All of the schools i work in still have kitchens and all serve meat with a veggie and halal option.
TBH some of the food is half decent, some isn't.
They also all have the option of a salad bar now too which seems quite popular.
The local council here had shit food in their canteen. I remember attending many meetings at the Council House and used to bring my own packed lunch knowing the cooked food would be pretty dire. However, i attended a meeting many years ago in a big converted house turned council office with the director of I.T and they had a fucking 3 course meal on offer, twas chicken casserole if i remember correctly, i had seconds....
Greenman wrote: ↑Wed Mar 16, 2022 12:20 pm
All of the schools i work in still have kitchens and all serve meat with a veggie and halal option.
TBH some of the food is half decent, some isn't.
They also all have the option of a salad bar now too which seems quite popular.
The local council here had shit food in their canteen. I remember attending many meetings at the Council House and used to bring my own packed lunch knowing the cooked food would be pretty dire. However, i attended a meeting many years ago in a big converted house turned council office with the director of I.T and they had a fucking 3 course meal on offer, twas chicken casserole if i remember correctly, i had seconds....
How the other half live eh, on our tax money!
Technically you live on our tax money because all the schools are tax funded.
Greenman wrote: ↑Wed Mar 16, 2022 12:20 pm
All of the schools i work in still have kitchens and all serve meat with a veggie and halal option.
TBH some of the food is half decent, some isn't.
They also all have the option of a salad bar now too which seems quite popular.
The local council here had shit food in their canteen. I remember attending many meetings at the Council House and used to bring my own packed lunch knowing the cooked food would be pretty dire. However, i attended a meeting many years ago in a big converted house turned council office with the director of I.T and they had a fucking 3 course meal on offer, twas chicken casserole if i remember correctly, i had seconds....
How the other half live eh, on our tax money!
Technically you live on our tax money because all the schools are tax funded.
The US have started the process of making "Daylight Savings" (why can't they have British Summer Time like a proper country?) a permanent thing. I'm honestly not sure if this is a piss take or not, but it's still only March!
Who cares about the US daylight savings? Well, not many on here I suppose, but I know it's been floated in the UK a few times and AFAIK the US would be the first western country to bin off seasonal clock changes.
Count Steer wrote: ↑Wed Mar 16, 2022 8:59 am
They probably mean vegetarian not vegan.
Having a veggie option at school meals
Council events? Who cares and who goes to them for the food?
It's 'twitter outrage' again.
They did mean vegan but it is only for the 12 council meetings a year so as you say, "twitter outrage".
Nice that they get it right (unlike the eggs, cheese and fish eating 'vegans').
If they'd said 'We won't be providing any food at council meetings to save money', people would say 'good show'.
Because they won't be serving meat etc there's a faux howl of outrage whipped up by a fat-bloke-in-jeans-media-farmer and/or 'I eat meat, me' from people that don't attend council meetings. Zzzzzzz.....
Doubt is not a pleasant condition.
But certainty is an absurd one.
Voltaire
Count Steer wrote: ↑Wed Mar 16, 2022 8:59 am
They probably mean vegetarian not vegan.
Having a veggie option at school meals
Council events? Who cares and who goes to them for the food?
It's 'twitter outrage' again.
They did mean vegan but it is only for the 12 council meetings a year so as you say, "twitter outrage".
Nice that they get it right (unlike the eggs, cheese and fish eating 'vegans').
If they'd said 'We won't be providing any food at council meetings to save money', people would say 'good show'.
Because they won't be serving meat etc there's a faux howl of outrage whipped up by a fat-bloke-in-jeans-media-farmer and/or 'I eat meat, me' from people that don't attend council meetings. Zzzzzzz.....
Mr. Dazzle wrote: ↑Wed Mar 16, 2022 1:56 pm
The US have started the process of making "Daylight Savings" (why can't they have British Summer Time like a proper country?) a permanent thing. I'm honestly not sure if this is a piss take or not, but it's still only March!
Who cares about the US daylight savings? Well, not many on here I suppose, but I know it's been floated in the UK a few times and AFAIK the US would be the first western country to bin off seasonal clock changes.
P&O have sacked the crews with no notice and had replacement crews waiting on the shore to take over, I'm surprised that's legal.
Now ex-crews have locked themselves in ships with accidental hostages after seeing nothing but a pre-recorded message, I wonder if P&O rushed this so it wasn't the biggest headline.
Count Steer wrote: ↑Wed Mar 16, 2022 8:59 am
They probably mean vegetarian not vegan.
Having a veggie option at school meals
Council events? Who cares and who goes to them for the food?
It's 'twitter outrage' again.
They did mean vegan but it is only for the 12 council meetings a year so as you say, "twitter outrage".
Nice that they get it right (unlike the eggs, cheese and fish eating 'vegans').
If they'd said 'We won't be providing any food at council meetings to save money', people would say 'good show'.
Because they won't be serving meat etc there's a faux howl of outrage whipped up by a fat-bloke-in-jeans-media-farmer and/or 'I eat meat, me' from people that don't attend council meetings. Zzzzzzz.....
It's the Council's woke virtue signalling that is
As you say, no food should be served.
"Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people." - Giordano Bruno
Hospital told police patient was not raped because alleged attacker was transgender
Assault was confirmed through CCTV and witnesses despite previous denials, Lords told, as debate on single-sex wards policy continues
By
Hayley Dixon,
SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT
17 March 2022 • 8:00pm
A hospital told the police that a patient could not have been raped because her alleged attacker was trans, the House of Lords has heard.
The attack took place a year ago and the woman reported it but when officers contacted the hospital, which has not been named, they were told “that there was no male in the hospital, therefore the rape could not have happened”.
Baroness Nicholson of Winterbourne, who raised the issue during a debate on single-sex wards, continued: “They forgot that there was CCTV, nurses and observers.
“None the less, it has taken nearly a year for the hospital to agree that there was a male on the ward and, yes, this rape happened.
“During that year she has almost come to the edge of a nervous breakdown, because being disbelieved about being raped in hospital has been such an appalling shock. The hospital, with all its CCTV, has had to admit that the rape happened and that it was committed by a man.”
Investigated by the police
The legal definition of rape means that it can only be carried out by a physically intact man.
The case is currently being investigated by the police.
Lady Nicholson said that the case had arisen as a direct result of the NHS policy – known as Annex B - which allows patients to be placed on single-sex wards according to the gender with which they identify at the time.
“The result of Annex B is that hospital trusts inform ward sisters and nurses that if there is a male, as a trans person, in a female ward, and a female patient or anyone complains, they must be told that it is not true - there is no male there,” she told the upper chamber.
“I think it is completely wrong that the National Health Service should be instructing or allowing staff to mislead patients -to tell a straightforward lie. It is not acceptable.”
She called for the policy to be withdrawn arguing that it “gives priority to trans people over women” and therefore threatens the “dignity, privacy and safety” of female patients.
Lady Nicholson said that the policy undermines the provision of single-sex wards which were voted on by Parliament and “undermines" protections for women that "took at least 50 years to come through”.
The former MP said that by adding the self-identification clause in the policy on eliminating mixed-sex accommodation: “Parliament has been ignored and bypassed and surreptitiously something far-reaching has been brought in that affects all families, all faiths, all identities and all levels of society. In place of sex-based rights, we are giving priority rights to one special section of society.”
She said that she had not seen such “filleting of legislation anywhere before in Britain” and it was “cheating the public”.
The policy is being reviewed by the NHS but as this newspaper revealed, one of those carrying out that review is a “trans advocate”.
'Strengthening of trans rights'
Before the consultation on the issue closed, Dr Michael Brady promised campaigners that the “commitment from the team leading on the review is supporting the maintenance/strengthening of trans rights in the update”.
A coalition of women’s rights groups including doctors and nurses have written to the Health Secretary complaining that they were not consulted. Baroness Fox of Buckley said that the review is “not satisfactory” as it has “no public terms of reference” and is being “carried out in secret”.
She said that the fact that Dr Brady is the NHS “LGBT adviser might make him rather the opposite of impartial”.
Referring to The Telegraph article, she added: “I want the Government to take this seriously and recognise that when somebody says that there are no plans to reduce the existing rights of transgender people, what women hear - if I can translate it - is that women-only wards are not guaranteed at all.
“I want the Government to be honest with us about what they believe they are arguing for. I also want them to take us away from having to discover these things in newspapers and, instead, assure us that a new review will be set up that is independent and fully resourced.”
Lady Nicholson’s proposals were opposed by Lord Etherton QC, who argued that the current policy was “entirely appropriate and consistent with the anti-discrimination law in the Equality Act”.
"Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people." - Giordano Bruno
I recall from previous threads on here that there are RTTL members who can't believe that sort of thing could or would happen. In fact I reckon I could name them but as nobody ever changes their mind from what they read on internet forums they'll still believe it couldn't happen and that I and others are simply transphobic.
They'll know who they are of course and I guess will soon be responding with the same woke shite - everyone must be treated equally even if it means that one weirdo/pedo/sex offender gets a free ride to be a c*nt.
What we are talking about is a very small bunch of people who are not happy with equal rights and are demanding extra 'rights'. They want the right to be treated as something they are not.
Equal rights in this context acknowledge that there are differences between men and women, that they are not equal but should have equality in various areas of life, equality of opportunity for example. Your idea of equality is unattainable and your support for these weirdos is eroding the very equalities that have been fought for and attained. They are detrimental to women.
It's pretty selfish to say you'd be unhappy if it was your daughter involved in this rape, so would I be because I think all women, not just your daughter should not have to suffer sexual assaults. Your wife for example, would it be OK if she was raped by some sex offender, the woman buying bread in a supermarket . . . ? You know, all women, but not some weirdo who simply 'identifies as a woman'.
That, and support for it under the equality banner is just wrong. IMHO of course.
