hate

While most of us know Wetherspoons’ pubs, I had no idea it had also been running hotels since 1998, when the chain’s first opened in Shrewsbury with 22 rooms. It now has more than 50

Love it or loathe it, Wetherspoons is a British institution. Its patterned carpets, bargain drinks and grand old buildings are familiar features of high streets across the country.

For a long time, I’ve been in the loathe camp. Having whiled away much of my latter teenage years in one of its pubs – a once particularly grand building converted into the biggest, cheapest drinking den in the South East – I fell out of love with Tim Martin’s chain in my 20s. Partly because the local newspaper I worked for had no offices, so we had to hold news conferences in the room above our local Spoons. Partly out of support for independent pubs, which have been in a fight for survival for the past decade.

Something Spoons is certainly not doing. The chain is booming. It has around 800 venues across the UK and brought in £2.13 billion last year, an almost 5% year-on-year increase. But while most of us know its pubs, I had no idea it had also been running hotels since 1998, when the chain’s first opened in Shrewsbury with 22 rooms. A further 54 have opened since.

OPINION

As you might expect with Spoons, the major draw is the price. A room for a night costs at most £50 at most venues, which is an absolute bargain anywhere near London. The chain also scored four stars out of five for value for money in a Which? budget hotel survey, one of only two to land the score.

So, on a bitter Wednesday in November, I arrived at the Thomas Ingoldsby in Canterbury, frozen and disheveled after a long bike ride from Broadstairs, ready to give Spoons another chance. I was glad that I did.

Price

Cheap drinks are a big part of Spoons’ appeal, and its hotel rooms follow the same formula.

In the Which? survey, Wetherspoons was one of just two hotel groups to earn four stars for value for money. The other was the overall winner, the Coaching Inn Group. While the Coaching Inn Group’s average room rate was £128 a night, Wetherspoons’ was £70. When I checked, a double at the Thomas Ingoldsby for the following Wednesday was available for just £55.

The savings didn’t stop at the bedroom door. I spent the evening drinking £1.89 pints of ale, then tucked into a £2.99 veggie breakfast the next morning. Both were rather decent. Perhaps I’d spent too long inside the M25, but those prices felt almost ridiculously cheap. At a time when leaving the house seems to cost £20 before you’ve done anything, the affordability was the standout attraction.

Atmosphere

My previous Spoons visit had been to the vast, strangely subdued Coronet on London’s Holloway Road. Canterbury on a chilly Wednesday evening couldn’t have felt more different. There were university students, cheerful groups of pensioners and solitary blokes reading books over onion rings. It was a lively cross-section of life, with people happily sharing the same space.

The hotel rooms are a short flight of stairs above the pub, so getting to bed after a pint couldn’t be much easier. You could even take a deli wrap and chips upstairs to enjoy in the bath. A member of staff told me rooms could be booked on a whim, although anyone who had overdone it at the bar might be turned away.

The room

I’ve stayed in plenty of budget hotels, and this was among the best. Everything felt fresh, well maintained and thoughtfully put together. My double room was generously sized, with a large desk, a well-stocked tea tray and a decent-sized television. Better still, it had a view of Canterbury Cathedral that few hotels in the city could rival.

Only two rooms at the Thomas Ingoldsby enjoy that outlook. Those on the other side not only miss out on the cathedral view but are reportedly disturbed by early-morning lorry movements. If you can get it, room 110 is the one I’d recommend. After a freezing day cycling across Kent, I was particularly pleased to discover the thermostat went up to 25C — and that the heating delivered. Within a short time, it felt as though I’d escaped somewhere considerably warmer.

What’s included

There is no all-inclusive package, which is perhaps just as well given the potential combination of Hooch and endless chips. Still, the room came with plenty of useful extras: reliable Wi-Fi, a couple of packets of biscuits, fresh towels, two bottles of water and a generous supply of tea, coffee and hot chocolate sachets. Check-out was at 11am. Breakfast wasn’t included, but at £2.99 for my veggie option, that hardly felt like a reason to complain.

The verdict

A friend’s dad once told me that Spoons was the closest thing Britain had left to a genuine social institution. Watching the mix of people enjoying their evening in Canterbury, I could see what he meant.

As nightclubs and members’ societies close, places where people from different backgrounds can gather feel increasingly valuable. Whatever my reservations about the business, this pub offered exactly that.

Add a comfortable room, a cathedral view and remarkably low prices, and the appeal becomes difficult to resist. I arrived as a skeptic, but Thomas Ingoldsby won me over.

WASHINGTON  — Less than a week before eight people — including six Asian women — were killed in the Atlanta-area shootings congressional Democrats introduced legislation that would bolster the Department of Justice’s ability to address COVID-19 hate crimes.

The bill, introduced by U.S. Rep. Grace Meng (D-N.Y.) and Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), has been co-sponsored by more than 60 lawmakers and on Friday was endorsed by President Biden, who condemned the “ongoing crisis of gender-based and anti-Asian violence” and urged Congress to “swiftly pass the COVID-19 Hate Crimes Act.”

“It’s time for Congress to codify and expand upon these actions — because every person in our nation deserves to live their lives with safety, dignity and respect,” Biden said.

The bill would require at least one Department of Justice employee to facilitate fast reviews of federal, state and local COVID-19 hate crimes for at least a year, according to a draft provided by a Hirono spokeswoman.

It would also require the department to issue guidance to state and local law enforcement agencies on how to establish an online hate crime reporting system in multiple languages.

The system would “allow more victims to come forward,” A.B. Cruz III, president of the National Asian Pacific American Bar Assn., said in a statement.

The bill would also require Atty. Gen. Merrick Garland and Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra to work with the COVID–19 Health Equity Task Force and advocates to give guidance on how to discuss the pandemic without using incendiary language.

The bill would not drastically change the legal landscape as it relates to hate crimes but would spotlight how it intersects with COVID-19, said Anthony Michael Kreis, a law professor at Georgia State University College of Law.

Since virus-fueled lockdowns went into effect last March, thousands of Asian Americans have reported having faced racist verbal and physical attacks or have been shunned by others, according to a report by Stop AAPI Hate. The group, whose acronym stands for Asian American and Pacific Islander, received reports of 3,795 incidents over the last year, with 68.1% involving verbal harassment and 11.1% involving physical assaults.

Among the incidents, Asian Americans reported being punched while riding the subway in Washington, taunted with racial slurs in New York and coughed on while being blamed for the novel coronavirus in Dallas.

Then-President Trump last year said little to discourage the attacks but often used racist language to describe the deadly virus, calling it “kung flu” and the “China virus,” even after being warned that his rhetoric was incendiary. Meng said many Republican lawmakers “trafficked racist, bigoted terms to describe COVID-19.”

“In doing so, their language stoked people’s fears and created an atmosphere of intolerance and violence, which persists even today,” Meng said.

The bill would define COVID-19 hate crimes as violent offenses motivated by the real or perceived relationship to the spread of the coronavirus and the real or perceived background of a person, including their ethnicity and national origin.

Kreis said it’s unclear how adding a COVID-19 distinction to a federal hate crime would benefit existing law. The law, in practice, draws connections between current events and discrimination. For example, the law can already be used to prosecute crimes against LGBTQ people whose attackers express anti-HIV/AIDS sentiments, he said.

Kreis said that though anti-Asian slurs are seen as an expression of hate by the American public and, by extension, juries, anti-Asian imagery is not as noticeable in American society. This often requires prosecutors to handhold juries to connect the dots to understand what hate crimes against Asian Americans look like, he said.

“We need a lot more cultural competency in the ways in which anti-Asian stereotypes can manifest,” Kreis said. “That’s a hard endeavor we as a society need to tackle.”

Times staff writer Chris Megerian contributed to this report.