Mike, that doesn't make any sense.. you will pity people who find out the truth?
Finger on the pulse it's a "silent revolution".
you will pity people who find out the truth?
I think he means people who voted out to because of a whole load of problems which had nothing to do with the EU, and which are probably going to get worse, along with a whole load of new problems, after we leave.
So what the Tories are saying is that now the UK Is open for business with the whole world BUT foreign people are not so welcome.
Thanks god for Internet shopping.
better off voting ukip?
[img] 
[/img]
If the economy contracts in the short to medium term, as people have been saying it will, then they're not going to be able to afford to do the things that need doing, so it won't get better.
The function of May's speech was to redefine the referendum result as an instruction to do everything that she wants to do.
The proof lies with everything she did as Home Secretary.
It's a mandate-grab.
She voted for losing side in the referendum, then became PM without a contest, and now claims a mandate for significant political shift.
But it is party conference season, and that old "wall of reality" is looming on the horizon for her.
It's a mandate-grab.
She voted for losing side in the referendum, then became PM without a contest, and now claims a mandate for significant political shift.
Ah, but don't worry, a strong opposition will stop her from doing that.
Bugger!
[I]Regarding forcing businesses to publish lists of foreign employees she said: "It's not something we're definitely going to do. It's one of the tools we are going to use as a review, to see if we can use it as a way of nudging people to do better behaviour"[/I]
I also heard her speak, her (and Minister) always seem to refer to 'businesses' with regard to anything to do with employment, seemingly forgetting that the Public Sector is a rather large employer (and user of the Private Sector), directly employing +5 million folk.
So, will this new 'directive' also apply to them?
Looks like Ruth Davidson didn't get the memo:
"So as we have difficult – but necessary - debates on how we manage borders in future, let us not forget that behind discussions of numbers and rules and criteria, there lies people and homes and families," she said."And for those who have already chosen to build a life, open a business, make a contribution, I say this is your home, and you are welcome here."
..
Asked later by the BBC's Andrew Neil about Ms Rudd's foreign worker plan, Ms Davidson said: "It’s not something I would propose."
Good on her. At least not everyone is shining their best jackboots.
(any bets on how long she lasts?)
El-bent - MemberShe voted for losing side in the referendum, then became PM without a contest, and now claims a mandate for significant political shift.
Did you see her with Laura Kuenssberg? Paraphrasing but
"We were elected based on our manifesto and we have a mandate to deliver that manifesto"
"But there's lots of stuff in your manifesto that you're not doing"
"Yes, we also have a mandate to not deliver that manifesto"
"And there's lots of stuff you're doing that wasn't in your manifesto"
"Yes, our mandate is also to do things that weren't in the manifesto"
"Does that make any sense to anyone but you?"
"Nobody but me matters tbh"
The function of May's speech was to redefine the referendum result as an instruction to do everything that she wants to do.
Hence the heavy-handed mentions of the European Convention on Human Rights.
I have little doubt that'll be swept up with the rest of the reforms as if it was inevitable. Anything with Europe in the title is fair game regardless of the relation to EU membership.
Id vote for Ruth Davidson in a flash, wtf is she a tory?
kimbers - Member
Id vote for Ruth Davidson in a flash, wtf is she a tory?
Nope. PM May is much better choice than her.
Just like JC is the best leader for Labour.
[quote=ninfan ]Whereas I'm not sure if you're too thick to understand that race and nationality are different things.
Thanks for reminding me, so she's not a racist just a xenophobe (if you're not to thick to understand what that means 😉 )
Good analysis of Amber Rudd's speech by James O'Brien's...
Using Jambalaya's favourite role model, to draft her policy....
I'm sorry but Godwin was kicked in the nuts by Theresa on the first day of the confercene
Can you guess?
1930s Germany or Tory Party conference
Just delete the word Foreign or Jewish depending on where you think it was thought up
Pledge to remove\replace all foreign/Jewish doctors
Restrictions on foreign/Jewish students at universities
Shaming businesses for employing Jews/ foreigners
https://www.ushmm.org/wlc/mobile/en/article.php?ModuleId=10005681
DrJ - not there yet and hopefully a very long way to go, but it does feel like that's the direction Britain'd heading in.
There's been a few out there comparing 1930s Germany to 2010s Britain. There are parallels - hopefully the brakes will go on before we get there.
I quite like Britain, but leavers talking it down and relentlessly going on about how it isn't great anymore and we have to kick out the EU or immigrants or human rights or something to make it great - I disagree.
Britain was great on 22nd June and part of what made us great was championing human rights trying to work with our neighbours to create something better than the continent that used to be torn apart by war every 30 years.
Now? No we don't look so good.
With respect though Kimbers, maybe you just heard what you wanted to hear?
You could easily view each of those things a different way:
- They will stop recruiting doctors whose training was paid for by other countries ..many of which are poorer than the UK and themselves have less doctors per head of population
- They will welcome with open arms people who want to come here solely for the purpose of accessing education but will not welcome those who are really coming here for other reasons
- They will make sure the proven abuses by some employers are dealt with - and also force employers to invest more in training.
e.g.
On the latter point British Employers rank 22nd in Europe on the amount they invest in training and educating their employees. There is a significant risk to our economy (not least with Brexit) that some of the key labour skills we've attracted from abroad may decide to go somewhere else - leaving us without the skills and capabilities our economy needs.
She voted for losing side in the referendum, then became PM without a contest, and now claims a mandate for significant political shift.
She is a long term eurosceptic, I was a little surprised she came down for Remain but I believe that was out of loyalty. As per the leaks from newly Knighted Sir she was very reluctant to campaign and made only one minor effort.
She stood and won the contest, it was clear it was going to be a May landslide so Leesom stood asids
She's implementing the manifesto and Referendum result with an additional broadening of the appeal to the centre ground
No, she is going all the way to the far right.
They're taking SOME centre ground (investing in training and housing) almost admitting that they should've been doing it all along, but moving way to the right in the immigration area.
just5minutes - Member- They will welcome with open arms people who want to come here solely for the purpose of accessing education but will not welcome those who are really coming here for other reasons
This is categorically not this government's policy on international students- it wasn't under May, and Rudd just signalled an escalation.
(source: this is what I do for a living. If you tell an international recruiter, agent, admissions manager or compliance officer that we "welcome with open arms people who want to come here solely for the purpose of accessing education", they're likely to laugh in your face.)
Singapore. It's one model, we can look at Canada, Australia and US too if you like
Singapore has been a massive success commercially. There is a small portion of the local population who don't like the "one party state" overtones but none of them want the economic success or political freedoms of Thailand, Malaysia or Indonesia their immediate neighbours, how about Burma ?
Singapore has about 50% locals, 50% temporary immigrants. Some feautures of Singapore
Tough application process - education/professional certificates, proof you will bring specific required skills, high earning job to provide taxes
If you lose your job you have 2 weeks to leave (now possible to stay 6 months if you are job hunting)
Any serious crime you are deported after serving any prison time / flogging if required. Note graffiti on a public building is a serious crime
No interferring in political process
No benefits / welfare / health provision
Only rent/buy designated "ex-pat" accomodation which is much more expensive than locals have access too.
If you apply for Permanent Resident status thats a 5 year term
Singapore brings in many construction workers, they live in dedicated employer provided accommodation
Singapore is more flexible than the Gulf States many of which keep your passport and you have to apply for a Visa to leave 😯 many many Brits still choose to live and work there.
They're taking SOME centre ground (investing in training and housing) almost admitting that they should've been doing it all along
Don't listen to what they say, watch what they actually DO!
Talk is cheap. I'll believe it when I see it.
Regarding forcing businesses to publish lists of foreign employees she said: "It's not something we're definitely going to do. It's one of the tools we are going to use as a review, to see if we can use it as a way of nudging people to do better behaviour"
Urgh, "better behaviour". Because forrins are intrinsically bad and people born in the UK are all intrinsically good, so employing foreigners is a bad thing that needs to be punished.
People are going to be very disappointed when they realise that making things worse for 'other' people doesn't make things better for 'us'.
The "Britain is open for business, but **** off if you're foreign" sentiment is horrible. And this isn't a move to "the centre", it's a lurch to the right, a long way to the right. Naming and shaming companies for, [b]perfectly legally,[/b] employing people not born here, it's horrible.
No, she is going all the way to the far right.
People love to say the same thing about Le Penn and FN who have many left leaning employment policies, it's almost like they have given up trying to make a rational argument.
May and all those who voted Leave just want the UK to have immigration rules like every other country in the world outside the EU
People love to say the same thing about Le Penn and FN who have many left leaning employment policies, it's almost like they have given up trying to make a rational argument.
You know full well that it is perfectly possible to have some left and some right policies, because there's no single dimensional spectrum. There's at least two.
You KNOW this because it's been discussed on here many times.
Northwind, you will be well aware there are dodgy language schools who's "pupils" are really just looking for a way into the UK to stay and work illegally or maybe get lucky and marry a local so they can apply to stay. We do need to tighten up our immigration/border control processes, I am personally am in favour of full exit checks including for example entrants retaining their entry document which must be presented upon exit as per US etc.
Marine le Pen has tried to divert the FN from the far right but her dad, and her niece are doing their best to keep it there.
May and all those who voted Leave [b]and many of the elected leaders and people of countries in europe [/b]want the UK to have immigration rules like every other country in the world outside the EU [b]but the unelected commissioners in Brussels will not compromise on any element of this as a point of principle [/b]
FTFY
J5m - these unelected commissioners in Brussels where do they come from? Do they just appear or do the elected leaders of countries appoint them?
Singapore brings in many construction workers, they live in dedicated employer provided accommodation
Looks lovely
Instead of trying to emulate Singapore, why don't we just go back to what made the British Empire great in the first place? Conquering, slavery and tea.
On the latter point British Employers rank 22nd in Europe on the amount they invest in training and educating their employees. There is a significant risk to our economy (not least with Brexit) that some of the key labour skills we've attracted from abroad may decide to go somewhere else - leaving us without the skills and capabilities our economy needs.
So what has the EU got to do with business and government in the UK not investing? Now consider that it takes a decade to train a doctor and brexit happens in two.
Now consider that it takes a decade to train a doctor and brexit happens in two.
Solved with a 5yr renewable VISA. Why would a Do for need an upfront permanent lifetime guaranty of residency to take up a Junior Doctor's role ? After 7 years here they can apply for UK citizenship
How many doctors will want to work here knowing that they're likely to have their visa terminated at any given point?
Arrogant England strikes again.
Solved with a 5yr renewable VISA. Why would a Do for need an upfront permanent lifetime guaranty of residency to take up a Junior Doctor's role ? After 7 years here they can apply for UK citizenship
Assuming they are relaxed about being kicked out of the country at a moment's notice on the whim of whichever nutjob is in power.
My Norwegian computer programmer colleague is not very relaxed about the whole thing.
DrJ that's an HDB apartment block, that's what the locals can BUY. They are always oversubscribed. I have an Aussie mate who lives in one by the way in Little India, we always stay with him when we visit. Construction workers live in much simpler temporary accomodation generally fwiw.
As a company we have lost two talented staff members in the immediate aftermath of the vote, which will please Jamba.
Work visa's are typically only cancellable for cause, certainly the case with my US and Singaporean ones.
@oldnpastit well if your Norwegian friend does up sticks I can guaranty you there is a very long line of talented Indian (and Chinese) programmers who'd be very keen to come to the UK to work. I can put you in touch with some of my family members if you like.
What I heard this morning was basically plenty of references to "us" differentiating that from "them" meaning immigrants. What does this mean for immigrants who have [i]already[/i] built a life here for themselves.
Tough application process - education/professional certificates, proof you will bring specific required skills, high earning job to provide taxes
If you lose your job you have 2 weeks to leave (now possible to stay 6 months if you are job hunting)
Any serious crime you are deported after serving any prison time / flogging if required. Note graffiti on a public building is a serious crime
No interferring in political process
No benefits / welfare / health provision
Only rent/buy designated "ex-pat" accomodation which is much more expensive than locals have access too.
If you apply for Permanent Resident status thats a 5 year term
Only a small subset of those things needs to occur for me to be separated from my child. Jamba, does this give you an insight into why people are a bit sensitive over this? Incidentally, had a phone call from the school this morning for a census. Only questions were country of birth and nationality. Can't wait to see what that'll be used for 😥
As Ruth and Theresa's speeches where mentioned here I post them here. Ruth gives Labour a good battering from around 8:20. May of course spoke very strongly of course and of a broad inclusive agenda. Labour are in very big trouble not just becausenof their infighting but becasue in the next 4 years the Tories are going definiteoy occupy the centre ground. Mr Blue Sky indeed.
I really don't want to respond to Jambalaya but it's necessary to counter his post. This is not about those abusing student visas, and quite simply, nobody who knows the first thing about this government's record will say otherwise. Systems are already in place, and widely used, to deal with abuse. They could be stronger, perhaps, but that's not what's being proposed here.
This government's sustained attacks on students and universities have been largely indiscriminate- increasing costs for all overseas students, increasing barriers to entry for all students, and so on. The goal has obviously been to make the UK an obviously less welcoming place for all overseas students, and obviously not aimed at abusers. It's simply impossible to think that these are about visa abuse.
(I'm still not decided whether Amber Rudd's comments on english language proficiency in english language degree courses came from ignorance or willful deceit. If it had been Theresa May, it'd have been deceit. Rudd may possibly be that ignorant. Wait and see.)
It's simple maths- 50% of net immigration comes from students. We have a 100000 target for immigration, and 167000 new student arrivals per year. The stated goal is a catastrophic reduction in the overseas student population. This would cost the UK economy billions of pounds in direct benefit alone from fees and spending, and a terrible loss of influence worldwide, but far more important would be the wholesale loss of [i]institutions[/i] that would follow, with incalculable loss to the UK.
And to make something really clear; Rudd talks about linking student visa policy to the "quality of the institution"- when this has been previously discussed, that has meant "Oxbridge and the Russell Group". We're not talking about limitations for the low end here, we're talking about nothing but the elites.
But hey, apparently the UK is open for business.
