Migrant workers help UK economy

[Escapee]

Originally Posted by Damien

The report and news article says why.Besides, Post-War Britain was built with the help of Irish Immigrants

Yes, they were encouraged here because of the shortage of male workers after WW2, they also encourage workers from other countries that were part of the British Empire. That is why so many Carribean families moved here to jobs like driving a bus for London transport etc, also in the early 60's many moved here after the independance of jamaica because they were offered a choice of jamaican or British passport. I know a family where some of them took British passports and moved here, but the rest of the family had Jamaican passports and stayed at home.

I think the difference these days with migrant workers, is not the need to fill jobs due to shortage of able bodies but in many cases its to fill the jobs as cheaply as possible. Low paid jobs are full of migrant workers, and this is the direct fault of the government because of their softly softly approach with able bodied people who are benefit scroungers.

[JackB]

Rubbish. There is no way that saying your child is not getting the education they are entitled to because the teacher is having to spend all their time with other kids can be seen as anything other than a valid concern by a decent parent, unless that parent uses racist terms during the discussion with the school, in which case the parent is being racist.

I think that depends who the "other kids" are.

Originally Posted by Damien

The BBC is a good source of news, some perceive a liberal bias and a anti-Israel bias but its nothing compared to the vemon spewed out by the Mail. Maybe its because the BBC dont treat races as a single entity?

Originally Posted by JackB

Funny you should mention that after I read this earlier today.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...17/nbbc217.xml

You must have missed the fourth paragraph of that Telegraph article....
"After a year-long investigation the report, published today, maintains that the corporation’s coverage of day-to-day politics is fair and impartial."

I still am unsure of what vision of Britain people have. Our History is hardly full of happy, rich, success and dancing around green fields. Since all of you have been around England has had immgration.

Its seems with some on here, and not all controlled immgration is what everyone wants but its the extent of the controls we disagree on, but some have a warpped vision of what immgration has done and what Britain used to be. A complete avoidance of fact and a willingness to believe the worst if it conforms to their own views.

[Escapee]

Originally Posted by Damien

I still am unsure of what vision of Britain people have. Our History is hardly full of happy, rich, success and dancing around green fields. Since all of you have been around England has had immgration.

Its seems with some on here, and not all controlled immgration is what everyone wants but its the extent of the controls we disagree on, but some have a warpped vision of what immgration has done and what Britain used to be. A complete avoidance of fact and a willingness to believe the worst if it conforms to their own views.

I think the difference between now and further back in history, is the perception of the immigrants usefulness to the UK.

To stereotype to a certain degree, Irish workers were 'encouraged' here to build roads and caribbean workers were 'encouraged' here to drive buses and trains. That is a completely different reason to modern immigrants, modern immigrants are welcomed here by companies that want to pay peanuts to maximise their profits.

Joe public sees no benefit in an immigrant coming here and working for a private company unlike those filling a public sector job. Even Polish workers coming here to build houses are carrying out a much needed task, but they are again working cheaply to line the pockets of private companies.

Apart from Nurses and Doctors Immigrants are not filling many positions that have a direct benefit to the public.

[Osem]

At present we have what the government claim is a sound and growing economy. If problems such as these are evident during what are supposed to be the good times, how much worse are things going to be when the house of cards tumbles down? If people think tensions between the communities are raised now, God knows what it'll be like if we have a slump. There has been little or no long term thought given to this issue (i.e. additional infrastructure, public services etc.) and too much emphasis placed on the short term economic benefits of migrant labour. Whilst there may well be longer term benefits to the economy of mass migration that isn't much comfort to those who perceive they are losing out now whether it be in jobs, housing, education or anything else. The government opened the floodgates apparently expecting a trickle but got a torrent of migrants and that is why the debate has recently intensified. Had this same migration been properly managed over a more sensible period there would have been time to put additional resources and services in place to mitigate the affects on the host population and provide better conditions for the migrants. The whole thing has been a shambles.

Sorry to backtrack.

Originally Posted by Xaccers

Not when the reporting is up to the news paper.

Well you'd expect the BBC to report the headmaster's comments fairly, wouldn't you? But they didn't quote him at all. He is also quoted more fully by the Daily Mail although I expect the Mail's report is no more to your liking than the Manchester Evening News' is. Interestingly, we also learn from the BBC that Greater Manchester Police take "hate crime reports very seriously and its treatment of the teenager was in line with normal procedure." That a 14 year old's comments led to her being arrested for a "hate crime" is depressing example of the political correctness affecting this country. Even if your preferred version of events is true, shouldn't this have been dealt with by a reasonable teacher or the headmaster alone? Did the school really need to involve the police?

I'm sure he actually said more than "An allegation of a serious nature was made concerning a racially motivated remark by one student towards a group of Asian students new to the school and this country" in fact he probably said nothing of the sort. I know many people who've been misquoted by reporters to put a particular slant on the article, or to simply get across what
they're saying in a more concise manner. I also know of a complaint to the PCC regarding an article in a local Liverpool paper being upheld because the reporter had all his facts wrong making wild claims.

I know of similar cases too, but no such claims have been brought against either newspaper over this particular issue. And Paul Dacre, editor of the Daily Mail, is a member of the PCC. Perhaps that doesn't say much for the PCC?

Notice the girls are not reportedly interviewed, the only suggestion they can't speak English is from the chastised girl's mother, who is likely to be relying on her daughter's opinion of the girls and trying to defend her rather than first hand knowledge of the girls involved.

Evidently you are actually prepared to believe that this 14 year old is both a liar and a racist, despite no claims to the contrary? Interesting.

Please clarify: If she had been honest, ie that she was expected to discuss a subject with a group of 5 others, only 1 of whom could speak English, do you think she acted reasonably in asking her teacher if she could change groups? (And the MEN did not report the discussion group children as being girls.)

... There is no way that saying your child is not getting the education they are entitled to because the teacher is having to spend all their time with other kids can be seen as anything other than a valid concern by a decent parent, unless that parent uses racist terms during the discussion with the school, in which case the parent is being racist.

Absolutely right. Unfortunately not all teachers regard the issue in such an eminently reasonable way.

[Chrysalis]

Originally Posted by danielf

I'm not quite sure if that argument holds. Firstly, many immigrants will bugger off after a few years. Secondly, if they put their children through full education here, the children are likely to remain here and pay their own taxes (i.e. they would be contributing as much as the average native briton (on average)).

My real life experience suggests the opposite, local housing benefit office is maybe 50% immigrant mothers. We have numerous schools that teach immigrant kids only or are dominated by immigrant kids. One of the stats released by our government (not saying its accurate) points out immigrants are having more children per child bearing woman then non immigrants, I think people aren't going to come here have/with children then take them back to their native country.

--edit--

Someone else earlier pointed out about confusing asylum seekers with immigrants I may be doing this but its hard to see who is a immigrant and who is an asylum seeker.

---------- Post added at 09:51 ---------- Previous post was at 09:39 ----------

Originally Posted by Saaf_laandon_mo

I'm technically an immigrant (been here since 1975 tho) and most of my friends are 'immigrants' too.

Where I work the majority of the temps are immigrants (South Africans, Aussies, Albanians, a Lituanina and some Poles)

I think a lot of people on this forum know immigrants personally hence the discussions.

Yep, I probably come across as racist to a few people when I am not, I have asian friends, polish friends some do agree and some dont agree with my views. I dont wish for immigration to be stopped, I expect most people dont wish for immigration to be stopped but would like there to be more control of it and limited, not only does it cause crowding in the country but it also creates a bad stigma around every immigrant in this country.

---------- Post added at 09:52 ---------- Previous post was at 09:51 ----------

Originally Posted by Damien

What nationality? Most immgration is slow, it hasnt gone up that drastically in the last 10 years. Most schools kids from immgrant familys would have been born here.

Depends where you live as they tend to congregate in areas, its grown here by over 20% in the last 10 years.

---------- Post added at 09:53 ---------- Previous post was at 09:52 ----------

Originally Posted by Pierre

An there is the challenge that this government has failed to rise to. Get the spongers off benefits and get them working rather than let in loads of foreign workers.

Now that really would help the UK economy.

Yes but their precious housing market would collapse as housing demand would be lost without immigration

---------- Post added at 09:59 ---------- Previous post was at 09:53 ----------

Originally Posted by Xaccers

#30

#32
Chrysalis refers to an open immigration policy, when that isn't the case. It's apparently not even that easy to get a tourist visa to come and visit the UK for tourism!
There's also the suggestion that there will be a language barrier strain on education as immigrants have more children than natives (I assume that by natives, Chrysalis is not including native muslims, catholics, chavs, orthadox jews etc), even though children born in this country to immigrant parents can speak english before they get to school through the amazing ability of children to learn languages, even from TV (I knew a turkish boy who by the age of 4 could speak fluent american thanks to Seseme street).

Well by natives I mean people who dont need to be treated different to live in this country, examples school uniforms, speaking english, mixing with whites/asians etc. The reason there is these schools is because the children attending them would have problems attending a traditional school. Its a touchy subject and people can easily be offended by what I am trying to say but I hope my points are understood, educating children from a family where the parents can barely speak english is more diffilcult and expensive then educating someone who has had family here for generations.

---------- Post added at 10:08 ---------- Previous post was at 09:59 ----------

Originally Posted by Escapee

I think the difference between now and further back in history, is the perception of the immigrants usefulness to the UK.

To stereotype to a certain degree, Irish workers were 'encouraged' here to build roads and caribbean workers were 'encouraged' here to drive buses and trains. That is a completely different reason to modern immigrants, modern immigrants are welcomed here by companies that want to pay peanuts to maximise their profits.

Joe public sees no benefit in an immigrant coming here and working for a private company unlike those filling a public sector job. Even Polish workers coming here to build houses are carrying out a much needed task, but they are again working cheaply to line the pockets of private companies.

Apart from Nurses and Doctors Immigrants are not filling many positions that have a direct benefit to the public.

There is also housing, housing demands are currently driven by private landlords buying up properties and letting out to immigrants and students, previously it was more mainly students. In terms of social housing it is well known in areas of social housing that asylum seekers/immagrants will get priority on social housing it is very noticeable as 9 out of 10 houses an asylum seeker will move into and when someone asks them how long they been waiting for the house they will say something like a month or a week when people have been on the waiting list for years. Reasons like this is why people in estate areas have a higher objection to immigration as they are affected more. Again asylum seekers which technically are not immigrants are part of this.

From what I see polish immigrants are benefiting the private sector a lot, they tend to work hard for low wages and then live in private rented properties of course this is also keeping wages low, immigrants from muslim countries have a high unemployment ratio and high amount of illegal immigration, also from african countries high amount of illegal immigration but are hard workers similiar to the polish, all this is from my own personal experiences and stats from muslim employment. It may well be a different picture to what it is like nationally.

One thing we can be sure of there is currently nowhere near enough houses been built which would also indicate public services are stressed since they tend to be expanded alongside housing.

[Saaf_laandon_mo]

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

My real life experience suggests the opposite, local housing benefit office is maybe 50% immigrant mothers. We have numerous schools that teach immigrant kids only or are dominated by immigrant kids. One of the stats released by our government (not saying its accurate) points out immigrants are having more children per child bearing woman then non immigrants, I think people aren't going to come here have/with children then take them back to their native country.

--edit--

Someone else earlier pointed out about confusing asylum seekers with immigrants I may be doing this but its hard to see who is a immigrant and who is an asylum seeker.

---------- Post added at 09:51 ---------- Previous post was at 09:39 ----------

When you say that in your local office housing Benefit office that immigrant mothers make up at least 50% of the claimants, I doubt that this is reflected nationwide. It would be interesting if there were stats that showed percentage of immigrants claiming housing benefit as a proportion to total claimants. Additionally how long ago have the immigrated into the UK? Are you saying that these people are, to use a common term, "straight of the boat", and getting housing benefits?

As for schools that exclusively only teach immigrants, I have yet to come across any of these in London, so I'm curious to know where in the UK you are referring to.

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

Yep, I probably come across as racist to a few people when I am not, I have asian friends, polish friends some do agree and some dont agree with my views. I dont wish for immigration to be stopped, I expect most people dont wish for immigration to be stopped but would like there to be more control of it and limited, not only does it cause crowding in the country but it also creates a bad stigma around every immigrant in this country.

---------- Post added at 09:52 ---------- Previous post was at 09:51 ----------
I dont see you coming across as being a racist, and I understand what you say about controlled immigration. I am just fed up with people blaming everything from house prices to kids doing badly at school to immigrants, in particular indian/pakistani muslim ones which seem to be flavour of the month for the anti immigration fanatics. In my opinion a lot of non immigrants in the UK are not unemployed because of the immigrants coming here, but more so because of their own inability to get off their backside and actually go out to work, rather than sponging off the dole.

As for the housing price/shortages, I read a few months ago that the London property price increase was down to the banking sector and their huge bonuses. Yes, banking does have a lot of immigrants, but you'd find that they are all working. You cant just single out immigration for housing shortages/property prices.

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

From what I see polish immigrants are benefiting the private sector a lot, they tend to work hard for low wages and then live in private rented properties of course this is also keeping wages low, immigrants from muslim countries have a high unemployment ratio and high amount of illegal immigration, also from african countries high amount of illegal immigration but are hard workers similiar to the polish, all this is from my own personal experiences and stats from muslim employment. It may well be a different picture to what it is like nationally.

One thing we can be sure of there is currently nowhere near enough houses been built which would also indicate public services are stressed since they tend to be expanded alongside housing.

Would it be possible to publish a link to stats regarding Muslim employment. I would say that muslim immigrants from India, Pakistan and Africa do very well in employement and contribute quite highly to the UK economy, be they employed or self employed. I find it quite strange that once again muslim immigrants that are being singled out, this time for being unemployed. In my experience the majority of muslim immigrants (especially those from India/Pakistan and a few African countries) are hard working, and have a healthy work ethic. Their kids (who were born here or who came over when they were very young) do very well at school too, and go on to university to study proper degrees such as economics, business, computing, medicine and not media studies or art or drama which seems to be quite common with the english (oh sorry for stereo typing but it seems to be contagious on this thread).

[Chrysalis]

In regards to the muslim statistics I got them from a bbc news article and it was based on muslims over 25 if I remember correctly. I also based it on that most of the women I see in the housing benefit office are muslim, but its possible they may have working husbands in a low wage job. I also live an a city which has a high muslim population it is also surprising that I dont see many in places I have worked whilst there has been many polish and asian workers. I am not saying I am right tho just based on my personal experiences and a bbc news article which of course could be inaccurate in itself.

I bet there is many hard working muslims as in all religions.

Here is the article, not sure if its the right one but has some stats there.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4771233.stm

[Saaf_laandon_mo]

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

In regards to the muslim statistics I got them from a bbc news article and it was based on muslims over 25 if I remember correctly. I also based it on that most of the women I see in the housing benefit office are muslim, but its possible they may have working husbands in a low wage job. I also live an a city which has a high muslim population it is also surprising that I dont see many in places I have worked whilst there has been many polish and asian workers. I am not saying I am right tho just based on my personal experiences and a bbc news article which of course could be inaccurate in itself.

I bet there is many hard working muslims as in all religions.

Here is the article, not sure if its the right one but has some stats there.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4771233.stm

Thanks for the Link.... can I ask where you're from/where you live?

I have just read that link, and it doesn't differentiate between immigrants and UK born muslims.

Could it be that no one wants to employ a muslim, based on the streotypes that are prevalent in society about them. (you can see a lot of these in this Forum, and I doubt if its just restriced to CF)

Also the muslim religion emcompasses people from quite a lot of backgrounds, so that percentage could also include Bristish born muslims. I am assuming the survey required the respondant to indicate their religion. It will definately include Bengalis and Somalians who make up quite a big chunk of the unemployed in parts of London for example. Its difficult to relate that survey/report to immigrants without more information.

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by JackB

I think that depends who the "other kids" are.

So you'll let your child not get the education they are entitled too for fear of somehow being called a racist by discussing the matter with the head teacher (what exactly do you think you'll say? "These bloody foriegners with no right to be here are stopping my kid getting educated") yet you'll quite happily appear as a racist on here.
Sorry, but I pity your child if that's how little importance you actually place on their education.
I certainly wouldn't let something like that slip by.

---------- Post added at 12:11 ---------- Previous post was at 12:01 ----------

Originally Posted by freezin

Sorry to backtrack.



Well you'd expect the BBC to report the headmaster's comments fairly, wouldn't you?

Hell no. I'd expect the BBC to put their own slant on it using the information available. The girls may not have wished to give interviews for example.

Originally Posted by freein

I know of similar cases too, but no such claims have been brought against either newspaper over this particular issue. And Paul Dacre, editor of the Daily Mail, is a member of the PCC. Perhaps that doesn't say much for the PCC?

You know of other cases where a local rag claims toy guns sold for £1.99 can kill or paralyse, where complaints have been raised by someone who just read the article and wished to set the record straight over the facts?

Originally Posted by freezin

Evidently you are actually prepared to believe that this 14 year old is both a liar and a racist, despite no claims to the contrary? Interesting.

Are you not prepared to believe that the 14 year old is both a liar and a racist?
If not, why not?
Many 14 year olds are liars, many are racists, many are both. What's special about this girl that she can't possibly be either?

Originally Posted by freezin

Please clarify: If she had been honest, ie that she was expected to discuss a subject with a group of 5 others, only 1 of whom could speak English, do you think she acted reasonably in asking her teacher if she could change groups? (And the MEN did not report the discussion group children as being girls.)

I've been put to work with a girl who had speach issues, she never spoke, the reason I was put with her was to try and bring her out of her shell because of the type of person I was, I wouldn't make fun of her, or ignore her, I'd coax her to speak, and it worked.
What better way to help people if they have poor english skills to learn english than to work with english pupils in a discussion task?
Or do you think they should integrate by being segregated in class? Would that be better?

---------- Post added at 12:24 ---------- Previous post was at 12:11 ----------

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

Someone else earlier pointed out about confusing asylum seekers with immigrants I may be doing this but its hard to see who is a immigrant and who is an asylum seeker.

It's quite easy if you just use your noggin
Asylum seekers are not allowed to work, so are reliant on reduced benefits and social housing (different allocation of social housing to natives, so no worry about them jumping ahead of any British workshy scrotes now, so don't fret). Why aren't they allowed to work I hear any sensible person ask?
Well, you see, a load of racist anti-immigrant bigots went "waaa waaa waaa they're just claiming to be asylum seekers to take all our jobs, the low paid ones which Brits like us don't want to do" so the governmnet, in true Tabloid Policy style, denied asylum seekers the right to work, so any doctors, nurses, teachers etc who are qualified to work in the UK, just can't. So, because they can't work, there's this little thing called duty of care, you may have heard about it, it's sometimes considered part of what's being British, and basically it means that being decent human beings (we are decent human beings aren't we? Well, I am) we look after people in need whenever we can. So rather than your asylum seeker being able to work, pay rent, tax, food etc, they now are reliant on the state to support them. Course, then all the right wing racist biggots said "Waa waa waa they're all coming over to get benefits that our own workshy scrotes should get" so the benefits that an asylum seeker get are lower than what a British workshy scrote would get.
Then the right wing racist biggots said "Waa waa waa they're still coming for benefits, and 0.5% of the total benefit expendature is way too high, that money should go to British workshy scrotes" and we have the situation we're in today where the media loves blurring the line between immigrant and asylum seeker.
Great isn't it?

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

Well by natives I mean people who dont need to be treated different to live in this country, examples school uniforms, speaking english, mixing with whites/asians etc. The reason there is these schools is because the children attending them would have problems attending a traditional school. Its a touchy subject and people can easily be offended by what I am trying to say but I hope my points are understood, educating children from a family where the parents can barely speak english is more diffilcult and expensive then educating someone who has had family here for generations.

So Catholics who send their kids to Catholic schools aren't native then?
Or Anglicans who send their children to CoE schools?

Educating someone who spent most of their childhood speaking another language costs more in time, but even if English isn't spoken at home, most children who were born here are able to speak english by the time they reach primary school (the exception I know of being the son of an ex-neighbour, who could hardly speak, didn't know his colours or how to count to 3, but could swear like a trooper. Course his mother was white, english (native), and never did a days work in her life, oh and her other kids are currently helping to boost the prison population even higher).

Originally Posted by Xaccers

Hell no. I'd expect the BBC to put their own slant on it using the information available. The girls may not have wished to give interviews for example.

Well I would. They show a bias towards the "immigration is good" line of thought in my view. But it seems the headmaster did talk to the press, but the BBC either didn't interview him or chose not to report his comments. After what the Mail had said, if there was a different side to the story, and if it was to report on the story at all, I think the BBC had a duty as our publicly funded broadcaster to present both sides of the matter. There is no reason why the other children should have given interviews. They do of course have a right to their privacy if they and their parents want it. (And how do you know they were girls?)

Originally Posted by Xaccers

You know of other cases where a local rag claims toy guns sold for £1.99 can kill or paralyse, where complaints have been raised by someone who just read the article and wished to set the record straight over the facts?

We know it happens, but no one complained over the reporting of this case. And the anti-racist lobby is not normally reluctant to make capital out of those it thinks are racists.

Originally Posted by Xaccers

Are you not prepared to believe that the 14 year old is both a liar and a racist? If not, why not? Many 14 year olds are liars, many are racists, many are both. What's special about this girl that she can't possibly be either?

I didn't say she couldn't possibly be either, and indeed I allowed for the fact that she could be, but you are not even willing to give her the benefit of the doubt despite the police, who take "hate crimes very seriously" dropping the case and no one saying that she was wrong in her assertion of the launguage barrier, not even via the BBC. Innocent until proven guilty in your eyes?

Originally Posted by Xaccers

I've been put to work with a girl who had speach issues, she never spoke, the reason I was put with her was to try and bring her out of her shell because of the type of person I was, I wouldn't make fun of her, or ignore her, I'd coax her to speak, and it worked.

That's very laudable, sincerely. May I ask in what capacity have you been working with her?

Originally Posted by xaccers

What better way to help people if they have poor english skills to learn english than to work with english pupils in a discussion task? Or do you think they should integrate by being segregated in class? Would that be better?

Integration into mainstream education is all very well for those with poor English skills, but it doesn't help the academic education of those who already speak English proficiently enough to understand the lesson. I don't believe segregation in schools helps community cohesion or integration, but schools are already becoming segregated anyway.

Originally Posted by freezin

That a 14 year old's comments led to her being arrested for a "hate crime" is depressing example of the political correctness affecting this country. Even if your preferred version of events is true, shouldn't this have been dealt with by a reasonable teacher or the headmaster alone? Did the school really need to involve the police?

Originally Posted by freezin

Please clarify: If she had been honest, ie that she was expected to discuss a subject with a group of 5 others, only 1 of whom could speak English, do you think she acted reasonably in asking her teacher if she could change groups?

???

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by freezin

Well I would. They show a bias towards the "immigration is good" line of thought in my view. But it seems the headmaster did talk to the press, but the BBC either didn't interview him or chose not to report his comments. After what the Mail had said, if there was a different side to the story, and if it was to report on the story at all, I think the BBC had a duty as our publicly funded broadcaster to present both sides of the matter. There is no reason why the other children should have given interviews. They do of course have a right to their privacy if they and their parents want it. (And how do you know they were girls?)

Exactly, there is no reason why the others should talk to the media, yet as a consiquence, we only have one side of the story. You can assume that what has been reported covers everything if you like, I'll stick with keeping an open mind and acknowledge that there are aspects of what happened which we don't know about.

Originally Posted by freezin

We know it happens, but no one complained over the reporting of this case. And the anti-racist lobby is not normally reluctant to make capital out of those it thinks are racists.

How would the "anti-racist lobby" (you say that like it's a bad thing actually, do you believe it's bad to lobby against racism?) know what occured if the others involved aren't giving interviews?
You can't just write to the PCC and say "I don't like that article" and expect them to do something about it.
Would they have UKIP's magic crystal ball perhaps?
The one which tells them that immigration will continue at a constant rate until the end of time.
Are you using your husband's crystal ball to see if anyone has complaned to the PCC or not?
How exactly would you know unless the media printed a retraction, which is only one of many outcomes from a complaint to the PCC?

Originally Posted by freezin

I didn't say she couldn't possibly be either, and indeed I allowed for the fact that she could be, but you are not even willing to give her the benefit of the doubt despite the police, who take "hate crimes very seriously" dropping the case and no one saying that she was wrong in her assertion of the launguage barrier, not even via the BBC. Innocent until proven guilty in your eyes?

Hang on, if you're prepaired to believe she is a racist liar, what's your point?
I've not said she is a racist liar, I've not said the event didn't take place. If you have no problem with being prepaired to believe she is actually a racist liar, then what are you going on about?

Originally Posted by freezin

That's very laudable, sincerely. May I ask in what capacity have you been working with her?

I was a classmate, can't remember exactly what we were working on, it's about 20 years ago.
I could have said "Waa waa waaa I don't want to work with the girl who doesn't speak" or I could have gotten on with the task and hand and given her the confidence to find her voice, which thankfully happened, at least until some scrote over heard her and mocked her.

Originally Posted by freezin

Integration into mainstream education is all very well for those with poor English skills, but it doesn't help the academic education of those who already speak English proficiently enough to understand the lesson. I don't believe segregation in schools helps community cohesion or integration, but schools are already becoming segregated anyway.

So, there's a group of 6 pupils, 2 can speak english, can we assume 1 can speak both english and urdu while 4 can only speak urdu? (that's urdo the language, not to be mistaken for Locky's Hurdo, which we think is a hairstyle in Liverpool)
So, rather than work as a team, helping her fellow students and learning important life skills from it, you think it's ok that she went "waa waa waa miss it's too hard to actually do any work, I can't be bovvered to work with these that can't speak english"
Exactly how is that helping people integrate?
In her position, I would have used the bilingual student to translate, thus not only teaching the other 4 english language skills, but also learn some urdu at the same time.
But hey, learning can be hard, and it's not for everyone right?

[Chrysalis]

Originally Posted by Saaf_laandon_mo

Thanks for the Link.... can I ask where you're from/where you live?

I have just read that link, and it doesn't differentiate between immigrants and UK born muslims.

Could it be that no one wants to employ a muslim, based on the streotypes that are prevalent in society about them. (you can see a lot of these in this Forum, and I doubt if its just restriced to CF)

Also the muslim religion emcompasses people from quite a lot of backgrounds, so that percentage could also include Bristish born muslims. I am assuming the survey required the respondant to indicate their religion. It will definately include Bengalis and Somalians who make up quite a big chunk of the unemployed in parts of London for example. Its difficult to relate that survey/report to immigrants without more information.

I agree that stereotyping will exist especially after 9/11, having spoken to some of my friends about this last night they have put me straight on a few other things as well like many people I used to work with were actually muslim when I thought they wasn't.

My views on immigration I would like to add would apply to whites as well, so american, australian, german and french immigrants would be included in my thoughts.

---------- Post added at 09:34 ---------- Previous post was at 09:29 ----------

Originally Posted by Xaccers

It's quite easy if you just use your noggin
Asylum seekers are not allowed to work, so are reliant on reduced benefits and social housing (different allocation of social housing to natives, so no worry about them jumping ahead of any British workshy scrotes now, so don't fret). Why aren't they allowed to work I hear any sensible person ask?
Well, you see, a load of racist anti-immigrant bigots went "waaa waaa waaa they're just claiming to be asylum seekers to take all our jobs, the low paid ones which Brits like us don't want to do" so the governmnet, in true Tabloid Policy style, denied asylum seekers the right to work, so any doctors, nurses, teachers etc who are qualified to work in the UK, just can't. So, because they can't work, there's this little thing called duty of care, you may have heard about it, it's sometimes considered part of what's being British, and basically it means that being decent human beings (we are decent human beings aren't we? Well, I am) we look after people in need whenever we can. So rather than your asylum seeker being able to work, pay rent, tax, food etc, they now are reliant on the state to support them. Course, then all the right wing racist biggots said "Waa waa waa they're all coming over to get benefits that our own workshy scrotes should get" so the benefits that an asylum seeker get are lower than what a British workshy scrote would get.
Then the right wing racist biggots said "Waa waa waa they're still coming for benefits, and 0.5% of the total benefit expendature is way too high, that money should go to British workshy scrotes" and we have the situation we're in today where the media loves blurring the line between immigrant and asylum seeker.
Great isn't it?



So Catholics who send their kids to Catholic schools aren't native then?
Or Anglicans who send their children to CoE schools?

Educating someone who spent most of their childhood speaking another language costs more in time, but even if English isn't spoken at home, most children who were born here are able to speak english by the time they reach primary school (the exception I know of being the son of an ex-neighbour, who could hardly speak, didn't know his colours or how to count to 3, but could swear like a trooper. Course his mother was white, english (native), and never did a days work in her life, oh and her other kids are currently helping to boost the prison population even higher).

The reason asylum seekers are part of my arguments is simply because the 2 things are linked, if you have an open immigration policy then quite simply there will be more asylum seekers the two things come hand in hand so asylum seekers costs should be counted as part of costs associated with immigration.

Immigrants from countries such as australia and american I would expect to have lower costs as there shouldnt be so much of a language and culture barrier but they of course all add to the overcrowding problems we have in this country.

Regarding the native stuff I knew it would be questioned but hard to word what I am on about. Its not merely about religion but more to do with language and culture barriers.