly.”
A Met spokesperson said: “Our advice is to carefully consider the Health Protection Regulations relating to gatherings. Contravening this legislation could result in anyone involved in the holding of a large gathering (over 30 people) being subjected to a significant financial penalty. These regulations, have been designed to help protect people from coronavirus.
“In most locations participation in gatherings over 30 persons is an offence unless the gathering comes under one of the exemptions in the Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (No. 2) (England) Regulations 2020.
“Officers will continue to engage and encourage Londoners looking to attend an event of their obligation to adhere to these regulations.”


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-08-29--RIP King: Fans, Friends, Celebrities Mourn Loss of Black Panther Star Chadwick Boseman

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 @ @

It was the highest honor getting to work with you and getting to know you. What a generous and sincere human being. You believed in the sacred nature of the work and gave your all. Much love to your family. And much love from all of us left here.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-08-29--Exclusive: Black BBC Staff Morale At 'All Time Low' After N-Word Scandal

A file image of the exterior of BBC Broadcasting House. Leon Neal via Getty Images
Morale is at an “all-time low” among Black BBC staff who were banned from publicly supporting Black Lives Matter but watched on as their employer defended its use of the N-word.
The latest revelation regarding Black staff at the corporation follows a string of worrying accounts of “institutional racism”, bullying and a “glass ceiling” published by HuffPost UK on Friday after dozens of interviews.
Advertisement
As a result of our investigation, Bectu, the largest union at the BBC with thousands of members, said it would be taking up the matter with incoming BBC director general Tim Davie.
Responding to claims of “institutional racism”, the broadcaster has said: “The BBC is absolutely clear that we are an inclusive and welcoming organisation and we are saddened if anyone is experiencing any form of discrimination at work.
“That is why, as an organisation, we have put so much effort into ensuring that we have robust processes in place for staff to raise complaints which will be dealt with the utmost seriousness.”
Advertisement
We spoke to workers in the wake of the corporation’s eventual apology for the July 29 N-word use, which racked up 19,000 complaints in days.
Social affairs correspondent Fiona Lamdin used the slur while quoting a racist attacker in Bristol.
The BBC eventually bowed to public pressure and apologised after first claiming the use of the word was “editorially justified”. By this time popular 1Xtra presenter DJ Sideman publicly resigned in protest and a string of other journalists and broadcasters had publicly condemned its employers’ use of the word and refusal to apologise.
Just three days after the incident, the BBC aired a repeat of a 2019 documentary in which historian Lucy Worsley also used the slur uncensored as she quoted the assassin of Abraham Lincoln.
Worsley later apologised on Twitter and the BBC, after receiving more than 100 complaints, said in a statement: “We understand and we are sorry for any distress caused to any of our audience by language included in the programme.
“We recognise it is an offensive term and one that is rarely included in our output.”
In the wake of both incidents, the broadcaster promised that it will be “strengthening guidance on offensive language“.
A file image of the exterior of BBC Broadcasting House on February 5, 2020. Leon Neal via Getty Images
Advertisement
Black Lives Matter backlash
The murder of George Floyd, a Black man, at the hands of US police officers in May, and the subsequent wave of Black Lives Matter protests, have amplified concerns about racism and lack of diversity within workplaces in both Britain and America.
The BBC tailored extensive programming to discussions around Floyd and racism via special editions of 1Xtra Talks, re-runs of popular Black shows on television and £100m worth of funding to reflect more diverse audiences.
“Like George Floyd, Black BBC staff feel like management’s knee is on our necks.” - A BBC source.
But in an email to staff, the broadcaster told its employees not to publicly back Black Lives Matter on social media or at protests in case “it undermines public trust”. The organisation also warned TV presenters and guests not to wear the Black Lives Matter badge.
In a private Zoom call, leaked to HuffPost UK in June, staffers expressed concern about being banned from attending Black Lives Matter protests.
Advertisement
One employee said: “Last year I went to Manchester Pride and there was a huge BBC cohort on a float and, to me, that’s a campaign. LGBTQ Pride is a campaign and I could go to Pride with my lanyard and my BBC shirt and be proud of who I am. But if I go to a Black Lives Matter protest, I could be sacked.
“I really don’t get the disconnect – either we do campaigns or we don’t. And in my opinion a Black Lives Matter campaign is just as important as an LGBTQ campaign.”
Someone else said: “Recently there have been quite a few sessions involving senior management and the use of the hashtag Black Lives Matter. Some of the criticism coming from senior management was that it’s connected with a specific movement and compared it with Extinction Rebellion. Honestly I find that comparison very myopic and narrow minded; ER is a disruptive fringe movement which appeals to a very specific crowd while Black Lives Matter has now gone way, way beyond a specific route – it’s become a universal theme.”
Staff also told HuffPost UK the BBC’s diversity funding and early show of sympathy with the Black Lives Matter campaign were superficial and that the reality for Black staff within the organisation remained grim.
The BBC maintains it is not impartial on racism but also insists it is “not a campaigning organisation”.
Advertisement
A spokesperson said: “Opposition to racism is a fundamental democratic principle, reflected, for example, in the fact that incitement to racial hatred is a criminal offence in the UK. It is therefore fully consistent with the BBC’s editorial guidelines.
“While the BBC is opposed to racism, it is not a campaigning organisation. Campaigns frequently advocate for legitimate social or policy change. However, the BBC must retain its independence in relation to them. This is why BBC presenters cannot wear campaign badges or insignia on air – and this is nothing new.”
One source, A, who has worked there for more than a decade, told HuffPost UK: “Like George Floyd, Black BBC staff feel like management’s knee is on our necks and they’re stopping us from exposing the rot that’s going on inside these walls.
“Staff are scared because we’re in a position wherein we’re not allowed to bring the organisation into disrepute. We aren’t allowed to talk about the news and the scandal that’s going on in our building. That’s scandalous.
“If you look at the way the BBC deals with claims of racism and the way that the staffing is – there aren’t that many people of colour in key departments or at senior levels – then without a doubt the BBC is institutionally racist.”
Advertisement
Naga Munchetty saga
Source A said staff morale was at rock bottom following the scandal last year of BBC Breakfast presenter Naga Munchetty being sanctioned for criticising racist comments made by US president Donald Trump.
Complaints had been made about both Munchetty, who is of Asian descent, and her white co-host Dan Walker. But only Munchetty was penalised, prompting accusations of racial bias against the BBC.
BBC director general Tony Hall eventually stepped in to overturn the ruling against Munchetty, who had been found to have broken the broadcaster’s editorial guidelines.
Prior to the U-turn, more than 50,000 people signed a petition calling for the organisation to reverse its judgement.
Advertisement
“Morale is as low as it can get. Since George Floyd’s death, staff are now speaking up about their experiences of racism at the BBC more than they used to – but outrage has been felt since the Naga Munchetty saga last year and that’s when to a large extent Black and brown people started speaking like never before,” Source A said.
“There was scepticism around measures such as BBC spending £100m on diverse programming.
“The sad thing with the N-word is that Black and brown staff are saying nothing has been learned; the BBC had all of these listening sessions after George Floyd’s death where staff were invited to talk to management to tell them how they were feeling about racism.
“It seems like everybody had a story to tell about racism at the BBC. The outpouring was unbelievable – there were tears. The stories you heard behind closed doors – staff were sharing these not just in WhatsApp groups, but in listening sessions with other staff, and telling management what they’ve been through.
“So, we thought there was going to be a change moving forward. Management were saying for the first time: ‘We hadn’t realised things were so bad.’
“Then the N-word has now shown us that those were just words.”
The source said further angst was created when staff were informed in email from Kamal Ahmed, editorial director at BBC News, that all use of racially insulting language in news and current affairs would mean a mandatory referral to Fran Unsworth, the director of BBC News.
Advertisement
A spokesperson told us: “The BBC is not impartial on racism and this is fully consistent with the BBC’s editorial guidelines. In recent weeks we have announced a four-point plan to improve our approach on the use of racially insulting language. We will continue to listen and learn.”
Diversity crisis
Source B is another Black BBC staffer. They told us: “When the big issues like Naga-gate and the N-word happen, the one thing you find yourself wondering is: ‘Why have I not heard from my line manager?’
“Why is Kamal Ahmed always the one to apologise or make the speech when these things happen? He doesn’t make the decisions which led to those scandals.
“I want the real power brokers to come and give us an account for why they made those decisions. And that’s a really big problem; they get the person of colour to be an apologist for all the decisions they make around Black audiences.
“I can’t speak for Kamal but if I was in that position I’d feel like an idiot. I’d feel like I’m being used for that agenda of pacifying when it comes to issues affecting Black audiences.”
Advertisement
On the other hand, June Sarpong, the corporation’s new head of diversity, has faced criticism for not commenting at length on the N-word issue. In a tweet on August 13, Sarpong wrote: “FYI: News does not fall under my remit.”
August 6th. FYI: News does not fall under my remit. — June Sarpong OBE (@junesarpong) August 13, 2020
Marcus Ryder, acting chair of the Lenny Henry Centre for Diversity and former BBC executive, said: “Every Black person thought there needs to be somebody at the BBC who has diversity in their title who should be speaking out and representing them when it comes to the N-word. People assumed that was June. Now we’re floundering around, we don’t know whose position that is.”
Ryder said the BBC’s figures show it fails to promote and retain Black people – and the corporation should welcome outside scrutiny in order to make improvements.
“The BBC at its best is brilliant at self analysis,” he said. “I remember really clearly when George Entwhistle, who had only been director general for 50 odd days, went and got interviewed on the Today Programme. They had an approach of holding power to account irrespective of if the power was the BBC.
Advertisement
“The BBC to its credit was like: ‘If we want other powers – like the government and other public bodies – to be liable and held to account, we must do the same.’ Entwhistle subjects himself to be interrogated by the BBC’s journalists; hours later, he resigned because of that interrogation. That’s the BBC at its best; holding power to account without fear nor favour, the BBC realising it needs to be held to account.
“What you have here with the N-word is the BBC saying: ‘We will not be held to account. We will not subject ourselves to our editorial reasoning. We will not be questioned.’ This is the BBC at its worst. I say this as a massive fan of the BBC.”
Another source added: “The audience are going – not just the young but even the middle aged Black and brown audiences are going elsewhere for their news and entertainment.
“Places like Netflix, YouTube – you’ll find programmes that reflect people that look like you.”
They added: “I’m sad to say that in five to 10 years from now, the BBC will be on its back foot even more so and in steep decline.”
A BBC spokesperson said: “We have a zero-tolerance approach to bullying and harassment – of all kinds – at the BBC and have recently strengthened our approach to ensure staff can come forward.
Advertisement
“The BBC goes further than any other broadcaster by publishing diversity data annually, including for leadership positions. We have already achieved our 2020 target on 15% Black, Asian and minority ethnic staff across our workforce. We know there is more work to do on improving diversity at leadership levels across the BBC and we are fully committed to achieving this.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-08-29--Notting Hill Carnival Going Digital Brings It Home To Its Radical Roots

A performer dances in the street parade at the annual Notting Hill Carnival in central London, August 25, 2008. REUTERS/Suzanne Plunkett (BRITAIN) Suzanne Plunkett / reuters
In the wake of coronavirus thwarting all of our social plans for the foreseeable future, Notting Hill Carnival 2020 is being held as a virtual event for the first time in its 54 year history.
This year’s lineup includes virtual panels discussing the political and cultural significance of the carnival and Black Lives Matter merchandise for sale. It is clear we are witnessing a return to the political roots of the festivities.
Advertisement
While nothing can match the vibrant energy of dancing through the streets of West London, reverberating sound systems, and a cup of rum punch in tow, the virtual event allows Black British people like me to reflect on a rich legacy of anti-racist activism, something that, this year, seems more important than ever.
Notting Hill Carnival is arguably the social event of the summer, attended by nearly two million people, from all walks of life – only eclipsed by the legendary Rio de Janeiro carnival.
“For Black British people we have to consistently adhere to respectability politics to try avoid discrimination and prove our humanity. Carnival allows us to feel momentarily liberated from the constraints of systemic racism.”
News reports show uptight police officers being whined on by masqueraders, a true display of British multiculturalism and “tolerance”. The atmosphere is often so joyous that it can be easy to forget the revolutionary struggle that spurred the genesis of carnival, especially given the increasing levels of commercialisation and gentrification of the event.
Advertisement
Notting Hill Carnival has a radical history, borne from the race riots between the newly arrived West Indian immigrants, and white working-class Teddy boys in the 1950s.
Following the economic and physical destruction of World War II, the British government formally invited Caribbean people to the UK under the British Nationality Act to help rebuild Britain.
For people like my grandparents, they were enticed by the promise of greater work opportunities, and picturesque images of the “Mother Country”. Upon arrival, the genteel childhood images of Britain were shattered as they were greeted with racial hostility and violence.
Groups such as the White Defence League patrolled the area chanting and defacing property with the slogan “Keep Britain White”, targeting Caribbean households with firebombs or faeces posted through the letterbox.
“Carnival embodies the fullness of what it means to be Black and British.”
Advertisement
In 1959, tensions came to a boil and led to a week of disturbances in Notting Hill that spread even as far as Nottingham. Political activist and founder of the first Black British newspaper, The West Indian Gazette, Claudia Jones decided to initiate the first carnival in direct response to the race relations, famously asserting “a people’s art is the genesis of their freedom”.
Although many dismiss carnival as just a raucous party with rum and women in feathers, it started as an extremely subversive and radical event borne on plantations across the Americas.
There is a great misunderstanding about the ancestral traditions and symbolism present in Notting Hill Carnival. For instance dances such as “whining” (rhythmically gyrating your hips) are frequently referred to as ’sex stimulation.’
However, this is a pre-colonial West and Central African tradition used as fertility dance or to worship deities. Chocolate Nation, a mas band notorious for smearing chocolate and paint on party goers at Notting Hill Carnival also has radical roots. This tradition known as J’ouvert comes from slave revolts in Trinidad and Tobago where enslaved people would cover themselves in oil and mud to avoid being persecuted.
“In a world where footage of Black people being murdered is normalised, Black joy and celebrating the resilient spirit of our ancestors is one of the most radical things we can do.”
Advertisement
For Black British people we have to consistently adhere to respectability politics to try avoid discrimination and prove our humanity. Carnival allows us to feel momentarily liberated from the constraints of systemic racism.
Because, after all, how far has the Black British community really come since SMS Windrush docked on our shores?
The murder of George Floyd by police officers in the United States, and the global coronavirus pandemic have amplified the stark inequalities that still exist within every echelon of our society.
A common tactic is to simply deflect and dismiss systemic racism as an “American problem”, but it is undeniable that Britain still has a huge race problem.
Whilst I am relieved that we are having these pertinent conversations, it is draining to consistently relive traumatic experiences or, even worse, argue the existence of racism.
Advertisement
The only time we see Black people in the media shouldn’t be to just talk about racism. Blackness is so multifaceted, to me it is joy, resilience, delicious food and so much more. Carnival embodies the fullness of what it means to be Black and British.
In fact, the virtual nature of carnival this year affords an unprecedented level of accessibility for all Black British people to connect with their culture. For those who are disabled, elderly or live outside of London, it’s an opportunity to join in the celebrations at home.
I personally suffer from anxiety triggered by large crowds, and the over policing of carnival and use of kettling techniques can make me feel overwhelmed.
Carnival is a space where partying meets the political. In a world where footage of Black people being murdered is normalised, Black joy and celebrating the resilient spirit of our ancestors is one of the most radical things we can do.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-08-29--'It's Too Soon': These Parents Aren't Sending Their Kids Back To School

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Debate has been raging over the past few weeks among parents who are concerned about sending their children back to school amid the pandemic.
It comes as kids are shown to have a milder experience of the virus than adults, with the risk of school outbreaks remaining relatively low, according to Public Health England. Despite government guidance, which says all children – both primary and secondary – must return in September or face fines, some parents are making the decision to homeschool their kids instead.
Advertisement
Interestingly, a survey of more than 2,000 parents by Netmums revealed one in five parents in the UK are still unsure if they’ll be sending their children back, and 88% said they’d risk a fine to keep their children at home.
In the poll, 45% of parents said it’s still “too soon” to think about returning children to school, 25% are still worried about the health risk to their children, and 19% are concerned about the health risk to the rest of their family from their children bringing Covid-19 back home.
HuffPost UK spoke to mothers who told us they aren’t ready to send their kids back to school until they’re convinced it’s completely safe to do so.
Advertisement
‘I don’t want to risk the health of my children for an education’
Aneesa Saleem, 32, from Lancashire, has two children: Fakhirah Zeeshan, nine, and Muhammed Saleem, six.
Advertisement
Aneesa Saleem Aneesa Saleem
“I’m not sending my children back this year, for sure. Not until I know the area I live in is safe and protected. I’m from Lancashire, where it’s hit the most – and the thing that matters most to me is the health and wellbeing of my children.
“The school they go to is saying Years 1, 2 and 6 will be allowed to return – but how can I only send one child and not the other? Either the government needs to make extra measures to keep schools open, or have teachers teach from home. There are many I know who are studying from home, but they’re the privileged ones. What about people who are barely able to pay rent? How are those parents expected to get their children a tablet so they can learn from home?
“I want a system where the school provides some sort of support at home for children. This pandemic is going nowhere – and yes, it can get extremely stressful, staying at home. But that’s where we as parents have to take the initiative to keep our children’s minds active.
“I would love my kids to go school, but I know that when kids get together, they’re not going to think about distancing – and honestly, I don’t want to risk the health of my children for an education. Education is important but this issue needs to be addressed, first.”
Advertisement
‘It feels like a big decision, but the benefits are undeniable’
Susie Ramroop, 44, has an eight-year-old daughter who she took out of school before lockdown began. They live in London.
Susie Ramroop Susie Ramroop
“I didn’t trust the government were acting quickly enough, so I took my eight-year-old out of school before lockdown began. I mostly love her school, but I felt they could’ve done a lot better during lockdown. Given I’m a complete rule follower, this was a big deal.
“I always thought homeschooling would be hard, and considered I might not have the patience for it. But it’s worked well for us. I grew in confidence with the positive feedback from my daughter. She’s very self-disciplined and wanted to stick to the structure of the school day. When she grew tired of it by early July, I declared the summer holidays early.
“My daughter loves me being her teacher. She misses her friends, but she doesn’t miss her teacher spending more time on disciplining other children, rather than helping her stretch intellectually. She likes to get her head down and concentrate. She’s become a voracious reader and even drafted her own children’s book under my tuition. I’m also acutely aware that in northern Europe, there’s evidence to suggest she doesn’t need to be in school at this age. I’d prefer she spent time doing outdoor activities, and playing music.
Advertisement
“I’d like to move to the countryside. Since homeschooling I’ve realised we could create the schedule that works for all of us and not compromise at all. It feels like a big decision, but the benefits are undeniable.”
‘They’ll be home-schooled until I feel it’s safe’
Charlotte Watson, 26, has two children and lives in Long Eaton, Derbyshire. She has two daughters, aged four and seven.
Mayur Kakade via Getty Images Stock image
“My children won’t be going back. They’ll be homeschooled until I feel it’s safe. I believe Boris Johnson wants all kids in school so their parents can go back to work, as school is a form of ‘free childcare’ for most parents.
“Children can be carriers of the virus, and can be asymptomatic. They’re at risk of spreading coronavirus to their vulnerable parents or other family members. I think losing a loved one would mess with their mental health more than missing school.
Advertisement
“I’m planning to homeschool, and wait for it to feel safe for them to go back. I’m very lucky to not have to work at the moment, as my partner brings home a comfortable income.
“I have been battling with myself for weeks over sending them back to school, and the ‘mum guilt’ has come at me full-speed. But, children are so versatile and will bounce back from this – at such young ages, I think they will be completely oblivious to what happened in 2020 when they have grown up!”
Commenting on the school return, a Department for Education spokesperson told HuffPost UK: “Getting all children back into their classrooms full-time in September is a national priority, because it is the best place for their education, development and wellbeing. This will be particularly important for disadvantaged children and those with special educational needs.
“We have always been clear in our guidance about the protective measures that schools should implement to reduce risks for staff and pupils as far as possible.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-08-29--How The Light Gets in Festival Is Back, And This Time It's Global

HuffPost HuffPost journalists Paul Waugh, Rachel Moss and Aman Sethi will all be hosting sessions.
Not content with hosting one online festival in a pandemic year, How The Light Gets In is doing it again – only this time it’s going global across three continents.
Following the success of its first virtual edition in May 2020, the philosophy and music festival returns for a fresh weekend of live debate and performance on 19-20 September, with a programme of more than 200 online events across eight stages, curated and hosted from London, New York and Delhi.
Advertisement
Nobel prizewinners, academics, politicians and journalists will be joined by the mix of musicians and comedians How the Light Gets In regulars have come to expect – all appearing in a purpose-built festival site on Zoom.
HuffPost UK also returns as How The Light Gets In media partner, with three journalists from its international editions hosting panels and interviews.
“How The Light Gets In is growing,” says founding director, Hilary Lawson, from the Institute of Art and Ideas. “There’s no reason for philosophical issues to be Anglocentric and we wanted to reflect that in the way we did the festival. Setting up debates in India and the States has just ensured we are punching globally.
“In a way, the pandemic has returned people to the big philosophical questions that affect our lives, such as what is the aim of life, what is the nature of reality? We held a lot of political debates back in May, in the middle of lockdown, and we still are doing those this time. But I think that people have had six months talking about Covid-19. They are also interested in the bigger questions.”
Advertisement
The festival’s online arena has been designed to emulate the conviviality and serendipity of the festival’s biannual editions in Hay-on-Wye and London – with a chance to mingle with old friends, make new ones and chew the fat with speakers after each of the live sessions. There’s even an after-hours disco.
“Being on the festival site will be more like being in a VR space,” explains Lawson. “It’s not laid out like a normal website: you choose between things, just as you would in reality, arriving at the box office and heading into the festival. There’s a chance to get lost on the way as you cross the site, and plenty of opportunities to meet other festival goers and talk to the speakers.”
Amid a busy programme, Paul Waugh, HuffPost UK’s executive editor of politics, and writer of The Waugh Zone, will be chairing the ‘Dreams, Delusions and Class Interests’ session, as Conservative cabinet Minister Kwasi Kwarteng, Labour MP Dawn Butler and satirist PJ O’Rourke wrestle with the relevance of class and whether “left” and “right” are still good ways to split up politics.
Rachel Moss, life reporter and co-presenter of HuffPost UK’s weekly podcast about women’s health, bodies and private lives, Am I Making You Uncomfortable? will be interviewing human rights defender Bianca Jagger.
Aman Sethi, editor-in-chief of HuffPost India, will be hosting ‘Tomorrow’s World’, a debate weighing up technology both as a threat and solution, with Oxford transhumanist Anders Sandberg, inventor and green technologist, Priyadarshini Karve, and director of Big Brother Watch, Silkie Carlo.
Advertisement
Lawson admits he was surprised just how social the virtual May festival felt and “how good it was to go with friends”.
“There’s something about the online space that can feel isolated and solitary, but a lot of people said it changed their ideas of what being online could be,” he says. “You can bump into people and have a chat somewhere where people are genuinely exploring a variety of options, rather than simply clicking a button.”
Matt Eachus themancphotographer.co.uk


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-08-29--It’s 2020, And I Still Have To Explain Why I Chose Not To Take My Husband’s Surname

Image taken by Mayte Torres via Getty Images "It’s time we stopped sleepwalking ourselves into upholding gender biases that do ourselves (and our daughters) no favors," the author writes.
Growing up and yearning to fit in, as teens often do, I resented my surname.
At nine letters long, the South Asian surname I inherited from my father proved too long and difficult to spell, much less pronounce with an anglophone tongue. I longed for the inconspicuous conformity offered by Brown or Smith.
It wasn’t until age 23, when I set out to visit the land of my father’s childhood in Indian-administered Kashmir, that I finally made peace with my surname —through the barrel of a rifle pointed at my face.
Advertisement
When Partition happened in 1947, my father, along with his siblings and mother, found himself uprooted from his native Kishtwar and separated from family members — including his own father. As soon as he was old enough to change his name by deed poll, he renamed himself Kishtwari after his beloved Land of Sapphire and Saffron. It was his way of maintaining a tangible link to the home he instinctively knew he’d never be able to return to.
Decades later, that decision was to secure my swift release and safe onward journey when a group of armed men (they were clearly not Indian Army officials) at a makeshift roadside checkpoint surrounded our vehicle, forcing us out. Determined to keep outsiders from heading deeper into Kashmir, the bearded men looked through my belongings — I was the only foreigner and woman — for evidence I did not belong. The name on my passport was enough to assuage their concerns.
Irony of ironies, the surname of the man who was to become my husband in 2012, Fabre, was the French equivalent of Smith. I finally had the opportunity to substitute my unusual name with something more conventional. However, my misplaced sense of shame had since been replaced with a strong sense of self; I wasn’t about to give that up.
Instead, I suggested fusing our two surnames to create one long, double-barrelled shared identity; the emphasis on shared. (If I were expected to take on his name, he could surely expect to take on mine.)
Advertisement
His response wasn’t his finest hour: He laughed, a nervous sort of laugh, swiftly followed by “Don’t be so ridiculous.”
My soon-to-be husband’s reaction betrayed the disparity in expectations society places on women. It was settled: I would keep my name and he would keep his.
“No man has even been asked to explain why he should get to keep his surname, so why, then, should women provide a rationale for keeping theirs?”
Knowing the family history of my surname, perhaps you understand my desire to hang on to it. But what if there was no such story? What if my surname had been Brown or Smith or Fabre? What if it was a name, like any other, that had no particular sentimental value beyond simply being mine, and I still wanted to keep it?
No man has even been asked to explain why he should get to keep his surname, so why, then, should women provide a rationale for keeping theirs?
Advertisement
According to a 2011 study, 72% of American adults surveyed said they believe a woman should give up her maiden name upon marriage. Half the respondents agreed that it was “a good idea” for states to legally require a woman to take her husband’s last name. Almost half of those who replied (46.5%) did not think it was OK for a man to take on his wife’s name. Until as late as the 1980s, some states only allowed married women the right to vote if they had changed their surnames.
These entrenched views don’t just affect women. In 2017, researchers found that people make assumptions about the power dynamics in couples who buck this marital trend, with the men perceived to be more feminine and even disempowered (I’ll let my under-the-thumb husband know). It comes as no surprise, then, to learn that a 2018 study revealed that out of 877 heterosexual married men, just 3% had taken their wives’ surnames.
Across the Western world, women who choose not to take on their husbands’ surnames remain very much in the minority — even in Norway, with its strong feminist culture, new brides who keep their surnames make up just 20% of all marriage registrations; numbers in the United States are similar. In Britain, it’s as low as 10%.
In our supposedly enlightened times, why do so many women enable this millennia-old patriarchal tradition to endure? Imported from the British, hereditary surnames were originally a French custom that took hold at the time of the Norman conquest. A woman was, for all intents and purposes, a vassal, to be passed on from her father to her husband upon marriage — hence the longstanding tradition, reenacted at weddings, of “giving away” the bride, and cultures in which dowries are still exchanged.
Many people wrongly believe that women are expected to change their names as a matter of law when they marry. Until I started contemplating marriage, I had no idea just how relaxed the rules around surnames are. A surname can be kept, hyphenated with a spouse’s name, swapped for a spouse’s, or completely invented.
Advertisement
I have noticed an increasing trend of people citing “practical” reasons for women changing their names, but what could be more practical than changing nothing? Surely getting used to a new identity, changing your ID, including Social Security, driver’s license and passport, as well as asking your workplace to make any relevant changes is the opposite of practical?
Assumptions are inevitably made about how to address me. I see no reason to correct people who refer to me as Mrs Fabre. I do, however, take exception to people passing judgment, whether it manifests in a roll of the eyes or a condescending smile.
These tell-tale signs pale in comparison, however, to the reactions I receive when I explain my children carry both their parents’ names and that, ahem, mine goes first.
I’m not quite sure why, but this seems to be sensitive territory. And in my experience, women usually struggle more than men: First, an incredulous look creeps over their faces as the sheer horror of what I have just revealed sinks in. Then, the questions come: Why would you do that? How does your husband feel about it? Why is it important to you that your name goes first? Why would you emasculate him?
The best I can offer by way of explanation is to answer with a question of my own: Would you ask me those questions if I were a man?
Advertisement
“I see no reason to correct people who refer to me as Mrs. Fabre. I do, however, take exception to people passing judgment, whether it manifests in a roll of the eyes or a condescending smile.”
When I was pregnant with my twin girls, my husband and I discussed our options: We agreed that they should take both our surnames. With that decided, there was the issue of name order. To help us decide, we conducted a highly controlled experiment: a straw poll of our friends. We asked about a dozen people which sounded better: Fabre Kishtwari or Kishtwari Fabre? With “neither” not a valid option, their views were unanimous: Kishtwari Fabre. (The only people who disagreed with the findings, strangely enough, were my in-laws.)
This worked for us, and others will navigate their own paths differently, but what people often see as obstacles when deciding what to do about names are often easily overcome.
Will our girls experience the same discomfort regarding their surnames that I once did over mine? Perhaps. Although, I suspect having very honest conversations with them might help mitigate that. We chose not to hyphenate their surnames for practical reasons: Should they choose to marry when they grow up, this option offers them maximum flexibility. (Yes, it means they might decide to shed one of the surnames; they might even decide to shed both.) Either way, it’ll be their (fully informed) decision to make.
For some women, the importance of tradition is reason enough to divest themselves of their names. What is marriage after all, if not the continuation of another tradition, deeply rooted in sexist customs? Yet marriage has evolved so that in many countries, both partners are considered equal and enjoy the same protections.
Advertisement
It’s time we stopped sleepwalking ourselves into upholding gender biases that do ourselves (and our daughters) no favours. For anyone currently thinking about marriage and having that debate, asking a man if he is willing to take on his future wife’s name could become the new equality litmus test for couples.
Whatever your personal views, his reaction will determine just how far his commitment to equality stretches. He might surprise you, or, depending on his reaction, you might just surprise yourself.
This article first appeared on HuffPost Personal


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-08-29--'Punch Up, Not Down': 6 Comics On The Push For Socially-Conscious Comedy

The comedy scene has never felt more divided: a vast chasm separates performers who believe comedy should be sensitive to the concerns of minority groups by ‘punching up, not punching down,’ and the more traditional comedians who believe that anything goes.
The debate grew more heated with the arrival of woke culture and cancel culture, both of which have justified criticism of performers for targeting minority groups by creating more platforms for discussions around appropriateness in comedy.
Advertisement
For many, this reality check on the sensitivity of the jokes made by some comedians is a positive thing - but others have seen this movement as an attack on free speech. These conversations have been exacerbated by the fallout from the Black Lives Matter movement.
Films and series like Fawlty Towers, Little Britain and Gone With The Wind were removed from streaming platforms – though some BAME people responded by saying energy should be expended on changing the way we create new comedy now, rather than tinkering with old shows.
The debate has been heightened further by plans for a Scottish Hate Crime Bill, which, if passed, would offer further protections to minority groups from language and actions deemed hateful in the eyes of the law. But again, critics including Rowan Atkinson feel the bill threatens free speech. Others say free speech has nothing to do with hate speech and that comedy shouldn’t be hateful anyway.
Of course, not all comedy will appeal to all audiences. But the cultural revolution going on around the platforming and celebrating of diverse voices means that jokes made years ago at the expense of disadvantaged people now feel seriously misjudged and outdated.
Advertisement
Moreover, these jokes just aren’t that funny, say comedians HuffPost UK spoke with, who shared their thoughts about the future of comedy...
“You have the freedom to say what you want to say, but that doesn’t mean you’re free from consequence.”
Bruce Tang Supplied
Bruce Tang, founder of Comediasians, the comedy-variety night featuring all Asian performers, a BBC Writers’ Room contributor and Do the Right Scene’s Special Delivery performer: “I’m bored of ‘offensive’ comedy - it’s lazy. Any idiot can use hate speech for the sake of shock, there’s no craft in that. When it comes down to it you have to ask - was that joke worth it? Was that contribution meaningful?
“You have the freedom to say what you want to say, but that doesn’t mean you’re free from consequence. As much as you have the right to say something, others have their right to react how they feel. If a well-constructed point is delivered in the right way, then any topic can be funny. What matters is if the audience understands the comedian’s point of view and their intention.
Advertisement
“There’s a misplaced pressure on comedy to be a bastion of free speech and intelligent debate, but comedy can be anything. My aim is to make comedy so intricately constructed and so mind-numbingly stupid that you’ve just got to laugh. Why waste time causing offence when you can be laughing at a frog singing show tunes instead?”
“The thing I love most about comedy is that laughter is self-policing. If it resonates, we laugh.”
Jordan Gray Supplied
Jordan Gray, Transaction, Comedy Central: “When did we start feeling naked without an opinion? Pick any cultural hot potato and the dialogue can be divided into four viewpoints: those who “agree”, “disagree”, “don’t care”… and the grossly underrepresented “don’t know yet”. There’s nothing ignorant about taking your time to gather your own thoughts on a divisive joke, term or turn-of-phrase.
“When in doubt, the thing I love most about comedy is that laughter is self-policing. If it resonates, we laugh. Strangely, some of us have become so detached from our physical squishy bits that we’re prepared to stifle a laugh in service of a stance. That’s like holding in a s*** in case somebody outs you for eating.
“Here comes the spanner. In modern comedy, there’s a phenomenon called “ironic bigotry” (where we’re laughing at the ignorance of the perpetrator over and above the bigotry itself). When utilised masterfully (Alan Partridge, David Brent) it can be incredibly unifying. Problem is, it does look very similar to *actual* bigotry. World-class stand-ups from Dave Chappelle to Al Murray have anecdotally suffered personal crises upon realising that they were sometimes getting the “wrong kind of laughs”.
Advertisement
“Let us never forget that opinions are like assholes: Always worth exploring.”
“If thoughts and opinions lead to the harm of discriminated groups, then something has gone wrong.”
Tai Campbell Supplied
Tai Campbell, BBC Comedy Writer’s Room winner: “All of a sudden I became a drug dealer. The comedian could have asked me about my achievements, failures or even my scruffy shoes like he did the white audience members but for him I was reduced to the thing he saw Black men as; worst of all some of the audience loved it. I imagine the throbbing power he must have felt putting a 6’ 1” Black man in his place, this isn’t new and it’s not old either.
“In an increasingly polarising time I can agree and disagree with both sides. Cancel culture can lead to the demonising of people for something small while anti-liberals gaslight and compound entire groups calling us snowflakes, forcing us to just ‘get over’ the trauma they will never experience.
“Freedom of speech means you can say what you want, it doesn’t mean you can say what you want without facing the consequences. That’s not to say I don’t enjoy candid insights into thoughts and opinions but if those thoughts and opinions lead to the harm of discriminated groups then something has gone wrong. If you can’t relate – congratulations! Now go learn some empathy and the difference between ‘punching up’ and ‘punching down’.”
“Being a comedian is exactly to influence the feelings of the people, any people, that hear you. You can choose to use that influence for good – to entertain, to drive change – or for bad – to insult, to incite hate.”
Ginnia Cheng Supplied
Ginnia Cheng, So You Think You’re Funny semi-finalist, co-founder of sex-positive comedy collective Sex Standing Up: “Being from Hong Kong, where people are literally putting their lives on the line in the fight for free speech, I just roll my eyes at the debate over here as to whether hate speech laws will impede on comedy.
“I do believe people should be able to say what they want. But when it comes to comedy, if your first reaction to a law protecting against inciting hatred and violence is to claim that your rights to free speech as a comedian is at risk, is what you’re doing really comedy?
“You’re essentially arguing that your right to saying hateful rhetoric passed off as a joke is more important than someone’s right to not feel like they are going to get sexually assaulted, or attacked because of their race, or made to feel absolutely worthless, because of something you said.
“Comedians can’t argue that they’re not responsible for the feelings of every single person out there – being a comedian is exactly to influence the feelings of the people, any people, that hear you. You can choose to use that influence for good – to entertain, to drive change – or for bad – to insult, to incite hate. Choose wisely or you’ll probably end up on the wrong side of history!”
Advertisement
“Before the lockdown, the last evening I spent in a comedy club had jokes that ticked the boxes of misogyny, fat-shaming and homophobia.”
Athena Kugblenu Supplied
Athena Kugblenu, 10 Best Jokes, Edinburgh 2018, BBC Radio Four News Quiz writer: “What can I say about cancel culture in comedy that hasn’t already been said? It’s loud, judgemental people on social media. It’s unfunny comedians who’d rather be contrary than write a proper joke. It’s the death of free speech. Or it’s free speech in action. It doesn’t even exist; cancellation seems to lead to more social media followers, streaming deals and lucrative Patreons.
“Sometimes I think: ‘I wish I could get cancelled, it looks great’. It’s not true that there is a ‘woke brigade’ patrolling comedy. Before the lockdown, the last evening I spent in a comedy club had jokes that ticked the boxes of misogyny, fat-shaming and homophobia.
“Comedians telling these sort of jokes either aren’t listening to the jokes that are being told in comedy clubs, or they aren’t in the clubs in the first place because they are not being booked to perform. I hardly see any of these right wing comics in comedy clubs. They are on Twitter and putting out their podcasts, but I rarely see them on stage.
Advertisement
“It is true that there are audiences who are more demanding from the creatives they enjoy. They don’t want jokes that punch down. They don’t want jokes that further marginalise already marginalised people. They’d rather advocate for the people most harmed by society than laugh at them. That seems like a nice hill to park on. If not for you, fine. We’ve got a big section of the electorate that didn’t care about austerity, Windrush or selling the NHS. A bunch of people don’t care much for refugees either. So I don’t think you’re alone.”
“The real implication of freedom of speech is that you can say what you want without serious legal consequences - but there will still be social consequences.”
Stephanie Laing Supplied
Stephanie Laing, Leicester Mercury Comedian of the Year Finalist 2015: “Some people seem to think that the existence of woke culture means that freedom of speech is dying. They feel like you can’t say what you want anymore, and this must be dangerous for our freedom. However, the real implication of freedom of speech is just that you can say what you want without there being serious legal consequences. There will still be social consequences. If you use your freedom of speech to say things that are hurtful or victimising, then other people can use their freedom of speech to tell you to shut up and go away.
“If you say shitty things, then yes Twitter (which is a privately owned business) can make it so that you can’t say those shitty things on that website anymore. This isn’t you being ‘no-platformed’. The internet exists, it’s impossible to ‘no platform’ people. You can use another platform, set up a website, shout stuff in the street. You can use your freedom of speech to do all those things. But that doesn’t mean other people have to listen, or agree, or welcome you into their homes or businesses.”
Advertisement
“My rule is to never ‘punch down,’ never make the punch line about the victim of the injustice, instead ‘punch up.’”
Jon Pearson Steve Ullathorne
Jon Pearson, Glee Club and The Comedy Store performer: “Being a stand-up comedian, free speech is our job. Good comedy can often tread close to the line of what could be deemed as offensive. However a well written routine, with plenty of thought and testing at new material nights, where it can fail and needs to be rewritten, can make the audience think about sensitive subjects in a different way.
“In its greatest form, comedy can change a person’s mind on certain topics. It should never cross over into hate speech; that is just a rally. Being woke will help you write and perform in a more rounded and educated fashion.
‘Woke culture’ as a term has started to be used in a negative way. How can it be wrong to be aware and actively attentive to social injustice or injustices involving race, gender or sexuality, to name a few? Doesn’t that just make you a more educated person? Yes, as comedians we can play on these subjects, poke fun at them - but knowing the subject inside out enables us to make those observations.
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-08-29--Chadwick Boseman, Black Panther Star, Dies After Private Four-Year Battle With Cancer

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Black Panther actor Chadwick Boseman has died at the age of 43 following a four-year battle with colon cancer, his family said in a statement.
The Hollywood star died at home with his wife and family by his side, the statement said.
“A true fighter, Chadwick persevered through it all, and brought you many of the films you have come to love so much,” it added.
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.”
The family added: “The family thanks you for your love and prayers, and asks you to continue to respect their privacy during this difficult time.”
Chadwick Boseman last year. VALERIE MACON via Getty Images
Boseman had not spoken publicly about his diagnosis.
The US actor had been known for playing real-life figures, including professional baseball player Jackie Robinson in 2013 biopic 42 and James Brown in 2014’s Get On Up, before he landed the Marvel role which made him a superstar.
Advertisement
He first played Black Panther in 2016’s Captain America: Civil War, before the character headlined a hugely successful blockbuster in 2018.
Black Panther was a hit with critics who praised its diversity and it grossed over 1.3 billion dollars at the global box office, as well as earning a best picture nomination at the Academy Awards.
Chadwick Boseman in Black Panther Marvel
In June he starred in Spike Lee’s searing drama Da 5 Bloods, playing a Vietnam soldier.
Following the shock news of his death, tributes to Boseman poured in from across the entertainment industry.
British Oscar nominee Cynthia Erivo said Boseman was “a gentleman” and “the kindest superhero I have ever met”.
Advertisement
In a touching tribute, she wrote: “Took my hand and walked me down the steps, had a hug every time we met. There was only ever love. A real one. We lost a real one. I’m truly crushed.
“We lost the Black Panther, the hero that gave our babies a hero to aspire to. Just f****** heartbroken.
“Dearest Chadwick You will never be forgotten. Rest In Power!! God Rest your soul kind man.
“Can we please just love on each other now, we are losing each other!!!”
The Hollywood actress Kate Hudson also paid tribute, saying Boseman’s death was “devastating”.
She wrote on Instagram: “I have no words, just love and tears at the moment. Sending all this love to his family and all the film families that had the pleasure to work along side this beautiful man. Rest my friend.”
Award-winning actor Sterling K Brown had a supporting role in Black Panther and shared a tribute to Boseman on Twitter.
He said: “I don’t have words. Rest In Peace, Bruh. Thank you for all you did while you were here. Thank you for being a friend. You are loved. You will be missed.”
Advertisement
The NAACP, one of the leading civil rights groups in the US, shared a tribute to Boseman on Twitter. Boseman’s portrayal of Marvel superhero Black Panther was lauded as an important landmark in the fight for wider representation in Hollywood.
The NAACP said: “For showing us how to conquer adversity with grace… For showing us how to ‘Say it Loud!’… For show us how to walk as a King, without losing the common touch…. For showing us just how powerful we are… Thank you #ChadwickBoseman #RestInPower #BlackPantherForever.”
The film academy described Boseman’s death as an “immeasurable loss”.
It added: “From Black Panther to Da 5 Bloods, Chadwick Boseman brought strength and light to the screen, every time.”
Black Panther scored seven nominations at the 91st Academy Awards, including best picture.
It won for best costume design, best original score and best production design, becoming the first film in the Marvel Cinematic Universe to win an Academy Award.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-08-29--Exclusive: Teachers’ Union Added 50,000 Members In Covid Pandemic

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Britain’s biggest teaching union has seen a surge in membership of more than 50,000 new members since the coronavirus pandemic began, HuffPost UK can reveal.
The huge spike in members for the National Education Union, which means it can now boast nearly half a million teachers among its ranks, emerged as schools in England prepared to go back to full time classroom teaching of pupils next week.
Advertisement
Other trade unions in education and the wider public sector have also seen rises in membership as workers seek greater protection and rights amid the uncertainty caused by the virus crisis.
Unison has seen a net increase of at least 24,000 extra members, and sources within Unite and the GMB said they have seen “tens of thousands” more people join, particularly early in the pandemic.
Other teaching unions have benefitted from the rise in activism. The Association of School and College Leaders (ASCL) has seen a 1,500 jump on top of its 20,000 membership. The NASUWT has also seen an increase, although it could not say by how much.
The TUC and union leaders said that the surge ought to dispel the government’s claims that unions are part of the problem rather than the solution to tackling the pandemic and putting health and safety at the heart of workplaces.
Advertisement
Pressure from teaching unions and heads partly lay behind the U-turn last week from education secretary Gavin Williamson to allow discretionary use of face coverings in communal areas in English schools, with mandatory use in lockdown regions.
The NEU became the biggest union of teachers in Europe after the National Union of Teachers (NUT) and the Association of Teachers and Lecturers (ATL) merged in 2017.
In one week alone at the start of the pandemic it put on 10,000 members, an unprecedented rise.
Internal estimates of the NEU’s rise in membership vary, but insiders said that it soared steadily by 20,000 in May to more than 30,000 in mid summer. Official figures won’t be made public until next year.
A union spokesperson said the increase had been estimated at 32,000, but HuffPost has been told by sources within the union movement that it has now reached 50,000 extra members since March.
In TUC YouTube workshops to spread its best practice with other unions, the NEU has revealed that it has mobilised teachers and support staff online via a string of techniques from Zoom calls to mass town hall phone calls, texts and Facebook and via its new app.
Advertisement
One popular innovation among members has been its ‘checklist’ app that allows staff to see if schools are adhering to the five-point list of benchmarks the union felt had to be met for schools to reopen earlier this summer.
The app, which was downloaded by huge numbers of teachers and its findings swiftly sent to heads by staff reps, is credited by the union for so few schools opening in June.
Boris Johnson had promised that all pupils would have at least four weeks classroom time but was forced to change tack and instead allow only key years back to school before the summer break.
The union has since devised a fresh checklist for the September reopening and has repeatedly called for better contingency planning by government to cope with outbreaks that could force schools to close once more
With Williamson still under pressure to quit over the exams algorithm fiasco, unions aim to hit back at moves to pit teachers against parents and instead turn the focus on what government support is provided.
Advertisement
The NEU, which has a £1 membership offer for newly qualified teachers, has had more than 100,000 members on Zoom calls.
It hosted one Zoom call of 20,000 people, a record for a trade union and the biggest trade union or political meeting of recent years, and has recruited more than 3,000 new workplace reps through mobilising people who used the technology.
Kevin Courtney, joint general secretary of the National Education Union, said: “Our new membership has increased substantially since March.
“The reason is very simple - we have been consistently amplifying the voice of teachers, heads and school staff, who are working hard for every young person in their care but are too often traduced by this government.
Advertisement
“In deeply uncertain times, where far too many loved ones have lost their lives to Covid, unions are playing a crucial role in ensuring all workers are protected. Rarely has it been truer to say that we are stronger together.”
Geoff Barton, general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders, said: “ASCL membership was increasing before the pandemic began, and has continued to rise over the past six months, with nearly 1,500 new members joining the association.
“During that period we have been sending out bulletins to members on almost a daily basis, as well as running webinars, and providing a great deal of information and support on our website, including a regularly updated set of frequently asked questions.
“We have received very positive feedback from our members, and we know that this has contributed to the rise in membership we have seen. We are very grateful to all those who have put their faith in us and we will continue to do everything possible to support them at this challenging time and beyond.”
Several unions in the public sector have benefitted from worker anger at the government’s handling of the pandemic, although many fear that large scale redundancies in the private sector now loom this autumn once the Treasury’s furlough scheme finally ends.
Advertisement
Even before the virus hit, union membership had risen year on year in the UK. Among the extra 91,000 who joined a union last year, most were women, particularly in health and social care and education.
TUC general secretary Frances O’Grady said: “We are hearing from TUC unions about lots of people wanting to know more and asking to join. The pandemic has caused great anxiety, with worries about safety at work, rights like flexible working and whether their job is safe when the job retention scheme ends. And they see unions as the part of the community that can help them.
“But it is not just about ‘us’ helping ‘them’. It’s a way for workers to come together with their workmates to protect each other’s needs. Yes, unions use central resources to help new members and newly unionised workplaces. But most importantly, we give them training and support so they know how to help each other.
“The pandemic may have also helped to shatter myths about unions from hostile voices. People saw the reality of union reps stepping up in their workplace and neighbourhood to negotiate safety and support in the pandemic.
“And they saw unions stepping up nationally to win support like the job retention scheme. It helps people understand that we’re an open community movement, dedicated to making life better for all of Britain’s working people.”
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-08-29--Large Crowd Gathers In Trafalgar Square For Anti-Lockdown Protest

Anti-mask protesters are seen at the Unite for Freedom protest in Trafalgar Square. Peter Summers via Getty Images
A large crowd has gathered in Trafalgar Square to protest against Covid-19 lockdown measures.
The ‘Unite for Freedom’ event, which started at midday on Saturday, was organised by a number of anti-lockdown groups, who claim the government has responded with disproportionate force to the virus.
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.
Advertisement
Face-coverings were near non-existent, with banners with slogans such as “masks are muzzles” and “stop 5G” – a reference to baseless links between the technology and coronavirus – on display.
Covid-19 has killed more than 40,000 people in Britain to date.
Among the key speakers at the event were climate change denier and and anti-5G campaigner Piers Corbyn and David Icke, a conspiracy theorist perhaps best known for claiming that the world is run by reptilian aliens.
At least a thousand anti-lockdown protestors have filled London’s Trafalgar Square pic.twitter.com/b1PuSPX87A — Jason Rodrigues (@RodriguesJasonL) August 29, 2020
In a poster shared online to publicise the event, organisers called for “no more lockdowns, no social distancing, no masks.”
Advertisement
The poster also demands “no mandatory vaccinations”. No vaccines are mandatory in the UK and there is currently little evidence to support claims that a coronavirus vaccine will be mandatory in the UK.
Protesters are also calling for the government to “restore all human rights that have been violated.” In April Robert Buckland, the UK’s justice secretary, said the UK’s response to Covid-19 represented a necessary “infringement” of human rights – but in doing to they protected Article 2 of the Human Rights Act, the right to life.
While demonstrators have garnered significant support online – particularly on Facebook where public pages and groups dedicated to opposing lockdown have thrived – many have responded angrily to the gathering, or simply pointed out that a potential second wave probably can’t be stopped by a protest alone.
Massive protests in Trafalgar Square asking for no more lockdown no mandatory face masks and no mandatory anything
Unfortunately I don’t think Coronavirus tends to listen to protests #Trafalgarsquare pic.twitter.com/D8MhNkfxp0 — Osama Gaweesh (@osgaweesh) August 29, 2020
So you think the Trafalgar Square lot see the fundamental issue with protesting about the threat of a second lockdown, whilst doing the very thing likely to cause one?? — Jake Humphrey (@mrjakehumphrey) August 29, 2020
Advertisement
A similar, much larger, protest in Berlin was ordered to disperse earlier on Saturday after around 18,000 people took to the streets to speak out against restrictions.
The demonstration had initially been banned, but campaigners won a legal battle on Friday night allowing them to go ahead.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-08-30--Treasury Refuses To Quash Reports Of Massive Autumn Tax Hike To Deal With Coronavirus Crisis

Chancellor of the Exchequer Rishi Sunak during a visit to Rothesay on the Isle of Bute, Scotland. PA
A senior Treasury official has refused to quash reports the government is planning a £20 billion tax hike in the autumn to deal with the cost of the coronavirus crisis.
Speaking to Times Radio, Stephen Barclay insisted any such move was for chancellor Rishi Sunak to announce in the November Budget.
Advertisement
He said: “Treasury ministers don’t get into what a Budget will or will not do and particularly on tax measures ahead of that, that’s for the chancellor, the Budget.
“There is always four moving parts to this. The key objective within the Treasury is to get growth.
“There is then a balance between the other three moving parts of debt, of spending, spending feeding into that, and tax.
“And what’s your trade-off then between your spending measures and your tax measures. The real objective is to reduce the economic scarring from Covid.”
According to a report in The Sunday Times, the Treasury is looking at raising corporation tax and capital gains tax, and cutting pension tax relief, among a raft of other revenue-raising measures.
Advertisement
The money could be clawed back from pensions, businesses, the wealthy and foreign aid and chancellor Rishi Sunak is considering hiking corporation tax from 19% to 24% in order to boost revenue by £12 billion next year, the report indicated.
Capital gains tax might also be paid at the same rate as income tax, under the ideas reportedly being looked at.
Chancellor of the Exchequer Rishi Sunak during a visit to Rothesay on the Isle of Bute, Scotland. PA
Pension tax relief could be “slashed” under measures being considered by the Treasury to help pay for the Covid-19 crisis, The Sunday Telegraph reported.
The newspaper also said that raising fuel and other duties was being looked at.
A revamp of the inheritance tax system and the introduction of an online sales tax were also reportedly being considered, PA Media reports.
Advertisement
The international development budget could also be caught up in Treasury reappraisals due to the cost of the pandemic, it was claimed.
The aid budget has already been cut by £2.9 billion from £15.8 billion this year, due to the contraction in the economy caused by the Covid-19 outbreak.
However, the Government insists it still meets its obligation to provide 0.7% of gross national income (GNI) to international development.
Treasury sources told the PA news agency that they do not comment on what may, or may not be, in the upcoming Budget.
Former Cabinet minister Damian Green, who served as then prime minister Theresa May’s de facto deputy, said he was wary about any changes to the so-called pensions “triple lock”.
Advertisement
The lock means the state pension increases each year in line with either wages, inflation or 2.5%, depending on which of the three figures is highest.
Green told Times Radio: “I would be very wary of the Government going down that route.
“It was a manifesto commitment to keep it. I think this raft of things… feels like a standard pre-Budget, Treasury kite-flying to see what people will make of this.
“Clearly the chancellor faces some unpalatable options because he’s rightly spent many, many billions of pounds supporting the economy and individual workers over the past few months.
“The other one on that list that I particularly wince at is the thought of breaking the commitment on foreign aid.
“I’m proud of the fact that Britain is one of the few countries that meets its commitment to have a small part, 0.7% of our GDP, spent on foreign aid and I would certainly want to see that continued.”


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-08-30--When Will We See The Queen Again?

When Will We See The Queen Again?

As other members of the royal family are carefully making in-person appearances post-lockdown, Queen Elizabeth’s reemergence on the public stage looks to be some time off.
The monarch recently made the trek to Balmoral, her estate in Scotland, for her annual summer stay, which typically covers most of August and September. But instead of returning to Buckingham Palace in London afterward, as she normally would, the Sunday Times recently reported that the queen will most likely head back to Windsor Castle outside the city.
Advertisement
Amid the chaos and uncertainty of the coronavirus pandemic, the palace communications team has reassured the public that the queen is doing well ― through radio and TV addresses, photos of her riding her horses, and a glimpse here and there of the sovereign on a video call.
But it’s no doubt hard for the monarch who once said she must “be seen to be believed” to remain isolated from the public. And many royal fans want to know: When will they see the queen again?
New reports suggest Queen Elizabeth will head back to Windsor Castle instead of Buckingham Palace after her summer stay in Scotland. Chris Jackson via Getty Images
The 94-year-old queen began quarantining at Windsor Castle alongside the 99-year-old Prince Philip in March, arriving a week earlier than normal due to the pandemic. By May, royal biographer Andrew Morton declared that Covid-19 had rendered her reign “effectively over.”
Advertisement
“It’s terribly sad but I can’t see how the Queen can resume her job,” he told The Telegraph, as reports swirled that Elizabeth would be withdrawing from public life for months and Prince Charles would be named Prince Regent (a title he would only assume while the queen was still alive). “The Covid-19 virus isn’t going away soon and will be with us for months if not years,” Morton said.
“The brutal truth is that her reign is effectively over,” he added. “Covid-19 has done more damage to the monarchy than Oliver Cromwell.”
At the time, Buckingham Palace told HuffPost, “The Queen continues to be busy and will follow appropriate advice on engagements.”
Though it might seem like this particular pandemic could prematurely end Queen Elizabeth’s reign, the monarchy has survived worse.
Queen Elizabeth is currently staying at her Balmoral estate in Scotland. WPA Pool via Getty Images
Advertisement
“There have been monarchs in the past who have reigned during periods of plague and pandemic,” Harris told HuffPost, pointing to King Edward III, who lost three of his dozen children to the Black Death plague in the mid-14th century.
“In the early 1660s, there were numerous outbreaks of plague in Restoration London, especially the Great Plague of 1665, during the reign of Charles II,” she said, which drove the king and his court out of the city for months.
“For centuries, the monarch has faced the challenge of acting as a unifying force while remaining in comparative seclusion during times of plague and pandemic,” said Harris.
Windsor Castle hardly represents a flight from the queen’s duties either. Harris said it is “a place that symbolizes the continuity of the monarchy over the past thousand years.”
Advertisement
Queen Elizabeth and Prince Philip headed to Windsor Castle at the beginning of the coronavirus pandemic. DANIEL LEAL-OLIVAS via Getty Images
“Windsor Castle has existed since the Norman Conquest (though it has been renovated and rebuilt many times since then, most recently after the fire of 1992) and the reigning dynasty also took its name from the castle in 1917,” the author noted.
Harris predicts that one of the queen’s first public engagements again will be coronavirus-related and deal with essential workers, just like Prince William, Prince Charles and Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall’s first events out of quarantine.
“The Queen will probably meet with health care workers and other first responders to thank them for their efforts during the pandemic,” she said. “The Queen may also want to meet with individuals who contracted the illness and recovered in order to hear about their experiences.”
Throughout the past few months, we’ve heard little about the queen’s own experience with the pandemic and only seen one in-person event, when she knighted Capt. Tom Moore at Windsor. But William Hanson, etiquette coach and executive director of The English Manner, described it as a sign of sacrifice that Elizabeth has limited her in-person engagements and carried on without a word of public complaint.
Advertisement
“By The Queen scaling back her commitments, making big changes to her lifestyle, she once again sets the tone for the nations over which she reigns,” he said. “If The Sovereign can make personal sacrifices and not see her family and friends without grumbling, so can the rest of us.”
Queen Elizabeth speaks to carers via video call to mark Carers Week 2020 on June 11. Chris Jackson via Getty Images
While it’s unlikely that the queen will return to Buckingham Palace before the end of the year, the Sunday Times expects that she will still head to her Sandringham estate for the Christmas holiday.
If the queen needs any guidance as to what she should say in her annual Christmas address this year, she can look for inspiration from her famous “Annus Horribilis” speech in 1992 ― the year in which a fire destroyed 115 rooms in Windsor Castle; Sarah, Duchess of York was caught in a toe-sucking scandal; and the queen’s three oldest children announced they were separating from or divorcing their spouses. That November, the queen said:
1992 is not a year on which I shall look back with undiluted pleasure. In the words of one of my more sympathetic correspondents, it has turned out to be an “Annus Horribilis.” I suspect that I am not alone in thinking it so. Indeed, I suspect that there are very few people or institutions unaffected by these last months of worldwide turmoil and uncertainty.
In the meantime, as Hugo Vickers, a broadcaster, royal biographer and author of “The Crown Dissected,” told HuffPost, it is important to take as many precautions as possible to safeguard the health of the queen and the Duke of Edinburgh. Not just because they’re royal, but because they’re in a vulnerable age group.
“Under normal circumstances, we would not be wondering why two nonagenarians were living quietly,” he said, adding that the queen “should not emerge until it is known that it is safe, and that may be a long time off.”


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-08-30--Donald Trump Lashes Out At His Niece During Yet Another Twitter Rampage

LOADING ERROR LOADING
President Donald Trump finally let loose Saturday on his niece Mary Trump for her harshly critical book about him, calling her “unstable.”
He also blasted Washington Post journalist Bob Woodward and former national security adviser John Bolton, who both spilled — or will spill — damning details about him in books.
Advertisement
Trump tweeted that only books that make him look bad have a chance at being published.
He called Bolton a “dumb warmonger” in an attack tweet. The worst he could call Woodward was a “social pretender” with nothing good to say.
But Trump was particularly vicious about his niece. He said she was “rightfully shunned, scorned and mocked her entire life” and was “never even liked by her own ... grandfather.”
About the only way a person is able to write a book on me is if they agree that it will contain as much bad “stuff” as possible, much of which is lies. It’s like getting a job with CNN or MSDNC and saying that “President Trump is great.” You have ZERO chance. FAKE NEWS! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) August 29, 2020
..Even whether it’s dumb warmongers like John Bolton, social pretenders like Bob Woodward, who never has anything good to say, or an unstable niece, who was now rightfully shunned, scorned and mocked her entire life, and never even liked by her own very kind & caring grandfather! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) August 29, 2020
Advertisement
Mary Trump delivered her own stinging blows to the president in her book, “Too Much and Never Enough: How My Family Created the World’s Most Dangerous Man.”
Mary Trump also recently released secret audio recordings of Trump’s sister, former federal judge Maryanne Trump Barry, who ripped the president as a man entirely without principles, a liar, a cheat and cruel.
So even the trump siblings know
pic.twitter.com/FupL1yI0Ge — Molly Jong-Fast🏡 (@MollyJongFast) August 23, 2020
Barry called Eric Trump “the moron” and characterised Ivanka Trump as callous and self-absorbed as the administration separated migrant children from their parents.
Mary Trump told The Washington Post that her uncle is “unfit” to be president and that she will do “everything in my power” to make certain he doesn’t win reelection.
Advertisement
Woodward examined the president’s response to Covid-19 in his upcoming book, “Rage,” and obtained copies of 24 letters between Trump and his one-time pal, North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un, CNN reported earlier this month.
Woodward reportedly conducted 17 interviews with Trump for the book, which is due September 15.
Trump on Friday tweeted that the book was “a FAKE” — even though he hadn’t read it.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-08-30--The Chase’s Mark ‘The Beast’ Labbett Splits From Wife After Open Marriage Fails To Work

LOADING ERROR LOADING
The Chase star Mark Labbett has split from his wife of seven years after their open marriage failed to work, he has revealed.
The 55-year-old TV quizzer, who has a three-year-old son with Katie, 28, told the Sun on Sunday that they had spent the last 18 months trying to make their unconventional marriage work after Katie told him about an affair.
Advertisement
Mark Labbett and wife Katie PA Archive/PA Images
“It’s got to the point now where I realise it is better for us to go our separate ways and remain friendly without the stress factor of living together,” Mark told the newspaper.
“When Katie first came clean to me about her boyfriend, I’d had an inkling,” he said.
“But right from the start, my attitude was quite pragmatic – this was spilt milk, what could we do about the situation to make it OK?
“We had a family. We couldn’t just throw that away lightly. There were other considerations.
“But Covid provided the perfect storm. My mental health suffered and the differences in our ages became magnified.”
Advertisement
Joe Maher via Getty Images
Katie said: “I want everyone to know what’s what and that we are all happy. I just want Mark to be happy.”
The pair previously revealed that they discovered, after getting together, that they are second cousins, but “it wasn’t something we were aware of at the time”.
Mark’s agent David Hahn said in a statement: “We can confirm Mark and Katie have split but will not be making any further comment.”
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-08-30--The Government Is Paying Love Island Stars To Promote Failing Test And Trace System

Love Island PA Media
The government has admitted to paying social media influencers and reality TV stars to promote the NHS Test and Trace system as it failed to reach its 80% target for the ninth week in a row.
A spokesperson said the government had a responsibility to “use every means possible” to keep the public informed during the pandemic.
Advertisement
They added: “Our use of social media influencers has meant over 7 million people have been reached. This is just one part of a wider campaign utilising TV, radio, social, print and other advertisements to ensure the public has the information it needs.”
It comes as the Sunday Mirror reported Love Island stars Shaughna Phillips, Chris Hughes and Josh Denzel were among those paid by the Cabinet Office to tell their online followers testing for Covid-19 was “free, quick and vital to stop the spread”.
But Phillips and Hughes have also both posted images online in the last month which showed them failing to socially distance from others on Mediterranean islands.
Advertisement
The Mirror cited a social media expert as saying the stars would usually command between £5,000 and £10,000 for an ad post.
The government’s spokesman said: “All costs involved in the campaign will be published as part of the regular transparency reports on gov.uk.”
The celebrities could also face an investigation by the Advertising Standards Agency after not initially labelling their posts as advertisements.
The government’s spokesman indicated the Cabinet Office had been clear about labelling such content correctly and noted all three posts had “now” been marked as ads.
Advertisement
It comes after recent data showed three-quarters of close contacts of people who tested positive for Covid-19 were reached through the Test and Trace system, once again falling short of the government’s target.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-08-30--New Poll Adds To Growing Tory Disquiet Over Boris Johnson's Leadership

Prime Minister Boris Johnson as he tours Castle Rock school, Coalville, in the east Midlands. PA
Boris Johnson is facing criticism from some Conservative MPs following a series of U-turns over recent months and a new poll by Opinium putting Labour at level pegging with the Tories for the first time since July 2019.
With Parliament set to return on Tuesday, the mood on Tory benches will be sombre and with one senior MP saying it was becoming increasingly difficult for MPs to defend government action as policies can be abandoned quickly by ministers.
Advertisement
Sir Charles Walker, vice-chairman of the 1922 committee of Conservative backbenchers and usually seen as a loyalist to the PM, told the Observer: “Too often it looks like this government licks its finger and sticks it in the air to see which way the wind is blowing.
“It is becoming increasingly difficult for backbenchers now to promote and defend government policy as so often that policy is changed or abandoned without notice.
“Whether this approach is by design or by accident, the climate of uncertainty it creates is unsustainable and erodes morale.”
The handling of the coronavirus crisis – especially the fiasco over exam results – has provoked public concern from some Tory MPs throughout the summer.
Advertisement
A U-turn over whether English secondary-school pupils should wear masks in some situations also caused disquiet among some backbenchers over how the situation was being handled.
A snapshot survey by Opinium put the Tories and Labour neck and neck on 40%.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-08-30--Universities Could Become Ground Zero For Second Wave Of Coronavirus, Union Warns

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Universities become ground zero for a second wave of coronavirus unless they avoid face-to-face teaching, academics have warned.
The movement of an expected one million students around Britain as they return to universities in the next month has led the University and College Union (UCU) to warn the government is “encouraging a public health crisis”.
Advertisement
UCU general secretary Jo Grady said the mass movement “could lead to universities being the care homes of any second wave of Covid”.
UCU's @DrJoGrady tells Sky News why we can't risk reopening university campuses next month👇🏽 pic.twitter.com/2kJFzv3QRn — UCU (@ucu) August 29, 2020
She also accused the government of a lack of planning, with more students expected on campuses following the admissions fiasco as data emerges that infection rates are increasing among younger people.
“So the very people who are increasingly getting infected by this virus are being encouraged in mass numbers to move all around the country and congregate and live together,” Grady said.
Advertisement
“It doesn’t make sense.”
The UCU wants students to avoid campuses until Christmas unless a testing scheme begins operating at universities.
It comes after a group of scientists recommended universities test all students and staff for coronavirus as they arrive on campus and avoid face-to-face teaching.
Independent Sage reported on August 21 that all courses should be offered online – apart from those which are lab or practice-based – as in-person teaching carries a higher risk of virus transmission.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-08-30--Andrew Lloyd Webber’s Phantom Of The WAPera Is The Mash-Up We Didn’t Know We Needed

LOADING ERROR LOADING
If you thought Andrew Lloyd Webber was only about the show tunes, think again.
The legendary composer and musical theatre star is just as obsessed with Cardi B and Megan Thee Stallion’s WAP as the rest of us, it seems.
So much so, that he has shared his own take on the rappers’ anthem, by giving it a West End makeover.
Advertisement
The 72-year-old has shared a video on TikTok of him busting some *checks notes* moves to the ‘I don’t cook, I don’t clean’ part of the song, before mashing up the intro from his 1986 musical Phantom Of The Opera with Cardi and Megan’s hit.
Phantom Of The WAPera, anyone?
How terribly British.