Will Chris Packham be next

[fallen-archie]

In the light of the recent sacking of the England Women's manager following the teams 6-0 win and a campaign by the guardian newspaper over his alleged racist remarks to a player, are we putting people in an impossible situation when they are in public life. Jenny Murray felt the wrath of the left following a glib remark and Richard Branson is also being targeted due to his success in business and his role within the NHS. Chris Packham is the latest victim because he described some farmers and those involved in the grouse shooting industry as the nasty brigade, he is also campaigning for the banning of glysophate which he claims is a health risk, because of this a campaign is being vigorously fought to get him sacked as a BBC presenter!
All of the people I have mentioned are good at what they do, is it because of that fact that they are targeted or are the concerns expressed genuine enough to seek their careers are ended?

[cee-dee]

There's several issues surrounding something like this.

Those in a priviledged position should not use that position to further things about which they've got a bee in their bonnet.

They should be allowed to say what they think, just the same as everyone else but shouldn't spout off about their "thing" while doing the job they're paid for.

They should be allowed to retain their position but should be reprimanded and told to desist in future when appearing in their "official" capacity.

[fallen-archie]

Why? Packham has never used his position on the BBC to further his personal views, surely he should be allowed to express an opinion ona subject close to his heart rather than keeping his mouth shut because he works for the Beeb.

[suzieseaside]

I would say he has every right to express his opinion about wildlife and conservation issues (they are not unreasonable IMO and at least he has the spherical objects to make them).  I have no doubt that he is being targeted by the huntin' shootin' fishin' Countryside Alliance / British Field Sports Society who don't like criticism. No doubt they assume that they have plenty of powerful allies in Government, wealthy landowners etc. but they tried to get him sacked from the Beeb 2 years ago and failed.

As for Monsanto who are purely profit-driven, it's about time there was more research into environmental and human health issues  that have been flagged up about Glyphosate.- now classified by the WHO I think as 'probably carcinogenic to humans' and should be subject to tighter regulation.  Many problems in agriculture could be reduced by better management strategies rather than throwing more chemicals about for a quick fix and maximum profits.

I expect there is a petition to sign somewhere in support of CP - I'll look for it and sign it.  If the Beeb are too wimpy to allow people to voice opinions that have merit (e.g. I think I'm right in saying that years ago the Government Chief Scientiic Advisor concluded that badger-culling did not solve the TB problem but Government chose to ignore it and gave into the farming lobby) then maybe Channel 4 would take him on.

[j_uk643]

If you cared to read the FA statement on the matter, they make it clear  why England women's manager was removed, and it had nothing to do with the alleged  racial comments at the time,or the win.

[fallen-archie]

Well I did and I Don’t believe it, thanks for the heads up!

[jd.linklater]

According to this report his sacking was nothing to do with racism, more about an inappropriate relationship with a player 3 years earlier.

http://metro.co.uk/2017/09/21/what-did-mark-sampson-do-and-why-was-he-sacked-as-england-womens-footb...

[j_uk643]

Lol, before it was pointed out, that is....

They were young girls he was inappropriately linked with, something some claim to be a 'blood boiling' concern.

Seems not, when the ethnic element is removed

[fallen-archie]

It was interesting listening to the young lady yesterday in the House of Commons select committee. She was very confident and indeed eloquent in her presentation, She did not appear to have suffered greatly at the hands of her manager although she did express her concerns over his inappropriate remarks however glib or petty they may have appeared.
Much of her venom yesterday was aimed at the hierarchy which like many British institutions is made up of white middle aged males, many young people appear to have a problem with this as it is seen as white male domination in our multi faceted society! I can see how this is interpreted by some as a barrier to greater inclusiveness but for me it is a traditional set up which needs an overhaul, surely if the fa is to oversee the women’s game it would be right and proper to have some female involvement within its governing body? Likewise as a multicultural society then the body should reflect this, I also feel that people ought to be in place because they merit the position not simply because they have a particular skin colour and therein lies my main concern, I don’t care if a prime minister is black brown or white but I do believe they should be competent.
Clearly in terms of the young victim here she is better at presentation than she was at football, if she wants to further her career in management or politics then it is up to her up prove herself and she has made a good start.
I am quite certain that once she is in the HOC we will all be attending retraining classes to prevent a recurrence of the type of banter once familiar in this country but now so scorned.

[j_uk643]

As well being an award winning football player, Eniola Aluko is a graduate female Solicitor of African descent, which appears to be enough on any single count to trigger some to hyperbole, invective, and incoherence

The hearings were hopefully aimed at a greater understanding and improvement in the grievance procedures, structure, and culture within the FA relating to women's football. That players should be selected on ability, and not on unrelated issues including personal prejudice by coaches or management, and where an allegation exists, the complaints procedure should fairly and impartially review any alleged complaints and not just seek to protect and preserve it's organisation at the expense of players careers

It appears according to some professionals within the game, that Sampson’s behaviour towards young girls whose career he held considerable influence over was ‘an open secret'. This raises some questions about the appointment procedures within the FA.

Despite this some appear not only totally uninterested in this matter,but remain in denial about the reasons for Sampson’s dismissal and the welfare of young girls, despite the available evidence, and despite their own troubling content elsewhere, devoting much attention to the topic when it involves one specific type of perpetrator only.