Current Affairs

[oldbluefox]

Were the Nightingale hospitals built in error?
What planet are these people on?

[Kendhni]

My problem was never with those who come here to work nor with media reporting of the minority who come to skive. It has always been that the EU can't see the difference. They insist on freedom of movement. No ifs. No buts. If the rule was freedom of movement for leisure of if you have a job to go to no problem. Then the system would have been seen to be fair. The problem was always freedom of movement to claim better benefits or make use of a better health service. Small changes to the rules could have resulted in a decisively different referendum outcome but they were intransigent.

Eloquent bu incorrect. Even when Cameron went to the EU looking concessions he was told, in relation to immigration, to enforce the laws that were available to him. Successive UK governments have refused to do so - I guess there is a much bigger picture going on apart from the one that the media is trying to program the population with.

As I said in my response to QB above I'm not trying to drag it all up again. And as I also said it doesn't matter whether it was EU rules or UK application of them. Cameron didn't get it and that is why he lost the referendum. And as you correctly say no government from Major onwards has got it.

It's not that the government got-it or didn't get-it, as I said in my response, it is the medias attempts at programming their audience that don't get it. There is a much bigger picture here which means despite what MPs say, when in opposition, the tune changes when in power. To survive in the 21st century Britain needs migrant labour and skilled workers from other countries, they will bring their families and they will get the same entitlement to benefits in the UK as any other workers - all this other stuff about housing and benefits is mostly media spin exposing the edge-cases.

Similar to HS2. Who is it for? The next generation, projections show it will be required for movement of both people and goods within the next 20-25 years. Who will pay for it? In the main it will be the next generation, not the current generation - they are still paying for all the advances in infrastructure that their parents complained we didn't need (in between complaining about congestion on the roads and railways). When governments continue with huge capital projects there is usually a very different underlying bigger picture than what sells newspapers.

[david63]

To survive in the 21st century Britain needs migrant labour and skilled workers from other countries, they will bring their families and they will get the same entitlement to benefits in the UK as any other workers

No problem with that in principle but it should operate the same as other countries in that you are not entitled to certain benefits until you become a citizen of that country.

[barney]

Euroholics still try to peddle the myth that leaving the EU was mainly about stopping immigration.

The truth of the matter is that leaving the EU was about controlling immigration.

There are 27 countries that operate a free for all and the rest of the world operates on a controlled system.
That is normal, not the EU model.

Most western countries are built on immigration, but that doesn't mean that you shouldn't have some control over it.

it's not too much to ask, that our country operates like nearly every other country in the world.

https://www.economicshelp.org/blog/2107 ... of-labour/

[Onelife]

Eloquent bu incorrect. Even when Cameron went to the EU looking concessions he was told, in relation to immigration, to enforce the laws that were available to him. Successive UK governments have refused to do so - I guess there is a much bigger picture going on apart from the one that the media is trying to program the population with.

As I said in my response to QB above I'm not trying to drag it all up again. And as I also said it doesn't matter whether it was EU rules or UK application of them. Cameron didn't get it and that is why he lost the referendum. And as you correctly say no government from Major onwards has got it.

It's not that the government got-it or didn't get-it, as I said in my response, it is the medias attempts at programming their audience that don't get it. There is a much bigger picture here which means despite what MPs say, when in opposition, the tune changes when in power. To survive in the 21st century Britain needs migrant labour and skilled workers from other countries, they will bring their families and they will get the same entitlement to benefits in the UK as any other workers - all this other stuff about housing and benefits is mostly media spin exposing the edge-cases.

Similar to HS2. Who is it for? The next generation, projections show it will be required for movement of both people and goods within the next 20-25 years. Who will pay for it? In the main it will be the next generation, not the current generation - they are still paying for all the advances in infrastructure that their parents complained we didn't need (in between complaining about congestion on the roads and railways). When governments continue with huge capital projects there is usually a very different underlying bigger picture than what sells newspapers.

I’m not sure if this is still the case but it was the case that a minimum of 16 hours work entitled migrants, certainly those with children to benefits. It becomes a very easy trap to fall into…free accommodation, child benefits, healthcare which will be far more than most have enjoyed from where they come from.

The fact remains that the land of milk and honey leaves many migrant families joining the benefit system within weeks of stepping ashore. Unlike the 40% of migrants which have the skills or have fallen lucky in getting a job at Kens place of work, the large majority are destined to do low paid, zeros our contract work which will require subsidised benefit support…. I personally don’t think these are the kind of 21st building blocks on which to rebuild our economy.

[Onelife]

There are clearly some benefits to Covid !9…Love Island 2020 has been cancelled

[Mervyn and Trish]

It's not that the government got-it or didn't get-it, as I said in my response, it is the medias attempts at programming their audience that don't get it.

We will have to agree to disagree Ken. Sadly your response shows that like many other Europhiles you don't get it either. Fair enough you disagree but don't pretend you know what influenced my vote and those of others. I can only speak for myself but for me it wasn't the media. It was ivory towers out of touch arrogant politicians here and bureaucrats in the EU.

No government in the recent year's has been in touch with public opinion outside the M25 and that's nothing to do with the media. To take one example, when we heard Gordon Brown describe a woman who has expressed concerns about immigration as a bigot, that was not media spin. That was an arrogant politician caught off guard. If the mainstream parties had taken those concerns, which as has been said above were not about stopping but about controlling immigration, seriously, UKIP would never have become a significant force.

Anyway I say for the third time I'm not trying to stir up this debate again and will not be drawn into it again. We will never agree. If you wish to respond fair enough, but don't take my failure to respond again as agreement.

[Mervyn and Trish]

In interesting story in the media this morning, if it is true of course.

"Meanwhile, a new antibody test with 99.8 per cent accuracy has been created by scientists in Edinburgh, although its developers fear that interest in Europe for the technology could mean the NHS misses out."

But NHS miss out? Call me a nationalist if you like, but if these scientists are working in the UK then the UK should get first call on the results of their work. NHS first. Rest of Europe and the world form a queue. By all means share the formula but not hand over the product. And if the EU disagrees tough. Would we get first pick if the work had been done in Germany or France?

[towny44]

In interesting story in the media this morning, if it is true of course.

"Meanwhile, a new antibody test with 99.8 per cent accuracy has been created by scientists in Edinburgh, although its developers fear that interest in Europe for the technology could mean the NHS misses out."

But NHS miss out? Call me a nationalist if you like, but if these scientists are working in the UK then the UK should get first call on the results of their work. NHS first. Rest of Europe and the world form a queue. By all means share the formula but not hand over the product. And if the EU disagrees tough. Would we get first pick if the work had been done in Germany or France?

I read the same article Merv, I do hope that it was just the company trying to get public opinion to support their efforts to get orders from the NHS rather than them showing no interest. I tend to suspect that it is probably way more expensive than alternatives currently under test, and also not the route we want to go, which is the reason for NHS lukewarm interest.

[Onelife]

In interesting story in the media this morning, if it is true of course.

"Meanwhile, a new antibody test with 99.8 per cent accuracy has been created by scientists in Edinburgh, although its developers fear that interest in Europe for the technology could mean the NHS misses out."

But NHS miss out? Call me a nationalist if you like, but if these scientists are working in the UK then the UK should get first call on the results of their work. NHS first. Rest of Europe and the world form a queue. By all means share the formula but not hand over the product. And if the EU disagrees tough. Would we get first pick if the work had been done in Germany or France?

I read the same article Merv, I do hope that it was just the company trying to get public opinion to support their efforts to get orders from the NHS rather than them showing no interest. I tend to suspect that it is probably way more expensive than alternatives currently under test, and also not the route we want to go, which is the reason for NHS lukewarm interest.

I agree John and it could be the case that theses antibody test machines are popping up everywhere (not literally of course) all of which will be looking for a market place….quality first, price second will be the order of the day for most buyers.

[Frank Manning]

Were the Nightingale hospitals built in error?
What planet are these people on?

I thought that too. I wasn't laughing though. I thought it was just another example of media arrogance and stupidity really.

[Frank Manning]

There are clearly some benefits to Covid !9…Love Island 2020 has been cancelled

Brilliant news! Bunch of talentless wannabes.

[towny44]

Were the Nightingale hospitals built in error?
What planet are these people on?

I thought that too. I wasn't laughing though. I thought it was just another example of media arrogance and stupidity really.

But we all knew that would happen, if the numbers needing them had been too high then we would not have acted soon enough, now it's being mothballed it was a waste of money.
Everything must lead to a story, if not it never happened, so don't wait for many good news stories.

[Onelife]

There are clearly some benefits to Covid !9…Love Island 2020 has been cancelled

Brilliant news! Bunch of talentless wannabes.

As is the case with all these "reality" has been, wanna rekindle my career x celebrity programs…the sooner racing returns the better I say

[Kendhni]

It's not that the government got-it or didn't get-it, as I said in my response, it is the medias attempts at programming their audience that don't get it.

We will have to agree to disagree Ken. Sadly your response shows that like many other Europhiles you don't get it either. Fair enough you disagree but don't pretend you know what influenced my vote and those of others.

I have no idea where that came from. I was very clear that I was attacking the media not individuals - unlike your comments. It has nothing to do with Europhile (has that become a standard response to something someone disagrees with or maybe has no rational response to? I see it mentioned in a couple of posts?) - it is to do with the needs of this country. Sadly that is the bit that the some are not getting.

I also do not require any validation of opinion.

[Kendhni]

Euroholics still try to peddle the myth that leaving the EU was mainly about stopping immigration.

The truth of the matter is that leaving the EU was about controlling immigration.

Good to find someone who claims to speak for the majority of those who voted to leave the EU
There were an awful lot of comments on an awful lot of social media and in an awful lot of mainstream media that used the word 'stop' rather than 'control'.

it's not too much to ask, that our country operates like nearly every other country in the world.

https://www.economicshelp.org/blog/2107 ... of-labour/

Which goes right back to the point that I first made. We have similar legislation available on our statute books to many other countries, but multiple governments have pretty much refused to use it. There has to be a reason why we CHOOSE not to use it. What is that we are not being told? We can only surmise why. In the case of my company part of the problem is because our universities are not churning out enough people with the right skillset - it is an employees market at the minute. We bring people in from all over the world, which, since I work for an American company we should be thankful that they, and other American companies, are willing to use offshore plants to do much of their work (gives tens of thousands of people jobs in the UK).

[Mervyn and Trish]

There are clearly some benefits to Covid !9…Love Island 2020 has been cancelled

Brilliant news! Bunch of talentless wannabes.

So should I tear up my application form?

[barney]

Euroholics still try to peddle the myth that leaving the EU was mainly about stopping immigration.

The truth of the matter is that leaving the EU was about controlling immigration.

Good to find someone who claims to speak for the majority of those who voted to leave the EU
There were an awful lot of comments on an awful lot of social media and in an awful lot of mainstream media that used the word 'stop' rather than 'control'.

it's not too much to ask, that our country operates like nearly every other country in the world.

https://www.economicshelp.org/blog/2107 ... of-labour/

Which goes right back to the point that I first made. We have similar legislation available on our statute books to many other countries, but multiple governments have pretty much refused to use it. There has to be a reason why we CHOOSE not to use it. What is that we are not being told? We can only surmise why. In the case of my company part of the problem is because our universities are not churning out enough people with the right skillset - it is an employees market at the minute. We bring people in from all over the world, which, since I work for an American company we should be thankful that they, and other American companies, are willing to use offshore plants to do much of their work (gives tens of thousands of people jobs in the UK).

It’s quite obvious why the UK has not used existing legislation prior to Brexit.
The very same people complaining about the result of the vote would be the same one’s complaining about victimisation of the poor immigrant.
Imagine the port at Dover with lines of Eu citizens being sent back because they couldn’t support themselves.
The Guardian would have a field day

You need to visit many of the parks in London full of eastern european rough sleepers to see the success of free movement.
They are not all highly qualified as your company employ.

[Kendhni]

It’s quite obvious why the UK has not used existing legislation prior to Brexit.
The very same people complaining about the result of the vote would be the same one’s complaining about victimisation of the poor immigrant.
Imagine the port at Dover with lines of Eu citizens being sent back because they couldn’t support themselves.
The Guardian would have a field day

I have not seen any evidence to support or contradict that assertion?

You need to visit many of the parks in London full of eastern european rough sleepers to see the success of free movement.
They are not all highly qualified as your company employ.

I think you are focusing on a tiny minority of the immigrant population. The majority show the 'success' of free movement, from all over the world, at all levels of the socio-economic scale.

[oldbluefox]

With the proposed points system I doubt any of your co-workers would have had any problems. Our exit from the EU simply means we can control who comes into the country as opposed to taking in all and sundry.

[barney]

It’s quite obvious why the UK has not used existing legislation prior to Brexit.
The very same people complaining about the result of the vote would be the same one’s complaining about victimisation of the poor immigrant.
Imagine the port at Dover with lines of Eu citizens being sent back because they couldn’t support themselves.
The Guardian would have a field day

I have not seen any evidence to support or contradict that assertion?

You need to visit many of the parks in London full of eastern european rough sleepers to see the success of free movement.
They are not all highly qualified as your company employ.

I think you are focusing on a tiny minority of the immigrant population. The majority show the 'success' of free movement, from all over the world, at all levels of the socio-economic scale.

Really?

I assume that you have read the reports on the damage done to eastern european economies due to brain drain.
Basically, they train them up at their expense and the west profits.
Globalisation is basically bad.
Good for the corporations, bad for the citizens.
We judge by GDP which suits the rich.

[towny44]

It’s quite obvious why the UK has not used existing legislation prior to Brexit.
The very same people complaining about the result of the vote would be the same one’s complaining about victimisation of the poor immigrant.
Imagine the port at Dover with lines of Eu citizens being sent back because they couldn’t support themselves.
The Guardian would have a field day

I have not seen any evidence to support or contradict that assertion?

You need to visit many of the parks in London full of eastern european rough sleepers to see the success of free movement.
They are not all highly qualified as your company employ.

I think you are focusing on a tiny minority of the immigrant population. The majority show the 'success' of free movement, from all over the world, at all levels of the socio-economic scale.

Ken, I agreed with you initially about why those immigrants in jobs and possibly wanting to remain in the country should be treated the same as UK citizens. However please stop digging up why you consider we leavers got it all wrong, and how you consider this was a major driver in the leave vote. It might have been the number one issue with a minority of the poorer working classes, but even here I think that the extra pressures on public services was of far more importance than just the possible loss of jobs and benefit claiming.

[Kendhni]

It’s quite obvious why the UK has not used existing legislation prior to Brexit.
The very same people complaining about the result of the vote would be the same one’s complaining about victimisation of the poor immigrant.
Imagine the port at Dover with lines of Eu citizens being sent back because they couldn’t support themselves.
The Guardian would have a field day

I have not seen any evidence to support or contradict that assertion?

You need to visit many of the parks in London full of eastern european rough sleepers to see the success of free movement.
They are not all highly qualified as your company employ.

I think you are focusing on a tiny minority of the immigrant population. The majority show the 'success' of free movement, from all over the world, at all levels of the socio-economic scale.

Really?

I assume that you have read the reports on the damage done to eastern european economies due to brain drain.
Basically, they train them up at their expense and the west profits.
Globalisation is basically bad.
Good for the corporations, bad for the citizens.
We judge by GDP which suits the rich.

Bit of a strawman there ... you have completely moved the goalposts from a tiny minority that sleep rough to looking at the impact back in their home countries.
I partially agree with you on some of the new points you make (albeit they only seem to focus on the bad and ignore the good), however that is not what the previous posts were discussing.
The one I do disagree with you on is saying the Globalisation is bad ... you have made a very generic statement which totally ignores the complexities and the major benefits that globalisation has, and continues to bring to many. Any political philosophy offers both good and bad.

[Kendhni]

Ken, I agreed with you initially about why those immigrants in jobs and possibly wanting to remain in the country should be treated the same as UK citizens. However please stop digging up why you consider we leavers got it all wrong, and how you consider this was a major driver in the leave vote. It might have been the number one issue with a minority of the poorer working classes, but even here I think that the extra pressures on public services was of far more importance than just the possible loss of jobs and benefit claiming.

I have not once mentioned brexit, leave or remain or anything to do with it - this has little to do with leave or remain. It is others that seem to want to make this about brexit - something that actually never crossed my mind until I started being accused of being Europhile, Euroholic etc.

We have immigration coming from all over the world and that will continue irrespective of leave or remain. Immigration and movement of workers goes way beyond brexit. My question, and the point I was making was ... why does the UK CHOOSE not to enforce immigration related legislation it already has.

Your last sentence is interesting about pressure on the public services, yet the stats actually say immigration was a net benefit to public services.

[Onelife]

There is a much bigger picture than whether or not immigration is a net contributor to the UK, however, for clarity the figures do point to Ken being right about this although one would presume the figures are based on those who are contributing and doesn’t take into account the thousands who contribute nothing.

With regard to pressure on the services I would just say this…the more you have to service the more pressure you put on the services.

This will become more evident as the years roll by, most Immigrants looking to make a new life in our country are young and relatively healthy…. but ass the saying goes… “age waits for no one” sooner or later the young will get old, along with all the age related medical and social issues that go with it = more servicing.

Now for the bigger picture as seen through my eyes…as we become more multicultural diverse the more culturally segmented, we have become. I see no social interaction between ethnic groups although there is tolerance to some degree. I see no attempt from certain Ethnic groups to integrate into UK laws and it values and I see no point in continuing this rant because nothing will change until we have a Government that recognises where all this is going to end up

Good night.