I've several Indian colleagues who live over here. Difficult to know what to say truthfully to them if they mentioned any of this. 'Get out while you still can'?
It must be resisted by anyone with a moral compass
I can't read the details because I am not a Telegraph subscriber, and nobody else seems to have the story yet.
Daily Telegraph - "Nigel Farage will pledge to eject hundreds of thousands of legal migrants in an unprecedented reversal of Britain’s relaxed border rules.
The Reform UK leader will unveil plans to force all migrants with permanent residency to reapply for visas under stricter criteria including a higher salary requirement and a better standard of English.
The party would also change the law to prevent foreign nationals from accessing the British welfare system. The party claims this would save £234bn over the lifetime of the average migrant.
Edit. I don't subscribe to the Telegraph but this article appears to be free to read?
Are they seriously going to suggest this for people with Indefinite Leave to Remain/Settled Status. This is entirely bonkers involving millions of absolutely ordinary people who have made their home, lawfully, here for years.
Would mean that I couldn’t return to the UK with my wife unless she had a job to go to.
I am so angry that I would, for the first time, join protests against it but unfortunately my mobility has deteriorated so much recently I am having to have a hospital style mobility bed installed so it is not possible
It doesn't however stop me talking and online campaigning against it
You have a big bunch of friends here. Happy to chat
That nice of you
Both my wife and I are struggling with mobilty and pain at night from osteoarthritis and other issues
We struggle to sleep well, so we decided to call in a specialist mobility company who are producing a double bed with individual articulated mattresses that will raise to near vertical and elevate the legs and feet at the same time. It has to be made taking into account our weight and heights and is effectively a hospital specific double bed
It is expensive, but if it provides some relief going forward which we are sure it will [ only one pillow is needed ] then it is a worthwhile investment
We both intend to hang around for as long as possible [and take on Farage ] which you may not quite like !!!!
Keep fighting the good fight old boy! You’ve got good years left in you. And your wise voice is much valued on here
Small point - have you tried slow release tramadol? It’s quite a miraculous drug. It’s a good opioid painkiller but it’s also a SSRI - it makes you more cheerful. Might be worth investigating
I fully intend to marinate myself in it, should the time come
My sister took tramadol when her terminal cancer became severe but I am only allowed paracetamol due to my complex medical issues
Indeed I am not allowed over the counter painkillers and all my medication is strictly controlled by my medics and our pharmacist
DM me if you want to try it
Just a reminder that selling, supplying or even giving tramadol away for free is punishable by up to 14 years in prison and/or an unlimited fine.
Lol. Are you actually trying to get me IMPRISONED FOR FOURTEEN YEARS FOR A COMMENT ON AN OBSCURE FORUM
I've several Indian colleagues who live over here. Difficult to know what to say truthfully to them if they mentioned any of this. 'Get out while you still can'?
It must be resisted by anyone with a moral compass
I can't read the details because I am not a Telegraph subscriber, and nobody else seems to have the story yet.
Daily Telegraph - "Nigel Farage will pledge to eject hundreds of thousands of legal migrants in an unprecedented reversal of Britain’s relaxed border rules.
The Reform UK leader will unveil plans to force all migrants with permanent residency to reapply for visas under stricter criteria including a higher salary requirement and a better standard of English.
The party would also change the law to prevent foreign nationals from accessing the British welfare system. The party claims this would save £234bn over the lifetime of the average migrant.
Web searching tells me there is no such thing as 'permanent residency' in the UK, there is 'indefinite leave to remain' and then British citizenship. Since I don't think they plan to deport those with British citizenship (they could be but I think the Telegraph would have said so as it's a far juicier headline), this is effectively changing the rules around indefinite leave to remain and introducing tougher criteria to stay.
There's a big, big issue coming down the line when all these Boriswavers become eligible for indefinite leave to remain, and therefore state benefits. Kemi had already flagged that up - she wants to delay the granting of ilr. I suppose this is Reform's plan for dealing with that.
Except that this explicitly targets all those currently with indefinite leave to remain, however long they have been here. So someone who was told in the, say, Nineties they can remain indefinitely we will be saying “fuck off” to.
Thousands of people here on spousal visas for example, some of whom can’t apply for naturalisation because their country of origin won’t allow it (eg Germany for countries outside the EU, India for everywhere), they don’t want to, or can’t afford it , will have to leave their families and leave the country.
You can apply for naturalisation if you are prepared to give up your home citizenship, so if you are genuinely permanently resident in the UK that shouldn't be a problem. If you "don't want to" maybe you should consider changing your mind and if "you can't afford to" maybe you and your partner should have budgeted better.
You say it “shouldn’t be a problem”? On what planet does not being able to return to the country you came from one day (perhaps with your British spouse to retire) not be a problem?
Maybe, just maybe, lots of people they didn’t budget the £1750 plus citizenship ceremony for naturalisation because they were expressly told they didn’t need to?
But you enjoy your perverse pleasure in causing severe misery to British and overseas families that have done you no harm and in many cases a lot of benefit. It must make you very happy. Well done!👍
Well that's £500 a year to save before the Reform government gets in
Actually, I think it should be cheaper, you should "earn" citizenship, not have to pay for it
Reform are also proposing lengthening the amount of time for people to be able to naturalise.
If you have paid your way, it shouldn't be down to length of stay per se
Thinking about it, if you are from a country that doesn't allow dual citizenship, maybe you should think twice before marrying a foreigner.
But don't worry I have no intention of voting Refuk, I do think our immigration and naturalisation laws need a complete overhaul though
Spain is very restrictive about the countries it allows dual citizenship of - mostly only Spanish speaking countries. The there would be if Spain removed ILR from British migrants there. “Renounce your U.K. citizenship and become Spanish!” That would go down well.
I've several Indian colleagues who live over here. Difficult to know what to say truthfully to them if they mentioned any of this. 'Get out while you still can'?
It must be resisted by anyone with a moral compass
I can't read the details because I am not a Telegraph subscriber, and nobody else seems to have the story yet.
Daily Telegraph - "Nigel Farage will pledge to eject hundreds of thousands of legal migrants in an unprecedented reversal of Britain’s relaxed border rules.
The Reform UK leader will unveil plans to force all migrants with permanent residency to reapply for visas under stricter criteria including a higher salary requirement and a better standard of English.
The party would also change the law to prevent foreign nationals from accessing the British welfare system. The party claims this would save £234bn over the lifetime of the average migrant.
Edit. I don't subscribe to the Telegraph but this article appears to be free to read?
Are they seriously going to suggest this for people with Indefinite Leave to Remain/Settled Status. This is entirely bonkers involving millions of absolutely ordinary people who have made their home, lawfully, here for years.
Would mean that I couldn’t return to the UK with my wife unless she had a job to go to.
I am so angry that I would, for the first time, join protests against it but unfortunately my mobility has deteriorated so much recently I am having to have a hospital style mobility bed installed so it is not possible
It doesn't however stop me talking and online campaigning against it
You have a big bunch of friends here. Happy to chat
That nice of you
Both my wife and I are struggling with mobilty and pain at night from osteoarthritis and other issues
We struggle to sleep well, so we decided to call in a specialist mobility company who are producing a double bed with individual articulated mattresses that will raise to near vertical and elevate the legs and feet at the same time. It has to be made taking into account our weight and heights and is effectively a hospital specific double bed
It is expensive, but if it provides some relief going forward which we are sure it will [ only one pillow is needed ] then it is a worthwhile investment
We both intend to hang around for as long as possible [and take on Farage ] which you may not quite like !!!!
Keep fighting the good fight old boy! You’ve got good years left in you. And your wise voice is much valued on here
Small point - have you tried slow release tramadol? It’s quite a miraculous drug. It’s a good opioid painkiller but it’s also a SSRI - it makes you more cheerful. Might be worth investigating
I fully intend to marinate myself in it, should the time come
My sister took tramadol when her terminal cancer became severe but I am only allowed paracetamol due to my complex medical issues
Indeed I am not allowed over the counter painkillers and all my medication is strictly controlled by my medics and our pharmacist
DM me if you want to try it
Just a reminder that selling, supplying or even giving tramadol away for free is punishable by up to 14 years in prison and/or an unlimited fine.
Well, it would stop the photos on PB from obscure foreign junket knapping journeys for 14 years.
So, there's that.
To be clear I really actually very much like the wanderlust updates.
If anything, the Reform proposal doesn’t go anywhere near far enough
Our immigration policy should be harsh. It’s easier to cut some slack from a tough stance than it is to start to act tough when you’ve been feeble. We have had an open door policy for two decades and it’s resulted in us leaving the EU, and then riots on the streets. We have a human rights lawyer in No10, and even he is saying the Boris Wave was a piss take.
Christ the PB Centrist Dorks have lost it, tonight
It’s a weird toxic combo of sad fucko Tories desperately trying to paint Reform as Nazis and the usual terminal dull midwit accountant/academic/*never had an original idea* losers - @kinabalu, @bondegezou - desperately trying to maintain the erection of outrage
It seems that there are people who think that a migrant worker (plus their dependents) should be for life.
This country is fully entitled to say "thanks but no more and goodbye" at any time either after their 'contract' is up or if they prove unsatisfactory.
If you’re suggesting that the migrants have a “contract” with the state the Reform is, in the case of those with ILR, proposing to breach that contract.
Not with a Reform government they don't.
And I see no problem in them losing ILR if their behaviour is of a serious negative nature.
For example I suspect you would struggle to convince people that a murderer should not lose their ILR as an extreme example.
Alternatively people with ILR could be charged for being in this country - how much would depend on their individual circumstances.
We agree criminals should lose ILR. But Reform are now proposing removing ILR from EVERYONE who has it. It’s their policy launched tonight. Explicitly.
“Our solution to this problem is to abolish ILR completely. That means no new awards and those who currently hold it will have it rescinded. We will replace it with a five-year renewable work visa, with a vastly higher qualifying salary, much reduced ability to bring dependents and a much higher required standard of English. Crucially, this visa will give holders no access to welfare."
So it’s about kicking out lawfully resident foreigners who’ve done nothing wrong.
And how likely do you think that could be applied in practice ?
Especially with the UK's bollox bureaucracy and multitude of human rights lawyers.
Now it may be possible to stop new ILR grants and then slowly work backwards but whatever is attempted would be almost infinitely harder than Zia Yusuf babbling about it.
Impossible to implement? I read almost exactly the same thing on here 12 months ago about Trump 2’s policies. Yet they’re being implemented. Badly implemented, for all shades of opinion, but implemented nonetheless.
And I’m not sure what effect human rights lawyers will have sans the HRA and ECHR.
I've several Indian colleagues who live over here. Difficult to know what to say truthfully to them if they mentioned any of this. 'Get out while you still can'?
It must be resisted by anyone with a moral compass
I can't read the details because I am not a Telegraph subscriber, and nobody else seems to have the story yet.
Daily Telegraph - "Nigel Farage will pledge to eject hundreds of thousands of legal migrants in an unprecedented reversal of Britain’s relaxed border rules.
The Reform UK leader will unveil plans to force all migrants with permanent residency to reapply for visas under stricter criteria including a higher salary requirement and a better standard of English.
The party would also change the law to prevent foreign nationals from accessing the British welfare system. The party claims this would save £234bn over the lifetime of the average migrant.
Web searching tells me there is no such thing as 'permanent residency' in the UK, there is 'indefinite leave to remain' and then British citizenship. Since I don't think they plan to deport those with British citizenship (they could be but I think the Telegraph would have said so as it's a far juicier headline), this is effectively changing the rules around indefinite leave to remain and introducing tougher criteria to stay.
There's a big, big issue coming down the line when all these Boriswavers become eligible for indefinite leave to remain, and therefore state benefits. Kemi had already flagged that up - she wants to delay the granting of ilr. I suppose this is Reform's plan for dealing with that.
Except that this explicitly targets all those currently with indefinite leave to remain, however long they have been here. So someone who was told in the, say, Nineties they can remain indefinitely we will be saying “fuck off” to.
Thousands of people here on spousal visas for example, some of whom can’t apply for naturalisation because their country of origin won’t allow it (eg Germany for countries outside the EU, India for everywhere), they don’t want to, or can’t afford it , will have to leave their families and leave the country.
You can apply for naturalisation if you are prepared to give up your home citizenship, so if you are genuinely permanently resident in the UK that shouldn't be a problem. If you "don't want to" maybe you should consider changing your mind and if "you can't afford to" maybe you and your partner should have budgeted better.
You say it “shouldn’t be a problem”? On what planet does not being able to return to the country you came from one day (perhaps with your British spouse to retire) not be a problem?
Maybe, just maybe, lots of people they didn’t budget the £1750 plus citizenship ceremony for naturalisation because they were expressly told they didn’t need to?
But you enjoy your perverse pleasure in causing severe misery to British and overseas families that have done you no harm and in many cases a lot of benefit. It must make you very happy. Well done!👍
Well that's £500 a year to save before the Reform government gets in
Actually, I think it should be cheaper, you should "earn" citizenship, not have to pay for it
Reform are also proposing lengthening the amount of time for people to be able to naturalise.
If you have paid your way, it shouldn't be down to length of stay per se
Thinking about it, if you are from a country that doesn't allow dual citizenship, maybe you should think twice before marrying a foreigner.
But don't worry I have no intention of voting Refuk, I do think our immigration and naturalisation laws need a complete overhaul though
Spain is very restrictive about the countries it allows dual citizenship of - mostly only Spanish speaking countries. The there would be if Spain removed ILR from British migrants there. “Renounce your U.K. citizenship and become Spanish!” That would go down well.
I don't see a problem. If you go to live in Spain, you become Spanish.
If course a lot of Brits in Spain want to continue to get their free NHS despite no longer being resident here or paying UK taxes
You might not see a problem. Perceptions would differ.
If anything, the Reform proposal doesn’t go anywhere near far enough
Our immigration policy should be harsh. It’s easier to cut some slack from a tough stance than it is to start to act tough when you’ve been feeble. We have had an open door policy for two decades and it’s resulted in us leaving the EU, and then riots on the streets. We have a human rights lawyer in No10, and even he is saying the Boris Wave was a piss take.
The open door policy to the EU worked well: people came and went. It was leaving the EU that led to the Boriswave.
It seems that there are people who think that a migrant worker (plus their dependents) should be for life.
This country is fully entitled to say "thanks but no more and goodbye" at any time either after their 'contract' is up or if they prove unsatisfactory.
If you’re suggesting that the migrants have a “contract” with the state the Reform is, in the case of those with ILR, proposing to breach that contract.
Not with a Reform government they don't.
And I see no problem in them losing ILR if their behaviour is of a serious negative nature.
For example I suspect you would struggle to convince people that a murderer should not lose their ILR as an extreme example.
Alternatively people with ILR could be charged for being in this country - how much would depend on their individual circumstances.
We agree criminals should lose ILR. But Reform are now proposing removing ILR from EVERYONE who has it. It’s their policy launched tonight. Explicitly.
“Our solution to this problem is to abolish ILR completely. That means no new awards and those who currently hold it will have it rescinded. We will replace it with a five-year renewable work visa, with a vastly higher qualifying salary, much reduced ability to bring dependents and a much higher required standard of English. Crucially, this visa will give holders no access to welfare."
So it’s about kicking out lawfully resident foreigners who’ve done nothing wrong.
And, as I noted earlier, it would mean stripping ILR from my wife and forcing her to take a work visa in the event that we move back to the UK.
Note that I have British citizenship, and my two children were born in the UK and have British citizenship.
Just a Spouse Visa would do, no?
They are time limited. You then upgrade to ILR after 2 years, or it was when my wife did. But without ILR…?
Leave to Remain with No Recourse.
Unless she can qualify for a work visa of course
If we got welfare grifting under control properly across the board we wouldn't have to worry so much about immigrants on welfare, because the whole problem would be smaller.
British-born people are more likely to be on benefits than immigrants.
And? Absent transportation to Australia, we are stuck with them. We can choose whether to take new immigrants and what access to welfare to give them.
If anything, the Reform proposal doesn’t go anywhere near far enough
Our immigration policy should be harsh. It’s easier to cut some slack from a tough stance than it is to start to act tough when you’ve been feeble. We have had an open door policy for two decades and it’s resulted in us leaving the EU, and then riots on the streets. We have a human rights lawyer in No10, and even he is saying the Boris Wave was a piss take.
The open door policy to the EU worked well: people came and went. It was leaving the EU that led to the Boriswave.
I've several Indian colleagues who live over here. Difficult to know what to say truthfully to them if they mentioned any of this. 'Get out while you still can'?
It must be resisted by anyone with a moral compass
I can't read the details because I am not a Telegraph subscriber, and nobody else seems to have the story yet.
Daily Telegraph - "Nigel Farage will pledge to eject hundreds of thousands of legal migrants in an unprecedented reversal of Britain’s relaxed border rules.
The Reform UK leader will unveil plans to force all migrants with permanent residency to reapply for visas under stricter criteria including a higher salary requirement and a better standard of English.
The party would also change the law to prevent foreign nationals from accessing the British welfare system. The party claims this would save £234bn over the lifetime of the average migrant.
Edit. I don't subscribe to the Telegraph but this article appears to be free to read?
Are they seriously going to suggest this for people with Indefinite Leave to Remain/Settled Status. This is entirely bonkers involving millions of absolutely ordinary people who have made their home, lawfully, here for years.
Would mean that I couldn’t return to the UK with my wife unless she had a job to go to.
I am so angry that I would, for the first time, join protests against it but unfortunately my mobility has deteriorated so much recently I am having to have a hospital style mobility bed installed so it is not possible
It doesn't however stop me talking and online campaigning against it
You have a big bunch of friends here. Happy to chat
That nice of you
Both my wife and I are struggling with mobilty and pain at night from osteoarthritis and other issues
We struggle to sleep well, so we decided to call in a specialist mobility company who are producing a double bed with individual articulated mattresses that will raise to near vertical and elevate the legs and feet at the same time. It has to be made taking into account our weight and heights and is effectively a hospital specific double bed
It is expensive, but if it provides some relief going forward which we are sure it will [ only one pillow is needed ] then it is a worthwhile investment
We both intend to hang around for as long as possible [and take on Farage ] which you may not quite like !!!!
Keep fighting the good fight old boy! You’ve got good years left in you. And your wise voice is much valued on here
Small point - have you tried slow release tramadol? It’s quite a miraculous drug. It’s a good opioid painkiller but it’s also a SSRI - it makes you more cheerful. Might be worth investigating
I fully intend to marinate myself in it, should the time come
My sister took tramadol when her terminal cancer became severe but I am only allowed paracetamol due to my complex medical issues
Indeed I am not allowed over the counter painkillers and all my medication is strictly controlled by my medics and our pharmacist
DM me if you want to try it
I am now remembering an evening where we ran out of decent rizla, dropped our remaining hash on the floor - then had a really quite delirious evening of sticking together joints with Evostick, carpet fibres, and eventually crumbled co-codamol. Halcyon times.
If anything, the Reform proposal doesn’t go anywhere near far enough
Our immigration policy should be harsh. It’s easier to cut some slack from a tough stance than it is to start to act tough when you’ve been feeble. We have had an open door policy for two decades and it’s resulted in us leaving the EU, and then riots on the streets. We have a human rights lawyer in No10, and even he is saying the Boris Wave was a piss take.
The open door policy to the EU worked well: people came and went. It was leaving the EU that led to the Boriswave.
Also... didn't you support Boris?
Please point to the coming and going.
Individuals came and went. Labour shortages were efficiently filled. Net immigration was positive, but it was nothing like the numbers seen post-Brexit.
I've several Indian colleagues who live over here. Difficult to know what to say truthfully to them if they mentioned any of this. 'Get out while you still can'?
It must be resisted by anyone with a moral compass
I can't read the details because I am not a Telegraph subscriber, and nobody else seems to have the story yet.
Daily Telegraph - "Nigel Farage will pledge to eject hundreds of thousands of legal migrants in an unprecedented reversal of Britain’s relaxed border rules.
The Reform UK leader will unveil plans to force all migrants with permanent residency to reapply for visas under stricter criteria including a higher salary requirement and a better standard of English.
The party would also change the law to prevent foreign nationals from accessing the British welfare system. The party claims this would save £234bn over the lifetime of the average migrant.
Edit. I don't subscribe to the Telegraph but this article appears to be free to read?
Are they seriously going to suggest this for people with Indefinite Leave to Remain/Settled Status. This is entirely bonkers involving millions of absolutely ordinary people who have made their home, lawfully, here for years.
Would mean that I couldn’t return to the UK with my wife unless she had a job to go to.
I am so angry that I would, for the first time, join protests against it but unfortunately my mobility has deteriorated so much recently I am having to have a hospital style mobility bed installed so it is not possible
It doesn't however stop me talking and online campaigning against it
You have a big bunch of friends here. Happy to chat
That nice of you
Both my wife and I are struggling with mobilty and pain at night from osteoarthritis and other issues
We struggle to sleep well, so we decided to call in a specialist mobility company who are producing a double bed with individual articulated mattresses that will raise to near vertical and elevate the legs and feet at the same time. It has to be made taking into account our weight and heights and is effectively a hospital specific double bed
It is expensive, but if it provides some relief going forward which we are sure it will [ only one pillow is needed ] then it is a worthwhile investment
We both intend to hang around for as long as possible [and take on Farage ] which you may not quite like !!!!
Keep fighting the good fight old boy! You’ve got good years left in you. And your wise voice is much valued on here
Small point - have you tried slow release tramadol? It’s quite a miraculous drug. It’s a good opioid painkiller but it’s also a SSRI - it makes you more cheerful. Might be worth investigating
I fully intend to marinate myself in it, should the time come
My sister took tramadol when her terminal cancer became severe but I am only allowed paracetamol due to my complex medical issues
Indeed I am not allowed over the counter painkillers and all my medication is strictly controlled by my medics and our pharmacist
DM me if you want to try it
I am now remembering an evening where we ran out of decent rizla, dropped our remaining hash on the floor - then had a really quite delirious evening of sticking together joints with Evostick, carpet fibres, and eventually crumbled co-codamol. Halcyon times.
Reminds me of the hangover from smoking dried Town Moor cow shit, we all convinced ourselves we were high...
It seems that there are people who think that a migrant worker (plus their dependents) should be for life.
This country is fully entitled to say "thanks but no more and goodbye" at any time either after their 'contract' is up or if they prove unsatisfactory.
If you’re suggesting that the migrants have a “contract” with the state the Reform is, in the case of those with ILR, proposing to breach that contract.
Not with a Reform government they don't.
And I see no problem in them losing ILR if their behaviour is of a serious negative nature.
For example I suspect you would struggle to convince people that a murderer should not lose their ILR as an extreme example.
Alternatively people with ILR could be charged for being in this country - how much would depend on their individual circumstances.
We agree criminals should lose ILR. But Reform are now proposing removing ILR from EVERYONE who has it. It’s their policy launched tonight. Explicitly.
“Our solution to this problem is to abolish ILR completely. That means no new awards and those who currently hold it will have it rescinded. We will replace it with a five-year renewable work visa, with a vastly higher qualifying salary, much reduced ability to bring dependents and a much higher required standard of English. Crucially, this visa will give holders no access to welfare."
So it’s about kicking out lawfully resident foreigners who’ve done nothing wrong.
And, as I noted earlier, it would mean stripping ILR from my wife and forcing her to take a work visa in the event that we move back to the UK.
Note that I have British citizenship, and my two children were born in the UK and have British citizenship.
Just a Spouse Visa would do, no?
They are time limited. You then upgrade to ILR after 2 years, or it was when my wife did. But without ILR…?
Leave to Remain with No Recourse.
Unless she can qualify for a work visa of course
If we got welfare grifting under control properly across the board we wouldn't have to worry so much about immigrants on welfare, because the whole problem would be smaller.
British-born people are more likely to be on benefits than immigrants.
And? Absent transportation to Australia, we are stuck with them. We can choose whether to take new immigrants and what access to welfare to give them.
The point is that immigrants are not the problem. They're just people. There are regular posters here who are immigrants (or emigrants, depending on your point of view). Others are married to immigrants. We should not be scapegoating people just because they live in a different country to where they started.
If anything, the Reform proposal doesn’t go anywhere near far enough
Our immigration policy should be harsh. It’s easier to cut some slack from a tough stance than it is to start to act tough when you’ve been feeble. We have had an open door policy for two decades and it’s resulted in us leaving the EU, and then riots on the streets. We have a human rights lawyer in No10, and even he is saying the Boris Wave was a piss take.
The open door policy to the EU worked well: people came and went. It was leaving the EU that led to the Boriswave.
Also... didn't you support Boris?
Please point to the coming and going.
Individuals came and went. Labour shortages were efficiently filled. Net immigration was positive, but it was nothing like the numbers seen post-Brexit.
The rise in the chart has not much to do with shortages and everything to do with a new country joining FoM. Are we to believe that the tortuous process of EU enlargement has timelines which magically coincide with the economic cycle causing a Labour shortage?
If anything, the Reform proposal doesn’t go anywhere near far enough
Our immigration policy should be harsh. It’s easier to cut some slack from a tough stance than it is to start to act tough when you’ve been feeble. We have had an open door policy for two decades and it’s resulted in us leaving the EU, and then riots on the streets. We have a human rights lawyer in No10, and even he is saying the Boris Wave was a piss take.
The open door policy to the EU worked well: people came and went. It was leaving the EU that led to the Boriswave.
Also... didn't you support Boris?
Please point to the coming and going.
Individuals came and went. Labour shortages were efficiently filled. Net immigration was positive, but it was nothing like the numbers seen post-Brexit.
The rise in the chart has not much to do with shortages and everything to do with a new country joining FoM. Are we to believe that the tortuous process of EU enlargement has timelines which magically coincide with the economic cycle causing a Labour shortage?
EU enlargement caused a blip in the numbers, sure. Which was still less than the post-Brexit Boriswave. The problem was never freedom of movement. The problem was electing populist right charlatans.
It seems that there are people who think that a migrant worker (plus their dependents) should be for life.
This country is fully entitled to say "thanks but no more and goodbye" at any time either after their 'contract' is up or if they prove unsatisfactory.
If you’re suggesting that the migrants have a “contract” with the state the Reform is, in the case of those with ILR, proposing to breach that contract.
Not with a Reform government they don't.
And I see no problem in them losing ILR if their behaviour is of a serious negative nature.
For example I suspect you would struggle to convince people that a murderer should not lose their ILR as an extreme example.
Alternatively people with ILR could be charged for being in this country - how much would depend on their individual circumstances.
We agree criminals should lose ILR. But Reform are now proposing removing ILR from EVERYONE who has it. It’s their policy launched tonight. Explicitly.
“Our solution to this problem is to abolish ILR completely. That means no new awards and those who currently hold it will have it rescinded. We will replace it with a five-year renewable work visa, with a vastly higher qualifying salary, much reduced ability to bring dependents and a much higher required standard of English. Crucially, this visa will give holders no access to welfare."
So it’s about kicking out lawfully resident foreigners who’ve done nothing wrong.
And, as I noted earlier, it would mean stripping ILR from my wife and forcing her to take a work visa in the event that we move back to the UK.
Note that I have British citizenship, and my two children were born in the UK and have British citizenship.
Just a Spouse Visa would do, no?
They are time limited. You then upgrade to ILR after 2 years, or it was when my wife did. But without ILR…?
Leave to Remain with No Recourse.
Unless she can qualify for a work visa of course
If we got welfare grifting under control properly across the board we wouldn't have to worry so much about immigrants on welfare, because the whole problem would be smaller.
British-born people are more likely to be on benefits than immigrants.
And? Absent transportation to Australia, we are stuck with them. We can choose whether to take new immigrants and what access to welfare to give them.
The point is that immigrants are not the problem. They're just people. There are regular posters here who are immigrants (or emigrants, depending on your point of view). Others are married to immigrants. We should not be scapegoating people just because they live in a different country to where they started.
I know. My partner is foreign. But by the same token, policy making can't be driven by individual, heartrending stories. There has to be some detachment.
It seems that there are people who think that a migrant worker (plus their dependents) should be for life.
This country is fully entitled to say "thanks but no more and goodbye" at any time either after their 'contract' is up or if they prove unsatisfactory.
If you’re suggesting that the migrants have a “contract” with the state the Reform is, in the case of those with ILR, proposing to breach that contract.
Not with a Reform government they don't.
And I see no problem in them losing ILR if their behaviour is of a serious negative nature.
For example I suspect you would struggle to convince people that a murderer should not lose their ILR as an extreme example.
Alternatively people with ILR could be charged for being in this country - how much would depend on their individual circumstances.
We agree criminals should lose ILR. But Reform are now proposing removing ILR from EVERYONE who has it. It’s their policy launched tonight. Explicitly.
“Our solution to this problem is to abolish ILR completely. That means no new awards and those who currently hold it will have it rescinded. We will replace it with a five-year renewable work visa, with a vastly higher qualifying salary, much reduced ability to bring dependents and a much higher required standard of English. Crucially, this visa will give holders no access to welfare."
So it’s about kicking out lawfully resident foreigners who’ve done nothing wrong.
And, as I noted earlier, it would mean stripping ILR from my wife and forcing her to take a work visa in the event that we move back to the UK.
Note that I have British citizenship, and my two children were born in the UK and have British citizenship.
Just a Spouse Visa would do, no?
They are time limited. You then upgrade to ILR after 2 years, or it was when my wife did. But without ILR…?
Leave to Remain with No Recourse.
Unless she can qualify for a work visa of course
If we got welfare grifting under control properly across the board we wouldn't have to worry so much about immigrants on welfare, because the whole problem would be smaller.
British-born people are more likely to be on benefits than immigrants.
And? Absent transportation to Australia, we are stuck with them. We can choose whether to take new immigrants and what access to welfare to give them.
The point is that immigrants are not the problem. They're just people. There are regular posters here who are immigrants (or emigrants, depending on your point of view). Others are married to immigrants. We should not be scapegoating people just because they live in a different country to where they started.
I know. My partner is foreign. But by the same token, policy making can't be driven by individual, heartrending stories. There has to be some detachment.
If anything, the Reform proposal doesn’t go anywhere near far enough
Our immigration policy should be harsh. It’s easier to cut some slack from a tough stance than it is to start to act tough when you’ve been feeble. We have had an open door policy for two decades and it’s resulted in us leaving the EU, and then riots on the streets. We have a human rights lawyer in No10, and even he is saying the Boris Wave was a piss take.
The open door policy to the EU worked well: people came and went. It was leaving the EU that led to the Boriswave.
Also... didn't you support Boris?
Please point to the coming and going.
Individuals came and went. Labour shortages were efficiently filled. Net immigration was positive, but it was nothing like the numbers seen post-Brexit.
The rise in the chart has not much to do with shortages and everything to do with a new country joining FoM. Are we to believe that the tortuous process of EU enlargement has timelines which magically coincide with the economic cycle causing a Labour shortage?
EU enlargement caused a blip in the numbers, sure. Which was still less than the post-Brexit Boriswave. The problem was never freedom of movement. The problem was electing populist right charlatans.
30k a year to 300k a year with EU enlargement is more than a blip, Boriswave aside.
(The Boriswave could have been avoided by simple quota. But Boris or his team were too lazy to monitor it or respond to monitoring results. Or wanted the high immigration.)
If anything, the Reform proposal doesn’t go anywhere near far enough
Our immigration policy should be harsh. It’s easier to cut some slack from a tough stance than it is to start to act tough when you’ve been feeble. We have had an open door policy for two decades and it’s resulted in us leaving the EU, and then riots on the streets. We have a human rights lawyer in No10, and even he is saying the Boris Wave was a piss take.
The open door policy to the EU worked well: people came and went. It was leaving the EU that led to the Boriswave.
Also... didn't you support Boris?
Please point to the coming and going.
Individuals came and went. Labour shortages were efficiently filled. Net immigration was positive, but it was nothing like the numbers seen post-Brexit.
The rise in the chart has not much to do with shortages and everything to do with a new country joining FoM. Are we to believe that the tortuous process of EU enlargement has timelines which magically coincide with the economic cycle causing a Labour shortage?
EU enlargement caused a blip in the numbers, sure. Which was still less than the post-Brexit Boriswave. The problem was never freedom of movement. The problem was electing populist right charlatans.
30k a year to 300k a year with EU enlargement is more than a blip, Boriswave aside.
(The Boriswave could have been avoided by simple quota. But Boris or his team were too lazy to monitor it or respond to monitoring results. Or wanted the high immigration.)
So, you agree the problem was with Boris and the people who voted him in.
Christ the PB Centrist Dorks have lost it, tonight
It’s a weird toxic combo of sad fucko Tories desperately trying to paint Reform as Nazis and the usual terminal dull midwit accountant/academic/*never had an original idea* losers - @kinabalu, @bondegezou - desperately trying to maintain the erection of outrage
Pff
Mmm, if only we had the wit and originality to agree with the online right trope of the day or whatever Nigel Farage says about anything.
If anything, the Reform proposal doesn’t go anywhere near far enough
Our immigration policy should be harsh. It’s easier to cut some slack from a tough stance than it is to start to act tough when you’ve been feeble. We have had an open door policy for two decades and it’s resulted in us leaving the EU, and then riots on the streets. We have a human rights lawyer in No10, and even he is saying the Boris Wave was a piss take.
The open door policy to the EU worked well: people came and went. It was leaving the EU that led to the Boriswave.
Also... didn't you support Boris?
Please point to the coming and going.
Individuals came and went. Labour shortages were efficiently filled. Net immigration was positive, but it was nothing like the numbers seen post-Brexit.
The rise in the chart has not much to do with shortages and everything to do with a new country joining FoM. Are we to believe that the tortuous process of EU enlargement has timelines which magically coincide with the economic cycle causing a Labour shortage?
EU enlargement caused a blip in the numbers, sure. Which was still less than the post-Brexit Boriswave. The problem was never freedom of movement. The problem was electing populist right charlatans.
The conclusion seems to be we didn't elect enough of one in 2019.
If anything, the Reform proposal doesn’t go anywhere near far enough
Our immigration policy should be harsh. It’s easier to cut some slack from a tough stance than it is to start to act tough when you’ve been feeble. We have had an open door policy for two decades and it’s resulted in us leaving the EU, and then riots on the streets. We have a human rights lawyer in No10, and even he is saying the Boris Wave was a piss take.
The open door policy to the EU worked well: people came and went. It was leaving the EU that led to the Boriswave.
Also... didn't you support Boris?
Please point to the coming and going.
Individuals came and went. Labour shortages were efficiently filled. Net immigration was positive, but it was nothing like the numbers seen post-Brexit.
The rise in the chart has not much to do with shortages and everything to do with a new country joining FoM. Are we to believe that the tortuous process of EU enlargement has timelines which magically coincide with the economic cycle causing a Labour shortage?
EU enlargement caused a blip in the numbers, sure. Which was still less than the post-Brexit Boriswave. The problem was never freedom of movement. The problem was electing populist right charlatans.
30k a year to 300k a year with EU enlargement is more than a blip, Boriswave aside.
(The Boriswave could have been avoided by simple quota. But Boris or his team were too lazy to monitor it or respond to monitoring results. Or wanted the high immigration.)
So, you agree the problem is with Boris and the people who voted him in.
If remainers have graduated from blaming Brexit for the Boriswave to blaming Boris, I'm happy to agree with them.
I'm happy with my decision to vote for Boris over Corbyn, nonetheless.
If anything, the Reform proposal doesn’t go anywhere near far enough
Our immigration policy should be harsh. It’s easier to cut some slack from a tough stance than it is to start to act tough when you’ve been feeble. We have had an open door policy for two decades and it’s resulted in us leaving the EU, and then riots on the streets. We have a human rights lawyer in No10, and even he is saying the Boris Wave was a piss take.
The open door policy to the EU worked well: people came and went. It was leaving the EU that led to the Boriswave.
Also... didn't you support Boris?
Please point to the coming and going.
Individuals came and went. Labour shortages were efficiently filled. Net immigration was positive, but it was nothing like the numbers seen post-Brexit.
The rise in the chart has not much to do with shortages and everything to do with a new country joining FoM. Are we to believe that the tortuous process of EU enlargement has timelines which magically coincide with the economic cycle causing a Labour shortage?
EU enlargement caused a blip in the numbers, sure. Which was still less than the post-Brexit Boriswave. The problem was never freedom of movement. The problem was electing populist right charlatans.
Brexit delivered the Boriswave and the big increase in boat crossings and yet some are now rewarding Mr Brexit .
Just shows that the pandemic of idiocy which seemed to have subsided for a while is now back on steroids.
It seems that there are people who think that a migrant worker (plus their dependents) should be for life.
This country is fully entitled to say "thanks but no more and goodbye" at any time either after their 'contract' is up or if they prove unsatisfactory.
If you’re suggesting that the migrants have a “contract” with the state the Reform is, in the case of those with ILR, proposing to breach that contract.
Not with a Reform government they don't.
And I see no problem in them losing ILR if their behaviour is of a serious negative nature.
For example I suspect you would struggle to convince people that a murderer should not lose their ILR as an extreme example.
Alternatively people with ILR could be charged for being in this country - how much would depend on their individual circumstances.
We agree criminals should lose ILR. But Reform are now proposing removing ILR from EVERYONE who has it. It’s their policy launched tonight. Explicitly.
“Our solution to this problem is to abolish ILR completely. That means no new awards and those who currently hold it will have it rescinded. We will replace it with a five-year renewable work visa, with a vastly higher qualifying salary, much reduced ability to bring dependents and a much higher required standard of English. Crucially, this visa will give holders no access to welfare."
So it’s about kicking out lawfully resident foreigners who’ve done nothing wrong.
And how likely do you think that could be applied in practice ?
Especially with the UK's bollox bureaucracy and multitude of human rights lawyers.
Now it may be possible to stop new ILR grants and then slowly work backwards but whatever is attempted would be almost infinitely harder than Zia Yusuf babbling about it.
Impossible to implement? I read almost exactly the same thing on here 12 months ago about Trump 2’s policies. Yet they’re being implemented. Badly implemented, for all shades of opinion, but implemented nonetheless.
And I’m not sure what effect human rights lawyers will have sans the HRA and ECHR.
So how many immigrants to the USA have been deported ?
There are over 50m immigrants in the USA, deportations so far appear to have been about 200k - not much higher than Biden managed.
If anything, the Reform proposal doesn’t go anywhere near far enough
Our immigration policy should be harsh. It’s easier to cut some slack from a tough stance than it is to start to act tough when you’ve been feeble. We have had an open door policy for two decades and it’s resulted in us leaving the EU, and then riots on the streets. We have a human rights lawyer in No10, and even he is saying the Boris Wave was a piss take.
The open door policy to the EU worked well: people came and went. It was leaving the EU that led to the Boriswave.
Also... didn't you support Boris?
I voted for him as it was the only option on my ballot paper to ensure the referendum result was implemented. But his immigration policy was a joke and he deserves to be left out in the cold now
Absurd hyperbole. It is perfectly accepted policy in much of the world that non citizens do not have a right to state welfare and must leave if not meeting the employment criteria. It is not evil, it is fiscally sensible.
What democracies do not give permanent residents any rights to welfare?
We don't have a "permanent resident" category and never have.
We have an “indefinite leave to remain” category which is exactly the same thing.
ILR can already be revoked (eg if you no longer meet the criteria as a refugee and the ILR was granted on that basis).
Spreading love, peace, unity, restraint and reconciliation?
Just said that tomorrow they will announce a cure for autism!!!!!
If you ban it, it doesn't exist!
(Good luck with your pain: I've had arthritis for a couple of years now, and it's beginning to get tiresome. Luckily, I'm young enough to exercise, which helps. And I'm allowed codeine and voltarol.)
If anything, the Reform proposal doesn’t go anywhere near far enough
Our immigration policy should be harsh. It’s easier to cut some slack from a tough stance than it is to start to act tough when you’ve been feeble. We have had an open door policy for two decades and it’s resulted in us leaving the EU, and then riots on the streets. We have a human rights lawyer in No10, and even he is saying the Boris Wave was a piss take.
The open door policy to the EU worked well: people came and went. It was leaving the EU that led to the Boriswave.
Also... didn't you support Boris?
Please point to the coming and going.
Individuals came and went. Labour shortages were efficiently filled. Net immigration was positive, but it was nothing like the numbers seen post-Brexit.
The rise in the chart has not much to do with shortages and everything to do with a new country joining FoM. Are we to believe that the tortuous process of EU enlargement has timelines which magically coincide with the economic cycle causing a Labour shortage?
EU enlargement caused a blip in the numbers, sure. Which was still less than the post-Brexit Boriswave. The problem was never freedom of movement. The problem was electing populist right charlatans.
30k a year to 300k a year with EU enlargement is more than a blip, Boriswave aside.
(The Boriswave could have been avoided by simple quota. But Boris or his team were too lazy to monitor it or respond to monitoring results. Or wanted the high immigration.)
So, you agree the problem is with Boris and the people who voted him in.
If remainers have graduated from blaming Brexit for the Boriswave to blaming Boris, I'm happy to agree with them.
I'm happy with my decision to vote for Boris over Corbyn, nonetheless.
Boris gave us Brexit which gave us Boris who because of Brexit gave us the 'Australian style' points system which triggered the Boriswave.
"Reform has pledged to scrap indefinite leave to remain entirely, replacing it with a renewable five-year visa for those who meet certain criteria, designed to bring Britain into line with other countries such as the United Arab Emirates. Those who currently have settled status would be forced to reapply for the new visa." (£)
No one thinks the Boriswave was good but this happened because of Brexit because as the Tories chased immigration to bolster the economy they realized EU nationals after being told to get lost weren’t in the mood to jump through a load of hoops .
So in their desperation the Tories started handing out more sweeteners as in bringing large numbers of dependents over with those workers from outside of the EU .
EU nationals were younger, fitter and less likely to come with family . The Treasury figures showed they were a net benefit to the country . It was of course much easier and cheaper to pop back and visit family in Europe.
And the boats jumped hugely in the year that the Brexit transition period ended . The Dublin agreement admittedly didn’t work well but was a form of deterrent . After Brexit those coming by boats knew they couldn’t be sent back .
We of course also lost access to the finger print database and a host of other measures that would have helped combat the boats .
Spreading love, peace, unity, restraint and reconciliation?
Just said that tomorrow they will announce a cure for autism!!!!!
If you ban it, it doesn't exist!
(Good luck with your pain: I've had arthritis for a couple of years now, and it's beginning to get tiresome. Luckily, I'm young enough to exercise, which helps. And I'm allowed codeine and voltarol.)
Thank you but just need to grin and bear it
My physio suggested cortisone knee injections but when he was about to do it he realised he wan't insured as I am permanently on blood thinners and it needed to be a doctor
Saw the doctor who said it would need to be done in hospital but expressed concern at complications including bleeding, infection and sepsis so I decided best to leave it and keep on paracetamol [ I am not allowed Ibuprofen or similar]
However, after the last year's I am just grateful for each day
It seems that there are people who think that a migrant worker (plus their dependents) should be for life.
This country is fully entitled to say "thanks but no more and goodbye" at any time either after their 'contract' is up or if they prove unsatisfactory.
If you’re suggesting that the migrants have a “contract” with the state the Reform is, in the case of those with ILR, proposing to breach that contract.
Not with a Reform government they don't.
And I see no problem in them losing ILR if their behaviour is of a serious negative nature.
For example I suspect you would struggle to convince people that a murderer should not lose their ILR as an extreme example.
Alternatively people with ILR could be charged for being in this country - how much would depend on their individual circumstances.
We agree criminals should lose ILR. But Reform are now proposing removing ILR from EVERYONE who has it. It’s their policy launched tonight. Explicitly.
“Our solution to this problem is to abolish ILR completely. That means no new awards and those who currently hold it will have it rescinded. We will replace it with a five-year renewable work visa, with a vastly higher qualifying salary, much reduced ability to bring dependents and a much higher required standard of English. Crucially, this visa will give holders no access to welfare."
So it’s about kicking out lawfully resident foreigners who’ve done nothing wrong.
And, as I noted earlier, it would mean stripping ILR from my wife and forcing her to take a work visa in the event that we move back to the UK.
Note that I have British citizenship, and my two children were born in the UK and have British citizenship.
Under your wife’s ILR conditions an extended absence from the UK might well bring it to an end anyway
"Reform has pledged to scrap indefinite leave to remain entirely, replacing it with a renewable five-year visa for those who meet certain criteria, designed to bring Britain into line with other countries such as the United Arab Emirates. Those who currently have settled status would be forced to reapply for the new visa." (£)
"Reform has pledged to scrap indefinite leave to remain entirely, replacing it with a renewable five-year visa for those who meet certain criteria, designed to bring Britain into line with other countries such as the United Arab Emirates. Those who currently have settled status would be forced to reapply for the new visa." (£)
You mean Reform are bigging up the UAE where migrants make up 88% of the population . I suppose Farages is hoping the easily duped will think of the UAE as rich and job done then .
"Reform has pledged to scrap indefinite leave to remain entirely, replacing it with a renewable five-year visa for those who meet certain criteria, designed to bring Britain into line with other countries such as the United Arab Emirates. Those who currently have settled status would be forced to reapply for the new visa." (£)
If anything, the Reform proposal doesn’t go anywhere near far enough
Our immigration policy should be harsh. It’s easier to cut some slack from a tough stance than it is to start to act tough when you’ve been feeble. We have had an open door policy for two decades and it’s resulted in us leaving the EU, and then riots on the streets. We have a human rights lawyer in No10, and even he is saying the Boris Wave was a piss take.
The open door policy to the EU worked well: people came and went. It was leaving the EU that led to the Boriswave.
Trump: [Kirk] did not hate his opponents. He wanted the best for them. That's where I disagreed with Charlie. I hate my opponent and I don't want the best for them. I'm sorry
If anything, the Reform proposal doesn’t go anywhere near far enough
Our immigration policy should be harsh. It’s easier to cut some slack from a tough stance than it is to start to act tough when you’ve been feeble. We have had an open door policy for two decades and it’s resulted in us leaving the EU, and then riots on the streets. We have a human rights lawyer in No10, and even he is saying the Boris Wave was a piss take.
The open door policy to the EU worked well: people came and went. It was leaving the EU that led to the Boriswave.
Trump: [Kirk] did not hate his opponents. He wanted the best for them. That's where I disagreed with Charlie. I hate my opponent and I don't want the best for them. I'm sorry
Trump: [Kirk] did not hate his opponents. He wanted the best for them. That's where I disagreed with Charlie. I hate my opponent and I don't want the best for them. I'm sorry
If anything, the Reform proposal doesn’t go anywhere near far enough
Our immigration policy should be harsh. It’s easier to cut some slack from a tough stance than it is to start to act tough when you’ve been feeble. We have had an open door policy for two decades and it’s resulted in us leaving the EU, and then riots on the streets. We have a human rights lawyer in No10, and even he is saying the Boris Wave was a piss take.
The open door policy to the EU worked well: people came and went. It was leaving the EU that led to the Boriswave.
"Reform has pledged to scrap indefinite leave to remain entirely, replacing it with a renewable five-year visa for those who meet certain criteria, designed to bring Britain into line with other countries such as the United Arab Emirates. Those who currently have settled status would be forced to reapply for the new visa." (£)
If it’s not just those with ILR but settled status that means’s they’re going after EU nationals aswell. That will breach the EU UK trade agreement . So they’re also intent on destroying our improved relationship with the EU.
Trump: [Kirk] did not hate his opponents. He wanted the best for them. That's where I disagreed with Charlie. I hate my opponent and I don't want the best for them. I'm sorry
"Reform has pledged to scrap indefinite leave to remain entirely, replacing it with a renewable five-year visa for those who meet certain criteria, designed to bring Britain into line with other countries such as the United Arab Emirates. Those who currently have settled status would be forced to reapply for the new visa." (£)
"Reform has pledged to scrap indefinite leave to remain entirely, replacing it with a renewable five-year visa for those who meet certain criteria, designed to bring Britain into line with other countries such as the United Arab Emirates. Those who currently have settled status would be forced to reapply for the new visa." (£)
Trump: [Kirk] did not hate his opponents. He wanted the best for them. That's where I disagreed with Charlie. I hate my opponent and I don't want the best for them. I'm sorry
Stay Classy.....dial down the temperature....they go low, we go....
Talking of classy have you seen Dr Evil lookalike Stephen Miller's tirade against the "domestic extremist organisation" known as the Democratic Party. Miller plans on rooting out "domestic terrorists" (i.e the Democratic Party).
Stride and Davey both affirm commitment to the triple lock
They are both wrong and how on earth are we to get out of this mess with politicians inability to do the right thing
The downside of democracy: governing in the national interest may result in electorally damaging actions.
Many opt to damage the national interest instead.
The triple lock is an interesting phenomenon - it's relatively new but is now allocated the same kind of national emulation as the NHS.
Removing it does not save the government much money in the short/medium term, nor does would affect current pensioners particularly badly. It's a long term fiscal issue that carries gigantic short-term political risk, so there is no chance of it removed by any party.
The triple lock is hated on social media as a sign politicians are in thrall to boomer pensioners who vote to impoverish workers and the young. My belief is this came originally from Russian trolls but we are where we are.
Depends which social media - on Facebook it would appear the Russian trolls have worked very hard to persuade boomers that getting rid of the triple lock would amount to geronticide, and therefore have undermined the UK's public finances.
Well, for a start, one clue is the use of the word boomers. We do not really use that term, and if we did, then our baby boom was later than the American one, so our boomers are not quite of pensionable age. It all smacks of some KGB analyst in Madeupgrad combining memes from the wrong side of the Atlantic rather than an organic, homegrown movement.
This says more about you than it does anyone else, since the baby boom was referred to when I was a child in school in the 90s (albeit in Australia) and has always been a term used for generations that anyone online in the UK speaking about generations uses.
I don't know any "Millenial" like myself that would be unfamiliar with the term Boomer, so it being used is not remotely "American".
People complaining about Americanisms when we've grown up connected online and having been conversing with Americans and Brits and others for decades is utterly preposterous.
Almost as preposterous as defending the completely ruinous and unaffordable Triple Lock.
Do keep up. Our baby boom was different from the American baby boom. That's the point.
I am not sure that it was very different. We had an immediate post war spike in births, then a slight lull, building to a second peak in 1964 also with a million births, then dropping off to a trough in 1975 of under 700 000 births.
Perhaps the phasing was slightly different in the USA, but it was a very real phenomenon here too.
That's Keir Starmer's generation. As you say, things are different in America but the online (suspected Russian-inspired) trolling relies on US demographics.
No, it does not.
Anyone born by 1964 is already in their sixties.
The boomers are retiring in the UK and they're doing so having not paid enough taxes to balance the state's expenditure in decades, let alone setting aside surpluses that can afford a Triple Lock.
Its utterly unaffordable and inexcusable.
Sorry but you continually argue that the 2023 budget was all that was required and no extra taxes were needed.
You can't have it both ways...
I have never once argued that the 2023 budget was all that was required, quite the opposite, I have consistently said it was a [small] step in the right direction in raising taxes to cut the deficit while lowering the excess taxation tax on work, which we should do more of.
I have said there should be comprehensive tax reform, with the abolition of National Insurance and the merging of it into Income Tax, as well as removing the brakes on the economy that our planning system has.
I've never once said nothing extra needed. That's a figment of your own imagination, just because I reject the notion that Hunt's changes to taxation were counterproductive when they weren't.
If anything, the Reform proposal doesn’t go anywhere near far enough
Our immigration policy should be harsh. It’s easier to cut some slack from a tough stance than it is to start to act tough when you’ve been feeble. We have had an open door policy for two decades and it’s resulted in us leaving the EU, and then riots on the streets. We have a human rights lawyer in No10, and even he is saying the Boris Wave was a piss take.
The open door policy to the EU worked well: people came and went. It was leaving the EU that led to the Boriswave.
Also... didn't you support Boris?
Please point to the coming and going.
It would have been even higher without the going?
Well yes, but non-EU citizens "go" too.
But not as much.
You never say whether you object to our new Boriswave immigrants, or whether you're just having fun using them as a stick to beat Tories with.
Stride and Davey both affirm commitment to the triple lock
They are both wrong and how on earth are we to get out of this mess with politicians inability to do the right thing
The downside of democracy: governing in the national interest may result in electorally damaging actions.
Many opt to damage the national interest instead.
The triple lock is an interesting phenomenon - it's relatively new but is now allocated the same kind of national emulation as the NHS.
Removing it does not save the government much money in the short/medium term, nor does would affect current pensioners particularly badly. It's a long term fiscal issue that carries gigantic short-term political risk, so there is no chance of it removed by any party.
The triple lock is hated on social media as a sign politicians are in thrall to boomer pensioners who vote to impoverish workers and the young. My belief is this came originally from Russian trolls but we are where we are.
Depends which social media - on Facebook it would appear the Russian trolls have worked very hard to persuade boomers that getting rid of the triple lock would amount to geronticide, and therefore have undermined the UK's public finances.
Well, for a start, one clue is the use of the word boomers. We do not really use that term, and if we did, then our baby boom was later than the American one, so our boomers are not quite of pensionable age. It all smacks of some KGB analyst in Madeupgrad combining memes from the wrong side of the Atlantic rather than an organic, homegrown movement.
This says more about you than it does anyone else, since the baby boom was referred to when I was a child in school in the 90s (albeit in Australia) and has always been a term used for generations that anyone online in the UK speaking about generations uses.
I don't know any "Millenial" like myself that would be unfamiliar with the term Boomer, so it being used is not remotely "American".
People complaining about Americanisms when we've grown up connected online and having been conversing with Americans and Brits and others for decades is utterly preposterous.
Almost as preposterous as defending the completely ruinous and unaffordable Triple Lock.
Do keep up. Our baby boom was different from the American baby boom. That's the point.
I am not sure that it was very different. We had an immediate post war spike in births, then a slight lull, building to a second peak in 1964 also with a million births, then dropping off to a trough in 1975 of under 700 000 births.
Perhaps the phasing was slightly different in the USA, but it was a very real phenomenon here too.
That's Keir Starmer's generation. As you say, things are different in America but the online (suspected Russian-inspired) trolling relies on US demographics.
No, it does not.
Anyone born by 1964 is already in their sixties.
The boomers are retiring in the UK and they're doing so having not paid enough taxes to balance the state's expenditure in decades, let alone setting aside surpluses that can afford a Triple Lock.
Its utterly unaffordable and inexcusable.
Sorry but you continually argue that the 2023 budget was all that was required and no extra taxes were needed.
You can't have it both ways...
I have never once argued that the 2023 budget was all that was required, quite the opposite, I have consistently said it was a [small] step in the right direction in raising taxes to cut the deficit while lowering the excess taxation tax on work, which we should do more of.
I have said there should be comprehensive tax reform, with the abolition of National Insurance and the merging of it into Income Tax, as well as removing the brakes on the economy that our planning system has.
I've never once said nothing extra needed. That's a figment of your own imagination, just because I reject the notion that Hunt's changes to taxation were counterproductive when they weren't.
You have and are wrong to do so, we need a more contributory welfare system using National Insurance rather than merging the latter into Income Tax
Stride and Davey both affirm commitment to the triple lock
They are both wrong and how on earth are we to get out of this mess with politicians inability to do the right thing
The downside of democracy: governing in the national interest may result in electorally damaging actions.
Many opt to damage the national interest instead.
The triple lock is an interesting phenomenon - it's relatively new but is now allocated the same kind of national emulation as the NHS.
Removing it does not save the government much money in the short/medium term, nor does would affect current pensioners particularly badly. It's a long term fiscal issue that carries gigantic short-term political risk, so there is no chance of it removed by any party.
The triple lock is hated on social media as a sign politicians are in thrall to boomer pensioners who vote to impoverish workers and the young. My belief is this came originally from Russian trolls but we are where we are.
Depends which social media - on Facebook it would appear the Russian trolls have worked very hard to persuade boomers that getting rid of the triple lock would amount to geronticide, and therefore have undermined the UK's public finances.
Well, for a start, one clue is the use of the word boomers. We do not really use that term, and if we did, then our baby boom was later than the American one, so our boomers are not quite of pensionable age. It all smacks of some KGB analyst in Madeupgrad combining memes from the wrong side of the Atlantic rather than an organic, homegrown movement.
This says more about you than it does anyone else, since the baby boom was referred to when I was a child in school in the 90s (albeit in Australia) and has always been a term used for generations that anyone online in the UK speaking about generations uses.
I don't know any "Millenial" like myself that would be unfamiliar with the term Boomer, so it being used is not remotely "American".
People complaining about Americanisms when we've grown up connected online and having been conversing with Americans and Brits and others for decades is utterly preposterous.
Almost as preposterous as defending the completely ruinous and unaffordable Triple Lock.
Do keep up. Our baby boom was different from the American baby boom. That's the point.
I am not sure that it was very different. We had an immediate post war spike in births, then a slight lull, building to a second peak in 1964 also with a million births, then dropping off to a trough in 1975 of under 700 000 births.
Perhaps the phasing was slightly different in the USA, but it was a very real phenomenon here too.
That's Keir Starmer's generation. As you say, things are different in America but the online (suspected Russian-inspired) trolling relies on US demographics.
No, it does not.
Anyone born by 1964 is already in their sixties.
The boomers are retiring in the UK and they're doing so having not paid enough taxes to balance the state's expenditure in decades, let alone setting aside surpluses that can afford a Triple Lock.
Its utterly unaffordable and inexcusable.
Sorry but you continually argue that the 2023 budget was all that was required and no extra taxes were needed.
You can't have it both ways...
I have never once argued that the 2023 budget was all that was required, quite the opposite, I have consistently said it was a [small] step in the right direction in raising taxes to cut the deficit while lowering the excess taxation tax on work, which we should do more of.
I have said there should be comprehensive tax reform, with the abolition of National Insurance and the merging of it into Income Tax, as well as removing the brakes on the economy that our planning system has.
I've never once said nothing extra needed. That's a figment of your own imagination, just because I reject the notion that Hunt's changes to taxation were counterproductive when they weren't.
You have and are wrong to do so, we need a more contributory welfare system using National Insurance rather than merging the latter into Income Tax
There's no reason why we can't have a contributory welfare system using Income Tax.
The relationship between Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer and US President Donald Trump is "getting a bit embarrassing", former Deputy Prime Minister Sir Nick Clegg has said. Speaking at an event at the Liberal Democrat conference, Sir Nick said the "endless knee-bending" was "slightly cringey" as he urged the prime minister to "speak up" for British values.
A project the European defence initiative should be funding. (And if not, our government should just tell RR to do it, and they'll buy the first 10k units off the production line.)
..Even more problematic, European industry does not have an indigenous mini turbofan to offer.
While European engine makers, including Safran, MTU, and Rolls-Royce, build or contribute to turbofan engines for aircraft, none have gone through the process of miniaturization.
Most Labour supporters won't accept any reform to welfare.
And this is ironic because while Keir Starmer is just over a year into entering Office with a huge majority, he is now too weak and totally lacks any authority within own his Cabinet and among his backbenchers to reform welfare let alone to set his own agenda if he ever had one on both domestic or foreign affairs. A few weeks ago I was watching the Skynews press review when Kevin Maguire was a guest during the Angela Raynor property scandal before she was forced to resign and he was asked what he thought Keir Starmer would do to handle the situation, I thought it very telling that this tribal Labour supporting journalist simple said that Keir Starmer will do what is best for Keir Starmer rather than his Labour government and the Labour party...
Stride and Davey both affirm commitment to the triple lock
They are both wrong and how on earth are we to get out of this mess with politicians inability to do the right thing
The downside of democracy: governing in the national interest may result in electorally damaging actions.
Many opt to damage the national interest instead.
The triple lock is an interesting phenomenon - it's relatively new but is now allocated the same kind of national emulation as the NHS.
Removing it does not save the government much money in the short/medium term, nor does would affect current pensioners particularly badly. It's a long term fiscal issue that carries gigantic short-term political risk, so there is no chance of it removed by any party.
The triple lock is hated on social media as a sign politicians are in thrall to boomer pensioners who vote to impoverish workers and the young. My belief is this came originally from Russian trolls but we are where we are.
Depends which social media - on Facebook it would appear the Russian trolls have worked very hard to persuade boomers that getting rid of the triple lock would amount to geronticide, and therefore have undermined the UK's public finances.
Well, for a start, one clue is the use of the word boomers. We do not really use that term, and if we did, then our baby boom was later than the American one, so our boomers are not quite of pensionable age. It all smacks of some KGB analyst in Madeupgrad combining memes from the wrong side of the Atlantic rather than an organic, homegrown movement.
This says more about you than it does anyone else, since the baby boom was referred to when I was a child in school in the 90s (albeit in Australia) and has always been a term used for generations that anyone online in the UK speaking about generations uses.
I don't know any "Millenial" like myself that would be unfamiliar with the term Boomer, so it being used is not remotely "American".
People complaining about Americanisms when we've grown up connected online and having been conversing with Americans and Brits and others for decades is utterly preposterous.
Almost as preposterous as defending the completely ruinous and unaffordable Triple Lock.
"Anyone online" being the important phrase. People don't use it much in the UK when talking normally, face to face.
Because we tend to have different conversations online to face-to-face, but if its relevant in a face-to-face conversation then it absolutely can be used.
However the issue is @DecrepiterJohnL was claiming that its not a term normally used in the UK on social media, yet its being used in the UK on social media, so inferring Russian influencing. Its a perfectly normal UK term when online, so that inference is false.
No, the point was that it was being used wrongly for this country, and that its American usage in anti-pensioner rants likely originated from Russian trolls.
Remarkably, on the other hand, this bombshell documentary seems to have been missed by all but the Guardian and the Mirror. One would have thought Chris Mason, Laura Kuennsberg, Allister Heath and Allison Pearson would be all over this. Instead, move along, nothing to see.
I suppose it happened such a long time ago and as Matt Hancock highlights, "we over-succeeded".
Having earlier considered bank rolling Reform, Musk’s public opinion of Farage has been that he is “weak sauce” and “doesn’t have what it takes”.
Perhaps the sustained poll leads have given Farage the comfort to say out loud his plans to achieve net emigration. Or perhaps he’s changed his mind and decided to get tougher. Either way, it does seem to have resolved the biggest problem Musk had with him policy-wise. Makes you wonder.
Having earlier considered bank rolling Reform, Musk’s public opinion of Farage has been that he is “weak sauce” and “doesn’t have what it takes”.
Perhaps the sustained poll leads have given Farage the comfort to say out loud his plans to achieve net emigration. Or perhaps he’s changed his mind and decided to get tougher. Either way, it does seem to have resolved the biggest problem Musk had with him policy-wise. Makes you wonder.
Are you implying that Farage might be a traitor that does the bidding of a foreign power who wants to bring down our legally-elected government?
If this site is representative of public opinion then we’re heading for dark times. That’s all.
Yet most of us would get on quite well if we met at a pub - and many have in the past. Indeed, there is probably much more that unites most of us than divides us - what we disagree on is often how to get to a certain aim.
This is the dark side of t'Internet: reasonable debate becomes very difficult.
Zarah Sultana has said she will call off legal action after a public row with Jeremy Corbyn over the fledgling party they were to co-lead.
The Coventry South MP acknowledged people felt “demoralised” after the quarrel over her push for members to sign up to Your Party, the political outfit she established with the former Labour leader.
Sultana, who had claimed she faced a “sexist boys’ club”, said she was “determined to reconcile” and was in talks with Corbyn.
If this site is representative of public opinion then we’re heading for dark times. That’s all.
It isn't, in so many ways.
Reading back over the thread I would strongly recommend that anyone with immigrant friends or family encourages them to get full British citizenship before the next election.
How are people supposed to put down roots and integrate if under constant threat of deportation?
If this site is representative of public opinion then we’re heading for dark times. That’s all.
It isn't, in so many ways.
Reading back over the tread I would strongly recommend that anyone with immigrant friends or family encourages them to get full British citizenship before the next election.
How are people supposed to put down roots and integrate if under constant threat of deportation?
The problem is that full British citizenship might not help. You don't have to go far from what's been said on here over the last couple of days to: "anyone who has come in over the last 20 years is deported."
Zarah Sultana has said she will call off legal action after a public row with Jeremy Corbyn over the fledgling party they were to co-lead.
The Coventry South MP acknowledged people felt “demoralised” after the quarrel over her push for members to sign up to Your Party, the political outfit she established with the former Labour leader.
Sultana, who had claimed she faced a “sexist boys’ club”, said she was “determined to reconcile” and was in talks with Corbyn.
I do wonder if her lawyers have looked at her complaint and told her that she doesn't stand a chance. That's the problem with immediately shouting about consulting the lawyers, and then caving...
Zarah Sultana has said she will call off legal action after a public row with Jeremy Corbyn over the fledgling party they were to co-lead.
The Coventry South MP acknowledged people felt “demoralised” after the quarrel over her push for members to sign up to Your Party, the political outfit she established with the former Labour leader.
Sultana, who had claimed she faced a “sexist boys’ club”, said she was “determined to reconcile” and was in talks with Corbyn.
I do wonder if her lawyers have looked at her complaint and told her that she doesn't stand a chance. That's the problem with immediately shouting about consulting the lawyers, and then caving...
She is very much a tweet first, think later kinda politician.
Remarkably, on the other hand, this bombshell documentary seems to have been missed by all but the Guardian and the Mirror. One would have thought Chris Mason, Laura Kuennsberg, Allister Heath and Allison Pearson would be all over this. Instead, move along, nothing to see.
I suppose it happened such a long time ago and as Matt Hancock highlights, "we over-succeeded".
You mean the ITV documentary last night that can be downstreamed from ITVx?
If this site is representative of public opinion then we’re heading for dark times. That’s all.
It isn't, in so many ways.
Reading back over the tread I would strongly recommend that anyone with immigrant friends or family encourages them to get full British citizenship before the next election.
How are people supposed to put down roots and integrate if under constant threat of deportation?
The problem is that full British citizenship might not help. You don't have to go far from what's been said on here over the last couple of days to: "anyone who has come in over the last 20 years is deported."
Yes, I know.
I shall point it out to some of my Indian colleagues who are pro-Reform.
I suppose they expect the Face Eating Leopards to eat them last.
Comments
So, there's that.
To be clear I really actually very much like the wanderlust updates.
It’s a weird toxic combo of sad fucko Tories desperately trying to paint Reform as Nazis and the usual terminal dull midwit accountant/academic/*never had an original idea* losers - @kinabalu, @bondegezou - desperately trying to maintain the erection of outrage
Pff
And I’m not sure what effect human rights lawyers will have sans the HRA and ECHR.
Also... didn't you support Boris?
Please point to the coming and going.
(The Boriswave could have been avoided by simple quota. But Boris or his team were too lazy to monitor it or respond to monitoring results. Or wanted the high immigration.)
I'm happy with my decision to vote for Boris over Corbyn, nonetheless.
Just shows that the pandemic of idiocy which seemed to have subsided for a while is now back on steroids.
There are over 50m immigrants in the USA, deportations so far appear to have been about 200k - not much higher than Biden managed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deportation_in_the_second_Trump_administration
https://www.nbcnews.com/data-graphics/us-immigration-tracker-follow-arrests-detentions-border-crossings-rcna189148
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2025/aug/29/trump-immigration-ice-cbp-data
Trump does seem to have been successful at massively reducing new illegal immigration though.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mcu03c2dZQI (44mins)
Pause
jeez, tough crowd...
It’s not permanent residency
(Good luck with your pain: I've had arthritis for a couple of years now, and it's beginning to get tiresome. Luckily, I'm young enough to exercise, which helps. And I'm allowed codeine and voltarol.)
Touch of scissors stone paper.
Finally I have tamed my drinks corner and have reduced it to one or two essential bottles. No more
https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/reform-nigel-farage-indefinite-leave-to-remain-migrant-xw2ddf20w
So in their desperation the Tories started handing out more sweeteners as in bringing large numbers of dependents over with those workers from outside of the EU .
EU nationals were younger, fitter and less likely to come with family . The Treasury figures showed they were a net benefit to the country . It was of course much easier and cheaper to pop back and visit family in Europe.
And the boats jumped hugely in the year that the Brexit transition period ended . The Dublin agreement admittedly didn’t work well but was a form of deterrent . After Brexit those coming by boats knew they couldn’t be sent back .
We of course also lost access to the finger print database and a host of other measures that would have helped combat the boats .
My physio suggested cortisone knee injections but when he was about to do it he realised he wan't insured as I am permanently on blood thinners and it needed to be a doctor
Saw the doctor who said it would need to be done in hospital but expressed concern at complications including bleeding, infection and sepsis so I decided best to leave it and keep on paracetamol [ I am not allowed Ibuprofen or similar]
However, after the last year's I am just grateful for each day
Acyn
@Acyn
Trump: [Kirk] did not hate his opponents. He wanted the best for them. That's where I disagreed with Charlie. I hate my opponent and I don't want the best for them. I'm sorry
https://x.com/Acyn/status/1969897421523357977
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump_and_religion
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-stephen-miller-outlaw-democratic-party-b2827609.html
I have said there should be comprehensive tax reform, with the abolition of National Insurance and the merging of it into Income Tax, as well as removing the brakes on the economy that our planning system has.
I've never once said nothing extra needed. That's a figment of your own imagination, just because I reject the notion that Hunt's changes to taxation were counterproductive when they weren't.
Stroh!
I had no idea they still made that stuff. It's like Austria wanted to mete out liquid punishment upon itself for giving us Hitler.
BBC on the Sultana/Grandpa rapprochement.
After the government abandoned plans to tighten eligibility for Pips, it set up a review of the payments by disability minister Sir Stephen Timms.
His report will not be ready for another year, but McFadden pushed back against the idea that reform had come to a halt until then.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ckg3jl0ylkyo
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1l881vnv2no
Mr Self Awareness....
https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/tory-plot-bring-down-starmer-no-10-chief-3930317
Morgan McSweeney, and the donations were not to the Labour Party itself but to a pressure group he used to run.
Shabana Mahmood is dragged into storm over the hidden £700k fortune for think-tank run by Keir Starmer's right-hand man
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15120611/Shabana-Mahmood-hidden-700k-think-tank-Keir-Starmer.html
Amazing turnout for the memorial service.
I suppose it happened such a long time ago and as Matt Hancock highlights, "we over-succeeded".
Perhaps the sustained poll leads have given Farage the comfort to say out loud his plans to achieve net emigration. Or perhaps he’s changed his mind and decided to get tougher. Either way, it does seem to have resolved the biggest problem Musk had with him policy-wise. Makes you wonder.
This is the dark side of t'Internet: reasonable debate becomes very difficult.
Zarah Sultana has said she will call off legal action after a public row with Jeremy Corbyn over the fledgling party they were to co-lead.
The Coventry South MP acknowledged people felt “demoralised” after the quarrel over her push for members to sign up to Your Party, the political outfit she established with the former Labour leader.
Sultana, who had claimed she faced a “sexist boys’ club”, said she was “determined to reconcile” and was in talks with Corbyn.
Reading back over the thread I would strongly recommend that anyone with immigrant friends or family encourages them to get full British citizenship before the next election.
How are people supposed to put down roots and integrate if under constant threat of deportation?
F1: Singapore's a way off but the forecast is full of thunder and rain.
The Covid Contracts: Follow the Money
This compelling documentary tells the untold story of how companies with little or no track record earned UK Government contracts and made a killing from Covid.
https://www.itv.com/watch/the-covid-contracts-follow-the-money/10a6572a0001B
I shall point it out to some of my Indian colleagues who are pro-Reform.
I suppose they expect the Face Eating Leopards to eat them last.