Kipper employing illegal immigrants is funny and allow people to call Kippers hypocrites but won't shift any votes.
He's likely to be an MEP next week though.
Did he do it purposely or by accident?
Doesn't matter. Employers are supposed to ensure their employees are in the country legally and allowed to work. Saying they didn't know is not an excuse.
Why do you keep coming out with statements of fact that happen to be just your opinion? It might matter to people that were considering voting for him, its a reasonable question to ask.
If someone assumed a worker was English and didnt ask to see his passport, in my book that is nowhere near as bad as deliberately employing an illegal immigrant.
pure and simple fact. It is a legal responsibility of an employer to confirm an employee has a right to be here and to work. It is not optional, it is obligatory.
Ukip’s small business spokesman has been accused of hypocrisy after his restaurant employed seven illegal immigrants last year.
Ukip has regularly attacked the government’s immigration policy for allowing “huge” numbers of foreign workers to come to the UK and failing to put “the British people first”.
I thought them picking a restaurant owner was a strange move under the circumstances.
It's businesses like restaurants, fast food chains, shops, petrol stations etc with large numbers of unskilled workers that are the prime area for employers importing illegal workers living twelve to a house in one of the employer's properties and sending the money home.
Kipper employing illegal immigrants is funny and allow people to call Kippers hypocrites but won't shift any votes.
He's likely to be an MEP next week though.
Did he do it purposely or by accident?
Doesn't matter. Employers are supposed to ensure their employees are in the country legally and allowed to work. Saying they didn't know is not an excuse.
Why do you keep coming out with statements of fact that happen to be just your opinion? It might matter to people that were considering voting for him, its a reasonable question to ask.
If someone assumed a worker was English and didnt ask to see his passport, in my book that is nowhere near as bad as deliberately employing an illegal immigrant.
It is not my opinion it is the law. As an employer it is something I am well aware of.
Kipper employing illegal immigrants is funny and allow people to call Kippers hypocrites but won't shift any votes.
He's likely to be an MEP next week though.
Did he do it purposely or by accident?
Doesn't matter. Employers are supposed to ensure their employees are in the country legally and allowed to work. Saying they didn't know is not an excuse.
What an old-fashioned attitude you have RT.
Don't you know in our exciting new economy that all middle class people are entitled to immigrant servants to wipe our arses and wash our cars ?
@saddened said: KIPPERS do appear to have reading comprehension issues. -------------------------------------- The only thing I cant quite comprehend is why you insist in being such a nasty tit.
Kipper employing illegal immigrants is funny and allow people to call Kippers hypocrites but won't shift any votes.
He's likely to be an MEP next week though.
Did he do it purposely or by accident?
Doesn't matter. Employers are supposed to ensure their employees are in the country legally and allowed to work. Saying they didn't know is not an excuse.
Why do you keep coming out with statements of fact that happen to be just your opinion? It might matter to people that were considering voting for him, its a reasonable question to ask.
If someone assumed a worker was English and didnt ask to see his passport, in my book that is nowhere near as bad as deliberately employing an illegal immigrant.
It is not my opinion it is the law. As an employer it is something I am well aware of.
I dont doubt you are right, but personally I would distinguish between intent and oversight. I havent read the story for all I know the UKIP guy was pulling a fast one
As we know, Mike has come up with some whizzo long-shots in the past (did he ever mention his 50/1 on Obama?), spotting opportunities well before anyone else.
Kipper employing illegal immigrants is funny and allow people to call Kippers hypocrites but won't shift any votes.
He's likely to be an MEP next week though.
Did he do it purposely or by accident?
Doesn't matter. Employers are supposed to ensure their employees are in the country legally and allowed to work. Saying they didn't know is not an excuse.
Why do you keep coming out with statements of fact that happen to be just your opinion? It might matter to people that were considering voting for him, its a reasonable question to ask.
If someone assumed a worker was English and didnt ask to see his passport, in my book that is nowhere near as bad as deliberately employing an illegal immigrant.
It's hardly morally bad, but if it's the law they have to make sure and not just assume, then that's that. It is more of a story if it was intentional though.
Kipper employing illegal immigrants is funny and allow people to call Kippers hypocrites but won't shift any votes.
He's likely to be an MEP next week though.
Did he do it purposely or by accident?
Doesn't matter. Employers are supposed to ensure their employees are in the country legally and allowed to work. Saying they didn't know is not an excuse.
Why do you keep coming out with statements of fact that happen to be just your opinion? It might matter to people that were considering voting for him, its a reasonable question to ask.
If someone assumed a worker was English and didnt ask to see his passport, in my book that is nowhere near as bad as deliberately employing an illegal immigrant.
It is not my opinion it is the law. As an employer it is something I am well aware of.
I dont doubt you are right, but personally I would distinguish between intent and oversight. I havent read the story for all I know the UKIP guy was pulling a fast one
The law specifically will not make that distinction.
The Ukip story is a good example of how actual reality is completely different from the political class' version i.e. the sheer number of people working illegally and the sheer number of houses they are living in and the collective effect on employment, housing shortage, tax and pretty much every government stat.
Kipper employing illegal immigrants is funny and allow people to call Kippers hypocrites but won't shift any votes.
He's likely to be an MEP next week though.
Did he do it purposely or by accident?
Doesn't matter. Employers are supposed to ensure their employees are in the country legally and allowed to work. Saying they didn't know is not an excuse.
Why do you keep coming out with statements of fact that happen to be just your opinion? It might matter to people that were considering voting for him, its a reasonable question to ask.
If someone assumed a worker was English and didnt ask to see his passport, in my book that is nowhere near as bad as deliberately employing an illegal immigrant.
It's hardly morally bad, but if it's the law they have to make sure and not just assume, then that's that. It is more of a story if it was intentional though.
@saddened said: KIPPERS do appear to have reading comprehension issues. -------------------------------------- The only thing I cant quite comprehend is why you insist in being such a nasty tit.
It gives him some meaning to his life.
my party good, your party bad, my party good, your party bad, my party good, your party bad, my party good, your party bad, my party good, your party bad etc etc etc
As we know, Mike has come up with some whizzo long-shots in the past (did he ever mention his 50/1 on Obama?), spotting opportunities well before anyone else.
This;ll be a deluge at exactly a week tonight - Ukip supporters claiming they were duped into voting for wrong party http://goo.gl/8Z2rfC
UKIP wilng term will play into the anti establishmnet meme that has built up as the other parties and media attack
If its the Conservative I could swallow it thanks to nabbing the 25/1 on Monday
Actually it will be confirmation that KIPPERS are too stupid to read a ballot paper.
Possibly
My parents are both voting UKIP for the first time, as am I, and I am certain one of us will vote for the wrong party.. stupid old kippers
Exactly, stupid old kippers. If people are too stupid to read a ballot paper, what does that say about their understanding of the relevant issues.
I think it would be quite an easy mistake to make, and wouldnt confuse that mistake with them being stupid at all. It would be a shame, especially as many people have very little interest in politics, arent nearly as concened as people on here, and may have been motivated to vote for UKIP having not voted for a long while.
I'm surprised people are allowed to create such deliberately confusing party names for elections, but while I will not be joyful if it costs UKIP votes on this occasion (Although I don't intend to vote for them myself, I would be very happy if UKIP were able to rise to a position of multiple MPs and be the fourth major force in British politics in the future), there are limits to how outraged I could be about it.
If out of apathetic confusion or any other reason besides stupidity (which people cannot help) people can not even pay enough attention to avoid voting for the wrong party by mistake, it is their own damn fault and I have little sympathy about it - if they have been motivated enough to vote for the first time in a long time, or first time ever, and they are not mentally incapable, then they have to take responsibility for taking the time to notice the shadyness of AIFE'd name and position on the ballot paper.
Yes I am clearly atypical in that I am interested in politics more than most, but we should not treat people like children because they are not that interested in politics generally, and while I don't think it's right AIFE can craft a name for the sole purpose of confusion, it is right and proper that if someone is taking the responsibility to cast their vote in an election, it is upon their shoulders to be discerning about it and on their head if they didn't look at the form closely enough.
'I wonder if any company or consortium could be found who would guarantee to build the line for a fixed price.' The tenders for all the different sections of work will be at a fixed price. The 14 billion contingencies are over and above the normal engineering and building contingencies which cover changes in design once work has started and unexpected problems for instance in the ground and old fashioned changes of mind by the client. These 14 billion contingencies are mainly for political events which may cause delays disruption and changes.
In other words, no, nobody will take on the project for a fixed price. Suppose we put it a bit wider, not just the build but the running of the railway. Would any company or consortium step up then? Surely there must be at least one, after all we keep getting told that this railway is needed and will make a profit for the taxpayer.
Dear me HL are you trying to be ironic ???
You'll be suggesting next that income > expenditure is a good thing.
Don't you know such concepts are inappropriate in matters concerning governments and their magic money tree.
Kipper employing illegal immigrants is funny and allow people to call Kippers hypocrites but won't shift any votes.
He's likely to be an MEP next week though.
Did he do it purposely or by accident?
Doesn't matter. Employers are supposed to ensure their employees are in the country legally and allowed to work. Saying they didn't know is not an excuse.
Why do you keep coming out with statements of fact that happen to be just your opinion? It might matter to people that were considering voting for him, its a reasonable question to ask.
If someone assumed a worker was English and didnt ask to see his passport, in my book that is nowhere near as bad as deliberately employing an illegal immigrant.
It's hardly morally bad, but if it's the law they have to make sure and not just assume, then that's that. It is more of a story if it was intentional though.
By failing to check it can only be intentional.
On that point I was being more general. In this instance the chances they were ignorant of the law seems very low indeed. In other situations it might be more probable that it could be ignorance of the law, though of course that would not get them off the hook.
"After ICM’s May Polling for The Guardian Found 3 million More UKIP voters Than in April – An Industry Methodology Rethink Is In Order.
I asked seasoned commentator Mike Smithson of Politicalbetting.com over Twitter if he still thought the unprompted Telephone polls such as Ipsos Mori (showing 3% UKIP national support just before in October 2012) had UKIP’s support level right.
Ben Page, Chief Executive of Ipsos Mori, the UK’s second largest market research firm – swiftly tweeted at me to indicate that he thought indeed they had, referencing the 2010 General Election result as evidence.
This;ll be a deluge at exactly a week tonight - Ukip supporters claiming they were duped into voting for wrong party http://goo.gl/8Z2rfC
y
Actually it will be confirmation that KIPPERS are too stupid to read a ballot paper.
Possibly
My parents are both voting UKIP for the first time, as am I, and I am certain one of us will vote for the wrong party.. stupid old kippers
Exactly, stupid old kippers. If people are too stupid to read a ballot paper, what does that say about their understanding of the relevant issues.
I think it would be quite an easy mistake to make, and wouldnt confuse that mistake with them being stupid at all. It would be a shame, especially as many people have very little interest in politics, arent nearly as concened as people on here, and may have been motivated to vote for UKIP having not voted for a long while.
I'm surprised people are allowed to create such deliberately confusing party names for elections, but while I will not be joyful if it costs UKIP votes on this occasion (Although I don't intend to vote for them myself, I would be very happy if UKIP were able to rise to a position of multiple MPs and be the fourth major force in British politics in the future), there are limits to how outraged I could be about it.
If out of apathetic confusion or any other reason besides stupidity (which people cannot help) people can not even pay enough attention to avoid voting for the wrong party by mistake, it is their own damn fault and I have little sympathy about it - if they have been motivated enough to vote for the first time in a long time, or first time ever, and they are not mentally incapable, then they have to take responsibility for taking the time to notice the shadyness of AIFE'd name and position on the ballot paper.
Yes I am clearly atypical in that I am interested in politics more than most, but we should not treat people like children because they are not that interested in politics generally, and while I don't think it's right AIFE can craft a name for the sole purpose of confusion, it is right and proper that if someone is taking the responsibility to cast their vote in an election, it is upon their shoulders to be discerning about it and on their head if they didn't look at the form closely enough.
I kind of agree, I didnt say any different. What will be will be
My only point really was I wouldnt celebrate too wildly if I were the party that won by default
isam I kind of agree, I didnt say any different. What will be will be
My only point really was I wouldnt celebrate too wildly if I were the party that won by default
On that I also agree. But then parties celebrate like demons when they win a by-election in their own heartland as though it were the biggest kick in the face of their opponents, a true signal of the country's intentions - party hacks will seize any moment to celebrate, never mind that certain factors should make them less so.
"After ICM’s May Polling for The Guardian Found 3 million More UKIP voters Than in April – An Industry Methodology Rethink Is In Order.
I asked seasoned commentator Mike Smithson of Politicalbetting.com over Twitter if he still thought the unprompted Telephone polls such as Ipsos Mori (showing 3% UKIP national support just before in October 2012) had UKIP’s support level right.
Ben Page, Chief Executive of Ipsos Mori, the UK’s second largest market research firm – swiftly tweeted at me to indicate that he thought indeed they had, referencing the 2010 General Election result as evidence.
They actually disagree about things enough to hold a debate? The EU is different than I thought.
It would be funny if none of them ended up getting the job, as as much as they hope to use this to democratize the EU (EU federalists, maybe it should have been a bit more democratic at the start, if that's where you wanted to end up, hmm), like it says in the article the powers that be don't have to choose one of them.
Funniest bit to me has to be:
The BBC's Simon Wilson, reporting from the European Parliament venue, says Mr Verhofstadt was "the most animated - even when not speaking", while Mr Schulz had a good position in the middle, which "helped him look presidential".
I honestly cannot tell from that alone whether it might possibly mean his political positions during it were in the middle, or if it is just as it seems, that his literal position in the middle helped him look presidential.
If the most noteworthy thing about the man is that he got the coverted centre spot, gods help him.
On Wednesday we ("we" being about 20 members of the Conservative Party in Croydon) went on a walkabout with Boris. I noticed that he walked fairly briskly past this person and didn't risk an awkward photobombclashfluff situation:
An incredibly stupid idiot openly flaunts his stupidity and stupidly admits to being so stupid that he (a) thinks that 15 equals "about 20", (b) didn't bother to read the ballot paper like all normal people always do, (c) doesn't understand the idea of alphabetical order and doesn't realise that U comes towards the end of the alphabet, yet stupidly wants to boast about his stupidity instead of hanging his head in shame and hiding in a cupboard for the next 47 years:
On Wednesday we ("we" being about 20 members of the Conservative Party in Croydon) went on a walkabout with Boris. I noticed that he walked fairly briskly past this person and didn't risk an awkward photobombclashfluff situation:
Farage predicting 1 or 2 UKIP seats in Scotland next week...
Private polling or hope. What are the odds of UKIP winning a Scottish seat ?
There was a poll a couple of weeks ago putting the Tories on 11% and UKIP on 10%, so certainly a good chance of one seat. Two seats is a bit far-fetched.
When Fukushima occured and Germany announced it was shutting down all it's nuclear I said to myself that their knee jerk reaction would end in tears, and so it seems it has.
Do you think the Tories have a good chance of keeping control of Croydon council next Thursday?
I'm not allowed to say or hint any clues or suggestions about what I think the result might be, because I've already observed (as of yesterday) the processing of some of the postal votes.
Very few people have read Das Kapital or Mein Kampf. I have never fully read either, getting bored about half way through each.
I have read Mein Kampf. It is incredibly boring, and rather badly written. For a lot of it, I actually read it out loud to myself, standing up, with the book supported as if on a podium. It occurred to me that the reason it's so badly written is that it wasn't "written" at all; it was spoken. Hitler ranted it as a stream of consciousness, as he often did later with his improvised speeches, and his words were written down by Rudolf Hess (presumably in shorthand originally) as a written text.
On Wednesday we ("we" being about 20 members of the Conservative Party in Croydon) went on a walkabout with Boris. I noticed that he walked fairly briskly past this person and didn't risk an awkward photobombclashfluff situation:
This clearly holds back the economy if you restricted in ability move goods and people.
As places such as Milton Keynes grows and the demand from places grows then problem worsens.
The track capacity issue is primarily caused by the mixing of freight, commuter and intercity with different acceleration and top speed characteristics, desperate away the intercity services from the WCML to HS2 and create a load of new capacity on the old network for commuter services and freight to more efficiently use the line and move the intercity into new tracks, as happens in much of the rest of the planet.
Oh, the expected total cost for London Manchester and Leeds via Birmingham actually £28bn with £14bn of contingency lets not get carried away the exaggeration.
This is from a couple of weeks back - there was masses of coverage in the European press, except for the British press that ignored it, presumably because "Our readers aren't interested in Euripe" (b) there aren't any Brits standing (c) Nobody was weird or took their clothes off.
I summarised the comments here at the time, but briefly:
- The ECR decided they weren't going to stand, though they refused to endorse the Christian Democrat. Similarly, Labour refused to endorse the Social Democrat, though both are expected to fall into line in the end. - The standard of debate was seen as impressive, not least as everyone debated in English, which wasn't the mother tongue of any of them. If was later dubbed into six languages for other viewers. - The Christian Democrat was seen as very much the status quo man, solid but grey. - The Socialist was idealistic, keen on the environment and confronting vested interests but vague in detail - The Liberal won the voodoo poll after the debate hands down - he was strongly pro-integration - The Green won praise even from the Fankfurter Allgemieine as young, sparkling and full of ideas. - The far-left Syriza candidate was criticised for failing to turn up at all.
Sorry, HYUFD - this was a new and final debate which I missed - my summary relates to the previous one. Haven't had time to watch it or scan the press yet.
Farage predicting 1 or 2 UKIP seats in Scotland next week...
Private polling or hope. What are the odds of UKIP winning a Scottish seat ?
The last polls have UKIP on 10% in Scotland, and 20% in Wales. Perhaps Mr Farage is suggesting that if their performance in Scotland matches their (predicted) performance in Wales, they will win two seats?
One scottish seat is certainly possible on current polling.
Farage predicting 1 or 2 UKIP seats in Scotland next week...
Private polling or hope. What are the odds of UKIP winning a Scottish seat ?
The last polls have UKIP on 10% in Scotland, and 20% in Wales. Perhaps Mr Farage is suggesting that if their performance in Scotland matches their (predicted) performance in Wales, they will win two seats?
One scottish seat is certainly possible on current polling.
Maybe based on one poll, but if you go by any previous real votes they get less than 1% so whether you believe one poll or all previous real votes is down to whether you are all there.
Comments
I thought them picking a restaurant owner was a strange move under the circumstances.
It's businesses like restaurants, fast food chains, shops, petrol stations etc with large numbers of unskilled workers that are the prime area for employers importing illegal workers living twelve to a house in one of the employer's properties and sending the money home.
http://www.wakefieldexpress.co.uk/news/local-news/update-men-from-dewsbury-and-heckmondwike-jailed-for-human-trafficking-1-6615353
It's the real reason for youth unemployment as it's the kind of jobs teenagers used to do.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10828055/Conservative-university-associations-need-to-shed-toffish-image.html
https://www.gov.uk/check-an-employees-right-to-work-documents
https://www.gov.uk/penalties-for-employing-illegal-workers
Ignorance is no defence.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1215198/Baroness-Scotland-facing-10-000-unknowingly-employing-illegal-immigrant-housekeeper.html
Text just received
"Fit blonde milf on quessie time"
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-27397579
Don't you know in our exciting new economy that all middle class people are entitled to immigrant servants to wipe our arses and wash our cars ?
KIPPERS do appear to have reading comprehension issues.
--------------------------------------
The only thing I cant quite comprehend is why you insist in being such a nasty tit.
•Jeb Bush (R) 47% {47%} [49%]
•Hillary Clinton (D) 41% {39%} [42%]
•Rand Paul (R) 46% {47%} [49%]
•Hillary Clinton (D) 40% {41%} [43%]
•Chris Christie (R) 44% {43%} [46%] (43%)
•Hillary Clinton (D) 41% {39%} [38%] (42%)
•Mike Huckabee (R) 43% {45%}
•Hillary Clinton (D) 42% {41%}
•Hillary Clinton (D) 44% {44%} [49%] (53%)
•Sarah Palin (R) 41% {43%} [40%] (37%)
http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2014/PPP_Release_AK_514.pdf
As we know, Mike has come up with some whizzo long-shots in the past (did he ever mention his 50/1 on Obama?), spotting opportunities well before anyone else.
There again, by way of balance:
http://www1.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2008/09/12/could-kitty-be-labours-sarah-palin/
Libs need a new strategy - obvious what it should be - would also need a new face to front it.
whether they will or not, no idea
The responsibility is 100% on the employer.
Those arrested were primarily waiters and bar staff and several were Pakistani and Indian nationals, according to one of the illegal workers.
my party good, your party bad, my party good, your party bad, my party good, your party bad, my party good, your party bad, my party good, your party bad etc etc etc
He's probably too scared to be a football fan.
Ermm... she's quite annoying actually...but still yes!
If out of apathetic confusion or any other reason besides stupidity (which people cannot help) people can not even pay enough attention to avoid voting for the wrong party by mistake, it is their own damn fault and I have little sympathy about it - if they have been motivated enough to vote for the first time in a long time, or first time ever, and they are not mentally incapable, then they have to take responsibility for taking the time to notice the shadyness of AIFE'd name and position on the ballot paper.
Yes I am clearly atypical in that I am interested in politics more than most, but we should not treat people like children because they are not that interested in politics generally, and while I don't think it's right AIFE can craft a name for the sole purpose of confusion, it is right and proper that if someone is taking the responsibility to cast their vote in an election, it is upon their shoulders to be discerning about it and on their head if they didn't look at the form closely enough.
You'll be suggesting next that income > expenditure is a good thing.
Don't you know such concepts are inappropriate in matters concerning governments and their magic money tree.
More seriously, RIP Bob Hoskins. I used to watch 'On the Move' as a kid.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Move_%28TV_series%29
My only point really was I wouldnt celebrate too wildly if I were the party that won by default
I kind of agree, I didnt say any different. What will be will be
My only point really was I wouldnt celebrate too wildly if I were the party that won by default
On that I also agree. But then parties celebrate like demons when they win a by-election in their own heartland as though it were the biggest kick in the face of their opponents, a true signal of the country's intentions - party hacks will seize any moment to celebrate, never mind that certain factors should make them less so.
Not to mention posting a year old link!
I blame too many cups of tea today
It would be funny if none of them ended up getting the job, as as much as they hope to use this to democratize the EU (EU federalists, maybe it should have been a bit more democratic at the start, if that's where you wanted to end up, hmm), like it says in the article the powers that be don't have to choose one of them.
Funniest bit to me has to be:
The BBC's Simon Wilson, reporting from the European Parliament venue, says Mr Verhofstadt was "the most animated - even when not speaking", while Mr Schulz had a good position in the middle, which "helped him look presidential".
I honestly cannot tell from that alone whether it might possibly mean his political positions during it were in the middle, or if it is just as it seems, that his literal position in the middle helped him look presidential.
If the most noteworthy thing about the man is that he got the coverted centre spot, gods help him.
https://d3j5vwomefv46c.cloudfront.net/photos/large/853021529.jpg?1400163072
http://www.bucksfreepress.co.uk/news/localnews/highwycombe/11212856.UKIP_supporter__duped__into_voting_for_rival_party/
So I'm back to watching one of my all time favorites - Alistair Cooke's America.
Farage "if you understand basic arithmetic..."
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2629390/Over-half-public-want-stay-EU-just-FOUR-cent-voters-say-definitely-Ukip-general-election.html
Night all.
Why does anyone pay the licence? I don't, never have, never will for this shit...
The Guardian has story of Catholic Ukipper criticising Islam...above story about Boko Haram!
theguardian.com/uk
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Parliament_election,_2014
I summarised the comments here at the time, but briefly:
- The ECR decided they weren't going to stand, though they refused to endorse the Christian Democrat. Similarly, Labour refused to endorse the Social Democrat, though both are expected to fall into line in the end.
- The standard of debate was seen as impressive, not least as everyone debated in English, which wasn't the mother tongue of any of them. If was later dubbed into six languages for other viewers.
- The Christian Democrat was seen as very much the status quo man, solid but grey.
- The Socialist was idealistic, keen on the environment and confronting vested interests but vague in detail
- The Liberal won the voodoo poll after the debate hands down - he was strongly pro-integration
- The Green won praise even from the Fankfurter Allgemieine as young, sparkling and full of ideas.
- The far-left Syriza candidate was criticised for failing to turn up at all.
One scottish seat is certainly possible on current polling.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Parliament_election,_2014_(United_Kingdom)#Scottish_polls