I can never fathom why anyone who has committed themselves to one political party, even if only for career reasons, would change straight over to another party. In that situation, I would be spending at least 6 months as an independent.
I think we underestimate the extent to which politicians are people and their relationships matter to them. A defection may be as much about a relationship someone has developed with a politician in another party that they find is surprisingly like-minded, then it is about ideology or career ambitions.
I suppose it's always worth considering that politicians only support part of their party's platform, just like the rest of us. I usually vote Tory in general elections but it's unlikely I support 50% of their manifesto, just I agree with less of the other parties'. If I support 40% of the LibDems' manifesto then I am close to switching (and in fact I normally vote Lib Dem in local elections)
You'd expect a MP to support a bit more of their party's platform, but platforms change and other parties may become better at representing their views
My apolitical Russian mother's family left Russia in 1927 not because they passionately disagreed with the Revolution but because it was increasingly mandatory to support the current government line *which frequently changed*. They moved to Danzig/Gdansk, and found it was in some ways worse, with the future Gauleiter living next door and flying the Nazi flag (they put up a Soviet flag as a way of avoiding guilt by association). My grandfather, very talented in languages, started a second legal career in Berlin. They sheltered Jewish families in Gdansk and muddled on until 1937, when the trend was clear, and then used banking connections to move to Britain, except my grandfather, who started a third civil legal career in Argentina. The idea was that the family would join him once he was established, but WW2 intervened and stopped all civilian traffic; by the time it resumed the amicable separation was permanent. Fed up with Continental fanaticism, my mother loved the apolitical British and enthusiastically adopted British nationality, speakig English without an accent very quickly. She refused to teach me Russian, on the basis that bilingual kids didn't have a solld allegiance, and we were British, full stop. She voted Tory throughout her adult life on the basis that they were blessedly free of dogma - she revised her opinion on the arrival of Thatcher, and joined Chelsea Labour Party so as to support me, though she'd turn up to branch meetings wearing her fur coat and looking distinctly out of place. She bonded with the one genuinely working-class member, who recognised her genuine friendliness, but regarded the various earnest middle-class leftists with suspicion.
Strange background! I've never disowned it, any more than I've disowned my teenage communist sympathies that reacted against my apolitical parents. We are all creatures of our environment.
Fascinating, Nick. Have you ever thought of publishing your memoirs?
Thank you! I've thought of it, but to be honest my own life has been relatively uneventful - grew up in various countries, moderated my politics a bit, became a Labour MP for 13 years, worked for various charities, retired and happily remarried. The family was much more interesting. By contrast my quiet father was from very traditional English stock - he was attracted to my flamboyant Russian mother as a break from that, whereas she was attracted to him for his mild English manner. They both got what they wanted and lived a virtually dispute-free life despite being very different personalities. I lived with them until they died in my 30s and 40s, which had obvious drawbacks, but I've never really regretted it.
Returning from town, switch on TV, and Farage is front, centre, and everywhere dominating the media over his unacceptable proposals over immigration
He not only receives media coverage almost daily and answers every question put to him
He may be speaking to millions but it is all so divisive
And Ed Davey, is he having a conference as he hardly appears in the media ?
Ed Davey coming onto the conference stage to the clown music was quite remarkable.
Nigel is box office, particularly in the Trump era. The BBC and Sky love him. If Nigel becomes PM it will be in no small part due to ramping by the mainstream media. One can hope that Trump brings him down over the next three years.
The UK electorate need to bring Farage down
This is probably the start of them doing so. There will be stories of people who have been here years, friends, neighbours etc who might get deported,or families separated over the policy and a number of current Reformites will say 'hang on.......' and those not wedded to hardline immigration policy will likewise react to stop them. Remigration is not popular enough as a concept to win an election but its unpopular enough to stop someone winning one
My wife has just said this is terrible and many will be scared by such a shocking policy and should not be
I would add - this is not the British way of treating people
I want the boats stopped, sensible immigration, and to make sure everyone living and working in our communities do not feel threatened by a right wing mob copying Trump
You'll find no disagreement from me to any of that
Would you give Indefinite Leave to Remain to the entire Boriswave? That seems to be your position. Farcical
I wouldn't be revisiting ILR already granted. Im open to a review of future ILR and who gets it etc
So you agree with the idea that some of the Boriswave must be deported. They won’t all get ILR. In which case your only dispute is the exact level of deportations, or the income level for new visas
Anyone who doesnt have ILR should leave once their visa expires if its not renewed or ILR when granted. We need a sensible policy around that. Im vehemently opposed to kicking out people told they can stay.
He’s not saying they are all going to be expelled. He’s saying that they will tighten the rules on the ILR status, so yes some will be deported
It’s not nice. But then to my mind what mass migration has done to Britain is not nice. We’ve gone beyond nice, tragically - due to both main parties calamitously lying about and mishandling immigration
Any solution to the problem is going to be unpleasant for some people, just as open borders have been very very unpleasant for a lot of Brits
I know what hes saying and I know the situation. We disagree (in part) on what is a reasonable solution to the issues. Just because Nigel is wading across the Rubicon i dont have to get fish in my keks
Returning from town, switch on TV, and Farage is front, centre, and everywhere dominating the media over his unacceptable proposals over immigration
He not only receives media coverage almost daily and answers every question put to him
He may be speaking to millions but it is all so divisive
And Ed Davey, is he having a conference as he hardly appears in the media ?
Ed Davey coming onto the conference stage to the clown music was quite remarkable.
Nigel is box office, particularly in the Trump era. The BBC and Sky love him. If Nigel becomes PM it will be in no small part due to ramping by the mainstream media. One can hope that Trump brings him down over the next three years.
The UK electorate need to bring Farage down
This is probably the start of them doing so. There will be stories of people who have been here years, friends, neighbours etc who might get deported,or families separated over the policy and a number of current Reformites will say 'hang on.......' and those not wedded to hardline immigration policy will likewise react to stop them. Remigration is not popular enough as a concept to win an election but its unpopular enough to stop someone winning one
My wife has just said this is terrible and many will be scared by such a shocking policy and should not be
I would add - this is not the British way of treating people
I want the boats stopped, sensible immigration, and to make sure everyone living and working in our communities do not feel threatened by a right wing mob copying Trump
You'll find no disagreement from me to any of that
Would you give Indefinite Leave to Remain to the entire Boriswave? That seems to be your position. Farcical
I wouldn't be revisiting ILR already granted. Im open to a review of future ILR and who gets it etc
So you agree with the idea that some of the Boriswave must be deported. They won’t all get ILR. In which case your only dispute is the exact level of deportations, or the income level for new visas
Anyone who doesnt have ILR should leave once their visa expires if its not renewed or ILR when granted. We need a sensible policy around that. Im vehemently opposed to kicking out people told they can stay.
But vast numbers of the Boriswave will become eligible between now and the time that Reform gets into power. So retrospective action will be necessary, and this seems fair notice.
Yes - however they are putting forward a conspiratorial narrative.
It is an event with an attendance of 5000 on an SSSI common with ground nesting birds. Moving it to another site sounds rational.
They have turned that into "Natural England are Banning you taking your children to fly a kite", which is somewhere between disingenuous and dishonest. And then they go on to "delete Natural England".
It maybe populist attention seeking, or trying to paint NE as part of the Deep State. Will they be going next for "let's delete all SSSIs, and stop proecting Stonehenge and temperate rainforests"?
I want to know who they are, and I don't want faked up narratives.
You can tell why he’s annoyed 8 of the social houses opposite the one he has bought have families that don’t work with motobility cars that are better than the 11 year old polo they have to share
Worse the poster can’t afford children but that isn’t a problem in the social housing
This, going around recently, has radicalised a fair number of people:
(It works by checking Dartford crossing free ticket eligibility IIRC).
Did the story about 20% of new car sales being via Motability ever get stood up, or is there something else going on?
Surely the government could start by limiting the scheme to cars made in the UK, so as not to be sending subsidy money abroad?
Wasn't it over 30%?
Motability was set up to replace the Invacar three wheeled scooter.
Why does anyone need a choice? If a user needs a small car, a basic Corsa should suffice. If a larger car is required a Citroen Berlingo should do the trick. If one can afford to upgrade to a BMW M5 they don't need a Motability car.
I don;t think so.
Motobility have 815,000 leased vehicles looking at their 2024 report. The UK had 1,952,000 cars sold in 2024.
Motobility leases are 3 to 5 years (depending on adaptions) so that to me looks like 8/57 so 14% of the market is motobility.
Only about 7% of Motability cars are adapted. A further 5% are specialist wheelchair-accessible vehicles. The other 88% are just unmodified cars for half price.
And? I’ve said 14% of new cars are motobility I don’t think those figures change anything
Returning from town, switch on TV, and Farage is front, centre, and everywhere dominating the media over his unacceptable proposals over immigration
He not only receives media coverage almost daily and answers every question put to him
He may be speaking to millions but it is all so divisive
And Ed Davey, is he having a conference as he hardly appears in the media ?
Ed Davey coming onto the conference stage to the clown music was quite remarkable.
Nigel is box office, particularly in the Trump era. The BBC and Sky love him. If Nigel becomes PM it will be in no small part due to ramping by the mainstream media. One can hope that Trump brings him down over the next three years.
The UK electorate need to bring Farage down
This is probably the start of them doing so. There will be stories of people who have been here years, friends, neighbours etc who might get deported,or families separated over the policy and a number of current Reformites will say 'hang on.......' and those not wedded to hardline immigration policy will likewise react to stop them. Remigration is not popular enough as a concept to win an election but its unpopular enough to stop someone winning one
My wife has just said this is terrible and many will be scared by such a shocking policy and should not be
I would add - this is not the British way of treating people
I want the boats stopped, sensible immigration, and to make sure everyone living and working in our communities do not feel threatened by a right wing mob copying Trump
You'll find no disagreement from me to any of that
Would you give Indefinite Leave to Remain to the entire Boriswave? That seems to be your position. Farcical
I wouldn't be revisiting ILR already granted. Im open to a review of future ILR and who gets it etc
So you agree with the idea that some of the Boriswave must be deported. They won’t all get ILR. In which case your only dispute is the exact level of deportations, or the income level for new visas
Anyone who doesnt have ILR should leave once their visa expires if its not renewed or ILR when granted. We need a sensible policy around that. Im vehemently opposed to kicking out people told they can stay.
He’s not saying they are all going to be expelled. He’s saying that they will tighten the rules on the ILR status, so yes some will be deported
It’s not nice. But then to my mind what mass migration has done to Britain is not nice. We’ve gone beyond nice, tragically - due to both main parties calamitously lying about and mishandling immigration
Any solution to the problem is going to be unpleasant for some people, just as open borders have been very very unpleasant for a lot of Brits
At the end of the day, they are going to have to sell that policy. Could they sell it successfully? Maybe. Little surprises me in politics anymore. But I do think it is fraught with danger, and the potential to make a number of people feel rather squeamish once it is pointed out it applies to people already here with ILR.
I suspect that to form a government, Reform don’t only need the votes of immigration hardliners. They’re going to have to speak to more moderate voters too, for whom it’s a concern.
Returning from town, switch on TV, and Farage is front, centre, and everywhere dominating the media over his unacceptable proposals over immigration
He not only receives media coverage almost daily and answers every question put to him
He may be speaking to millions but it is all so divisive
And Ed Davey, is he having a conference as he hardly appears in the media ?
Ed Davey coming onto the conference stage to the clown music was quite remarkable.
Nigel is box office, particularly in the Trump era. The BBC and Sky love him. If Nigel becomes PM it will be in no small part due to ramping by the mainstream media. One can hope that Trump brings him down over the next three years.
The UK electorate need to bring Farage down
This is probably the start of them doing so. There will be stories of people who have been here years, friends, neighbours etc who might get deported,or families separated over the policy and a number of current Reformites will say 'hang on.......' and those not wedded to hardline immigration policy will likewise react to stop them. Remigration is not popular enough as a concept to win an election but its unpopular enough to stop someone winning one
My wife has just said this is terrible and many will be scared by such a shocking policy and should not be
I would add - this is not the British way of treating people
I want the boats stopped, sensible immigration, and to make sure everyone living and working in our communities do not feel threatened by a right wing mob copying Trump
You'll find no disagreement from me to any of that
Would you give Indefinite Leave to Remain to the entire Boriswave? That seems to be your position. Farcical
I wouldn't be revisiting ILR already granted. Im open to a review of future ILR and who gets it etc
So you agree with the idea that some of the Boriswave must be deported. They won’t all get ILR. In which case your only dispute is the exact level of deportations, or the income level for new visas
Anyone who doesnt have ILR should leave once their visa expires if its not renewed or ILR when granted. We need a sensible policy around that. Im vehemently opposed to kicking out people told they can stay.
He’s not saying they are all going to be expelled. He’s saying that they will tighten the rules on the ILR status, so yes some will be deported
It’s not nice. But then to my mind what mass migration has done to Britain is not nice. We’ve gone beyond nice, tragically - due to both main parties calamitously lying about and mishandling immigration
Any solution to the problem is going to be unpleasant for some people, just as open borders have been very very unpleasant for a lot of Brits
I know what hes saying and I know the situation. We disagree (in part) on what is a reasonable solution to the issues. Just because Nigel is wading across the Rubicon i dont have to get fish in my keks
Judging by the Daily Mail comments section this is wildly popular. But that’s the Daily Mail of course
I am surprised myself at how forthright this policy is. He’s certainly put the snake on the table. I’m not quite sure it’s a rubicon
However on examination I see why he’s done it. As @Luckyguy1983 says - a lot of the Boriswave will get ILR in the coming 4 years unless Labour does something (which they claim to be doing but never do). So he’s making it retrospective
You can tell why he’s annoyed 8 of the social houses opposite the one he has bought have families that don’t work with motobility cars that are better than the 11 year old polo they have to share
Worse the poster can’t afford children but that isn’t a problem in the social housing
This, going around recently, has radicalised a fair number of people:
(It works by checking Dartford crossing free ticket eligibility IIRC).
Did the story about 20% of new car sales being via Motability ever get stood up, or is there something else going on?
Surely the government could start by limiting the scheme to cars made in the UK, so as not to be sending subsidy money abroad?
Wasn't it over 30%?
Motability was set up to replace the Invacar three wheeled scooter.
Why does anyone need a choice? If a user needs a small car, a basic Corsa should suffice. If a larger car is required a Citroen Berlingo should do the trick. If one can afford to upgrade to a BMW M5 they don't need a Motability car.
I don;t think so.
Motobility have 815,000 leased vehicles looking at their 2024 report. The UK had 1,952,000 cars sold in 2024.
Motobility leases are 3 to 5 years (depending on adaptions) so that to me looks like 8/57 so 14% of the market is motobility.
Only about 7% of Motability cars are adapted. A further 5% are specialist wheelchair-accessible vehicles. The other 88% are just unmodified cars for half price.
And? I’ve said 14% of new cars are motobility I don’t think those figures change anything
I'm not disagreeing with you. Just adding some ancillary information.
Returning from town, switch on TV, and Farage is front, centre, and everywhere dominating the media over his unacceptable proposals over immigration
He not only receives media coverage almost daily and answers every question put to him
He may be speaking to millions but it is all so divisive
And Ed Davey, is he having a conference as he hardly appears in the media ?
Ed Davey coming onto the conference stage to the clown music was quite remarkable.
Nigel is box office, particularly in the Trump era. The BBC and Sky love him. If Nigel becomes PM it will be in no small part due to ramping by the mainstream media. One can hope that Trump brings him down over the next three years.
The UK electorate need to bring Farage down
This is probably the start of them doing so. There will be stories of people who have been here years, friends, neighbours etc who might get deported,or families separated over the policy and a number of current Reformites will say 'hang on.......' and those not wedded to hardline immigration policy will likewise react to stop them. Remigration is not popular enough as a concept to win an election but its unpopular enough to stop someone winning one
My wife has just said this is terrible and many will be scared by such a shocking policy and should not be
I would add - this is not the British way of treating people
I want the boats stopped, sensible immigration, and to make sure everyone living and working in our communities do not feel threatened by a right wing mob copying Trump
You'll find no disagreement from me to any of that
Would you give Indefinite Leave to Remain to the entire Boriswave? That seems to be your position. Farcical
I wouldn't be revisiting ILR already granted. Im open to a review of future ILR and who gets it etc
So you agree with the idea that some of the Boriswave must be deported. They won’t all get ILR. In which case your only dispute is the exact level of deportations, or the income level for new visas
Anyone who doesnt have ILR should leave once their visa expires if its not renewed or ILR when granted. We need a sensible policy around that. Im vehemently opposed to kicking out people told they can stay.
But vast numbers of the Boriswave will become eligible between now and the time that Reform gets into power. So retrospective action will be necessary, and this seems fair notice.
Thats an argument for announcing retrospective income tax. You've not paid enough, get saving
Farage's first problem is no one (and that may well include the Government) knows how many people are here on a status of Indefinite Leave to Remain (ILR). There could, in theory, be tens or even hundreds of thousands involved and the first cost is going to be the bureaucracy for all these people to be located and compelled to re-apply.
Obviously, some will try and hide and hope never to be found - others will be refused and then will go through an appeal process which will no doubt be grist to the mall for the lawyers.
Once we've got some potential deportees, the next stage is deporting them - where? I imagine if we're talking the "Boriswave" primarily the Indian Sub Continent so we're going to have the edifying spectacle of groups of families queueing up to get on planes with the accompanying tears and anger.
Returning from town, switch on TV, and Farage is front, centre, and everywhere dominating the media over his unacceptable proposals over immigration
He not only receives media coverage almost daily and answers every question put to him
He may be speaking to millions but it is all so divisive
And Ed Davey, is he having a conference as he hardly appears in the media ?
Ed Davey coming onto the conference stage to the clown music was quite remarkable.
Nigel is box office, particularly in the Trump era. The BBC and Sky love him. If Nigel becomes PM it will be in no small part due to ramping by the mainstream media. One can hope that Trump brings him down over the next three years.
The UK electorate need to bring Farage down
This is probably the start of them doing so. There will be stories of people who have been here years, friends, neighbours etc who might get deported,or families separated over the policy and a number of current Reformites will say 'hang on.......' and those not wedded to hardline immigration policy will likewise react to stop them. Remigration is not popular enough as a concept to win an election but its unpopular enough to stop someone winning one
My wife has just said this is terrible and many will be scared by such a shocking policy and should not be
I would add - this is not the British way of treating people
I want the boats stopped, sensible immigration, and to make sure everyone living and working in our communities do not feel threatened by a right wing mob copying Trump
You'll find no disagreement from me to any of that
Would you give Indefinite Leave to Remain to the entire Boriswave? That seems to be your position. Farcical
I wouldn't be revisiting ILR already granted. Im open to a review of future ILR and who gets it etc
So you agree with the idea that some of the Boriswave must be deported. They won’t all get ILR. In which case your only dispute is the exact level of deportations, or the income level for new visas
Anyone who doesnt have ILR should leave once their visa expires if its not renewed or ILR when granted. We need a sensible policy around that. Im vehemently opposed to kicking out people told they can stay.
He’s not saying they are all going to be expelled. He’s saying that they will tighten the rules on the ILR status, so yes some will be deported
It’s not nice. But then to my mind what mass migration has done to Britain is not nice. We’ve gone beyond nice, tragically - due to both main parties calamitously lying about and mishandling immigration
Any solution to the problem is going to be unpleasant for some people, just as open borders have been very very unpleasant for a lot of Brits
I know what hes saying and I know the situation. We disagree (in part) on what is a reasonable solution to the issues. Just because Nigel is wading across the Rubicon i dont have to get fish in my keks
The independent antislavery commissioner, a former special adviser to Boris Johnson, was speaking after the Home Office revealed more than 470 care companies have had their licences to sponsor migrant workers revoked amid concerns about fraud, abuse and exploitation.
About 39,000 workers were linked to the firms. The Work Rights Centre said the figures pointed to a “national scandal”. Lyons called the number of licence revocations “alarming”.
More than a quarter of the approximately 155,000 care workers who came to the UK from February 2022 to December 2024 were hired by employers who later lost their licence.
Reform are a cancer on the UK . After they’ve finished rounding up legal migrants and the angry mob still think their life is crap they’ll move onto the next group to use as scapegoats.
That's the problem with leaving the EU, the easiest thing to blame (the EU) no longer existed (as an excuse) so they could no longer hide their latent racism...
Can we just take the daft 'hateful racist' tag as read for anyone who suggests a serious policy about anything? I can feel brain cells ebbing away as I read.
Remember that Farage’s immigration Brexit poster was that Turks would be allowed to come here. He knows his audience
He's gone back to Blair and succession nation immigration today. I suppose it kicks Davey to story three or four on a bulletin.
Well Reform have crossed the Rubicon. Whatever they do/achieve it will have to be from the far bank cos they ain't coming back over
Better to talk tough then give in a smidge. I think this is like low balling an Estate Agent when bidding for a house, if the most you can afford is 800 you offer 700 in the hope of paying 750. Politicians throw out their low bid knowing they’ll get talked into being slightly more reasonable
You could create a hostile environment (which is likely happening) and those with skills / agency might just piss off somewhere else. Just seen an add locally this week looking for care workers for Belgium. Last year it was doctors for Canada. Everyone is poaching skilled people from everyone else. 5 of my siblings went to Australia and loved it. Took their expensive education with them.
Returning from town, switch on TV, and Farage is front, centre, and everywhere dominating the media over his unacceptable proposals over immigration
He not only receives media coverage almost daily and answers every question put to him
He may be speaking to millions but it is all so divisive
And Ed Davey, is he having a conference as he hardly appears in the media ?
Ed Davey coming onto the conference stage to the clown music was quite remarkable.
Nigel is box office, particularly in the Trump era. The BBC and Sky love him. If Nigel becomes PM it will be in no small part due to ramping by the mainstream media. One can hope that Trump brings him down over the next three years.
The UK electorate need to bring Farage down
This is probably the start of them doing so. There will be stories of people who have been here years, friends, neighbours etc who might get deported,or families separated over the policy and a number of current Reformites will say 'hang on.......' and those not wedded to hardline immigration policy will likewise react to stop them. Remigration is not popular enough as a concept to win an election but its unpopular enough to stop someone winning one
My wife has just said this is terrible and many will be scared by such a shocking policy and should not be
I would add - this is not the British way of treating people
I want the boats stopped, sensible immigration, and to make sure everyone living and working in our communities do not feel threatened by a right wing mob copying Trump
You'll find no disagreement from me to any of that
Would you give Indefinite Leave to Remain to the entire Boriswave? That seems to be your position. Farcical
I wouldn't be revisiting ILR already granted. Im open to a review of future ILR and who gets it etc
So you agree with the idea that some of the Boriswave must be deported. They won’t all get ILR. In which case your only dispute is the exact level of deportations, or the income level for new visas
Anyone who doesnt have ILR should leave once their visa expires if its not renewed or ILR when granted. We need a sensible policy around that. Im vehemently opposed to kicking out people told they can stay.
He’s not saying they are all going to be expelled. He’s saying that they will tighten the rules on the ILR status, so yes some will be deported
It’s not nice. But then to my mind what mass migration has done to Britain is not nice. We’ve gone beyond nice, tragically - due to both main parties calamitously lying about and mishandling immigration
Any solution to the problem is going to be unpleasant for some people, just as open borders have been very very unpleasant for a lot of Brits
I know what hes saying and I know the situation. We disagree (in part) on what is a reasonable solution to the issues. Just because Nigel is wading across the Rubicon i dont have to get fish in my keks
Judging by the Daily Mail comments section this is wildly popular. But that’s the Daily Mail of course
I am surprised myself at how forthright this policy is. He’s certainly put the snake on the table. I’m not quite sure it’s a rubicon
However on examination I see why he’s done it. As @Luckyguy1983 says - a lot of the Boriswave will get ILR in the coming 4 years unless Labour does something (which they claim to be doing but never do). So he’s making it retrospective
It may or may nif end up wildly popular, that's up to the electorate. It wont be wildly popular (the bits ive mentioned anyway) with me. I think but cant be certain that its popularity will be commensurate with how much heat is in the immigration issue
My husband, Charlie. He wanted to save young men, just like the one who took his life. That young man. That young man on the cross. Our Savior said, "Father, forgive them, for they not know what they do." That man. That young man. I forgive him. I forgive him because it was what Christ did in his. What Charlie would do. The answer to hate is not hate. The answer we know from the gospel is love and always love.
Love for our enemies and love for those who persecute us.
Its a rather a self-righteous, hypocritical love though isn't it, given that according to their theology they believe most of their persecutors are destined for eternal torment in hell.
No, I get the impression (FWIW) that she's genuine, though I have a very different world view. The rest of the event was... somewhat different.
I'm sure she was genuine and she believes all the 'love thy enemy' and 'salvation through Christ' evangelism.
But that evangelism also believes that those who haven't turned to Jesus are destined for eternal torment.
So her husband's killer gets a place in heaven if he 'discovers Jesus' while kind, moral, helpful people go to hell merely because they have the wrong or no religion.
I'm not an admirer of 'salvationist' beliefs.
Virtuous non believers who don't believe won't go to hell, they go to purgatory until they find salvation through Christ, certainly on RC doctrine.
Only those who actively reject Christ and embraced evil and the Devil and all his works go to hell
Is there a reserved section in Hell for bad people who pretend to be devout Christians?
I believe they are in the Eighth Circle, guilty of fraud, because they claim a status that is not theirs.
Dante's system of moral alignment is interesting. Those who practise fraud actually reserve worse punishment than murderers and heretics. The worst punishments are reserved for traitors, who do not burn, but rather, are encased in ice, to varying degrees.
You can tell why he’s annoyed 8 of the social houses opposite the one he has bought have families that don’t work with motobility cars that are better than the 11 year old polo they have to share
Worse the poster can’t afford children but that isn’t a problem in the social housing
This, going around recently, has radicalised a fair number of people:
(It works by checking Dartford crossing free ticket eligibility IIRC).
Did the story about 20% of new car sales being via Motability ever get stood up, or is there something else going on?
Surely the government could start by limiting the scheme to cars made in the UK, so as not to be sending subsidy money abroad?
Better to simply have Motability's VAT exemption taken away. Then only the cheap small cars could be afforded with the PIP payments anyway, and the government would get the usual VAT.
(Allegedly, it's 50% in Northern Ireland. Hard to believe...)
This is the correct course of action, however no government will dare to do it, because the car manufacturers will squeal like anything about 20% of the new car market disappearing overnight.
In the medium term, it would have quite an effect on the second hand market too - lots fewer new cars would flatten the depreciation curve quite a bit.
I can never fathom why anyone who has committed themselves to one political party, even if only for career reasons, would change straight over to another party. In that situation, I would be spending at least 6 months as an independent.
In Parliament aiui that involves the loss of a lot of support systems, which can be difficult.
I'm not sure about the support systems - I never noticed any, though it'd make life difficult for the 3 full-time staff, who tend to be selected from constituency activists. But you develop a lot of personal relationships which make switching difficult for most of us, in addition to which there is usually a support network in the local party, who would normally be horrified. I think that switching would require a strong pull factor as well as a push - going independent as an MP feels a bit feeble. I was never tempted as there wasn't a left-wing alternative in Parliament.
Indeed. But that's not the narrative. it's an event that draws 5000 people that was being held on an SSSI which is an important nature site .
The tweet, and the video attached to the tweet, frames it as 'Natural England banning you from having a day out flying kites across the country', where NE are actually considering the impact on an SSSI Common.
Returning from town, switch on TV, and Farage is front, centre, and everywhere dominating the media over his unacceptable proposals over immigration
He not only receives media coverage almost daily and answers every question put to him
He may be speaking to millions but it is all so divisive
And Ed Davey, is he having a conference as he hardly appears in the media ?
Ed Davey coming onto the conference stage to the clown music was quite remarkable.
Nigel is box office, particularly in the Trump era. The BBC and Sky love him. If Nigel becomes PM it will be in no small part due to ramping by the mainstream media. One can hope that Trump brings him down over the next three years.
The UK electorate need to bring Farage down
This is probably the start of them doing so. There will be stories of people who have been here years, friends, neighbours etc who might get deported,or families separated over the policy and a number of current Reformites will say 'hang on.......' and those not wedded to hardline immigration policy will likewise react to stop them. Remigration is not popular enough as a concept to win an election but its unpopular enough to stop someone winning one
My wife has just said this is terrible and many will be scared by such a shocking policy and should not be
I would add - this is not the British way of treating people
I want the boats stopped, sensible immigration, and to make sure everyone living and working in our communities do not feel threatened by a right wing mob copying Trump
You'll find no disagreement from me to any of that
Would you give Indefinite Leave to Remain to the entire Boriswave? That seems to be your position. Farcical
I wouldn't be revisiting ILR already granted. Im open to a review of future ILR and who gets it etc
So you agree with the idea that some of the Boriswave must be deported. They won’t all get ILR. In which case your only dispute is the exact level of deportations, or the income level for new visas
Anyone who doesnt have ILR should leave once their visa expires if its not renewed or ILR when granted. We need a sensible policy around that. Im vehemently opposed to kicking out people told they can stay.
But vast numbers of the Boriswave will become eligible between now and the time that Reform gets into power. So retrospective action will be necessary, and this seems fair notice.
Thats an argument for announcing retrospective income tax. You've not paid enough, get saving
One has to accept that sometimes the law will change, after you have emigrated to a country, but before you have acquired citizenship.
Well Reform have crossed the Rubicon. Whatever they do/achieve it will have to be from the far bank cos they ain't coming back over
Why now? Do they recognise Kemi as a policy free zone? Or are they worried about those on Reform's right? Or has someone at the BBC promised them as much airtime as they want despite the fact they are a (very) minor party at Westminster?
I strongly suspect Nigel has heard rumblings that he might soon be the target of a coup. The Far-Right would have been emboldened by the recent Trafalgar Square rally and they've got access to some serious resources - Musk being only a part of it. This all smacks of Nigel shoring up his right flank in panic.
And his left flank, the day after the LibDems announced they want to ‘stop the boats’.
The Natural England thing is afaics BS, unless eg you would be disturbing protected birds, nesting.
It's a weird thing with which to lead.
The site is described as a "heath," which in southern England are often under terrible pressure from developers and recreational disturbance. Very few left now. They can be precious habitats, and should be protected.
I go there regularly. I have walked, cycled, and run, up and around it. There will be no housing pressure on that heath; and if they wanted to care for nature, they could always take over the adjacent gold course.
Next, it'll be banning people from it "to protect nature..."
People should be banned from a lot of places to protect nature.
Whenever I read about money being spent at a wildlife site "to improve public access" I shake my head.
If they don't want public access, they should get no public funding. And any land given to them with the expectation that public access should be provided should be given to an organisation that will.
People have to live and work with nature. In extreme cases, nature can be safeguarded. But safeguarding all of nature will do nothing to help man's interaction with, and understanding of, nature.
You'd just have a 21st century Kinder Trespass situation occurring, with the 'gamekeepers' employed not by landed gentry, but by faceless bureaucracies.
There is a notorious site somewhere in Yorkshire (I still can't tell you where else I'll be shot) which holds the last native example of a particular species.
The plant was thought extinct (thanks to Victorian collectors) until someone found a single example in the 1930s.
The site was managed by a committee which used included both government agency and volunteer effort, including a 24 hour watch when it was flowering.
With modern techniques it has been possible to propagate it and you can now see the results in various sites across the north of England, some of which are public, and some of which are not.
Should there have been public access as it involved public money? I guarantee it would have gone extinct if there had. It was 60 years between finding it and being able to grow it on.
Reform are a cancer on the UK . After they’ve finished rounding up legal migrants and the angry mob still think their life is crap they’ll move onto the next group to use as scapegoats.
That's the problem with leaving the EU, the easiest thing to blame (the EU) no longer existed (as an excuse) so they could no longer hide their latent racism...
Can we just take the daft 'hateful racist' tag as read for anyone who suggests a serious policy about anything? I can feel brain cells ebbing away as I read.
Remember that Farage’s immigration Brexit poster was that Turks would be allowed to come here. He knows his audience
As with almost all remainers, you're confusing politics with your identity. If you are an upstanding, educated, open-minded person, you must be pro-EU. But the EU is a political construct, a nascent state and an issuer of laws. When you insist on seeing it as an core part of your identity, you open yourself to massive abuse, because you can never turn away from it - to do so would be to depart from righteousness.
That's the real difference between leavers and remainers. Leavers calculated the costs and benefits, remainers thought of their identity.
Indeed. But that's not the narrative. it's an event that draws 5000 people that was being held on an SSSI which is an important nature site .
The tweet, and the video attached to the tweet, frames it as 'Natural England banning you from having a day out flying kites across the country', where NE are actually considering the impact on an SSSI Common.
My perspective is that imo the answer to unthinking, populist politics is not just more unthinking, populist politics.
The tweet frames it as Natural England banning you from having a day out flying kites at this specific location. There's even a map showing where the event was going to be (and was previously) held. It doesn't say anything about banning kite flying nationwide.
Returning from town, switch on TV, and Farage is front, centre, and everywhere dominating the media over his unacceptable proposals over immigration
He not only receives media coverage almost daily and answers every question put to him
He may be speaking to millions but it is all so divisive
And Ed Davey, is he having a conference as he hardly appears in the media ?
Ed Davey coming onto the conference stage to the clown music was quite remarkable.
Nigel is box office, particularly in the Trump era. The BBC and Sky love him. If Nigel becomes PM it will be in no small part due to ramping by the mainstream media. One can hope that Trump brings him down over the next three years.
The UK electorate need to bring Farage down
This is probably the start of them doing so. There will be stories of people who have been here years, friends, neighbours etc who might get deported,or families separated over the policy and a number of current Reformites will say 'hang on.......' and those not wedded to hardline immigration policy will likewise react to stop them. Remigration is not popular enough as a concept to win an election but its unpopular enough to stop someone winning one
My wife has just said this is terrible and many will be scared by such a shocking policy and should not be
I would add - this is not the British way of treating people
I want the boats stopped, sensible immigration, and to make sure everyone living and working in our communities do not feel threatened by a right wing mob copying Trump
You'll find no disagreement from me to any of that
Would you give Indefinite Leave to Remain to the entire Boriswave? That seems to be your position. Farcical
I wouldn't be revisiting ILR already granted. Im open to a review of future ILR and who gets it etc
So you agree with the idea that some of the Boriswave must be deported. They won’t all get ILR. In which case your only dispute is the exact level of deportations, or the income level for new visas
Anyone who doesnt have ILR should leave once their visa expires if its not renewed or ILR when granted. We need a sensible policy around that. Im vehemently opposed to kicking out people told they can stay.
He’s not saying they are all going to be expelled. He’s saying that they will tighten the rules on the ILR status, so yes some will be deported
It’s not nice. But then to my mind what mass migration has done to Britain is not nice. We’ve gone beyond nice, tragically - due to both main parties calamitously lying about and mishandling immigration
Any solution to the problem is going to be unpleasant for some people, just as open borders have been very very unpleasant for a lot of Brits
I know what hes saying and I know the situation. We disagree (in part) on what is a reasonable solution to the issues. Just because Nigel is wading across the Rubicon i dont have to get fish in my keks
Judging by the Daily Mail comments section this is wildly popular. But that’s the Daily Mail of course
I am surprised myself at how forthright this policy is. He’s certainly put the snake on the table. I’m not quite sure it’s a rubicon
However on examination I see why he’s done it. As @Luckyguy1983 says - a lot of the Boriswave will get ILR in the coming 4 years unless Labour does something (which they claim to be doing but never do). So he’s making it retrospective
It may or may nif end up wildly popular, that's up to the electorate. It wont be wildly popular (the bits ive mentioned anyway) with me. I think but cant be certain that its popularity will be commensurate with how much heat is in the immigration issue
The next set of polls will be interesting, indeed
I remember when Nigel first announced his “we will deport 600,000” policy. I said on here that this would possibly damage his polling, “it sounds too extreme”. It did nothing of the kind. Reform’s polling is either unchanged or it has risen - as others have fallen further
We consistently underestimate how far to the right the electorate is, now, on these migration/asylum issues. Something has changed
Returning from town, switch on TV, and Farage is front, centre, and everywhere dominating the media over his unacceptable proposals over immigration
He not only receives media coverage almost daily and answers every question put to him
He may be speaking to millions but it is all so divisive
And Ed Davey, is he having a conference as he hardly appears in the media ?
Ed Davey coming onto the conference stage to the clown music was quite remarkable.
Nigel is box office, particularly in the Trump era. The BBC and Sky love him. If Nigel becomes PM it will be in no small part due to ramping by the mainstream media. One can hope that Trump brings him down over the next three years.
The UK electorate need to bring Farage down
This is probably the start of them doing so. There will be stories of people who have been here years, friends, neighbours etc who might get deported,or families separated over the policy and a number of current Reformites will say 'hang on.......' and those not wedded to hardline immigration policy will likewise react to stop them. Remigration is not popular enough as a concept to win an election but its unpopular enough to stop someone winning one
My wife has just said this is terrible and many will be scared by such a shocking policy and should not be
I would add - this is not the British way of treating people
I want the boats stopped, sensible immigration, and to make sure everyone living and working in our communities do not feel threatened by a right wing mob copying Trump
You'll find no disagreement from me to any of that
Would you give Indefinite Leave to Remain to the entire Boriswave? That seems to be your position. Farcical
I wouldn't be revisiting ILR already granted. Im open to a review of future ILR and who gets it etc
So you agree with the idea that some of the Boriswave must be deported. They won’t all get ILR. In which case your only dispute is the exact level of deportations, or the income level for new visas
Anyone who doesnt have ILR should leave once their visa expires if its not renewed or ILR when granted. We need a sensible policy around that. Im vehemently opposed to kicking out people told they can stay.
But vast numbers of the Boriswave will become eligible between now and the time that Reform gets into power. So retrospective action will be necessary, and this seems fair notice.
Thats an argument for announcing retrospective income tax. You've not paid enough, get saving
One has to accept that sometimes the law will change, after you have emigrated to a country, but before you have acquired citizenship.
Laws can change for citizens too, doesn't mean you support them or just shrug if you find them unacceptable. We are subject to the law, we don't have to throw it a party.
This is yet more hysteria. Farage is not going to deport a single British subject or EU citizen. That’s what he says
He is making it tougher for the Boriswave to stay. As he should do. Because otherwise our welfare state will collapse
The collapse will come from the crowds of British young people all claiming PIP and their cheap cars due to their various collection-of-initials mental health conditions
You can tell why he’s annoyed 8 of the social houses opposite the one he has bought have families that don’t work with motobility cars that are better than the 11 year old polo they have to share
Worse the poster can’t afford children but that isn’t a problem in the social housing
This, going around recently, has radicalised a fair number of people:
(It works by checking Dartford crossing free ticket eligibility IIRC).
Did the story about 20% of new car sales being via Motability ever get stood up, or is there something else going on?
Surely the government could start by limiting the scheme to cars made in the UK, so as not to be sending subsidy money abroad?
Wasn't it over 30%?
Motability was set up to replace the Invacar three wheeled scooter.
Why does anyone need a choice? If a user needs a small car, a basic Corsa should suffice. If a larger car is required a Citroen Berlingo should do the trick. If one can afford to upgrade to a BMW M5 they don't need a Motability car.
PIP is not means tested.
Because of the VAT exemption, the lease is less than half the price (46% per Motability themselves) so they can only afford the M5 by using motability's VAT exemption.
The VAT is 20%, the purported 45% saving Motability claim is if you bundle in maintenance, insurance and breakdown cover and note 5 on hteir press release "Percentage savings shown are the difference between the Motability Scheme lease cost and the highest priced alternative option, expressed as a percentage."
Well Reform have crossed the Rubicon. Whatever they do/achieve it will have to be from the far bank cos they ain't coming back over
Why now? Do they recognise Kemi as a policy free zone? Or are they worried about those on Reform's right? Or has someone at the BBC promised them as much airtime as they want despite the fact they are a (very) minor party at Westminster?
Good question.
IMO Reform are seeking to establish in the public's mind that the big problem is the number of immigrants in the country full stop. Why? Because it's possible - likely even - that the small boats have dwindled and net migration is way down by the time of the next election. If this happens Reform, a single issue party, could be faced with the disaster of that single issue lacking salience. This is insurance against that.
"The issue, as we've been saying repeatedly, are those already here."
You can tell why he’s annoyed 8 of the social houses opposite the one he has bought have families that don’t work with motobility cars that are better than the 11 year old polo they have to share
Worse the poster can’t afford children but that isn’t a problem in the social housing
This, going around recently, has radicalised a fair number of people:
(It works by checking Dartford crossing free ticket eligibility IIRC).
Did the story about 20% of new car sales being via Motability ever get stood up, or is there something else going on?
Surely the government could start by limiting the scheme to cars made in the UK, so as not to be sending subsidy money abroad?
Better to simply have Motability's VAT exemption taken away. Then only the cheap small cars could be afforded with the PIP payments anyway, and the government would get the usual VAT.
(Allegedly, it's 50% in Northern Ireland. Hard to believe...)
This is the correct course of action, however no government will dare to do it, because the car manufacturers will squeal like anything about 20% of the new car market disappearing overnight.
In the medium term, it would have quite an effect on the second hand market too - lots fewer new cars would flatten the depreciation curve quite a bit.
Since we now have complete freedom on VAT rates, no reason this couldn't be done 5% at a time.
You can tell why he’s annoyed 8 of the social houses opposite the one he has bought have families that don’t work with motobility cars that are better than the 11 year old polo they have to share
Worse the poster can’t afford children but that isn’t a problem in the social housing
This, going around recently, has radicalised a fair number of people:
(It works by checking Dartford crossing free ticket eligibility IIRC).
Did the story about 20% of new car sales being via Motability ever get stood up, or is there something else going on?
Surely the government could start by limiting the scheme to cars made in the UK, so as not to be sending subsidy money abroad?
Better to simply have Motability's VAT exemption taken away. Then only the cheap small cars could be afforded with the PIP payments anyway, and the government would get the usual VAT.
(Allegedly, it's 50% in Northern Ireland. Hard to believe...)
This is the correct course of action, however no government will dare to do it, because the car manufacturers will squeal like anything about 20% of the new car market disappearing overnight.
In the medium term, it would have quite an effect on the second hand market too - lots fewer new cars would flatten the depreciation curve quite a bit.
I don't think so - the kind of PIP claimant who can afford to spend their payment on a car will likely be able to so anyway, albeit with slightly reduced demand if VAT is applied. Ultimately this issue boils down to the fact PIP is not means-tested, so you do get some quite rich people buying with the scheme.
A much better use of the cash would be capital spending on buses. Then you get a service that helps people who cannot drive for medical/poverty reasons, and a coherent transport network. The PIP subsidies buys you about 3,000 electric buses a year, made in Scotland. For context, Edinburgh's fleet is 700, so over 5 years you could provide a population of 11 million people the same excellent service we have here.
Returning from town, switch on TV, and Farage is front, centre, and everywhere dominating the media over his unacceptable proposals over immigration
He not only receives media coverage almost daily and answers every question put to him
He may be speaking to millions but it is all so divisive
And Ed Davey, is he having a conference as he hardly appears in the media ?
Ed Davey coming onto the conference stage to the clown music was quite remarkable.
Nigel is box office, particularly in the Trump era. The BBC and Sky love him. If Nigel becomes PM it will be in no small part due to ramping by the mainstream media. One can hope that Trump brings him down over the next three years.
The UK electorate need to bring Farage down
This is probably the start of them doing so. There will be stories of people who have been here years, friends, neighbours etc who might get deported,or families separated over the policy and a number of current Reformites will say 'hang on.......' and those not wedded to hardline immigration policy will likewise react to stop them. Remigration is not popular enough as a concept to win an election but its unpopular enough to stop someone winning one
My wife has just said this is terrible and many will be scared by such a shocking policy and should not be
I would add - this is not the British way of treating people
I want the boats stopped, sensible immigration, and to make sure everyone living and working in our communities do not feel threatened by a right wing mob copying Trump
You'll find no disagreement from me to any of that
Would you give Indefinite Leave to Remain to the entire Boriswave? That seems to be your position. Farcical
I wouldn't be revisiting ILR already granted. Im open to a review of future ILR and who gets it etc
So you agree with the idea that some of the Boriswave must be deported. They won’t all get ILR. In which case your only dispute is the exact level of deportations, or the income level for new visas
Anyone who doesnt have ILR should leave once their visa expires if its not renewed or ILR when granted. We need a sensible policy around that. Im vehemently opposed to kicking out people told they can stay.
He’s not saying they are all going to be expelled. He’s saying that they will tighten the rules on the ILR status, so yes some will be deported
It’s not nice. But then to my mind what mass migration has done to Britain is not nice. We’ve gone beyond nice, tragically - due to both main parties calamitously lying about and mishandling immigration
Any solution to the problem is going to be unpleasant for some people, just as open borders have been very very unpleasant for a lot of Brits
I know what hes saying and I know the situation. We disagree (in part) on what is a reasonable solution to the issues. Just because Nigel is wading across the Rubicon i dont have to get fish in my keks
Judging by the Daily Mail comments section this is wildly popular. But that’s the Daily Mail of course
I am surprised myself at how forthright this policy is. He’s certainly put the snake on the table. I’m not quite sure it’s a rubicon
However on examination I see why he’s done it. As @Luckyguy1983 says - a lot of the Boriswave will get ILR in the coming 4 years unless Labour does something (which they claim to be doing but never do). So he’s making it retrospective
It may or may nif end up wildly popular, that's up to the electorate. It wont be wildly popular (the bits ive mentioned anyway) with me. I think but cant be certain that its popularity will be commensurate with how much heat is in the immigration issue
The next set of polls will be interesting, indeed
I remember when Nigel first announced his “we will deport 600,000” policy. I said on here that this would possibly damage his polling, “it sounds too extreme”. It did nothing of the kind. Reform’s polling is either unchanged or it has risen - as others have fallen further
We consistently underestimate how far to the right the electorate is, now, on these migration/asylum issues. Something has changed
But maybe this WILL be “too extreme”? Let’s see
Short term i think it will/may boost his polling. Long term its an albatross and will probably (if it doesn't drive some away which i think it will, not sure how many though) galvanise the antis into stop reform Vorderman style campaigns. Immigration is a heat issue - if the heat comes out then this policy doesnt fly at all. Economy/CoL is a constant issue on the other hand. Reform need the rage in order to succeed
Reform are a cancer on the UK . After they’ve finished rounding up legal migrants and the angry mob still think their life is crap they’ll move onto the next group to use as scapegoats.
That's the problem with leaving the EU, the easiest thing to blame (the EU) no longer existed (as an excuse) so they could no longer hide their latent racism...
Can we just take the daft 'hateful racist' tag as read for anyone who suggests a serious policy about anything? I can feel brain cells ebbing away as I read.
Remember that Farage’s immigration Brexit poster was that Turks would be allowed to come here. He knows his audience
As with almost all remainers, you're confusing politics with your identity. If you are an upstanding, educated, open-minded person, you must be pro-EU. But the EU is a political construct, a nascent state and an issuer of laws. When you insist on seeing it as an core part of your identity, you open yourself to massive abuse, because you can never turn away from it - to do so would be to depart from righteousness.
That's the real difference between leavers and remainers. Leavers calculated the costs and benefits, remainers thought of their identity.
I voted leave but wanted as with others on here a decent relationship with the EU.
Also Leavers didn't calculate the costs they say £350m on the back of a bus and didn't realise they were being lied to. Most Remainers saw through it....
Indeed. But that's not the narrative. it's an event that draws 5000 people that was being held on an SSSI which is an important nature site .
The tweet, and the video attached to the tweet, frames it as 'Natural England banning you from having a day out flying kites across the country', where NE are actually considering the impact on an SSSI Common.
My perspective is that imo the answer to unthinking, populist politics is not just more unthinking, populist politics.
The tweet frames it as Natural England banning you from having a day out flying kites at this specific location. There's even a map showing where the event was going to be (and was previously) held. It doesn't say anything about banning kite flying nationwide.
I disagree. The Looking for Growth tweet is not location specific. And the first phrase in the video is "Why are we banned from having fun in Britain?". The text of the tweet:
Looking for Growth @lfg_uk You wanted a nice day out flying kites with your family. But @NaturalEngland won't let you.
Natural England won't let us build, won't let us have fun. It won't let us do anything.
The Government empowers them to block everything. This has to end.
Returning from town, switch on TV, and Farage is front, centre, and everywhere dominating the media over his unacceptable proposals over immigration
He not only receives media coverage almost daily and answers every question put to him
He may be speaking to millions but it is all so divisive
And Ed Davey, is he having a conference as he hardly appears in the media ?
Ed Davey coming onto the conference stage to the clown music was quite remarkable.
Nigel is box office, particularly in the Trump era. The BBC and Sky love him. If Nigel becomes PM it will be in no small part due to ramping by the mainstream media. One can hope that Trump brings him down over the next three years.
The UK electorate need to bring Farage down
This is probably the start of them doing so. There will be stories of people who have been here years, friends, neighbours etc who might get deported,or families separated over the policy and a number of current Reformites will say 'hang on.......' and those not wedded to hardline immigration policy will likewise react to stop them. Remigration is not popular enough as a concept to win an election but its unpopular enough to stop someone winning one
My wife has just said this is terrible and many will be scared by such a shocking policy and should not be
I would add - this is not the British way of treating people
I want the boats stopped, sensible immigration, and to make sure everyone living and working in our communities do not feel threatened by a right wing mob copying Trump
You'll find no disagreement from me to any of that
Would you give Indefinite Leave to Remain to the entire Boriswave? That seems to be your position. Farcical
I wouldn't be revisiting ILR already granted. Im open to a review of future ILR and who gets it etc
So you agree with the idea that some of the Boriswave must be deported. They won’t all get ILR. In which case your only dispute is the exact level of deportations, or the income level for new visas
Anyone who doesnt have ILR should leave once their visa expires if its not renewed or ILR when granted. We need a sensible policy around that. Im vehemently opposed to kicking out people told they can stay.
He’s not saying they are all going to be expelled. He’s saying that they will tighten the rules on the ILR status, so yes some will be deported
It’s not nice. But then to my mind what mass migration has done to Britain is not nice. We’ve gone beyond nice, tragically - due to both main parties calamitously lying about and mishandling immigration
Any solution to the problem is going to be unpleasant for some people, just as open borders have been very very unpleasant for a lot of Brits
I know what hes saying and I know the situation. We disagree (in part) on what is a reasonable solution to the issues. Just because Nigel is wading across the Rubicon i dont have to get fish in my keks
Judging by the Daily Mail comments section this is wildly popular. But that’s the Daily Mail of course
I am surprised myself at how forthright this policy is. He’s certainly put the snake on the table. I’m not quite sure it’s a rubicon
However on examination I see why he’s done it. As @Luckyguy1983 says - a lot of the Boriswave will get ILR in the coming 4 years unless Labour does something (which they claim to be doing but never do). So he’s making it retrospective
It may or may nif end up wildly popular, that's up to the electorate. It wont be wildly popular (the bits ive mentioned anyway) with me. I think but cant be certain that its popularity will be commensurate with how much heat is in the immigration issue
The next set of polls will be interesting, indeed
I remember when Nigel first announced his “we will deport 600,000” policy. I said on here that this would possibly damage his polling, “it sounds too extreme”. It did nothing of the kind. Reform’s polling is either unchanged or it has risen - as others have fallen further
We consistently underestimate how far to the right the electorate is, now, on these migration/asylum issues. Something has changed
But maybe this WILL be “too extreme”? Let’s see
True of some but not of all if my anecdotal experience is any guide. The most extreme tend to shout the loudest while those who may not feel that way keep quiet.
I have a friend who was openly advocating last Friday deploying the army to the beaches and shooting on sight illegal migrants as they landed. I could see others in my circle whingeing and flinching at that suggestion so while Reform currently enjoy the support of about a third of the electorate, there are many who don't like the extreme positions though too few are openly challenging Farage's policies because it's as politically suicidal to be seen (or perceived) to be pro-migrant as it once was to be pro-tax rises.
You can tell why he’s annoyed 8 of the social houses opposite the one he has bought have families that don’t work with motobility cars that are better than the 11 year old polo they have to share
Worse the poster can’t afford children but that isn’t a problem in the social housing
This, going around recently, has radicalised a fair number of people:
(It works by checking Dartford crossing free ticket eligibility IIRC).
Did the story about 20% of new car sales being via Motability ever get stood up, or is there something else going on?
Surely the government could start by limiting the scheme to cars made in the UK, so as not to be sending subsidy money abroad?
Better to simply have Motability's VAT exemption taken away. Then only the cheap small cars could be afforded with the PIP payments anyway, and the government would get the usual VAT.
(Allegedly, it's 50% in Northern Ireland. Hard to believe...)
This is the correct course of action, however no government will dare to do it, because the car manufacturers will squeal like anything about 20% of the new car market disappearing overnight.
In the medium term, it would have quite an effect on the second hand market too - lots fewer new cars would flatten the depreciation curve quite a bit.
I don't think so - the kind of PIP claimant who can afford to spend their payment on a car will likely be able to so anyway, albeit with slightly reduced demand if VAT is applied. Ultimately this issue boils down to the fact PIP is not means-tested, so you do get some quite rich people buying with the scheme.
A much better use of the cash would be capital spending on buses. Then you get a service that helps people who cannot drive for medical/poverty reasons, and a coherent transport network. The PIP subsidies buys you about 3,000 electric buses a year, made in Scotland. For context, Edinburgh's fleet is 700, so over 5 years you could provide a population of 11 million people the same excellent service we have here.
It's not the wealth of people that dictates whether they spend their PIP on a car. It's whether having an updated car is the main thing they need to support themselves. My aunt has restricted growth but is otherwise fully capable. She needs an adapted car so she can get to work as an administrator which means she can support herself and not be a burden on the state. She's not at all wealthy but it's where a little bit of help makes all the difference.
The Natural England thing is afaics BS, unless eg you would be disturbing protected birds, nesting.
It's a weird thing with which to lead.
The site is described as a "heath," which in southern England are often under terrible pressure from developers and recreational disturbance. Very few left now. They can be precious habitats, and should be protected.
I go there regularly. I have walked, cycled, and run, up and around it. There will be no housing pressure on that heath; and if they wanted to care for nature, they could always take over the adjacent gold course.
Next, it'll be banning people from it "to protect nature..."
People should be banned from a lot of places to protect nature.
Whenever I read about money being spent at a wildlife site "to improve public access" I shake my head.
If they don't want public access, they should get no public funding. And any land given to them with the expectation that public access should be provided should be given to an organisation that will.
People have to live and work with nature. In extreme cases, nature can be safeguarded. But safeguarding all of nature will do nothing to help man's interaction with, and understanding of, nature.
You'd just have a 21st century Kinder Trespass situation occurring, with the 'gamekeepers' employed not by landed gentry, but by faceless bureaucracies.
There is a notorious site somewhere in Yorkshire (I still can't tell you where else I'll be shot) which holds the last native example of a particular species.
The plant was thought extinct (thanks to Victorian collectors) until someone found a single example in the 1930s.
The site was managed by a committee which used included both government agency and volunteer effort, including a 24 hour watch when it was flowering.
With modern techniques it has been possible to propagate it and you can now see the results in various sites across the north of England, some of which are public, and some of which are not.
Should there have been public access as it involved public money? I guarantee it would have gone extinct if there had. It was 60 years between finding it and being able to grow it on.
Yes, but that's an unusual and extreme case, and of course that should be protected. It's slightly different from trying to 'protect' areas that are not that unique. Also, access can improve knowledge.
As an example, I used to love the bleak Peak moorland, such as Kinder and Bleaklow. Absolutely love them. And I don't think such areas should have windfarms on them, and have cheered on the revegetation schemes. But why do I think that? Because I've accessed the areas, know them well, and love them. I understand why they are special. If I had not visited them, I probably would not give a damn if they were built on.
Some places are special, and should be protected. But such places are relatively rare.
Returning from town, switch on TV, and Farage is front, centre, and everywhere dominating the media over his unacceptable proposals over immigration
He not only receives media coverage almost daily and answers every question put to him
He may be speaking to millions but it is all so divisive
And Ed Davey, is he having a conference as he hardly appears in the media ?
Ed Davey coming onto the conference stage to the clown music was quite remarkable.
Nigel is box office, particularly in the Trump era. The BBC and Sky love him. If Nigel becomes PM it will be in no small part due to ramping by the mainstream media. One can hope that Trump brings him down over the next three years.
The UK electorate need to bring Farage down
This is probably the start of them doing so. There will be stories of people who have been here years, friends, neighbours etc who might get deported,or families separated over the policy and a number of current Reformites will say 'hang on.......' and those not wedded to hardline immigration policy will likewise react to stop them. Remigration is not popular enough as a concept to win an election but its unpopular enough to stop someone winning one
My wife has just said this is terrible and many will be scared by such a shocking policy and should not be
I would add - this is not the British way of treating people
I want the boats stopped, sensible immigration, and to make sure everyone living and working in our communities do not feel threatened by a right wing mob copying Trump
You'll find no disagreement from me to any of that
Would you give Indefinite Leave to Remain to the entire Boriswave? That seems to be your position. Farcical
I wouldn't be revisiting ILR already granted. Im open to a review of future ILR and who gets it etc
So you agree with the idea that some of the Boriswave must be deported. They won’t all get ILR. In which case your only dispute is the exact level of deportations, or the income level for new visas
Anyone who doesnt have ILR should leave once their visa expires if its not renewed or ILR when granted. We need a sensible policy around that. Im vehemently opposed to kicking out people told they can stay.
He’s not saying they are all going to be expelled. He’s saying that they will tighten the rules on the ILR status, so yes some will be deported
It’s not nice. But then to my mind what mass migration has done to Britain is not nice. We’ve gone beyond nice, tragically - due to both main parties calamitously lying about and mishandling immigration
Any solution to the problem is going to be unpleasant for some people, just as open borders have been very very unpleasant for a lot of Brits
I know what hes saying and I know the situation. We disagree (in part) on what is a reasonable solution to the issues. Just because Nigel is wading across the Rubicon i dont have to get fish in my keks
Judging by the Daily Mail comments section this is wildly popular. But that’s the Daily Mail of course
I am surprised myself at how forthright this policy is. He’s certainly put the snake on the table. I’m not quite sure it’s a rubicon
However on examination I see why he’s done it. As @Luckyguy1983 says - a lot of the Boriswave will get ILR in the coming 4 years unless Labour does something (which they claim to be doing but never do). So he’s making it retrospective
It may or may nif end up wildly popular, that's up to the electorate. It wont be wildly popular (the bits ive mentioned anyway) with me. I think but cant be certain that its popularity will be commensurate with how much heat is in the immigration issue
The next set of polls will be interesting, indeed
I remember when Nigel first announced his “we will deport 600,000” policy. I said on here that this would possibly damage his polling, “it sounds too extreme”. It did nothing of the kind. Reform’s polling is either unchanged or it has risen - as others have fallen further
We consistently underestimate how far to the right the electorate is, now, on these migration/asylum issues. Something has changed
But maybe this WILL be “too extreme”? Let’s see
True of some but not of all if my anecdotal experience is any guide. The most extreme tend to shout the loudest while those who may not feel that way keep quiet.
I have a friend who was openly advocating last Friday deploying the army to the beaches and shooting on sight illegal migrants as they landed. I could see others in my circle whingeing and flinching at that suggestion so while Reform currently enjoy the support of about a third of the electorate, there are many who don't like the extreme positions though too few are openly challenging Farage's policies because it's as politically suicidal to be seen (or perceived) to be pro-migrant as it once was to be pro-tax rises.
You can never overestimate the impact of the people who just want a nice, quiet life
You can tell why he’s annoyed 8 of the social houses opposite the one he has bought have families that don’t work with motobility cars that are better than the 11 year old polo they have to share
Worse the poster can’t afford children but that isn’t a problem in the social housing
This, going around recently, has radicalised a fair number of people:
(It works by checking Dartford crossing free ticket eligibility IIRC).
Did the story about 20% of new car sales being via Motability ever get stood up, or is there something else going on?
Surely the government could start by limiting the scheme to cars made in the UK, so as not to be sending subsidy money abroad?
Better to simply have Motability's VAT exemption taken away. Then only the cheap small cars could be afforded with the PIP payments anyway, and the government would get the usual VAT.
(Allegedly, it's 50% in Northern Ireland. Hard to believe...)
This is the correct course of action, however no government will dare to do it, because the car manufacturers will squeal like anything about 20% of the new car market disappearing overnight.
In the medium term, it would have quite an effect on the second hand market too - lots fewer new cars would flatten the depreciation curve quite a bit.
I don't think so - the kind of PIP claimant who can afford to spend their payment on a car will likely be able to so anyway, albeit with slightly reduced demand if VAT is applied. Ultimately this issue boils down to the fact PIP is not means-tested, so you do get some quite rich people buying with the scheme.
A much better use of the cash would be capital spending on buses. Then you get a service that helps people who cannot drive for medical/poverty reasons, and a coherent transport network. The PIP subsidies buys you about 3,000 electric buses a year, made in Scotland. For context, Edinburgh's fleet is 700, so over 5 years you could provide a population of 11 million people the same excellent service we have here.
It's not the wealth of people that dictates whether they spend their PIP on a car. It's whether having an updated car is the main thing they need to support themselves. My aunt has restricted growth but is otherwise fully capable. She needs an adapted car so she can get to work as an administrator which means she can support herself and not be a burden on the state. She's not at all wealthy but it's where a little bit of help makes all the difference.
You're right, I was being too simplistic. I think the scheme has been developed in such a way because of the different circumstances of claimants; anything that requires an assessment is going to be expensive and subject to challenge.
Returning from town, switch on TV, and Farage is front, centre, and everywhere dominating the media over his unacceptable proposals over immigration
He not only receives media coverage almost daily and answers every question put to him
He may be speaking to millions but it is all so divisive
And Ed Davey, is he having a conference as he hardly appears in the media ?
Ed Davey coming onto the conference stage to the clown music was quite remarkable.
Nigel is box office, particularly in the Trump era. The BBC and Sky love him. If Nigel becomes PM it will be in no small part due to ramping by the mainstream media. One can hope that Trump brings him down over the next three years.
The UK electorate need to bring Farage down
This is probably the start of them doing so. There will be stories of people who have been here years, friends, neighbours etc who might get deported,or families separated over the policy and a number of current Reformites will say 'hang on.......' and those not wedded to hardline immigration policy will likewise react to stop them. Remigration is not popular enough as a concept to win an election but its unpopular enough to stop someone winning one
My wife has just said this is terrible and many will be scared by such a shocking policy and should not be
I would add - this is not the British way of treating people
I want the boats stopped, sensible immigration, and to make sure everyone living and working in our communities do not feel threatened by a right wing mob copying Trump
You'll find no disagreement from me to any of that
Would you give Indefinite Leave to Remain to the entire Boriswave? That seems to be your position. Farcical
I wouldn't be revisiting ILR already granted. Im open to a review of future ILR and who gets it etc
So you agree with the idea that some of the Boriswave must be deported. They won’t all get ILR. In which case your only dispute is the exact level of deportations, or the income level for new visas
The issue being addressed is that around a million of the boriswave will qualify for ILR before the election and a way of sending them home must be worked out. Labour promised that they would extend ILR qualification to 10 years but they haven't delivered so other parties will need to make adjustments for that.
Returning from town, switch on TV, and Farage is front, centre, and everywhere dominating the media over his unacceptable proposals over immigration
He not only receives media coverage almost daily and answers every question put to him
He may be speaking to millions but it is all so divisive
And Ed Davey, is he having a conference as he hardly appears in the media ?
Ed Davey coming onto the conference stage to the clown music was quite remarkable.
Nigel is box office, particularly in the Trump era. The BBC and Sky love him. If Nigel becomes PM it will be in no small part due to ramping by the mainstream media. One can hope that Trump brings him down over the next three years.
The UK electorate need to bring Farage down
This is probably the start of them doing so. There will be stories of people who have been here years, friends, neighbours etc who might get deported,or families separated over the policy and a number of current Reformites will say 'hang on.......' and those not wedded to hardline immigration policy will likewise react to stop them. Remigration is not popular enough as a concept to win an election but its unpopular enough to stop someone winning one
My wife has just said this is terrible and many will be scared by such a shocking policy and should not be
I would add - this is not the British way of treating people
I want the boats stopped, sensible immigration, and to make sure everyone living and working in our communities do not feel threatened by a right wing mob copying Trump
You'll find no disagreement from me to any of that
Would you give Indefinite Leave to Remain to the entire Boriswave? That seems to be your position. Farcical
I wouldn't be revisiting ILR already granted. Im open to a review of future ILR and who gets it etc
So you agree with the idea that some of the Boriswave must be deported. They won’t all get ILR. In which case your only dispute is the exact level of deportations, or the income level for new visas
The issue being addressed is that around a million of the boriswave will qualify for ILR before the election and a way of sending them home must be worked out. Labour promised that they would extend ILR qualification to 10 years but they haven't delivered so other parties will need to make adjustments for that.
Reform are a cancer on the UK . After they’ve finished rounding up legal migrants and the angry mob still think their life is crap they’ll move onto the next group to use as scapegoats.
That's the problem with leaving the EU, the easiest thing to blame (the EU) no longer existed (as an excuse) so they could no longer hide their latent racism...
Can we just take the daft 'hateful racist' tag as read for anyone who suggests a serious policy about anything? I can feel brain cells ebbing away as I read.
Remember that Farage’s immigration Brexit poster was that Turks would be allowed to come here. He knows his audience
As with almost all remainers, you're confusing politics with your identity. If you are an upstanding, educated, open-minded person, you must be pro-EU. But the EU is a political construct, a nascent state and an issuer of laws. When you insist on seeing it as an core part of your identity, you open yourself to massive abuse, because you can never turn away from it - to do so would be to depart from righteousness.
That's the real difference between leavers and remainers. Leavers calculated the costs and benefits, remainers thought of their identity.
Laughable nonsense.
I would guess that well over half of both sets of voters cast their ballot on an identitarian basis.
And the theory that Brexiteers are somehow a more rational bunch is ... classic Lucky.
Is it just my imagination or is the subset of the population that thinks Nigel is the cure-all identical with the subset of the population that thought Boris was the cure-all, which in turn is identical with the subset of the population that now thinks Boris is a twat?
Returning from town, switch on TV, and Farage is front, centre, and everywhere dominating the media over his unacceptable proposals over immigration
He not only receives media coverage almost daily and answers every question put to him
He may be speaking to millions but it is all so divisive
And Ed Davey, is he having a conference as he hardly appears in the media ?
Ed Davey coming onto the conference stage to the clown music was quite remarkable.
Nigel is box office, particularly in the Trump era. The BBC and Sky love him. If Nigel becomes PM it will be in no small part due to ramping by the mainstream media. One can hope that Trump brings him down over the next three years.
The UK electorate need to bring Farage down
This is probably the start of them doing so. There will be stories of people who have been here years, friends, neighbours etc who might get deported,or families separated over the policy and a number of current Reformites will say 'hang on.......' and those not wedded to hardline immigration policy will likewise react to stop them. Remigration is not popular enough as a concept to win an election but its unpopular enough to stop someone winning one
My wife has just said this is terrible and many will be scared by such a shocking policy and should not be
I would add - this is not the British way of treating people
I want the boats stopped, sensible immigration, and to make sure everyone living and working in our communities do not feel threatened by a right wing mob copying Trump
You'll find no disagreement from me to any of that
Would you give Indefinite Leave to Remain to the entire Boriswave? That seems to be your position. Farcical
I wouldn't be revisiting ILR already granted. Im open to a review of future ILR and who gets it etc
So you agree with the idea that some of the Boriswave must be deported. They won’t all get ILR. In which case your only dispute is the exact level of deportations, or the income level for new visas
Anyone who doesnt have ILR should leave once their visa expires if its not renewed or ILR when granted. We need a sensible policy around that. Im vehemently opposed to kicking out people told they can stay.
He’s not saying they are all going to be expelled. He’s saying that they will tighten the rules on the ILR status, so yes some will be deported
It’s not nice. But then to my mind what mass migration has done to Britain is not nice. We’ve gone beyond nice, tragically - due to both main parties calamitously lying about and mishandling immigration
Any solution to the problem is going to be unpleasant for some people, just as open borders have been very very unpleasant for a lot of Brits
I know what hes saying and I know the situation. We disagree (in part) on what is a reasonable solution to the issues. Just because Nigel is wading across the Rubicon i dont have to get fish in my keks
Judging by the Daily Mail comments section this is wildly popular. But that’s the Daily Mail of course
I am surprised myself at how forthright this policy is. He’s certainly put the snake on the table. I’m not quite sure it’s a rubicon
However on examination I see why he’s done it. As @Luckyguy1983 says - a lot of the Boriswave will get ILR in the coming 4 years unless Labour does something (which they claim to be doing but never do). So he’s making it retrospective
It may or may nif end up wildly popular, that's up to the electorate. It wont be wildly popular (the bits ive mentioned anyway) with me. I think but cant be certain that its popularity will be commensurate with how much heat is in the immigration issue
The next set of polls will be interesting, indeed
I remember when Nigel first announced his “we will deport 600,000” policy. I said on here that this would possibly damage his polling, “it sounds too extreme”. It did nothing of the kind. Reform’s polling is either unchanged or it has risen - as others have fallen further
We consistently underestimate how far to the right the electorate is, now, on these migration/asylum issues. Something has changed
But maybe this WILL be “too extreme”? Let’s see
Short term i think it will/may boost his polling. Long term its an albatross and will probably (if it doesn't drive some away which i think it will, not sure how many though) galvanise the antis into stop reform Vorderman style campaigns. Immigration is a heat issue - if the heat comes out then this policy doesnt fly at all. Economy/CoL is a constant issue on the other hand. Reform need the rage in order to succeed
Immigration is not going away as a major issue, unfortunately, and for multiple reasons
It is now baked in, thanks to the stupidity of successive Labour and Tory governments
Indeed. But that's not the narrative. it's an event that draws 5000 people that was being held on an SSSI which is an important nature site .
The tweet, and the video attached to the tweet, frames it as 'Natural England banning you from having a day out flying kites across the country', where NE are actually considering the impact on an SSSI Common.
My perspective is that imo the answer to unthinking, populist politics is not just more unthinking, populist politics.
The tweet frames it as Natural England banning you from having a day out flying kites at this specific location. There's even a map showing where the event was going to be (and was previously) held. It doesn't say anything about banning kite flying nationwide.
I disagree. The Looking for Growth tweet is not location specific. And the first phrase in the video is "Why are we banned from having fun in Britain?". The text of the tweet:
Looking for Growth @lfg_uk You wanted a nice day out flying kites with your family. But @NaturalEngland won't let you.
Natural England won't let us build, won't let us have fun. It won't let us do anything.
The Government empowers them to block everything. This has to end.
The tweet also includes a video, accompanying said text. If you watch the video, it is clear they are referring to a specific case.
Reform are a cancer on the UK . After they’ve finished rounding up legal migrants and the angry mob still think their life is crap they’ll move onto the next group to use as scapegoats.
That's the problem with leaving the EU, the easiest thing to blame (the EU) no longer existed (as an excuse) so they could no longer hide their latent racism...
Can we just take the daft 'hateful racist' tag as read for anyone who suggests a serious policy about anything? I can feel brain cells ebbing away as I read.
Remember that Farage’s immigration Brexit poster was that Turks would be allowed to come here. He knows his audience
As with almost all remainers, you're confusing politics with your identity. If you are an upstanding, educated, open-minded person, you must be pro-EU. But the EU is a political construct, a nascent state and an issuer of laws. When you insist on seeing it as an core part of your identity, you open yourself to massive abuse, because you can never turn away from it - to do so would be to depart from righteousness.
That's the real difference between leavers and remainers. Leavers calculated the costs and benefits, remainers thought of their identity.
This is probably true. And I say that as a long-time Eurosceptic who wavered then voted Remain on the basis of a cost/benefit analysis. (Specifically the cost of bringing down a government that I actually quite liked).
Is it just my imagination or is the subset of the population that thinks Nigel is the cure-all identical with the subset of the population that thought Boris was the cure-all, which in turn is identical with the subset of the population that now thinks Boris is a twat?
Sorry, there's an obvious flaw in that: those who think Boris is a twat is, of course, universal.
Is it just my imagination or is the subset of the population that thinks Nigel is the cure-all identical with the subset of the population that thought Boris was the cure-all, which in turn is identical with the subset of the population that now thinks Boris is a twat?
Sorry, there's an obvious flaw in that: those who think Boris is a twat is, of course, universal.
Indeed. But that's not the narrative. it's an event that draws 5000 people that was being held on an SSSI which is an important nature site .
The tweet, and the video attached to the tweet, frames it as 'Natural England banning you from having a day out flying kites across the country', where NE are actually considering the impact on an SSSI Common.
My perspective is that imo the answer to unthinking, populist politics is not just more unthinking, populist politics.
The tweet frames it as Natural England banning you from having a day out flying kites at this specific location. There's even a map showing where the event was going to be (and was previously) held. It doesn't say anything about banning kite flying nationwide.
I disagree. The Looking for Growth tweet is not location specific. And the first phrase in the video is "Why are we banned from having fun in Britain?". The text of the tweet:
Looking for Growth @lfg_uk You wanted a nice day out flying kites with your family. But @NaturalEngland won't let you.
Natural England won't let us build, won't let us have fun. It won't let us do anything.
The Government empowers them to block everything. This has to end.
The tweet also includes a video, accompanying said text. If you watch the video, it is clear they are referring to a specific case.
A lot of people locally were pi**ed off that this lovely festival, which ran for over 30 years with no reported issues, was cancelled by Natural England on spurious grounds. Lots of money no longer being raised for charity.
(Though I can think of at least one who won't be happy that the case is being used for political purposes...)
Reform are a cancer on the UK . After they’ve finished rounding up legal migrants and the angry mob still think their life is crap they’ll move onto the next group to use as scapegoats.
Reform are a symptom not a cause. They articulate the opinions of a large chunk of the electorate, and if Reform disappeared tomorrow a substitute would appear before too long. Whether that would be on the right wing of the Conservatives, or grouped around Tommy Robinson, or something else, we do not know.
But the root causes of Reform's rise won't have disappeared.
Indeed you’re quite right.
But the current solution, favoured by some, of telling the voters they are stupid won’t bring them back
Returning from town, switch on TV, and Farage is front, centre, and everywhere dominating the media over his unacceptable proposals over immigration
He not only receives media coverage almost daily and answers every question put to him
He may be speaking to millions but it is all so divisive
And Ed Davey, is he having a conference as he hardly appears in the media ?
Ed Davey coming onto the conference stage to the clown music was quite remarkable.
Nigel is box office, particularly in the Trump era. The BBC and Sky love him. If Nigel becomes PM it will be in no small part due to ramping by the mainstream media. One can hope that Trump brings him down over the next three years.
The UK electorate need to bring Farage down
This is probably the start of them doing so. There will be stories of people who have been here years, friends, neighbours etc who might get deported,or families separated over the policy and a number of current Reformites will say 'hang on.......' and those not wedded to hardline immigration policy will likewise react to stop them. Remigration is not popular enough as a concept to win an election but its unpopular enough to stop someone winning one
My wife has just said this is terrible and many will be scared by such a shocking policy and should not be
I would add - this is not the British way of treating people
I want the boats stopped, sensible immigration, and to make sure everyone living and working in our communities do not feel threatened by a right wing mob copying Trump
You'll find no disagreement from me to any of that
Would you give Indefinite Leave to Remain to the entire Boriswave? That seems to be your position. Farcical
I wouldn't be revisiting ILR already granted. Im open to a review of future ILR and who gets it etc
So you agree with the idea that some of the Boriswave must be deported. They won’t all get ILR. In which case your only dispute is the exact level of deportations, or the income level for new visas
Anyone who doesnt have ILR should leave once their visa expires if its not renewed or ILR when granted. We need a sensible policy around that. Im vehemently opposed to kicking out people told they can stay.
He’s not saying they are all going to be expelled. He’s saying that they will tighten the rules on the ILR status, so yes some will be deported
It’s not nice. But then to my mind what mass migration has done to Britain is not nice. We’ve gone beyond nice, tragically - due to both main parties calamitously lying about and mishandling immigration
Any solution to the problem is going to be unpleasant for some people, just as open borders have been very very unpleasant for a lot of Brits
I know what hes saying and I know the situation. We disagree (in part) on what is a reasonable solution to the issues. Just because Nigel is wading across the Rubicon i dont have to get fish in my keks
Judging by the Daily Mail comments section this is wildly popular. But that’s the Daily Mail of course
I am surprised myself at how forthright this policy is. He’s certainly put the snake on the table. I’m not quite sure it’s a rubicon
However on examination I see why he’s done it. As @Luckyguy1983 says - a lot of the Boriswave will get ILR in the coming 4 years unless Labour does something (which they claim to be doing but never do). So he’s making it retrospective
It may or may nif end up wildly popular, that's up to the electorate. It wont be wildly popular (the bits ive mentioned anyway) with me. I think but cant be certain that its popularity will be commensurate with how much heat is in the immigration issue
The next set of polls will be interesting, indeed
I remember when Nigel first announced his “we will deport 600,000” policy. I said on here that this would possibly damage his polling, “it sounds too extreme”. It did nothing of the kind. Reform’s polling is either unchanged or it has risen - as others have fallen further
We consistently underestimate how far to the right the electorate is, now, on these migration/asylum issues. Something has changed
But maybe this WILL be “too extreme”? Let’s see
Short term i think it will/may boost his polling. Long term its an albatross and will probably (if it doesn't drive some away which i think it will, not sure how many though) galvanise the antis into stop reform Vorderman style campaigns. Immigration is a heat issue - if the heat comes out then this policy doesnt fly at all. Economy/CoL is a constant issue on the other hand. Reform need the rage in order to succeed
Immigration is not going away as a major issue, unfortunately, and for multiple reasons
It is now baked in, thanks to the stupidity of successive Labour and Tory governments
A major issue, sure. Farage probably needs it to be THE major issue and an immigration election to stand any chance to win a majority. Time will tell its tale, but as far as Reform go, like Duncan Bannatyne 'i'm out'
Returning from town, switch on TV, and Farage is front, centre, and everywhere dominating the media over his unacceptable proposals over immigration
He not only receives media coverage almost daily and answers every question put to him
He may be speaking to millions but it is all so divisive
And Ed Davey, is he having a conference as he hardly appears in the media ?
Ed Davey coming onto the conference stage to the clown music was quite remarkable.
Nigel is box office, particularly in the Trump era. The BBC and Sky love him. If Nigel becomes PM it will be in no small part due to ramping by the mainstream media. One can hope that Trump brings him down over the next three years.
The UK electorate need to bring Farage down
This is probably the start of them doing so. There will be stories of people who have been here years, friends, neighbours etc who might get deported,or families separated over the policy and a number of current Reformites will say 'hang on.......' and those not wedded to hardline immigration policy will likewise react to stop them. Remigration is not popular enough as a concept to win an election but its unpopular enough to stop someone winning one
My wife has just said this is terrible and many will be scared by such a shocking policy and should not be
I would add - this is not the British way of treating people
I want the boats stopped, sensible immigration, and to make sure everyone living and working in our communities do not feel threatened by a right wing mob copying Trump
You'll find no disagreement from me to any of that
Would you give Indefinite Leave to Remain to the entire Boriswave? That seems to be your position. Farcical
I wouldn't be revisiting ILR already granted. Im open to a review of future ILR and who gets it etc
So you agree with the idea that some of the Boriswave must be deported. They won’t all get ILR. In which case your only dispute is the exact level of deportations, or the income level for new visas
Anyone who doesnt have ILR should leave once their visa expires if its not renewed or ILR when granted. We need a sensible policy around that. Im vehemently opposed to kicking out people told they can stay.
He’s not saying they are all going to be expelled. He’s saying that they will tighten the rules on the ILR status, so yes some will be deported
It’s not nice. But then to my mind what mass migration has done to Britain is not nice. We’ve gone beyond nice, tragically - due to both main parties calamitously lying about and mishandling immigration
Any solution to the problem is going to be unpleasant for some people, just as open borders have been very very unpleasant for a lot of Brits
I know what hes saying and I know the situation. We disagree (in part) on what is a reasonable solution to the issues. Just because Nigel is wading across the Rubicon i dont have to get fish in my keks
Judging by the Daily Mail comments section this is wildly popular. But that’s the Daily Mail of course
I am surprised myself at how forthright this policy is. He’s certainly put the snake on the table. I’m not quite sure it’s a rubicon
However on examination I see why he’s done it. As @Luckyguy1983 says - a lot of the Boriswave will get ILR in the coming 4 years unless Labour does something (which they claim to be doing but never do). So he’s making it retrospective
It may or may nif end up wildly popular, that's up to the electorate. It wont be wildly popular (the bits ive mentioned anyway) with me. I think but cant be certain that its popularity will be commensurate with how much heat is in the immigration issue
The next set of polls will be interesting, indeed
I remember when Nigel first announced his “we will deport 600,000” policy. I said on here that this would possibly damage his polling, “it sounds too extreme”. It did nothing of the kind. Reform’s polling is either unchanged or it has risen - as others have fallen further
We consistently underestimate how far to the right the electorate is, now, on these migration/asylum issues. Something has changed
But maybe this WILL be “too extreme”? Let’s see
There is also an "it's popular until it's real" aspect to a lot of this deportation stuff.
Deport the mother of your child's friend at school who is married to a British national? Deport your parents' long-standing care worker who no longer meets the minimum income threshold? Outrageous.
So I expect this will be popular with a sufficiently large part of the electorate until it comes into contact with reality.
Returning from town, switch on TV, and Farage is front, centre, and everywhere dominating the media over his unacceptable proposals over immigration
He not only receives media coverage almost daily and answers every question put to him
He may be speaking to millions but it is all so divisive
And Ed Davey, is he having a conference as he hardly appears in the media ?
Ed Davey coming onto the conference stage to the clown music was quite remarkable.
Nigel is box office, particularly in the Trump era. The BBC and Sky love him. If Nigel becomes PM it will be in no small part due to ramping by the mainstream media. One can hope that Trump brings him down over the next three years.
The UK electorate need to bring Farage down
This is probably the start of them doing so. There will be stories of people who have been here years, friends, neighbours etc who might get deported,or families separated over the policy and a number of current Reformites will say 'hang on.......' and those not wedded to hardline immigration policy will likewise react to stop them. Remigration is not popular enough as a concept to win an election but its unpopular enough to stop someone winning one
My wife has just said this is terrible and many will be scared by such a shocking policy and should not be
I would add - this is not the British way of treating people
I want the boats stopped, sensible immigration, and to make sure everyone living and working in our communities do not feel threatened by a right wing mob copying Trump
You'll find no disagreement from me to any of that
Would you give Indefinite Leave to Remain to the entire Boriswave? That seems to be your position. Farcical
I wouldn't be revisiting ILR already granted. Im open to a review of future ILR and who gets it etc
So you agree with the idea that some of the Boriswave must be deported. They won’t all get ILR. In which case your only dispute is the exact level of deportations, or the income level for new visas
The issue being addressed is that around a million of the boriswave will qualify for ILR before the election and a way of sending them home must be worked out. Labour promised that they would extend ILR qualification to 10 years but they haven't delivered so other parties will need to make adjustments for that.
Yep
Labour will not extend. They want these people, eventually, naturalised and voting for them
Returning from town, switch on TV, and Farage is front, centre, and everywhere dominating the media over his unacceptable proposals over immigration
He not only receives media coverage almost daily and answers every question put to him
He may be speaking to millions but it is all so divisive
And Ed Davey, is he having a conference as he hardly appears in the media ?
Ed Davey coming onto the conference stage to the clown music was quite remarkable.
Nigel is box office, particularly in the Trump era. The BBC and Sky love him. If Nigel becomes PM it will be in no small part due to ramping by the mainstream media. One can hope that Trump brings him down over the next three years.
The UK electorate need to bring Farage down
This is probably the start of them doing so. There will be stories of people who have been here years, friends, neighbours etc who might get deported,or families separated over the policy and a number of current Reformites will say 'hang on.......' and those not wedded to hardline immigration policy will likewise react to stop them. Remigration is not popular enough as a concept to win an election but its unpopular enough to stop someone winning one
My wife has just said this is terrible and many will be scared by such a shocking policy and should not be
I would add - this is not the British way of treating people
I want the boats stopped, sensible immigration, and to make sure everyone living and working in our communities do not feel threatened by a right wing mob copying Trump
You'll find no disagreement from me to any of that
Would you give Indefinite Leave to Remain to the entire Boriswave? That seems to be your position. Farcical
I wouldn't be revisiting ILR already granted. Im open to a review of future ILR and who gets it etc
So you agree with the idea that some of the Boriswave must be deported. They won’t all get ILR. In which case your only dispute is the exact level of deportations, or the income level for new visas
Anyone who doesnt have ILR should leave once their visa expires if its not renewed or ILR when granted. We need a sensible policy around that. Im vehemently opposed to kicking out people told they can stay.
He’s not saying they are all going to be expelled. He’s saying that they will tighten the rules on the ILR status, so yes some will be deported
It’s not nice. But then to my mind what mass migration has done to Britain is not nice. We’ve gone beyond nice, tragically - due to both main parties calamitously lying about and mishandling immigration
Any solution to the problem is going to be unpleasant for some people, just as open borders have been very very unpleasant for a lot of Brits
I know what hes saying and I know the situation. We disagree (in part) on what is a reasonable solution to the issues. Just because Nigel is wading across the Rubicon i dont have to get fish in my keks
Judging by the Daily Mail comments section this is wildly popular. But that’s the Daily Mail of course
I am surprised myself at how forthright this policy is. He’s certainly put the snake on the table. I’m not quite sure it’s a rubicon
However on examination I see why he’s done it. As @Luckyguy1983 says - a lot of the Boriswave will get ILR in the coming 4 years unless Labour does something (which they claim to be doing but never do). So he’s making it retrospective
It may or may nif end up wildly popular, that's up to the electorate. It wont be wildly popular (the bits ive mentioned anyway) with me. I think but cant be certain that its popularity will be commensurate with how much heat is in the immigration issue
The next set of polls will be interesting, indeed
I remember when Nigel first announced his “we will deport 600,000” policy. I said on here that this would possibly damage his polling, “it sounds too extreme”. It did nothing of the kind. Reform’s polling is either unchanged or it has risen - as others have fallen further
We consistently underestimate how far to the right the electorate is, now, on these migration/asylum issues. Something has changed
But maybe this WILL be “too extreme”? Let’s see
True of some but not of all if my anecdotal experience is any guide. The most extreme tend to shout the loudest while those who may not feel that way keep quiet.
I have a friend who was openly advocating last Friday deploying the army to the beaches and shooting on sight illegal migrants as they landed. I could see others in my circle whingeing and flinching at that suggestion so while Reform currently enjoy the support of about a third of the electorate, there are many who don't like the extreme positions though too few are openly challenging Farage's policies because it's as politically suicidal to be seen (or perceived) to be pro-migrant as it once was to be pro-tax rises.
Your point is fair, but it goes the other way too. A lot of those who favour the more shooty solutions tend to only voice those opinions privately. Those views are still rather unfashionable. Similarly, the 'but what are they doing in the country at all' views when another report of some crime perpetrated by some individual who has somehow made it through the asylum process. Generally in polite middle class circles unless you know the people really well, the only acceptable response is still 'hmm' and not making eye contact or expressing a view at all.
Returning from town, switch on TV, and Farage is front, centre, and everywhere dominating the media over his unacceptable proposals over immigration
He not only receives media coverage almost daily and answers every question put to him
He may be speaking to millions but it is all so divisive
And Ed Davey, is he having a conference as he hardly appears in the media ?
Ed Davey coming onto the conference stage to the clown music was quite remarkable.
Nigel is box office, particularly in the Trump era. The BBC and Sky love him. If Nigel becomes PM it will be in no small part due to ramping by the mainstream media. One can hope that Trump brings him down over the next three years.
The UK electorate need to bring Farage down
This is probably the start of them doing so. There will be stories of people who have been here years, friends, neighbours etc who might get deported,or families separated over the policy and a number of current Reformites will say 'hang on.......' and those not wedded to hardline immigration policy will likewise react to stop them. Remigration is not popular enough as a concept to win an election but its unpopular enough to stop someone winning one
My wife has just said this is terrible and many will be scared by such a shocking policy and should not be
I would add - this is not the British way of treating people
I want the boats stopped, sensible immigration, and to make sure everyone living and working in our communities do not feel threatened by a right wing mob copying Trump
You'll find no disagreement from me to any of that
Would you give Indefinite Leave to Remain to the entire Boriswave? That seems to be your position. Farcical
I wouldn't be revisiting ILR already granted. Im open to a review of future ILR and who gets it etc
So you agree with the idea that some of the Boriswave must be deported. They won’t all get ILR. In which case your only dispute is the exact level of deportations, or the income level for new visas
Anyone who doesnt have ILR should leave once their visa expires if its not renewed or ILR when granted. We need a sensible policy around that. Im vehemently opposed to kicking out people told they can stay.
He’s not saying they are all going to be expelled. He’s saying that they will tighten the rules on the ILR status, so yes some will be deported
It’s not nice. But then to my mind what mass migration has done to Britain is not nice. We’ve gone beyond nice, tragically - due to both main parties calamitously lying about and mishandling immigration
Any solution to the problem is going to be unpleasant for some people, just as open borders have been very very unpleasant for a lot of Brits
I know what hes saying and I know the situation. We disagree (in part) on what is a reasonable solution to the issues. Just because Nigel is wading across the Rubicon i dont have to get fish in my keks
Judging by the Daily Mail comments section this is wildly popular. But that’s the Daily Mail of course
I am surprised myself at how forthright this policy is. He’s certainly put the snake on the table. I’m not quite sure it’s a rubicon
However on examination I see why he’s done it. As @Luckyguy1983 says - a lot of the Boriswave will get ILR in the coming 4 years unless Labour does something (which they claim to be doing but never do). So he’s making it retrospective
It may or may nif end up wildly popular, that's up to the electorate. It wont be wildly popular (the bits ive mentioned anyway) with me. I think but cant be certain that its popularity will be commensurate with how much heat is in the immigration issue
The next set of polls will be interesting, indeed
I remember when Nigel first announced his “we will deport 600,000” policy. I said on here that this would possibly damage his polling, “it sounds too extreme”. It did nothing of the kind. Reform’s polling is either unchanged or it has risen - as others have fallen further
We consistently underestimate how far to the right the electorate is, now, on these migration/asylum issues. Something has changed
But maybe this WILL be “too extreme”? Let’s see
Short term i think it will/may boost his polling. Long term its an albatross and will probably (if it doesn't drive some away which i think it will, not sure how many though) galvanise the antis into stop reform Vorderman style campaigns. Immigration is a heat issue - if the heat comes out then this policy doesnt fly at all. Economy/CoL is a constant issue on the other hand. Reform need the rage in order to succeed
Immigration is not going away as a major issue, unfortunately, and for multiple reasons
It is now baked in, thanks to the stupidity of successive Labour and Tory governments
A major issue, sure. Farage probably needs it to be THE major issue and an immigration election to stand any chance to win a majority. Time will tell its tale, but as far as Reform go, like Duncan Bannatyne 'i'm out'
Returning from town, switch on TV, and Farage is front, centre, and everywhere dominating the media over his unacceptable proposals over immigration
He not only receives media coverage almost daily and answers every question put to him
He may be speaking to millions but it is all so divisive
And Ed Davey, is he having a conference as he hardly appears in the media ?
Ed Davey coming onto the conference stage to the clown music was quite remarkable.
Nigel is box office, particularly in the Trump era. The BBC and Sky love him. If Nigel becomes PM it will be in no small part due to ramping by the mainstream media. One can hope that Trump brings him down over the next three years.
The UK electorate need to bring Farage down
This is probably the start of them doing so. There will be stories of people who have been here years, friends, neighbours etc who might get deported,or families separated over the policy and a number of current Reformites will say 'hang on.......' and those not wedded to hardline immigration policy will likewise react to stop them. Remigration is not popular enough as a concept to win an election but its unpopular enough to stop someone winning one
My wife has just said this is terrible and many will be scared by such a shocking policy and should not be
I would add - this is not the British way of treating people
I want the boats stopped, sensible immigration, and to make sure everyone living and working in our communities do not feel threatened by a right wing mob copying Trump
You'll find no disagreement from me to any of that
Would you give Indefinite Leave to Remain to the entire Boriswave? That seems to be your position. Farcical
I wouldn't be revisiting ILR already granted. Im open to a review of future ILR and who gets it etc
So you agree with the idea that some of the Boriswave must be deported. They won’t all get ILR. In which case your only dispute is the exact level of deportations, or the income level for new visas
Anyone who doesnt have ILR should leave once their visa expires if its not renewed or ILR when granted. We need a sensible policy around that. Im vehemently opposed to kicking out people told they can stay.
He’s not saying they are all going to be expelled. He’s saying that they will tighten the rules on the ILR status, so yes some will be deported
It’s not nice. But then to my mind what mass migration has done to Britain is not nice. We’ve gone beyond nice, tragically - due to both main parties calamitously lying about and mishandling immigration
Any solution to the problem is going to be unpleasant for some people, just as open borders have been very very unpleasant for a lot of Brits
I know what hes saying and I know the situation. We disagree (in part) on what is a reasonable solution to the issues. Just because Nigel is wading across the Rubicon i dont have to get fish in my keks
Judging by the Daily Mail comments section this is wildly popular. But that’s the Daily Mail of course
I am surprised myself at how forthright this policy is. He’s certainly put the snake on the table. I’m not quite sure it’s a rubicon
However on examination I see why he’s done it. As @Luckyguy1983 says - a lot of the Boriswave will get ILR in the coming 4 years unless Labour does something (which they claim to be doing but never do). So he’s making it retrospective
It may or may nif end up wildly popular, that's up to the electorate. It wont be wildly popular (the bits ive mentioned anyway) with me. I think but cant be certain that its popularity will be commensurate with how much heat is in the immigration issue
The next set of polls will be interesting, indeed
I remember when Nigel first announced his “we will deport 600,000” policy. I said on here that this would possibly damage his polling, “it sounds too extreme”. It did nothing of the kind. Reform’s polling is either unchanged or it has risen - as others have fallen further
We consistently underestimate how far to the right the electorate is, now, on these migration/asylum issues. Something has changed
But maybe this WILL be “too extreme”? Let’s see
There is also an "it's popular until it's real" aspect to a lot of this deportation stuff.
Deport the mother of your child's friend at school who is married to a British national? Deport your parents' long-standing care worker who no longer meets the minimum income threshold? Outrageous.
So I expect this will be popular with a sufficiently large part of the electorate until it comes into contact with reality.
And by that stage, the damage will have been done.
Expect lots of TV from the government of "Look at this bad person we've deported!", in the same way ICE is in America, and lots of "Think of the people we've saved!"
The thing is, I don't think that will work well in the UK.
One thing that startles me is, that in the USA, people are not out in the streets over this. Then I remember the way fascists and communists rounded people up with scarce a complaint over the years. I hope that we in the UK are not so supine as innocent men, women and kids are rounded up for deportation, but I fear we may be.
Returning from town, switch on TV, and Farage is front, centre, and everywhere dominating the media over his unacceptable proposals over immigration
He not only receives media coverage almost daily and answers every question put to him
He may be speaking to millions but it is all so divisive
And Ed Davey, is he having a conference as he hardly appears in the media ?
Ed Davey coming onto the conference stage to the clown music was quite remarkable.
Nigel is box office, particularly in the Trump era. The BBC and Sky love him. If Nigel becomes PM it will be in no small part due to ramping by the mainstream media. One can hope that Trump brings him down over the next three years.
The UK electorate need to bring Farage down
This is probably the start of them doing so. There will be stories of people who have been here years, friends, neighbours etc who might get deported,or families separated over the policy and a number of current Reformites will say 'hang on.......' and those not wedded to hardline immigration policy will likewise react to stop them. Remigration is not popular enough as a concept to win an election but its unpopular enough to stop someone winning one
My wife has just said this is terrible and many will be scared by such a shocking policy and should not be
I would add - this is not the British way of treating people
I want the boats stopped, sensible immigration, and to make sure everyone living and working in our communities do not feel threatened by a right wing mob copying Trump
You'll find no disagreement from me to any of that
Would you give Indefinite Leave to Remain to the entire Boriswave? That seems to be your position. Farcical
I wouldn't be revisiting ILR already granted. Im open to a review of future ILR and who gets it etc
So you agree with the idea that some of the Boriswave must be deported. They won’t all get ILR. In which case your only dispute is the exact level of deportations, or the income level for new visas
Anyone who doesnt have ILR should leave once their visa expires if its not renewed or ILR when granted. We need a sensible policy around that. Im vehemently opposed to kicking out people told they can stay.
He’s not saying they are all going to be expelled. He’s saying that they will tighten the rules on the ILR status, so yes some will be deported
It’s not nice. But then to my mind what mass migration has done to Britain is not nice. We’ve gone beyond nice, tragically - due to both main parties calamitously lying about and mishandling immigration
Any solution to the problem is going to be unpleasant for some people, just as open borders have been very very unpleasant for a lot of Brits
I know what hes saying and I know the situation. We disagree (in part) on what is a reasonable solution to the issues. Just because Nigel is wading across the Rubicon i dont have to get fish in my keks
Judging by the Daily Mail comments section this is wildly popular. But that’s the Daily Mail of course
I am surprised myself at how forthright this policy is. He’s certainly put the snake on the table. I’m not quite sure it’s a rubicon
However on examination I see why he’s done it. As @Luckyguy1983 says - a lot of the Boriswave will get ILR in the coming 4 years unless Labour does something (which they claim to be doing but never do). So he’s making it retrospective
It may or may nif end up wildly popular, that's up to the electorate. It wont be wildly popular (the bits ive mentioned anyway) with me. I think but cant be certain that its popularity will be commensurate with how much heat is in the immigration issue
The next set of polls will be interesting, indeed
I remember when Nigel first announced his “we will deport 600,000” policy. I said on here that this would possibly damage his polling, “it sounds too extreme”. It did nothing of the kind. Reform’s polling is either unchanged or it has risen - as others have fallen further
We consistently underestimate how far to the right the electorate is, now, on these migration/asylum issues. Something has changed
But maybe this WILL be “too extreme”? Let’s see
Short term i think it will/may boost his polling. Long term its an albatross and will probably (if it doesn't drive some away which i think it will, not sure how many though) galvanise the antis into stop reform Vorderman style campaigns. Immigration is a heat issue - if the heat comes out then this policy doesnt fly at all. Economy/CoL is a constant issue on the other hand. Reform need the rage in order to succeed
Immigration is not going away as a major issue, unfortunately, and for multiple reasons
It is now baked in, thanks to the stupidity of successive Labour and Tory governments
A major issue, sure. Farage probably needs it to be THE major issue and an immigration election to stand any chance to win a majority. Time will tell its tale, but as far as Reform go, like Duncan Bannatyne 'i'm out'
You were never in
The dragons weren't either. Listen to the pitch and then make an offer or decide you're out.
Indeed. But that's not the narrative. it's an event that draws 5000 people that was being held on an SSSI which is an important nature site .
The tweet, and the video attached to the tweet, frames it as 'Natural England banning you from having a day out flying kites across the country', where NE are actually considering the impact on an SSSI Common.
My perspective is that imo the answer to unthinking, populist politics is not just more unthinking, populist politics.
The tweet frames it as Natural England banning you from having a day out flying kites at this specific location. There's even a map showing where the event was going to be (and was previously) held. It doesn't say anything about banning kite flying nationwide.
It's utter crap trying to defend the undefensible. Natural England need to go.
That it is somewhat ironic when Bibi states World powers acknowledging a two state solution is supporting Hamas, when he has been supporting Hamas to destabilise the region for two decades.
I suffer from anxiety and depression. I don't even bother applying for benefits for it since unlike what tabloids would have you believe I know the chances of me getting it are a) remote & b) cause me so much stress as to make me worse.
This has always been my approach.
I was also told that I could claim DLA after my diagnosis for high-functioning autism, but I decided that I didn't want to put myself through the process of convincing someone how incapable I was.
That it is somewhat ironic when Bibi states World powers acknowledging a two state solution is supporting Hamas, when he has been supporting Hamas to destabilise the region for two decades.
Returning from town, switch on TV, and Farage is front, centre, and everywhere dominating the media over his unacceptable proposals over immigration
He not only receives media coverage almost daily and answers every question put to him
He may be speaking to millions but it is all so divisive
And Ed Davey, is he having a conference as he hardly appears in the media ?
Ed Davey coming onto the conference stage to the clown music was quite remarkable.
Nigel is box office, particularly in the Trump era. The BBC and Sky love him. If Nigel becomes PM it will be in no small part due to ramping by the mainstream media. One can hope that Trump brings him down over the next three years.
The UK electorate need to bring Farage down
This is probably the start of them doing so. There will be stories of people who have been here years, friends, neighbours etc who might get deported,or families separated over the policy and a number of current Reformites will say 'hang on.......' and those not wedded to hardline immigration policy will likewise react to stop them. Remigration is not popular enough as a concept to win an election but its unpopular enough to stop someone winning one
My wife has just said this is terrible and many will be scared by such a shocking policy and should not be
I would add - this is not the British way of treating people
I want the boats stopped, sensible immigration, and to make sure everyone living and working in our communities do not feel threatened by a right wing mob copying Trump
You'll find no disagreement from me to any of that
Would you give Indefinite Leave to Remain to the entire Boriswave? That seems to be your position. Farcical
I wouldn't be revisiting ILR already granted. Im open to a review of future ILR and who gets it etc
So you agree with the idea that some of the Boriswave must be deported. They won’t all get ILR. In which case your only dispute is the exact level of deportations, or the income level for new visas
Anyone who doesnt have ILR should leave once their visa expires if its not renewed or ILR when granted. We need a sensible policy around that. Im vehemently opposed to kicking out people told they can stay.
He’s not saying they are all going to be expelled. He’s saying that they will tighten the rules on the ILR status, so yes some will be deported
It’s not nice. But then to my mind what mass migration has done to Britain is not nice. We’ve gone beyond nice, tragically - due to both main parties calamitously lying about and mishandling immigration
Any solution to the problem is going to be unpleasant for some people, just as open borders have been very very unpleasant for a lot of Brits
I know what hes saying and I know the situation. We disagree (in part) on what is a reasonable solution to the issues. Just because Nigel is wading across the Rubicon i dont have to get fish in my keks
Judging by the Daily Mail comments section this is wildly popular. But that’s the Daily Mail of course
I am surprised myself at how forthright this policy is. He’s certainly put the snake on the table. I’m not quite sure it’s a rubicon
However on examination I see why he’s done it. As @Luckyguy1983 says - a lot of the Boriswave will get ILR in the coming 4 years unless Labour does something (which they claim to be doing but never do). So he’s making it retrospective
It may or may nif end up wildly popular, that's up to the electorate. It wont be wildly popular (the bits ive mentioned anyway) with me. I think but cant be certain that its popularity will be commensurate with how much heat is in the immigration issue
The next set of polls will be interesting, indeed
I remember when Nigel first announced his “we will deport 600,000” policy. I said on here that this would possibly damage his polling, “it sounds too extreme”. It did nothing of the kind. Reform’s polling is either unchanged or it has risen - as others have fallen further
We consistently underestimate how far to the right the electorate is, now, on these migration/asylum issues. Something has changed
But maybe this WILL be “too extreme”? Let’s see
There is also an "it's popular until it's real" aspect to a lot of this deportation stuff.
Deport the mother of your child's friend at school who is married to a British national? Deport your parents' long-standing care worker who no longer meets the minimum income threshold? Outrageous.
So I expect this will be popular with a sufficiently large part of the electorate until it comes into contact with reality.
We are now going to find out how popular the Four Star Party is. The knuckle draggers and plastic patriots will of course cheer on sending "foreigners" home, especially ones who are "British". Go look on X, there's a load of posts from patriots saying anyone who isn't white isn't British.
For everyone else? I expect we are going to be fed endless propaganda to demonise the people targeted for deportation. How Dare They live here taking our jobs / benefits / women etc
As a matter of interest, when Natural England make a wrong decision, as they did in Royston, how can the decision be challenged? They are a big organisation with many lawyers, and the festival was organised by small charities.
You can tell why he’s annoyed 8 of the social houses opposite the one he has bought have families that don’t work with motobility cars that are better than the 11 year old polo they have to share
Worse the poster can’t afford children but that isn’t a problem in the social housing
This, going around recently, has radicalised a fair number of people:
(It works by checking Dartford crossing free ticket eligibility IIRC).
Did the story about 20% of new car sales being via Motability ever get stood up, or is there something else going on?
Surely the government could start by limiting the scheme to cars made in the UK, so as not to be sending subsidy money abroad?
Wasn't it over 30%?
Motability was set up to replace the Invacar three wheeled scooter.
Why does anyone need a choice? If a user needs a small car, a basic Corsa should suffice. If a larger car is required a Citroen Berlingo should do the trick. If one can afford to upgrade to a BMW M5 they don't need a Motability car.
PIP is not means tested.
Because of the VAT exemption, the lease is less than half the price (46% per Motability themselves) so they can only afford the M5 by using motability's VAT exemption.
The VAT is 20%, the purported 45% saving Motability claim is if you bundle in maintenance, insurance and breakdown cover and note 5 on hteir press release "Percentage savings shown are the difference between the Motability Scheme lease cost and the highest priced alternative option, expressed as a percentage."
everything is included though, insurance , service, tyres , road tax , etc
Indeed. But that's not the narrative. it's an event that draws 5000 people that was being held on an SSSI which is an important nature site .
The tweet, and the video attached to the tweet, frames it as 'Natural England banning you from having a day out flying kites across the country', where NE are actually considering the impact on an SSSI Common.
My perspective is that imo the answer to unthinking, populist politics is not just more unthinking, populist politics.
The tweet frames it as Natural England banning you from having a day out flying kites at this specific location. There's even a map showing where the event was going to be (and was previously) held. It doesn't say anything about banning kite flying nationwide.
I disagree. The Looking for Growth tweet is not location specific. And the first phrase in the video is "Why are we banned from having fun in Britain?". The text of the tweet:
Looking for Growth @lfg_uk You wanted a nice day out flying kites with your family. But @NaturalEngland won't let you.
Natural England won't let us build, won't let us have fun. It won't let us do anything.
The Government empowers them to block everything. This has to end.
The tweet also includes a video, accompanying said text. If you watch the video, it is clear they are referring to a specific case.
A lot of people locally were pi**ed off that this lovely festival, which ran for over 30 years with no reported issues, was cancelled by Natural England on spurious grounds. Lots of money no longer being raised for charity.
(Though I can think of at least one who won't be happy that the case is being used for political purposes...)
The thought that occurs to me - if this festival and the preparations for it have been happening for 30 years then it is a part of the annual cycle of nature in that area.
Cancelling the festival is altering the environment.
Note in the article they are talking about timings to mow the area. This isn’t pristine nature - it’s a curated space. Say like Kew Gardens.
Some morons fail to understand that human activity is part of the environment. The Lake District looks the way it does, because of lots of human activity. The Norfolk Broads are the result of flooded turf mining. And so on.
Returning from town, switch on TV, and Farage is front, centre, and everywhere dominating the media over his unacceptable proposals over immigration
He not only receives media coverage almost daily and answers every question put to him
He may be speaking to millions but it is all so divisive
And Ed Davey, is he having a conference as he hardly appears in the media ?
Ed Davey coming onto the conference stage to the clown music was quite remarkable.
Nigel is box office, particularly in the Trump era. The BBC and Sky love him. If Nigel becomes PM it will be in no small part due to ramping by the mainstream media. One can hope that Trump brings him down over the next three years.
The UK electorate need to bring Farage down
This is probably the start of them doing so. There will be stories of people who have been here years, friends, neighbours etc who might get deported,or families separated over the policy and a number of current Reformites will say 'hang on.......' and those not wedded to hardline immigration policy will likewise react to stop them. Remigration is not popular enough as a concept to win an election but its unpopular enough to stop someone winning one
My wife has just said this is terrible and many will be scared by such a shocking policy and should not be
I would add - this is not the British way of treating people
I want the boats stopped, sensible immigration, and to make sure everyone living and working in our communities do not feel threatened by a right wing mob copying Trump
You'll find no disagreement from me to any of that
Would you give Indefinite Leave to Remain to the entire Boriswave? That seems to be your position. Farcical
I wouldn't be revisiting ILR already granted. Im open to a review of future ILR and who gets it etc
So you agree with the idea that some of the Boriswave must be deported. They won’t all get ILR. In which case your only dispute is the exact level of deportations, or the income level for new visas
Anyone who doesnt have ILR should leave once their visa expires if its not renewed or ILR when granted. We need a sensible policy around that. Im vehemently opposed to kicking out people told they can stay.
He’s not saying they are all going to be expelled. He’s saying that they will tighten the rules on the ILR status, so yes some will be deported
It’s not nice. But then to my mind what mass migration has done to Britain is not nice. We’ve gone beyond nice, tragically - due to both main parties calamitously lying about and mishandling immigration
Any solution to the problem is going to be unpleasant for some people, just as open borders have been very very unpleasant for a lot of Brits
I know what hes saying and I know the situation. We disagree (in part) on what is a reasonable solution to the issues. Just because Nigel is wading across the Rubicon i dont have to get fish in my keks
Judging by the Daily Mail comments section this is wildly popular. But that’s the Daily Mail of course
I am surprised myself at how forthright this policy is. He’s certainly put the snake on the table. I’m not quite sure it’s a rubicon
However on examination I see why he’s done it. As @Luckyguy1983 says - a lot of the Boriswave will get ILR in the coming 4 years unless Labour does something (which they claim to be doing but never do). So he’s making it retrospective
It may or may nif end up wildly popular, that's up to the electorate. It wont be wildly popular (the bits ive mentioned anyway) with me. I think but cant be certain that its popularity will be commensurate with how much heat is in the immigration issue
The next set of polls will be interesting, indeed
I remember when Nigel first announced his “we will deport 600,000” policy. I said on here that this would possibly damage his polling, “it sounds too extreme”. It did nothing of the kind. Reform’s polling is either unchanged or it has risen - as others have fallen further
We consistently underestimate how far to the right the electorate is, now, on these migration/asylum issues. Something has changed
But maybe this WILL be “too extreme”? Let’s see
There is also an "it's popular until it's real" aspect to a lot of this deportation stuff.
Deport the mother of your child's friend at school who is married to a British national? Deport your parents' long-standing care worker who no longer meets the minimum income threshold? Outrageous.
So I expect this will be popular with a sufficiently large part of the electorate until it comes into contact with reality.
We are now going to find out how popular the Four Star Party is. The knuckle draggers and plastic patriots will of course cheer on sending "foreigners" home, especially ones who are "British". Go look on X, there's a load of posts from patriots saying anyone who isn't white isn't British.
For everyone else? I expect we are going to be fed endless propaganda to demonise the people targeted for deportation. How Dare They live here taking our jobs / benefits / women etc
We live in repellent political times.
Indeed, the "White British are going to take over" stuff is jus dog-whistling to put down anyone who is different.
This directly affects me, my family and friends. I guess it directly affects many of the posters on here, including some who are spreading it.
Returning from town, switch on TV, and Farage is front, centre, and everywhere dominating the media over his unacceptable proposals over immigration
He not only receives media coverage almost daily and answers every question put to him
He may be speaking to millions but it is all so divisive
And Ed Davey, is he having a conference as he hardly appears in the media ?
Ed Davey coming onto the conference stage to the clown music was quite remarkable.
Nigel is box office, particularly in the Trump era. The BBC and Sky love him. If Nigel becomes PM it will be in no small part due to ramping by the mainstream media. One can hope that Trump brings him down over the next three years.
The UK electorate need to bring Farage down
This is probably the start of them doing so. There will be stories of people who have been here years, friends, neighbours etc who might get deported,or families separated over the policy and a number of current Reformites will say 'hang on.......' and those not wedded to hardline immigration policy will likewise react to stop them. Remigration is not popular enough as a concept to win an election but its unpopular enough to stop someone winning one
My wife has just said this is terrible and many will be scared by such a shocking policy and should not be
I would add - this is not the British way of treating people
I want the boats stopped, sensible immigration, and to make sure everyone living and working in our communities do not feel threatened by a right wing mob copying Trump
You'll find no disagreement from me to any of that
Would you give Indefinite Leave to Remain to the entire Boriswave? That seems to be your position. Farcical
I wouldn't be revisiting ILR already granted. Im open to a review of future ILR and who gets it etc
So you agree with the idea that some of the Boriswave must be deported. They won’t all get ILR. In which case your only dispute is the exact level of deportations, or the income level for new visas
Anyone who doesnt have ILR should leave once their visa expires if its not renewed or ILR when granted. We need a sensible policy around that. Im vehemently opposed to kicking out people told they can stay.
He’s not saying they are all going to be expelled. He’s saying that they will tighten the rules on the ILR status, so yes some will be deported
It’s not nice. But then to my mind what mass migration has done to Britain is not nice. We’ve gone beyond nice, tragically - due to both main parties calamitously lying about and mishandling immigration
Any solution to the problem is going to be unpleasant for some people, just as open borders have been very very unpleasant for a lot of Brits
I know what hes saying and I know the situation. We disagree (in part) on what is a reasonable solution to the issues. Just because Nigel is wading across the Rubicon i dont have to get fish in my keks
Judging by the Daily Mail comments section this is wildly popular. But that’s the Daily Mail of course
I am surprised myself at how forthright this policy is. He’s certainly put the snake on the table. I’m not quite sure it’s a rubicon
However on examination I see why he’s done it. As @Luckyguy1983 says - a lot of the Boriswave will get ILR in the coming 4 years unless Labour does something (which they claim to be doing but never do). So he’s making it retrospective
It may or may nif end up wildly popular, that's up to the electorate. It wont be wildly popular (the bits ive mentioned anyway) with me. I think but cant be certain that its popularity will be commensurate with how much heat is in the immigration issue
The next set of polls will be interesting, indeed
I remember when Nigel first announced his “we will deport 600,000” policy. I said on here that this would possibly damage his polling, “it sounds too extreme”. It did nothing of the kind. Reform’s polling is either unchanged or it has risen - as others have fallen further
We consistently underestimate how far to the right the electorate is, now, on these migration/asylum issues. Something has changed
But maybe this WILL be “too extreme”? Let’s see
There is also an "it's popular until it's real" aspect to a lot of this deportation stuff.
Deport the mother of your child's friend at school who is married to a British national? Deport your parents' long-standing care worker who no longer meets the minimum income threshold? Outrageous.
So I expect this will be popular with a sufficiently large part of the electorate until it comes into contact with reality.
We are now going to find out how popular the Four Star Party is. The knuckle draggers and plastic patriots will of course cheer on sending "foreigners" home, especially ones who are "British". Go look on X, there's a load of posts from patriots saying anyone who isn't white isn't British.
For everyone else? I expect we are going to be fed endless propaganda to demonise the people targeted for deportation. How Dare They live here taking our jobs / benefits / women etc
We live in repellent political times.
Indeed, the "White British are going to take over" stuff is jus dog-whistling to put down anyone who is different.
This directly affects me, my family and friends. I guess it directly affects many of the posters on here, including some who are spreading it.
Who are these White British People who are hiding under our beds? {says a whitish pink guy} ? :-)
But if no one calls the bullshit out, instead stroking his ego and telling us all what a clever boy he is, he still keeps his voters.
That's the problem with all of them though. No proper scrutiny. 22 billion back holes, 350 million for saucy nurses etc etc Its just bullshit, headline, move on
Returning from town, switch on TV, and Farage is front, centre, and everywhere dominating the media over his unacceptable proposals over immigration
He not only receives media coverage almost daily and answers every question put to him
He may be speaking to millions but it is all so divisive
And Ed Davey, is he having a conference as he hardly appears in the media ?
Ed Davey coming onto the conference stage to the clown music was quite remarkable.
Nigel is box office, particularly in the Trump era. The BBC and Sky love him. If Nigel becomes PM it will be in no small part due to ramping by the mainstream media. One can hope that Trump brings him down over the next three years.
The UK electorate need to bring Farage down
This is probably the start of them doing so. There will be stories of people who have been here years, friends, neighbours etc who might get deported,or families separated over the policy and a number of current Reformites will say 'hang on.......' and those not wedded to hardline immigration policy will likewise react to stop them. Remigration is not popular enough as a concept to win an election but its unpopular enough to stop someone winning one
My wife has just said this is terrible and many will be scared by such a shocking policy and should not be
I would add - this is not the British way of treating people
I want the boats stopped, sensible immigration, and to make sure everyone living and working in our communities do not feel threatened by a right wing mob copying Trump
You'll find no disagreement from me to any of that
Would you give Indefinite Leave to Remain to the entire Boriswave? That seems to be your position. Farcical
I wouldn't be revisiting ILR already granted. Im open to a review of future ILR and who gets it etc
So you agree with the idea that some of the Boriswave must be deported. They won’t all get ILR. In which case your only dispute is the exact level of deportations, or the income level for new visas
Anyone who doesnt have ILR should leave once their visa expires if its not renewed or ILR when granted. We need a sensible policy around that. Im vehemently opposed to kicking out people told they can stay.
He’s not saying they are all going to be expelled. He’s saying that they will tighten the rules on the ILR status, so yes some will be deported
It’s not nice. But then to my mind what mass migration has done to Britain is not nice. We’ve gone beyond nice, tragically - due to both main parties calamitously lying about and mishandling immigration
Any solution to the problem is going to be unpleasant for some people, just as open borders have been very very unpleasant for a lot of Brits
I know what hes saying and I know the situation. We disagree (in part) on what is a reasonable solution to the issues. Just because Nigel is wading across the Rubicon i dont have to get fish in my keks
Judging by the Daily Mail comments section this is wildly popular. But that’s the Daily Mail of course
I am surprised myself at how forthright this policy is. He’s certainly put the snake on the table. I’m not quite sure it’s a rubicon
However on examination I see why he’s done it. As @Luckyguy1983 says - a lot of the Boriswave will get ILR in the coming 4 years unless Labour does something (which they claim to be doing but never do). So he’s making it retrospective
It may or may nif end up wildly popular, that's up to the electorate. It wont be wildly popular (the bits ive mentioned anyway) with me. I think but cant be certain that its popularity will be commensurate with how much heat is in the immigration issue
The next set of polls will be interesting, indeed
I remember when Nigel first announced his “we will deport 600,000” policy. I said on here that this would possibly damage his polling, “it sounds too extreme”. It did nothing of the kind. Reform’s polling is either unchanged or it has risen - as others have fallen further
We consistently underestimate how far to the right the electorate is, now, on these migration/asylum issues. Something has changed
But maybe this WILL be “too extreme”? Let’s see
There is also an "it's popular until it's real" aspect to a lot of this deportation stuff.
Deport the mother of your child's friend at school who is married to a British national? Deport your parents' long-standing care worker who no longer meets the minimum income threshold? Outrageous.
So I expect this will be popular with a sufficiently large part of the electorate until it comes into contact with reality.
We are now going to find out how popular the Four Star Party is. The knuckle draggers and plastic patriots will of course cheer on sending "foreigners" home, especially ones who are "British". Go look on X, there's a load of posts from patriots saying anyone who isn't white isn't British.
For everyone else? I expect we are going to be fed endless propaganda to demonise the people targeted for deportation. How Dare They live here taking our jobs / benefits / women etc
We live in repellent political times.
Indeed, the "White British are going to take over" stuff is jus dog-whistling to put down anyone who is different.
This directly affects me, my family and friends. I guess it directly affects many of the posters on here, including some who are spreading it.
Let's go through the looking glass. The fukers get elected and there is a voluntary exodus as people flee. Others are paid to leave*
Who will do the jobs they leave? It won't be these knuckle-dragging fucks. So we have swathes of jobs we can't fill, a big drop in tax revenues and money circulating which in turn closes businesses and puts more people out of work.
*Here's money to "go home" was the policy of the BNP, who also wanted all the immigrants out. One of my Brother in Laws supported them and I asked if he - as a second generation migrant - planned to repatriate himself to Spain or Ireland
The Natural England thing is afaics BS, unless eg you would be disturbing protected birds, nesting.
It's a weird thing with which to lead.
The site is described as a "heath," which in southern England are often under terrible pressure from developers and recreational disturbance. Very few left now. They can be precious habitats, and should be protected.
I go there regularly. I have walked, cycled, and run, up and around it. There will be no housing pressure on that heath; and if they wanted to care for nature, they could always take over the adjacent gold course.
Next, it'll be banning people from it "to protect nature..."
People should be banned from a lot of places to protect nature.
Whenever I read about money being spent at a wildlife site "to improve public access" I shake my head.
If they don't want public access, they should get no public funding. And any land given to them with the expectation that public access should be provided should be given to an organisation that will.
People have to live and work with nature. In extreme cases, nature can be safeguarded. But safeguarding all of nature will do nothing to help man's interaction with, and understanding of, nature.
You'd just have a 21st century Kinder Trespass situation occurring, with the 'gamekeepers' employed not by landed gentry, but by faceless bureaucracies.
There is a notorious site somewhere in Yorkshire (I still can't tell you where else I'll be shot) which holds the last native example of a particular species.
The plant was thought extinct (thanks to Victorian collectors) until someone found a single example in the 1930s.
The site was managed by a committee which used included both government agency and volunteer effort, including a 24 hour watch when it was flowering.
With modern techniques it has been possible to propagate it and you can now see the results in various sites across the north of England, some of which are public, and some of which are not.
Should there have been public access as it involved public money? I guarantee it would have gone extinct if there had. It was 60 years between finding it and being able to grow it on.
Yes, but that's an unusual and extreme case, and of course that should be protected. It's slightly different from trying to 'protect' areas that are not that unique. Also, access can improve knowledge.
As an example, I used to love the bleak Peak moorland, such as Kinder and Bleaklow. Absolutely love them. And I don't think such areas should have windfarms on them, and have cheered on the revegetation schemes. But why do I think that? Because I've accessed the areas, know them well, and love them. I understand why they are special. If I had not visited them, I probably would not give a damn if they were built on.
Some places are special, and should be protected. But such places are relatively rare.
As with many things, it is about compromise.
Kinder Scout isn't particularly unique habitat wise - in fact it is more degraded than many other areas, hence the revegetation scheme. It is only notoriety and a couple of extra hundred feet in altitude that make it well known.
Should it be prioritised ahead of Walshaw Moor, which has an application for 50 odd wind turbines (on peat, as usual)?
At the moment it is, mainly because of an arbitrary national park boundary.
You can tell why he’s annoyed 8 of the social houses opposite the one he has bought have families that don’t work with motobility cars that are better than the 11 year old polo they have to share
Worse the poster can’t afford children but that isn’t a problem in the social housing
This, going around recently, has radicalised a fair number of people:
(It works by checking Dartford crossing free ticket eligibility IIRC).
Did the story about 20% of new car sales being via Motability ever get stood up, or is there something else going on?
Surely the government could start by limiting the scheme to cars made in the UK, so as not to be sending subsidy money abroad?
Wasn't it over 30%?
Motability was set up to replace the Invacar three wheeled scooter.
Why does anyone need a choice? If a user needs a small car, a basic Corsa should suffice. If a larger car is required a Citroen Berlingo should do the trick. If one can afford to upgrade to a BMW M5 they don't need a Motability car.
PIP is not means tested.
Because of the VAT exemption, the lease is less than half the price (46% per Motability themselves) so they can only afford the M5 by using motability's VAT exemption.
The VAT is 20%, the purported 45% saving Motability claim is if you bundle in maintenance, insurance and breakdown cover and note 5 on hteir press release "Percentage savings shown are the difference between the Motability Scheme lease cost and the highest priced alternative option, expressed as a percentage."
everything is included though, insurance , service, tyres , road tax , etc
Tyres are always premium. An ex Motability car we own came with a new set of Continental tyres supplied via a central contract from Kwik Fit. Stick a set of mid range tyres like Kuhmo on every wheel on every Motability car when the tyres need replacing and the tyre bill is halved. The guy who had our car before us wouldn't be spending his own money on Continental tyres when there are cheap Chinese brands available.
I didn't know much about it until we acquired an ex Motability car but I have learned a great deal since. An absolute abuse of tax payer money.
Returning from town, switch on TV, and Farage is front, centre, and everywhere dominating the media over his unacceptable proposals over immigration
He not only receives media coverage almost daily and answers every question put to him
He may be speaking to millions but it is all so divisive
And Ed Davey, is he having a conference as he hardly appears in the media ?
Ed Davey coming onto the conference stage to the clown music was quite remarkable.
Nigel is box office, particularly in the Trump era. The BBC and Sky love him. If Nigel becomes PM it will be in no small part due to ramping by the mainstream media. One can hope that Trump brings him down over the next three years.
The UK electorate need to bring Farage down
This is probably the start of them doing so. There will be stories of people who have been here years, friends, neighbours etc who might get deported,or families separated over the policy and a number of current Reformites will say 'hang on.......' and those not wedded to hardline immigration policy will likewise react to stop them. Remigration is not popular enough as a concept to win an election but its unpopular enough to stop someone winning one
My wife has just said this is terrible and many will be scared by such a shocking policy and should not be
I would add - this is not the British way of treating people
I want the boats stopped, sensible immigration, and to make sure everyone living and working in our communities do not feel threatened by a right wing mob copying Trump
You'll find no disagreement from me to any of that
Would you give Indefinite Leave to Remain to the entire Boriswave? That seems to be your position. Farcical
I wouldn't be revisiting ILR already granted. Im open to a review of future ILR and who gets it etc
So you agree with the idea that some of the Boriswave must be deported. They won’t all get ILR. In which case your only dispute is the exact level of deportations, or the income level for new visas
Anyone who doesnt have ILR should leave once their visa expires if its not renewed or ILR when granted. We need a sensible policy around that. Im vehemently opposed to kicking out people told they can stay.
He’s not saying they are all going to be expelled. He’s saying that they will tighten the rules on the ILR status, so yes some will be deported
It’s not nice. But then to my mind what mass migration has done to Britain is not nice. We’ve gone beyond nice, tragically - due to both main parties calamitously lying about and mishandling immigration
Any solution to the problem is going to be unpleasant for some people, just as open borders have been very very unpleasant for a lot of Brits
I know what hes saying and I know the situation. We disagree (in part) on what is a reasonable solution to the issues. Just because Nigel is wading across the Rubicon i dont have to get fish in my keks
Judging by the Daily Mail comments section this is wildly popular. But that’s the Daily Mail of course
I am surprised myself at how forthright this policy is. He’s certainly put the snake on the table. I’m not quite sure it’s a rubicon
However on examination I see why he’s done it. As @Luckyguy1983 says - a lot of the Boriswave will get ILR in the coming 4 years unless Labour does something (which they claim to be doing but never do). So he’s making it retrospective
It may or may nif end up wildly popular, that's up to the electorate. It wont be wildly popular (the bits ive mentioned anyway) with me. I think but cant be certain that its popularity will be commensurate with how much heat is in the immigration issue
The next set of polls will be interesting, indeed
I remember when Nigel first announced his “we will deport 600,000” policy. I said on here that this would possibly damage his polling, “it sounds too extreme”. It did nothing of the kind. Reform’s polling is either unchanged or it has risen - as others have fallen further
We consistently underestimate how far to the right the electorate is, now, on these migration/asylum issues. Something has changed
But maybe this WILL be “too extreme”? Let’s see
There is also an "it's popular until it's real" aspect to a lot of this deportation stuff.
Deport the mother of your child's friend at school who is married to a British national? Deport your parents' long-standing care worker who no longer meets the minimum income threshold? Outrageous.
So I expect this will be popular with a sufficiently large part of the electorate until it comes into contact with reality.
We are now going to find out how popular the Four Star Party is. The knuckle draggers and plastic patriots will of course cheer on sending "foreigners" home, especially ones who are "British". Go look on X, there's a load of posts from patriots saying anyone who isn't white isn't British.
For everyone else? I expect we are going to be fed endless propaganda to demonise the people targeted for deportation. How Dare They live here taking our jobs / benefits / women etc
We live in repellent political times.
Indeed, the "White British are going to take over" stuff is jus dog-whistling to put down anyone who is different.
This directly affects me, my family and friends. I guess it directly affects many of the posters on here, including some who are spreading it.
Let's go through the looking glass. The fukers get elected and there is a voluntary exodus as people flee. Others are paid to leave*
Who will do the jobs they leave? It won't be these knuckle-dragging fucks. So we have swathes of jobs we can't fill, a big drop in tax revenues and money circulating which in turn closes businesses and puts more people out of work.
*Here's money to "go home" was the policy of the BNP, who also wanted all the immigrants out. One of my Brother in Laws supported them and I asked if he - as a second generation migrant - planned to repatriate himself to Spain or Ireland
The reason that people in the UK won't do those jobs is that the rate of pay is very, very low.
Which is why, despite the Boriswave etc, barely any change happened in the care sector ( "bottom wiping" ).
The migrants who'd been extorted by the care home bosses, into paying thousands for their visas, didn't want to work for barely minimum wage. Surprise!
My fear is that once again, no matter how ridiculous and delusional Farage's proposals are, people are going to be genuinely astonished to learn that you can apply for ILR having been here for 5 years. A lot of people who would have been quite relaxed about foreigners coming here to do unpleasant and low paid jobs for a time will not have appreciated the rights that are given as a matter of course to those who do them.
The response of the government rather gives the game away on this, stating that they are in the process (honest) of extending the period to 10 years. Whether Farage's solutions have any credibility he has succeeded once again in demonstrating that the established parties are universally seeking to pull the wool over the eyes of the British public and many will be a lot more annoyed about that than any alleged imperfections in his solution.
Pristine Georgian wine glasses are down about 75% in price from their auction-house peak
The colossal fall in antique value is not limited to mahogany furniture. As a result I now drink almost exclusively from glassware made 1730-1830. The glasses are small, exquisite, full of character, and with every sip of Malbec you think - OMG Byron could literally have drunk port from this glass
An example. £35. That’s the price of a nice but utterly generic, noom-less Riedel wine-goblet from John Lewis
The problem is that Rachel from Accounts will get into even more trouble if we stop buying the new shiny and instead reuse the old noomy.
iPhones are one thing but a table is a table.
I can't look at a made object without thinking about the effort and/or materials that have gone into making it. Even pieces of chinese tat knocked off on a production line. I hate discarding that effort unless there really isn't any further use for it.
The effort to make a glass in 1750 must have been orders of magnitude greater than the effort to make a generic John Lewis one, so I'd take the 1750 one every time.
Preach it, brother!
I love old stuff. They got the Noom. The artisan put it in there
You can buy hand-blown glass so delicate and beautiful it’s a work of art, from 1763, for well under £100
Yes but the problem with glass is, as any Antiques Roadshow viewer can attest, is that old glass is rubbish. Sure it might have an interesting story and quirky shape but that is because the craft was barely worthy of the name. It is interesting in the same way old computers are interesting, which is to say not at all for most people and if you want to use them rather than look at them, then head to John Lewis for a set of six champagne flutes and a Macbook.
By the way, this is the “rubbish” Georgian glassware you speak of. Made by a craftsman “barely worthy of the name”
It’s an “engraved opaque twist wine glass” from 1760. It’s so beautiful sometimes I just look at it. Other times it glows rich and golden with shots of Fielden English rye whisky
Cost? £64. Cheaper than any modern handmade glass from Reidel. 265 years old
Nice glass. But putting a glass directly on parquetry?
A bad habit. One day you'll do it with a wet one, and have to look up your leather bound repair book for its "removing marks from your parqs" section.
I couldn’t resist the beautiful imagery
If you do get a watermark, get a white tea towel, an iron which has been warmed but disconnected and gently iron the tea towel over the watermark. The trapped water will escape as steam and your table will be as good as new.
Indeed. But that's not the narrative. it's an event that draws 5000 people that was being held on an SSSI which is an important nature site .
The tweet, and the video attached to the tweet, frames it as 'Natural England banning you from having a day out flying kites across the country', where NE are actually considering the impact on an SSSI Common.
My perspective is that imo the answer to unthinking, populist politics is not just more unthinking, populist politics.
The tweet frames it as Natural England banning you from having a day out flying kites at this specific location. There's even a map showing where the event was going to be (and was previously) held. It doesn't say anything about banning kite flying nationwide.
I disagree. The Looking for Growth tweet is not location specific. And the first phrase in the video is "Why are we banned from having fun in Britain?". The text of the tweet:
Looking for Growth @lfg_uk You wanted a nice day out flying kites with your family. But @NaturalEngland won't let you.
Natural England won't let us build, won't let us have fun. It won't let us do anything.
The Government empowers them to block everything. This has to end.
The tweet also includes a video, accompanying said text. If you watch the video, it is clear they are referring to a specific case.
A lot of people locally were pi**ed off that this lovely festival, which ran for over 30 years with no reported issues, was cancelled by Natural England on spurious grounds. Lots of money no longer being raised for charity.
(Though I can think of at least one who won't be happy that the case is being used for political purposes...)
The thought that occurs to me - if this festival and the preparations for it have been happening for 30 years then it is a part of the annual cycle of nature in that area.
Cancelling the festival is altering the environment.
Note in the article they are talking about timings to mow the area. This isn’t pristine nature - it’s a curated space. Say like Kew Gardens.
Some morons fail to understand that human activity is part of the environment. The Lake District looks the way it does, because of lots of human activity. The Norfolk Broads are the result of flooded turf mining. And so on.
All of the UK is curated space, but we have to decide how to curate it.
I guarantee the Pasque flower isn't there because of a kite festival.
You can tell why he’s annoyed 8 of the social houses opposite the one he has bought have families that don’t work with motobility cars that are better than the 11 year old polo they have to share
Worse the poster can’t afford children but that isn’t a problem in the social housing
This, going around recently, has radicalised a fair number of people:
(It works by checking Dartford crossing free ticket eligibility IIRC).
Did the story about 20% of new car sales being via Motability ever get stood up, or is there something else going on?
Surely the government could start by limiting the scheme to cars made in the UK, so as not to be sending subsidy money abroad?
Wasn't it over 30%?
Motability was set up to replace the Invacar three wheeled scooter.
Why does anyone need a choice? If a user needs a small car, a basic Corsa should suffice. If a larger car is required a Citroen Berlingo should do the trick. If one can afford to upgrade to a BMW M5 they don't need a Motability car.
I don;t think so.
Motobility have 815,000 leased vehicles looking at their 2024 report. The UK had 1,952,000 cars sold in 2024.
Motobility leases are 3 to 5 years (depending on adaptions) so that to me looks like 8/57 so 14% of the market is motobility.
Motability are growing quickly according to their own figures, not in a steady state. 2024 was a record year for them, with 170,000 new customers and 220,000 renewing customers getting a new vehicle. So that seems to make 390,000 new cars, or 19.98%.
The Natural England thing is afaics BS, unless eg you would be disturbing protected birds, nesting.
It's a weird thing with which to lead.
The site is described as a "heath," which in southern England are often under terrible pressure from developers and recreational disturbance. Very few left now. They can be precious habitats, and should be protected.
I go there regularly. I have walked, cycled, and run, up and around it. There will be no housing pressure on that heath; and if they wanted to care for nature, they could always take over the adjacent gold course.
Next, it'll be banning people from it "to protect nature..."
People should be banned from a lot of places to protect nature.
Whenever I read about money being spent at a wildlife site "to improve public access" I shake my head.
If they don't want public access, they should get no public funding. And any land given to them with the expectation that public access should be provided should be given to an organisation that will.
People have to live and work with nature. In extreme cases, nature can be safeguarded. But safeguarding all of nature will do nothing to help man's interaction with, and understanding of, nature.
You'd just have a 21st century Kinder Trespass situation occurring, with the 'gamekeepers' employed not by landed gentry, but by faceless bureaucracies.
There is a notorious site somewhere in Yorkshire (I still can't tell you where else I'll be shot) which holds the last native example of a particular species.
The plant was thought extinct (thanks to Victorian collectors) until someone found a single example in the 1930s.
The site was managed by a committee which used included both government agency and volunteer effort, including a 24 hour watch when it was flowering.
With modern techniques it has been possible to propagate it and you can now see the results in various sites across the north of England, some of which are public, and some of which are not.
Should there have been public access as it involved public money? I guarantee it would have gone extinct if there had. It was 60 years between finding it and being able to grow it on.
Yes, but that's an unusual and extreme case, and of course that should be protected. It's slightly different from trying to 'protect' areas that are not that unique. Also, access can improve knowledge.
As an example, I used to love the bleak Peak moorland, such as Kinder and Bleaklow. Absolutely love them. And I don't think such areas should have windfarms on them, and have cheered on the revegetation schemes. But why do I think that? Because I've accessed the areas, know them well, and love them. I understand why they are special. If I had not visited them, I probably would not give a damn if they were built on.
Some places are special, and should be protected. But such places are relatively rare.
As with many things, it is about compromise.
Kinder Scout isn't particularly unique habitat wise - in fact it is more degraded than many other areas, hence the revegetation scheme. It is only notoriety and a couple of extra hundred feet in altitude that make it well known.
Should it be prioritised ahead of Walshaw Moor, which has an application for 50 odd wind turbines (on peat, as usual)?
At the moment it is, mainly because of an arbitrary national park boundary.
90% of the population will never climb either.
It isn't necessarily the uniqueness: it's the location and he benefits of moorland habitats - e.g. as a CO2 sink.
And yes, I'm against any wind farms on peat moorlands. I have zero problems with the wind farm I can (just) see from my house, which is on an old airfield site that became farmland.
Indeed. But that's not the narrative. it's an event that draws 5000 people that was being held on an SSSI which is an important nature site .
The tweet, and the video attached to the tweet, frames it as 'Natural England banning you from having a day out flying kites across the country', where NE are actually considering the impact on an SSSI Common.
My perspective is that imo the answer to unthinking, populist politics is not just more unthinking, populist politics.
The tweet frames it as Natural England banning you from having a day out flying kites at this specific location. There's even a map showing where the event was going to be (and was previously) held. It doesn't say anything about banning kite flying nationwide.
I disagree. The Looking for Growth tweet is not location specific. And the first phrase in the video is "Why are we banned from having fun in Britain?". The text of the tweet:
Looking for Growth @lfg_uk You wanted a nice day out flying kites with your family. But @NaturalEngland won't let you.
Natural England won't let us build, won't let us have fun. It won't let us do anything.
The Government empowers them to block everything. This has to end.
The tweet also includes a video, accompanying said text. If you watch the video, it is clear they are referring to a specific case.
A lot of people locally were pi**ed off that this lovely festival, which ran for over 30 years with no reported issues, was cancelled by Natural England on spurious grounds. Lots of money no longer being raised for charity.
(Though I can think of at least one who won't be happy that the case is being used for political purposes...)
The thought that occurs to me - if this festival and the preparations for it have been happening for 30 years then it is a part of the annual cycle of nature in that area.
Cancelling the festival is altering the environment.
Note in the article they are talking about timings to mow the area. This isn’t pristine nature - it’s a curated space. Say like Kew Gardens.
Some morons fail to understand that human activity is part of the environment. The Lake District looks the way it does, because of lots of human activity. The Norfolk Broads are the result of flooded turf mining. And so on.
All of the UK is curated space, but we have to decide how to curate it.
I guarantee the Pasque flower isn't there because of a kite festival.
My point it that by changing the usage of the land, you may be fucking up what's there. You need to consider all inputs into the system.
But if no one calls the bullshit out, instead stroking his ego and telling us all what a clever boy he is, he still keeps his voters.
That's the problem with all of them though. No proper scrutiny. 22 billion back holes, 350 million for saucy nurses etc etc Its just bullshit, headline, move on
Well I'd have voted Brexit if it gave us the saucy nurses you promise me.
At least Boris said it as it was. "Vote Conservative and your wife's breasts will be bigger and you will get a BMW M3".
The Natural England thing is afaics BS, unless eg you would be disturbing protected birds, nesting.
It's a weird thing with which to lead.
The site is described as a "heath," which in southern England are often under terrible pressure from developers and recreational disturbance. Very few left now. They can be precious habitats, and should be protected.
I go there regularly. I have walked, cycled, and run, up and around it. There will be no housing pressure on that heath; and if they wanted to care for nature, they could always take over the adjacent gold course.
Next, it'll be banning people from it "to protect nature..."
People should be banned from a lot of places to protect nature.
Whenever I read about money being spent at a wildlife site "to improve public access" I shake my head.
If they don't want public access, they should get no public funding. And any land given to them with the expectation that public access should be provided should be given to an organisation that will.
People have to live and work with nature. In extreme cases, nature can be safeguarded. But safeguarding all of nature will do nothing to help man's interaction with, and understanding of, nature.
You'd just have a 21st century Kinder Trespass situation occurring, with the 'gamekeepers' employed not by landed gentry, but by faceless bureaucracies.
There is a notorious site somewhere in Yorkshire (I still can't tell you where else I'll be shot) which holds the last native example of a particular species.
The plant was thought extinct (thanks to Victorian collectors) until someone found a single example in the 1930s.
The site was managed by a committee which used included both government agency and volunteer effort, including a 24 hour watch when it was flowering.
With modern techniques it has been possible to propagate it and you can now see the results in various sites across the north of England, some of which are public, and some of which are not.
Should there have been public access as it involved public money? I guarantee it would have gone extinct if there had. It was 60 years between finding it and being able to grow it on.
Yes, but that's an unusual and extreme case, and of course that should be protected. It's slightly different from trying to 'protect' areas that are not that unique. Also, access can improve knowledge.
As an example, I used to love the bleak Peak moorland, such as Kinder and Bleaklow. Absolutely love them. And I don't think such areas should have windfarms on them, and have cheered on the revegetation schemes. But why do I think that? Because I've accessed the areas, know them well, and love them. I understand why they are special. If I had not visited them, I probably would not give a damn if they were built on.
Some places are special, and should be protected. But such places are relatively rare.
As with many things, it is about compromise.
Kinder Scout isn't particularly unique habitat wise - in fact it is more degraded than many other areas, hence the revegetation scheme. It is only notoriety and a couple of extra hundred feet in altitude that make it well known.
Should it be prioritised ahead of Walshaw Moor, which has an application for 50 odd wind turbines (on peat, as usual)?
At the moment it is, mainly because of an arbitrary national park boundary.
90% of the population will never climb either.
It isn't necessarily the uniqueness: it's the location and he benefits of moorland habitats - e.g. as a CO2 sink.
And yes, I'm against any wind farms on peat moorlands. I have zero problems with the wind farm I can (just) see from my house, which is on an old airfield site that became farmland.
The problem, of course, isn't the wind farms themselves. It is that moving big items, like turbine towers and blades, on land is a big production. On the sea, a 50m turbine blade is a light deck cargo on n number of smallish ships. On land, nearly impossible to move - gouging roads is the only way to do it.
Returning from town, switch on TV, and Farage is front, centre, and everywhere dominating the media over his unacceptable proposals over immigration
He not only receives media coverage almost daily and answers every question put to him
He may be speaking to millions but it is all so divisive
And Ed Davey, is he having a conference as he hardly appears in the media ?
Ed Davey coming onto the conference stage to the clown music was quite remarkable.
Nigel is box office, particularly in the Trump era. The BBC and Sky love him. If Nigel becomes PM it will be in no small part due to ramping by the mainstream media. One can hope that Trump brings him down over the next three years.
The UK electorate need to bring Farage down
This is probably the start of them doing so. There will be stories of people who have been here years, friends, neighbours etc who might get deported,or families separated over the policy and a number of current Reformites will say 'hang on.......' and those not wedded to hardline immigration policy will likewise react to stop them. Remigration is not popular enough as a concept to win an election but its unpopular enough to stop someone winning one
My wife has just said this is terrible and many will be scared by such a shocking policy and should not be
I would add - this is not the British way of treating people
I want the boats stopped, sensible immigration, and to make sure everyone living and working in our communities do not feel threatened by a right wing mob copying Trump
You'll find no disagreement from me to any of that
Would you give Indefinite Leave to Remain to the entire Boriswave? That seems to be your position. Farcical
I wouldn't be revisiting ILR already granted. Im open to a review of future ILR and who gets it etc
So you agree with the idea that some of the Boriswave must be deported. They won’t all get ILR. In which case your only dispute is the exact level of deportations, or the income level for new visas
Anyone who doesnt have ILR should leave once their visa expires if its not renewed or ILR when granted. We need a sensible policy around that. Im vehemently opposed to kicking out people told they can stay.
He’s not saying they are all going to be expelled. He’s saying that they will tighten the rules on the ILR status, so yes some will be deported
It’s not nice. But then to my mind what mass migration has done to Britain is not nice. We’ve gone beyond nice, tragically - due to both main parties calamitously lying about and mishandling immigration
Any solution to the problem is going to be unpleasant for some people, just as open borders have been very very unpleasant for a lot of Brits
I know what hes saying and I know the situation. We disagree (in part) on what is a reasonable solution to the issues. Just because Nigel is wading across the Rubicon i dont have to get fish in my keks
Judging by the Daily Mail comments section this is wildly popular. But that’s the Daily Mail of course
I am surprised myself at how forthright this policy is. He’s certainly put the snake on the table. I’m not quite sure it’s a rubicon
However on examination I see why he’s done it. As @Luckyguy1983 says - a lot of the Boriswave will get ILR in the coming 4 years unless Labour does something (which they claim to be doing but never do). So he’s making it retrospective
It may or may nif end up wildly popular, that's up to the electorate. It wont be wildly popular (the bits ive mentioned anyway) with me. I think but cant be certain that its popularity will be commensurate with how much heat is in the immigration issue
The next set of polls will be interesting, indeed
I remember when Nigel first announced his “we will deport 600,000” policy. I said on here that this would possibly damage his polling, “it sounds too extreme”. It did nothing of the kind. Reform’s polling is either unchanged or it has risen - as others have fallen further
We consistently underestimate how far to the right the electorate is, now, on these migration/asylum issues. Something has changed
But maybe this WILL be “too extreme”? Let’s see
There is also an "it's popular until it's real" aspect to a lot of this deportation stuff.
Deport the mother of your child's friend at school who is married to a British national? Deport your parents' long-standing care worker who no longer meets the minimum income threshold? Outrageous.
So I expect this will be popular with a sufficiently large part of the electorate until it comes into contact with reality.
We are now going to find out how popular the Four Star Party is. The knuckle draggers and plastic patriots will of course cheer on sending "foreigners" home, especially ones who are "British". Go look on X, there's a load of posts from patriots saying anyone who isn't white isn't British.
For everyone else? I expect we are going to be fed endless propaganda to demonise the people targeted for deportation. How Dare They live here taking our jobs / benefits / women etc
We live in repellent political times.
Indeed, the "White British are going to take over" stuff is jus dog-whistling to put down anyone who is different.
This directly affects me, my family and friends. I guess it directly affects many of the posters on here, including some who are spreading it.
Let's go through the looking glass. The fukers get elected and there is a voluntary exodus as people flee. Others are paid to leave*
Who will do the jobs they leave? It won't be these knuckle-dragging fucks. So we have swathes of jobs we can't fill, a big drop in tax revenues and money circulating which in turn closes businesses and puts more people out of work.
*Here's money to "go home" was the policy of the BNP, who also wanted all the immigrants out. One of my Brother in Laws supported them and I asked if he - as a second generation migrant - planned to repatriate himself to Spain or Ireland
The reason that people in the UK won't do those jobs is that the rate of pay is very, very low.
Which is why, despite the Boriswave etc, barely any change happened in the care sector ( "bottom wiping" ).
The migrants who'd been extorted by the care home bosses, into paying thousands for their visas, didn't want to work for barely minimum wage. Surprise!
Well we could get the private sector out but I can imagine what the response would be to that...
My point is simple - we have holes in the workforce which we fill with migrants. It isn't just pay - we have people who don't want to work on a farm or in a factory or in a vast list of roles that our Simon Cowell generation consider beneath them.
Shocking as it might be, "just pay more" isn't an option without consequences.
The Natural England thing is afaics BS, unless eg you would be disturbing protected birds, nesting.
It's a weird thing with which to lead.
The site is described as a "heath," which in southern England are often under terrible pressure from developers and recreational disturbance. Very few left now. They can be precious habitats, and should be protected.
I go there regularly. I have walked, cycled, and run, up and around it. There will be no housing pressure on that heath; and if they wanted to care for nature, they could always take over the adjacent gold course.
Next, it'll be banning people from it "to protect nature..."
People should be banned from a lot of places to protect nature.
Whenever I read about money being spent at a wildlife site "to improve public access" I shake my head.
If they don't want public access, they should get no public funding. And any land given to them with the expectation that public access should be provided should be given to an organisation that will.
People have to live and work with nature. In extreme cases, nature can be safeguarded. But safeguarding all of nature will do nothing to help man's interaction with, and understanding of, nature.
You'd just have a 21st century Kinder Trespass situation occurring, with the 'gamekeepers' employed not by landed gentry, but by faceless bureaucracies.
There is a notorious site somewhere in Yorkshire (I still can't tell you where else I'll be shot) which holds the last native example of a particular species.
The plant was thought extinct (thanks to Victorian collectors) until someone found a single example in the 1930s.
The site was managed by a committee which used included both government agency and volunteer effort, including a 24 hour watch when it was flowering.
With modern techniques it has been possible to propagate it and you can now see the results in various sites across the north of England, some of which are public, and some of which are not.
Should there have been public access as it involved public money? I guarantee it would have gone extinct if there had. It was 60 years between finding it and being able to grow it on.
Yes, but that's an unusual and extreme case, and of course that should be protected. It's slightly different from trying to 'protect' areas that are not that unique. Also, access can improve knowledge.
As an example, I used to love the bleak Peak moorland, such as Kinder and Bleaklow. Absolutely love them. And I don't think such areas should have windfarms on them, and have cheered on the revegetation schemes. But why do I think that? Because I've accessed the areas, know them well, and love them. I understand why they are special. If I had not visited them, I probably would not give a damn if they were built on.
Some places are special, and should be protected. But such places are relatively rare.
As with many things, it is about compromise.
Kinder Scout isn't particularly unique habitat wise - in fact it is more degraded than many other areas, hence the revegetation scheme. It is only notoriety and a couple of extra hundred feet in altitude that make it well known.
Should it be prioritised ahead of Walshaw Moor, which has an application for 50 odd wind turbines (on peat, as usual)?
At the moment it is, mainly because of an arbitrary national park boundary.
90% of the population will never climb either.
Dug an old venture scout certificate - managed to do 20 miles around Kinder scout in somewhere between (Can't remember exactly) 4 hours and 4 hours 30 back in about 1999 with backpacks and all ! Not gone that far since but have done a few half maras.
You can tell why he’s annoyed 8 of the social houses opposite the one he has bought have families that don’t work with motobility cars that are better than the 11 year old polo they have to share
Worse the poster can’t afford children but that isn’t a problem in the social housing
This, going around recently, has radicalised a fair number of people:
(It works by checking Dartford crossing free ticket eligibility IIRC).
Did the story about 20% of new car sales being via Motability ever get stood up, or is there something else going on?
Surely the government could start by limiting the scheme to cars made in the UK, so as not to be sending subsidy money abroad?
Wasn't it over 30%?
Motability was set up to replace the Invacar three wheeled scooter.
Why does anyone need a choice? If a user needs a small car, a basic Corsa should suffice. If a larger car is required a Citroen Berlingo should do the trick. If one can afford to upgrade to a BMW M5 they don't need a Motability car.
I don;t think so.
Motobility have 815,000 leased vehicles looking at their 2024 report. The UK had 1,952,000 cars sold in 2024.
Motobility leases are 3 to 5 years (depending on adaptions) so that to me looks like 8/57 so 14% of the market is motobility.
Motability are growing quickly according to their own figures, not in a steady state. 2024 was a record year for them, with 170,000 new customers and 220,000 renewing customers getting a new vehicle. So that seems to make 390,000 new cars, or 19.98%.
Or £4bn per annum for Lloyds who financed the scheme on behalf of the Motability Charity. Mostly paid for by PIP. For balance what would 390,000 people do if they had to rely on public transport.
My fear is that once again, no matter how ridiculous and delusional Farage's proposals are, people are going to be genuinely astonished to learn that you can apply for ILR having been here for 5 years. A lot of people who would have been quite relaxed about foreigners coming here to do unpleasant and low paid jobs for a time will not have appreciated the rights that are given as a matter of course to those who do them.
The response of the government rather gives the game away on this, stating that they are in the process (honest) of extending the period to 10 years. Whether Farage's solutions have any credibility he has succeeded once again in demonstrating that the established parties are universally seeking to pull the wool over the eyes of the British public and many will be a lot more annoyed about that than any alleged imperfections in his solution.
If you want people to integrate then you need to give them some certainty over their status. Farage's proposals are a recipe from precisely the kind of immigration - working age single men, sending all their money home, failing to integrate - that he claims not to want. He's also based the whole plan on some bogus numbers that the think-tank who came up with them are now disowning. The UK's fiscal hole is not down to immigrants, and Farage's proposals, apart from being divisive and unfair, will only make the fiscal outlook worse.
My fear is that once again, no matter how ridiculous and delusional Farage's proposals are, people are going to be genuinely astonished to learn that you can apply for ILR having been here for 5 years. A lot of people who would have been quite relaxed about foreigners coming here to do unpleasant and low paid jobs for a time will not have appreciated the rights that are given as a matter of course to those who do them.
The response of the government rather gives the game away on this, stating that they are in the process (honest) of extending the period to 10 years. Whether Farage's solutions have any credibility he has succeeded once again in demonstrating that the established parties are universally seeking to pull the wool over the eyes of the British public and many will be a lot more annoyed about that than any alleged imperfections in his solution.
It always comes down to a sense of control - it really does feel like we have essentially open borders and provide housing, NHS, benefits to all who come, no questions asked. Boriswave + boats.
I dislike the notion that you have to earn a certain amount to live and work here though - low paid agricultural workers allow British people to sit in an office earning money; carers looks after our parents. Those people should have access to the NHS and other public services on a temporary basis. If they commit to the UK and demonstrate they can live within our laws, then ILR should be offered under reasonably strict criteria, not automatically.
I disagree entirely with the idea of deporting those who already have ILR. That seems like a grotesque betrayal of many good people who have built their lives here.
The Natural England thing is afaics BS, unless eg you would be disturbing protected birds, nesting.
It's a weird thing with which to lead.
The site is described as a "heath," which in southern England are often under terrible pressure from developers and recreational disturbance. Very few left now. They can be precious habitats, and should be protected.
I go there regularly. I have walked, cycled, and run, up and around it. There will be no housing pressure on that heath; and if they wanted to care for nature, they could always take over the adjacent gold course.
Next, it'll be banning people from it "to protect nature..."
People should be banned from a lot of places to protect nature.
Whenever I read about money being spent at a wildlife site "to improve public access" I shake my head.
If they don't want public access, they should get no public funding. And any land given to them with the expectation that public access should be provided should be given to an organisation that will.
People have to live and work with nature. In extreme cases, nature can be safeguarded. But safeguarding all of nature will do nothing to help man's interaction with, and understanding of, nature.
You'd just have a 21st century Kinder Trespass situation occurring, with the 'gamekeepers' employed not by landed gentry, but by faceless bureaucracies.
There is a notorious site somewhere in Yorkshire (I still can't tell you where else I'll be shot) which holds the last native example of a particular species.
The plant was thought extinct (thanks to Victorian collectors) until someone found a single example in the 1930s.
The site was managed by a committee which used included both government agency and volunteer effort, including a 24 hour watch when it was flowering.
With modern techniques it has been possible to propagate it and you can now see the results in various sites across the north of England, some of which are public, and some of which are not.
Should there have been public access as it involved public money? I guarantee it would have gone extinct if there had. It was 60 years between finding it and being able to grow it on.
Yes, but that's an unusual and extreme case, and of course that should be protected. It's slightly different from trying to 'protect' areas that are not that unique. Also, access can improve knowledge.
As an example, I used to love the bleak Peak moorland, such as Kinder and Bleaklow. Absolutely love them. And I don't think such areas should have windfarms on them, and have cheered on the revegetation schemes. But why do I think that? Because I've accessed the areas, know them well, and love them. I understand why they are special. If I had not visited them, I probably would not give a damn if they were built on.
Some places are special, and should be protected. But such places are relatively rare.
As with many things, it is about compromise.
Kinder Scout isn't particularly unique habitat wise - in fact it is more degraded than many other areas, hence the revegetation scheme. It is only notoriety and a couple of extra hundred feet in altitude that make it well known.
Should it be prioritised ahead of Walshaw Moor, which has an application for 50 odd wind turbines (on peat, as usual)?
At the moment it is, mainly because of an arbitrary national park boundary.
90% of the population will never climb either.
It isn't necessarily the uniqueness: it's the location and he benefits of moorland habitats - e.g. as a CO2 sink.
And yes, I'm against any wind farms on peat moorlands. I have zero problems with the wind farm I can (just) see from my house, which is on an old airfield site that became farmland.
The problem, of course, isn't the wind farms themselves. It is that moving big items, like turbine towers and blades, on land is a big production. On the sea, a 50m turbine blade is a light deck cargo on n number of smallish ships. On land, nearly impossible to move - gouging roads is the only way to do it.
What 'converted' me to the cause was a walking trip to South Wales a couple of decades ago. I stood on a hill and saw a massive white zig-zagging scar up a nearby hillside; the roadway that had to be built to get the windfarm's components up there. They need the same on the tops as well. These are not just minimal scars, but engineered structures having to take a significant loading.
Oddly enough, a while back environmentalists were complaining about the tiny tracks used by gamekeepers on moorland...
You can tell why he’s annoyed 8 of the social houses opposite the one he has bought have families that don’t work with motobility cars that are better than the 11 year old polo they have to share
Worse the poster can’t afford children but that isn’t a problem in the social housing
This, going around recently, has radicalised a fair number of people:
(It works by checking Dartford crossing free ticket eligibility IIRC).
Did the story about 20% of new car sales being via Motability ever get stood up, or is there something else going on?
Surely the government could start by limiting the scheme to cars made in the UK, so as not to be sending subsidy money abroad?
Wasn't it over 30%?
Motability was set up to replace the Invacar three wheeled scooter.
Why does anyone need a choice? If a user needs a small car, a basic Corsa should suffice. If a larger car is required a Citroen Berlingo should do the trick. If one can afford to upgrade to a BMW M5 they don't need a Motability car.
PIP is not means tested.
Because of the VAT exemption, the lease is less than half the price (46% per Motability themselves) so they can only afford the M5 by using motability's VAT exemption.
The VAT is 20%, the purported 45% saving Motability claim is if you bundle in maintenance, insurance and breakdown cover and note 5 on hteir press release "Percentage savings shown are the difference between the Motability Scheme lease cost and the highest priced alternative option, expressed as a percentage."
The VAT exemption does not lead to a saving of 20%, but one much larger: by buying cars without VAT, Motability is 20% ahead of everyone else on depreciation when it comes to selling the leased car on after three years.
Imagine a £30k car which sells for £20k after three years. But Motability only paid £25k for it. The cost of the capital part of the lease is halved!
You can tell why he’s annoyed 8 of the social houses opposite the one he has bought have families that don’t work with motobility cars that are better than the 11 year old polo they have to share
Worse the poster can’t afford children but that isn’t a problem in the social housing
This, going around recently, has radicalised a fair number of people:
(It works by checking Dartford crossing free ticket eligibility IIRC).
Did the story about 20% of new car sales being via Motability ever get stood up, or is there something else going on?
Surely the government could start by limiting the scheme to cars made in the UK, so as not to be sending subsidy money abroad?
Wasn't it over 30%?
Motability was set up to replace the Invacar three wheeled scooter.
Why does anyone need a choice? If a user needs a small car, a basic Corsa should suffice. If a larger car is required a Citroen Berlingo should do the trick. If one can afford to upgrade to a BMW M5 they don't need a Motability car.
PIP is not means tested.
Because of the VAT exemption, the lease is less than half the price (46% per Motability themselves) so they can only afford the M5 by using motability's VAT exemption.
The VAT is 20%, the purported 45% saving Motability claim is if you bundle in maintenance, insurance and breakdown cover and note 5 on hteir press release "Percentage savings shown are the difference between the Motability Scheme lease cost and the highest priced alternative option, expressed as a percentage."
everything is included though, insurance , service, tyres , road tax , etc
Tyres are always premium. An ex Motability car we own came with a new set of Continental tyres supplied via a central contract from Kwik Fit. Stick a set of mid range tyres like Kuhmo on every wheel on every Motability car when the tyres need replacing and the tyre bill is halved. The guy who had our car before us wouldn't be spending his own money on Continental tyres when there are cheap Chinese brands available.
I didn't know much about it until we acquired an ex Motability car but I have learned a great deal since. An absolute abuse of tax payer money.
I know I shouldn't take these things personally but there have been a number of people on here today who would support stripping my husband of his ILR and sending him back to Canada as well as taking the car that my aunt relies on away from her. Oh and also robbing my disabled uncle of his means of transport as my aunt also drives him around. I don't have that many more relations left to lose.
You can tell why he’s annoyed 8 of the social houses opposite the one he has bought have families that don’t work with motobility cars that are better than the 11 year old polo they have to share
Worse the poster can’t afford children but that isn’t a problem in the social housing
This, going around recently, has radicalised a fair number of people:
(It works by checking Dartford crossing free ticket eligibility IIRC).
Did the story about 20% of new car sales being via Motability ever get stood up, or is there something else going on?
Surely the government could start by limiting the scheme to cars made in the UK, so as not to be sending subsidy money abroad?
Wasn't it over 30%?
Motability was set up to replace the Invacar three wheeled scooter.
Why does anyone need a choice? If a user needs a small car, a basic Corsa should suffice. If a larger car is required a Citroen Berlingo should do the trick. If one can afford to upgrade to a BMW M5 they don't need a Motability car.
PIP is not means tested.
Because of the VAT exemption, the lease is less than half the price (46% per Motability themselves) so they can only afford the M5 by using motability's VAT exemption.
The VAT is 20%, the purported 45% saving Motability claim is if you bundle in maintenance, insurance and breakdown cover and note 5 on hteir press release "Percentage savings shown are the difference between the Motability Scheme lease cost and the highest priced alternative option, expressed as a percentage."
everything is included though, insurance , service, tyres , road tax , etc
Tyres are always premium. An ex Motability car we own came with a new set of Continental tyres supplied via a central contract from Kwik Fit. Stick a set of mid range tyres like Kuhmo on every wheel on every Motability car when the tyres need replacing and the tyre bill is halved. The guy who had our car before us wouldn't be spending his own money on Continental tyres when there are cheap Chinese brands available.
I didn't know much about it until we acquired an ex Motability car but I have learned a great deal since. An absolute abuse of tax payer money.
I know I shouldn't take these things personally but there have been a number of people on here today who would support stripping my husband of his ILR and sending him back to Canada as well as taking the car that my aunt relies on away from her. Oh and also robbing my disabled uncle of his means of transport as my aunt also drives him around. I don't have that many more relations left to lose.
Asking your Aunt to spend £5k, leased monthly, on a decent used car like the rest of us have to is not taking anything away. If she needs special modifications, those can be subsidised.
My fear is that once again, no matter how ridiculous and delusional Farage's proposals are, people are going to be genuinely astonished to learn that you can apply for ILR having been here for 5 years. A lot of people who would have been quite relaxed about foreigners coming here to do unpleasant and low paid jobs for a time will not have appreciated the rights that are given as a matter of course to those who do them.
The response of the government rather gives the game away on this, stating that they are in the process (honest) of extending the period to 10 years. Whether Farage's solutions have any credibility he has succeeded once again in demonstrating that the established parties are universally seeking to pull the wool over the eyes of the British public and many will be a lot more annoyed about that than any alleged imperfections in his solution.
It always comes down to a sense of control - it really does feel like we have essentially open borders and provide housing, NHS, benefits to all who come, no questions asked. Boriswave + boats.
I dislike the notion that you have to earn a certain amount to live and work here though - low paid agricultural workers allow British people to sit in an office earning money; carers looks after our parents. Those people should have access to the NHS and other public services on a temporary basis. If they commit to the UK and demonstrate they can live within our laws, then ILR should be offered under reasonably strict criteria, not automatically.
I disagree entirely with the idea of deporting those who already have ILR. That seems like a grotesque betrayal of many good people who have built their lives here.
People who already have ILR we should honour.
Abolishing it for those who don’t have it yet, or extending it to ten years as Labour have suggested, I have no issue with.
Katy Kam has been impressive on this.
I thought Reform, based on PB, were going to execute all non whites on prime time TV. Imagine my surprise when the BBC report talked about changes to ILR and visas
Comments
Just because Nigel is wading across the Rubicon i dont have to get fish in my keks
It is an event with an attendance of 5000 on an SSSI common with ground nesting birds. Moving it to another site sounds rational.
They have turned that into "Natural England are Banning you taking your children to fly a kite", which is somewhere between disingenuous and dishonest. And then they go on to "delete Natural England".
It maybe populist attention seeking, or trying to paint NE as part of the Deep State. Will they be going next for "let's delete all SSSIs, and stop proecting Stonehenge and temperate rainforests"?
I want to know who they are, and I don't want faked up narratives.
I suspect that to form a government, Reform don’t only need the votes of immigration hardliners. They’re going to have to speak to more moderate voters too, for whom it’s a concern.
I am surprised myself at how forthright this policy is. He’s certainly put the snake on the table. I’m not quite sure it’s a rubicon
However on examination I see why he’s done it. As @Luckyguy1983 says - a lot of the Boriswave will get ILR in the coming 4 years unless Labour does something (which they claim to be doing but never do). So he’s making it retrospective
https://x.com/igorsushko/status/1970058555203162596
If confirmed that’s one hell of an operation, are Ukraine going to soon be flying Flamingos towards military targets in the russian capital?
Farage's first problem is no one (and that may well include the Government) knows how many people are here on a status of Indefinite Leave to Remain (ILR). There could, in theory, be tens or even hundreds of thousands involved and the first cost is going to be the bureaucracy for all these people to be located and compelled to re-apply.
Obviously, some will try and hide and hope never to be found - others will be refused and then will go through an appeal process which will no doubt be grist to the mall for the lawyers.
Once we've got some potential deportees, the next stage is deporting them - where? I imagine if we're talking the "Boriswave" primarily the Indian Sub Continent so we're going to have the edifying spectacle of groups of families queueing up to get on planes with the accompanying tears and anger.
The independent antislavery commissioner, a former special adviser to Boris Johnson, was speaking after the Home Office revealed more than 470 care companies have had their licences to sponsor migrant workers revoked amid concerns about fraud, abuse and exploitation.
About 39,000 workers were linked to the firms. The Work Rights Centre said the figures pointed to a “national scandal”. Lyons called the number of licence revocations “alarming”.
More than a quarter of the approximately 155,000 care workers who came to the UK from February 2022 to December 2024 were hired by employers who later lost their licence.
Dante's system of moral alignment is interesting. Those who practise fraud actually reserve worse punishment than murderers and heretics. The worst punishments are reserved for traitors, who do not burn, but rather, are encased in ice, to varying degrees.
In the medium term, it would have quite an effect on the second hand market too - lots fewer new cars would flatten the depreciation curve quite a bit.
The tweet, and the video attached to the tweet, frames it as 'Natural England banning you from having a day out flying kites across the country', where NE are actually considering the impact on an SSSI Common.
There's a decent paywalled article in the NS (which is archived):
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk-politics/2025/04/lawrence-newport-interview-its-more-than-system-failure-its-people-failure
And Tom Harwood has picked it up:
https://x.com/tomhfh/status/1970066713367740863
They also claim to have been at the forefront of Ban Bully XL dogs.
https://lookingforgrowth.uk/campaigns/
My perspective is that imo the answer to unthinking, populist politics is not just more unthinking, populist politics.
The plant was thought extinct (thanks to Victorian collectors) until someone found a single example in the 1930s.
The site was managed by a committee which used included both government agency and volunteer effort, including a 24 hour watch when it was flowering.
With modern techniques it has been possible to propagate it and you can now see the results in various sites across the north of England, some of which are public, and some of which are not.
Should there have been public access as it involved public money? I guarantee it would have gone extinct if there had. It was 60 years between finding it and being able to grow it on.
That's the real difference between leavers and remainers. Leavers calculated the costs and benefits, remainers thought of their identity.
I remember when Nigel first announced his “we will deport 600,000” policy. I said on here that this would possibly damage his polling, “it sounds too extreme”. It did nothing of the kind. Reform’s polling is either unchanged or it has risen - as others have fallen further
We consistently underestimate how far to the right the electorate is, now, on these migration/asylum issues. Something has changed
But maybe this WILL be “too extreme”? Let’s see
"The issue, as we've been saying repeatedly, are those already here."
A much better use of the cash would be capital spending on buses. Then you get a service that helps people who cannot drive for medical/poverty reasons, and a coherent transport network. The PIP subsidies buys you about 3,000 electric buses a year, made in Scotland. For context, Edinburgh's fleet is 700, so over 5 years you could provide a population of 11 million people the same excellent service we have here.
Immigration is a heat issue - if the heat comes out then this policy doesnt fly at all.
Economy/CoL is a constant issue on the other hand. Reform need the rage in order to succeed
Also Leavers didn't calculate the costs they say £350m on the back of a bus and didn't realise they were being lied to. Most Remainers saw through it....
Looking for Growth @lfg_uk
You wanted a nice day out flying kites with your family. But
@NaturalEngland won't let you.
Natural England won't let us build, won't let us have fun. It won't let us do anything.
The Government empowers them to block everything. This has to end.
I have a friend who was openly advocating last Friday deploying the army to the beaches and shooting on sight illegal migrants as they landed. I could see others in my circle whingeing and flinching at that suggestion so while Reform currently enjoy the support of about a third of the electorate, there are many who don't like the extreme positions though too few are openly challenging Farage's policies because it's as politically suicidal to be seen (or perceived) to be pro-migrant as it once was to be pro-tax rises.
As an example, I used to love the bleak Peak moorland, such as Kinder and Bleaklow. Absolutely love them. And I don't think such areas should have windfarms on them, and have cheered on the revegetation schemes. But why do I think that? Because I've accessed the areas, know them well, and love them. I understand why they are special. If I had not visited them, I probably would not give a damn if they were built on.
Some places are special, and should be protected. But such places are relatively rare.
As with many things, it is about compromise.
Your point is?
I would guess that well over half of both sets of voters cast their ballot on an identitarian basis.
And the theory that Brexiteers are somehow a more rational bunch is ... classic Lucky.
It is now baked in, thanks to the stupidity of successive Labour and Tory governments
This is probably true. And I say that as a long-time Eurosceptic who wavered then voted Remain on the basis of a cost/benefit analysis. (Specifically the cost of bringing down a government that I actually quite liked).
(Though I can think of at least one who won't be happy that the case is being used for political purposes...)
But the current solution, favoured by some, of telling the voters they are stupid won’t bring them back
Time will tell its tale, but as far as Reform go, like Duncan Bannatyne 'i'm out'
Deport faceless benefit scroungers? Brilliant idea.
Deport the mother of your child's friend at school who is married to a British national? Deport your parents' long-standing care worker who no longer meets the minimum income threshold? Outrageous.
So I expect this will be popular with a sufficiently large part of the electorate until it comes into contact with reality.
Expect lots of TV from the government of "Look at this bad person we've deported!", in the same way ICE is in America, and lots of "Think of the people we've saved!"
The thing is, I don't think that will work well in the UK.
One thing that startles me is, that in the USA, people are not out in the streets over this. Then I remember the way fascists and communists rounded people up with scarce a complaint over the years. I hope that we in the UK are not so supine as innocent men, women and kids are rounded up for deportation, but I fear we may be.
I was also told that I could claim DLA after my diagnosis for high-functioning autism, but I decided that I didn't want to put myself through the process of convincing someone how incapable I was.
For everyone else? I expect we are going to be fed endless propaganda to demonise the people targeted for deportation. How Dare They live here taking our jobs / benefits / women etc
We live in repellent political times.
Cancelling the festival is altering the environment.
Note in the article they are talking about timings to mow the area. This isn’t pristine nature - it’s a curated space. Say like Kew Gardens.
Some morons fail to understand that human activity is part of the environment. The Lake District looks the way it does, because of lots of human activity. The Norfolk Broads are the result of flooded turf mining. And so on.
This directly affects me, my family and friends. I guess it directly affects many of the posters on here, including some who are spreading it.
https://x.com/tomhfh/status/1970066713367740863
22 billion back holes, 350 million for saucy nurses etc etc
Its just bullshit, headline, move on
Who will do the jobs they leave? It won't be these knuckle-dragging fucks. So we have swathes of jobs we can't fill, a big drop in tax revenues and money circulating which in turn closes businesses and puts more people out of work.
*Here's money to "go home" was the policy of the BNP, who also wanted all the immigrants out. One of my Brother in Laws supported them and I asked if he - as a second generation migrant - planned to repatriate himself to Spain or Ireland
Should it be prioritised ahead of Walshaw Moor, which has an application for 50 odd wind turbines (on peat, as usual)?
At the moment it is, mainly because of an arbitrary national park boundary.
90% of the population will never climb either.
I didn't know much about it until we acquired an ex Motability car but I have learned a great deal since. An absolute abuse of tax payer money.
Which is why, despite the Boriswave etc, barely any change happened in the care sector ( "bottom wiping" ).
The migrants who'd been extorted by the care home bosses, into paying thousands for their visas, didn't want to work for barely minimum wage. Surprise!
The response of the government rather gives the game away on this, stating that they are in the process (honest) of extending the period to 10 years. Whether Farage's solutions have any credibility he has succeeded once again in demonstrating that the established parties are universally seeking to pull the wool over the eyes of the British public and many will be a lot more annoyed about that than any alleged imperfections in his solution.
I guarantee the Pasque flower isn't there because of a kite festival.
And yes, I'm against any wind farms on peat moorlands. I have zero problems with the wind farm I can (just) see from my house, which is on an old airfield site that became farmland.
At least Boris said it as it was. "Vote Conservative and your wife's breasts will be bigger and you will get a BMW M3".
My point is simple - we have holes in the workforce which we fill with migrants. It isn't just pay - we have people who don't want to work on a farm or in a factory or in a vast list of roles that our Simon Cowell generation consider beneath them.
Shocking as it might be, "just pay more" isn't an option without consequences.
https://militarywatchmagazine.com/article/why-ukraine-cant-seriously-deplete-russia-s400
What do you think?
Not gone that far since but have done a few half maras.
I dislike the notion that you have to earn a certain amount to live and work here though - low paid agricultural workers allow British people to sit in an office earning money; carers looks after our parents. Those people should have access to the NHS and other public services on a temporary basis. If they commit to the UK and demonstrate they can live within our laws, then ILR should be offered under reasonably strict criteria, not automatically.
I disagree entirely with the idea of deporting those who already have ILR. That seems like a grotesque betrayal of many good people who have built their lives here.
Oddly enough, a while back environmentalists were complaining about the tiny tracks used by gamekeepers on moorland...
Imagine a £30k car which sells for £20k after three years. But Motability only paid £25k for it. The cost of the capital part of the lease is halved!
Yes, even the ones with a funny name and brown skin.
Abolishing it for those who don’t have it yet, or extending it to ten years as Labour have suggested, I have no issue with.
Katy Kam has been impressive on this.
I thought Reform, based on PB, were going to execute all non whites on prime time TV. Imagine my surprise when the BBC report talked about changes to ILR and visas