Dominic Lawson on Question Time (BBC Radio 4) now
Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2019 8:05 pm
Heading self-explanatory
The independent home for discussions on the English Chess scene.
https://www.ecforum.org.uk/
On both actually.Jonathan Rogers wrote: ↑Sat Jan 12, 2019 10:52 amPerhaps there were comments on Brexit or climate change instead?
Listen and judge for yourself, Justin.
Maybe just tell us the opinion you have in mind?David Sedgwick wrote: ↑Sat Jan 12, 2019 11:09 amListen and judge for yourself, Justin.
One of the reasons which some of his opinions surprised me is that I thought that you might agree with at least one of them.
I thought that Justin might agree that reducing the maximum stake on fixed odds betting terminals to £2 was desirable.
This is surely quite right in principle and an organisation like the ECF couldn't function unless we took that view. However, in a situation where a given sport in a given cauntry has a deep structural problem with the near-absence of women (not to mention any reputational damage caused by the well-publicised views of its most famous practitioner) then either it takes that problem seriously, which it clains to do, or it has a President with a long record of sexist attitudes and a published position that sexism in chess doesn't exist. The situation as it stands is utter humbug.Roger Lancaster wrote: ↑Sun Jan 13, 2019 2:32 amIn assessing the suitability of an actual or would-be ECF director to hold office, I'd regard his or her politics as coming a long way down the list
Just to answer your earlier question specifically, this was not an issue which came up during the programme. I have commented above on the most controversial topic which did (in relation to Dominic Lawson).JustinHorton wrote: ↑Sun Jan 13, 2019 7:03 amThis is surely quite right in principle and an organisation like the ECF couldn't function unless we took that view. However, in a situation where a given sport in a given cauntry has a deep structural problem with the near-absence of women (not to mention any reputational damage caused by the well-publicised views of its most famous practitioner) then either it takes that problem seriously, which it clains to do, or it has a President with a long record of sexist attitudes and a published position that sexism in chess doesn't exist. The situation as it stands is utter humbug.Roger Lancaster wrote: ↑Sun Jan 13, 2019 2:32 amIn assessing the suitability of an actual or would-be ECF director to hold office, I'd regard his or her politics as coming a long way down the list
I've now listened to Lawson's reply and he spends little or no time on the the real causes of poverty, but spends his most of his answer criticising the poor for gambling, smoking and drinking. We've had to listen to this nonsense ever since the nineteenth century. Some people might like chess to be represented by this privileged patrician snob but I'll leave it to Siegfried Sassoon to sum up my feelings about people like Lawson.David Sedgwick wrote: ↑Sat Jan 12, 2019 10:06 pmI thought that Justin might agree that reducing the maximum stake on fixed odds betting terminals to £2 was desirable.
As for the contributors to Twitter above, if there had been no problem previously, then the change wouldn't have been necessary.
It would be facile and offensive to suggest that gambling on fixed odds betting terminals was a principal cause of the increasing demand for food banks, but to my ear Dominic Lawson didn't say that.
I was surprised that he didn't take the free market approach that people should accept responsibility for their own actions.