Open Letter to All My Female Friends

Dear all,

This morning's Today programme on Radio 4 has just said that the Foreign Secretary being in a room with another man was a 'lapse of judgement' for a straight politician. Therefore and henceforth I shall have to make some adjustments to the way I live to avoid making a similar 'lapse' seeing as I am an openly gay politician this will affect my female friends and acquaintances.

To Caron, you had better not get ill again. I know during your recent illness I spent many hours coming to see you and sometimes turning up while you were still in your pyjamas. But if the press were to get hold of such information it would be dynamite and a serious lapse of judgement in their opinion. Therefore in future this will have to stop, even if you are on death's bed all meeting you will he have to be clothed in outdoor wear and you will have to wheeled or trolleyed, if necessary, to a public venue. If other's catch the pubonic plague as a result that is a price that will have to be paid.

Also Caron and Elspeth Finlay I know that you have often driven me into the back and beyonds to dump me on some strange street with loads of leaflets. However, in future I may have to insist on a male driver as the exit of a campaign headquarters in the sole company of a woman and not returning for hours, with the same driver, and then looking exhausted might be similarly misconstrued.

Dear Helen Duffett and Meg and others I do love the direct message conversations that we have on Twitter. But I think we are going to have to stop them which means the juicy stuff like planning the BOTY's, or bloggers at conference or just talking about hot men on TV will just have to be done in the open.

As for my dear cousin Rachel, we are going to have to keep using the Lab/Lib Dem supporting cousin epithet on all our tweets to each other using up some of the valuable 140 characters. If only your mother had been born male and we shared the same surname, that would have made things easier.

Addendum paragraph As for Pam Tilson I clearly cannot be seen walking to or from a sporting arena in your company, tongues would wag. So that rules out my accompanying you to the Oval to watch the Glens play at any time*.

So sadly I shall have to make the required changes I cannot afford to have my character besmirched by keeping too close attention and proximity to members of the opposite sex. Guido and the MSM may well think I am slipping or defecting to a heterosexual lifestyle and that can never do.

Yours with regret,

Stephen Glenn

Further addendum I have just had assurances from the PSNI that Dubarrys, Kremlin or any other gay venue I may choose to enter will be swept of fag hags, lesbians and casual female hangers on. A security lock down will then be installed around the venue until 10 minutes after my departure. Drag Queen's are requested to turn up and depart in male apparel and sans make up, changing facilities will be provided at the discretion of the licensee inside the venue.

After all it wouldn't been right for me to be snapped by the press leaving such a place with a woman or faux-woman in shot. Think of the scandal the headlines writers would come up with.

* Actually that works out well for this Bangor fan.

Jobsworth Stealing Children Memories from Parents Part 632

The latest in the line of taking camera security too far has arisen in Sunderland, at the Bridges Centre. Kevin Geraghty-Shewan was approached first by a security guard and then by the police for taking pictures of his own son Ben having a good time. The reason was that they thought that Kevin might have been paedophile.

The fact that young Ben was fully clothed for winter and that the adults accompanying him as he rode the fun ride where his parents shows how little common sense the jobsworths are showing about this. While there is a need to stop people taking and distributing pictures of children for sexual gratification there are occasions that are being lost to the collective memory of today's children.

Fife Council Child Snatchers

I used to say "I" and "me"
Now it's "us", now it's "we"
Ben, most people would turn you away
I don't listen to a word they say
They don't see you as I do
I wish they would try to
I'm sure they'd think again
If they had a friend like Ben

from Ben by Michael Jackson

The problems is for one little Ben that chance may not be forthcoming. Earlier this week Fife Council put him on at risk-register once they were aware that he had been born last Friday. At four days old Irish Social services came and took the baby away from his mother and father.

His mother 17 year-old Kerry Robertson has mild learning difficulties, but Fife Council consider that she is incapable of raising the baby. The fact is that they found the mother and her 25 year old partner Mark McDougall because having fled Scotland when she was 29 weeks pregnant she kept up all her checks and scans in Ireland. So the fact that the couple were capable of looking after an unborn babies well being led Fife Council to them in Waterford.

John Hemming, Liberal Democrat MP for Birmingham Yardley, actually believes that the removal of baby from his parents under the protection order in Ireland is actually illegal. And says:

"There is no evidence that Mark and Kerry cannot be good parents and I just hope that the Irish authorities can resolve this as quickly as possible."

Now I know there has been some slop handed social services work in protecting real at risk children but the evidence in this case is not proven. As the FTO the South African News Blog points out:

Lets just say things was different and Kerry had no learning difficulties and she died at childbirth, no one would take Ben from his father. Why is this so different? Even if Kerry was unable to care for the child she is not alone, she has a partner who is committed and loving with a supporting family.

Indeed they also report:

When Mark McDougall saw Ben's care order there was a different name on it and date of birth. He believes social services has kidnapped his baby. Who can blame him?

So we come to Fife council whose executive director of social work, Stephen Moore said:

"I can confirm that although the Robertson family are not presently within Fife, we are committed to working closely with professional colleagues elsewhere to ensure safety and welfare of the child and indeed the whole family as this is of paramount concern to us.

"I would urge Kerry to use all the support that is being made available to her and her baby and to get appropriate help should she need it."

Now herein lies a major fault in what they say. Kerry had been doing just that. The two midwifes who had been caring for her and Ben fled the room in tears when the social services took the infant away from his mother and father. David Cameron may want to lock single parents up in the poor house, but here is a father who has stuck by the mother of child, even though the council had also stepped in to stop their marriage. Both parents are being denied the chance to prove they are capable parents because of an arbitrary decision made by some council official.

Had they asked the medical staff for evidence of their ability in the days since Ben's birth? It doesn't appear that they did, or if they did they went against that advice. With a sister-in-law who is a midwife I know how carefully the early days of a child's life are observed by those around the ward. They insure that the child and the parents are going to get the best start. They are the experts, they can spot if there is going to be any difficulties, not some paper pusher who thinks that someone's IQ is below a line in the sand.

Each case should be assessed on its merits. Fife council have not done so in this case, they made a decision long before full term as to the mother's ability irrespective of other situations such as her partner it appears.

Here in GMTV's report into the case back in October. You can even see how much Mark cares for Kerry and the unborn child at the time. Mark Goldring the expert from Mencap says that Fife at that time said they would look at all the facts and circumstances. Judge from yourself if that is the case. I feel that they have not.



UPDATE: Here is a letter from Morgan Gallagher of 'Nursing Matters' to Mr Moore of Fife Social Services and Nicola Sturgeon the Scottish Health Minister.

UPDATE 2: If you have been touched by this story join the Facebook Group to show your support. One comment from Mark MacDougall on there:

"Kerry has already proved Fife very wrong as all the medical staff at hospital nothing but praise for her parenting skills."

Read Also: A similar tale from Essex which makes you wonder just what can spark such decisions even more.

Government to Think Again Over ISA

While the Detective Chief Superintent, Chris Stevenson, responsible for the Soham investigation says expanded ISA powers as going to far and called for a return "back on an even keel" the Government position softened. Possibly unlike Tom Harris MP they listened to public opinion from more than just parents, people like the NSPCC, senior Police Officers acting and retired.

Retired Mr Stevenson said:

"The furore that has gripped the nation since [Soham] has made us all paranoid. Is it in the interests of children?

"Commentators keep referring back to Huntley and the events in Soham, citing this as the cause. I am sure Sir Michael Bichard did not intend this wave of recrimination over one case"

He recalled the tale of he a retired former police office was ordered to delete pictures of his own Grandson from his camera after taking pictures playing in the village team. One of the team managers said he would need the permission of every child present to be able to keep them. he said:

"I felt humbled. I am now a suspected paedophile. Along, I suspect, with millions of other parents and grandparents."

Being from a sporting family a quick look through our family album shows all manner of pictures of me and my brother in sporting settings. Vivid images of past triumphs and defeats which the current generation of children will not have to look back on when their muscles give way and (as in the case of my brother) middle age spread sets in.

Mr Stevenson though does have a stern word for those who use Soham as a reason for such over regulation, like Tom Harris and Ged Robinson (who debated with Mark Thompson). He pointed out:

"What he did to Holly and Jessica was as high as you can get on the offending scale, but did he come into contact with them through his appointment as a caretaker? Not exactly. You see he was caretaker of Soham Village College, the senior school for over 11-year-olds.

"How do we prevent such chance encounters happening? You can't. No amount of legislation, record keeping or checking can ever totally prevent this type of crime. Thankfully they are extremely rare.

"Are we feeding the paranoia that stops a grandfather taking a picture of his nine-year-old grandson playing football? Surely this cannot continue, someone needs to put things back on an even keel."

Andrew Flanagan, chief executive of the NSPCC, speaking on the Government's rethinking of its strategy said last night:

"Ed Balls has made the right decision to check the vetting and barring scheme to ensure it strikes the right balance.

"People want to make sure children are protected but need to understand fully and buy into any major new plan that helps to do so. This review and improved information about how it works will hopefully allay confusion and misunderstandings about what the scheme is meant to do and lead to its successful introduction."

Impartiality or BBC Ineptitude

Well it will be Sky News, ITV or Channel 4 for me from now on as well as watching snippets of Al Jazeera on You Tube because the BBC is refusing to show a TV appeal for the victims of the war in Gaza. I will also stop using BBC links from this blog after this post which will make things little harder but a price I'm willing to pay.

I've also stopped following @bbcbreaking and @bbcscotland on Twitter. If Twitter can spread the word on #MPexpences let's see if we can send the BBC a direct message by unfollowing them en masse.

In the BBC story of why they have refused Michael Johnson says it it so that they do not want to appear to be partial in their coverage of the conflict. For starters the conflict is currently in ceasefire and the majority of the victims, and all of the civilian victims in the war are from the Palestinian side by a ratio of 100:1. When you add on the buildings, health and education facilities that have been affected it greater heightens the case for a human response to help.

Mr Johnson's statement says:

"Inevitably an appeal would use pictures which are the same or similar to those we would be using in our news programmes but would do so with the objective of encouraging public donations.

"The danger for the BBC is that this could be interpreted as taking a political stance on an ongoing story."

So the BBC is telling orphaned and injured children, bereaved parents, doctors and nurses fighting to help the injured in damaged facilities that appearing to be impartial is more important than there lives. That because they covered the war impartially and showed the major extent of bombardments in Gaza and minimal impact in Israel, that impartiality and heavy weighting of coverage to Palestine is no longer impartial.

The BBC do not seem to be playing from a level playing field as they have shown appeals for war victims in the past. The fact that there is, or has been a sizable Jewish presence in running of the BBC does throw the current decision, which is contrary to the approach of ITV, Channel 4 and Five, into some sort of favouritism towards Israel (or possibly indirectly to the USA).

In my personal opinion the BBC should get off this particular high horse and join the human race for a change.

For the record various Blue Peter appeals on the BBC have been for victims of wars that are part of ongoing stories, others have been to war torn or embattled areas. The distribution of the things bought with these appeals must have been very carefully balanced to avoid favouritism. However, if the children's programming department can be trusted to remain impartial, you expect whoever would have t liaise with the appeal makers can be also.

• 1976 Lifeline Lebanon Appeal for victims of the civil war.
• 1979 Bring and Buy Sale for Cambodia which was still a contested country at the time.
• 2004 The Welcome Home Appeal to reunite families ripped apart by the Angolan civil war

Heinz Failure to Listen (Or Maybe Just Read)

H.J. Heinz when they initially pulled the New York Deli mayo ad said they listened to their consumers. Well it looks like they can't read then.

Yes the first of the long awaited responses to the fact that they pulled the ad in light of 200 or so complaints from people not valuing the rights of all (another alleged Heinz promise). Yeah Tim Trent got a response which is exactly what Michael Mullen said over here that they "accept that this ad was not in accordance with our long-standing corporate policy of respecting everyone's rights and values."

Now there is much quoted proverb you can please all of the people some or time and some of the people all of the time. Therefore it would appear that Heinz's long-standing corporate policy of respecting everyone's rights and values, no matter how bigoted or how outlawed those values may be.

Still a soup of shame hanging over Heinz. The egg mayo is still very much over their faces with this whole debacle.

Ten Thousand Sign Heinz Petition

I've been watching for a while as the petition to Heinz to reinstate their ad has ticked closer to the momentous threshold of it's ten thousandth signature. Well at High Noon UK time, after all this is a UK ad, on the 28th June it was only 12 signature short of that number. It's only taken 15 minutes more to get to 10,000.

Considering that Heinz initially said when removing their ad that they listen to their customers can I ask are they listening now? So basing what they say are 202 or 10,000 people going to be listened to? It has already been over 57 hours since I sent emails and posted complaints to Heinz UK. Mr Nigel Dickie, who yesterday along with other execs at Heinz removed their personal contact details from Heinz's website, not Mr Michael Mullen have not even had the decency to get somebody within the organisation acknowledge my emails and complaints. As someone who works in a call centre environment I know that even a simple acknowledgement at a time like this is easily achievable. After all those of us who have written in are largely aware that a lot of others are doing so as well. 57 hours however is a little bit long to get yourself into motion.

Heinz on their website list their Premier Values. How do they score this week.

Passion . . . to be passionate about winning and about our brands, products and people, thereby delivering superior value to our shareholders.

Heinz produced an ad that was innovative, with layered very dry British humour. They also were launching a new range linking it with the New York Deli's it was named after. However, when the American Family Association issued an alert their passion wavered. (Notice one lie the fact that the vote on civil partnership in California is stated as not being legal in England [the UK])Despite the spontaneous nature of the counter debate and individual comments and letters many posted on various forums no passion to restore the ad is forthcoming.

3/10 for trying then backtracking than failing to acknowledge a mistake.

Risk Tolerance . . . to create a culture where entrepreneurship and prudent risk taking are encouraged and rewarded.

A prudent risk was taken with the ad, it was shown in a more tolerant society than the USA. Sadly the actions of reactionaries in another country is attacking the liberties of a sovereign state. Watch out UK we'll soon be on some axis of evil and be invaded by our ally if this keep up. A risk was taken, but it hasn't been rewarded what off the person who commissioned the ad, they have since been slammed from on high that the ad is "not in accordance with Corporate Policy". How is that going to encourage whatever members of Heinz staff gauged that risk and took the ad campaign on board?

1/10 First sign that the risk failed they backtracked ignoring any counter risk.

Excellence . . . to be the best in quality and in everything we do.

Whoops. I think the above says it all first they said they listened to their consumers but haven't seemed to listen to one side of the argument.

5/10 This 5 is purely for the ad itself.

Motivation . . . to celebrate success, recognizing and rewarding the achievements of individuals and teams.

Oops again Nigel Dickie's original comments to his UK market have since been overruled and overridden from the corporate chiefs. The advertising team must be feeling small if still employed and not currently on gardening leave. Motivation has been given to their consumers however, to protest, blog, boycott and complain, not an ideal business model.

2/10

Innovation . . . to innovate in everything, from products to processes.

Product I have not tasted yet was going to try some this week but as I'm boycotting no idea. Advert again good product. Processes lousy no response, hiding away hoping the storm will pass, no signs yet, pulled an ad before investigation which in all likelihood if any action is taken will result in protests of about 50% of current ads on UK TV as a result of far more graphic depictions/implying of actual sexual activity.

4/10 All points awarded to product not process.

Empowerment . . . to empower our talented people to take the initiative and to do what's right.

They took an initiative have since been told that was wrong.

0/10 Can't promise one and fail to deliver on the other.

Respect . . . to act with integrity and respect towards all.

TOWARDS ALL Heinz!!! Now respectfully explaining the concept of the ad to the AFA should have been enough. However, it is a long held theory that ironic humour is often lost on the Americans, no offence to any and I know some who do get it. No same sex parenting couple that I, and many comments from others on messages boards I've read, know of exists where there is a not either two mums or two dads, or the non-biological partner is merely known by their name. Therefore there is no gay kiss. The peck is far less sexual than a kiss going on in a UK ad for Heinz Salad Cream, which also contains nudity and forced removal or anther's clothing. So why is one ok by corporate policy and the other not Heinz?

-10/10 Two facedness, taking backwards steps over equality.

Nick Clegg Joins Calls for Heinz to Reinstate Ad

The Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg has joined the growing number of concerned citizens in the UK and beyond resulting from Heinz's pulling of their New York Deli Mayo advertisement.

On the Lib Dem website from the letter he has sent to the company he has said:

"The depiction of a same-sex kiss in this advert was innocent both in tone and content, and I am shocked that you decided to withdraw it.

"While I understand that some people in Britain today are uncomfortable with same-sex relationships, such prejudice should not be condoned by an organisation of your size and stature."

He's has joined the growing number of people asking Heinz to "reverse this decision and reinstate the advert".

Heinz Early Day Motion

Diane Abbott has lodged this Early Day Motion regarding the Heinz Deli Mayo Ad's removal on the back of 202 non-justifiable complaints:

That this House notes that the manufacturer Heinz has withdrawn its television advertisement, which features two men kissing, on the basis of 200 complaints that it might be embarrassing for parents with children to watch; further notes that millions of children watch depictions of same-sex relationships in soap operas every day; further notes that the advertisement was not intended to be a realistic depiction of a same-sex relationship, and that the advertisement was intended to be humorous; believes that Heinz's decision was ill-considered and likely to offend millions of gay, lesbian and transgender people; and calls on Heinz to reconsider its decision.

Ironically it is EDM 1889 which is when such a reaction would have been expected rather than 2008. So far 9 other Labour MPs have signed it, Diane Abbott, Chris Bryant, Alan Simpson, Ian Gibson, Jeremy Corbyn, Karen Buck, Greg Pope, Kelvin Hopkins, Eric Illsey and Lynne Jones.

I have written to Michael Connarty urging him to do the same. If you live in the UK please write to your MP and encourage them to do likewise following this clicky link if you're not sure how.

Update: Sadly the Parliament site is not updating the signatories regularly enough to check the current level of Parliamentary support however Lynne Featherstone has blogged that she has since signed it. Nick Clegg has also written to Heinz on this issue.

Updated to 4 July: More names added to Government website total now 22 with Paul Holmes, Mike Hancock, Stephen Williams, Mark Oaten (Lib Dem), Glenda Jackson, Chris McCafferty, John McDonnell, Martin Caton, Jim Devine, Rudi Vis, Linda Riordan, Harry Cohen (Labour).

Second EDM 1913: It appears Lynne Featherstone contrary to the above has submitted her own EDM:

That this House regrets Heinz's decision to withdraw its television advert featuring two men kissing because of homophobic complaints and considers the scenes portrayed were in no way offensive or indecent; believes footage displaying affection between two people of the same sex should be treated in the same way as two people of the opposite sex; and calls for the company to resume its advertising campaign as planned.

Signed as of 4th July by 15 other MPs:

Lynne Jones, Jim Devine, Glenda Jackson, John McDonnell, Alan Simpson, Jeremy Corbyn, Paul Flynn, Rudi Vis, Kelvin Hopkins, Harry Cohen and Bill Etherington (Labour)

Mike Hancock, Adrian Sanders, Paul Holmes and Stephen Williams (Liberal Deomocrats)

The sad absence of any Tory, Nationalist of Northern Irish member from either EDM is starkly disappointing inditment against those parties.

What the Heinz?

Well yesterday's tale of mayo and the juxtaposed image of a male deli guy in place of the mum of the household has taken a rather sinister twist.

Yesterday the Director of UK Corporate and Government Affairs, Nigel
Dickie had been telling us the as was pulled because complaints to the Advertising Standards Agency and Heinz themselves had been about "offensive", "inappropriate" content in the ad and that many of the 202 complainants thought the ad was "unsuitable to be seen by children". He's even gone further to say that some of those parents had, bless their hearts, had to explain to their kids that homosexuals existed.

However, there was uproar from those of us who got the joke, both gay and straight. I mean no gay family would have a mum and a dad either two mums or two dads. The person making the sandwiches was referred to a mum, therefore the fact that they spoke with a New York accent so out of keeping with the family was a play on the product. The 'kiss' was an innocent, indeed almost obligatory, peck before heading to work, one was wondering how that could be seen as offensive or inappropriate when you considered the content of the programmes it was being shown against.

However, as I pointed out the story has gone global. Twice this blog has been visited from somebody at H.J. Heinz corporate offices in Pennsylvania. The Director of Global Corporate Affairs, Michael Mullen has issued a press release here. He has probably put his foot even further into it by saying:

"Heinz pulled the ad in the UK because our consumer research showed that it failed in its attempt to be humorous and offended people on all sides.

"Heinz apologizes for its misplaced attempt at humor and we accept that this ad was not in accordance with our long-standing corporate policy of respecting everyone's rights and values."

I have sent an email to Mr Mullen rejecting his apology as there is nothing in the ad which he needs to apologise to me about. There is however other issues I would like to see him apologise about and if you want to do the same his email address is Michael.mullen@us.hjheinz.com

BTW the facebook group currently has 1823 people going to boycott the company's products and the petition to reinstate the ad now has 5288 signatures.

UPDATE 10:15
Interesting opinion piece on the blog of what appears to the PR company, Seventy Seven PR, owned by the Ad's producers AMV BBDO. These are the personal views of James Gordon MacIntosh not those of the agency Seventy Seven or AMV BBDO as he so kindly points out below.

School Plays To Change Forever

So now our literature and plays are to be watered down for school productions. So here are a few of the changes to be looked out for, found on a photocopier at the Department of Education and Skills.

Animal Farm:

The main charactors can no longer be portrayed as pigs they must instead be referred by their full titles as PC Squealer, Sgt Snowball and Chief Superintentent Napoleon. Also cut out the bits about terrorising Mr. Jones see current change in legislation.

A Merchant of Venice:

Shylock the Jew to be renamed Sebastian the Merchant Banker. William Hague's ammendment to make the plot about saving the pound instead of Antonio's pound of flesh has been rejected.

Pirates of Penznace:

Of course piracy is a crime therefore the pirates can either be replaced by malcontents on jetskis or surfers protesting against pollution.

Little Shop of Horrors:

Gender balance is required in the protitudes outside the shop. Therefore a lad in full football kit should be added. Of course all reference to the profession of these people is not to be mentioned, any copy of the News of the World found near the staging area may affect the schools funding for the next few years; Ruth Kelly or her sucessor will be informed.

Much Ado About Nothing:

Children really shouldn't be reading Hansard at such a young age they might get ideas about not voting Labour.