Quizzes & Puzzles0 min ago
The Ultimate In Hypocracy?
61 Answers
http:// www.bbc .co.uk/ news/uk -englan d-25731 328
Or perhaps he was a secret admirer of the Le Dame de fer!
Or perhaps he was a secret admirer of the Le Dame de fer!
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by ToraToraTora. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.actually many didn't, they followed the unions, and the policies in place, i think it is chill who's granddad worked in the mines, i could be wrong, and if so i hope he drops in to say, but someone mentioned that Scargill was not liked, often despised, and that he was thought something of a hypocrite, and not just over buying a flat.
wiki
On 25 August 2010, it was reported that Scargill had been told that he no longer qualified for full membership of the NUM under union rules he had helped draw up, but was only eligible for "life" or "retired" or "honorary" membership - which did not carry voting rights. In February 2012, Scargill won £13,000 in a court action against the NUM, primarily for car expenses, and for the earlier temporary denial of membership. Scargill admitted there was 'bad blood' between him and the NUM general secretary Chris Kitchen, who said, "I honestly do believe that Arthur, in his own world, believes that the NUM is here to afford him the lifestyle that he's become accustomed to." However, in December 2012, Scargill lost a similar case concerning rent on his flat in the Barbican, London. For years the NUM had been paying £34,000 annual rent for the flat on Scargill's instructions, without the knowledge of NUM members or many senior officials; Scargill claimed the NUM should continue funding his flat for the rest of his life, and thereafter for any widow who survived him. Chris Kitchen said: "I would say it's time to walk away, Mr Scargill. You've been found out. The NUM is not your personal bank account and never will be again.
On 25 August 2010, it was reported that Scargill had been told that he no longer qualified for full membership of the NUM under union rules he had helped draw up, but was only eligible for "life" or "retired" or "honorary" membership - which did not carry voting rights. In February 2012, Scargill won £13,000 in a court action against the NUM, primarily for car expenses, and for the earlier temporary denial of membership. Scargill admitted there was 'bad blood' between him and the NUM general secretary Chris Kitchen, who said, "I honestly do believe that Arthur, in his own world, believes that the NUM is here to afford him the lifestyle that he's become accustomed to." However, in December 2012, Scargill lost a similar case concerning rent on his flat in the Barbican, London. For years the NUM had been paying £34,000 annual rent for the flat on Scargill's instructions, without the knowledge of NUM members or many senior officials; Scargill claimed the NUM should continue funding his flat for the rest of his life, and thereafter for any widow who survived him. Chris Kitchen said: "I would say it's time to walk away, Mr Scargill. You've been found out. The NUM is not your personal bank account and never will be again.
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
I expect many of us (well, ok, all of us) would take advantage of something going (legally) cheap if the opportunity arose. So, while that might make this business seem reasonable it does not alter the fact that Scargill is/was a total unmitigated douche-bag. and, of course, a total disaster for the miners. his attitude to the miners was a bit like quite a few catholic priests approach to orphans. FT.
Chewn - "If someone trying to get a flat on the cheap was the ultimate in hypocrisy we would all live in a better world than we do now."
But it's not 'someone' is it?
It's Arthur Scargill, sworn and vocifourous enemy of the Conservatives, their policies, and everything they stood for.
So yes, it is hypocrisy writ very large indeed.
But it's not 'someone' is it?
It's Arthur Scargill, sworn and vocifourous enemy of the Conservatives, their policies, and everything they stood for.
So yes, it is hypocrisy writ very large indeed.
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.