Nigel Farage has committed prosecutable election offences with this video under the Representation of the People Act 1983.
The Act prohibits inducing voters through the threat of “temporal injury”, which includes material disadvantage such as the targeted imposition of government burdens.
Threatening to specifically house illegal migrants in a constituency if it does not vote Reform is coercive and constitutes a criminal offence.
(a)if he, directly or indirectly, by himself or by any other person on his behalf, makes use of or threatens to make use of any force, violence or restraint, or inflicts or threatens to inflict, by himself or by any other person, any temporal or spiritual injury, damage, harm or loss upon or against any person in order to induce or compel that person to vote or refrain from voting, or on account of that person having voted or refrained from voting..
@Nigelb - you’re looking at the old section 115 as originally enacted. The current version only applies to Scotland -
You want section 114A which is the current position in the rUK. The website’s hard to handle and a lot of people get this wrong.
Substantively though these sections are designed to catch personal threats not policy promises.
Fair point, my mistake. But the updated bit says substantially the same. ..(4)The following activities fall within this subsection—
(a)using or threatening to use violence against a person;
(b)damaging or destroying, or threatening to damage or destroy, a person’s property;
(c)damaging or threatening to damage a person’s reputation;
(d)causing or threatening to cause financial loss to a person;
(e)causing spiritual injury to, or placing undue spiritual pressure on, a person;
(f)doing any other act designed to intimidate a person;
(g)doing any act designed to deceive a person in relation to the administration of an election...
Policy promises which are targeted specifically and solely at constituencies which elect the candidates of a particular party, if they can be construed as damaging to property, would I think fall under this section.
It would be a test case, since afaik, no one until now has been idiotic enough to pledge a policy on this basis (and Farage seems also to have endorsed Yusuf's piece of stupidity).
The harder point would be demonstrating that b/d/f might apply here, but I don't think it impossible.
I think it would be a brave prosecutor who would seek to argue that before a court.
Why ?
Setting aside arguments over the nature of the threat, and which subsection might describe it, why would the section not cover threats made against every individual in a constituency which elected the candidate of a particular party ?
Just because a threat of harm is made as a policy pledge ought not to exempt it. The legislation certainly doesn't say that it does.
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
I’ve said many times on here that immigrants should be houses in cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country, rather than dumped on struggling coastal towns. This policy from Reform isn’t much different I suppose. People are shrieking about it, but it is Green policy to accept refugees without fuss, and plenty of lefties wore ‘Refugees Welcome’ t-shirts so why should they be upset by it?
How do you build cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country? To start with, the most expensive streets in the country tend to have a fair percentage of the street occupied already.
Good luck justifiying the £10m an acre it would cost to buy suitable land there..
I suppose you could try buying an empty house on Bishops Avenue, and try building a 100 story tower block. But those things are actually rather expensive. And the cost of trying to do one on a fairly suburban street would be fun - getting thousands of tons of stuff in and out would be insanely expensive.
You'd probably end up with very expensive flats from that. Nice views, probably.
Just park caravans all down the road like in Bristol.
You obviously haven't met the Sturmabteilung in charge of parking enforcement in Hampstead.
Surely you’d love that kind of effective enforcement?
The conservative leaflet that dropped into my paper recycling bin was promising less rigorous parking enforcement.
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
I’ve said many times on here that immigrants should be houses in cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country, rather than dumped on struggling coastal towns. This policy from Reform isn’t much different I suppose. People are shrieking about it, but it is Green policy to accept refugees without fuss, and plenty of lefties wore ‘Refugees Welcome’ t-shirts so why should they be upset by it?
How do you build cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country? To start with, the most expensive streets in the country tend to have a fair percentage of the street occupied already.
Good luck justifiying the £10m an acre it would cost to buy suitable land there..
I suppose you could try buying an empty house on Bishops Avenue, and try building a 100 story tower block. But those things are actually rather expensive. And the cost of trying to do one on a fairly suburban street would be fun - getting thousands of tons of stuff in and out would be insanely expensive.
You'd probably end up with very expensive flats from that. Nice views, probably.
Just park caravans all down the road like in Bristol.
You obviously haven't met the Sturmabteilung in charge of parking enforcement in Hampstead.
Compulsory purchase the derelict plots on Bishops Avenue etc
Still expensive to build in London. Even if you give yourself permission for tower blocks. There's a reason that flat new starts have virtually stopped. And that's in areas where access for construction is easy.
In all seriousness it is extremely hard to find accommodation for refugees in London given the difference between average rents and what the taxpayer is willing to spend to house them. We are part of a community group set up to support refugee families in our neighbourhood through community sponsorship. The group provides support with finding schools and GPs, work opportunities, ESOL classes and negotiating the welfare system. But the most challenging task is finding accommodation that is inside their budget. In the end, some people in the group bought a flat which they rent at below market rates, as this was the only way to make it work. All of which is to say that it is possible to house refugees in "posh" areas, with sufficient effort from members of the community. There are a lot of community sponsorship groups around the country, in all kinds of neighbourhoods, doing precisely that.
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
I’ve said many times on here that immigrants should be houses in cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country, rather than dumped on struggling coastal towns. This policy from Reform isn’t much different I suppose. People are shrieking about it, but it is Green policy to accept refugees without fuss, and plenty of lefties wore ‘Refugees Welcome’ t-shirts so why should they be upset by it?
How do you build cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country? To start with, the most expensive streets in the country tend to have a fair percentage of the street occupied already.
Good luck justifiying the £10m an acre it would cost to buy suitable land there..
I suppose you could try buying an empty house on Bishops Avenue, and try building a 100 story tower block. But those things are actually rather expensive. And the cost of trying to do one on a fairly suburban street would be fun - getting thousands of tons of stuff in and out would be insanely expensive.
You'd probably end up with very expensive flats from that. Nice views, probably.
Just park caravans all down the road like in Bristol.
You obviously haven't met the Sturmabteilung in charge of parking enforcement in Hampstead.
Compulsory purchase the derelict plots on Bishops Avenue etc
Still expensive to build in London. Even if you give yourself permission for tower blocks. There's a reason that flat new starts have virtually stopped. And that's in areas where access for construction is easy.
I suspect that it is the cost of the land not the cost of the building.
You suspect wrong. The cost of construction has gone through the roof (ha!). Materials, labour, the lot. On top of that, regulatory costs have exceeded inflation for a long time.
Nigel Farage has committed prosecutable election offences with this video under the Representation of the People Act 1983.
The Act prohibits inducing voters through the threat of “temporal injury”, which includes material disadvantage such as the targeted imposition of government burdens.
Threatening to specifically house illegal migrants in a constituency if it does not vote Reform is coercive and constitutes a criminal offence.
(a)if he, directly or indirectly, by himself or by any other person on his behalf, makes use of or threatens to make use of any force, violence or restraint, or inflicts or threatens to inflict, by himself or by any other person, any temporal or spiritual injury, damage, harm or loss upon or against any person in order to induce or compel that person to vote or refrain from voting, or on account of that person having voted or refrained from voting..
@Nigelb - you’re looking at the old section 115 as originally enacted. The current version only applies to Scotland -
You want section 114A which is the current position in the rUK. The website’s hard to handle and a lot of people get this wrong.
Substantively though these sections are designed to catch personal threats not policy promises.
Fair point, my mistake. But the updated bit says substantially the same. ..(4)The following activities fall within this subsection—
(a)using or threatening to use violence against a person;
(b)damaging or destroying, or threatening to damage or destroy, a person’s property;
(c)damaging or threatening to damage a person’s reputation;
(d)causing or threatening to cause financial loss to a person;
(e)causing spiritual injury to, or placing undue spiritual pressure on, a person;
(f)doing any other act designed to intimidate a person;
(g)doing any act designed to deceive a person in relation to the administration of an election...
Policy promises which are targeted specifically and solely at constituencies which elect the candidates of a particular party, if they can be construed as damaging to property, would I think fall under this section.
It would be a test case, since afaik, no one until now has been idiotic enough to pledge a policy on this basis (and Farage seems also to have endorsed Yusuf's piece of stupidity).
The harder point would be demonstrating that b/d/f might apply here, but I don't think it impossible.
I think it would be a brave prosecutor who would seek to argue that before a court.
Why ?
Setting aside arguments over the nature of the threat, and which subsection might describe it, why would the section not cover threats made against every individual in a constituency which elected the candidate of a particular party ?
Just because a threat of harm is made as a policy pledge ought not to exempt it. The legislation certainly doesn't say that it does.
No but you’ve got to prove beyond reasonable doubt that, for example, financial loss or property damage was threatened specifically to a person or persons. That would likely involve proving that current such arrangements did so. Like I said, brave prosecutor.
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
I’ve said many times on here that immigrants should be houses in cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country, rather than dumped on struggling coastal towns. This policy from Reform isn’t much different I suppose. People are shrieking about it, but it is Green policy to accept refugees without fuss, and plenty of lefties wore ‘Refugees Welcome’ t-shirts so why should they be upset by it?
How do you build cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country? To start with, the most expensive streets in the country tend to have a fair percentage of the street occupied already.
I don't have a fully costed manifesto, but you get the gist. House the migrants in posh areas and let the people who aren't struggling for jobs, doctors appointments, school places etc suffer the consequences, rather than those who are already in bother having an added burden
But then wouldn't people complain about them getting to live where I can't afford to?
Yes, I did think that. A drawback. But my main gripe with mass immigration was always the double impact it had on the poor; their areas changed, their jobs were less secure, they had to fight harder for resources, all the time living cheek to jowl with the competition while the people profiting, the already wealthy, lived in better conditions because of it
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
I’ve said many times on here that immigrants should be houses in cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country, rather than dumped on struggling coastal towns. This policy from Reform isn’t much different I suppose. People are shrieking about it, but it is Green policy to accept refugees without fuss, and plenty of lefties wore ‘Refugees Welcome’ t-shirts so why should they be upset by it?
How do you build cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country? To start with, the most expensive streets in the country tend to have a fair percentage of the street occupied already.
I don't have a fully costed manifesto, but you get the gist. House the migrants in posh areas and let the people who aren't struggling for jobs, doctors appointments, school places etc suffer the consequences, rather than those who are already in bother having an added burden
Please cost it - remembering that most builders can no longer afford to build in London because £500,000 a flat doesn't cover costs..
Big caravan sites in Richmond Park, the Cotswolds, Hyde Park, Regents Park, the posh squares in London, Hampstead Heath, Sidmouth, Bristol, etc
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
I’ve said many times on here that immigrants should be houses in cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country, rather than dumped on struggling coastal towns. This policy from Reform isn’t much different I suppose. People are shrieking about it, but it is Green policy to accept refugees without fuss, and plenty of lefties wore ‘Refugees Welcome’ t-shirts so why should they be upset by it?
How do you build cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country? To start with, the most expensive streets in the country tend to have a fair percentage of the street occupied already.
I don't have a fully costed manifesto, but you get the gist. House the migrants in posh areas and let the people who aren't struggling for jobs, doctors appointments, school places etc suffer the consequences, rather than those who are already in bother having an added burden
Please cost it - remembering that most builders can no longer afford to build in London because £500,000 a flat doesn't cover costs..
Big caravan sites in Richmond Park, the Cotswolds, Hyde Park, Regents Park, the posh squares in London, Hampstead Heath, Sidmouth, Bristol, etc
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
I’ve said many times on here that immigrants should be houses in cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country, rather than dumped on struggling coastal towns. This policy from Reform isn’t much different I suppose. People are shrieking about it, but it is Green policy to accept refugees without fuss, and plenty of lefties wore ‘Refugees Welcome’ t-shirts so why should they be upset by it?
How do you build cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country? To start with, the most expensive streets in the country tend to have a fair percentage of the street occupied already.
I don't have a fully costed manifesto, but you get the gist. House the migrants in posh areas and let the people who aren't struggling for jobs, doctors appointments, school places etc suffer the consequences, rather than those who are already in bother having an added burden
Please cost it - remembering that most builders can no longer afford to build in London because £500,000 a flat doesn't cover costs..
Big caravan sites in Richmond Park, the Cotswolds, Hyde Park, Regents Park, the posh squares in London, Hampstead Heath, Sidmouth, Bristol, etc
I dont see how "We are going to need massive detention camps in nice green suburban parts of England because we can't control the border" is a vote winner for Reform.
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
I’ve said many times on here that immigrants should be houses in cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country, rather than dumped on struggling coastal towns. This policy from Reform isn’t much different I suppose. People are shrieking about it, but it is Green policy to accept refugees without fuss, and plenty of lefties wore ‘Refugees Welcome’ t-shirts so why should they be upset by it?
How do you build cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country? To start with, the most expensive streets in the country tend to have a fair percentage of the street occupied already.
I don't have a fully costed manifesto, but you get the gist. House the migrants in posh areas and let the people who aren't struggling for jobs, doctors appointments, school places etc suffer the consequences, rather than those who are already in bother having an added burden
Please cost it - remembering that most builders can no longer afford to build in London because £500,000 a flat doesn't cover costs..
Big caravan sites in Richmond Park, the Cotswolds, Hyde Park, Regents Park, the posh squares in London, Hampstead Heath, Sidmouth, Bristol, etc
I dont see how "We are going to need massive detention camps in nice green suburban parts of England because we can't control the border" is a vote winner for Reform.
Well it wouldn't be for those areas but those areas aren't going to vote Reform in any case.
Another idea Reform might suggest would be to cover the Cotswolds and Chilterns with solar farms.
The coalfield towns had their environment trashed for two centuries to provide the country with energy so now its time 'thatched cottage land' took its turn.
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
I’ve said many times on here that immigrants should be houses in cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country, rather than dumped on struggling coastal towns. This policy from Reform isn’t much different I suppose. People are shrieking about it, but it is Green policy to accept refugees without fuss, and plenty of lefties wore ‘Refugees Welcome’ t-shirts so why should they be upset by it?
How do you build cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country? To start with, the most expensive streets in the country tend to have a fair percentage of the street occupied already.
I don't have a fully costed manifesto, but you get the gist. House the migrants in posh areas and let the people who aren't struggling for jobs, doctors appointments, school places etc suffer the consequences, rather than those who are already in bother having an added burden
Please cost it - remembering that most builders can no longer afford to build in London because £500,000 a flat doesn't cover costs..
Big caravan sites in Richmond Park, the Cotswolds, Hyde Park, Regents Park, the posh squares in London, Hampstead Heath, Sidmouth, Bristol, etc
I dont see how "We are going to need massive detention camps in nice green suburban parts of England because we can't control the border" is a vote winner for Reform.
It would toughen the other parties up on the issue. The areas I mentioned becoming detention centres wouldn’t bother Reform supporters too much
The point is, mass immigration has fucked over the poor and the JAMs, while the rich profited financially and were immune to the social consequences. It’s time to redress the balance
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
I’ve said many times on here that immigrants should be houses in cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country, rather than dumped on struggling coastal towns. This policy from Reform isn’t much different I suppose. People are shrieking about it, but it is Green policy to accept refugees without fuss, and plenty of lefties wore ‘Refugees Welcome’ t-shirts so why should they be upset by it?
How do you build cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country? To start with, the most expensive streets in the country tend to have a fair percentage of the street occupied already.
I don't have a fully costed manifesto, but you get the gist. House the migrants in posh areas and let the people who aren't struggling for jobs, doctors appointments, school places etc suffer the consequences, rather than those who are already in bother having an added burden
Please cost it - remembering that most builders can no longer afford to build in London because £500,000 a flat doesn't cover costs..
Big caravan sites in Richmond Park, the Cotswolds, Hyde Park, Regents Park, the posh squares in London, Hampstead Heath, Sidmouth, Bristol, etc
I hear Scotland is empty.
I had a bleak moment over the christmas/NY break re-watching "The Year of the Sex Olympics" (a Nigel Kneale classic, if you've not seen it). I was imagining a reality show hosted by a gurning GB News and/or Farage style character watching the migrants fight it out on a Gruinard-esque island to see who might get a pass on deportation.
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
I’ve said many times on here that immigrants should be houses in cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country, rather than dumped on struggling coastal towns. This policy from Reform isn’t much different I suppose. People are shrieking about it, but it is Green policy to accept refugees without fuss, and plenty of lefties wore ‘Refugees Welcome’ t-shirts so why should they be upset by it?
How do you build cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country? To start with, the most expensive streets in the country tend to have a fair percentage of the street occupied already.
I don't have a fully costed manifesto, but you get the gist. House the migrants in posh areas and let the people who aren't struggling for jobs, doctors appointments, school places etc suffer the consequences, rather than those who are already in bother having an added burden
Please cost it - remembering that most builders can no longer afford to build in London because £500,000 a flat doesn't cover costs..
Big caravan sites in Richmond Park, the Cotswolds, Hyde Park, Regents Park, the posh squares in London, Hampstead Heath, Sidmouth, Bristol, etc
Communal tents - so much more cost effective. If you point out any downsides, you get fined. Call them "long houses" enough, charge 10 grand for a weeks 'experience' visit, and even the Guardian will come round to the idea.
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
I’ve said many times on here that immigrants should be houses in cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country, rather than dumped on struggling coastal towns. This policy from Reform isn’t much different I suppose. People are shrieking about it, but it is Green policy to accept refugees without fuss, and plenty of lefties wore ‘Refugees Welcome’ t-shirts so why should they be upset by it?
How do you build cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country? To start with, the most expensive streets in the country tend to have a fair percentage of the street occupied already.
I don't have a fully costed manifesto, but you get the gist. House the migrants in posh areas and let the people who aren't struggling for jobs, doctors appointments, school places etc suffer the consequences, rather than those who are already in bother having an added burden
Please cost it - remembering that most builders can no longer afford to build in London because £500,000 a flat doesn't cover costs..
Big caravan sites in Richmond Park, the Cotswolds, Hyde Park, Regents Park, the posh squares in London, Hampstead Heath, Sidmouth, Bristol, etc
I dont see how "We are going to need massive detention camps in nice green suburban parts of England because we can't control the border" is a vote winner for Reform.
It would toughen the other parties up on the issue. The areas I mentioned becoming detention centres wouldn’t bother Reform supporters too much
The point is, mass immigration has fucked over the poor and the JAMs, while the rich profited financially and were immune to the social consequences. It’s time to redress the balance
There's this bit in the West Wing where Jed Bartlett says something like "I'm the President of all Americans, not just the ones who voted for me".
And for a long time, politics was like that.
But we saw that break down in the US in recent years: during the government shutdown, the Trump administration deliberately withheld funds from Blue States, even as it sent them to Red States.
No government should ever seek to govern only for those who voted it for it. There should never be 'punishment' for voting the wrong way.
Now, if Farage had framed it as "we think the costs should be shared around, and it's wrong that the most deprived areas bear the brunt of these costs", that would have been fine. But "vote Green, get detention centres" is the kind of thing that riles me beyond belief.
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
I’ve said many times on here that immigrants should be houses in cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country, rather than dumped on struggling coastal towns. This policy from Reform isn’t much different I suppose. People are shrieking about it, but it is Green policy to accept refugees without fuss, and plenty of lefties wore ‘Refugees Welcome’ t-shirts so why should they be upset by it?
How do you build cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country? To start with, the most expensive streets in the country tend to have a fair percentage of the street occupied already.
I don't have a fully costed manifesto, but you get the gist. House the migrants in posh areas and let the people who aren't struggling for jobs, doctors appointments, school places etc suffer the consequences, rather than those who are already in bother having an added burden
Please cost it - remembering that most builders can no longer afford to build in London because £500,000 a flat doesn't cover costs..
Big caravan sites in Richmond Park, the Cotswolds, Hyde Park, Regents Park, the posh squares in London, Hampstead Heath, Sidmouth, Bristol, etc
Communal tents - so much more cost effective. If you point out any downsides, you get fined. Call them "long houses" enough, charge 10 grand for a weeks 'experience' visit, and even the Guardian will come round to the idea.
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
I’ve said many times on here that immigrants should be houses in cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country, rather than dumped on struggling coastal towns. This policy from Reform isn’t much different I suppose. People are shrieking about it, but it is Green policy to accept refugees without fuss, and plenty of lefties wore ‘Refugees Welcome’ t-shirts so why should they be upset by it?
How do you build cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country? To start with, the most expensive streets in the country tend to have a fair percentage of the street occupied already.
Good luck justifiying the £10m an acre it would cost to buy suitable land there..
I suppose you could try buying an empty house on Bishops Avenue, and try building a 100 story tower block. But those things are actually rather expensive. And the cost of trying to do one on a fairly suburban street would be fun - getting thousands of tons of stuff in and out would be insanely expensive.
You'd probably end up with very expensive flats from that. Nice views, probably.
Just park caravans all down the road like in Bristol.
You obviously haven't met the Sturmabteilung in charge of parking enforcement in Hampstead.
Compulsory purchase the derelict plots on Bishops Avenue etc
Still expensive to build in London. Even if you give yourself permission for tower blocks. There's a reason that flat new starts have virtually stopped. And that's in areas where access for construction is easy.
I suspect that it is the cost of the land not the cost of the building.
You suspect wrong. The cost of construction has gone through the roof (ha!). Materials, labour, the lot. On top of that, regulatory costs have exceeded inflation for a long time.
They found the end of the road.
What happened to all those skilled trades with a work ethic?
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
I’ve said many times on here that immigrants should be houses in cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country, rather than dumped on struggling coastal towns. This policy from Reform isn’t much different I suppose. People are shrieking about it, but it is Green policy to accept refugees without fuss, and plenty of lefties wore ‘Refugees Welcome’ t-shirts so why should they be upset by it?
How do you build cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country? To start with, the most expensive streets in the country tend to have a fair percentage of the street occupied already.
I don't have a fully costed manifesto, but you get the gist. House the migrants in posh areas and let the people who aren't struggling for jobs, doctors appointments, school places etc suffer the consequences, rather than those who are already in bother having an added burden
Please cost it - remembering that most builders can no longer afford to build in London because £500,000 a flat doesn't cover costs..
Big caravan sites in Richmond Park, the Cotswolds, Hyde Park, Regents Park, the posh squares in London, Hampstead Heath, Sidmouth, Bristol, etc
I hear Scotland is empty.
I had a bleak moment over the christmas/NY break re-watching "The Year of the Sex Olympics" (a Nigel Kneale classic, if you've not seen it). I was imagining a reality show hosted by a gurning GB News and/or Farage style character watching the migrants fight it out on a Gruinard-esque island to see who might get a pass on deportation.
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
I’ve said many times on here that immigrants should be houses in cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country, rather than dumped on struggling coastal towns. This policy from Reform isn’t much different I suppose. People are shrieking about it, but it is Green policy to accept refugees without fuss, and plenty of lefties wore ‘Refugees Welcome’ t-shirts so why should they be upset by it?
How do you build cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country? To start with, the most expensive streets in the country tend to have a fair percentage of the street occupied already.
I don't have a fully costed manifesto, but you get the gist. House the migrants in posh areas and let the people who aren't struggling for jobs, doctors appointments, school places etc suffer the consequences, rather than those who are already in bother having an added burden
Please cost it - remembering that most builders can no longer afford to build in London because £500,000 a flat doesn't cover costs..
Big caravan sites in Richmond Park, the Cotswolds, Hyde Park, Regents Park, the posh squares in London, Hampstead Heath, Sidmouth, Bristol, etc
I dont see how "We are going to need massive detention camps in nice green suburban parts of England because we can't control the border" is a vote winner for Reform.
It would toughen the other parties up on the issue. The areas I mentioned becoming detention centres wouldn’t bother Reform supporters too much
The point is, mass immigration has fucked over the poor and the JAMs, while the rich profited financially and were immune to the social consequences. It’s time to redress the balance
There's this bit in the West Wing where Jed Bartlett says something like "I'm the President of all Americans, not just the ones who voted for me".
And for a long time, politics was like that.
But we saw that break down in the US in recent years: during the government shutdown, the Trump administration deliberately withheld funds from Blue States, even as it sent them to Red States.
No government should ever seek to govern only for those who voted it for it. There should never be 'punishment' for voting the wrong way.
Now, if Farage had framed it as "we think the costs should be shared around, and it's wrong that the most deprived areas bear the brunt of these costs", that would have been fine. But "vote Green, get detention centres" is the kind of thing that riles me beyond belief.
Yes, I can see how Reform’s policy could rile someone; they said it in quite a vindictive way. But there’s no need for them to be so explicit about why they’re detaining asylum seekers in certain areas, just do it.
As I said, I’ve always hated the double impact of mass immigration on the poor, while the rich profit financially and escape the downsides. It turns the working class against the migrants and allows them to be cast as stupid racists, when in the main, they’re just looking to maintain their standard of living. Divide and rule
Sir Keir Starmer will host senior business, culture and policing figures in Downing Street on Tuesday as part of coordinated efforts to tackle antisemitism with a "whole of society" approach.
Announcing the summit, the prime minister said "it is not enough to simply say we stand with Jewish communities", and that effort was needed across sectors to "eradicate antisemitism from every corner of society".
The man accused of setting off the New Year's Day fire that led to the deadly Palisades inferno was apparently "fixated" with Luigi Mangione and held a "resentment of the rich," according to prosecutors.
I'm listening to this and the Tom Holland bits are annoying but thankfully brief. It's like "Triggernometry" where one person does all the talking, and the other makes pointless brief interjections.
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
I’ve said many times on here that immigrants should be houses in cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country, rather than dumped on struggling coastal towns. This policy from Reform isn’t much different I suppose. People are shrieking about it, but it is Green policy to accept refugees without fuss, and plenty of lefties wore ‘Refugees Welcome’ t-shirts so why should they be upset by it?
How do you build cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country? To start with, the most expensive streets in the country tend to have a fair percentage of the street occupied already.
I don't have a fully costed manifesto, but you get the gist. House the migrants in posh areas and let the people who aren't struggling for jobs, doctors appointments, school places etc suffer the consequences, rather than those who are already in bother having an added burden
Please cost it - remembering that most builders can no longer afford to build in London because £500,000 a flat doesn't cover costs..
Big caravan sites in Richmond Park, the Cotswolds, Hyde Park, Regents Park, the posh squares in London, Hampstead Heath, Sidmouth, Bristol, etc
I dont see how "We are going to need massive detention camps in nice green suburban parts of England because we can't control the border" is a vote winner for Reform.
It would toughen the other parties up on the issue. The areas I mentioned becoming detention centres wouldn’t bother Reform supporters too much
The point is, mass immigration has fucked over the poor and the JAMs, while the rich profited financially and were immune to the social consequences. It’s time to redress the balance
There's this bit in the West Wing where Jed Bartlett says something like "I'm the President of all Americans, not just the ones who voted for me".
And for a long time, politics was like that.
But we saw that break down in the US in recent years: during the government shutdown, the Trump administration deliberately withheld funds from Blue States, even as it sent them to Red States.
No government should ever seek to govern only for those who voted it for it. There should never be 'punishment' for voting the wrong way.
Now, if Farage had framed it as "we think the costs should be shared around, and it's wrong that the most deprived areas bear the brunt of these costs", that would have been fine. But "vote Green, get detention centres" is the kind of thing that riles me beyond belief.
Yes, I can see how Reform’s policy could rile someone; they said it in quite a vindictive way. But there’s no need for them to be so explicit about why they’re detaining asylum seekers in certain areas, just do it.
As I said, I’ve always hated the double impact of mass immigration on the poor, while the rich profit financially and escape the downsides. It turns the working class against the migrants and allows them to be cast as stupid racists, when in the main, they’re just looking to maintain their standard of living. Divide and rule
The thing is, once something has been said, it cannot be unsaid. Nigel Farage -and Reform- chose to make this statement.
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
I’ve said many times on here that immigrants should be houses in cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country, rather than dumped on struggling coastal towns. This policy from Reform isn’t much different I suppose. People are shrieking about it, but it is Green policy to accept refugees without fuss, and plenty of lefties wore ‘Refugees Welcome’ t-shirts so why should they be upset by it?
How do you build cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country? To start with, the most expensive streets in the country tend to have a fair percentage of the street occupied already.
Good luck justifiying the £10m an acre it would cost to buy suitable land there..
I suppose you could try buying an empty house on Bishops Avenue, and try building a 100 story tower block. But those things are actually rather expensive. And the cost of trying to do one on a fairly suburban street would be fun - getting thousands of tons of stuff in and out would be insanely expensive.
You'd probably end up with very expensive flats from that. Nice views, probably.
Just park caravans all down the road like in Bristol.
You obviously haven't met the Sturmabteilung in charge of parking enforcement in Hampstead.
Compulsory purchase the derelict plots on Bishops Avenue etc
Still expensive to build in London. Even if you give yourself permission for tower blocks. There's a reason that flat new starts have virtually stopped. And that's in areas where access for construction is easy.
I suspect that it is the cost of the land not the cost of the building.
You suspect wrong. The cost of construction has gone through the roof (ha!). Materials, labour, the lot. On top of that, regulatory costs have exceeded inflation for a long time.
They found the end of the road.
What happened to all those skilled trades with a work ethic?
They need more money. Because everything has gone up in price.
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
I’ve said many times on here that immigrants should be houses in cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country, rather than dumped on struggling coastal towns. This policy from Reform isn’t much different I suppose. People are shrieking about it, but it is Green policy to accept refugees without fuss, and plenty of lefties wore ‘Refugees Welcome’ t-shirts so why should they be upset by it?
How do you build cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country? To start with, the most expensive streets in the country tend to have a fair percentage of the street occupied already.
I don't have a fully costed manifesto, but you get the gist. House the migrants in posh areas and let the people who aren't struggling for jobs, doctors appointments, school places etc suffer the consequences, rather than those who are already in bother having an added burden
Please cost it - remembering that most builders can no longer afford to build in London because £500,000 a flat doesn't cover costs..
Big caravan sites in Richmond Park, the Cotswolds, Hyde Park, Regents Park, the posh squares in London, Hampstead Heath, Sidmouth, Bristol, etc
I dont see how "We are going to need massive detention camps in nice green suburban parts of England because we can't control the border" is a vote winner for Reform.
It would toughen the other parties up on the issue. The areas I mentioned becoming detention centres wouldn’t bother Reform supporters too much
The point is, mass immigration has fucked over the poor and the JAMs, while the rich profited financially and were immune to the social consequences. It’s time to redress the balance
There's this bit in the West Wing where Jed Bartlett says something like "I'm the President of all Americans, not just the ones who voted for me".
And for a long time, politics was like that.
But we saw that break down in the US in recent years: during the government shutdown, the Trump administration deliberately withheld funds from Blue States, even as it sent them to Red States.
No government should ever seek to govern only for those who voted it for it. There should never be 'punishment' for voting the wrong way.
Now, if Farage had framed it as "we think the costs should be shared around, and it's wrong that the most deprived areas bear the brunt of these costs", that would have been fine. But "vote Green, get detention centres" is the kind of thing that riles me beyond belief.
Yes, I can see how Reform’s policy could rile someone; they said it in quite a vindictive way. But there’s no need for them to be so explicit about why they’re detaining asylum seekers in certain areas, just do it.
As I said, I’ve always hated the double impact of mass immigration on the poor, while the rich profit financially and escape the downsides. It turns the working class against the migrants and allows them to be cast as stupid racists, when in the main, they’re just looking to maintain their standard of living. Divide and rule
And I've always hated blaming the real problems of government policy - underinvestment outside of the South East, for example - on immigration, when those policies far better explain our problems.
This latest from Reform further demonstrates how divisive they are. They have nothing to say beyond that toxic rhetoric.
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
I’ve said many times on here that immigrants should be houses in cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country, rather than dumped on struggling coastal towns. This policy from Reform isn’t much different I suppose. People are shrieking about it, but it is Green policy to accept refugees without fuss, and plenty of lefties wore ‘Refugees Welcome’ t-shirts so why should they be upset by it?
How do you build cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country? To start with, the most expensive streets in the country tend to have a fair percentage of the street occupied already.
I don't have a fully costed manifesto, but you get the gist. House the migrants in posh areas and let the people who aren't struggling for jobs, doctors appointments, school places etc suffer the consequences, rather than those who are already in bother having an added burden
Please cost it - remembering that most builders can no longer afford to build in London because £500,000 a flat doesn't cover costs..
Big caravan sites in Richmond Park, the Cotswolds, Hyde Park, Regents Park, the posh squares in London, Hampstead Heath, Sidmouth, Bristol, etc
I dont see how "We are going to need massive detention camps in nice green suburban parts of England because we can't control the border" is a vote winner for Reform.
It would toughen the other parties up on the issue. The areas I mentioned becoming detention centres wouldn’t bother Reform supporters too much
The point is, mass immigration has fucked over the poor and the JAMs, while the rich profited financially and were immune to the social consequences. It’s time to redress the balance
There's this bit in the West Wing where Jed Bartlett says something like "I'm the President of all Americans, not just the ones who voted for me".
And for a long time, politics was like that.
But we saw that break down in the US in recent years: during the government shutdown, the Trump administration deliberately withheld funds from Blue States, even as it sent them to Red States.
No government should ever seek to govern only for those who voted it for it. There should never be 'punishment' for voting the wrong way.
Now, if Farage had framed it as "we think the costs should be shared around, and it's wrong that the most deprived areas bear the brunt of these costs", that would have been fine. But "vote Green, get detention centres" is the kind of thing that riles me beyond belief.
Yes, I can see how Reform’s policy could rile someone; they said it in quite a vindictive way. But there’s no need for them to be so explicit about why they’re detaining asylum seekers in certain areas, just do it.
As I said, I’ve always hated the double impact of mass immigration on the poor, while the rich profit financially and escape the downsides. It turns the working class against the migrants and allows them to be cast as stupid racists, when in the main, they’re just looking to maintain their standard of living. Divide and rule
The thing is, once something has been said, it cannot be unsaid. Nigel Farage -and Reform- chose to make this statement.
I hold no candle for Farage or Reform, and think it crass, but I can't say I'm that animated by it - other than it nakedly bakes in partisanship - because they just said the quiet part out loud.
Governments have been playing this game - favouring their areas and disfavouring areas that aren't, particularly in marginal seats - for decades.
Kemi Badenoch is increasingly impressive. This is exactly the firm, politely "fuck you" kind of attitude we need towards the evil Jew hating Left, and maybe only a black woman with confidence can bring it off, in the modern Tory party
She could persuade me away from Reform if her brand wasn't so Ratnered and she wasn't surrounded by dreadful Tory Woke Wets who need to be expelled. But, she really has grown in "office", and good for her
Kemi Badenoch is increasingly impressive. This is exactly the firm, politely "fuck you" kind of attitude we need towards the evil Jew hating Left, and maybe only a black woman with confidence can bring it off, in the modern Tory party
She could persuade me away from Reform if her brand wasn't so Ratnered and she wasn't surrounded by dreadful Tory Woke Wets who need to be expelled. But, she really has grown in "office", and good for her
I shall watch, with interest
That's an excellent clip.
I think public are often impressed when a politician holds their ground says this is how I see it even if you don't, despite if social media says "p'owned".....I remember Cameron getting setup by the Lib Dem activist with the disabled kid. All the reports were oh look Cameron in trouble here, public giving him grief. But actually I think he came out of it looking pretty good, a polite but firm I don't see it that way.
But you can't do it once though, you have to do it consistently and be reasonable doing it.
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
I’ve said many times on here that immigrants should be houses in cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country, rather than dumped on struggling coastal towns. This policy from Reform isn’t much different I suppose. People are shrieking about it, but it is Green policy to accept refugees without fuss, and plenty of lefties wore ‘Refugees Welcome’ t-shirts so why should they be upset by it?
How do you build cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country? To start with, the most expensive streets in the country tend to have a fair percentage of the street occupied already.
I don't have a fully costed manifesto, but you get the gist. House the migrants in posh areas and let the people who aren't struggling for jobs, doctors appointments, school places etc suffer the consequences, rather than those who are already in bother having an added burden
Please cost it - remembering that most builders can no longer afford to build in London because £500,000 a flat doesn't cover costs..
Big caravan sites in Richmond Park, the Cotswolds, Hyde Park, Regents Park, the posh squares in London, Hampstead Heath, Sidmouth, Bristol, etc
I dont see how "We are going to need massive detention camps in nice green suburban parts of England because we can't control the border" is a vote winner for Reform.
It would toughen the other parties up on the issue. The areas I mentioned becoming detention centres wouldn’t bother Reform supporters too much
The point is, mass immigration has fucked over the poor and the JAMs, while the rich profited financially and were immune to the social consequences. It’s time to redress the balance
There's this bit in the West Wing where Jed Bartlett says something like "I'm the President of all Americans, not just the ones who voted for me".
And for a long time, politics was like that.
But we saw that break down in the US in recent years: during the government shutdown, the Trump administration deliberately withheld funds from Blue States, even as it sent them to Red States.
No government should ever seek to govern only for those who voted it for it. There should never be 'punishment' for voting the wrong way.
Now, if Farage had framed it as "we think the costs should be shared around, and it's wrong that the most deprived areas bear the brunt of these costs", that would have been fine. But "vote Green, get detention centres" is the kind of thing that riles me beyond belief.
Yes, I can see how Reform’s policy could rile someone; they said it in quite a vindictive way. But there’s no need for them to be so explicit about why they’re detaining asylum seekers in certain areas, just do it.
As I said, I’ve always hated the double impact of mass immigration on the poor, while the rich profit financially and escape the downsides. It turns the working class against the migrants and allows them to be cast as stupid racists, when in the main, they’re just looking to maintain their standard of living. Divide and rule
The thing is, once something has been said, it cannot be unsaid. Nigel Farage -and Reform- chose to make this statement.
I hold no candle for Farage or Reform, and think it crass, but I can't say I'm that animated by it - other than it nakedly bakes in partisanship - because they just said the quiet part out loud.
Governments have been playing this game - favouring their areas and disfavouring areas that aren't, particularly in marginal seats - for decades.
Exactly. This sort of thing is not new.
Asylum seekers have happily been dumped in large numbers, relative to other areas, in places like Middlesbrough, Gateshead and Rochdale and, as Isam said, if people dare to complain they are called racist.
Then you get the Green deputy leader outraged when they plan to dump several hundred in Crowborough in her own backyard.
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
I’ve said many times on here that immigrants should be houses in cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country, rather than dumped on struggling coastal towns. This policy from Reform isn’t much different I suppose. People are shrieking about it, but it is Green policy to accept refugees without fuss, and plenty of lefties wore ‘Refugees Welcome’ t-shirts so why should they be upset by it?
How do you build cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country? To start with, the most expensive streets in the country tend to have a fair percentage of the street occupied already.
I don't have a fully costed manifesto, but you get the gist. House the migrants in posh areas and let the people who aren't struggling for jobs, doctors appointments, school places etc suffer the consequences, rather than those who are already in bother having an added burden
Please cost it - remembering that most builders can no longer afford to build in London because £500,000 a flat doesn't cover costs..
Big caravan sites in Richmond Park, the Cotswolds, Hyde Park, Regents Park, the posh squares in London, Hampstead Heath, Sidmouth, Bristol, etc
I dont see how "We are going to need massive detention camps in nice green suburban parts of England because we can't control the border" is a vote winner for Reform.
It would toughen the other parties up on the issue. The areas I mentioned becoming detention centres wouldn’t bother Reform supporters too much
The point is, mass immigration has fucked over the poor and the JAMs, while the rich profited financially and were immune to the social consequences. It’s time to redress the balance
There's this bit in the West Wing where Jed Bartlett says something like "I'm the President of all Americans, not just the ones who voted for me".
And for a long time, politics was like that.
But we saw that break down in the US in recent years: during the government shutdown, the Trump administration deliberately withheld funds from Blue States, even as it sent them to Red States.
No government should ever seek to govern only for those who voted it for it. There should never be 'punishment' for voting the wrong way.
Now, if Farage had framed it as "we think the costs should be shared around, and it's wrong that the most deprived areas bear the brunt of these costs", that would have been fine. But "vote Green, get detention centres" is the kind of thing that riles me beyond belief.
West Wing was fantasy. Just in case you didn't know.
Angela Rayner is a big drifter on Betfair's next Prime Minister market, and is now only second favourite behind Andy Burnham.
Caution: this is a quite illiquid market.
The rumours are she is quite the big drinker, definitely no illquidness around big Ange...oh you said drifter...
A Green MP in a video says you can smell the booze at Westminster.
They must be drinking a lot if the smell of it overwhelms the stink from the weed those guys are clearly smoking.
You cannot hope to bribe or twist, Thank God! The British journalist Because the two-faced twonk is clutching pearls over both Angela Rayner's alleged drinking and Hannah Spencer alleging that MPs drink.
Sir Keir Starmer will host senior business, culture and policing figures in Downing Street on Tuesday as part of coordinated efforts to tackle antisemitism with a "whole of society" approach.
Announcing the summit, the prime minister said "it is not enough to simply say we stand with Jewish communities", and that effort was needed across sectors to "eradicate antisemitism from every corner of society".
Kemi Badenoch is increasingly impressive. This is exactly the firm, politely "fuck you" kind of attitude we need towards the evil Jew hating Left, and maybe only a black woman with confidence can bring it off, in the modern Tory party
She could persuade me away from Reform if her brand wasn't so Ratnered and she wasn't surrounded by dreadful Tory Woke Wets who need to be expelled. But, she really has grown in "office", and good for her
I shall watch, with interest
That's an excellent clip.
I think public are often impressed when a politician holds their ground says this is how I see it even if you don't, despite if social media says "p'owned".....I remember Cameron getting setup by the Lib Dem activist with the disabled kid. All the reports were oh look Cameron in trouble here, public giving him grief. But actually I think he came out of it looking pretty good, a polite but firm I don't see it that way.
But you can't do it once though, you have to do it consistently and be reasonable doing it.
Yes, precisely. I expect the activist will say she p'wned Kemi, when in fact she was the one who was p'wned.
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
I’ve said many times on here that immigrants should be houses in cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country, rather than dumped on struggling coastal towns. This policy from Reform isn’t much different I suppose. People are shrieking about it, but it is Green policy to accept refugees without fuss, and plenty of lefties wore ‘Refugees Welcome’ t-shirts so why should they be upset by it?
How do you build cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country? To start with, the most expensive streets in the country tend to have a fair percentage of the street occupied already.
I don't have a fully costed manifesto, but you get the gist. House the migrants in posh areas and let the people who aren't struggling for jobs, doctors appointments, school places etc suffer the consequences, rather than those who are already in bother having an added burden
Please cost it - remembering that most builders can no longer afford to build in London because £500,000 a flat doesn't cover costs..
Big caravan sites in Richmond Park, the Cotswolds, Hyde Park, Regents Park, the posh squares in London, Hampstead Heath, Sidmouth, Bristol, etc
I dont see how "We are going to need massive detention camps in nice green suburban parts of England because we can't control the border" is a vote winner for Reform.
It would toughen the other parties up on the issue. The areas I mentioned becoming detention centres wouldn’t bother Reform supporters too much
The point is, mass immigration has fucked over the poor and the JAMs, while the rich profited financially and were immune to the social consequences. It’s time to redress the balance
There's this bit in the West Wing where Jed Bartlett says something like "I'm the President of all Americans, not just the ones who voted for me".
And for a long time, politics was like that.
But we saw that break down in the US in recent years: during the government shutdown, the Trump administration deliberately withheld funds from Blue States, even as it sent them to Red States.
No government should ever seek to govern only for those who voted it for it. There should never be 'punishment' for voting the wrong way.
Now, if Farage had framed it as "we think the costs should be shared around, and it's wrong that the most deprived areas bear the brunt of these costs", that would have been fine. But "vote Green, get detention centres" is the kind of thing that riles me beyond belief.
West Wing was fantasy. Just in case you didn't know.
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
I’ve said many times on here that immigrants should be houses in cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country, rather than dumped on struggling coastal towns. This policy from Reform isn’t much different I suppose. People are shrieking about it, but it is Green policy to accept refugees without fuss, and plenty of lefties wore ‘Refugees Welcome’ t-shirts so why should they be upset by it?
How do you build cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country? To start with, the most expensive streets in the country tend to have a fair percentage of the street occupied already.
I don't have a fully costed manifesto, but you get the gist. House the migrants in posh areas and let the people who aren't struggling for jobs, doctors appointments, school places etc suffer the consequences, rather than those who are already in bother having an added burden
Please cost it - remembering that most builders can no longer afford to build in London because £500,000 a flat doesn't cover costs..
Big caravan sites in Richmond Park, the Cotswolds, Hyde Park, Regents Park, the posh squares in London, Hampstead Heath, Sidmouth, Bristol, etc
I dont see how "We are going to need massive detention camps in nice green suburban parts of England because we can't control the border" is a vote winner for Reform.
It would toughen the other parties up on the issue. The areas I mentioned becoming detention centres wouldn’t bother Reform supporters too much
The point is, mass immigration has fucked over the poor and the JAMs, while the rich profited financially and were immune to the social consequences. It’s time to redress the balance
There's this bit in the West Wing where Jed Bartlett says something like "I'm the President of all Americans, not just the ones who voted for me".
And for a long time, politics was like that.
But we saw that break down in the US in recent years: during the government shutdown, the Trump administration deliberately withheld funds from Blue States, even as it sent them to Red States.
No government should ever seek to govern only for those who voted it for it. There should never be 'punishment' for voting the wrong way.
Now, if Farage had framed it as "we think the costs should be shared around, and it's wrong that the most deprived areas bear the brunt of these costs", that would have been fine. But "vote Green, get detention centres" is the kind of thing that riles me beyond belief.
Yes, I can see how Reform’s policy could rile someone; they said it in quite a vindictive way. But there’s no need for them to be so explicit about why they’re detaining asylum seekers in certain areas, just do it.
As I said, I’ve always hated the double impact of mass immigration on the poor, while the rich profit financially and escape the downsides. It turns the working class against the migrants and allows them to be cast as stupid racists, when in the main, they’re just looking to maintain their standard of living. Divide and rule
The thing is, once something has been said, it cannot be unsaid. Nigel Farage -and Reform- chose to make this statement.
I hold no candle for Farage or Reform, and think it crass, but I can't say I'm that animated by it - other than it nakedly bakes in partisanship - because they just said the quiet part out loud.
Governments have been playing this game - favouring their areas and disfavouring areas that aren't, particularly in marginal seats - for decades.
Exactly. This sort of thing is not new.
Asylum seekers have happily been dumped in large numbers, relative to other areas, in places like Middlesbrough, Gateshead and Rochdale and, as Isam said, if people dare to complain they are called racist.
Then you get the Green deputy leader outraged when they plan to dump several hundred in Crowborough in her own backyard.
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
I’ve said many times on here that immigrants should be houses in cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country, rather than dumped on struggling coastal towns. This policy from Reform isn’t much different I suppose. People are shrieking about it, but it is Green policy to accept refugees without fuss, and plenty of lefties wore ‘Refugees Welcome’ t-shirts so why should they be upset by it?
How do you build cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country? To start with, the most expensive streets in the country tend to have a fair percentage of the street occupied already.
I don't have a fully costed manifesto, but you get the gist. House the migrants in posh areas and let the people who aren't struggling for jobs, doctors appointments, school places etc suffer the consequences, rather than those who are already in bother having an added burden
Please cost it - remembering that most builders can no longer afford to build in London because £500,000 a flat doesn't cover costs..
Big caravan sites in Richmond Park, the Cotswolds, Hyde Park, Regents Park, the posh squares in London, Hampstead Heath, Sidmouth, Bristol, etc
I dont see how "We are going to need massive detention camps in nice green suburban parts of England because we can't control the border" is a vote winner for Reform.
It would toughen the other parties up on the issue. The areas I mentioned becoming detention centres wouldn’t bother Reform supporters too much
The point is, mass immigration has fucked over the poor and the JAMs, while the rich profited financially and were immune to the social consequences. It’s time to redress the balance
There's this bit in the West Wing where Jed Bartlett says something like "I'm the President of all Americans, not just the ones who voted for me".
And for a long time, politics was like that.
But we saw that break down in the US in recent years: during the government shutdown, the Trump administration deliberately withheld funds from Blue States, even as it sent them to Red States.
No government should ever seek to govern only for those who voted it for it. There should never be 'punishment' for voting the wrong way.
Now, if Farage had framed it as "we think the costs should be shared around, and it's wrong that the most deprived areas bear the brunt of these costs", that would have been fine. But "vote Green, get detention centres" is the kind of thing that riles me beyond belief.
Yes, I can see how Reform’s policy could rile someone; they said it in quite a vindictive way. But there’s no need for them to be so explicit about why they’re detaining asylum seekers in certain areas, just do it.
As I said, I’ve always hated the double impact of mass immigration on the poor, while the rich profit financially and escape the downsides. It turns the working class against the migrants and allows them to be cast as stupid racists, when in the main, they’re just looking to maintain their standard of living. Divide and rule
The thing is, once something has been said, it cannot be unsaid. Nigel Farage -and Reform- chose to make this statement.
I hold no candle for Farage or Reform, and think it crass, but I can't say I'm that animated by it - other than it nakedly bakes in partisanship - because they just said the quiet part out loud.
Governments have been playing this game - favouring their areas and disfavouring areas that aren't, particularly in marginal seats - for decades.
Indeed. It’s one of the potential explanations for the phenomenon of UNS, in that areas with lots of government supporters have proportionately fewer switching to vote for the opposition, because they’ve been favoured by the sitting government. UNS as a model is pretty much bust, now, I’d suggest, with so many parties competing for attention. And all the signs are that people are going to be disaffected from the government on Thursday in a highly proportional way.
Nevertheless to make public policy decisions blatantly on the basis of an area’s voting behaviour would quickly land a government in court, and Farage’s genius is such that, having now said he, he can’t actually do it.
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
I’ve said many times on here that immigrants should be houses in cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country, rather than dumped on struggling coastal towns. This policy from Reform isn’t much different I suppose. People are shrieking about it, but it is Green policy to accept refugees without fuss, and plenty of lefties wore ‘Refugees Welcome’ t-shirts so why should they be upset by it?
How do you build cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country? To start with, the most expensive streets in the country tend to have a fair percentage of the street occupied already.
I don't have a fully costed manifesto, but you get the gist. House the migrants in posh areas and let the people who aren't struggling for jobs, doctors appointments, school places etc suffer the consequences, rather than those who are already in bother having an added burden
Please cost it - remembering that most builders can no longer afford to build in London because £500,000 a flat doesn't cover costs..
Big caravan sites in Richmond Park, the Cotswolds, Hyde Park, Regents Park, the posh squares in London, Hampstead Heath, Sidmouth, Bristol, etc
I dont see how "We are going to need massive detention camps in nice green suburban parts of England because we can't control the border" is a vote winner for Reform.
It would toughen the other parties up on the issue. The areas I mentioned becoming detention centres wouldn’t bother Reform supporters too much
The point is, mass immigration has fucked over the poor and the JAMs, while the rich profited financially and were immune to the social consequences. It’s time to redress the balance
There's this bit in the West Wing where Jed Bartlett says something like "I'm the President of all Americans, not just the ones who voted for me".
And for a long time, politics was like that.
But we saw that break down in the US in recent years: during the government shutdown, the Trump administration deliberately withheld funds from Blue States, even as it sent them to Red States.
No government should ever seek to govern only for those who voted it for it. There should never be 'punishment' for voting the wrong way.
Now, if Farage had framed it as "we think the costs should be shared around, and it's wrong that the most deprived areas bear the brunt of these costs", that would have been fine. But "vote Green, get detention centres" is the kind of thing that riles me beyond belief.
Yes, I can see how Reform’s policy could rile someone; they said it in quite a vindictive way. But there’s no need for them to be so explicit about why they’re detaining asylum seekers in certain areas, just do it.
As I said, I’ve always hated the double impact of mass immigration on the poor, while the rich profit financially and escape the downsides. It turns the working class against the migrants and allows them to be cast as stupid racists, when in the main, they’re just looking to maintain their standard of living. Divide and rule
The policy of the previous govt was to delay processing of asylum claims, meaning there was an increasing number of claimants that had to be temporarily housed creating resentment and social issues. Getting rid of that backlog in processing will move those people to waiting to be returned or into the workforce, whether that dissipates the resentment remains to be seen. I've been unfortunate to have worked with a number of older, white male Johnson/Farage fans, generally comfortably off, you'd have your work cut out trying to claim they weren't racist because they would regularly say something racist, even John Terry's barrister would give it up as a bad job.
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
I’ve said many times on here that immigrants should be houses in cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country, rather than dumped on struggling coastal towns. This policy from Reform isn’t much different I suppose. People are shrieking about it, but it is Green policy to accept refugees without fuss, and plenty of lefties wore ‘Refugees Welcome’ t-shirts so why should they be upset by it?
How do you build cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country? To start with, the most expensive streets in the country tend to have a fair percentage of the street occupied already.
I don't have a fully costed manifesto, but you get the gist. House the migrants in posh areas and let the people who aren't struggling for jobs, doctors appointments, school places etc suffer the consequences, rather than those who are already in bother having an added burden
Please cost it - remembering that most builders can no longer afford to build in London because £500,000 a flat doesn't cover costs..
Big caravan sites in Richmond Park, the Cotswolds, Hyde Park, Regents Park, the posh squares in London, Hampstead Heath, Sidmouth, Bristol, etc
I hear Scotland is empty.
Filling up with immigrants being shipped from England actually, they got there before you
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
I’ve said many times on here that immigrants should be houses in cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country, rather than dumped on struggling coastal towns. This policy from Reform isn’t much different I suppose. People are shrieking about it, but it is Green policy to accept refugees without fuss, and plenty of lefties wore ‘Refugees Welcome’ t-shirts so why should they be upset by it?
How do you build cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country? To start with, the most expensive streets in the country tend to have a fair percentage of the street occupied already.
I don't have a fully costed manifesto, but you get the gist. House the migrants in posh areas and let the people who aren't struggling for jobs, doctors appointments, school places etc suffer the consequences, rather than those who are already in bother having an added burden
Please cost it - remembering that most builders can no longer afford to build in London because £500,000 a flat doesn't cover costs..
Big caravan sites in Richmond Park, the Cotswolds, Hyde Park, Regents Park, the posh squares in London, Hampstead Heath, Sidmouth, Bristol, etc
I dont see how "We are going to need massive detention camps in nice green suburban parts of England because we can't control the border" is a vote winner for Reform.
It would toughen the other parties up on the issue. The areas I mentioned becoming detention centres wouldn’t bother Reform supporters too much
The point is, mass immigration has fucked over the poor and the JAMs, while the rich profited financially and were immune to the social consequences. It’s time to redress the balance
There's this bit in the West Wing where Jed Bartlett says something like "I'm the President of all Americans, not just the ones who voted for me".
And for a long time, politics was like that.
But we saw that break down in the US in recent years: during the government shutdown, the Trump administration deliberately withheld funds from Blue States, even as it sent them to Red States.
No government should ever seek to govern only for those who voted it for it. There should never be 'punishment' for voting the wrong way.
Now, if Farage had framed it as "we think the costs should be shared around, and it's wrong that the most deprived areas bear the brunt of these costs", that would have been fine. But "vote Green, get detention centres" is the kind of thing that riles me beyond belief.
Yes, I can see how Reform’s policy could rile someone; they said it in quite a vindictive way. But there’s no need for them to be so explicit about why they’re detaining asylum seekers in certain areas, just do it.
As I said, I’ve always hated the double impact of mass immigration on the poor, while the rich profit financially and escape the downsides. It turns the working class against the migrants and allows them to be cast as stupid racists, when in the main, they’re just looking to maintain their standard of living. Divide and rule
The thing is, once something has been said, it cannot be unsaid. Nigel Farage -and Reform- chose to make this statement.
I hold no candle for Farage or Reform, and think it crass, but I can't say I'm that animated by it - other than it nakedly bakes in partisanship - because they just said the quiet part out loud.
Governments have been playing this game - favouring their areas and disfavouring areas that aren't, particularly in marginal seats - for decades.
Exactly. This sort of thing is not new.
Asylum seekers have happily been dumped in large numbers, relative to other areas, in places like Middlesbrough, Gateshead and Rochdale and, as Isam said, if people dare to complain they are called racist.
Then you get the Green deputy leader outraged when they plan to dump several hundred in Crowborough in her own backyard.
I'm listening to this and the Tom Holland bits are annoying but thankfully brief. It's like "Triggernometry" where one person does all the talking, and the other makes pointless brief interjections.
If you like these episodes then track down the audio books of Dominc Sandbrook's books 'State of Emergency' and 'Seasons in the Sun'. It covers all of the podcast material and much more. The narrator is also an absolute gem who does brilliant impressions of the main public figures. I've probably listened to them both half a dozen times.
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
I’ve said many times on here that immigrants should be houses in cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country, rather than dumped on struggling coastal towns. This policy from Reform isn’t much different I suppose. People are shrieking about it, but it is Green policy to accept refugees without fuss, and plenty of lefties wore ‘Refugees Welcome’ t-shirts so why should they be upset by it?
How do you build cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country? To start with, the most expensive streets in the country tend to have a fair percentage of the street occupied already.
I don't have a fully costed manifesto, but you get the gist. House the migrants in posh areas and let the people who aren't struggling for jobs, doctors appointments, school places etc suffer the consequences, rather than those who are already in bother having an added burden
Please cost it - remembering that most builders can no longer afford to build in London because £500,000 a flat doesn't cover costs..
Big caravan sites in Richmond Park, the Cotswolds, Hyde Park, Regents Park, the posh squares in London, Hampstead Heath, Sidmouth, Bristol, etc
I dont see how "We are going to need massive detention camps in nice green suburban parts of England because we can't control the border" is a vote winner for Reform.
It would toughen the other parties up on the issue. The areas I mentioned becoming detention centres wouldn’t bother Reform supporters too much
The point is, mass immigration has fucked over the poor and the JAMs, while the rich profited financially and were immune to the social consequences. It’s time to redress the balance
There's this bit in the West Wing where Jed Bartlett says something like "I'm the President of all Americans, not just the ones who voted for me".
And for a long time, politics was like that.
But we saw that break down in the US in recent years: during the government shutdown, the Trump administration deliberately withheld funds from Blue States, even as it sent them to Red States.
No government should ever seek to govern only for those who voted it for it. There should never be 'punishment' for voting the wrong way.
Now, if Farage had framed it as "we think the costs should be shared around, and it's wrong that the most deprived areas bear the brunt of these costs", that would have been fine. But "vote Green, get detention centres" is the kind of thing that riles me beyond belief.
Yes, I can see how Reform’s policy could rile someone; they said it in quite a vindictive way. But there’s no need for them to be so explicit about why they’re detaining asylum seekers in certain areas, just do it.
As I said, I’ve always hated the double impact of mass immigration on the poor, while the rich profit financially and escape the downsides. It turns the working class against the migrants and allows them to be cast as stupid racists, when in the main, they’re just looking to maintain their standard of living. Divide and rule
The thing is, once something has been said, it cannot be unsaid. Nigel Farage -and Reform- chose to make this statement.
I hold no candle for Farage or Reform, and think it crass, but I can't say I'm that animated by it - other than it nakedly bakes in partisanship - because they just said the quiet part out loud.
Governments have been playing this game - favouring their areas and disfavouring areas that aren't, particularly in marginal seats - for decades.
Exactly. This sort of thing is not new.
Asylum seekers have happily been dumped in large numbers, relative to other areas, in places like Middlesbrough, Gateshead and Rochdale and, as Isam said, if people dare to complain they are called racist.
Then you get the Green deputy leader outraged when they plan to dump several hundred in Crowborough in her own backyard.
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
I’ve said many times on here that immigrants should be houses in cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country, rather than dumped on struggling coastal towns. This policy from Reform isn’t much different I suppose. People are shrieking about it, but it is Green policy to accept refugees without fuss, and plenty of lefties wore ‘Refugees Welcome’ t-shirts so why should they be upset by it?
How do you build cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country? To start with, the most expensive streets in the country tend to have a fair percentage of the street occupied already.
I don't have a fully costed manifesto, but you get the gist. House the migrants in posh areas and let the people who aren't struggling for jobs, doctors appointments, school places etc suffer the consequences, rather than those who are already in bother having an added burden
Please cost it - remembering that most builders can no longer afford to build in London because £500,000 a flat doesn't cover costs..
Big caravan sites in Richmond Park, the Cotswolds, Hyde Park, Regents Park, the posh squares in London, Hampstead Heath, Sidmouth, Bristol, etc
I dont see how "We are going to need massive detention camps in nice green suburban parts of England because we can't control the border" is a vote winner for Reform.
It would toughen the other parties up on the issue. The areas I mentioned becoming detention centres wouldn’t bother Reform supporters too much
The point is, mass immigration has fucked over the poor and the JAMs, while the rich profited financially and were immune to the social consequences. It’s time to redress the balance
There's this bit in the West Wing where Jed Bartlett says something like "I'm the President of all Americans, not just the ones who voted for me".
And for a long time, politics was like that.
But we saw that break down in the US in recent years: during the government shutdown, the Trump administration deliberately withheld funds from Blue States, even as it sent them to Red States.
No government should ever seek to govern only for those who voted it for it. There should never be 'punishment' for voting the wrong way.
Now, if Farage had framed it as "we think the costs should be shared around, and it's wrong that the most deprived areas bear the brunt of these costs", that would have been fine. But "vote Green, get detention centres" is the kind of thing that riles me beyond belief.
Yes, I can see how Reform’s policy could rile someone; they said it in quite a vindictive way. But there’s no need for them to be so explicit about why they’re detaining asylum seekers in certain areas, just do it.
As I said, I’ve always hated the double impact of mass immigration on the poor, while the rich profit financially and escape the downsides. It turns the working class against the migrants and allows them to be cast as stupid racists, when in the main, they’re just looking to maintain their standard of living. Divide and rule
The thing is, once something has been said, it cannot be unsaid. Nigel Farage -and Reform- chose to make this statement.
I hold no candle for Farage or Reform, and think it crass, but I can't say I'm that animated by it - other than it nakedly bakes in partisanship - because they just said the quiet part out loud.
Governments have been playing this game - favouring their areas and disfavouring areas that aren't, particularly in marginal seats - for decades.
Exactly. This sort of thing is not new.
Asylum seekers have happily been dumped in large numbers, relative to other areas, in places like Middlesbrough, Gateshead and Rochdale and, as Isam said, if people dare to complain they are called racist.
Then you get the Green deputy leader outraged when they plan to dump several hundred in Crowborough in her own backyard.
I'm listening to this and the Tom Holland bits are annoying but thankfully brief. It's like "Triggernometry" where one person does all the talking, and the other makes pointless brief interjections.
What’s the beef with Tom Holland? I rather like both presenters. It’s a brilliant podcast.
Apart from being thoroughly nasty, isn't the Yusuf/Farage plan for detention centre in 'Green' constituencies somewhat flawed? Given that any seats won by the Greens are likely to be on c. 30-35% of the vote, those who voted Reform in that constituency would be 'punished' as well. See Gorton and Denton for example.
On reflection, I've no idea why I'm even giving such an unpleasant, unworkable and bizarre policy proposal the time of day.
I don’t remember this effeminate outrage over the last 25 years, as successive governments, of all stripes, have dumped “difficult” migrants in poor, white, working class areas
Weird
I’ve said many times on here that immigrants should be houses in cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country, rather than dumped on struggling coastal towns. This policy from Reform isn’t much different I suppose. People are shrieking about it, but it is Green policy to accept refugees without fuss, and plenty of lefties wore ‘Refugees Welcome’ t-shirts so why should they be upset by it?
How do you build cheap new builds on the most expensive streets in the country? To start with, the most expensive streets in the country tend to have a fair percentage of the street occupied already.
I don't have a fully costed manifesto, but you get the gist. House the migrants in posh areas and let the people who aren't struggling for jobs, doctors appointments, school places etc suffer the consequences, rather than those who are already in bother having an added burden
Please cost it - remembering that most builders can no longer afford to build in London because £500,000 a flat doesn't cover costs..
Big caravan sites in Richmond Park, the Cotswolds, Hyde Park, Regents Park, the posh squares in London, Hampstead Heath, Sidmouth, Bristol, etc
I dont see how "We are going to need massive detention camps in nice green suburban parts of England because we can't control the border" is a vote winner for Reform.
It would toughen the other parties up on the issue. The areas I mentioned becoming detention centres wouldn’t bother Reform supporters too much
The point is, mass immigration has fucked over the poor and the JAMs, while the rich profited financially and were immune to the social consequences. It’s time to redress the balance
There's this bit in the West Wing where Jed Bartlett says something like "I'm the President of all Americans, not just the ones who voted for me".
And for a long time, politics was like that.
But we saw that break down in the US in recent years: during the government shutdown, the Trump administration deliberately withheld funds from Blue States, even as it sent them to Red States.
No government should ever seek to govern only for those who voted it for it. There should never be 'punishment' for voting the wrong way.
Now, if Farage had framed it as "we think the costs should be shared around, and it's wrong that the most deprived areas bear the brunt of these costs", that would have been fine. But "vote Green, get detention centres" is the kind of thing that riles me beyond belief.
Yes, I can see how Reform’s policy could rile someone; they said it in quite a vindictive way. But there’s no need for them to be so explicit about why they’re detaining asylum seekers in certain areas, just do it.
As I said, I’ve always hated the double impact of mass immigration on the poor, while the rich profit financially and escape the downsides. It turns the working class against the migrants and allows them to be cast as stupid racists, when in the main, they’re just looking to maintain their standard of living. Divide and rule
The thing is, once something has been said, it cannot be unsaid. Nigel Farage -and Reform- chose to make this statement.
I hold no candle for Farage or Reform, and think it crass, but I can't say I'm that animated by it - other than it nakedly bakes in partisanship - because they just said the quiet part out loud.
Governments have been playing this game - favouring their areas and disfavouring areas that aren't, particularly in marginal seats - for decades.
Exactly. This sort of thing is not new.
Asylum seekers have happily been dumped in large numbers, relative to other areas, in places like Middlesbrough, Gateshead and Rochdale and, as Isam said, if people dare to complain they are called racist.
Then you get the Green deputy leader outraged when they plan to dump several hundred in Crowborough in her own backyard.
Comments
Setting aside arguments over the nature of the threat, and which subsection might describe it, why would the section not cover threats made against every individual in a constituency which elected the candidate of a particular party ?
Just because a threat of harm is made as a policy pledge ought not to exempt it.
The legislation certainly doesn't say that it does.
But a shocking record.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=40gaYF2UgWg
(you can fast-forward thru the Tom Holland bits)
Very difficult to see him losing from here,
They found the end of the road.
Wuuuuu!!
Their last three matches are all from the bottom third of the table. I suspect only West Ham will put up any serious resistance.
Djokovic got grumpy last year at the crowd shouting "Ruuuuud" for Caspar Ruud because he thought it was booing. But he gets grumpy about a lot.
Another idea Reform might suggest would be to cover the Cotswolds and Chilterns with solar farms.
The coalfield towns had their environment trashed for two centuries to provide the country with energy so now its time 'thatched cottage land' took its turn.
Parody Nigel Farage
@Parody_PM
·
4h
Parody account
Just to be clear on our new policy, if everyone votes Reform there will be no detention centres built anywhere so no immigrants will be locked up.
https://x.com/Parody_PM/status/2051369113864323275
The point is, mass immigration has fucked over the poor and the JAMs, while the rich profited financially and were immune to the social consequences. It’s time to redress the balance
And for a long time, politics was like that.
But we saw that break down in the US in recent years: during the government shutdown, the Trump administration deliberately withheld funds from Blue States, even as it sent them to Red States.
No government should ever seek to govern only for those who voted it for it. There should never be 'punishment' for voting the wrong way.
Now, if Farage had framed it as "we think the costs should be shared around, and it's wrong that the most deprived areas bear the brunt of these costs", that would have been fine. But "vote Green, get detention centres" is the kind of thing that riles me beyond belief.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mBW6loqMQmA
As I said, I’ve always hated the double impact of mass immigration on the poor, while the rich profit financially and escape the downsides. It turns the working class against the migrants and allows them to be cast as stupid racists, when in the main, they’re just looking to maintain their standard of living. Divide and rule
Announcing the summit, the prime minister said "it is not enough to simply say we stand with Jewish communities", and that effort was needed across sectors to "eradicate antisemitism from every corner of society".
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/czd2l55d1e7o
The man accused of setting off the New Year's Day fire that led to the deadly Palisades inferno was apparently "fixated" with Luigi Mangione and held a "resentment of the rich," according to prosecutors.
https://www.reddit.com/r/SipsTea/comments/1t41gjq/marjorie_taylor_greene_donald_trump_texted_me/
This latest from Reform further demonstrates how divisive they are. They have nothing to say beyond that toxic rhetoric.
Divide and rule indeed.
Caution: this is a quite illiquid market.
Governments have been playing this game - favouring their areas and disfavouring areas that aren't, particularly in marginal seats - for decades.
Although TBF that would be a bit tricky given the number that have had plane crashes, sudden illnesses or fallen out of windows.
Good morning, everyone.
As an aside, I have a pint of water on my desk. Obviously, I'm far too virtuous to be the favourite to be next PM.
They must be drinking a lot if the smell of it overwhelms the stink from the weed those guys are clearly smoking.
But you can't do it once though, you have to do it consistently and be reasonable doing it.
Asylum seekers have happily been dumped in large numbers, relative to other areas, in places like Middlesbrough, Gateshead and Rochdale and, as Isam said, if people dare to complain they are called racist.
Then you get the Green deputy leader outraged when they plan to dump several hundred in Crowborough in her own backyard.
You have to laugh.
Farage is real.
Thank God! The British journalist
Because the two-faced twonk is clutching pearls over both Angela Rayner's alleged drinking and Hannah Spencer alleging that MPs drink.
In terms of all immigration, this is very much concentrated in London and the wider South East, which are also the richest parts of the country.
These numbers don’t really support some of the claims above.
Nevertheless to make public policy decisions blatantly on the basis of an area’s voting behaviour would quickly land a government in court, and Farage’s genius is such that, having now said he, he can’t actually do it.
I've been unfortunate to have worked with a number of older, white male Johnson/Farage fans, generally comfortably off, you'd have your work cut out trying to claim they weren't racist because they would regularly say something racist, even John Terry's barrister would give it up as a bad job.
NEW THREAD