Why was IMMMIGRATION ignored in the budget>?

SingleSue

jojo1964 wrote: »

Laws i was thinking about were along the lines of.

Correct equiptment for workers involved in stripping asbestos from buildings.

Correct equiptment for workers involved in working at heights, etc etc.

Ten of course are the rights to paid holidays, getting adequate breaks from work etc etc.

Im sure that there are other posters who can expand hugely on the few items i have mentioned.

The unions in the past have done sterling work for the workers (they have also made massive mistakes) but on balance, the workers in this country are infinitely better off because of union involvement, even those who do not belong to a union have benefitted.

Perhaps you would prefer a scenario whereby all these improvements are discarded because we are employing a workforce who have not had these safeguards in their own country, and as such, are able to undercut the local labour force because they are prepared to work longer hours, without holidays, and without adhering to health and safety rules.

Erm, you are putting words in my mouth there, you neither know what I would prefer or what I would not prefer.

My benefits at work have come from European rulings which this country have had to adhere to but then that is just the industry I have worked in. I didn't say they haven't done anything, just that they have never had an involvement in my working life.

For someone working in factory or with heavy machinery, then yes, safeguards with working with dangerous equipment or for those working at a height are extremely important.

I have worked in the more safe, corporate sector..although I did work heavy machinery in my younger days in a fairground, apart from the yearly safety inspection of rides (and the smaller daily inspection by our own staff), health and safety was just something of an annoyance to be ignored, our 12 hour days with no holiday during the March to September rule etc were the rules when we signed on for it, not saying that is good either.

I did my own undercutting of the workforce on purpose to get taken on initially in my chosen career, I was prepared to work longer hours than my peers and I was prepared to go without a few days holidays (not too many though!).....but I am British, so it goes on in all walks of life.

I suppose my view of unions is coloured by growing up in the 70's and seeing all the hallybaloo regarding strikes etc (including the pee take in the carry on films) and then in the mid 80's having my education completely blighted by teachers strikes....this has obviously made me dislike them a little.

jojo1964

SingleSue wrote: »

Erm, you are putting words in my mouth there, you neither know what I would prefer or what I would not prefer.

My benefits at work have come from European rulings which this country have had to adhere to but then that is just the industry I have worked in. I didn't say they haven't done anything, just that they have never had an involvement in my working life.

For someone working in factory or with heavy machinery, then yes, safeguards with working with dangerous equipment or for those working at a height are extremely important.

I have worked in the more safe, corporate sector..although I did work heavy machinery in my younger days in a fairground, apart from the yearly safety inspection of rides (and the smaller daily inspection by our own staff), health and safety was just something of an annoyance to be ignored, our 12 hour days with no holiday during the March to September rule etc were the rules when we signed on for it, not saying that is good either.

I did my own undercutting of the workforce on purpose to get taken on initially in my chosen career, I was prepared to work longer hours than my peers and I was prepared to go without a few days holidays (not too many though!).....but I am British, so it goes on in all walks of life.

I suppose my view of unions is coloured by growing up in the 70's and seeing all the hallybaloo regarding strikes etc (including the pee take in the carry on films) and then in the mid 80's having my education completely blighted by teachers strikes....this has obviously made me dislike them a little.

I fear you have things the wrong way round, many of the rulings brought in by Europe were already being implemented here because of the unions, and were designed to ensure that other european countries were brought up to our safer levels.

The unions have made many mistakes in the past, and at present are fairly toothless, due in no small part to Arthur Scargill/Maggie Thatcher, but generally they have improved the environment for the workers in this country enormously.

harryhound

MiserlyMartin wrote: »

And it isn't two sided apart from the undeniable facts which result in only one conclusion. Nobody is saying shut the borders for good and send all foreigners home. Controlled immigration is good and has a place. But uncontrolled immigration is crazy. Its so uncontrolled now that the government have absolutely no idea how many people are here let alone being able to manage the budgets for local services, infrastructure to house and school their children. Some may say that as we have taken in so many more people than we can manage that we ought to shut the borders completely for a while to bring the average level down and get some kind of control before managed imigration can start.

I thought it great fun that Slough, knowing that the census returns are an out of date work of fiction, has taken to counting the bin bags and the volume of sewage in an attempt to get a better idea of the size of its population.

STOP PRESS: Applications for working visas to Australia, available to those under age of ?? (Ask Generali ?!) from Germany & UK are up 20% this year.
Vox Pop: "I was only going to stay 3 months BUT this seems to be the only country where I can get a job".

(Mind you back in the 60's Australia would take the likes of me as a 10 pound Pom [ = sign up for 2 years] but not as a no frills pay your way charter flight visitor. So it was another 30 years before I got to Australia)

hethmar

I read in the Times yesterday that the French are now requiring anyone entering the country to live there to take out their own health insurance at about £3k a year. Why cant we do this then?

Conrad

The UK landmass was once part of an equatorial supercontinent.
By luck we find ourselves here in the N Atlantic. Now Man seeks to divide Humans based on notional lines on a map.

One nday we will do away with the John Wayne, goodies and baddies stuff.

jojo1964

hethmar wrote: »

I read in the Times yesterday that the French are now requiring anyone entering the country to live there to take out their own health insurance at about £3k a year. Why cant we do this then?

The French, being our closest neighbours, have always "encouraged" would be settlers to go elsewhere, by bringing in schemes designed to "persuade" them to seek an easier life elsewhere.

I know this phrase was used differently during the Americas cup some years ago, but it feels apt to change the country, and use it here.


Britain may rule the waves, but other european countries waive the rules.

jojo1964

Conrad wrote: »

The UK landmass was once part of an equatorial supercontinent.
By luck we find ourselves here in the N Atlantic. Now Man seeks to divide Humans based on notional lines on a map.

One nday we will do away with the John Wayne, goodies and baddies stuff.

Its not a case of dividing humans, that would be impossible anyway, with all the Airports and Channel tunnel, plus all the ferry services, simply finding out, and sticking to the optimum numbers we, as a country, can support, in an ideal world we would have room, and facilities for all who wished to settle here, but in the current situation, with rising unemployment, increasing numbers of homeless, a care system which is unable to cope, NHS waiting lists far too long, pensioners dying of hypothermia by their thousands every winter because they are scared to use their heating, class sizes too big to give our children a good education, sewerage systems unable to cope due to lack of investment, water supplies at risk of running short during a sustained hot spell (always makes me laugh, that one, being surrounded by water), prisons overcrowded, in fact just about every facet of normal life in this country is under immense pressure from an increasing population.

Maybe that is why people tend to object so much to immigration.

dylansmum

MiserlyMartin wrote: »

And it isn't two sided apart from the undeniable facts which result in only one conclusion. Nobody is saying shut the borders for good and send all foreigners home. Controlled immigration is good and has a place. But uncontrolled immigration is crazy. Its so uncontrolled now that the government have absolutely no idea how many people are here let alone being able to manage the budgets for local services, infrastructure to house and school their children. Some may say that as we have taken in so many more people than we can manage that we ought to shut the borders completely for a while to bring the average level down and get some kind of control before managed imigration can start.

You missed the point entirely (see below). And some are saying close the borders - read the posts. Some are BNP supporters; they want voluntary repatriation - oh and lots of healthy living, fresh air, corporal punishment, and women to stay at home!

Why would even more managed immigration (as you put it) change the fact that there are no fixed amounts of jobs in any economy? It would not solve unemployment or house repossessions, for example.

I am not sure about your point about services; if migrants are working they pay taxes. If they are illegal they can't access services.

If you are saying the country is not big enough in terms of infrastructure, then what we do if the estimated 8.8 million emigrants came 'home'?

Never mind.

julieq

ultra10 wrote: »

No I have to Agree, my "Low level of intellect" was down to , too much time In Notts Uni Student Union , Amongst other things about 10 yrs back ..Seriously tho, can you not do better than that ?? In terms of "Insult" it is pretty weak .. Have a sleep, Lie down on your couch..whatever infact ... Nite :rolleyes:.

Whoever said I wanted to insult you? I'm making an observation on your intellect based on what you write, no more or less.

As I said in my post:

"What I do object to, and what I object to very strongly, is feeling ashamed to let my children accept an English flag from people in the town centre (as I did on Saturday), because it has become the symbol of a petty, jealous, sneering and disingenuous view of the world that paints what is different and foreign as a threat, which seeks to set one group of people apart based on lies, exaggerations and demagoguery."

If you support the BNP you're either a knave or a fool, because the BNP uses spurious arguments and rabble rousing to collect supporters, generally from disadvantaged ill-educated groups. Those making the arguments - the knaves - know precisely what they're doing: it's demagoguery, aimed at scapegoating entire groups on the basis they look or behave differently.

I'm heartily sick of watching the far right wrap MY flag around themselves. You make me ashamed to be British, and ashamed to let my children carry THEIR flag because people like you have tainted it with your foul generalisations.

luvpump

julieq wrote: »

Ultra10, I don't care why you'll be voting BNP, although I suspect it's something to do with a fairly low level of intellect.

What I do object to, and what I object to very strongly, is feeling ashamed to let my children accept an English flag from people in the town centre (as I did on Saturday), because it has become the symbol of a petty, jealous, sneering and disingenuous view of the world that paints what is different and foreign as a threat, which seeks to set one group of people apart based on lies, exaggerations and demagoguery.

I take people as I find them. However you draw the demagraphic map there are people who are nice and people who are not. But I've yet to find a BNP supporter I'd give the time of day to, so as far as I'm concerned if we're rounding people up for expulsion to save "our way of life", I know who I'd want first on the cattle trucks.

I Dont Normally get involved is these kind of threads, I have no time for the Far right or the Far left for that matter, but this refernance "Cattle Carts" is pretty Pathetic :rolleyes: ......Especially When you consider we have an Unhealthy proportion of Islamists who's aim is to impose more & more Sharia Law in the u.k, not to mention numerous attempts to kill as many of the "Infidel" as possible !!