Anyone choosing to stay in Calais is dismissable Southam unless there is a reason they can't apply for asylum in France. What is so horrendous about France that they are seeking refuge from France to the UK?
'Speaking to ITV on Monday following his visit, Mr Corbyn called for a humane response to the migration in Calais.
He said: 'I'm not saying all 9,000 should come. Start with those that have a British connection and a British passport - that's an obvious one.
'And the Home Office can let up a bit and be reasonable in those cases.'
Mr Corbyn said he had been 'surprised' by how many people at the camp he had met who held British passports.
Why are they in the camp if they hold a British passport. Are they fake? Am I missing something here?
A humane response would be to (a) ask for ID/documentation (b) if they have none, to detain, photograph, fingerprint and interview them (c) put them in a secure facility - give them 7 days to claim asylum or admit they have no legal reason for entry (d) if they do claim asylum, to rigorously interview them and cross-check stories (d) if the stories don't add up (keep interviewing again and again for inconsistency) or they refuse to admit a country of origin make them subject to deportation within 30 days to a secure facility/ refugee camp in MENA (e) once they are there they can apply for further help and aid, where it is the only place it will be offered, or give up and go back home.
You mean actually apply international law and conventions to the way these people should be handled? What a shocking thought.
Why are they in the camp if they hold a British passport
Perhaps they like the vibrant, diverse community there.
Perhaps they are attracted by the prospect of free housing and much else. Or perhaps they just like appearing on the telly with Jezza Corbyn.
Or taking selfies with him on their personal I phones during this tour of a camp with appalling conditions. Etc etc etc. (See previous photos of Corbyn and "the refugees") . A commenter on another blog who is working here pointed out they have a better phone than he did.
Just wondering .....How do they keep an I phone contract or even pay as you go now given they have err nothing but he clothes they stand up in?
Anyone choosing to stay in Calais is dismissable Southam unless there is a reason they can't apply for asylum in France. What is so horrendous about France that they are seeking refuge from France to the UK?
Maybe the solution is for us to have ourselves designated as an 'unsafe' country. That would put the human rights lawyers in a spin
Unless I live and mix with a wholly atypical group of people (OK, I admit most are Tories), I sense a truly massive degree of opposition to the vast number of people attempting to enter the UK and other EU countries (which of course would over time give them the entitlement to enter the UK). The overwhelming belief is that a large majority of such individuals are purely and simply economic migrants, looking for a better life, paid for by EU taxpayers. I may be wrong but I sense that the LEAVE vote in the forthcoming referendum will be significantly increased by British voters' resentment resulting from this threat of unjustified levels of immigration and the resulting effect on their lives and on their country.
Anyone choosing to stay in Calais is dismissable Southam unless there is a reason they can't apply for asylum in France. What is so horrendous about France that they are seeking refuge from France to the UK?
Hardly a surprise that the SWP are trying to help get people out Tory-run "broken Britain" to the paradise that is Socialist France... Oh.
Good morning all. The Calais camp is one reason while I'm unpersuaded that Germany's migrants will stay put.
As many others have asked, why are they not settling down in France, getting jobs and learning the lingo? That's always the line that people use to placate those who worry about immigration. Why is Calais a UK issue?
It is a UK issue because they are in Calais seeking easy passage to the UK. And the French are not taking appropriate action to deal with this large bunch of migrants.
They should be doing exactly what @Casino_Royale just outlined - going into this camp and sorting out the genuine asylum seekers and kicking out the rest. But they aren't.
This inactivity is encouraging more to go to Calais. Meaning more people trying to gain access to the UK through the tunnel - or, as happened just a few days ago, being egged on by UK-based anarchist agitators, to try to board a ferry in order to force their way into the UK
it shows just how low thew standards of politics in this country has fallen to.
Nah.....its always been like this. Each election is 'the dirtiest to date'. Each campaign 'more vicious than the last'. Each Prime Minister 'the most shameful disgrace' to hold the office.
But, curiously enough, we're still here, in one of the most prosperous, safe large country in the world....
What 'bunchgate' tells me is that we have an opposition flailing to articulate an alternative on the issue that wouldn't see them haemorrhage votes while still ferociously virtue signalling.
There's merit in that, it's to Cameron's credit it's all they have to beat him up with, the use of swarm and bunch. My point is the tories are even worse, they spend hours laughing at Miliband eating a sandwich.
See what I mean? No faux outrage from Nigel and Paul, pure piss take, you do get that don't you?
Faux outrage?
You mentioned Tories spending hours 'laughing at Miliband eating a sandwich'. There's a photo of Kippers doing the same, mocking Milliband. What's the difference?
Good morning all. The Calais camp is one reason while I'm unpersuaded that Germany's migrants will stay put.
As many others have asked, why are they not settling down in France, getting jobs and learning the lingo? That's always the line that people use to placate those who worry about immigration. Why is Calais a UK issue?
Calais is part of the U.K. if it wasn't for those dastardly French. It was said of Calais it is the brightest jewel in the English crown.
Let's be honest, would you want to live somewhere full of French people. I sympathise with those wanting to move the UK as every English person should.
it shows just how low thew standards of politics in this country has fallen to.
Nah.....its always been like this. Each election is 'the dirtiest to date'. Each campaign 'more vicious than the last'. Each Prime Minister 'the most shameful disgrace' to hold the office.
But, curiously enough, we're still here, in one of the most prosperous, safe large country in the world....
What 'bunchgate' tells me is that we have an opposition flailing to articulate an alternative on the issue that wouldn't see them haemorrhage votes while still ferociously virtue signalling.
There's merit in that, it's to Cameron's credit it's all they have to beat him up with, the use of swarm and bunch. My point is the tories are even worse, they spend hours laughing at Miliband eating a sandwich.
So a review that hasn't started yet might consider something. Wow that is scary.
I am fed up with this petty posturing on both sides of the EU debate. The reality is very different to how both sides are portraying it - and the game playing is making the necessary discussions almost impossible to have.
A Tory MP faces pressure to quit the board of the Vote Leave campaign after he led a failed coup against its leaders.
In the latest bout of in-fighting in the drive to get Britain out of the European Union, MP Bernard Jenkin moved against campaign director Dominic Cummings and chief executive Matthew Elliott at a board meeting on Tuesday.
I have not heard it, but calling a large group of people with very different stories a "bunch of migrants" does sound pretty dismissive to me. It potentially conveys contempt for individuals living in atrocious conditions whose motivations are often complex and whose experiences are sometimes truly tragic. It sounds like Cameron was using the phrase to have a dig at Corbyn. That only works if these people are thought of as dismissible.
I am not surprised many on the left have expressed dismay and anger at the words and how they were used. I think they are absolutely genuine in doing so. This looks to me to be a case of very different world views. We are all sensitive to different things.
SO
As I say, this is a case of very different world views. I totally get the point you are making. But I totally get why people on the left are upset by what Cameron said.
But they aren't genuinely upset - this is a classic example of faux outrage in order to distract attention from their own failings.
And by continuing to peddle this particular line, they are only making themselves look more and more out of touch
I disagree - I think a lot of people are genuinely upset. But I also agree that this probably makes them out of touch with majority opinion.
My wife said she bought a bunch of bananas yesterday. I had to upbraid her for her callousness and remind her it was a "group" of bananas. Totally different...
Apart from the usual suspects who spend their time looking for things they can get offended by on behalf of unsuspecting others, this is a storm in a teaspoon.
What to do about large numbers of migrants wanting to settle in Europe and Britain in particular is not an easy question. But for the vast majority, if the question is do we WANT many tens of thousand of people to come here, well, like it or not, that IS an easy question. No thanks.
I have not heard it, but calling a large group of people with very different stories a "bunch of migrants" does sound pretty dismissive to me. It potentially conveys contempt for individuals living in atrocious conditions whose motivations are often complex and whose experiences are sometimes truly tragic. It sounds like Cameron was using the phrase to have a dig at Corbyn. That only works if these people are thought of as dismissible.
I am not surprised many on the left have expressed dismay and anger at the words and how they were used. I think they are absolutely genuine in doing so. This looks to me to be a case of very different world views. We are all sensitive to different things.
SO
As I say, this is a case of very different world views. I totally get the point you are making. But I totally get why people on the left are upset by what Cameron said.
But they aren't genuinely upset - this is a classic example of faux outrage in order to distract attention from their own failings.
And by continuing to peddle this particular line, they are only making themselves look more and more out of touch
I disagree - I think a lot of people are genuinely upset. But I also agree that this probably makes them out of touch with majority opinion.
My wife said she bought a bunch of bananas yesterday. I had to upbraid her for her callousness and remind her it was a "group" of bananas. Totally different...
Apart from the usual suspects who spend their time looking for things they can get offended by on behalf of unsuspecting others, this is a storm in a teaspoon.
What to do about large numbers of migrants wanting to settle in Europe and Britain in particular is not an easy question. But for the vast majority, if the question is do we WANT many tens of thousand of people to come here, well, like it or not, that IS an easy question. No thanks.
@RobMifune: Labour complaints this week: 1. Doors painted red 20 yrs ago 2. Wristband = free food 3. Google paying £130m more tax than before 4. "Bunch"
@RobMifune: Labour complaints this week: 1. Doors painted red 20 yrs ago 2. Wristband = free food 3. Google paying £130m more tax than before 4. "Bunch"
Don't forget people with British passports stranded in Calais
Out of curiosity, how many who claimed they'd home a migrant actually did? Only in their other home if at all?
Yvette and her mou face springs to mind.
Apparently the fragrant Yvette was most put out yesterday and very distressed ( think that little wrinkled worried face look she always has) by Dave's use of the horrific word "bunch" to describe these law breakers. No doubt she will immediately offer her home(s) as a safe haven to some of these families as a suitable response ......
Oh? she offered that before though didn't she so maybe not then and it's just more leftie hypocrisy?
I disagree - I think a lot of people are genuinely upset. But I also agree that this probably makes them out of touch with majority opinion. '
Agree there are lots of people desperately waiting to find something to be outraged about, don't know how Twitter would survive without them.
I almost feel sorry for such people. Almost.
If they are so sensitive as to get upset by words like "bunch" then they are going to spend their whole lives being either distressed, outraged or upset, or all three.
It's a wonder they can function as independent adults at all.
I have not heard it, but calling a large group of people with very different stories a "bunch of migrants" does sound pretty dismissive to me. It potentially conveys contempt for individuals living in atrocious conditions whose motivations are often complex and whose experiences are sometimes truly tragic. It sounds like Cameron was using the phrase to have a dig at Corbyn. That only works if these people are thought of as dismissible.
I am not surprised many on the left have expressed dismay and anger at the words and how they were used. I think they are absolutely genuine in doing so. This looks to me to be a case of very different world views. We are all sensitive to different things.
SO
As I say, this is a case of very different world views. I totally get the point you are making. But I totally get why people on the left are upset by what Cameron said.
But they aren't genuinely upset - this is a classic example of faux outrage in order to distract attention from their own failings.
And by continuing to peddle this particular line, they are only making themselves look more and more out of touch
I disagree - I think a lot of people are genuinely upset. But I also agree that this probably makes them out of touch with majority opinion.
My wife said she bought a bunch of bananas yesterday. I had to upbraid her for her callousness and remind her it was a "group" of bananas. Totally different...
Apart from the usual suspects who spend their time looking for things they can get offended by on behalf of unsuspecting others, this is a storm in a teaspoon.
What to do about large numbers of migrants wanting to settle in Europe and Britain in particular is not an easy question. But for the vast majority, if the question is do we WANT many tens of thousand of people to come here, well, like it or not, that IS an easy question. No thanks.
I'm afraid you wife is correct - bunch is the collective noun for bananas, grapes and other fruit that grow together. Yours, Mr Pedantic. :-)
The OED allows 'bunch' to be applied to a group of people, but says it is informal use.
I disagree - I think a lot of people are genuinely upset. But I also agree that this probably makes them out of touch with majority opinion. '
Agree there are lots of people desperately waiting to find something to be outraged about, don't know how Twitter would survive without them.
I almost feel sorry for such people. Almost.
If they are so sensitive as to get upset by words like "bunch" then they are going to spend their whole lives being either distressed, outraged or upset, or all three.
It's a wonder they can function as independent adults at all.
Well I hope you never get upset about something I say then.
Out of curiosity, how many who claimed they'd home a migrant actually did? Only in their other home if at all?
Yvette and her mou face springs to mind.
Apparently the fragrant Yvette was most put out yesterday and very distressed ( think that little wrinkled worried face look she always has) by Dave's use of the horrific word "bunch" to describe these law breakers. No doubt she will immediately offer her home(s) as a safe haven to some of these families as a suitable response ......
Oh? she offered that before though didn't she so maybe not then and it's just more leftie hypocrisy?
I don't think this "would you have them in your own home" argument is a good one, from either side.
It's not hypocritical to be fine with the state doing something (knowing that one is paying for it through one's taxes) while not wanting to provide the same service personally.
I have not heard it, but calling a large group of people with very different stories a "bunch of migrants" does sound pretty dismissive to me. It potentially conveys contempt for individuals living in atrocious conditions whose motivations are often complex and whose experiences are sometimes truly tragic. It sounds like Cameron was using the phrase to have a dig at Corbyn. That only works if these people are thought of as dismissible.
I am not surprised many on the left have expressed dismay and anger at the words and how they were used. I think they are absolutely genuine in doing so. This looks to me to be a case of very different world views. We are all sensitive to different things.
SO
As I say, this is a case of very different world views. I totally get the point you are making. But I totally get why people on the left are upset by what Cameron said.
But they aren't genuinely upset - this is a classic example of faux outrage in order to distract attention from their own failings.
And by continuing to peddle this particular line, they are only making themselves look more and more out of touch
I disagree - I think a lot of people are genuinely upset. But I also agree that this probably makes them out of touch with majority opinion.
My wife said she bought a bunch of bananas yesterday. I had to upbraid her for her callousness and remind her it was a "group" of bananas. Totally different...
Apart from the usual suspects who spend their time looking for things they can get offended by on behalf of unsuspecting others, this is a storm in a teaspoon.
What to do about large numbers of migrants wanting to settle in Europe and Britain in particular is not an easy question. But for the vast majority, if the question is do we WANT many tens of thousand of people to come here, well, like it or not, that IS an easy question. No thanks.
I'm afraid you wife is correct - bunch is the collective noun for bananas, grapes and other fruit that grow together. Yours, Mr Pedantic. :-)
The OED allows 'bunch' to be applied to a group of people, but says it is informal use.
The serious point to be made being that even though Jezza is in whatever category is below worse than useless, Dave can't afford to relax at PMQs, or anywhere else. He was chatting away "informally" but needs to apply himself all the time even when facing the shower that Lab has become.
I don't know Blanchflowers predictions but was his mass unemployment claim based on what Osborne said he was going to do (eliminate the deficit in a single parliament) or what he actually did ( follow Labour's spending plans)?
His prediction of five million unemployed was based on what Osborne said he was going to do, which was in fact quite close to what he did do. The slower reduction in deficit came largely as a result of the negative impact of the Euro-crisis on the UK economy.
Osborne most certainly did not follow Labour's spending plans and was opposed at each and every turn by Miliband and Balls. While Darling had a nominal objective of halving the deficit by the end of the parliament (which is what I presume you refer to), he never laid out plans to get there, and nor did his successors.
In any case, even if there was a deviation between what Osborne said he'd do and what he actually did, it doesn't go anywhere near far enough to explain the discrepancy between on the one hand Blanchflower's predictions of unemployment much worse than the 1980s, and on the other, the reality of the highest employment of all time.
As you say - he could not follow labours spending plans because they did not have any. They did not have a spending review before the election. Osborne did not promise to eliminate the deficit in a parliament, he promised to eliminate the structural deficit. That still might leave elements of the cyclical deficit. As the OOB figures pointed out at the time, the structural deficit turned out to be bigger than supposed.
Genuine question, pre-2010 general election can you point me to where Osborne says structural deficit rather than just deficit because a cursory Google search only points me towards deficit.
Out of curiosity, how many who claimed they'd home a migrant actually did? Only in their other home if at all?
Yvette and her mou face springs to mind.
Apparently the fragrant Yvette was most put out yesterday and very distressed ( think that little wrinkled worried face look she always has) by Dave's use of the horrific word "bunch" to describe these law breakers. No doubt she will immediately offer her home(s) as a safe haven to some of these families as a suitable response ......
Oh? she offered that before though didn't she so maybe not then and it's just more leftie hypocrisy?
I don't think this "would you have them in your own home" argument is a good one, from either side.
It's not hypocritical to be fine with the state doing something (knowing that one is paying for it through one's taxes) while not wanting to provide the same service personally.
I believe the point about Cooper is that she did make an offer to provide a home for one of these migrants. But it would appear that she never did make good on that.
I have not heard it, but calling a large group of people with very different stories a "bunch of migrants" does sound pretty dismissive to me. It potentially conveys contempt for individuals living in atrocious conditions whose motivations are often complex and whose experiences are sometimes truly tragic. It sounds like Cameron was using the phrase to have a dig at Corbyn. That only works if these people are thought of as dismissible.
I am not surprised many on the left have expressed dismay and anger at the words and how they were used. I think they are absolutely genuine in doing so. This looks to me to be a case of very different world views. We are all sensitive to different things.
SO
As I say, this is a case of very different world views. I totally get the point you are making. But I totally get why people on the left are upset by what Cameron said.
But they aren't genuinely upset - this is a classic example of faux outrage in order to distract attention from their own failings.
And by continuing to peddle this particular line, they are only making themselves look more and more out of touch
I disagree - I think a lot of people are genuinely upset. But I also agree that this probably makes them out of touch with majority opinion.
My wife said she bought a bunch of bananas yesterday. I had to upbraid her for her callousness and remind her it was a "group" of bananas. Totally different...
Apart from the usual suspects who spend their time looking for things they can get offended by on behalf of unsuspecting others, this is a storm in a teaspoon.
What to do about large numbers of migrants wanting to settle in Europe and Britain in particular is not an easy question. But for the vast majority, if the question is do we WANT many tens of thousand of people to come here, well, like it or not, that IS an easy question. No thanks.
I'm afraid you wife is correct - bunch is the collective noun for bananas, grapes and other fruit that grow together. Yours, Mr Pedantic. :-)
The OED allows 'bunch' to be applied to a group of people, but says it is informal use.
The serious point to be made being that even though Jezza is in whatever category is below worse than useless, Dave can't afford to relax at PMQs, or anywhere else. He was chatting away "informally" but needs to apply himself all the time even when facing the shower that Lab has become.
I think he was applying himself and knew what he was doing and will be happy with the results.
Woman goes running into a police station shouting 'I've been graped, I've been graped' Policeman says 'don't you mean raped madam?' 'No' she says, 'there was a bunch of them'
Kevin Saunders #bbcdp 80,000 kids need a home in UK already. Obviously no brownie points available for lefties to worry about these. https://t.co/dmNZz3vtI5
On topic, I think it is a measure of economic optimism that GDP figures released today have been met with a collective "meh" from everyone. There is not a lot of optimism, but at the same time there isn't a lot of pessimism outside of the AEP column's on the Telegraph website.
I have not heard it, but calling a large group of people with very different stories a "bunch of migrants" does sound pretty dismissive to me. It potentially conveys contempt for individuals living in atrocious conditions whose motivations are often complex and whose experiences are sometimes truly tragic. It sounds like Cameron was using the phrase to have a dig at Corbyn. That only works if these people are thought of as dismissible.
I am not surprised many on the left have expressed dismay and anger at the words and how they were used. I think they are absolutely genuine in doing so. This looks to me to be a case of very different world views. We are all sensitive to different things.
SO
As I say, this is a case of very different world views. I totally get the point you are making. But I totally get why people on the left are upset by what Cameron said.
But they aren't genuinely upset - this is a classic example of faux outrage in order to distract attention from their own failings.
And by continuing to peddle this particular line, they are only making themselves look more and more out of touch
I disagree - I think a lot of people are genuinely upset. But I also agree that this probably makes them out of touch with majority opinion.
My wife said she bought a bunch of bananas yesterday. I had to upbraid her for her callousness and remind her it was a "group" of bananas. Totally different...
Apart from the unot, that IS an easy question. No thanks.
I'm afraid you wife is correct - bunch is the collective noun for bananas, grapes and other fruit that grow together. Yours, Mr Pedantic. :-)
The OED allows 'bunch' to be applied to a group of people, but says it is informal use.
The serious point to be made being that even though Jezza is in whatever category is below worse than useless, Dave can't afford to relax at PMQs, or anywhere else. He was chatting away "informally" but needs to apply himself all the time even when facing the shower that Lab has become.
I think he was applying himself and knew what he was doing and will be happy with the results.
Perhaps.
I would be vaguely disappointed if it was felt necessary to engage in dog-whistling if that is what it was.
Efficient, good politics, but I would be vaguely disappointed.
But then I am on the left of the far right of the Party.
Kevin Saunders #bbcdp 80,000 kids need a home in UK already. Obviously no brownie points available for lefties to worry about these. https://t.co/dmNZz3vtI5
'Give us your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses...'cos we can't stand the ones we have here'
Good morning all. The Calais camp is one reason while I'm unpersuaded that Germany's migrants will stay put.
As many others have asked, why are they not settling down in France, getting jobs and learning the lingo? That's always the line that people use to placate those who worry about immigration. Why is Calais a UK issue?
The numbers in the camp at Calais are about 6000 I believe. Hardly huge numbers dissatisfied with France. How many Germans migrate to the UK? Precious few. Rightly or wrongly Germany invited these people to Germany - because they need them. There are jobs in Germany. We have many Poles because we did not make use of transitional arrangements.
Eight years is the time it takes to become a naturalised German citizen.
Good morning all. The Calais camp is one reason while I'm unpersuaded that Germany's migrants will stay put.
As many others have asked, why are they not settling down in France, getting jobs and learning the lingo? That's always the line that people use to placate those who worry about immigration. Why is Calais a UK issue?
The numbers in the camp at Calais are about 6000 I believe. Hardly huge numbers dissatisfied with France. How many Germans migrate to the UK? Precious few. Rightly or wrongly Germany invited these people to Germany - because they need them. There are jobs in Germany. We have many Poles because we did not make use of transitional arrangements.
Eight years is the time it takes to become a naturalised German citizen.
There are no more than 6000 at Calais because the conditions are awful. If the gates were opened, there'd be a lot more coming.
The point about Germany is silly. If there are jobs there - and there are - then why not invite the millions of unemployed across Greece, Spain and the rest of the struggling Eurozone countries?
Out of curiosity, how many who claimed they'd home a migrant actually did? Only in their other home if at all?
Yvette and her mou face springs to mind.
Apparently the fragrant Yvette was most put out yesterday and very distressed ( think that little wrinkled worried face look she always has) by Dave's use of the horrific word "bunch" to describe these law breakers. No doubt she will immediately offer her home(s) as a safe haven to some of these families as a suitable response ......
Oh? she offered that before though didn't she so maybe not then and it's just more leftie hypocrisy?
I don't think this "would you have them in your own home" argument is a good one, from either side.
It's not hypocritical to be fine with the state doing something (knowing that one is paying for it through one's taxes) while not wanting to provide the same service personally.
I believe the point about Cooper is that she did make an offer to provide a home for one of these migrants. But it would appear that she never did make good on that.
That is why her posturing is so hypocritical.
Right. That's what I meant by "from either side". It was a silly offer of hers because it's nothing to do with the price of anything and (by personalising it like that) probably alienated some people who might have taken her side.
Even if she had done it and managed to get an "Yvette has taken in a migrant but Dave (who lives in a thousand-room palace) hasn't" story running, it's still bad for her side to couch the issue in those terms.
One sometimes sees the argument from the right, though, that people are hypocrites if they want to let migrants into their country but not their house. That's not a good argument imo (there are plenty of better ones).
As I say, this is a case of very different world views. I totally get the point you are making. But I totally get why people on the left are upset by what Cameron said.
But they aren't genuinely upset - this is a classic example of faux outrage in order to distract attention from their own failings.
And by continuing to peddle this particular line, they are only making themselves look more and more out of touch
I disagree - I think a lot of people are genuinely upset. But I also agree that this probably makes them out of touch with majority opinion.
My wife said she bought a bunch of bananas yesterday. I had to upbraid her for her callousness and remind her it was a "group" of bananas. Totally different...
Apart from the usual suspects who spend their time looking for things they can get offended by on behalf of unsuspecting others, this is a storm in a teaspoon.
What to do about large numbers of migrants wanting to settle in Europe and Britain in particular is not an easy question. But for the vast majority, if the question is do we WANT many tens of thousand of people to come here, well, like it or not, that IS an easy question. No thanks.
I'm afraid you wife is correct - bunch is the collective noun for bananas, grapes and other fruit that grow together. Yours, Mr Pedantic. :-)
The OED allows 'bunch' to be applied to a group of people, but says it is informal use.
Point stands that the faux outrage on this is ridiculous...
Good morning all. The Calais camp is one reason while I'm unpersuaded that Germany's migrants will stay put.
As many others have asked, why are they not settling down in France, getting jobs and learning the lingo? That's always the line that people use to placate those who worry about immigration. Why is Calais a UK issue?
The numbers in the camp at Calais are about 6000 I believe. Hardly huge numbers dissatisfied with France. How many Germans migrate to the UK? Precious few. Rightly or wrongly Germany invited these people to Germany - because they need them. There are jobs in Germany. We have many Poles because we did not make use of transitional arrangements.
Eight years is the time it takes to become a naturalised German citizen.
There are no more than 6000 at Calais because the conditions are awful. If the gates were opened, there'd be a lot more coming.
The point about Germany is silly. If there are jobs there - and there are - then why not invite the millions of unemployed across Greece, Spain and the rest of the struggling Eurozone countries?
I must admit, if I was an unemployed Spaniard, I'd be heading to Berlin. Very low living expenses, and an incredibly buoyant jobs market. You can rent an apartment (a whole apartment) for as little as 600 Euros a month.
Kevin Saunders #bbcdp 80,000 kids need a home in UK already. Obviously no brownie points available for lefties to worry about these. https://t.co/dmNZz3vtI5
'Give us your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses...'cos we can't stand the ones we have here'
'Apparently the fragrant Yvette was most put out yesterday and very distressed ( think that little wrinkled worried face look she always has) by Dave's use of the horrific word "bunch" to describe these law breakers. No doubt she will immediately offer her home(s) as a safe haven to some of these families as a suitable response ......
Oh? she offered that before though didn't she so maybe not then and it's just more leftie hypocrisy? '
Has she told us yet when her 'spare house' was given to asylum seekers ?
She wouldn't have been making empty gestures during her recent bid for the Labour leadership ?
Surprised that Twitter hasn't been swamped by people demanding an answer.
Out of curiosity, how many who claimed they'd home a migrant actually did? Only in their other home if at all?
Yvette and her mou face springs to mind.
Apparently the fragrant Yvette was most put out yesterday and very distressed ( think that little wrinkled worried face look she always has) by Dave's use of the horrific word "bunch" to describe these law breakers. No doubt she will immediately offer her home(s) as a safe haven to some of these families as a suitable response ......
Oh? she offered that before though didn't she so maybe not then and it's just more leftie hypocrisy?
I don't think this "would you have them in your own home" argument is a good one, from either side.
It's not hypocritical to be fine with the state doing something (knowing that one is paying for it through one's taxes) while not wanting to provide the same service personally.
There are a number of my centre-left friends whose online activity does not reflect what they'd say over a beer to me on a 1:1 privately.
I have not heard it, but calling a large group of people with very different stories a "bunch of migrants" does sound pretty dismissive to me. It potentially conveys contempt for individuals living in atrocious conditions whose motivations are often complex and whose experiences are sometimes truly tragic. It sounds like Cameron was using the phrase to have a dig at Corbyn. That only works if these people are thought of as dismissible.
I am not surprised many on the left have expressed dismay and anger at the words and how they were used. I think they are absolutely genuine in doing so. This looks to me to be a case of very different world views. We are all sensitive to different things.
SO
As I say, this is a case of very different world views. I totally get the point you are making. But I totally get why people on the left are upset by what Cameron said.
But they aren't genuinely upset - this is a classic example of faux outrage in order to distract attention from their own failings.
And by continuing to peddle this particular line, they are only making themselves look more and more out of touch
I disagree - I think a lot of people are genuinely upset. But I also agree that this probably makes them out of touch with majority opinion.
My wife said she bought a bunch of bananas yesterday. I had to upbraid her for her callousness and remind her it was a "group" of bananas. Totally different...
Apart from the usual suspects who spend their time looking for things they can get offended by on behalf of unsuspecting others, this is a storm in a teaspoon.
What to do about large numbers of migrants wanting to settle in Europe and Britain in particular is not an easy question. But for the vast majority, if the question is do we WANT many tens of thousand of people to come here, well, like it or not, that IS an easy question. No thanks.
I'm afraid you wife is correct - bunch is the collective noun for bananas, grapes and other fruit that grow together. Yours, Mr Pedantic. :-)
The OED allows 'bunch' to be applied to a group of people, but says it is informal use.
But we know from that Canadian "academic" that the OED is a deeply misogynistic institution which uses language to crush women. So it is probably deeply racist as well. We can't trust the OED
@RobMifune: Labour complaints this week: 1. Doors painted red 20 yrs ago 2. Wristband = free food 3. Google paying £130m more tax than before 4. "Bunch"
Don't forget people with British passports stranded in Calais
In fairness, people with British passports are stranded in Calais on a fairly regular basis. Normally when the ferry workers/farmers/other disgruntled French folk are on strike (again). Or perhaps when "migrants" and their supporters have stormed the tunnel/a ferry/blocked the roads.
On a more serious note, A French acquaintance who has relatives in Calais was saying what a nightmare situation it is becoming for the regular inhabitants. The roads around are regularly blocked, so it can become a bit siege-like. It can feel quite scary at times with some of the migrant activity, not to mention the behaviour of many of those who claim to support them. (I'm talking here about some of the hard left/anarchist groups rather than the more genuine "charity types"). And because the number of day-trippers has fallen off so steeply, local businesses are struggling to survive.
Out of curiosity, how many who claimed they'd home a migrant actually did? Only in their other home if at all?
Yvette and her mou face springs to mind.
Apparently the fragrant Yvette was most put out yesterday and very distressed ( think that little wrinkled worried face look she always has) by Dave's use of the horrific word "bunch" to describe these law breakers. No doubt she will immediately offer her home(s) as a safe haven to some of these families as a suitable response ......
Oh? she offered that before though didn't she so maybe not then and it's just more leftie hypocrisy?
I don't think this "would you have them in your own home" argument is a good one, from either side.
It's not hypocritical to be fine with the state doing something (knowing that one is paying for it through one's taxes) while not wanting to provide the same service personally.
There are a number of my centre-left friends whose online activity does not reflect what they'd say over a beer to me on a 1:1 privately.
You have just described 98% of all internet interactions.
'Apparently the fragrant Yvette was most put out yesterday and very distressed ( think that little wrinkled worried face look she always has) by Dave's use of the horrific word "bunch" to describe these law breakers. No doubt she will immediately offer her home(s) as a safe haven to some of these families as a suitable response ......
Oh? she offered that before though didn't she so maybe not then and it's just more leftie hypocrisy? '
Has she told us yet when her 'spare house' was given to asylum seekers ?
She wouldn't have been making empty gestures during her recent bid for the Labour leadership ?
Surprised that Twitter hasn't been swamped by people demanding an answer.
Look who else offered to take a refugee.
'Sturgeon told the Murnaghan programme on Sky News that she would be “absolutely happy” to take a refugee from Syria.'
Lots of (commendable, gullible, fill in as you please) bleeding heart types who offered housing for migrants were told it would be unsuitable. Few people have an entire house going spare and it simply isn't policy right now to put people up in a spare room. So not sure the accusations of hypocrisy are accurate, though I have no doubt some of the more public "I'd take a migrant in" pronouncements were purely posturing by folk who knew it would never come to that.
Cameron should come out as a Pastafarian at the next PMQs. Just for the lolz:
Pastafarians believe heaven is a beer volcano with a stripper factory, while hell is the same but the beer is stale and the strippers have sexually transmitted diseases.
But they aren't genuinely upset - this is a classic example of faux outrage in order to distract attention from their own failings.
And by continuing to peddle this particular line, they are only making themselves look more and more out of touch
I disagree - I think a lot of people are genuinely upset. But I also agree that this probably makes them out of touch with majority opinion.
My wife said she bought a bunch of bananas yesterday. I had to upbraid her for her callousness and remind her it was a "group" of bananas. Totally different...
Apart from the unot, that IS an easy question. No thanks.
I'm afraid you wife is correct - bunch is the collective noun for bananas, grapes and other fruit that grow together. Yours, Mr Pedantic. :-)
The OED allows 'bunch' to be applied to a group of people, but says it is informal use.
The serious point to be made being that even though Jezza is in whatever category is below worse than useless, Dave can't afford to relax at PMQs, or anywhere else. He was chatting away "informally" but needs to apply himself all the time even when facing the shower that Lab has become.
I think he was applying himself and knew what he was doing and will be happy with the results.
Perhaps.
I would be vaguely disappointed if it was felt necessary to engage in dog-whistling if that is what it was.
Efficient, good politics, but I would be vaguely disappointed.
But then I am on the left of the far right of the Party.
Is it a dog-whistle? Wouldn't that mean that right-wingers were intended to pick up the signal and no-one else? I think, rather, that Dave intended to wind up the left and enlist their help in pushing his Labour-are-on-the-side-of-not-you message.
Which party are you on the left of the far-right of btw? Very intriguing self-description.
Out of curiosity, how many who claimed they'd home a migrant actually did? Only in their other home if at all?
Yvette and her mou face springs to mind.
Apparently the fragrant Yvette was most put out yesterday and very distressed ( think that little wrinkled worried face look she always has) by Dave's use of the horrific word "bunch" to describe these law breakers. No doubt she will immediately offer her home(s) as a safe haven to some of these families as a suitable response ......
Oh? she offered that before though didn't she so maybe not then and it's just more leftie hypocrisy?
I don't think this "would you have them in your own home" argument is a good one, from either side.
It's not hypocritical to be fine with the state doing something (knowing that one is paying for it through one's taxes) while not wanting to provide the same service personally.
There are a number of my centre-left friends whose online activity does not reflect what they'd say over a beer to me on a 1:1 privately.
That's another matter. One should be true to one's beer-drinking self.
Kevin Saunders #bbcdp 80,000 kids need a home in UK already. Obviously no brownie points available for lefties to worry about these. https://t.co/dmNZz3vtI5
'Give us your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses...'cos we can't stand the ones we have here'
Lots of (commendable, gullible, fill in as you please) bleeding heart types who offered housing for migrants were told it would be unsuitable. Few people have an entire house going spare and it simply isn't policy right now to put people up in a spare room. So not sure the accusations of hypocrisy are accurate, though I have no doubt some of the more public "I'd take a migrant in" pronouncements were purely posturing by folk who knew it would never come to that.
Well the Cooper-Balls family are not short of property - they have a lovely portfolio funded by the state. They could have moved into just one of their homes and let the others to people in genuine need.
And, of course, they could have collected the rent for that - meaning even more public money going into the Cooper-Balls accounts.
But they aren't genuinely upset - this is a classic example of faux outrage in order to distract attention from their own failings.
And by continuing to peddle this particular line, they are only making themselves look more and more out of touch
I disagree - I think a lot of people are genuinely upset. But I also agree that this probably makes them out of touch with majority opinion.
My wife said she bought a bunch of bananas yesterday. I had to upbraid her for her callousness and remind her it was a "group" of bananas. Totally different...
Apart from the unot, that IS an easy question. No thanks.
I'm afraid you wife is correct - bunch is the collective noun for bananas, grapes and other fruit that grow together. Yours, Mr Pedantic. :-)
The OED allows 'bunch' to be applied to a group of people, but says it is informal use.
The serious point to be made being that even though Jezza is in whatever category is below worse than useless, Dave can't afford to relax at PMQs, or anywhere else. He was chatting away "informally" but needs to apply himself all the time even when facing the shower that Lab has become.
I think he was applying himself and knew what he was doing and will be happy with the results.
Perhaps.
I would be vaguely disappointed if it was felt necessary to engage in dog-whistling if that is what it was.
Efficient, good politics, but I would be vaguely disappointed.
But then I am on the left of the far right of the Party.
Is it a dog-whistle? Wouldn't that mean that right-wingers were intended to pick up the signal and no-one else? I think, rather, that Dave intended to wind up the left and enlist their help in pushing his Labour-are-on-the-side-of-not-you message.
Which party are you on the left of the far-right of btw? Very intriguing self-description.
Sorry yes - my misuse of dog-whistle. It did indeed (and might have been intended to, hence my disappointment) wind up the left inviting them to jump with both feet into the wrong side of the argument.
From my comments shall you knoweth my party.. Or let's put it like this: I am a caring enough Conservative supporter to recognise the tragedy that has befallen Labour.
Out of curiosity, how many who claimed they'd home a migrant actually did? Only in their other home if at all?
Yvette and her mou face springs to mind.
Apparently the fragrant Yvette was most put out yesterday and very distressed ( think that little wrinkled worried face look she always has) by Dave's use of the horrific word "bunch" to describe these law breakers. No doubt she will immediately offer her home(s) as a safe haven to some of these families as a suitable response ......
Oh? she offered that before though didn't she so maybe not then and it's just more leftie hypocrisy?
I don't think this "would you have them in your own home" argument is a good one, from either side.
It's not hypocritical to be fine with the state doing something (knowing that one is paying for it through one's taxes) while not wanting to provide the same service personally.
There are a number of my centre-left friends whose online activity does not reflect what they'd say over a beer to me on a 1:1 privately.
That's another matter. One should be true to one's beer-drinking self.
Well, it's an issue for as long as the Government thinks twitterstorms and Facebook reshares are representative of public opinion.
Kevin Saunders #bbcdp 80,000 kids need a home in UK already. Obviously no brownie points available for lefties to worry about these. https://t.co/dmNZz3vtI5
'Give us your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses...'cos we can't stand the ones we have here'
Good morning all. The Calais camp is one reason while I'm unpersuaded that Germany's migrants will stay put.
As many others have asked, why are they not settling down in France, getting jobs and learning the lingo? That's always the line that people use to placate those who worry about immigration. Why is Calais a UK issue?
The numbers in the camp at Calais are about 6000 I believe. Hardly huge numbers dissatisfied with France. How many Germans migrate to the UK? Precious few. Rightly or wrongly Germany invited these people to Germany - because they need them. There are jobs in Germany. We have many Poles because we did not make use of transitional arrangements.
Eight years is the time it takes to become a naturalised German citizen.
There are no more than 6000 at Calais because the conditions are awful. If the gates were opened, there'd be a lot more coming.
The point about Germany is silly. If there are jobs there - and there are - then why not invite the millions of unemployed across Greece, Spain and the rest of the struggling Eurozone countries?
Yes, this idea that Germany is importing a workforce is ridiculous. There are enough eastern Europeans and southern Europeans who could go to Germany. It was never about importing labour, it was a stupid decision by Merkel to try and repent for Germany's Nazi history and make them look like they have moved on from it.
Kevin Saunders #bbcdp 80,000 kids need a home in UK already. Obviously no brownie points available for lefties to worry about these. https://t.co/dmNZz3vtI5
'Give us your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses...'cos we can't stand the ones we have here'
Kevin Saunders #bbcdp 80,000 kids need a home in UK already. Obviously no brownie points available for lefties to worry about these. https://t.co/dmNZz3vtI5
'Give us your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses...'cos we can't stand the ones we have here'
But we know from that Canadian "academic" that the OED is a deeply misogynistic institution which uses language to crush women. So it is probably deeply racist as well. We can't trust the OED
Obviously, we can't burn the whole of the OED. A fire that big could easily get out of hand. But perhaps the Left could organise a symbolic offering up of words that cause offence, to be thrown into a fiery cleanser....
Alternatively, they could spend the time thinking up some policies that connect with voters.
Kevin Saunders #bbcdp 80,000 kids need a home in UK already. Obviously no brownie points available for lefties to worry about these. https://t.co/dmNZz3vtI5
'Give us your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses...'cos we can't stand the ones we have here'
Kevin Saunders #bbcdp 80,000 kids need a home in UK already. Obviously no brownie points available for lefties to worry about these. https://t.co/dmNZz3vtI5
'Give us your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses...'cos we can't stand the ones we have here'
'Apparently the fragrant Yvette was most put out yesterday and very distressed ( think that little wrinkled worried face look she always has) by Dave's use of the horrific word "bunch" to describe these law breakers. No doubt she will immediately offer her home(s) as a safe haven to some of these families as a suitable response ......
Oh? she offered that before though didn't she so maybe not then and it's just more leftie hypocrisy? '
Has she told us yet when her 'spare house' was given to asylum seekers ?
She wouldn't have been making empty gestures during her recent bid for the Labour leadership ?
Surprised that Twitter hasn't been swamped by people demanding an answer.
Look who else offered to take a refugee.
'Sturgeon told the Murnaghan programme on Sky News that she would be “absolutely happy” to take a refugee from Syria.'
Perhaps one of the Nat Bunch can fill us in as to whether she held good on her offer.
Cooper never made such an offer - check out her weasely answer her:
"“If that’s what it took and that’s what was needed, then of course, I think lots of people would be. But I think what I’ve been calling for is for each city and each county to support 10 refugee families. I think we can do that, I think we’ve got a lot of people across the country coming forward now and saying: ‘Do you know what, we want to help’.”
Kevin Saunders #bbcdp 80,000 kids need a home in UK already. Obviously no brownie points available for lefties to worry about these. https://t.co/dmNZz3vtI5
'Give us your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses...'cos we can't stand the ones we have here'
Keen-o-waaah. It's a grain from Latin America which is some new "superfood". It's all the rage in Islington and Camden.
I expect you know that there is now an argument that westerners should not eat it as our appetite for it has (allegedly) made it too expensive for the people whose stable it used to be.
However I'm sure that one can obtain ethical quinoa if one tries. And one does try, does one not?
Kevin Saunders #bbcdp 80,000 kids need a home in UK already. Obviously no brownie points available for lefties to worry about these. https://t.co/dmNZz3vtI5
'Give us your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses...'cos we can't stand the ones we have here'
Kevin Saunders #bbcdp 80,000 kids need a home in UK already. Obviously no brownie points available for lefties to worry about these. https://t.co/dmNZz3vtI5
'Give us your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses...'cos we can't stand the ones we have here'
Kevin Saunders #bbcdp 80,000 kids need a home in UK already. Obviously no brownie points available for lefties to worry about these. https://t.co/dmNZz3vtI5
'Give us your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses...'cos we can't stand the ones we have here'
Out of curiosity, how many who claimed they'd home a migrant actually did? Only in their other home if at all?
Yvette and her mou face springs to mind.
Apparently the fragrant Yvette was most put out yesterday and very distressed ( think that little wrinkled worried face look she always has) by Dave's use of the horrific word "bunch" to describe these law breakers. No doubt she will immediately offer her home(s) as a safe haven to some of these families as a suitable response ......
Oh? she offered that before though didn't she so maybe not then and it's just more leftie hypocrisy?
I don't think this "would you have them in your own home" argument is a good one, from either side.
It's not hypocritical to be fine with the state doing something (knowing that one is paying for it through one's taxes) while not wanting to provide the same service personally.
There are a number of my centre-left friends whose online activity does not reflect what they'd say over a beer to me on a 1:1 privately.
That's another matter. One should be true to one's beer-drinking self.
Well, it's an issue for as long as the Government thinks twitterstorms and Facebook reshares are representative of public opinion.
Do you think the Government does think that? (Or am I reading too much into your comment?)
Lots of (commendable, gullible, fill in as you please) bleeding heart types who offered housing for migrants were told it would be unsuitable. Few people have an entire house going spare and it simply isn't policy right now to put people up in a spare room. So not sure the accusations of hypocrisy are accurate, though I have no doubt some of the more public "I'd take a migrant in" pronouncements were purely posturing by folk who knew it would never come to that.
There's inverse hypocrisy too - people who say "Oi, prominent leftie X hasn't taken in a migrant, so nobody needs to do anything".
In general, most people feel uncomfortable in making a public issue of helping someone anyway. Years ago as an MP I offered to put up a woman and two kids while they sorted themselves out after they'd suffered domestic violence. It wouldn't have occurred to me at the time to talk about it to anyone else, but I think most of us would rally round for a bit in a crunch if we could.
Kevin Saunders #bbcdp 80,000 kids need a home in UK already. Obviously no brownie points available for lefties to worry about these. https://t.co/dmNZz3vtI5
'Give us your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses...'cos we can't stand the ones we have here'
Comments
You have triggered me.
Just wondering .....How do they keep an I phone contract or even pay as you go now given they have err nothing but he clothes they stand up in?
Maybe the solution is for us to have ourselves designated as an 'unsafe' country. That would put the human rights lawyers in a spin
The overwhelming belief is that a large majority of such individuals are purely and simply economic migrants, looking for a better life, paid for by EU taxpayers.
I may be wrong but I sense that the LEAVE vote in the forthcoming referendum will be significantly increased by British voters' resentment resulting from this threat of unjustified levels of immigration and the resulting effect on their lives and on their country.
Oh.
They should be doing exactly what @Casino_Royale just outlined - going into this camp and sorting out the genuine asylum seekers and kicking out the rest. But they aren't.
This inactivity is encouraging more to go to Calais. Meaning more people trying to gain access to the UK through the tunnel - or, as happened just a few days ago, being egged on by UK-based anarchist agitators, to try to board a ferry in order to force their way into the UK
You mentioned Tories spending hours 'laughing at Miliband eating a sandwich'. There's a photo of Kippers doing the same, mocking Milliband. What's the difference?
http://lordashcroftpolls.com/2016/01/brexit-a-view-from-new-europe
Let's be honest, would you want to live somewhere full of French people. I sympathise with those wanting to move the UK as every English person should.
Brits tend to support re-introduction of national service – https://t.co/A1Kd1p6HLU https://t.co/aJFPuQaLk0
http://youtu.be/G0ZZJXw4MTA
I am fed up with this petty posturing on both sides of the EU debate. The reality is very different to how both sides are portraying it - and the game playing is making the necessary discussions almost impossible to have.
In the latest bout of in-fighting in the drive to get Britain out of the European Union, MP Bernard Jenkin moved against campaign director Dominic Cummings and chief executive Matthew Elliott at a board meeting on Tuesday.
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/tory-bernard-jenkin-under-pressure-to-quit-vote-leave-campaign-after-coup-plot-a3167196.html
Apart from the usual suspects who spend their time looking for things they can get offended by on behalf of unsuspecting others, this is a storm in a teaspoon.
What to do about large numbers of migrants wanting to settle in Europe and Britain in particular is not an easy question. But for the vast majority, if the question is do we WANT many tens of thousand of people to come here, well, like it or not, that IS an easy question. No thanks.
Yvette and her mou face springs to mind.
"@gene70: @FireFlyFury @megynkelly @realDonaldTrump And this is the bimbo that's asking presidential questions? https://t.co/oU1uUGnuWb"
1. Doors painted red 20 yrs ago
2. Wristband = free food
3. Google paying £130m more tax than before
4. "Bunch"
I disagree - I think a lot of people are genuinely upset. But I also agree that this probably makes them out of touch with majority opinion. '
Agree there are lots of people desperately waiting to find something to be outraged about, don't know how Twitter would survive without them.
Oh? she offered that before though didn't she so maybe not then and it's just more leftie hypocrisy?
Sample sizes for Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina are enourmous by US standards.
If they are so sensitive as to get upset by words like "bunch" then they are going to spend their whole lives being either distressed, outraged or upset, or all three.
It's a wonder they can function as independent adults at all.
The OED allows 'bunch' to be applied to a group of people, but says it is informal use.
I fancy a bunch of grapes.
Real Donald Trump
Wow, two candidates called last night and said they want to go to my event tonight at Drake University.
It's not hypocritical to be fine with the state doing something (knowing that one is paying for it through one's taxes) while not wanting to provide the same service personally.
http://metro.co.uk/2016/01/28/the-netherlands-has-recognised-the-church-of-the-flying-spaghetti-monster-as-a-religion-5649017/
You are being derogatory to grapes (some of which might be black).
I demand you are banned from this site.
That is why her posturing is so hypocritical.
Back to open borders and appalling post-war social housing.
Stephen Daisley
.@kdugdalemsp says 287,000 work days lost in the Scottish NHS due to stress last year. An increase of 21% on two years ago. #fmqs
Kevin Saunders
#bbcdp 80,000 kids need a home in UK already. Obviously no brownie points available for lefties to worry about these. https://t.co/dmNZz3vtI5
I would be vaguely disappointed if it was felt necessary to engage in dog-whistling if that is what it was.
Efficient, good politics, but I would be vaguely disappointed.
But then I am on the left of the far right of the Party.
#bbcdp 80,000 kids need a home in UK already. Obviously no brownie points available for lefties to worry about these. https://t.co/dmNZz3vtI5
'Give us your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses...'cos we can't stand the ones we have here'
How many Germans migrate to the UK? Precious few. Rightly or wrongly Germany invited these people to Germany - because they need them. There are jobs in Germany. We have many Poles because we did not make use of transitional arrangements.
Eight years is the time it takes to become a naturalised German citizen.
Calling the family a "bunch" was clearly derogatory and would have put me off them.
The point about Germany is silly. If there are jobs there - and there are - then why not invite the millions of unemployed across Greece, Spain and the rest of the struggling Eurozone countries?
Even if she had done it and managed to get an "Yvette has taken in a migrant but Dave (who lives in a thousand-room palace) hasn't" story running, it's still bad for her side to couch the issue in those terms.
One sometimes sees the argument from the right, though, that people are hypocrites if they want to let migrants into their country but not their house. That's not a good argument imo (there are plenty of better ones).
'Apparently the fragrant Yvette was most put out yesterday and very distressed ( think that little wrinkled worried face look she always has) by Dave's use of the horrific word "bunch" to describe these law breakers. No doubt she will immediately offer her home(s) as a safe haven to some of these families as a suitable response ......
Oh? she offered that before though didn't she so maybe not then and it's just more leftie hypocrisy? '
Has she told us yet when her 'spare house' was given to asylum seekers ?
She wouldn't have been making empty gestures during her recent bid for the Labour leadership ?
Surprised that Twitter hasn't been swamped by people demanding an answer.
On a more serious note, A French acquaintance who has relatives in Calais was saying what a nightmare situation it is becoming for the regular inhabitants. The roads around are regularly blocked, so it can become a bit siege-like. It can feel quite scary at times with some of the migrant activity, not to mention the behaviour of many of those who claim to support them. (I'm talking here about some of the hard left/anarchist groups rather than the more genuine "charity types"). And because the number of day-trippers has fallen off so steeply, local businesses are struggling to survive.
'Sturgeon told the Murnaghan programme on Sky News that she would be “absolutely happy” to take a refugee from Syria.'
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/sep/06/nicola-sturgeon-and-yvette-cooper-offer-to-house-syrian-refugees
Perhaps one of the Nat Bunch can fill us in as to whether she held good on her offer.
Pastafarians believe heaven is a beer volcano with a stripper factory, while hell is the same but the beer is stale and the strippers have sexually transmitted diseases.
Read more: http://metro.co.uk/2016/01/28/the-netherlands-has-recognised-the-church-of-the-flying-spaghetti-monster-as-a-religion-5649017/#ixzz3yXbNhHCt"
Which party are you on the left of the far-right of btw? Very intriguing self-description.
And, of course, they could have collected the rent for that - meaning even more public money going into the Cooper-Balls accounts.
My opinion (and betting) was that Sadiq was very likely to win. I think Zac's campaign is beginning to look competent though.
From my comments shall you knoweth my party.. Or let's put it like this: I am a caring enough Conservative supporter to recognise the tragedy that has befallen Labour.
And you don't want to eat it to find out - just stick to cous-cous
Alternatively, they could spend the time thinking up some policies that connect with voters.
"“If that’s what it took and that’s what was needed, then of course, I think lots of people would be. But I think what I’ve been calling for is for each city and each county to support 10 refugee families. I think we can do that, I think we’ve got a lot of people across the country coming forward now and saying: ‘Do you know what, we want to help’.”
Greg Hands
Why is it only you in hi-vis jacket & helmet? Do they think you're accident prone? https://t.co/5hgRU4Vgyd
However I'm sure that one can obtain ethical quinoa if one tries. And one does try, does one not?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-35429630
No evidence of abuse at the Kids Company? Really?
I hope they are continuing to investigate the other criminal activities associated with that bunch of charlatans
Blow #4 for Corbyn - Labour less clear and united than any time since 1991 - see @ipsosMORI in @eveningstandard https://t.co/jUqO6g6zM9
Kinn-wah is the Spanish version of the original South American pronunciation.
I thought it was pronounced: NO-than-ks
In general, most people feel uncomfortable in making a public issue of helping someone anyway. Years ago as an MP I offered to put up a woman and two kids while they sorted themselves out after they'd suffered domestic violence. It wouldn't have occurred to me at the time to talk about it to anyone else, but I think most of us would rally round for a bit in a crunch if we could.
Blow #3 for Corbyn - public backs dividends idea, but support drops when his name is added. Toxic? see @ipsosMORI