Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Categories
- 1.8K All Categories
- 1 Site Stuff
- 31 Admin (FAQs, rules, queries etc.)
- The Boleyn Arms
- 49 General Chatter
- 8 Member info & Family Album
- 3 Radio Llama (music videos)
- 540 Fun & Games
- 167 BA Predictor Threads
- 49 Word Games
- 4 Quizzes
- 2 Pun Threads
- 352 Magic Minutes
- 3 Other Fun & Games
- 140 Current West Ham
- 213 Men's First Team
- 4 Women's Team
- 13 PL2 & Academy
- 34 Management & Board
- 16 Stadium & Training Ground
- 32 West Ham Miscellaneous
- West Ham Matches
- 460 Match Threads
- 129 MOTM
- 12 West Ham Nostalgia
- 37 Former Players and Staff
- 5 Past Games & Glories
- 43 Transfers
- 51 Transfer Speculation
- 88 Completed Transfers
- 57 Internationals
- 50 Men's Internationals
- 5 Women's Internationals
- 2 Youth Internationals
- 136 Football Chatter
- 43 Football Chatter
- 284 Other Teams & Matches
- 27 Other Players & Staff
Comments
Now that Theresa May has made a hash of all that and basically is going into the negotiations with a weakened position (from what was imo already quite a weak base), who knows.
I see that the French President has said the door's still open for a U-turn.
However letting in over 300.000 people every year has got to stop and the next government has to get a handle on it.
And I know we've been through this before, but (whatever the numbers are 'net') ... why has it got to stop?
I haven't heard a convincing (and factually supported) argument why it is a bad thing.
Nor have I heard a convincing (or factually supported) argument of what actual number would be the optimal one: To me, from what I've read, the numbers of what are OK and not OK are quite random. It's just that a big number sounds bad, a smaller number sounds better, and a really small number must, by definition, be the best.
(I'm not expecting you to necessarily try to make the case - as I say, we've been round these houses before - but I'm just reiterating one the reasons why I voted Remain 1st time round: on the 'too many immigrants' argument, nobody succeeded in convincing me ;ok )
I am moving, although that is because I still live at home with my parents and they want to be nearer my sisters kids. I can't afford to buy my own place and I don't fancy house sharing with people I don't know. So we are moving to somewhere just outside Manchester, where hopefully it will be a bit quieter, I hope...hahaha
Some people don't mind living like sardines, I'm not one of them.
But to your main point: shortage of affordable housing in the South East, linked to over-concentration of jobs and growth in London, a consequence of the move to a service economy...
All things that can be (and should be) tackled ... but for me, the cause isn't too much immigration and the solution isn't stopping immigration.
I do wonder however if as time goes by the EU may fancy us out, if able to share out our financial services industry and make an example of us we may be more use out than in.
My instinct is that the problem with immigration is that our population has grown but austerity did not allow essential public services to be funded at even existing levels let alone grow to accommodate the increased demand. Once people get out of associating tax rises as bad and move to them being associated with better services we can move forward. Corbyns exposure of just how low our corporation tax is compared to the rest of Europe came as a shock to me, surely that is a good place to start raising a few pounds. It could even be structured more like personal tax to shield small and starting businesses. So maybe drop it to 15% under a certain level and then raise to 20% and then finally 25% at the highest rate ( still less than most of Europe). The personal taxation needs moving to 15k to ensure the lowest earners pay less tax and we can play about with rates at the top to bring in the shortfall, whilst it is the working tax credit system which makes us attractive for immigration and that is the biggest job to sort out. But two years spent redesigning our tax and benefit system will yield a lot more than two years spent leaving the EU.
Sorry for not getting back to you sooner.
I have asked my wife when interviewing what they judged a good command of english and she said to have a reasonable conversation with someone in english.
She spoke very highly of the Philippian nurses she interviewed saying they spoke very good english,were highly qualified and were hard workers.
That's interesting. So they weren't required to have formal language qualifications?
;hmm I don't think that can be right, because they would need a visa, and the Home Office has language requirements that are linked to actual exams and certificates and stuff. Maybe the interviewing your wife did was to select nurses they wanted to employ, and all the 'official' stuff came after.
(Thinking aloud ;biggrin )
They had to take about six written tests before they even got to the interview and it was very strict
When i said about qualifications i was talking about nursing not language qualifications and even if they had passed the interview they would still have had to get an home office visa before they left their country.
The answer is yes they did have to have language qualifications.
Its now been announced that the State Opening will be next Wednesday but Royal Ascot starts on Tuesday and rumours are that the Queen is in no mood to miss any of the racing.
If she doesn't turn up to the State Opening then the Lord Chancellor David Livington will have to give the Queen's Speech.
He was appointed to the job on Sunday.
It's a hard life.....reading a speech or going to the races ;doh
(Metaphorically, of course. ;wink )
On the Tower Block fire Andrew Marr presented and read from a series of recommendations from a report presented to the Government in 2000. Keir Starmer admitted and agreed that on that occasion and others when Labour were last in power and since under the LibDem/Con Gov't and David Cameron's Gov't when recommendations had been made, they had not been acted on - therefore ALL parties were responsible and accountable for the deaths and injuries.
I must admit he came across much better and more sensibly in the discussion than many of the other politicians of all the other parties - if he is in charge of Labour come the next election (which won't happen until about a year after the EU Exit) I think they will win it, if he had been in charge now I think they would have won it as well.
Because (a) the situations were very different in terms of both the design of the structure and the findings in terms of how the existing regulations had not been complied with, (b) blame was allocated in the Camberwell fire as negligence, pretty much - the main fault was that the existing regs were breached, and the safety checks didn't pick that up, not that the regs themselves were inadequate and (c) it's not yet been shown that those 2000 recommendations, had they been implemented, by the Tory and Tory/LibDem govts, whose responsibility it was, would have made any difference at Grenfell, seeing as we don't yet know exactly what went wrong in this latest case.
I will try to find a 'watch again' ;ok
Plus, the rights IN LEGISLATION will continue ... but what about rights not conferred by legislation, but by other means such as treaties, EU Directives with direct effect (which particularly pertain to rights of residency), etc?
MrsGrey,
I would make the point as you omit it that Labour were in power from 1997 to 2010 so in fairness (although not shown as you say that the 2000 recommendations would of made any difference) a Labour government with the power to act until 2010 didn't act so to say Tories/LibDem failed to act is misleading as Labour didn't act in that period either so it's fair to say all political parties failed to act and are equally guilty of a failing the people?
He also claimed that sprinklers may not have helped despite every fire safety expert who has been interviewed in the last few days saying that they would cos he's Chancellor of the Exchequer and obviously knows better. Both the inquest into the fire at Lakanal Tower in 2009 and the fire at Shirley Towers in 2010 recommended that sprinklers should be fitted to all old tower blocks. According to the Mirror out of 2925 council owned tower blocks only 18 have had sprinkler systems installed since then.
There have been claims that the lack of sprinklers was a result of the Tory austerity policies but many sources suggest that K&C council is sitting on a surplus of around £300m and recently spent around £25m pedestrianizing Exhibition Road so they're certainly not short of a bob or two.
I am a little uncomfortable with the political fall out of the Grenfall tragedy as I think everyone needs wait until facts are known before casting blame. It may turn out that everyone's first conclusion is spot on but it could just as likely be way off the mark. I feel however that political gain should not motivate any side when such tragedy strikes. I don't necessarily imagine that were Labour in govt from 2010 that the tragedy would have been averted, These terrible things happen but fortunately very rarely and we learn from them hopefully.
The EU hold all the cards and Davies will be in a room and hopefully the EU negotiator will put it straight from the beginning and say to him, ok David, we know you have given yourself the biggest political problem that any nation has done in a long long while, you have nothing to offer us that we need, some we would like for sure, but not need, as lets be clear all business which goes to UK will naturally be inclined to look for sourcing within EU once you have gone anyhow which will bring a surge in closer existing EU co -operation. Your Financial services industry which contributes a large tax take we will be taking anyhow through natural migration and later legislation. Your military which you may have felt was your final bargaining chip is not what you thought as we have only one existential threat which is Russia, should this become a real issue you know you could never defend against them anyhow and so do they, were any conflict to come that far only the US could intervene, so lets not pretend you have that chip. So I ask you to stop spouting nonsense for your local press and get real, speak to us with respect and we will do the same to you. Otherwise you will become cut off between the EU and the US and look very isolated to everyone, you make nothing much and will pretty soon be a tax haven run by media moguls and suffering mass public unrest due to the cuts in public services as your economy begins to fall quickly.
If we are lucky they will allow us to re assess leaving, as in my view, otherwise I think we are pretty much finished for a generation or two. I have seen leave friends slowly give up on most arguments regarding any possible benefit, certainly none that remotely outweigh the risks.
imo, the constant cuts to the civil service have left too few people trying to do too much, so that stuff like this review gets pushed down to a lower priority.