Picture posting is enabled for all :)
Bans on unaccompanied children are wrong. It's just plain on prejudice and intolerence. I'd like to see a campaign against it.]
If an under-eighteen wants an allotment why should their age be an issue? Bans on unaccompanied children are wrong. It's just plain on prejudice and intolerence. I'd like to see a campaign against it.
Quote from: Unwashed on November 15, 2009, 18:38:19If an under-eighteen wants an allotment why should their age be an issue? Bans on unaccompanied children are wrong. It's just plain on prejudice and intolerence. I'd like to see a campaign against it.This is a wind-up, isn't it Unwashed?
Quote from: Squash64 on November 16, 2009, 05:40:40Quote from: Unwashed on November 15, 2009, 18:38:19If an under-eighteen wants an allotment why should their age be an issue? Bans on unaccompanied children are wrong. It's just plain on prejudice and intolerence. I'd like to see a campaign against it.This is a wind-up, isn't it Unwashed?No.
OK, so. Anyone actually want to engage seriously with the issues here?
Unless a child is actually refused an allotment due to their age then is there an issue to debate?Has there even been a single instance where this has actually happened?
The trouble is that many children who would enjoy an allotment of their own don't even think of it as a possibility and so never get as far ask applying.
Quote from: Unwashed on November 16, 2009, 13:09:17The trouble is that many children who would enjoy an allotment of their own don't even think of it as a possibility and so never get as far ask applying. I'm still not clear what age you are talking about. "Under 18" isn't specific. What would be the lower age?