Re: Who did Amber in? : Thu May 10, 2018 4:08 pm  

Sal Paradise wrote:

In a word McClusky who saw Ed as a puppet he could manipulate - how wrong he was and not for the first time

Manipulating an opposition leader isn't very effective and right now, Labour are a hell of a long way from being electable to the masses.
If the Tories weren't so utterly inept, Labour would be tailed off last.
Thankfully for Corbyn, Mrs May is "in charge" and he may still get a sniff of power, just a sniff though as he will never win an overall majority.

However, May will be gone at some point and as long as the Tories dont go for Boris or Gove, they will win the next General Election.

Re: Who did Amber in? : Thu May 10, 2018 5:29 pm  

wrencat1873 wrote:

It's not the administrative cock up that is the issue, it's the denial of an over vigorous to deport anyone "we" can, regardless of whether they may be legally allowed to be here.
Over zealous staff, driven to overstep the line by those in power but its ok really ???

Try putting yourself in their position and just imagine the trauma.
Mind you it fits well with the immigrants "go home" vans that were trawling the capital, were they also an administrative error or just part of the racist narrative trotted out by the Conservatives and the Tory press.

Yes, I get all that. I have no problem with an aggressive climate surrounding ILLEGAL immigration - but a modicum of common sense would tell you most if not all Windrush migrants are (or should be made) legal.

The issue for the Home Office is that alongside the genuine cases, every day they are dealing with chancers and liars doing their best to gain entry to the UK by deception. Their culture has to be a suspicious one by definition. I wouldn't be surprised if some people are even using the Windrush backlash to sneak in the back door.

Of course it's traumatic. But yet again I will state the problem has been recognised, the government has acknowledged the distress caused and apologised, all Windrush migrants are being granted the right to remain and compensation is to be paid. I'm not sure what more you want them to do? I could tut and shake my head in empathy, but it won't really do much good.

Re: Who did Amber in? : Fri May 11, 2018 7:40 am  

Cronus wrote:

Yes, I get all that. I have no problem with an aggressive climate surrounding ILLEGAL immigration - but a modicum of common sense would tell you most if not all Windrush migrants are (or should be made) legal.

The issue for the Home Office is that alongside the genuine cases, every day they are dealing with chancers and liars doing their best to gain entry to the UK by deception. Their culture has to be a suspicious one by definition. I wouldn't be surprised if some people are even using the Windrush backlash to sneak in the back door.

Of course it's traumatic. But yet again I will state the problem has been recognised, the government has acknowledged the distress caused and apologised, all Windrush migrants are being granted the right to remain and compensation is to be paid. I'm not sure what more you want them to do? I could tut and shake my head in empathy, but it won't really do much good.

I agree, the issue does finally appear to be getting dealt with now and that can only be a positive step.
It was your "administrative cock up comment" that I thought was a little generous to those in charge at the Home Office.

Without the over zealous approach of "easy" targets, this would never have happened and to dismiss theis as an administrative cock up was letting certain people off the hook far too easily.

If people want their time in the "big chair" and take the kudos that comes with the ministerial title, they should also be prepared to take responsibility when things go wrong.

Rarely are these issues their personal fault but that's just the way it is.
Actually, credit should go to Rudd for actually resigning, far too many people in power dont take responsibility.

Re: Who did Amber in? : Fri May 11, 2018 7:23 pm  

Cronus wrote:

Yes, I get all that. I have no problem with an aggressive climate surrounding ILLEGAL immigration - but a modicum of common sense would tell you most if not all Windrush migrants are (or should be made) legal.

The issue for the Home Office is that alongside the genuine cases, every day they are dealing with chancers and liars doing their best to gain entry to the UK by deception. Their culture has to be a suspicious one by definition. I wouldn't be surprised if some people are even using the Windrush backlash to sneak in the back door.

Of course it's traumatic. But yet again I will state the problem has been recognised, the government has acknowledged the distress caused and apologised, all Windrush migrants are being granted the right to remain and compensation is to be paid. I'm not sure what more you want them to do? I could tut and shake my head in empathy, but it won't really do much good.

That's all right then. Guy with cancer was denied treatment for 6 months. But it's ok now because it's been recognised, it's been going one for years and May and her successors have been denying it. And those on the government benches behind May have been cheering her on because they heartily approve of persecuting people with brown skins. They may say it in code, but we all now what they mean.

Re: Who did Amber in? : Fri May 11, 2018 10:01 pm  

majorhound wrote:

That's all right then. Guy with cancer was denied treatment for 6 months. But it's ok now because it's been recognised, it's been going one for years and May and her successors have been denying it. And those on the government benches behind May have been cheering her on because they heartily approve of persecuting people with brown skins. They may say it in code, but we all now what they mean.

I don't see anyone saying it's 'all right'. But what more do you want them to do?

BTW, given you're apparently a gentleman of considerable years, you don't half post like a hormonal teenager. Your constant accusations of racism are plain boring.

Re: Who did Amber in? : Sat May 12, 2018 10:34 am  

Cronus wrote: I don't see anyone saying it's 'all right'. But what more do you want them to do? BTW, given you're apparently a gentleman of considerable years, you don't half post like a hormonal teenager. Your constant accusations of racism are plain boring. But true nevertheless. And it's not just me it's the United Nations https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/h ... 48021.html

Cronus wrote: I don't see anyone saying it's 'all right'. But what more do you want them to do? BTW, given you're apparently a gentleman of considerable years, you don't half post like a hormonal teenager. Your constant accusations of racism are plain boring. But true nevertheless. And it's not just me it's the United Nations https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/h ... 48021.html

Re: Who did Amber in? : Sat May 12, 2018 8:21 pm  

majorhound wrote: But true nevertheless. And it's not just me it's the United Nations https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/h ... 48021.html I can't see anything in that report stating that Tories are heartily cheering on racist policies deliberately targeting people with 'brown skin'. Which is what you said. And which is patently nonsense. There will always be a proportion of actively racist people in any population. The UK is still one of the most liberally-minded and tolerant countries in the world by far. That said, it's no surprise there's an undercurrent of resentment given the way Labour under Bliar chose to flood the country in order to boost their vote. Or so they thought. Problem is, for nigh on 20 years anyone expressing unhappiness with immigration has been automatically labelled racist and all discussion shouted down - by the likes of you, it seems. What's hilarious is that if the numbers had been controlled, some modicum of empathy shown for the concerns of the existing population and you lot hadn't shouted down all discussion, Brexit would never have happened.

majorhound wrote: But true nevertheless. And it's not just me it's the United Nations https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/h ... 48021.html I can't see anything in that report stating that Tories are heartily cheering on racist policies deliberately targeting people with 'brown skin'. Which is what you said. And which is patently nonsense. There will always be a proportion of actively racist people in any population. The UK is still one of the most liberally-minded and tolerant countries in the world by far. That said, it's no surprise there's an undercurrent of resentment given the way Labour under Bliar chose to flood the country in order to boost their vote. Or so they thought. Problem is, for nigh on 20 years anyone expressing unhappiness with immigration has been automatically labelled racist and all discussion shouted down - by the likes of you, it seems. What's hilarious is that if the numbers had been controlled, some modicum of empathy shown for the concerns of the existing population and you lot hadn't shouted down all discussion, Brexit would never have happened.

Re: Who did Amber in? : Sat May 12, 2018 10:29 pm  

Cronus wrote:

I can't see anything in that report stating that Tories are heartily cheering on racist policies deliberately targeting people with 'brown skin'. Which is what you said. And which is patently nonsense.

There will always be a proportion of actively racist people in any population. The UK is still one of the most liberally-minded and tolerant countries in the world by far. That said, it's no surprise there's an undercurrent of resentment given the way Labour under Bliar chose to flood the country in order to boost their vote. Or so they thought.

Problem is, for night on 20 years anyone expressing unhappiness with immigration has been automatically labelled racist and all discussion shouted down - by the likes of you, it seems.

What's hilarious is that if the numbers had been controlled, some modicum of empathy shown for the concerns of the existing population and you lot hadn't shouted down all discussion, Brexit would never have happened.

Although you may be right, the anti immigration campaign run by Farage & co, supported by the right wing press, has certainly increased the anti immigration feeling in the UK.

Re: Who did Amber in? : Mon May 14, 2018 9:26 am  

wrencat1873 wrote:

Although you may be right, the anti immigration campaign run by Farage & co, supported by the right wing press, has certainly increased the anti immigration feeling in the UK.

Is there a connection between wage stagnation and increased levels of immigration - if there is then that will fuel anti-immigration feeling more than anything.

The work shy will always find a way of not working - for them remain is a great option

Re: Who did Amber in? : Mon May 14, 2018 1:34 pm  

Cronus wrote: I can't see anything in that report stating that Tories are heartily cheering on racist policies deliberately targeting people with 'brown skin'. Which is what you said. And which is patently nonsense. There will always be a proportion of actively racist people in any population. The UK is still one of the most liberally-minded and tolerant countries in the world by far. That said, it's no surprise there's an undercurrent of resentment given the way Labour under Bliar chose to flood the country in order to boost their vote. Or so they thought. Problem is, for nigh on 20 years anyone expressing unhappiness with immigration has been automatically labelled racist and all discussion shouted down - by the likes of you, it seems. What's hilarious is that if the numbers had been controlled, some modicum of empathy shown for the concerns of the existing population and you lot hadn't shouted down all discussion, Brexit would never have happened. This is pure Tory Central Office claptrap to try and pass the blame somewhere else, anywhere else. This happened on their watch, and they were happy for it to happen until they got caught. They then thought that an apology was sufficient. Racism is endemic in our country. Always has been, Those who express these views now feel emboldened by Brexit to do so. Ask yourself what the police reaction was to the murder of Stephen Lawrence, was it put every man on the case to get someone. No it was to plant an undercover officer with the Lawrence family to try and get some dirt on them. Let's hear a victim of the Tories' policies opinion: "But there is no amount that can truly reflect the fear and anxiety, frustration and ill health we have suffered. It can’t fully reflect the three times I applied for and was given a job, only to be told that they were very sorry, but I couldn’t have it, because according to the government’s rules I didn’t have the right papers." " have been here since 1963. I went to primary school here and secondary school. I worked as a healthcare supervisor, a traffic warden with Camden council and the Metropolitan police. I even had vaccination documents from the jabs I was given when I arrived here. I did jury duty three times; in fact, I was asked to do it again even while I was being told I didn’t belong in this country. I had letters sent to the Home Office on my behalf by Jeremy Corbyn. I said to him, “You must be able to help; you’re the prime minister in waiting.” But he couldn’t." "I didn’t have a day free of worry. I became ill. I could not pay my rent and was taken to court by Islington council. I am still paying back thousands in rent arrears. I lived in fear of the day when there would be a knock on the door from the police. I arranged things for my three children to carry on without me, as if I was about to die. How can Javid’s compensation reflect that? How do you calculate compensation for the hours I sat waiting to talk to someone in the Home Office? Or the fact that I couldn’t visit my mother when she was dying in Barbados? I still don’t even know where she is buried." https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... ome-office I've no doubt that there are plenty of Aussies and Kiwis who came here about the same time, and I'd like to bet they're not suffering the same anxiety as this lady.

Cronus wrote: I can't see anything in that report stating that Tories are heartily cheering on racist policies deliberately targeting people with 'brown skin'. Which is what you said. And which is patently nonsense. There will always be a proportion of actively racist people in any population. The UK is still one of the most liberally-minded and tolerant countries in the world by far. That said, it's no surprise there's an undercurrent of resentment given the way Labour under Bliar chose to flood the country in order to boost their vote. Or so they thought. Problem is, for nigh on 20 years anyone expressing unhappiness with immigration has been automatically labelled racist and all discussion shouted down - by the likes of you, it seems. What's hilarious is that if the numbers had been controlled, some modicum of empathy shown for the concerns of the existing population and you lot hadn't shouted down all discussion, Brexit would never have happened. This is pure Tory Central Office claptrap to try and pass the blame somewhere else, anywhere else. This happened on their watch, and they were happy for it to happen until they got caught. They then thought that an apology was sufficient. Racism is endemic in our country. Always has been, Those who express these views now feel emboldened by Brexit to do so. Ask yourself what the police reaction was to the murder of Stephen Lawrence, was it put every man on the case to get someone. No it was to plant an undercover officer with the Lawrence family to try and get some dirt on them. Let's hear a victim of the Tories' policies opinion: "But there is no amount that can truly reflect the fear and anxiety, frustration and ill health we have suffered. It can’t fully reflect the three times I applied for and was given a job, only to be told that they were very sorry, but I couldn’t have it, because according to the government’s rules I didn’t have the right papers." " have been here since 1963. I went to primary school here and secondary school. I worked as a healthcare supervisor, a traffic warden with Camden council and the Metropolitan police. I even had vaccination documents from the jabs I was given when I arrived here. I did jury duty three times; in fact, I was asked to do it again even while I was being told I didn’t belong in this country. I had letters sent to the Home Office on my behalf by Jeremy Corbyn. I said to him, “You must be able to help; you’re the prime minister in waiting.” But he couldn’t." "I didn’t have a day free of worry. I became ill. I could not pay my rent and was taken to court by Islington council. I am still paying back thousands in rent arrears. I lived in fear of the day when there would be a knock on the door from the police. I arranged things for my three children to carry on without me, as if I was about to die. How can Javid’s compensation reflect that? How do you calculate compensation for the hours I sat waiting to talk to someone in the Home Office? Or the fact that I couldn’t visit my mother when she was dying in Barbados? I still don’t even know where she is buried." https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... ome-office I've no doubt that there are plenty of Aussies and Kiwis who came here about the same time, and I'd like to bet they're not suffering the same anxiety as this lady.