Do you want to discuss boring politics? (18 Viewers)

Earlsdon_Skyblue1 · Jun 19, 2025

mmttww said:
No, we're not gonna get on fine. Stuff you've said is beyond sh*t. I don't have to justify myself to you or anyone but I thought you might knock it off if I set my position out. You haven't. Justice isn't screaming at a father of two on the internet, inferring he's a sex offender and labelling him an apologist for horrific crimes. FFS just leave it now.

It isn't beyond shit. You've really let yourself down with a lot of defence towards these criminals. Like I said, that is on you, not anyone else. You need to take some self-reflection on this.

If you are a father of two then I would like to think you were stronger against this sort of thing, not doing what you have been doing, which is behaving like an apologist to their shit. Again - that's on you.

If you want me to leave it then you need to demonstrate some sort of emotion towards what has happened. So far you've been nothing other than angry towards those raising the issues, and apathetic towards those who have commited these crimes. You made one post when forced about the perpetrators, and several dozen about those upset about it. You must realise that it makes you look slightly questionable.

Once again, if you're going to continue to do that, then I'm going to call you out.

mmttww · Jun 19, 2025

Earlsdon_Skyblue1 said:
then I'm going to call you out.

Fill your boots!

Typing things you made up in your head doesn't change reality. Even if you type them really loud.

Sky Blue Pete · Jun 19, 2025

shmmeee said:
For no reason? Or because we change the rules? I’d be surprised. Is there precedent for it anywhere?

Sorry criminals

Earlsdon_Skyblue1 · Jun 19, 2025

mmttww said:
View attachment 43757

Fill your boots!

Typing things you made up in your head doesn't change reality. Even if you type them really loud.

Doesn't matter if it is upper case, or lower case. You've demonstrated yourself as a grooming gang apologist - as alluded to in previous posts. You might like to play it down by saying someone is imagining it, but it isn't going to work. You've consistently attacked those raising the issues, and consistently turned a blind eye when it comes to discussing the perpetrators.

One half-arsed post isn't going to change that, no matter how much you thought it would. Which is now evidently transparent.

Do a better job of calling this shit out, otherwise you go on the same pile of many of these apologists. You won't walk away easy from it, and every post myself and others will tespond to will be on you, despite how much you scream for the admins to save your arse.

Parent of two? You should be ashamed.

mmttww · Jun 19, 2025

Earlsdon_Skyblue1 said:
You won't walk away easy from it...

and you don't get to try and intimidate people like a cosplay Judge Dredd, so let's see how it goes.

Mucca Mad Boys · Jun 19, 2025

shmmeee said:
OK just to give the most common devils advocate: refugee arrives aged 6, commits a crime at 19, doesn’t know anyone in their “home” country or speak the language. Still deport?

You can’t retrospectively change laws no, you can change the rules for when ILR or citizenship is possible but you can’t remove right to remain or citizenship from those that have it without a huge legal battle.

With the specific example you’ve raised, just reform the system so that refugee and asylum is granted temporarily with the expectation the claimants can return when safe to do so. Right now, the refugee and asylum systems are pathways to gain residency and this is not what was intended (at least on this scale) when these rules were written up.

Just to clarify the remaining points:

1) You can retrospectively change indefinite leave to remain/citizenship laws and there’s a good argument to extend the period before indefinite leave to remain can be granted

2) Citizenship of naturalised citizens can also be revoked.

If a guest to our country commits a crime, particularly a violent crime, we should have a zero tolerance policy and deport them.

Sky_Blue_Dreamer · Jun 19, 2025

Earlsdon_Skyblue1 said:
I agree with this.

The issue is Brighton, the UK does not pay good wages. It's absolutely shite. Across so many fields. You would think someone looking after the elderly should be paid a respectable wage, but they aren't. Not the same, but it is similair principle for emergency workers, teachers, and other important roles.

It's a universal problem. I'm in the Czech Republic a lot. Many of the low income workers here are Ukranian. For them, the money is good. In the UK, the money is good for Polish people, or those from south Asia.

The UK needs to make wages for these jobs attractive enough, because at the moment the idea of doing a tough job for next to fuck all is not appealing for many. Especially when the benifit system is handing out money too easily, in my opinion.

I agree with you on this, but the argument the right always gives is we can't increase wages because it'll drive inflation and/or push taxes/borrowing up.

Mucca Mad Boys · Jun 19, 2025

Sky_Blue_Dreamer said:
I agree with you on this, but the argument the right always gives is we can't increase wages because it'll drive inflation and/or push taxes/borrowing up.

The NHS staff pay rises has certainly lead to borrowing increasing and almost definitely taxes in the autumn budget… but that’s another conversation to have later on in the year.

On this topic, successive governments have chosen to be reliant on migrants to fill NHS roles. It’s systematically cut trainee roles and places at universities so we’re not training enough healthcare professionals to keep up with population growth.

Pause for a moment and imagine the government does this with other public services such as teaching and policing?

When the left argues ‘we need migrants for the NHS’, they’re not wrong per se. However, it is driving a cycle where more migration begets more migration.

With how the immigration and residency rules work as things stand, a new arrival could trade 5 years of low-paid work for decades on welfare payments once they gain indefinite leave to remain.

It’s also v apparent the liberalisation of the health and social care visa route has had unintended impacts. We grant visas to people who never work in healthcare professions and we also allow their dependents to come too which is almost definitely going to be a net-drain on the exchequer.

tisza · Jun 19, 2025

shmmeee said:
OK just to give the most common devils advocate: refugee arrives aged 6, commits a crime at 19, doesn’t know anyone in their “home” country or speak the language. Still deport?

You can’t retrospectively change laws no, you can change the rules for when ILR or citizenship is possible but you can’t remove right to remain or citizenship from those that have it without a huge legal battle.

Shades of the shamina begum case except she was UK born.

shmmeee · Jun 19, 2025

Mucca Mad Boys said:
With the specific example you’ve raised, just reform the system so that refugee and asylum is granted temporarily with the expectation the claimants can return when safe to do so. Right now, the refugee and asylum systems are pathways to gain residency and this is not what was intended (at least on this scale) when these rules were written up.

Just to clarify the remaining points:

1) You can retrospectively change indefinite leave to remain/citizenship laws and there’s a good argument to extend the period before indefinite leave to remain can be granted

2) Citizenship of naturalised citizens can also be revoked.

If a guest to our country commits a crime, particularly a violent crime, we should have a zero tolerance policy and deport them.

I’m not talking about deporting if they’ve committed a crime but changing the rules and removing people who have already been granted right to remain. Say deciding tomorrow all EU settled status people have to apply for a visa. We could do it, we’re a sovereign country we can do what we want, but the political and legal battle would put off any government.

chiefdave · Jun 19, 2025

fatso said:
There's also a lot of able bodied British people who won't work as they can claim money from the state instead.
I personally know of a number of such cases, with some even getting new cars!

When people thrown stuff like this out I'm always intrigued as to how the people they know doing this are getting so much money.

There was a point when I thought I might lose my job post-covid. I looked into how much I would receive in benefits and it was basically fuck all, nowhere near enough to live on. I reckon 2 months tops before I'd have been in huge trouble financially.

Really baffles me that there's apparently a good chunk of people living a life of luxury while refusing to even consider working.

chiefdave · Jun 19, 2025

Mucca Mad Boys said:
When the left argues ‘we need migrants for the NHS’, they’re not wrong per se. However, it is driving a cycle where more migration begets more migration.

It’s also v apparent the liberalisation of the health and social care visa route has had unintended impacts. We grant visas to people who never work in healthcare professions and we also allow their dependents to come too which is almost definitely going to be a net-drain on the exchequer.

The problem here is that we're now so fucked there's not a short term fix. If the government came out tomorrow and said we've put the funding in place for the required number of police, teachers, doctors etc to be trained you've still got to both find people who want to go through that training and then spend years training them. At this point there's not a quick fix.

Not sure people coming in on social care visas can just hop to another career path. There's people working at my Dads care home who are qualified engineers for example, they can't just go and get a job at JLR, it would invalidate their visa. They also aren't allowed to bring their dependents with them, that's been the case since last March.

Sky_Blue_Dreamer · Jun 19, 2025

Mucca Mad Boys said:
The NHS staff pay rises has certainly lead to borrowing increasing and almost definitely taxes in the autumn budget… but that’s another conversation to have later on in the year.

On this topic, successive governments have chosen to be reliant on migrants to fill NHS roles. It’s systematically cut trainee roles and places at universities so we’re not training enough healthcare professionals to keep up with population growth.

Pause for a moment and imagine the government does this with other public services such as teaching and policing?

When the left argues ‘we need migrants for the NHS’, they’re not wrong per se. However, it is driving a cycle where more migration begets more migration.

With how the immigration and residency rules work as things stand, a new arrival could trade 5 years of low-paid work for decades on welfare payments once they gain indefinite leave to remain.

It’s also v apparent the liberalisation of the health and social care visa route has had unintended impacts. We grant visas to people who never work in healthcare professions and we also allow their dependents to come too which is almost definitely going to be a net-drain on the exchequer.

On the first point it's amazing how often paying people on lower wages more drives inflation but paying massive pay rises to execs and dividends to shareholders doesn't... Almost like it's an argument made by those people....

As for the second, we're currently needing more migration because of a native population getting older and needing more health and social care. In future it's highly possible the current migrants will be a more significant part of demand for those services. But when we teach our own kids to covet money and higher positions it's hardly surprising we don't have many wanting to take on a menial role with shit pay. if you want them to consider the job you're going to have to pay a lot more. That's not going to happen so migrants are the only answer. Or do you think we should change how we bring up kids and get them to be less 'aspirational'?

tisza · Jun 20, 2025

So Gove confirms Cummings's narrative that there were people in Whitehall (as well as Rotherham council) that wanted to try and block Andrew Norfolk's story.

Brighton Sky Blue · Jun 20, 2025

Perhaps we could go around squirting water at foreigners?

Spain tourism: The protesters and residents pushing back on tourism in Barcelona

Hostility towards tourists in Spain grows as locals complain of being forced out of their own cities.

www.bbc.co.uk

rob9872 · Jun 20, 2025

Brighton Sky Blue said:
Perhaps we could go around squirting water at foreigners?

Spain tourism: The protesters and residents pushing back on tourism in Barcelona

Hostility towards tourists in Spain grows as locals complain of being forced out of their own cities.

www.bbc.co.uk

Well it is it a bit warm

chiefdave · Jun 20, 2025

tisza said:
So Gove confirms Cummings's narrative that there were people in Whitehall (as well as Rotherham council) that wanted to try and block Andrew Norfolk's story.

Not convinced a Gove & Cummings orchestrated redemption arc for themselves is adding much benefit. After all they were both in government for many years when recommendations from previous inquiries were ignored.

Is there much here in terms of new information? We know all about Rotherham Council and its culture of denial, it why commissioners were put in over a decade ago.

Only seen Gove's Sky interview but unless he's said something different elsewhere he picks his words very carefully and talks about some officials urging caution as there may be risks for relatives of the victims concerned. Now I think we would all agree the need for action vastly outweighed that concern, to say the least, but isn't it the job of officials to present these scenarios to allow the likes of Gove & Cummings to make informed decisions?

Flagging something up as a possibility is very different to departments actively working to suppress information to protect the perpetrators. If that has happened then absolutely it needs to be investigated and action taken against those responsible.

Appreciate I'm repeating myself but I am concerned we're going tied up going over things like this when we really need to be putting all available resource to making sure every last offender is behind bars or deported. Feels like we're going round in circles with things we've known for years being presented as new information while everyone pats themselves on the back but nothing actually gets done.

tisza · Jun 20, 2025

chiefdave said:
Not convinced a Gove & Cummings orchestrated redemption arc for themselves is adding much benefit. After all they were both in government for many years when recommendations from previous inquiries were ignored.

Is there much here in terms of new information? We know all about Rotherham Council and its culture of denial, it why commissioners were put in over a decade ago.

Only seen Gove's Sky interview but unless he's said something different elsewhere he picks his words very carefully and talks about some officials urging caution as there may be risks for relatives of the victims concerned. Now I think we would all agree the need for action vastly outweighed that concern, to say the least, but isn't it the job of officials to present these scenarios to allow the likes of Gove & Cummings to make informed decisions?

Flagging something up as a possibility is very different to departments actively working to suppress information to protect the perpetrators. If that has happened then absolutely it needs to be investigated and action taken against those responsible.

Appreciate I'm repeating myself but I am concerned we're going tied up going over things like this when we really need to be putting all available resource to making sure every last offender is behind bars or deported. Feels like we're going round in circles with things we've known for years being presented as new information while everyone pats themselves on the back but nothing actually gets done.

There is no redemption for anyone.
What it shows is the need for this inquiry to include a close look at who knew what, when and how they reacted. Were there other instances where Govt/Whitehall did make deals to block information? What have police forces suppressed?
If the Norfolk report had been suppressed this whole scandal could have been far worse and a culture of denial continued. How many more victims could there have been?
The other huge concern is that Gove has said there could be up to 50 towns/ cities where these gangs are/were operating.
The framing of this inquiry is a massive task and must be got right.

Marty · Jun 20, 2025

Brighton Sky Blue said:
Perhaps we could go around squirting water at foreigners?

Spain tourism: The protesters and residents pushing back on tourism in Barcelona

Hostility towards tourists in Spain grows as locals complain of being forced out of their own cities.

www.bbc.co.uk

Lol, they're telling the wrong people to go home.

Mucca Mad Boys · Jun 20, 2025

Marty said:
Lol, they're telling the wrong people to go home.

Refugees welcome, British tourists go home…

rob9872 · Jun 20, 2025

I'd like to hear the thoughts of Roger Ellis ...

fernandopartridge · Jun 20, 2025

tisza said:
So Gove confirms Cummings's narrative that there were people in Whitehall (as well as Rotherham council) that wanted to try and block Andrew Norfolk's story.

He is a good faith actor of course

SBT · Jun 20, 2025

Brighton Sky Blue said:
Perhaps we could go around squirting water at foreigners?

Spain tourism: The protesters and residents pushing back on tourism in Barcelona

Hostility towards tourists in Spain grows as locals complain of being forced out of their own cities.

www.bbc.co.uk

There is a certain irony that the anti-tourism crowd and the pro-immigration crowd often seem to be the same people.

tisza · Jun 20, 2025

SBT said:
There is a certain irony that the anti-tourism crowd and the pro-immigration crowd often seem to be the same people.

Sometimes it seems it's the joy of protesting rather than the cause. Look at US some Republican is making a fortune selling these "professional" protest outfits to the migration/climate/BLM/defund police/there is life on Mars demonstrators

Nick · Jun 20, 2025

I'm not sure he grasps how decent workplaces operate.

tisza · Jun 20, 2025

fernandopartridge said:
He is a good faith actor of course

He (like every other Govt minister/senior whitehall decision-maker 2000-2024) should be iunder the microscope of any inquiry

fernandopartridge · Jun 20, 2025

Somebody like Gove would tell you both that the civil service is bloated and nobody does anything at the same time as blocking anything good that he tries to do.

tisza · Jun 20, 2025

fernandopartridge said:
Somebody like Gove would tell you both that the civil service is bloated and nobody does anything at the same time as blocking anything good that he tries to do.

Sounds like a typical Govt minister

tisza · Jun 20, 2025

Nick said:
I'm not sure he grasps how decent workplaces operate.

So they can't get the employees of a council they run to co-operate. And they think they are ready to govern a country??

fernandopartridge · Jun 20, 2025

tisza said:
So they can't the employees of a council they run to co-operate. And they think they are ready to govern a country??

What they are suggesting is that it's wrong to pay people to WFH but right to pay them to work in an office, and the extra costs that come with that. I

Brighton Sky Blue · Jun 20, 2025

Nick said:
I'm not sure he grasps how decent workplaces operate.

That ‘DOGE’ stuff can piss off back to the US

Nick · Jun 20, 2025

fernandopartridge said:
What they are suggesting is that it's wrong to pay people to WFH but right to pay them to work in an office, and the extra costs that come with that. I

I mean, I don't know how that council is being run. There may well be thousands of people at home doing fuck all.

It's just the fact he thinks that to find out if work is being done, somebody should be sitting and watching somebody's screen all day every day when common sense would say look at productivity.

fernandopartridge · Jun 20, 2025

Nick said:
I mean, I don't know how that council is being run. There may well be thousands of people at home doing fuck all.

It's just the fact he thinks that to find out if work is being done, somebody should be sitting and watching somebody's screen all day every day when common sense would say look at productivity.

The same argument applies when in the office anyway, you'd need to employ people to watch over others.

tisza · Jun 20, 2025

Brighton Sky Blue said:
That ‘DOGE’ stuff can piss off back to the US

With reform just have an image of 4 old blokes with fags behind their ears, rolled up copy of the Sun under their arm and writing numbers on the back of a fag packet.

Nick · Jun 20, 2025

fernandopartridge said:
The same argument applies when in the office anyway, you'd need to employ people to watch over others.

It's dinosaur behaviour.

I've started at a place where it's hybrid and a 4 day week. I've never seen so much stuff get done.

Do you want to discuss boring politics? (18 Viewers)

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency