Left-wing MP Ian Byrne’s highly-praised campaign to end hunger and make adequate nutrition a legal right steps up further
The ‘Right to Food’ campaign started by Liverpool West Derby MP Ian Byrne – which has already seen Byrne named MP of the Year, though that didn’t stop Labour trying unsuccessfully to orchestrate his deselection – steps up another gear two weekends from now.
Supporters of Byrne’s fight to end hunger in the UK by making proper nutrition a legal right will march in London, Liverpool and Belfast as follows:
London: Meet 12 noon at Tottenham Hotspur Stadium, London N17 OBX. At 1pm march to Tottenham Green, N15 4JA. Community Festival of Resistance with speeches, food, performances and workshops from 2pm.
Liverpool: Meet 12 noon St George’s Hall. March to Bombed Out Church (Famine Monument) then on to The Casa for a campaign rally at 1pm.
Belfast: Assemble outside Belfast City Hall at 1pm.
Byrne’s campaign has seen Liverpool, Manchester and Rotherham become ‘Right to Food’ cities and the campaign has spread to other countries.
For more information on the campaign and the marches, visit Byrne’s website here.
SKWAWKBOX needs your help. The site is provided free of charge but depends on the support of its readers to be viable. If you’d like to help it keep revealing the news as it is and not what the Establishment wants you to hear – and can afford to without hardship – please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal or here to set up a monthly donation via GoCardless (SKWAWKBOX will contact you to confirm the GoCardless amount). Thanks for your solidarity so SKWAWKBOX can keep doing its job.
If you wish to republish this post for non-commercial use, you are welcome to do so – see here for more.
Not only does he not like Ian Byrne, but keef doesn’t like the idea of the poor eating, so would these marches be permissible under a keef govt? .
https://media.tenor.com/EPQ9t4vWoZ4AAAAM/go-home-dislike.gif
And how many undercover plod would he have infiltrating the marches?
I wonder if SirKidStarver will be there?
I doubt it, he says he’s making no unfunded promises despite the fact Kids are starving.
Meanwhile, farmers are paid to leave fields fallow.
I don’t really see what the problem is with that. It’s basic crop rotation, innit? The (arable) land needs to recover.
But 90% of the problem lies with the rapaciousness of the supermarkets,. The other issues I have are with the fastidiousness of consumers and the (borderline criminal) amount of food waste in this country.
Fearnley-Whittingstall did his bit to address and correct the issue (and fair play to him) but there’s only so much can be done.
Toffee, they don’t do crop rotation anymore. Haven’t for a few decades. Too much profit lost leaving a field doing nothing. Farming is now big business (the wheat leaving Ukraine is actually American owned…).
What we have currently is where farmers are being paid for the fields to not be used anymore. Rewilding is the buzzword.
They’re currently trying to ban cows in Ireland…
Look into C40 cities for an idea of why fields are being left to waste.
Toffee, they don’t do crop rotation anymore.
And that, as I understand it, is a big reason why the planet’s fooked. Why our land and rivers are polluted. Why the bees and insects are on their way out.
Can’t have it all ways, I’m afraid. The ancients knew enough not to push mother earth…
Apparently, it is now ‘anti-British’ to disagree with Starmer.
Meanwhile, as the country falls apart politicians fiddle: An everyday tale of the popular game of silly buggers.
Like backsides and opinions everyone has a plan. Apparently they are very popular. Sometimes they are even legal requirements. Which, even in a nominally ‘democratic’ process requires voting once they have been finally formulated.
Simple’s eh? Not really.
So the plan is presented and mayhem ensues. Because, like all politics, each nominal gang meets beforehand to determine its position prior to the vote.
The wannabe blue gang (which pretends to be the red gang) finds itself in a bit a pickle. Some of the gang – who are a very deep shade of blue – are a tad unhappy about certain wider contextual issues and want it to be a free vote. In the end the decision is to whip the gang members into voting in favour of the plan.
Meanwhile, the orange gang (which is really a shade of the New Blue) agree to oppose the plan in the knowledge that this is just political posturing as they don’t have enough votes to outvote the wannabe blue gang that pretends to be the red gang.
Then the problems start. Because if the wannabe blue gang which pretends to be the red gang loses the vote the orange which is really a a shade of the New blue gang will be covered in midden muck up to their necks. The plan contains provisions beneficial to many of the orange/New blue gangs voting constituencies and their leader has their eyes fixed on attempting a promotion to London next year.
At this point it starts to unravel and get messy. The deep blue members of the wannabe blue gang which pretends to be the red gang decide to vote against the plan rather than abstain. The orange which is really a shade of the New blue gang look like winning the vote to scupper the plan and are forced to get somewhere in the region of 50% of their gang to abstain in order to ensure the success of a plan they are officially against.
And they reckon creche’s are closing down!
Dave – If only you and your comrades had an alternative that was even remotely credible to offer the electorate.
We do. Its called competence (something you are going to need stuck as you are in that hold you’ve dug for yourself).
Where the Oligarchy are subordinate to the Democratic State rather than the other way around.
Dave – Are you having a laugh, what competence would that be. Do you have some examples?
Do you have any examples of the competence of the system you are trolling for steveH?
You know, the one that has de-industrialised itself to the point it not even being able to field a coherent fit for role MIC which is getting its arse handed to it daily; relies on an unsustainable financialised economic paradigm which has led to unprecedented debt levels; which has de-skilled entire generations; and which cannot sustain itself?
How many people have been brought out of poverty under this model in the past three of four decades rather than being driven into poverty? Has it even reached 10% of the 700+ million achieved elsewhere?
You are seriously deluded as to who it is ‘having a laugh’ here.
But don’t just ask me steveH.
Get of your bone idle backside and run a poll to test how many people you are convincing here on any of the drivel you are peddling.