The 800,000 people living in Britain with little or no English

[Kardan]

Yes. English should be spoken in the United Kingdom with respect given to the native lingering language of Welsh in parts of Wales. It's pretty simple to understand and grasp really, and the existence of Welsh isn't a good enough reason for transforming many areas of our inner cities into Polish, Turkish or Arabics-speaking ghettos.

Only somebody harbouring an extreme and nasty dislike of his own country, people and culture could make such a strange equation.



The headline clearly states little or no English.



The headline clearly states little or no English. Pretty simple to grasp that - unless you get it really wrong and allow your own prejudices and dogma to get the better of you (as you just did) when you posted ONS figures trying to disprove a claim that was never made by the Telegraph or myself in the first place. Nice try, but the only misleading thing in this thread is your attempt to turn reality on its head.



Well that is if you believe the statistics which I do not. But assuming they are truthful, nobody made the claim that immigration is the only factor in unemployment. The main problem with mass immigration in terms of unemployment is the level of youth unemployment which, looking at some graphs, remains at some of it's highest levels ever. And before you say it - no, I am not saying that mass immigration is the only cause of youth unemployment but it is related. I have argued for example against the minimum wage in the past which also hurts youth unemployment.

Both policies which you support that hurt the working class the hardest despite being left wing and for the working man. Kinda like the Labour Party.

So you don't believe certain statistics (Economy/Unemployment), but you are happy to accept some statistics if it agrees with your argument (Immigration/English speakers)?

And then you agree with me, you would allow Welsh only speakers to remain in England?

[The Don]

Yeh because knowing some English should be grouped with not knowing any English /s. You're silly if you think the headline isn't being intentionally misleading. Also what does one classify as a 'little'? I seem to remember you arguing that we couldn't trust my statistics in the climate change debate as I hadn't read every paper that was classed as agreeing with climate change, then you go and use ridiculous statistics which can't be measured accurately (a little is a subjective term). Anything to make people dislike the EU, really pathetic.

[Ardemax]

The headline clearly states little or no English.

The ambiguity lies in the statement 'little' English.

[-:Undertaker:-]

So you don't believe certain statistics (Economy/Unemployment), but you are happy to accept some statistics if it agrees with your argument (Immigration/English speakers)?

Oh no not at all, if anything the figures will be much worse than what the government officially states as is usually the case. When I look at government figures, I look at them on the assumption that they are a pack of lies and the situation will be much worse.

I'm only going by government stats here as you lot seem to believe every word that comes from the ONS/Downing Street.

And then you agree with me, you would allow Welsh only speakers to remain in England?

Welsh is a language of the United Kingdom, so yes. Anything else, then no. Immigrants should be able to speak the English language without the need for translators if they are to be granted anything other than a tourism visa to Britain.

Yeh because knowing some English should be grouped with not knowing any English /s. You're silly if you think the headline isn't being intentionally misleading. Also what does one classify as a 'little'? I seem to remember you arguing that we couldn't trust my statistics in the climate change debate as I hadn't read every paper that was classed as agreeing with climate change, then you go and use ridiculous statistics which can't be measured accurately (a little is a subjective term).

You've been caught out. You are attempting to make it seem as though the Telegraph has made the claim that 800,000 immigrants cannot speak any English when the Telegraph quite clearly points out that it's talking about both those that cannot speak a word of English and those who only know a little bit of English. It's in the title, it's in the text - it's as clear as daylight for all who read it, except you because you want it to read as something else.

Anything to make people dislike the EU, really pathetic.

Oh absolutely, the handover of our sovereignty to the EU is much worse than most people can even imagine. The Human Rights Act which allows terrorists to stay in this country despite our government wanting to get rid of them, the £18bn-a year Climate Change Act which subsidies wealthy landowners at the expense of the poor who pay for it via their gas and electric bills, the coming crisis in energy that we are facing as a result of Brussels targets on emissions, the ERM disaster which took place when our government tried to peg Sterling to the to-be Eurozone, the disaster that would have occurred had you lot had your way and took us into the Euro, the Common Fisheries Policy that has devastated fishing in Britain, the persecution of butchers and shop keepers who wanted to keep using imperial measurements (as their customers wanted) but who were prosecuted because of EU legislation, the high food prices and disaster caused in the third world by EU agricultural policy, the influx of hundreds of thousands of immigrants who have changed local communities around this country without the residents ever being asked, the constant stream of anti-business regulations and red tape that emit from the EU every single week..... the list goes on and on and on and I am going to keep posting the truth about what damage the EU has done, what it is doing and what it's intentions are.

Let's face it - we eurosceptics have you on the run.

The ambiguity lies in the statement 'little' English.

Yes, so 800,000 people live in the UK with little or no English. Nobody said they all couldn't speak a word of English. The headline is pretty clear in what it reads and I think what the problem really is is the fact that people in this thread are reading the headline as something that it's not in an attempt to skew the argument in their favour.

[The Don]

Oh no not at all, if anything the figures will be much worse than what the government officially states as is usually the case. When I look at government figures, I look at them on the assumption that they are a pack of lies and the situation will be much worse.

I'm only going by government stats here as you lot seem to believe every word that comes from the ONS/Downing Street.



Welsh is a language of the United Kingdom, so yes. Anything else, then no. Immigrants should be able to speak the English language without the need for translators if they are to be granted anything other than a tourism visa to Britain.



You've been caught out. You are attempting to make it seem as though the Telegraph has made the claim that 800,000 immigrants cannot speak any English when the Telegraph quite clearly points out that it's talking about both those that cannot speak a word of English and those who only know a little bit of English. It's in the title, it's in the text - it's as clear as daylight for all who read it, except you because you want it to read as something else.



Oh absolutely, the handover of our sovereignty to the EU is much worse than most people can even imagine. The Human Rights Act which allows terrorists to stay in this country despite our government wanting to get rid of them, the £18bn-a year Climate Change Act which subsidies wealthy landowners at the expense of the poor who pay for it via their gas and electric bills, the coming crisis in energy that we are facing as a result of Brussels targets on emissions, the ERM disaster which took place when our government tried to peg Sterling to the to-be Eurozone, the disaster that would have occurred had you lot had your way and took us into the Euro, the Common Fisheries Policy that has devastated fishing in Britain, the persecution of butchers and shop keepers who wanted to keep using imperial measurements (as their customers wanted) but who were prosecuted because of EU legislation, the high food prices and disaster caused in the third world by EU agricultural policy, the influx of hundreds of thousands of immigrants who have changed local communities around this country without the residents ever being asked, the constant stream of anti-business regulations and red tape that emit from the EU every single week..... the list goes on and on and on and I am going to keep posting the truth about what damage the EU has done, what it is doing and what it's intentions are.

Let's face it - we eurosceptics have you on the run.



Yes, so 800,000 people live in the UK with little or no English. Nobody said they all couldn't speak a word of English. The headline is pretty clear in what it reads and I think what the problem really is is the fact that people in this thread are reading the headline as something that it's not in an attempt to skew the argument in their favour.

I'll post it again since you didn't really answer my points.

You're silly if you think the headline isn't being intentionally misleading. Also what does one classify as a 'little'? I seem to remember you arguing that we couldn't trust my statistics in the climate change debate as I hadn't read every paper that was classed as agreeing with climate change, then you go and use ridiculous statistics which can't be measured accurately (a little is a subjective term).

How would you measure what is classed as 'enough' English?

[-:Undertaker:-]

I'll post it again since you didn't really answer my points.

You're silly if you think the headline isn't being intentionally misleading. Also what does one classify as a 'little'? I seem to remember you arguing that we couldn't trust my statistics in the climate change debate as I hadn't read every paper that was classed as agreeing with climate change, then you go and use ridiculous statistics which can't be measured accurately (a little is a subjective term).

How would you measure what is classed as 'enough' English?

The headline does state what the article and statistics back up, namely that 800,000 immigrants either cannot speak English or only have a very limited grasp of the language. The headline fits the article perfectly despite your earlier attempts to twist the headline into something that it wasn't - only in your imagination did the headline ever refer to 800,000 who couldn't speak any English at all. And besides, even if it didn't - you do know that headlines are intended yo be attention grabbing and attract the readers attention? Something you should've been taught in year 7 English class.

But here we have YET ANOTHER immigration debate where you and others are so determined to avoid actually having a debate, that instead you'll start nitpicking over the headline of the Telegraph or whatever newspaper I have posted the article from. You posted this...

The official statistics has the number listed as 138,000, not 800,000 so I'm not sure where the telegraph pulled that number from...

http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/census...arch-2011.html

In 2011, less than half a per cent (138,000) of all usual residents aged three years and over could not speak English.

..in an attempt to be a smart arse. Little did you realise before jumping to prove the article false that the headline or article did not refer solely to immigrants who could not speak a word of English, it referred to 800,000 who either could not speak the language entirely or who had a very poor grasp of the language. You bent the debate, stop trying to bend it even more and admit you misread the headline and allowed your prejudices to get the better of you when posting those ONS figures.

And you still haven't replied to the actual debate topic at end when I asked you earlier how there are, in your words, 'other ways' to get immigrants to learn English and we haven't had a response to that but we've had many continued responses to a god damned headline: the classic debate tactic of those in favour of mass immigration - debate and talk about ANYTHING but the actual subject of the effects of uncontrolled immigration.

And the pollsters sit there wondering why people are sick of it. Pfft.

[The Don]

The headline does state what the article and statistics back up, namely that 800,000 immigrants either cannot speak English or only have a very limited grasp of the language. The headline fits the article perfectly despite your earlier attempts to twist the headline into something that it wasn't - only in your imagination did the headline ever refer to 800,000 who couldn't speak any English at all. And besides, even if it didn't - you do know that headlines are intended yo be attention grabbing and attract the readers attention? Something you should've been taught in year 7 English class.

But here we have YET ANOTHER immigration debate where you and others are so determined to avoid actually having a debate, that instead you'll start nitpicking over the headline of the Telegraph or whatever newspaper I have posted the article from. You posted this...



..in an attempt to be a smart arse. Little did you realise before jumping to prove the article false that the headline or article did not refer solely to immigrants who could not speak a word of English, it referred to 800,000 who either could not speak the language entirely or who had a very poor grasp of the language. You bent the debate, stop trying to bend it even more and admit you misread the headline and allowed your prejudices to get the better of you when posting those ONS figures.

And you still haven't replied to the actual debate topic at end when I asked you earlier how there are, in your words, 'other ways' to get immigrants to learn English and we haven't had a response to that but we've had many continued responses to a god damned headline: the classic debate tactic of those in favour of mass immigration - debate and talk about ANYTHING but the actual subject of the effects of uncontrolled immigration.

And the pollsters sit there wondering why people are sick of it. Pfft.

You keep skipping the point of my posts which is, how does one classify what 'A litte' English is. You can throw out all the insults you want but it doesn't change the fact that the classification of 'a little' is ridiculous and has been grouped together with those which do not know any English so that morons can get worked up about all these foreigners coming over here taking our jobs without knowing any English.

It seems you have fallen prey to this yourself with your initial post

I just had a lightbulb moment. How about a rule that you cannot come into this country unless you speak English? I would have thought, you know, that's a basic ******* start to come to some kind of coherent immigration system.

Yeah so there's my idea - not allowed in unless you can speak English. How's that for a bleeding obvious start?

If he thinks we should allow hundreds of thousands of people into this country who can't speak the language then OF COURSE he'll be wanting the rest of the population to pay for their translation services, how else would they manage if not? I assume such a thing by a process of simple logic.

As for immigration in general, it's now tied with the economy as the most important issue. Expect more of it.

Where you've clearly overlooked the 'little to' part or don't have the capacity to understand that that's a ridiculously flawed system. Do we only allow people with a GCSE equivalent or higher in English Language to come in? If so we'll have to deport 20% of the students who took their English GCSE's in November since they failed to get a pass grade.

[Kardan]

You keep skipping the point of my posts which is, how does one classify what 'A litte' English is. You can throw out all the insults you want but it doesn't change the fact that the classification of 'a little' is ridiculous and has been grouped together with those which do not know any English so that morons can get worked up about all these foreigners coming over here taking our jobs without knowing any English.

It seems you have fallen prey to this yourself with your initial post






Where you've clearly overlooked the 'little to' part or don't have the capacity to understand that that's a ridiculously flawed system. Do we only allow people with a GCSE equivalent or higher in English Language to come in? If so we'll have to deport 20% of the students who took their English GCSE's in November since they failed to get a pass grade.

Might be worth noting that a pass grade is G+, rather than C+