Brown portrays UKIP, BNP and the Conservatives as xenophobes on immigration

[-:Undertaker:-]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8595973.stm
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1262548/Brown-Tory-scare-tactics-immigration-appeal-worst-instincts-nationalism-xenophobia.html



http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/03/31/article-1262548-08F1E0DC000005DC-527_468x301.jpg



Prime Minister Gordon Brown has stepped up his pre-election rhetoric on immigration by telling would-be illegal migrants: "You are not welcome." Mr Brown said there had been a significant drop in asylum claims and net immigration thanks to Labour's "tough and hard-headed" policy. But he warned against scaremongering and urged a "united front" among the main parties to combat xenophobia. The Tories said Mr Brown had "failed on immigration" and had no new ideas. Net immigration - the difference between those entering and leaving the country - has gone up from 47,500 when Labour came to power in 1997 to 163,000 in 2008, according to the Office for National Statistics. The Conservatives say they want to get it back down to mid-1990s levels - with the aid of an annual cap on work permits issued to people from outside the EU through the points-based migration system.

But Mr Brown sought to differentiate between the position of parties such as the BNP and UKIP and "mainstream parties" who he said share a consensus that immigration is a positive force in British society and a necessary contributor to economic growth. He told the audience "how we conduct this debate is as important as the debate itself". And he called on mainstream parties to unite against "those who want to end immigration not because of the pressures it places on our communities but simply because they don't like migrants". Giving his reaction to Mr Brown's speech, Conservative leader David Cameron said: "I'm delighted that the prime minister has converted to the cause of controlled migration, but people will wonder what he has been doing for the last few years."

The Lib Dems favour a policy of earned citizenship for illegal immigrants - dubbed an "amnesty" by their opponents. They also say they would channel skilled migrant workers to parts of the country where there are labour shortages, away from the overcrowded South-East of England. The big three parties are facing a general election challenge in some parts of the country from the UK Independence Party and the British National Party - both want to withdraw from the EU and introduce far tougher immigration policies. The BNP wants want an immediate end to all immigration to the UK, including from other EU countries, and a programme of "voluntary repatriation".

UKIP wants a five-year freeze on immigration for permanent settlement and work permits for EU citizens. The party's leader in Brussels, Nigel Farage, told BBC Radio 4's The World at One Labour has "lost control" of immigration but the UK would continue to have an "open door" while it was a member of the EU. If industries needed certain skilled workers during the 5-year freeze they would be given "a time specific work permit" but not the right to "settle in this country, bring their family and to contribute to what is now the most overcrowded country in Europe," said Mr Farage.When all else fails they play the racism/xenophobic card, implying it at least. Not only is he directly attacking UKIP and the BNP on this issue but he is attacking the Conservatives also with the hidden message/warning that basically if you dont agree with the open door policy of Labour then you are a racist/xenophobe and has attacked Tory 'scare-tactics' on immigration. This man and his party have had since 1997 [13 years] to grapple this issue and strangely it is only now with an election weeks away that he pledges to be tough in immigration, more fool you if you fall for more of his lies. The Conservatives, while having a better policy than that of Labours (whether or not they'd implement this is another issue) are also stuck because they have no control what so ever over immigration from the European Union.

Controlling immigration - do you really believe him?

[GommeInc]

It is a poor card to pull out. However, immigration has been tackled quite hard lately by Labour, though there is always room for improvement. The problem with UKIP and BNP is that they sell themselves as a one trick pony, where they are only ever heard of through their immigration policies. Their other policies like saving the British pub and obviously more hard hitting policies are put on the back bench, though you could arguably say this is because the media only ever focus on these issues, and the big parties drive the public away from the other BNP/UKIP policies and openly mock them. If UKIP want to do anything, they should focus on their other policies and think about putting immigration on the back bench for a little while.

Let's not forget that UKIP and BNP are quite different. BNP are more controversial, while UKIP are actually pretty down to earth and see immigration as a short-term problem, though not a very wise idea suggesting closing the borders up completely for about 20 years. It only needs proper moderation, not shutting up shop :P (though this may not be true, that's the impression they give).

[-:Undertaker:-]

It is a poor card to pull out. However, immigration has been tackled quite hard lately by Labour, though there is always room for improvement. The problem with UKIP and BNP is that they sell themselves as a one trick pony, where they are only ever heard of through their immigration policies. Their other policies like saving the British pub and obviously more hard hitting policies are put on the back bench, though you could arguably say this is because the media only ever focus on these issues, and the big parties drive the public away from the other BNP/UKIP policies and openly mock them. If UKIP want to do anything, they should focus on their other policies and think about putting immigration on the back bench for a little while.

Let's not forget that UKIP and BNP are quite different. BNP are more controversial, while UKIP are actually pretty down to earth and see immigration as a short-term problem, though not a very wise idea suggesting closing the borders up completely for about 20 years. It only needs proper moderation, not shutting up shop :P (though this may not be true, that's the impression they give).

They say they have, but I think I read something a week or so ago which was an asylum seeker who actually got to Britain through the channel tunnel by walking and apparently we are paying for the French Calasis camp in which we cannot stop; as I understand it they get into Europe (EU) and then we have to take them as they are within the European Union. It is a total mess and all people want is a system like any other country has where we [Britain] has control over its own borders. Gordon and Labour have now had 13 years to sort this problem out, its that bad we dont even know how many illegals there are here now but its estimated to be approaching the 1 million mark now - think of the effects of crime that brings along with the effect on the NHS, police and others services.

Indeed, the last bit i'm not sure whether you mean the BNP or UKIP but UKIP policy is to have a 5-year freeze while we install a new system and deport any illegals/criminals and militants, then the borders would be re-opened only to those who we need (job wise) and those who will conform to our way of life (the western way) which would prevent these militants you see from gaining access.

[Hitman]

Ah bloody Gordon Brown! Does he not care about Britain? Immigration is good if controlled properly - we will soon be living in Britainistan.

[GommeInc]

Indeed, the last bit i'm not sure whether you mean the BNP or UKIP but UKIP policy is to have a 5-year freeze while we install a new system and deport any illegals/criminals and militants, then the borders would be re-opened only to those who we need (job wise) and those who will conform to our way of life (the western way) which would prevent these militants you see from gaining access.
Probably meant 5 years. Not sure where 20 years came from :P 5 years is quite along time though :/

[-:Undertaker:-]

Probably meant 5 years. Not sure where 20 years came from :P 5 years is quite along time though :/

Well they'd still allow visa applicants to come in for work but freeze the other parts of the system, afterall just under 1 million people to track, find, assess and deport is going to take a long time and hopefully it would be done (most of it anyway) within a 5 year term, one term of parliament in other words.

[MrPinkPanther]

I don't think you understand Undertaker. The government wants to and does deports illegal immigrants, that is the point, they are illegal. It's just impossible to track many of them because they have already assimilated into British culture and some illegals aren't even aware that they are illegal migrants because they were born here. You can't just suddenly say "UKIP will get rid of illegal immigrants" because all they can do is what Labour are doing at the moment except they will shut our borders proving detrimental to the economy. Also illegal immigrants place no strain on the welfare state because they aren't allowed service to it, the only way they could is if they committed crime which is highly doubtable because they wish to remain as inconspicuous as possible.

[-:Undertaker:-]

I don't think you understand Undertaker. The government wants to and does deports illegal immigrants, that is the point, they are illegal. It's just impossible to track many of them because they have already assimilated into British culture and some illegals aren't even aware that they are illegal migrants because they were born here. You can't just suddenly say "UKIP will get rid of illegal immigrants" because all they can do is what Labour are doing at the moment except they will shut our borders proving detrimental to the economy. Also illegal immigrants place no strain on the welfare state because they aren't allowed service to it, the only way they could is if they committed crime which is highly doubtable because they wish to remain as inconspicuous as possible.

I do not think you understand. Firstly if the government really wanted to get rid of illegal immigrants, it would regain control of our borders back from the European Union and install proper border controls. Secondly if it wanted to get rid of illegal immigrants like you say then it would actually do so, rather than playing ball games with them and the courts over whether they should be able to stay or not. Illegal immigrants do place a strain on the welfare state because they can use fake IDs, they need houses and food anyway to survive so they are either committing crime (imagine the scope of that, 1 million people), working in jobs but not offically (in which case it would be rather simple for the government to track them down because you'd have somebody who doesnt 'exist' working in a job which does exist) and finally they are putting a strain on the state with the police, NHS and all other services.

As for shutting the borders;- they are proposing to shut them for only 5 years and we have 8 million unemployed here as it is at the moment so i'm afraid the economic argue really does not add up - to add to that the fact that they would still allow people to come and work here on visas would still benefit the economy. It is rather simple, its called control and its something we had over ourselves before the European Union took that away from us. The little control we had left, this government just destroyed. Take a look at the figures, they rocketed under Labour because Labour removed any controls left and made the benefits system even more generous and exploitable which made and still makes Britain the destination of choice.

As a Liberal Democrat and being to the left of the scale, I know the words 'controlled' & 'immigration' are hard to string together, if not impossible.

[Inseriousity.]

I think controlled immigration is a good idea (and should really be happening anyway!) but illegal immigrants are inevitable. I don't think even the BNP could keep out illegal immigrants determined to get into the country; they'll just find new and more infallible methods of doing so. However, despite what the media says, the amount of non-White British is still tiny (5%, I think, this might have changed) when compared to the whole population.

[MissAlice]

We lack skills in controlling benefits, we don’t have the right procedures in place to record when someone who is receiving benefits is sent to prison, and similarly this also applies to immigrants. We need to get a proper grip, it was recently published that we had paid out some £27 million in benefits to criminals.

It's been revealed that £6million was overpaid to criminals behind bars in 2008/09, a 50 per cent rise over the £4million figure the year before.

Some £7 million was overpaid in 2006/07, £4 million in 2005/06 and £6 million in 2004/05 - a total of £27 million in the last five years.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1260682/Convicts-paid-27m-benefits-bars.html#ixzz0jn5f8xPS

A LANDMARK ruling that allows jobless migrants to claim benefits in Britain for their children living in their home country sparked outrage last night.

Critics warned the judgment could "open the door" to thousands of benefits tourists abusing generous payouts in Britain.

In yesterday’s High Court ruling " showing how EU law is taking precedence over the UK"s " a Portuguese national living in Britain won a legal battle for child benefit for his two daughters in his home country despite no longer working and claiming incapacity benefit here.

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/164813/Benefits-scandal-Payouts-for-immigrants-children-abroad

As someone described it, it’s a kick in the teeth to all those hard working Britons. Is it any wonder the kitty is running dry and the Labour government did talk about a death tax?

This headline makes my blood boil. What was the cost to taxpayers?
A government blunder allowed a convicted rapist to win the right to get married in Britain - and avoid deportation by just two hours.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1262243/Rapist-facing-deportation-allowed-stay-UK-married.html#ixzz0jnBL92kB

When we do eventually deport, it’s not difficult to come back within hours.

Look whose back! Red faces at the Home Office as Algerian bag snatcher who has been deported twice is arrested yet again.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1260997/Look-whos-Red-faces-Home-Office-Algerian-bag-snatcher-deported-twice-arrested-again.html#ixzz0jnHN8nmh


We need to get control of the situation, because right now we are the welfare for the world.

[alexxxxx]

Well they'd still allow visa applicants to come in for work but freeze the other parts of the system, afterall just under 1 million people to track, find, assess and deport is going to take a long time and hopefully it would be done (most of it anyway) within a 5 year term, one term of parliament in other words.
i don't understand what you mean, 'they'd still allow visa applicants.'

an immigrant requires a visa to live & work here and therefore become an immigrant? (unless you're from the EU, where you don't have to, but you can register at the police station and stuff)

[-:Undertaker:-]

i don't understand what you mean, 'they'd still allow visa applicants.'

an immigrant requires a visa to live & work here and therefore become an immigrant? (unless you're from the EU, where you don't have to, but you can register at the police station and stuff)

They would only be allowed a visa to come and work here and then go back home, EU nationals do not need visas which is something a UKIP government would change as it would leave the European Union. After the 5-year freeze we would then allow proceedings for immigrants to settle here provided they conformed to our standards which would be along the lines listed below;


we require their area of work.
the would not place a strain on the NHS or other services.
they are financially able to support themselves.
they have no criminal record.
they are of an age which would be beneficial to the UK economy.
they would be required to be moderate (to keep out extremists).


An excellent post by Alice and I would advise anyone reading to turn back the page to read her post. :)

[jrh2002]

NOBODY who comes here from abroad should be allowed access to our benefits system until they have worked here for 5 years. If they come on hard times during that period then we should give them a 1 way ticket home (if we deport prisoners with a 3k bonus to clear off then a 1 way ticket is nothing). I think the EU countries should have to look after their own citizens so if I am out of work living abroad then the UK picks up my tab and if there is a Polish person here out of work then Poland should pay their citizens benefits whatever country they are in (I can assure you the immigration numbers would drop by 80% over night). The UK is a soft touch and pays higher benefits than almost every other country so no wonder all the scum come running here. We need to get out of the EU so that we can set our own limits on who we let in and not bang on about the points system that in reality covers a very small percentage of people that are not EU citizens. We all know labour get a lot of votes and support from the immigrants and people on benefits so we all know the real reason they are allowing us to overflow.

[GommeInc]

The benefits system does need a ruddy good kick up the backside. The EMA should be totally scrapped too, in its current form (but that's another discussion entirely). The benefits system should only be for Brits who have been here for a good number of years, with exception to fighting with and for us in wars and anything that's benefitted us. It's harsh, but true :/

[Catzsy]

We lack skills in controlling benefits, we don’t have the right procedures in place to record when someone who is receiving benefits is sent to prison, and similarly this also applies to immigrants. We need to get a proper grip, it was recently published that we had paid out some £27 million in benefits to criminals.

It's been revealed that £6million was overpaid to criminals behind bars in 2008/09, a 50 per cent rise over the £4million figure the year before.

Some £7 million was overpaid in 2006/07, £4 million in 2005/06 and £6 million in 2004/05 - a total of £27 million in the last five years.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1260682/Convicts-paid-27m-benefits-bars.html#ixzz0jn5f8xPS

A LANDMARK ruling that allows jobless migrants to claim benefits in Britain for their children living in their home country sparked outrage last night.

Critics warned the judgment could "open the door" to thousands of benefits tourists abusing generous payouts in Britain.

In yesterday’s High Court ruling " showing how EU law is taking precedence over the UK"s " a Portuguese national living in Britain won a legal battle for child benefit for his two daughters in his home country despite no longer working and claiming incapacity benefit here.

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/164813/Benefits-scandal-Payouts-for-immigrants-children-abroad

As someone described it, it’s a kick in the teeth to all those hard working Britons. Is it any wonder the kitty is running dry and the Labour government did talk about a death tax?

This headline makes my blood boil. What was the cost to taxpayers?
A government blunder allowed a convicted rapist to win the right to get married in Britain - and avoid deportation by just two hours.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1262243/Rapist-facing-deportation-allowed-stay-UK-married.html#ixzz0jnBL92kB

When we do eventually deport, it’s not difficult to come back within hours.

Look whose back! Red faces at the Home Office as Algerian bag snatcher who has been deported twice is arrested yet again.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1260997/Look-whos-Red-faces-Home-Office-Algerian-bag-snatcher-deported-twice-arrested-again.html#ixzz0jnHN8nmh


We need to get control of the situation, because right now we are the welfare for the world.


NOBODY who comes here from abroad should be allowed access to our benefits system until they have worked here for 5 years. If they come on hard times during that period then we should give them a 1 way ticket home (if we deport prisoners with a 3k bonus to clear off then a 1 way ticket is nothing). I think the EU countries should have to look after their own citizens so if I am out of work living abroad then the UK picks up my tab and if there is a Polish person here out of work then Poland should pay their citizens benefits whatever country they are in (I can assure you the immigration numbers would drop by 80% over night). The UK is a soft touch and pays higher benefits than almost every other country so no wonder all the scum come running here. We need to get out of the EU so that we can set our own limits on who we let in and not bang on about the points system that in reality covers a very small percentage of people that are not EU citizens. We all know labour get a lot of votes and support from the immigrants and people on benefits so we all know the real reason they are allowing us to overflow.

Well I guess you will be voting conservative or UKIP then :)

I have to say that quoting from naturally right wing papers isn't always going to get a measured view. I do try to read both right wing and left wing papers.

Whilst your views are respected I feel they are quite harsh. Less than 3% of eastern europeans who have migrated here claim benefits. In fact their work ethic is probably better than our own. Labour has worked quite hard to combat the benefit culture by abolishing both incapacity benefit and job seekers allowance for 16 - 18 years old. Less than 10% of the population were not born here so technically are immigrants. This is not going to make a great deal of difference in an election especially they have to have British Citizenship which can take years.

Some facts:

Migrants

All foreign nationals must have a national insurance number to claim benefits. Some EU
citizens are entitled to claim as long as they are working or actively seeking work and
have an NI number. Citizens from the new EU countries (A8) are not entitled to benefits
until they have been here at least two years or are registered with the government
Registration Scheme. To register they must have a job. After a year of employment they
may be eligible for certain state benefits - child benefits, tax credit, housing benefit and
housing accommodation. People from other countries must have special work permits
and cannot generally claim benefits.

Illegal immigrants

They are not entitled to any benefits.

Asylum Seekers
They are not entitled to benefits.


What rights do they have to housing?

Migrants

If they have an NI number, have a right to be in the UK and are residents of the UK they
may go on the housing register. If ‘A8’ migrant workers seek housing accommodation
during their first year Arun DC are not obliged to provide any assistance. After one year
in the UK providing they are in permanent legal employment, A8 migrants have the
same rights as UK residents and can apply for housing assistance and will be eligible to
join the housing register. In all cases migrant workers get no preferential treatment and
their need is assessed in the same way as anyone else who applies. ☛

Illegal immigrants

They are not entitled to housing.

Asylum Seekers

They are not entitled to housing. They are housed through NASS or privately

Migrants

Generally they have the right to register as an NHS patient with a doctor if they are here
for a settled purpose (i.e. are intending to be resident here for six months or over). If
they are not residents then they are treated as private patients.

Illegal immigrants

They cannot register as an NHS patient and will only be treated in an emergency by a
hospital or GP.

Asylum Seekers

They have the right to register as an NHS patient at a GP surgery.

Myth
All the immigrants come to Britain - we are way down the table.

Fact
Switzerland has one of the highest percentage of immigrant population in Europe with nearly 23% of its total population (1.5 millions of immigrants). Latvia (19%), Estonia (15%), Austria (15%), Ukraine (15%), Croatia (15%), Cyprus (14.3%), Ireland (14%), Moldova (13%), Germany (12%), Sweden (12%), Belarus (12%), Spain (11.4%), France (10%), and the Netherlands (10%)Italy (8.4%), United Kingdom (8.9%), Greece (8.6%), Russia (8.4%), Italy (8.4%) ,Slovenia (8.3%), Norway (7.4%), Portugal (7.2%), Denmark (7.1%), Iceland (7.6%), , Belgium (6.9%)

The British population in Spain is over 8% and Britains can claim benefits.

Social Security Benefits and Emigrating Within the EU
If you’re moving within the EU, you’re normally able to carry on receiving similar benefits to that which you received in the UK. You will be insured for social security purposes in the country you work in and are allowed to receive the same kind of benefits of nationals of that country. In order to do this, you must of course contribute at the same level as members of your new nation. This can be extremely beneficial, as it will entitle you to the rights of sickness and maternity benefits, work accident cover, unemployment supplements, family allowances and more. For countries that are within the EEA, you should have no problem with receiving comparable benefits.


Personally I feel that both posts show only the headline stories that people who vote for the righter
wing parties will be interested in and want to believe and perhaps should be a but more measured.
I am not a fan of Gordon Brown myself as he is a ditherer but tbf any prime minister faced with the global recession of this magnitude would be under pressure. I am also not a big fan of the EU either
but unless the right wing start being a bit less hysterical in their arguments (I don't mean the conservatives) they are not going to persuade the people able to sanction a referendum to do so.

[-:Undertaker:-]

In your post Rosie, you have just listed a number of things that they can claim on as though its a trivial issue. It is not a trivial issue. When will you and the three main parties get it into your heads that we want controls over our borders; we do not want people here who are just trying to milk the benefits system and have never done a days job in their lifetime, we do not want criminals here, we do not want just under one million illegal immigrants here committing crimes and sucking the system dry with fake IDs. Why on earth should we pay for all of this?. If the politicians from the three main parties (Labour especially) love these people so much, they should seriously consider funding them themselves because we are fed up of it.

In regards to the European Union I am afraid you cannot talk about anything especially immigration without tackling this issue. As Lord Pearson is reported to have said, the Conservatives claim to be tough on immigration and border controls yet fail to mention the fact that they would be powerless to stop 70 million Turks coming here if they wanted to thanks to EU laws once Turkey joins the European Union. The Labour Party promised us a referendum on the reform of the European Union back in 2005 and lied. The Conservatives promised a referendum on the reform; guranteed that it was not passed by the time that they had gained office, they knew it would of passed before they gained the keys to number 10 and thus another spin trick from a main political party.

Nothing is being hyped up, why do you think the Lib/Lab/Con three are so eager not to debate the EU and immigration/border controls? - because it makes them look bad so what they do (as shown by Brown today) is they make false pledges which as Lord Pearson has again stated in an interview conducted yesterday (see below) about things which are out of their control such as the issue of the uncontrolled immigration from the European Union which you can call the 'backdoor to Britain'. It is really ironic that after 13 years in office, Gordon Brown now pledges to be tough on immigration just weeks away from the General Election and more fool you for falling for it.

The two main issues in this election are considered to be the economy and immigration, immigration is an issue and is turning some of our inner cities into racial ghettos in which we are storing up enormous social and political problems for the future in. France did the same and a few years back they actually had race riots, Britain will go the same way if this is allowed to continue. Infact many 3rd and 4th generation migrants who settled here in the days of the Empire are now saying that enough is enough, this is totally out of control. The figures speak for themselves, just under one million people here and we dont know who they are or where they are - I find that scary.

The issues of immigration, border controls and the economy (and effects of immigration on the state & economy) are inseperable from the European issue.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W5lDG-hGIvw.

[Catzsy]

Sorry, Dan I do not want to debate this subject with you as it just turns into a never ending arguement where things are continually repeated which is why I quoted Jrh and MissAlice.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Sorry, Dan I do not want to debate this subject with you as it just turns into a never ending arguement where things are continually repeated which is why I quoted Jrh and MissAlice.

I am sorry but that does not wash, in response to Alice's post you make it out as though its only the right and the papers who are peddling some sort of myth about the crisis we are facing concerning immigration and the issues surrounding it, that I am afraid is totally and utterly wrong. You yourself in your reply show in many areas where they can milk the taxpayer dry and you word it as though its not a big issue and costs the taxpayer very little, utterly wrong again I am afraid. Not knowing where or who one million people are within these shores is not an example of Labour being hard hitting or tough, its an example of dithering and more so the sign of a utterly pathetic and uncaring government who quite frankly appear as though they could not give a toss until its election time which has only been proven futher by Gordon Brown implying that UKIP, the BNP and the Conservatives are xenophobic just because of the simple fact that they all (UKIP & BNP at least) want some control over our borders.

It is not that our debates 'go on forever' it is because you refuse to awknowledge that this government can possibly be in the wrong at all and i'm just being the nasty little evil right winger against everything that Saint Gordy or the Holy Labour Party do or say, i'm sure if you debated this issue with Alice and Jrh and if Alice or Jrh keep responding then the replies from yourself will turn into "well I have my opinion you have yours, end of matter". You hint at UKIP for one as being 'hysterical' on the issue, well if you think that is the case you should be able to defend that and back it up, because as I have pointed out quite clearly and what Lord Pearson shows; we are not being hysterical we are being realistic.

There is very little to repeat here as you yourself have given example of how they can bleed the taxpayer dry when they are totally undeserving of taxpayer money and help, so where is this 'hysterical' bit you mention coming into play(?) because I certainly cannot spot it.

[Hitman]

It's stupid when the "thousands of Brits are in Spain" card is pulled out. Firstly, I would say nearly every British person in Spain has money. You do not go to Spain if you have no money or if you are looking for benefits (I'll come onto this next). You must have some money, even if it's a small amount. A lot of Brits in Spain are either rich and not working, or they are average and working (thus contributing to the Spanish economy).

In Spain they don't hand out benefits willy nilly: in fact, I don't think us Brits can get Spanish benefits... heck I don't know if Spain even has a benefits system! I never ever knew of any British people on benefits when I was in Spain. Maybe they were on British benefits but not Spanish ones.

So if you want to pull that card out think again. I would say 98% of the British living in Spain are contributing to the Spanish economy by either taking money to Spain or working in Spain - they spend what they earn in Spain and pay their Spanish taxes.

On the other hand, the immigrants coming into the UK tend to have no money. Many bring their families and claim benefits from them and live off of benefits. Some do work, but they send the money back to their home country (many Polish do this for example). They don't spend what they earn in the UK, they take it out of our economy.

I would love to write more but I am really busy with business matters.

[alexxxxx]

It's stupid when the "thousands of Brits are in Spain" card is pulled out. Firstly, I would say nearly every British person in Spain has money. You do not go to Spain if you have no money or if you are looking for benefits (I'll come onto this next). You must have some money, even if it's a small amount. A lot of Brits in Spain are either rich and not working, or they are average and working (thus contributing to the Spanish economy).

most brits in spain are retired or resident for part of the year.



In Spain they don't hand out benefits willy nilly: in fact, I don't think us Brits can get Spanish benefits... heck I don't know if Spain even has a benefits system! I never ever knew of any British people on benefits when I was in Spain. Maybe they were on British benefits but not Spanish ones.

can you give me some evidence that spain 'doesn't give out benefits willy nilly' - of course they have a benefits system, every western country has one, including spain who have unemployment. and british people claiming benefits in britain does happen - and it's illegal afaik.


So if you want to pull that card out think again. I would say 98% of the British living in Spain are contributing to the Spanish economy by either taking money to Spain or working in Spain - they spend what they earn in Spain and pay their Spanish taxes.

On the other hand, the immigrants coming into the UK tend to have no money. Many bring their families and claim benefits from them and live off of benefits. Some do work, but they send the money back to their home country (many Polish do this for example). They don't spend what they earn in the UK, they take it out of our economy.

have you maybe thought that that happens in england too? 'Immigrants to the UK tend to have no money' - what rubbish. You ever heard of the THOUSANDS of students that come here and effectively top-up british people's university fees or the other thousands that live and work in the city of london or generally hold down jobs. What rubbish. In Spain they have a lot of people who come from south america looking for work and illegal immigrants from north africa. They send money home.

and undertaker you must be completely unaware about how people from outside the EU become 'immigruntz' because a VISA/Work Permit is always required. there is no sort of visa-less immigrant apart from an illegal immigrant.

[Catzsy]

It's stupid when the "thousands of Brits are in Spain" card is pulled out. Firstly, I would say nearly every British person in Spain has money. You do not go to Spain if you have no money or if you are looking for benefits (I'll come onto this next). You must have some money, even if it's a small amount. A lot of Brits in Spain are either rich and not working, or they are average and working (thus contributing to the Spanish economy).

In Spain they don't hand out benefits willy nilly: in fact, I don't think us Brits can get Spanish benefits... heck I don't know if Spain even has a benefits system! I never ever knew of any British people on benefits when I was in Spain. Maybe they were on British benefits but not Spanish ones.

So if you want to pull that card out think again. I would say 98% of the British living in Spain are contributing to the Spanish economy by either taking money to Spain or working in Spain - they spend what they earn in Spain and pay their Spanish taxes.

On the other hand, the immigrants coming into the UK tend to have no money. Many bring their families and claim benefits from them and live off of benefits. Some do work, but they send the money back to their home country (many Polish do this for example). They don't spend what they earn in the UK, they take it out of our economy.

I would love to write more but I am really busy with business matters.

That had nothing to do with the benefits - I was trying to put the myth that all immigrants head for the UK which is blatently untrue. =]

[Hitman]

Before I write out my reply I want to make it clear that I'm not going to take part in one of these big discussions you and the others usually have that take up pages.

I cannot give you cold hard evidence, no, but I can tell you from experience that there weren't as many benefits, or at least they were not advertised everywhere like they are here. For example, EMA, I do not believe there's the equivalent of that in Spain. My dad wasn't earning much money and was in fact unemployed when we first got to Spain and there were no benefits for us, however here there would be. Yes you're right about them doing that, and I am pretty sure it's illegal too. The Government should be monitoring where they are or whatever (passports are now scanned).

It's not rubbish. :S A lot of poor Polish people come to the UK looking for work so they can send back money to Poland. I will agree that there are immigrants with money, but there are probably a lot more without. This has declined though due to the exchange rate.


most brits in spain are retired or resident for part of the year.


can you give me some evidence that spain 'doesn't give out benefits willy nilly' - of course they have a benefits system, every western country has one, including spain who have unemployment. and british people claiming benefits in britain does happen - and it's illegal afaik.

have you maybe thought that that happens in england too? 'Immigrants to the UK tend to have no money' - what rubbish. You ever heard of the THOUSANDS of students that come here and effectively top-up british people's university fees or the other thousands that live and work in the city of london or generally hold down jobs. What rubbish. In Spain they have a lot of people who come from south america looking for work and illegal immigrants from north africa. They send money home.

and undertaker you must be completely unaware about how people from outside the EU become 'immigruntz' because a VISA/Work Permit is always required. there is no sort of visa-less immigrant apart from an illegal immigrant.

[-:Undertaker:-]

and undertaker you must be completely unaware about how people from outside the EU become 'immigruntz' because a VISA/Work Permit is always required. there is no sort of visa-less immigrant apart from an illegal immigrant.

They get the visa, and once they are here they simply disappear!

[Hitman]

Just to back up the point about the Polish, look here. (I'm sure there's more but I cba to trundle through Google - you can if you want).

http://www.metro.co.uk/news/387413-poles-return-home-to-claim-british-benefits

They were getting classes on how to get benefits... looks like they only came for benefits? My point is that many immigrants to the UK come because of the generous handouts. Many also come for jobs, to study and that too, but the fact is a lot come because benefits here pay more then in their home country. The immigrants to Spain (the British at least, but many Germans and Dutch people too) go for the weather/lifestyle. They tend to take a load of money with them and pump money into the Spanish economy. The immigrants coming to the UK for benefits do not. They bring nothing and take away whatever they're given. They do not spend that money here because things are expensive here, at one time they could get three times as many loafs of bread in Poland than here, so they sent it back.

I really shouldn't have bothered posting because I've wasted so much time that I don't have to waste.

[Catzsy]

Before I write out my reply I want to make it clear that I'm not going to take part in one of these big discussions you and the others usually have that take up pages.

I cannot give you cold hard evidence, no, but I can tell you from experience that there weren't as many benefits, or at least they were not advertised everywhere like they are here. For example, EMA, I do not believe there's the equivalent of that in Spain. My dad wasn't earning much money and was in fact unemployed when we first got to Spain and there were no benefits for us, however here there would be. Yes you're right about them doing that, and I am pretty sure it's illegal too. The Government should be monitoring where they are or whatever (passports are now scanned).

It's not rubbish. :S A lot of poor Polish people come to the UK looking for work so they can send back money to Poland. I will agree that there are immigrants with money, but there are probably a lot more without. This has declined though due to the exchange rate.


Less than 3% of the Polish population claim benefits. They do work that most of the British workforce won't even entertain. Also, yes I do agree that they send money home but of course they contribute to the British Economy by paying tax and insurance and while they are here they have to live so there is food, rent so on and so on. =]

This is quite a good guide on the Social Security benefits available in spain. I agree that it does not seem as comprehensive as the UK.

http://spain.othercountries.com/pages/articles/index.asp?page=social-security

Gordon Brown has not the been the best prime minister we have ever had and I have said that on more than one occasion in this section but there is not a great deal of difference in all three really but nohing is now going to be done before the election and if people vote then whoever is elected will see the issues that they feel strongly about and hopefully do something about it particularly the waste of money in the EU.

The problem with this country is apathy. Many people complain but they don't bother to vote.

[HotelUser]

I'm sorry, am I missing something here? Saying the BNP are xenophobic are like saying fire trucks are red. There's nothing wrong with pointing out a usually undisputed truth.

[-:Undertaker:-]

I'm sorry, am I missing something here? Saying the BNP are xenophobic are like saying fire trucks are red. There's nothing wrong with pointing out a usually undisputed truth.

Just pointing it out, but did you know that the BNP, Labour Party, Conservative Party and the Liberal Democrats all have candidate shortlists based on race and/or the gender of someone?

[jrh2002]

Well I guess you will be voting conservative or UKIP then :)

I have to say that quoting from naturally right wing papers isn't always going to get a measured view. I do try to read both right wing and left wing papers.

Whilst your views are respected I feel they are quite harsh. Less than 3% of eastern europeans who have migrated here claim benefits. In fact their work ethic is probably better than our own. Labour has worked quite hard to combat the benefit culture by abolishing both incapacity benefit and job seekers allowance for 16 - 18 years old. Less than 10% of the population were not born here so technically are immigrants. This is not going to make a great deal of difference in an election especially they have to have British Citizenship which can take years.

Some facts:

Migrants

All foreign nationals must have a national insurance number to claim benefits. Some EU
citizens are entitled to claim as long as they are working or actively seeking work and
have an NI number. Citizens from the new EU countries (A8) are not entitled to benefits
until they have been here at least two years or are registered with the government
Registration Scheme. To register they must have a job. After a year of employment they
may be eligible for certain state benefits - child benefits, tax credit, housing benefit and
housing accommodation. People from other countries must have special work permits
and cannot generally claim benefits.

Illegal immigrants

They are not entitled to any benefits.

Asylum Seekers
They are not entitled to benefits.


What rights do they have to housing?

Migrants

If they have an NI number, have a right to be in the UK and are residents of the UK they
may go on the housing register. If ‘A8’ migrant workers seek housing accommodation
during their first year Arun DC are not obliged to provide any assistance. After one year
in the UK providing they are in permanent legal employment, A8 migrants have the
same rights as UK residents and can apply for housing assistance and will be eligible to
join the housing register. In all cases migrant workers get no preferential treatment and
their need is assessed in the same way as anyone else who applies. ☛

Illegal immigrants

They are not entitled to housing.

Asylum Seekers

They are not entitled to housing. They are housed through NASS or privately

Migrants

Generally they have the right to register as an NHS patient with a doctor if they are here
for a settled purpose (i.e. are intending to be resident here for six months or over). If
they are not residents then they are treated as private patients.

Illegal immigrants

They cannot register as an NHS patient and will only be treated in an emergency by a
hospital or GP.

Asylum Seekers

They have the right to register as an NHS patient at a GP surgery.

Myth
All the immigrants come to Britain - we are way down the table.

Fact
Switzerland has one of the highest percentage of immigrant population in Europe with nearly 23% of its total population (1.5 millions of immigrants). Latvia (19%), Estonia (15%), Austria (15%), Ukraine (15%), Croatia (15%), Cyprus (14.3%), Ireland (14%), Moldova (13%), Germany (12%), Sweden (12%), Belarus (12%), Spain (11.4%), France (10%), and the Netherlands (10%)Italy (8.4%), United Kingdom (8.9%), Greece (8.6%), Russia (8.4%), Italy (8.4%) ,Slovenia (8.3%), Norway (7.4%), Portugal (7.2%), Denmark (7.1%), Iceland (7.6%), , Belgium (6.9%)

The British population in Spain is over 8% and Britains can claim benefits.

Social Security Benefits and Emigrating Within the EU
If you’re moving within the EU, you’re normally able to carry on receiving similar benefits to that which you received in the UK. You will be insured for social security purposes in the country you work in and are allowed to receive the same kind of benefits of nationals of that country. In order to do this, you must of course contribute at the same level as members of your new nation. This can be extremely beneficial, as it will entitle you to the rights of sickness and maternity benefits, work accident cover, unemployment supplements, family allowances and more. For countries that are within the EEA, you should have no problem with receiving comparable benefits.


Personally I feel that both posts show only the headline stories that people who vote for the righter
wing parties will be interested in and want to believe and perhaps should be a but more measured.
I am not a fan of Gordon Brown myself as he is a ditherer but tbf any prime minister faced with the global recession of this magnitude would be under pressure. I am also not a big fan of the EU either
but unless the right wing start being a bit less hysterical in their arguments (I don't mean the conservatives) they are not going to persuade the people able to sanction a referendum to do so.

We had a council estate here a few years back that gave houses and flats unfurnished to the UK citizens but they were fully furnished for the immigrants. You say they must be normal immigrants but when they were mainly larger families of somalians who did not work I can only presume they arrived here as illegals because they did not have a thing to offer otherwise.

Lots of countries do have immigrants but we are the one with soft touch laws and a good benefit system so all the scum come running here. Lets go to the UK they give you a free house and free money :o they should get jack **** and the assylum seekers should get housed in old army bases fenced in and shipped home as soon as the time is right.

Did you know a fear of your life lets you claim asylum? Women are rolling up here from safe countries and claiming they are battered wives and once they get allowed to stay then their so called violent husband rolls up and they are now back in love and he gets to stop. People turn up from decent countries and claim they will be killed because they are gay so they get to stop.

I suggest we get gun towers in the docks and channel tunnel in calais and as soon as an illegal has scaled a fence and is in the compound they should be machine gunned (sounds like my perfect job)


Sorry, Dan I do not want to debate this subject with you as it just turns into a never ending arguement where things are continually repeated which is why I quoted Jrh and MissAlice.

Is this positive discrimination?


It's stupid when the "thousands of Brits are in Spain" card is pulled out. Firstly, I would say nearly every British person in Spain has money. You do not go to Spain if you have no money or if you are looking for benefits (I'll come onto this next). You must have some money, even if it's a small amount. A lot of Brits in Spain are either rich and not working, or they are average and working (thus contributing to the Spanish economy).

In Spain they don't hand out benefits willy nilly: in fact, I don't think us Brits can get Spanish benefits... heck I don't know if Spain even has a benefits system! I never ever knew of any British people on benefits when I was in Spain. Maybe they were on British benefits but not Spanish ones.

So if you want to pull that card out think again. I would say 98% of the British living in Spain are contributing to the Spanish economy by either taking money to Spain or working in Spain - they spend what they earn in Spain and pay their Spanish taxes.

On the other hand, the immigrants coming into the UK tend to have no money. Many bring their families and claim benefits from them and live off of benefits. Some do work, but they send the money back to their home country (many Polish do this for example). They don't spend what they earn in the UK, they take it out of our economy.

I would love to write more but I am really busy with business matters.

I have a place in Tenerife that I am buying and you are right :o there are benefits systems but theres a slim to no chance of us immigrants getting on it :o us brits abroad work for a living or as you say spend if we are just there for the weather. We would not dream of going to a country and taking advantage of their good nature. We go abroad and fit in with their cultures and laws wherever it is (I am not including the idiot holiday makers running riot here but they do get dealt with strongly) I only rent in the UK because I am not being tied down to this **** hole and if gordon wins the next election I will be off to the sun and pay my tax in a country where I feel its spent on what it should be.


That had nothing to do with the benefits - I was trying to put the myth that all immigrants head for the UK which is blatently untrue. =]

We have some amazing immigrants here with what they have acheived like Al-Fayed, Stellios ex easy jet guy and lots more and the people who come to work hard and better themselves are more than welcome :) the free loaders here for free living are the ones who we want sorting out. Saying that how many immigrants will come here to make their fortune now? it seems anybody who tries to make something of themself is beaten down and persecuted by jealous labour as they are now rich...... no wonder lots of the big businesses who can move their operations abroad or partially abroad are doing so. We should look after the people who make us the money and employ lots of people but no we tax them so much they clear off abroad with their cash and then all that money now lost needs to be made up for by the poorer ppl left here.


Less than 3% of the Polish population claim benefits. They do work that most of the British workforce won't even entertain. Also, yes I do agree that they send money home but of course they contribute to the British Economy by paying tax and insurance and while they are here they have to live so there is food, rent so on and so on. =]

This is quite a good guide on the Social Security benefits available in spain. I agree that it does not seem as comprehensive as the UK.

http://spain.othercountries.com/pages/articles/index.asp?page=social-security

Gordon Brown has not the been the best prime minister we have ever had and I have said that on more than one occasion in this section but there is not a great deal of difference in all three really but nohing is now going to be done before the election and if people vote then whoever is elected will see the issues that they feel strongly about and hopefully do something about it particularly the waste of money in the EU.

The problem with this country is apathy. Many people complain but they don't bother to vote.

I would love to see how many brits get benefits abroad I would assume its less than 1% and imagine me going in to a foreign job center and then demanding an interpreter lol If you cant speak the language of the country you are in then you dont deserve to get any help at all.
I dont know any brit abroad who claims benefit abroad and think thats how it should be here in the UK (of course theres brits there getting their benefits in their uk bank accounts and draw it out in euros lol they are benefits cheats yes but why doesnt the government stop this?)


I'm sorry, am I missing something here? Saying the BNP are xenophobic are like saying fire trucks are red. There's nothing wrong with pointing out a usually undisputed truth.

I dispute this so called truth :o Yes there are racist idiots in the BNP as there are in all parties. The BNP is a recognised political party looking after the interests of the british tax payer and not just the WHITE british tax payer. If the party was just a racist mob then they would have been banned but for all the attempts to get rid of them they are just getting stronger and thats not from them getting better but more that the big parties are ignoring lots of the big issues the public want them to address.

[alexxxxx]

I have a place in Tenerife that I am buying and you are right :o there are benefits systems but theres a slim to no chance of us immigrants getting on it :o us brits abroad work for a living or as you say spend if we are just there for the weather. We would not dream of going to a country and taking advantage of their good nature. We go abroad and fit in with their cultures and laws wherever it is (I am not including the idiot holiday makers running riot here but they do get dealt with strongly) I only rent in the UK because I am not being tied down to this **** hole and if gordon wins the next election I will be off to the sun and pay my tax in a country where I feel its spent on what it should be.

Oh lovely, bad-talk the UK, call it a poo hole because of the immigrants, then go off to spain for work, presumably - but i don't know - without a guarantee of a job in a country with stupidly high unemployment, which is only possible because of the EU and then put an EU flag with a nazi symbol in the middle. If you seem to think britain isn't worth being here - why are you?

[jrh2002]

Oh lovely, bad-talk the UK, call it a poo hole because of the immigrants, then go off to spain for work, presumably - but i don't know - without a guarantee of a job in a country with stupidly high unemployment, which is only possible because of the EU and then put an EU flag with a nazi symbol in the middle. If you seem to think britain isn't worth being here - why are you?

The UK is my country and its been run in to the ground by a bunch of people who spend money like a kid in a sweetshop but at least the kid in the sweetshop was using his own money or money given to him for that reason. The UK is where I was born and pay ALL my taxes which I can assure you add up to more than a lot of people earn in a year. I am self employed but the nature of my business means I can earn my money based anywhere in the world :) The UK can easily prosper by a trade agreement with other european countries and not by us giving the EU Billions a year (A small minority of coutries pay in to the EU and the majority take out) The EU flag with the swastika is showing my disapproval of the EU forcing their crazy laws on us or over ruling our UK laws as well as the euopean court of human rights that stick their noses in to our justice system and helping the criminals out.

Look at lord Ashcroft and him not paying UK taxes on his overseas earnings :o When hes opposed to the people in power and looking at how they waste can you blame him not paying UK tax on money he has earned abroad? I am buying abroad as an investment and rent it out at a reduced price but only to people i know :) As I say I pay all my tax in the UK but if labour get in again I will be going abroad and will pay my tax to a more deserving country :) Not sure how you say if it was not for the EU we could not go abroad :s If we have something to offer and are going to pay our way most countries in the world will take us......

[Catzsy]

Jrh2002 Is this positive discrimination?

No I was actually taking your advice from an earlier thread that perhaps Dan and I should agree to disagree as perhaps it was getting a little personal. :P

[-:Undertaker:-]

Oh lovely, bad-talk the UK, call it a poo hole because of the immigrants, then go off to spain for work, presumably - but i don't know - without a guarantee of a job in a country with stupidly high unemployment, which is only possible because of the EU and then put an EU flag with a nazi symbol in the middle. If you seem to think britain isn't worth being here - why are you?

Hang on a second, you yourself are a self-confessed EU Federalist and would like to see the United Kingdom abolished under a new Europeran Superstate, so its pretty ironic that you are slamming somebody who actually has an ounce of patriotism and loyalty to this country, its culture & its history compared to yourself who would gladly dissolve it tommorow even without the consent of the people.

So I would like to ask you; why are you here alex?

[alexxxxx]

Hang on a second, you yourself are a self-confessed EU Federalist and would like to see the United Kingdom abolished under a new Europeran Superstate, so its pretty ironic that you are slamming somebody who actually has an ounce of patriotism and loyalty to this country, its culture & its history compared to yourself who would gladly dissolve it tommorow even without the consent of the people.

So I would like to ask you; why are you here alex?

i'd never want to see the UK abolished, what a stupid comment. he has no loyalty to the country whatsoever? instead of trying to change the country, he'd rather flee. the eu does not destroy individual cultures, infact its social fund funds cultural projects all over the UK - something you'd rather we didn't do.

i'm still here because i love my country and i want what's best for it - in my view.

[-:Undertaker:-]

i'd never want to see the UK abolished, what a stupid comment. he has no loyalty to the country whatsoever? instead of trying to change the country, he'd rather flee. the eu does not destroy individual cultures, infact its social fund funds cultural projects all over the UK - something you'd rather we didn't do.

i'm still here because i love my country and i want what's best for it - in my view.

He'd rather flee like many already do because they are sick to the back teeth of those in power who hold views very similar to you, we cant remove you and while the country slides deeper and deeper into the red you continue raising our taxes to fund for your wasteful projects while at the same time being totally and utterly corrupt (Mandelson, Barroso). In the past you have said we should create the European superstate thus abolishing the United Kingdom and ending our country and yet you still refuse to accept the idea that people want a say on that. It should not be upto you, the unelected Van Rompuy, the unelected Ashton, the unelected Barroso or thousands of other unelected eurocrats.. we fought two world wars as did people from many countries across the world to fight for the British Empire and the United Kingdom to stop the very thing you want which is a European Superstate.

I know you europhiles are very keen on the historical and cultural argument despite the fact that Europe shares nothing in common with its neighbours, look at any European city - it is a mish mash of different periods and cultures and they all relate barely anything to eachother. The very reason we had wars in Europe was for one single underlying reason and has been throughout history; they all attempted to create a European superstate. Phillip, Hitler, Stalin and his successors all tried creating the very thing you are wanting to create now which is your own little European Empire. Past generations did not want it and we do not want it so how long will it be before you [the left] realises this?, or at least listens to the 'people' as you are so keen on spouting about so often.

The point on the EU funding cultural projects - i'm sorry, but if I gave you £10 to spend on me for the day and you only spent 50p on me and kept the other £9.50 for yourself then in what economical sense or even common sense does that even add up? - it is beyond stupid and its what i'd brand as daylight robbery. So you slam people like Jrh for wanting to leave this country well there you have your reason, because its run by people just like you.

[Hitman]

i'd never want to see the UK abolished, what a stupid comment. he has no loyalty to the country whatsoever? instead of trying to change the country, he'd rather flee. the eu does not destroy individual cultures, infact its social fund funds cultural projects all over the UK - something you'd rather we didn't do.

i'm still here because i love my country and i want what's best for it - in my view.
I'm patriotic about Britain but I'd rather live elsewhere because of how its become. You say he should try and change the country... how exactly? Vote? Not going to make a huge difference I'm afraid... maybe we should promote the UKIP... no, we'll be deemed racist or not politically correct. Sigh.

[jrh2002]

So us tax payers should stop here and keep paying our taxes to a corrupt government who what I would say waste my money all over the place and neglect the people who create the wealth (Tax payers) while we support people who are more than happy with a life on benefits?

Would you fight for this country? Pushing our troops in to an illegal war and thinking we should police the world only for that to make the country a huge terrorist target and to make it even better we let all these so called asylum seekers in to our country who roll up with no identification only for a number of them to start plotting from within. If the country looked after the people who deserve it then I would be here defending it with all my heart and would put my life on the line to look after it. After labour who were meant to be the party of the working man kicking ALL of us tax payers to death (except the ppl who have kids they shouldnt have as they cant afford them but then they get family tax credits). There is no incentive to make something of yourself because as soon as you start to succeed you get penalised but if you sit on your arse and claim benefits you are looked on as a poor unfortunate little soul and get everythnig thrown at you including a nice shiny new laptop :@ I loved my country but how can I defend it in its current state? Its like your super model g/f who left you turning back up wanting you back when shes now a 20 stone scabby old dog with 6 kids from 5 different fathers......

When somebody takes charge who starts making big changes is when I will be able to tell people how much I love my country again (I think this could be a very long time)

[HotelUser]

@Danny and James,
Other parties may contain racist or xenophobic members, though for the life of me I can't ever remember a Conservative or Liberal leader ever denying the Holocaust:rolleyes:

[jrh2002]

@Danny and James,
Other parties may contain racist or xenophobic members, though for the life of me I can't ever remember a Conservative or Liberal leader ever denying the Holocaust:rolleyes:

Nick Griffin back tracked on that crazy idea some time ago but I did say in a different thread the party has no chance of moving forward with a self obsessed person like him in charge. I dont support the BNP but do think they have a number of good policies that could be adapted and made a little more user friendly by the big parties that would be huge vote winners.

[-:Undertaker:-]

@Danny and James,
Other parties may contain racist or xenophobic members, though for the life of me I can't ever remember a Conservative or Liberal leader ever denying the Holocaust:rolleyes:

The only parties that I know of which do not have policies based on race/gender/sexuality and UKIP and possibly the Green Party. The Labour Party, Liberal Democrats, Conservatives and the British National Party all have policies/rules based on one of the above and or numerous of the above. It is hard when its turned around to see through all the propaganda that (possibly) you've been fed by the main parties that you arent all that clean yourselves when it comes to discrimination. As for the holocaust I dont agree with Griffin (who has now changed his view anyway) but I am sorry, we live in a democracy and it is anybodys right to deny a historical event.

[HotelUser]

The only parties that I know of which do not have policies based on race/gender/sexuality and UKIP and possibly the Green Party. The Labour Party, Liberal Democrats, Conservatives and the British National Party all have policies/rules based on one of the above and or numerous of the above. It is hard when its turned around to see through all the propaganda that (possibly) you've been fed by the main parties that you arent all that clean yourselves when it comes to discrimination. As for the holocaust I dont agree with Griffin (who has now changed his view anyway) but I am sorry, we live in a democracy and it is anybodys right to deny a historical event.

It's perfectly within his right to deny a historical event. It's also perfectly fine for the majority of the population to completely reject a political party because it's leader and other key people of the party have made absolutely ridiculous and stupid claims such as: the holocaust didn't happen. The leader reflects the party, and as James said, the BNP wont progress with Nick at the head.

[Catzsy]

The only parties that I know of which do not have policies based on race/gender/sexuality and UKIP and possibly the Green Party. The Labour Party, Liberal Democrats, Conservatives and the British National Party all have policies/rules based on one of the above and or numerous of the above. It is hard when its turned around to see through all the propaganda that (possibly) you've been fed by the main parties that you arent all that clean yourselves when it comes to discrimination. As for the holocaust I dont agree with Griffin (who has now changed his view anyway) but I am sorry, we live in a democracy and it is anybodys right to deny a historical event.

But it's okay for you to believe all the 'propaganda' as I see it from UKIP and not even have a good word about the main parties? And it not ourselves that need to be clean? When do other members address you in a personal way like that? Members say UKIP or whatever party it is they don't say 'you' , they remain objective in their terms. Otherwise imo it looks like a personal attack on the member which I am sure you don't mean as we all have a right to our opinons - that is free speech and democracy. You are correct that being a holocaust denier is not against the law in this country and if he has really changed his views well that is to be applauded.

[-:Undertaker:-]

But it's okay for you to believe all the 'propaganda' as I see it from UKIP and not even have a good word about the main parties? And it not ourselves that need to be clean? When do other members address you in a personal way like that? Members say UKIP or whatever party it is they don't say 'you' , they remain objective in their terms. Otherwise imo it looks like a personal attack on the member which I am sure you don't mean as we all have a right to our opinons - that is free speech and democracy. You are correct that being a holocaust denier is not against the law in this country and if he has really changed his views well that is to be applauded.

I did support one of the main parties until only a year ago when I switched fully to UKIP as I felt it no longer represented Conservatism. The Labour Party, Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats have all backtracked and lied to us over Europe so why on earth would I fool myself into believing a word they say?

[Catzsy]

I did support one of the main parties until only a year ago when I switched fully to UKIP as I felt it no longer represented Conservatism. The Labour Party, Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats have all backtracked and lied to us over Europe so why on earth would I fool myself into believing a word they say?

I don't think you got the point of the post, Dan.

[-:Undertaker:-]

I don't think you got the point of the post, Dan.

I use 'you' in my replies because I am replying to you and/or your party and its policies, therefore the usage of the word 'you' is relevant in a debate. You yourself support the idea of candidate shortlists by the main parties based on aspects of a person such as the race/gender and therefore if I was debating with yourself on that issue, I would address you as 'you' as I am debating against your points of the discussion.

Back on topic, given the lies and backtracks that the three main major parties have been involved in in recent years, why on earth should I trust a word they say? - I dont have to support a party, and if UKIP ever go that way as the Conservatives did then I would not be in support of them either, i'm not obliged to support a political party.

[Catzsy]

I use 'you' in my replies because I am replying to you and/or your party and its policies, therefore the usage of the word 'you' is relevant in a debate. You yourself support the idea of candidate shortlists by the main parties based on aspects of a person such as the race/gender and therefore if I was debating with yourself on that issue, I would address you as 'you' as I am debating against your points of the discussion.

Back on topic, given the lies and backtracks that the three main major parties have been involved in in recent years, why on earth should I trust a word they say? - I dont have to support a party, and if UKIP ever go that way as the Conservatives did then I would not be in support of them either, i'm not obliged to support a political party.

Yes and it's not just me you do it too - its quite a few members. We are not the parties and this isn't the House of Commons. It would be much more pleasant if the this term wasn't used as it does seem quite personal as opposed to others who do not. :P

Well imo the labour party did not do too bad until the global recession. I think this probably because they more closely represent my core beliefs. I have had a look at the UKIP manifesto some nice parts but none are costed. Some I don't agree with. None of them are perfect - everyone goes for the one who suits them the best. That's freedom and democracy.

[jam666]

Well imo the labour party did not do too bad until the global recession. I think this probably because they more closely represent my core beliefs. I have had a look at the UKIP manifesto some nice parts but none are costed. Some I don't agree with. None of them are perfect - everyone goes for the one who suits them the best. That's freedom and democracy.

Yes by all means its freedom and democracy but half of the people who vote choose a party and dont actually know what they stand for or what their policys are. I know people who for example vote for labour simply because they like the colour red more than blue! which is completely ludicrous.

Dan, i really dont know how you can say you support UKIP because the three main partys have been involved in "lies and backtracks" when UKIP doesnt exactly have a clean slate does it? so going by your example, there is no one you could vote for. Whilst you are free to support UKIP just as I am Conservatives I simply feel that they are a one policy party and whilst they may have other policys, the main focus of their previous election campaigns has largely being the EU and as a result has left many people thinking (including myself) that it is all they would do if elected.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Yes by all means its freedom and democracy but half of the people who vote choose a party and dont actually know what they stand for or what their policys are. I know people who for example vote for labour simply because they like the colour red more than blue! which is completely ludicrous.

Dan, i really dont know how you can say you support UKIP because the three main partys have been involved in "lies and backtracks" when UKIP doesnt exactly have a clean slate does it? so going by your example, there is no one you could vote for. Whilst you are free to support UKIP just as I am Conservatives I simply feel that they are a one policy party and whilst they may have other policys, the main focus of their previous election campaigns has largely being the EU and as a result has left many people thinking (including myself) that it is all they would do if elected.

UKIP does have a clean slate i'm afraid, and if it did not have a clean slate then I would simply not support them. I am not bound to having to support a certain party for governement. All the people ever involved in fraud within UKIP were thrown out immediately which is unlike the main parties and that is a fact (check it up if you wish, its all on the internet with the scandals involvinh Tom Wise and so on). As a conservative and I am myself, the very things you and myself stand for are no longer in the Conservative Party, they are in UKIP. Do not take it from me, take it from the Thatcherites who left the Tories; Lord Tebbit, Lord Pearson, Lord Monckton and various other Tory figures because you have lost your way as a party.

As for policy, well i'm afraid its just like if David Cameron puts the economy at the head of his campaign. The big issues this election are expected to be the economy and immigration. Now what the main parties are not telling you is that both of these sectors are impossible to rectify while we are members of the European Union. The EU makes over 75% of British legislation while the other 25% (or less) is made by the elected British parliament which has to legislate within the confines of EU rules and directives. You are kidding yourself if you say otherwise, even if the second coming of Mrs Thatcher was elected as Conservative Party leader and refused to leave the European Union, it would make little difference as the EU is making the laws, not the British PM. You also have to remember that it was the European issue that finished Mrs Thatchers premiership because near the end she started turning on Europe and theres no doubt in my mind that if she was British PM now, we would not be in the European Union. (check her Bruges Group connections & UKIP connections).

"We are not electing a Government - we are choosing managers to run the UK on behalf of the EU." - Lord Pearson

[Catzsy]

Yes by all means its freedom and democracy but half of the people who vote choose a party and dont actually know what they stand for or what their policys are. I know people who for example vote for labour simply because they like the colour red more than blue! which is completely ludicrous.

Dan, i really dont know how you can say you support UKIP because the three main partys have been involved in "lies and backtracks" when UKIP doesnt exactly have a clean slate does it? so going by your example, there is no one you could vote for. Whilst you are free to support UKIP just as I am Conservatives I simply feel that they are a one policy party and whilst they may have other policys, the main focus of their previous election campaigns has largely being the EU and as a result has left many people thinking (including myself) that it is all they would do if elected.

Well I think the part in bold is a bit of an exageration but I agree that people just read the papers, believe what they say and vote from that as opposed to actually doing some reasearch on the manifestos.

[MrPinkPanther]

UKIP does have a clean slate i'm afraid, and if it did not have a clean slate then I would simply not support them
Hardly
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article1434608.ece
http://ukipwatch.org/2005/01/ukip-scandal.html
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article7086827.ece


take it from the Thatcherites who left the Tories; Lord Tebbit

The big issues this election are expected to be the economy and immigration.
Tebbit recently said that the only party that seemed to understand how tax works was the Liberal Democrats.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Hardly
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article1434608.ece
http://ukipwatch.org/2005/01/ukip-scandal.html
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article7086827.ece


Tebbit recently said that the only party that seemed to understand how tax works was the Liberal Democrats.

It is quite amazing really, every single one of those scandals were sorted and the party took direct action straight away. Tom Wise was finished off instantly and ended up in prison, and as Nigel Farage said; good. I have not got to support a party and if the party never took any action then I simply would not support them, I turned my back on the Tories and I can just as easily turn it once again on UKIP. As for the donations party (which we addressed on this forum anyway), they did not do anything immoral or against the law so what exactly is your point?

What I would like to know is why Nick Clegg claims on his expenses for food? - we all have to eat.

[Catzsy]

It is quite amazing really, every single one of those scandals were sorted and the party took direct action straight away. Tom Wise was finished off instantly and ended up in prison, and as Nigel Farage said; good. I have not got to support a party and if the party never took any action then I simply would not support them, I turned my back on the Tories and I can just as easily turn it once again on UKIP. As for the donations party (which we addressed on this forum anyway), they did not do anything immoral or against the law so what exactly is your point?

What I would like to know is why Nick Clegg claims on his expenses for food? - we all have to eat.



I think it's because you keep having a go at the main parties for the same thing and in each case swift direct action has been taken which is exactly the same as UKIP. :)

[-:Undertaker:-]

I think it's because you keep having a go at the main parties for the same thing and in each case swift direct action has been taken which is exactly the same as UKIP. :)

The main parties did not take action though, the MPs involved in flipping houses and so forth were not suspended or any action taken against them.

[Catzsy]

The main parties did not take action though, the MPs involved in flipping houses and so forth were not suspended or any action taken against them.

Examples?

[-:Undertaker:-]

Examples?

The expenses scandal in which I believe it was over half of parliament involved in it, now yes some did sick to the moral rules and the law itself, others such as Nick Clegg the Liberal Democrat leader claimed for food. The main parties (unlike UKIP) could not and did not suspend those involved because if they had done so, very little of their party would remain. To check on expenses, the Telegraph has a large achieve with details on them all of which some include avoiding capital gains tax and so forth.

[Catzsy]

The expenses scandal in which I believe it was over half of parliament involved in it, now yes some did sick to the moral rules and the law itself, others such as Nick Clegg the Liberal Democrat leader claimed for food. The main parties (unlike UKIP) could not and did not suspend those involved because if they had done so, very little of their party would remain. To check on expenses, the Telegraph has a large achieve with details on them all of which some include avoiding capital gains tax and so forth.


The whole thing was investigated and those who were found to have wrongly claimed were dealt with. I thought you believed in the 'innocent until proved guilty' theory or does that only apply to UKIP?

[-:Undertaker:-]

The whole thing was investigated and those who were found to have wrongly claimed were dealt with. I thought you believed in the 'innocent until proved guilty' theory or does that only apply to UKIP?

I do believe in the innocent until proven guilty, but the fact is that with some MPs expenses they clearly acted both morally and lawfully wrong and the main parties took no action against them. The expenses were there, many were clearly in the wrong and had they been part of a private business they would of been sacked on the spot for twisting the expenses system like they did. The main parties did not act, UKIP did. If UKIP hadn't, I would be blaming all of them. I called when the scandal was on, for the Queen to dissolve parliament and for every single MP to be investigated by the police - that is what should of happened, I dont care whether you are UKIP, Labour, BNP, Green, Liberal Democrat or Tory - if you act in such a way with public money then you should be at the very least, investigated.

Many MPs got away with it and are now retiring on their golden plated pension.

[Catzsy]

Dan, there was an independent enquiry and all found to have were dealt with. You cannot say 'lawful' because the the courts have yet to make their verdict. It's not all black and white there is deceit and corruption within all the parties much as you defend and prevaricate about UKIP. They are no different.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Dan, there was an independent enquiry and all found to have were dealt with. You cannot say 'lawful' because the the courts have yet to make their verdict. It's not all black and white there is deceit and corruption within all the parties much as you defend and prevaricate about UKIP. They are no different.

I am sorry but some of them MPs got away with daylight theft, if that was any normal business then they would of been sacked immediately. UKIP on the other hand was not involved in the Westminister scandal but has had issues with people like Tom Wise in the past, who they suspended and threw out. They took the action, the others [Labour, Conservatives & Liberal Democrats] did not as many of the MPs within them parties were merely told to 'repay the money back' - that is not good enough. UKIP is clean and has acted swiftly in issues like this, the BNP and the Green Party also appear to be clean.

[Catzsy]

I am sorry but some of them MPs got away with daylight theft, if that was any normal business then they would of been sacked immediately. UKIP on the other hand was not involved in the Westminister scandal but has had issues with people like Tom Wise in the past, who they suspended and threw out. They took the action, the others [Labour, Conservatives & Liberal Democrats] did not as many of the MPs within them parties were merely told to 'repay the money back' - that is not good enough. UKIP is clean and has acted swiftly in issues like this, the BNP and the Green Party also appear to be clean.

Appear being the right word. Let's hope they keep whiter than white then. :P Love your optimism,

[-:Undertaker:-]

Appear being the right word. Let's hope they keep whiter than white then. :P Love your optimism,

With the state the country is in, we need optimism. :P

Of course there may of been internal corruption within the party, its bound to happen. The very thing I am pleased with UKIP over is the way it has acted over these scandals (which will occur to any party) and they will occur more and more as the party grows because it is growing and is now the fourth biggest party in the United Kingdom, but they have acted quickly on every story such as Tom Wise and i'm happy with that.

[Catzsy]

With the state the country is in, we need optimism. :P

I don't disagree with that at the present time - I would most definitely be asking for trouble. On a parting note I hate to say it but Nick Clegg is coming over as the most believable at the moment I think.