Media articles on Westminster debate June 2018

For years dismissed as 'laziness', but now cruel disease is finally getting attention it deserves
Rochdale News:
"Now a three-hour Westminster Hall debate on Thursday afternoon (21 June, 1.30 to 4.30 pm), supported by the ME Association and other charities, will discuss treatments and research into the disease, which is estimated to cost the UK economy around £3.5billion in lost taxes, healthcare and benefit costs."
"
The debate, led by Carol Monaghan MP (SNP, Glasgow NW) and Nicky Morgan (Con), has had cross-party support and will be attended by local MP for Middleton and Heywood, Liz McInnes, who confirmed she intends to speak during the debate.

Rochdale MP, Tony Lloyd confirmed that due to his role as a Shadow Cabinet member, he cannot participate in the debate, but will be watching closely.

He said: “Unfortunately it is a Westminster Hall debate, I cannot participate as a member of the Shadow Cabinet. However, I will of course be watching the debate closely and with interest.”

Ms Monaghan will call for more funding for medical research into the causes and mechanisms of the illness, which affects all ages, races and genders, and speak of the absence of effective treatment programmes."

full article here:
http://www.rochdaleonline.co.uk/new...ease-is-finally-getting-attention-it-deserves

 

Is that per year?

 

Yes. The report last year from the MEA and the Optimum Health Clinic put the figure as £3.3 billion per year, http://www.meassociation.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020Health-Counting-the-Cost-Sept-2017.pdf

 

still being very polite about the abysmal pace trial why are journalists so reluctant to show this pseudo science is pure fraud with malicious intent.

 

English libel laws.

If the journalist did make that claim in an article, and was then taken to court over it by somebody who could reasonably claim that they were defamed by it, the journalist would have to prove that the claim was correct, and being able to prove that 1. actual fraud took place, and 2. there was malicious intent would be very difficult to do.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_defamation_law

 

https://www.loughboroughecho.net/news/local-news/parliament-debate-treatment-patients-14801745

 

This in a nutshell. Note that you can also technically be sued for this if you say the same on Twitter, but journalists are a more obvious target. UK libel law is a nasty mess.

 

https://twitter.com/user/status/1009929565572141062

https://twitter.com/user/status/1009929874285481984

 

Is there no requirement to prove damages in the UK?

 

Press release from the MEA

http://www.meassociation.org.uk/201...or-cruel-death-sentence-disease-22-june-2018/

 

Topple in the Canary with an unusually subdued headline considering the drama of the debate!: 'A cross-party debate has offered a ray of hope for the ‘millions missing’

https://www.thecanary.co/discovery/...fered-a-ray-of-hope-for-the-millions-missing/

 

I didn't read this but I fear the Rickey Gervais angle could easily backfire on us.


https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/la...Brine-Apologise/amp?__twitter_impression=true

 

The ME Association's statement was a sensible approach, not focussing on outrage or offence, but instead suggesting ways of making a positive contribution. Thanks to whoever thought of responding in that way.

 

Another Rickey Gervais headline

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/polit...-ricky-12767943.amp?__twitter_impression=true

 

Compare and contrast the level of media coverage we've got so far with the media coverage for say a BPS brigade paper falsely claiming we can recover by merely changing thoughts and a bit of exercise or about vexatious patients harassing doctors who are bravely struggling against the odds to save these patients from themselves.

We need the media dam to break big time.

 

Perhaps it just shows what the press can do if not spoon fed by the SMC. Very little.

 

From FB:
"Luke Pollard
Yesterday at 03:29 ·
Hello #Plymouth - yesterday I spoke in the debate on Myalgic encephalomyelitis (ME), in Westminster Hall.

First of all, I want to thank each and every one of you that sent me your experiences on ME ahead of the debate - we received countless emails, Facebook and Twitter messages.

I did not have time to read them all out but I hope that the ones I read out reflect your views. In my speech I spoke about the need to address the invisibility of ME. That means better funding of research and education, an end to the PACE trials and more genuine effort by health professionals and Government to correctly diagnose and support those people with ME and their families. I used some of my speech to talk about ME in young people as many people shared with me their experiences of their children with ME.
A common message interpreted when it comes to this illness is that individuals feel invisible and partly unfulfilled by the Government’s ignorance in relation to ME. This is why I believe we must do more and fight for the individuals that are struggling with Myalgic encephalomyelitis.

The ME debate was really important and I was left in no doubt having sat through all three hours of it that this is a subject where there is cross-party pressure on Ministers to do the right thing. I will continue to stand up for people with ME in Plymouth.

Can I thank you again for taking the time to send me your views, thoughts, experiences and suggestions. Keep in touch."

 

Thank you very much Luke Pollard and to everyone who got their MPs on board with the debate, sadly mine wasn't interested and just came out with the usual government type garbage.

It's very heartening to hear Luke is wanting to continue to help too.

Is it the case that we can't write to other MPs, that it is only our own MPs who we can correspond with? Or is that wrong?