Pap voted Brexit TBF…
My kids went to school with the children of quite a few immigrants, illegal or legal. We assisted in an asylum case for one family, successful, as it went.
While you’d be hard pressed to identify any of them as “not born in England” these days, they required a lot of support in the early days which the school was thankfully able to provide.
I don’t think failing schools, already unable to meet the expected level of achievement, are going to do any better if they’re having to do a load of remedial language work.
Originally posted by @Chertsey-Saint
Nope, don’t understand your point. The article never mentions British kids. The point was the article was inconsistent in its message, so I was hoping you’d go off and find an article that actually answers whether it’s all kids of Illegal Immigrants, or just the illegal ones.
Fuck off, Cherts.
If you were that arsed you’d know already. Or do you really need me to read things for you?
So which is it then? You posted an inconsistent article, so I think the onus is on you to tell us what the correct interpretation is.
Fuck sake, it was something that was discussed at a meeting that, seemingly, got put down as soon as it entered the world!
I bet there’s a fuckton load of other unsavoury stuff discussed at meetings, by all political parties, that never gets published!
4 Likes
Equally there are a lot of very fucking stupid ideas that get implemented regardless, the 2006 enabling act and snoopers charter among them.
You could also include benefit sanctions in that. Doesn’t help get people back into work. Doesn’t save any money. It’s great for driving people to suicide though, which numerous reports have indicated.
The question is whether you can live with the idea.
Originally posted by @pap
Equally there are a lot of very fucking stupid ideas that get implemented regardless, electing Jeremy Corbyn to the leadership among them.
You could also include benefit sanctions in that. Doesn’t help get people back into work. Doesn’t save any money. It’s great for driving people to suicide though, which numerous reports have indicated.
The question is whether you can live with the idea.
Is that the question? It seems Moot Point tbh
Believe it or not, people vote on these things 
Completely agree re. benefit sanctions.
I (yay) signed on for a bit in 2012 and the whole process is purely designed to get people off benefits by hook or by crook. The first thing that sticks out in my memory is that your meetings (one week you’re signing on, the other week you’re meeting your jobs adviser) are as scattered and irregular as possible in order to try and find a time that causes you to miss an appointment. Miss an appointment and you’re sanctioned. Bang. 4 weeks of benefits gone and then its 3 months if you’re sanctioned again.
Now, granted, the fact that your appointment might be booked in at 4pm one week and 8.30am the next isn’t necessarily the biggest chore in the world, but its the clear cynicism of it all and the obviousness that they’re trying to ‘hit’ a time where you’ll have some kind of commitment that stops you attending. If its a kid’s birthday party, nan’s funeral, or just a general commitment elsewhere, its no excuse. Miss an appointment for anything but a job interview and whack, you’re sanctioned. There are plenty of other ways in which you can come a cropper which I can’t quite remember but they’re all ridiculously petty and stupid.
Another thing is that if you resign for *any* reason (even if you’re in a jump-or-be-pushed situation), you’re not entitled to claim jobseeker’s. Again, that seems fair on paper, but to give one example, my mate was forced to resign from his job at a fairly large engineering firm because they’re not winning any contracts and there hasn’t been much work for him to do at all over the past few months. The firm is a major multinational and wants to let people go, but doesn’t want the embarrassment of redundancies, so they more-or-less got the HR department to run around picking people up for minor faults (shit like non-work internet usage when the staff literally were just sat in the office with nothing to do) and have put several staff into bogus disciplinaries. Naturally you don’t want to be sacked for what the company can, according to the letter of the law, get away with describing as ‘gross misconduct’ so you resign. Essentially, for my friend to have avoided being picked up on his high internet useage, he’d have had to outright pretend to have been working when the firm had no work for him to do. It wasn’t his fault at all.
Now obviously I’m a middle-class kid from London and when I was on benefits I wasn’t in anything close to real trouble. I just had parents who grew up poor and were very quick to essentially make the point that “Er, yeah, being unemployed isn’t nice is it? No you can’t borrow £20 to go to the pub with your mates, if you’re unemployed, you have to sign on”. But yeah, its not hard to conceive of seriously vulnerable people who could have quite easily been massively screwed over by the benefits system.
3 Likes
Yeah I know I just wanted to get that michief edit past the censor, see if you noticed. Too late now tho, you’ve quoted it so it’s True!
3 Likes
3 Likes
Libs hAve taken Richmond park. Interestingly the torys didn’t have a candidate, wonder why?
labour also had a bad day 12.3 % in the GE down to 3.7%
Because they thought Zac would win, and as an (ex) Tory would vote along similar lines. If they put a candidate in it would likely split the vote and the Lib Dems would get in.
This is the first by-election seat to change hands since the 2015, correct?
May down to a technical majority of 11.
Was always going to be, they didn’t put forward a candidate!
Labour candidate lost deposit.
First by-election decided by Brexit, and the fact that she’d only vote for a soft Brexit. Think we’ll see many, many by-elections decided on this. If I were the Lib Dems I would suggest that all candidates say they’ll vote against Hard Brexit. We’d see a massive surge in support for them.
It’s pretty much Lib Dem policy to vote for the softest Brexit possible. I think all their candidates will now be running on this ticket and probably would have done whether she’d won or lost. Interestingly, she wasn’t even a member of the party until very recently - pushed into it by the referendum.
1 Like
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/12/listen-julia-hartley-brewer-trolls-sarah-olney-second-election/
Lol.
As there were more remainers on the ‘left’, we could see a surge of Labour supporters going to the Lib Dems. As so many already feel disenfranchised with Corbyn, it’s just the kind of excuse they need.
Yep.
What the Lib Dems should do is video TF signing a pledge to vote for soft Brexit…
1 Like
Originally posted by @Chertsey-Saint
As there were more remainers on the ‘left’, we could see a surge of Labour supporters going to the Lib Dems. As so many already feel disenfranchised with Corbyn, it’s just the kind of excuse they need.
The Labour vote was less than the size of the local constituency party.
They should have either not stood, or stood someone more loyal.
JEREMY Corbyn’s former policy chief, who now works for his leadership rival Owen Smith, has told Labour members in the north of the borough to vote for his new boss.
They’ll probably give Wolmar another go at some point in a seat he’s never going to win. Don’t read too much into it, babe.