This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Coutts VS Nigel Farage
Visit the current forum | Forum Rules
 cryrst  The garden of England 23 Jul 23 8.16am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by YT
I'm happy to be such a worm. Where I live, the local Facebook noticeboard is bombarded by posts from a handful of annoying 'climate action' zealots. They got the parish council to declare a 'climate emergency' (in our village; population less than 2,000) and they are always banging on about enforcement of existing 'green' laws and campaigning for new laws to be introduced. One of them runs a shop where all the stock is said to be "sustainably sourced". It's BS, of course, because you could pick out virtually any item in the shop and drive massive holes through the sustainability claim. And it's a hobby in any case, funded by the hubby's high-flying (literally) job. Anyway, she advertised for a new member of staff to work in the shop, and in the list of requirements for the role she included "must be physically active". So I dobbed her in to The Equality and Human Rights Commission, which agreed that the phrase was unlawful unless it could be "objectively justified". To cut an already long story short, she couldn't justify it, so had to re-advertise the post (already filled by then) and post a retraction wherever the advert had been displayed, including on Facebook. I do love a good petard-hoisting! There’s always a bigger fish
|
|
 robdave2k  23 Jul 23 9.31am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
That's untrue. Almost always these days when a vacancy occurs there are a number of suitable clients available and a choice has to be made. It would be the same if a cake baker could only make 10 cakes a week but had 50 people wanting them. But you’re arguing for the “Cab Rank” rule, where
|
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 23 Jul 23 9.57am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by cryrst
I would ask why a bank would actually need to give a s*** about the politics of someone like NF. It would never affect the business as the other account holders are using it as ‘a bank’. This was a vanity decision which some there thought would get them a pat on the back and well done for your stand against that nasty nazi. Well as you are seeing elsewhere with the green bollox and push back on it, money is the driver of life and no one would have closed their account if NF was or wasn’t an account holder. The left or far left if it fits and the out there climate groups are an insidious lot who are determined to portray anyone who doesn’t agree with them as the enemy who need wasting. Well atm the rest of us are fed up and slowly the worm is turning. Coutts fell into their trap !
It's their ball, they can decide who gets to play with it. That anyone feels it's a poor decision is beside the point. It's not their business. If they believe that their reputation will be damaged then they have the right to take whatever action they believe is necessary. That they then used one of the account rules to engineer the desired result might be devious, and has proved counterproductive, but it's still their right. As it is to use discretion with others who also fail to meet the rules. I don't see anything "left" involved. I see only commercial pragmatism. Which has been badly handled and handed Farage a propaganda victory.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 23 Jul 23 10.07am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by georgenorman
For a start, there is no outrage in my post. I wouldn't care much about my custom being refused, I would probably find it amusing. I would simply find someone else who would accept the work and tell others to avoid the shop that turns down custom. Edited by georgenorman (23 Jul 2023 6.49am) I didn't say in yours! Just in these threads. You wouldn't have any choice other than to do what you suggest unless you could find a politically motivated sponsor with deep pockets like the "Christian Institute", ready to push the argument all the way to the SC. Maybe one would emerge from among the band of self-righteous brothers who populate this place.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 23 Jul 23 10.20am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Spiderman
Serious question, Out of all the suitable candidates, how do you choose? Say 1 is transgender, 1 is gay, 1 is Muslim, 1 is from ethnic minority and several are natives of Cornwall. Surely by not accepting some of these, you can be accused of discrimination? The baker in your scenario may not choose the gay or transgender customer to have the cakes, could he be sued? Yes, if it could be proved he made a decision on discriminatory grounds. If he ignored all the attributes you mention and reached a decision in an unbiased way, whatever it was, then no. Of course, in practice, the way a decision was made in such circumstances would never get tested. A coin toss would be the easiest explanation. In my own case I use the local council's housing department as my agent, rather than the high street agents with whom I have had some poor experiences. The council recommend on need, after ensuring affordability. I always take their recommendations, so don't have to think too much, although I do try to meet everyone first so they know who they are dealing with.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| cryrst The garden of England 23 Jul 23 10.21am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
It's their ball, they can decide who gets to play with it. That anyone feels it's a poor decision is beside the point. It's not their business. If they believe that their reputation will be damaged then they have the right to take whatever action they believe is necessary. That they then used one of the account rules to engineer the desired result might be devious, and has proved counterproductive, but it's still their right. As it is to use discretion with others who also fail to meet the rules. I don't see anything "left" involved. I see only commercial pragmatism. Which has been badly handled and handed Farage a propaganda victory. Why would NF need a victory for propaganda apart from proving how the left operate.
|
|
| Badger11 Beckenham 23 Jul 23 10.22am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by cryrst
Why would NF need a victory for propaganda apart from proving how the left operate. Exactly just like Trump they can't leave it along they have to keep picking at the scab.
One more point |
|
| Spiderman Horsham 23 Jul 23 10.22am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
It's their ball, they can decide who gets to play with it. That anyone feels it's a poor decision is beside the point. It's not their business. If they believe that their reputation will be damaged then they have the right to take whatever action they believe is necessary. That they then used one of the account rules to engineer the desired result might be devious, and has proved counterproductive, but it's still their right. As it is to use discretion with others who also fail to meet the rules. I don't see anything "left" involved. I see only commercial pragmatism. Which has been badly handled and handed Farage a propaganda victory. So what is different about NF now , from when they were happy to have his custom? Trying to jump on the Woke bandwagon? Massive own goal scored here
|
|
| georgenorman 23 Jul 23 10.24am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
I didn't say in yours! Just in these threads. You wouldn't have any choice other than to do what you suggest unless you could find a politically motivated sponsor with deep pockets like the "Christian Institute", ready to push the argument all the way to the SC. Maybe one would emerge from among the band of self-righteous brothers who populate this place. I knew you would say that, but of course it is clear to anyone that you implied it. As I said before, businesses and organisations and individuals should be able to do or not do business with whoever they like.
|
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 23 Jul 23 10.26am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by robdave2k
But you’re arguing for the “Cab Rank” rule, where I don't see why. A choice still has to be made. Not everyone can be accepted. I am not obliged to take the first on a list.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 23 Jul 23 10.36am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by cryrst
Why would NF need a victory for propaganda apart from proving how the left operate. NF is all about propaganda. It's what he lives by. He could have quietly accepted this, found another bank to handle his account and kept his personal life personal. Instead he worked himself up into a wholly mock outrage designed to wind up the right because he thought he could politically profit from it. His current period of exposure at GB News is no different to Trump's at "The Apprentice". It's all about him and the propaganda he spreads like muck on the fields.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 23 Jul 23 10.45am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by georgenorman
I knew you would say that, but of course it is clear to anyone that you implied it. As I said before, businesses and organisations and individuals should be able to do or not do business with whoever they like. I wrote it, so I know if it was implied. It wasn't! No individual, or business, is allowed to discriminate in an unlawful way. That you think they should doesn't change that. Nor does the fact that I believe Ashers Bakery did, but the SC disagreed. I accept that decision, even if I believe it to be unwise. My hope now is that, in time, the law will be changed to ensure that it can no longer happen.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Spiderman Horsham 23 Jul 23 10.55am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
NF is all about propaganda. It's what he lives by. He could have quietly accepted this, found another bank to handle his account and kept his personal life personal. Instead he worked himself up into a wholly mock outrage designed to wind up the right because he thought he could politically profit from it. His current period of exposure at GB News is no different to Trump's at "The Apprentice". It's all about him and the propaganda he spreads like muck on the fields. Why should he have accepted it quietly? It was an outrageous decision, whether you like NF or not. A slippery slope if the banks are not called out on it
|
|
| georgenorman 23 Jul 23 10.55am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
I wrote it, so I know if it was implied. It wasn't! No individual, or business, is allowed to discriminate in an unlawful way. That you think they should doesn't change that. Nor does the fact that I believe Ashers Bakery did, but the SC disagreed. I accept that decision, even if I believe it to be unwise. My hope now is that, in time, the law will be changed to ensure that it can no longer happen. Clearly you wrote it and clearly it is your usual dissembling. Indeed there are laws against businesses, organisations and individuals being able to do or not do business with whoever they like. Let’s hope that the law will be changed.
|
|
| robdave2k 23 Jul 23 11.29am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
I don't see why. A choice still has to be made. Not everyone can be accepted. I am not obliged to take the first on a list. So the 50 customers are in a queue. The bakery can turn them One person walks in and they can’t That’s the crux of your argument.
|
|
| Badger11 Beckenham 23 Jul 23 1.40pm |
|
|---|---|
|
One more point |
|
ASCPFC  Pro-Cathedral/caravan park 23 Jul 23 1.51pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Badger11
They lack the intellect, or ability to reflect, to see how they themselves do this and contribute to this all the time.
Red and Blue Army! |
|
| NEILLO Shoreham-by-Sea 23 Jul 23 1.54pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Badger11
In my view - which I will confess could be called bias given my intense personal dislike for the RBS group - this is another example of going to extremes. Assuming that we are all aware of the past misdemeanors of that organisation, they now want to be seen as the polar opposite of what they were in the Goodwin era. It's all ' beanbags and scatter cushions ' with them now. I think they've scored an own goal with this situation. And regardless of what I think of Farage, he is absolutely right to bring this into the public domain.
Old, Ungifted and White |
|
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2025 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.