- Jan 18, 2009
- 4,891
Not quite, How many of the UK nationals are UK nationals by birth in comparison to the 3m plus relatively recent new UK nationals that have taken up citizenship?
That information would help......
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Mediterranean migrant deaths and CMD.
- Thread starter Leekbrookgull
- Start date
Not quite, How many of the UK nationals are UK nationals by birth in comparison to the 3m plus relatively recent new UK nationals that have taken up citizenship?
That information would help......
BadFish
Huge Member
- Oct 19, 2003
- 18,238
They are Asylum Seekers until they are either granted or refused Refugee status. That status may be refused on the basis that they have passed through countries that are signatories to the refugee convention but until their case is decided they remain Asylum Seekers.
http://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/briefings/migration-uk-asylum
- Jan 18, 2009
- 4,891
Don't use the 300,000 figure use the approx. 700,000 figure of new NI numbers issued to new arrivals, add that to the asylum and illegal immigrant numbers and that is the figure.
Don't forget to add in how we are all getting richer and that there is no housing crisis, food banks, plenty of primary school places and that the rich are not paying their way.........
Excellent, Watford are still even money to win the Championship.......fill your boots and donate the winnings to charity.
Hastings gull
Well-known member
- Nov 23, 2013
- 4,652
Bad Fish: There you go 6% of non Uk nationals are claiming benefits (compared with 15% of Uk nationals)
I had not seen this yesterday and really can't believe that you could be so simplistic. it does smack rather of desperation. Non Uk nationals - for how long? Which are EU? non EU? What type of benefits? Uk nationals -does it include pensions, which are more likely to be paid to UK nationals, as immigrants tend to be younger. I receive winter fuel allowance and free prescriptions -are these included? What type of benefits are involved?
Your stats are meaningless.
I had not seen this yesterday and really can't believe that you could be so simplistic. it does smack rather of desperation. Non Uk nationals - for how long? Which are EU? non EU? What type of benefits? Uk nationals -does it include pensions, which are more likely to be paid to UK nationals, as immigrants tend to be younger. I receive winter fuel allowance and free prescriptions -are these included? What type of benefits are involved?
Your stats are meaningless.
Hastings gull
Well-known member
- Nov 23, 2013
- 4,652
If we are using the 300,000 figure then we are moving on to discussing immigration as a whole rather than the issue we started on. To me this is an important distinction as they are desperate people who need our help and their are millions more out there in desperate situations.
It seems that you have decided that those on the boats are either asylum seekers or refugees, and not immigrants simply wanting a better life, unless I have misunderstood you. I appreciate that the definitions are important for you, though I doubt, as previously stated, for the average person in the street, so what is the difference between someone on a boat that sinks and those in Calais.
It seems that you have decided that those on the boats are either asylum seekers or refugees, and not immigrants simply wanting a better life, unless I have misunderstood you. I appreciate that the definitions are important for you, though I doubt, as previously stated, for the average person in the street, so what is the difference between someone on a boat that sinks and those in Calais.
looney
Banned
- Jul 7, 2003
- 15,652
Then they can be both. AGAIN you dodge the question I asked you. Its not unreasonable to ask your motives. You are crowding a debate where you are free from the consequences of your views, wereas those resident have to face the possible outcome of your views. It is quite reasonable to ask you if you have o direct interest what are your motives?
Someone a bit old school may say "What the F*** has it got to do with you? F*** off out of it you cheeky git". The fact you wont discuss the reasons openly suggests they are Malevolent and formulated from some aspect of hatred.
BadFish
Huge Member
- Oct 19, 2003
- 18,238
They can be both, but sadly that is not up to us to decide. They can only be deemed criminals once their applications are processed and they choose to illegally stay in the country. Therefore without know their future actions it is not accurate to label them as criminals.
As to your other question, I will try to be clear on this as you seem unable to grasp my position on this but sadly after this go I will give up.
So once again I am not answering your question for a few of reasons.
1. I disagree with the premise of the questions. I was not crowding a debate I was simply having a conversation with Hastings Gull. The refugee problem is a global issue of which we are all effected.
2. I think you are trying to derail this debate and descend it into a personal shit fight (someone a bit old school might call you a troll). I would prefer to stay on topic.
3. This accusation has been levelled at me a number of times (often by your good self) and I have responded with my reasons on a number of occasions. It is my belief that you know my reasons for posting on threads like this. If you are still unsure you could either read my posts on this thread (its all there) or as i have said you can PM me ( That old school person would suggest that you don't want to discuss this in private because number 2 is correct and trolls desire the oxygen of publicity).
Hastings gull
Well-known member
- Nov 23, 2013
- 4,652
Good Morning. Missed you yesterday! I saw the post from Looney and know that you have had similar observations levelled at you, to which you responded that you have every right etc etc, which is of course quite true. Your views in a forum are as important as everyone else’s. But I do think you would also have to accept that there is an element of provocation, albeit not intended, as you do not live anywhere near here, and L’s assertion that you would not live with the consequences, is perfectly valid. You quote what you assume to be authoritative stats about the UK, but I am sure that it has not passed you by, that few if any on NSC quote about OZ, for the simple reason that we do not know enough. Quoting from literature which reflects your own views is one thing, but actually living here and talking to folk on an everyday basis is quite another. Whenever I mention Oz, it is invariably to ask you a question. Actually, I had intended to ask why you post precisely on the forum? When did you leave the UK, and do you feel affinity with “the old country”? I don’t think I have seen you post on anything to do with the Albion, though could be wrong on this.
Going on from L’s points, I do feel that what you write does reflect a perception that is very different to that of the majority in the UK. Academic definitions of status seem to be important to you, yet this is hardly mentioned here – indeed on Sky News they always talk about migrants’ boats and no one asks what status they will have. I watched a programme this morning on the heart-rending funerals in Malta, and then interviews with the locals, who felt very sorry for the folk, but were adamant that there is simply not enough room for them. In Italy last year, 170,000 arrived, and going by what we have seen, this figure is likely to be higher this year. I do genuinely applaud your willingness to help, as people do here, but you are not dealing with anything like the problems that we have in Europe, and, please, I am NOT being cynical, as a general rule, it is easier to be noble when the numbers are manageable. If the lad next door kicked his football into your garden once a day, it is manageable if irritating, but if then your willingness to hand it back resulted in the ball coming over every hour, you would be far less willing to help. I did you the courtesy of looking at Geelong and found the following. I also saw references to support groups for various groups from Eastern Europe; I don’t wish to employ double standards –if I say your stat about 6% and 15% was meaningless, than one should be equally careful about what I choose. If this is a true reflection of the extent of migration into Geelong, then it is quite clear that your experience and consequent perception is very different to that in the UK of the immigrant situation. Of course Oz is made up of immigrants, but I strongly suspect that the numbers entering are far less than here, and certainly over the years at a far slower rate.
Cultural groups
Migrants from Languages spoken
England (3.3%) Italian (2.1%)
Italy (1.5%) Mandarin (1.0%)
India (1.2%) Greek (1.0%)
New Zealand (1.1%) Croatian (0.5%)
China (0.8%) Serbian (0.3%)
Source: Census SA2 2011, ABS
BadFish
Huge Member
- Oct 19, 2003
- 18,238
I have to be honesty with you here. As much as you think I am overusing statistics I think you are overemphasising the importance of what people you speak to think. You are right in thinking that I place a lot of importance on the academic, this is to me a far superior measure of what is going on than opinions. this is why I post in the way I do, I make my point and I back it up with links and data. Many people chose to dismiss the information I present but usually fail to replace it with anything concrete.
As for me and my credentials? To be honest I don't really see what it matters to the points I am making and to be honest i think it is a cop out so people don't have to address the points I am making. But we have had a civil conversation so I will indulge.
I left Brighton about 15 years ago but retain strong connections with home. I speak to people in the UK on a regular basis. I also don't think that any opinions I have posted on here are that out of the ordinary. I would take the likes I have been given on posts and the other posters that have agreed with me as a indication of this. As you quite rightly pointed out I am often on these threads and discussing these kind of topics. One thing i have noticed is that they usually start with a range of different people posting opinions across the spectrum of ideas. Then many people leave and those that are left usually end up involved in nonsense and binfestery (I am ashamed to say that I am often one of these). What I am trying to say is that these threads are not a fair indication of what people believe as they are usually left with a load of trolls and argumentative twits acting like bitchy schools girls (something I am trying not to do). Aside from anything else I don't think it really matters if my views are in the minority (many of them are about many things) as I don't think that just because a majority believe something to be true it follows that it is.
If you find my posts provocative then I apologise it is not my intention. I am not sure that the same can be said about some of those who call me that.
Your comparisons to Australia are interesting and as you cite Geelong doesn't have a huge number of languages spoken. I do however wonder how this compares with Hastings? You say you strongly suggest that the numbers entering are far less than the UK I would agree with this but earlier I did post stats the showed that as a percentage of population our immigration was double the UK.
Anyway I think we both agree that this is a terrible business.
Cheers
Last edited:
BadFish
Huge Member
- Oct 19, 2003
- 18,238
Not quite is true but this was the closest data I can find, it certainly shows that on the whole they are not turning up to scrounge of the UK benefit system.
We know from this data that between 6% and 15% of immigrants are claiming benefits. This is a far cry from the suggestions that they are turning up and saying house me, feed me and clothe me. It would suggest that between 85 and 94% of immigrants are turning up and saying let me work.
Last edited:
BadFish
Huge Member
- Oct 19, 2003
- 18,238
I don't think any of those questions will change the present stats to a great enough extent that they would fail to seriously dispute your argument.They may change the stats by a percent or two but not enough to prove anything different.
Hastings gull
Well-known member
- Nov 23, 2013
- 4,652
Thanks. Of course you stress the academic side and back it up with links and data -the question, of course, is whether the data had been selectively arrived at and is of direct relevance, and I put it to you again that using that rough 6% and 15% hardly advanced your cause! Yes, in theory by and large it does not matter where you live, when one advances an argument, but where you live, and there would be other measurements such as income, can clearly have an influence on your opinions. I see what you are saying about a discussion then degenerating into a binfest, and of course it is very tempting to answer rude replies bordering on the slanderous with a similar response -in this case the anonymity of the Internet has much to answer for. But as to whether your debating opponents do not reflect ordinary opinion, I think actually they probably do, even if you might not like their tone. Of course it does not follow that just because a majority think this and that, that they must be right, simply because they are a majority. But having said that, the old adage tends to apply - we can't all be wrong! This morning, I read that 9 out of 10 voters regard immigration as something which needs to be tackled (presumably curtailed and perhaps even stopped) - in this case, it is important to listen to people, as it is quite clear that the vast majority of those 9 will be ordinary decent folk, who have genuine concerns. I really don't think I am over-emphasising the value of speaking to people -we ignore their concerns at our peril. People matter more than stats. You can't ignore folk's concerns and then moan when the UKIPs of this world emerge.(you may well agree here, I appreciate). By the way, I don't feel that your posts are provocative - as stated, your views are as valuable as everyone else's.
The racial make-up of Hastings, like most of Sussex, with perhaps the exeception of Crawley,(though not sure of this) is your usual white indigenous -I think this is the fashionable expression! The percentage of population who are immigrants in OZ to which you finally refer - left simply like that, I think this is clearly open to misinterpretation. How far back are you going and does this refer to recent large-scale immigration from the Third World. To what exactly are you referring? Captain Cook was an immigrant -does he appear on the stats?! (sorry!)
As to how this will all end? Foreign Ministers will, I assume, look to target the gangs, destroy the boats whilst in Libyan harbours and prevent them from leaving. All very drastic and doubtless will ensue in a deadly game of cat and mouse: very sad, but the alternative is such that we simply cannot take such huge numbers every year.
Hastings gull
Well-known member
- Nov 23, 2013
- 4,652
But this is not what you claimed originally. You said that 15% of British people? OK house me etc etc sounds simplistic, but if we let in the hundreds of folk in Calais, who have little or nothing, isn't that precisely what we will have to do, certainly initially. You must have seen the people emerging from the boats in Italy -did they look as if they could house, feed clothe themselves?
BadFish
Huge Member
- Oct 19, 2003
- 18,238
This is again why I think distinction is so important. Yes we will need to help Asylum Seekers until their cases are heard they are not allowed to work so have little choice than to survive on what is offered to them. This is part an parcel of being a signatory to the Asylum Seeker Convention. However it is not the case with other migrants as your posts suggested the data suggests that on the whole migrants come over to the UK, and don't claim benefits.
BadFish
Huge Member
- Oct 19, 2003
- 18,238
It is also worth pointing out that the 15% of British nationals was an aside for comparison (it was in brackets). The 9% of non British nationals was the statisitc i was using to debate your argument.
BadFish
Huge Member
- Oct 19, 2003
- 18,238
To be honest I think you are over simplifying my arguments somewhat. My opinion is not about whether immigration should be reduced or not, I have never suggested that this should not be the case. In fact on this subject I am firmly in favour of a referendum on the subject and then to act on that decision as necessary. Having said that I see a huge issue with this as it is my understanding that membership of the EU, ongoing deals with members and ex-members of the commonwealth and a global duty to assist with the Asylum Seeker issue will tie the governments hands somewhat in overseeing the reduction.
I absolutely agree that we should listen to people and take into account what they think but I don't think that just because a group of people are shouting the loudest that we should assume that they are representative of the minority.
I do not moan about the emergence of UKIP and I think their emergence is proof of something very important. The working man is being sold down the river (both working and middle class) and we are not represented by our governments (I say we because we are heading down this road in Australia too) and the situation is getting worse not better. Where i disagree with many people is that I think that we are shifting the blame to the wrong people (ably assisted by governments and media) and looking for answers in the wrong places.
Hastings gull
Well-known member
- Nov 23, 2013
- 4,652
Thanks, and I have to say that this never comes over in your posts. Somehow I doubt very much you would be happy with a referendum the result of which says, basically, no entry and drown in the sea. I am not sure to what extent the agreements are in operation, that you state - you could be right, but I have never heard of any ruling that we are legally obliged to take asylum seekers. Perhaps we are and it is electorally not tactful to inform the population!
I like your middle para - in my experience, the people who usually shout the loudest are invariably unrepresentative minorities ,and you have turned it on its head! No, the majority opinion will probably not reflect the ideas of the minority, as you say, but then that is what democracy is all about, surely. Would you have it another way?
I can't really comment on your final sentence, as it is too vague -what are you talking about?
BadFish
Huge Member
- Oct 19, 2003
- 18,238
No i wouldn't agree to a referendum on Asylum Seekers as i think we have a moral obligation to assist such people.And yes the Uk are a signatory of the 1951 refugee convention so are bound by international law to accept genuine refugees. As i have said I think the way that Australia treats Asylum Seekers is absolutely appalling.
I do however think a referendum on overall immigration would be a very useful thing.
Apologies for the middle sentence it should have read .....shouting the loudest that we should assume that they are representative of the majority.
- Apr 13, 2015
- 3,874
There are currently in the region of 50million refugees/externally displaced people in the world, as acknowledged by the UN, can any of you tell me at what point you stand up and say no to the inevitable north and west migration of the numbers that are being talked about. What set of circumstances would prompt the 'yay' sayers on this thread to stand up and say 'nay'.?
Last edited:
BadFish
Huge Member
- Oct 19, 2003
- 18,238
The premise of your questions doesn't address the point that the 50 million have to go somewhere. The ideal situation is that their homelands are made safe enough for them to return (not very easy to find answers to that one). Until this happens then some provision has to be made for them somewhere otherwise we will continue fishing their bodies out of the seas and oceans. My suggestion is that the 1951 convention is revisited and discussion are held on what to do about this situation. I am sure that with a little cooperation among nations we can work out a more equitable system than the one we currently employ. The burden of this problem is not equally shared across nations, this is something that should be addressed.
To put a figure on where one says nay is utterly simplistic and NIMBYism on a grand scale.