Just keeping an eye on Compass.
A reminder: A member of the Compass Board is Neal Lawson, a key Burnham strategic advisor.
This is one of their new initiatives:
………………………………
100 Ideas for 100 Days of the Burnham Government
https://www.compassonline.org.uk/100-ideas-for-100-days-of-the-burnham-government/
Last month, we called on Compass Members and our friends in the civil society space to combine and suggest a whole range of policies and ideas that this Government should undertake quickly to drag Britain out of the difficult political situation it finds itself in.
Today, we’re excited to launch ‘100 Ideas for 100 Days’.
Ideas are from Compass Members unless otherwise stated.
Note: Inclusion of a policy doesn’t necessarily equate to full endorsement of the policy from Compass or any individual/organisation named here.
[my bold]
…………………………………
Week One is about how Britain is governed. Take a look at the following two selections:
19.Commit publicly to using inclusive not divisive policy language – in particular ‘social security’ not ‘welfare’ with reference to benefits and ‘irregular’ not ‘illegal’ to describe asylum-seekers arriving by unauthorised means
Ruth Lister, Baroness Lister of Burtersett – Labour Peer
‘Language matters’ as the interim report of the Timms PIP review reminds us. A cost-free action would be to commit the government and its ministers publicly to inclusive rather than divisive language. Two examples: First, in its original meaning ‘welfare’ is of course a positive. But in its American meaning, used in relation to social security, it conjures up a miserable residual scheme for the stigmatised ‘other’. In contrast, social security conveys the aim of genuine financial security for all by social means. Second, too often asylum-seekers, with a legal right to seek asylum, who have travelled by unauthorised routes, are described as ‘illegal migrants’. This stokes public hostility. The more accurate term ‘irregular’ is less pejorative and does not convey the image of ‘breaking in’ used by the Right. [who decides what "inclusive" and "divisive" mean? my underlines]
22.Sanctions for false political statements
[Compass member]
Legislation to introduce sanctions on politicians or candidates who deliberately or recklessly make false or misleading statements and don’t correct the record when challenged. Adam Price has pioneered similar legislation in the Senedd; Compassion in Politics, Unlock Democracy and others are championing it for Westminster. [my underline]
……………………………………
Just wondering how, if adopted, the Burham Government intends to square that circle? In the past decade, most of the "inclusive" language about gender ideology coming from Labour has embraced, and even directly led to, false political statements detrimental to women's rights! (David Lammy and his "men can grow a cervix" anyone?" Keir "99% of women don't have a penis" Starmer?)
These are unlikely to be adopted (??) but these seem likely to be the kinds of ideas washing around Government because of Burnham's links to Compass and its membership.