Overstretched police? 19 police cars sent to protect Baronet Sir Philip Naylor-Leyland from fox hunting protesters
If you live in Cambridgeshire and found the police too busy to attend your call on the 23rd of December – it’s probably because NINETEEN Cambridgeshire police cars were sent to protect a fox hunt organised by Sir Philip Naylor-Leyland, 4th Baronet.
The police turned up in force and then proceeded to threaten the peaceful anti-hunt protesters with CS gas spray:
Figures also show DWP ministers spent £35million defending cruel decisions to deny sick and disabled people vital benefits.
Civil servants working for the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) have been handed over £40 million in performance-related bonuses, despite serious problems with the rollout of universal credit and a startling increase in the number of successful disability benefit appeals.
Figures released earlier this week show DWP staff were awarded £44 million in “good performance” bonuses in the last year, while thousands of new universal credit claimants were forced to a wait a minimum six weeks for their first payment and left at risk of becoming homeless because of rent arrears.
According to the figures, 240 senior DWP officials pocketed a total £760,000 in bonuses, while a further 88,300 junior staff were each handed an extra £1,750 in their pay packets.
A Cabinet Office spokesman defended the handouts, claiming bonuses are needed to “attract, retain and motivate highly-skilled individuals”.
Meanwhile, the data also reveals that DWP ministers spent a shocking £35 million of taxpayers cash defending cruel decisions to deny sick and disabled people Personal Independence Payments (PIP), despite separate figures showing 68% of appeals rule in favour of claimants – exposing chronic failures in the PIP assessment process…
A couple of days ago I was intrigued to see a piece on Skwawkbox about possible blocking of Labour Party pages from internet search engines due to the inclusion of the
nofollow meta tags which effectively blocks search engines from indexing that page’s content making it seem invisible to the web. These tags exist solely for that purpose.
Above: An extract of the source code for The Labour Party Democracy Review. The complete source can viewed at the page itself or here.
The content on the Labour website is part of The Labour Party Democracy Review and is an open invitation directed at Labour Party members to participate in the future of the political party
“If you’re a member of the party, submit your ideas and opinions to our Democracy Review now and help shape the future of our movement.”
Therefore its exclusion from internet searches is to the obvious detriment of possible change. It could also be said that any such restriction could be considered a direct attack on Jeremy Corbyn himself and his desire for inclusivity.
As it concerned what I thought at the time to be no more than a misplaced meta tag, possibly the result of a sloppy cut and paste operation by some inexperienced intern, it didn’t concern me as anything overtly sinister.
However that was a couple of days ago and despite a number of contacts made to certain individuals, departments and businesses with responsibility for such things – both by Skwawkbox and domestic empire, the offending search-restrictive content remains conspicuously unchanged.
Update: Skwawkbox contact with Labour HQ.
Labour’s HQ confirmed that the tag was not accidental and referred to emails that had been sent to members with a link to provide their input to the review – but this begs the question of why bother putting the page on the site at all if you’re going to hide it?
Now the situation has become murkier with confirmation to this blog by a leader’s office (LOTO) source that neither Corbyn nor his office had given approval for the noindex measure:
“We absolutely did not sanction that tag or anything else that would limit the number of people participating. On the contrary, we want input from as many people as possible so we get the benefit of everyone’s perspective.”
“..purpose-driven creative digital agency that empowers organizations, campaigns, and causes.”
I contacted them and its man in charge Ben Ostrower altering them both to this error in markup that was resulting in a negative impact for their client. Two days later I’m still awaiting their reply and removal of said meta tag. But regrettably they seem more interested in discussing Star Wars and somewhat ironically, Net Neutrality.
Normally one would expect such coding errors to be fixed immediately upon receipt of notification along with a cheery, ‘Thank you’, for spotting such a glaring error that might have otherwise caused public embarrassment – so why the stalling?
I don’t wish to launch into full conspiracy-mode, but the lack of action surrounding this simple code change, or even to acknowledge its existence is cause for some concern.
At the time of writing the errant meta tags that effectively ban The Labour Party Democracy Review from being seen remain in situ.
• The Labour Party Democracy Review
• View source code for The Labour Party Democracy Review
• Download source code for The Labour Party Democracy Review
• Why has Labour HQ blocked Democracy Review page from search engines?
• Excl: LOTO – ‘we did not sanction hiding Democracy Review page from search engines’
• Google: Block search indexing with ‘noindex’
Updated 18th December 2017: Skwawkbox obtain reply from Labour.
Updated 16th December 2017: to better illustrate source code.
Last Friday, Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn received an award – jointly with world-famous author and activist Noam Chomsky – from the International Peace Bureau (IPB) for his “sustained and powerful political work for disarmament and peace”.
It was ignored completely by the mainstream media (MSM) – even days later.
However, the SKWAWKBOX’s article on it went viral.
The Establishment was forced to react. Right-wing bots, trolls and sockpuppets came out in force to defend the MSM – by attacking the article, the messenger, even the importance of the award and of the international organisation that made it – but made their agenda all too obvious.
Channel 4’s FactCheck decided it was fair for the MSM to ignore the award because they usually ignore it – which itself ignored the pertinent question: would they have ignored it if Theresa May had (impossibly) won it?
The answer is, of course, straightforward:…
View original post 487 more words
Pro-Corbyn blogger @Rachael_Swindon is one of the most tireless campaigners for Labour, Corbyn and a fairer society that you’ll ever find.
As well as blogging and creating some of the strongest memes to support Labour’s message, she is a full-time mother of two kids who also cares full-time for her disabled husband, who recently took a turn for the worse. As a result, she and her family are in the support group of ESA and PIP, which allowed them – just about – to scrape by, except when the DWP screwed up.
Because of her effectiveness, Rachael has angered right-wingers both inside and outside the Labour party. Because she has a ‘donate’ button on her blog, in case the occasional donation comes in to help eke out meagre benefits, someone made a malicious report to the DWP, triggering an investigation.
Let’s be clear, Rachael has done nothing wrong – being on benefits doesn’t mean someone can’t give you a gift. It’s not earned income. But the DWP has suspended all benefits to Rachael and her family while they investigate – pushing her into desperate straits that have now become very desperate indeed..
This is part of a clearly coordinated series of attacks on some of the most effective pro-Corbyn bloggers and campaigners. The SKWAWKBOX has been targeted, as have others.
The ‘person’ responsible for this is slime. But there are far more good -hearted people out there.
If you are able to help Rachael, however small the amount, please go as soon as you can to her blog and use the donate button. Thank you for your help for great campaigner in an emergency, who’s paying a high price for doing the right thing – and for your support for the cause of making this a better country to live in.