Griffin and BNP strategy

durruti02 said:

you are such a fucking liar mate!!! .. FFS constant lies .. jesus wept!!


i have stated and belive consistently that this is NOT the case .. that it is about need and migrants then often have more priority

Click to expand...

No, it isn't a "lie" you posted up, what you rather charmingly described, as "scenarios"; you also posted a link to a Telegraph article which you used to 'support' your thesis. It's on this thread btw.

nino_savatte said:

No, it isn't a "lie" you posted up, what you rather charmingly described, as "scenarios"; you also posted a link to a Telegraph article which you used to 'support' your thesis. It's on this thread btw.

Click to expand...

calm down calm down! has nobody ever misinterpreted your words? No matter what has been said, he is clearly indicating how he meant his words to be interpreted.

durruti02 said:

i have stated and belive consistently that this is NOT the case .. that it is about need and migrants then often have more priority

Click to expand...

it is absolutely clear there is an absolute level playing field. Some time ago it was not so level. A number of points extra used to be given for "local people". This discriminated in favour of local people, and against nonlocal people. this is clearly what durruti wants. Why don't you construct a clear argument against such discrimination?

nino_savatte said:

1)This is the problem with the figure that The Telegraph has given: there is no breakdown and no information regarding temporary accommodation or hard to let properties that have been let to, not just immigrants, but to other applicants.

2)I know that Hackney and Southwark used to have schemes, whereby they would use an open bidding process to let out hard-to-let properties. I would imagine that such properties are becoming harder to find.

3)Durutti continues to use the word "migrant" to illustrate his point but, as we all know, that word covers a variety of situations and circumstances.

4)The programme also said that "most migrants will rent from the private sector".

5)Another issue that durutti avoids is the lack of new build social housing. Most councils haven't built any new homes for well over 20 years.

Click to expand...

1) yes you are right about the article. It IS unclear! And interestingly it is very hard to get hold of decent figures. This was one of the areas that i genuinely hoped you would help us with as apperrently urbans sole housing officer rep!

2) these ended in the 1980s at least in hackney.

3) agreed

4) agreed and see that i posted this back in early june.Talking to a mate earlier on today and he was helping some poles above him in small tower block ( 10 in 3 bed flat !) who were having problem with water and had a look at their contract .. they are being charged £1000 a week!! another mate in bethnal green said similar over 2 years ago that majority of his (large ) council block was private sub lets ..

5) nino nino nino .. on here maybe mate but as a shop steward in council housing i plaster the walls of our depot with posters arguing for new council housing and with my HI hat i am regulalry campaigning for same .. it is high on peoples priorities/demands p.s. i was a delegate to DCH today to but didn't go as had other things to do


i hope you do not mind that i put numbers on your paragraphs .. if you do not like this will not do again!

MC5 said:

Have you any data for the specific point you raise about London wages in the public sector and inflation over the many years you cite? It's not that I dion't believe you, I'm just interested.

I work in the charitable and voluntary sector and earn just over twelve grand a year (that's before tax), so there's no way I can afford to buy a house.

I did argue that immigration did have an affect on reducing wage growth for some in a post directed at you some time ago, when you stated, without any evidence, that immigration leads to a lowering of wages.

Click to expand...

Wages in london are a lot higher!! but never high enough as property inflation is enormous.

yes you are generally right it appears that migration causes, nationally, thru creating growth in a thatcherite fashion, average wage growth. And we agree that it AT LEAST slows wage growth at the bottom. I think there is evidence that here wages are actually reduced sometimes.

anecdotally my wages have gone down consistently for almost 20 years relative to inflation. There has been a public sectorpay freeze for almost all this time with annual rises almost always below inflation.

as for wages actually being reduced? yes e.g local estate cleaners were all on what is called scale 3, that is now about 18k ( this ioncludes what is called inner london weighting).. so in cowboy firms that have many of these contracts we see wages of £14K and even £12K .. this in LONDON FFS .. one company buses in portugese ever day, another relies on pakistani migrants. Local kids do not go for these jobs at these rates.

ok so this is NOT a direct affect of migration. Fundamentally it is spivs looking to maximise profits from contracts. And we all accept this. My point is that WITHOUT this recent migration this would NOT be possible. WITHOUT migration the cowboys would not have been able to get workers at these shit rates. And it is EASIER getting migrants for whom the money is just OK to work, than FORCING locals relucantly into these jobs. And so also unemplyment stays high!

as for figures? There are more but for now, the recent TUC report states in section 4.7

" A more recent independent study, using General Household Survey and
New Earnings Survey data,(40) found that “an increase in the number of
unskilled migrants reduces the wages of unskilled domestic workers. However
the quantitative impact of this increase is small. No discernible impact of
migration is found for skilled native workers.”

40 Migration, Trade and Wages, Alexander Hijzen and Peter Wright, University of Nottingham research paper series, research paper 2005/11

durruti02 said:

ok so this is NOT a direct affect of migration. Fundamentally it is spivs looking to maximise profits from contracts. And we all accept this. My point is that WITHOUT this recent migration this would NOT be possible. WITHOUT migration the cowboys would not have been able to get workers at these shit rates. And it is EASIER getting migrants for whom the money is just OK to work, than FORCING locals relucantly into these jobs. And so also unemplyment stays high!

Click to expand...

So are you saying that the left should involve itself in a campaign to halt migrants coming here?

Back to BNP strategy, well one rich member at least:

durruti02 said:

Wages in london are a lot higher!! but never high enough as property inflation is enormous.

Click to expand...

The trouble with that statement is that the cost of living in London dwarfs any wage, unless you happen to be on a six-figure salary.

durruti02 said:

1) yes you are right about the article. It IS unclear! And interestingly it is very hard to get hold of decent figures. This was one of the areas that i genuinely hoped you would help us with as apperrently urbans sole housing officer rep!

2) these ended in the 1980s at least in hackney.

3) agreed

4) agreed and see that i posted this back in early june.Talking to a mate earlier on today and he was helping some poles above him in small tower block ( 10 in 3 bed flat !) who were having problem with water and had a look at their contract .. they are being charged £1000 a week!! another mate in bethnal green said similar over 2 years ago that majority of his (large ) council block was private sub lets ..

5) nino nino nino .. on here maybe mate but as a shop steward in council housing i plaster the walls of our depot with posters arguing for new council housing and with my HI hat i am regulalry campaigning for same .. it is high on peoples priorities/demands p.s. i was a delegate to DCH today to but didn't go as had other things to do


i hope you do not mind that i put numbers on your paragraphs .. if you do not like this will not do again!

Click to expand...

Actually, I do mind you tampering with my post - even if it is only to add numbers to the paragraphs. I don't do it to you or to anyone else. Therefore I don't expect others to edit my posts. If you add numbers then there is a fair chance that you add other things to other people's posts and I've already caught you doing that.

What you also don't seem to understand is that in my former occupation in housing, I did not have access to figures; it was not my job to number crunch. There is also another issue here: you say "this was one of the areas that i genuinely hoped you would help us with as apperrently urbans sole housing officer rep!". So if I don't 'produce' for you then that means, in your eyes and those of your mates, that I'm a liar. I don't think you'd be able to get a set of figures from anyone in housing. Even a trade magazine like Inside Housing wouldn't have definitive figures. So I'm sorry about that. When I left housing almost 7 years ago, I did not expect to be performing tricks and dispensing data for posters on a public bulletin board. In fact, I wanted to forget about housing, I hated it so much.

What I would like to know is why you want me to answer all of you questions when you say that you work

as a shop steward in council housing

Click to expand...

So why don't you have access to this data? For the same reason that I didn't when I was working in housing. Furthermore, I would like to know why you felt it necessary to insinuate that I was lying about the points system?

RTB leaseholders have always overlooked the hidden cost of buying their own council home. So many leaseholders will let out either to students or immigrants. I used to meet many students on my rounds, many of them thought that they could get repair work done by the council until I told them that their landlord was responsible.

Subletting is illegal and all tenancy agreements state this. Those tenants who sublet are at risk of losing their home.

Apparently, Brown has given the go ahead for local authorities to build new social housing.

MC5 said:

So are you saying that the left should involve itself in a campaign to halt migrants coming here?

Click to expand...

you are funny mate! .. np a campaign to get local sustainable employment at living wages and to stop companies recruiting abroad particularly health workers from the third world. do you have a problem with either of them?

Oh and durruti02 I thought you might want to have a look at this.

In 1993, Oldham Borough Council was found to have been operating an unlawful segregation policy in its housing allocation, which ghettoised Asians onto a rundown estate, while whites were given homes in a more desirable area.

Click to expand...

Comments?

http://www.mediamonitors.net/mosaddeq6.html

durruti02 said:

you are funny mate! .. np a campaign to get local sustainable employment at living wages and to stop companies recruiting abroad particularly health workers from the third world. do you have a problem with either of them?

Click to expand...

I don't disagree with your first point, but your second point is over simplistic.

What about those who come here of their own accord?

BNP polled 19.5% yesterday in Rotherham Valley ward by election, coming second to Labour

JimPage said:

BNP polled 19.5% yesterday in Rotherham Valley ward by election, coming second to Labour

Click to expand...

In Labour heartlands there often isn't any opposition so it tends to artificially inflate the BNP vote - where there is some choice it tends to split that vote.

MC5 said:

I don't disagree with your first point, but your second point is over simplistic.

What about those who come here of their own accord?

Click to expand...

Well many do .. of that there is no question .. and as you know i support peoples right to move .. my whole agenda is about stopping the current neo liberal 'drive to the bottom', 'pull' ..

as i have CONSTANTLY reiterated, it is not immigration that is the problem, not the colour of migrants that is the problem ( as the BNP state), but that the spivs who have taken over this country are so clearly using immigration to further their economic aims.

Attica said:

In Labour heartlands there often isn't any opposition so it tends to artificially inflate the BNP vote - where there is some choice it tends to split that vote.

Click to expand...

attica .. i do not agree with this .. indeed it is EVEN worse if it is how you state ..

.. that whereas people might have voted LibDem in protest or then UKIP, NOW they vote for a party that ( so we are constantly told) is neo nazi.

MC5 said:

Oh and durruti02 I thought you might want to have a look at this.
Comments?

http://www.mediamonitors.net/mosaddeq6.html

Click to expand...

this is news???

MC you think i do not accept that labour has used institutional racism for decades, and partly to control communities????

i agree with virtually all the article except it i think they underestimate the problem that some small sections of the muslim community have not tried to integrate. This inward insulare attidtude though is typical of communities unders pressure, but equally while racism has to be utterly destroyed, it will not be if either side stick to any form of relegious fundamentalism.

but also .. i do not believe in a society of serperate but equal communities as a minority of fundamentalist muslims want .. seperate but equal is of course apartheid and the policy of many neo-nazis.

most white people are not racist ( or do you differ) and do not support racism. The vast majority of white people also have no power even though they may be better of than their asian neighbours. It is this powerlessness that leads to scape goating .. it is this that needs to be dealt with.

Old news and I agree with most of the points you make, apart from the "not tried to integrate" one, which I think you're confusing with the term 'assimilate'?

MC5 said:

Old news and I agree with most of the points you make, apart from the "not tried to integrate" one, which I think you're confusing with the term 'assimilate'?

Click to expand...

not sure what you mean .. i am not saying people should merge .. but if you live in a country you should speak same language and not take fundamentalist stance on e.g. sharia as do a minority .. but as i said this is usually a reaction TOO oppression when people go inward looking .. which puts onus on majority pop to deal with issue

durruti02 said:

attica .. i do not agree with this .. indeed it is EVEN worse if it is how you state ..

.. that whereas people might have voted LibDem in protest or then UKIP, NOW they vote for a party that ( so we are constantly told) is neo nazi.

Click to expand...

In Northern seats I am thinking of there was no alternative - Labour was all there was, uncontested. Challenges from the Left even in times of mass working class struggles failed to register a significant vote. One I have been told of in my town in a council ward (Labour heartland, well known union man) only got 30 votes.

I don't think it is as bad as you imply - the BNP have been widely touted by the media as a 'protest vote' so perhaps it is a self fullfilling prophecy? Until there is some serious research on this issue we are all 'blowing in the wind'.

In Labour heartlands there often isn't any opposition so it tends to artificially inflate the BNP vote - where there is some choice it tends to split that vote.

Click to expand...

In Northern seats I am thinking of there was no alternative - Labour was all there was, uncontested

Click to expand...

Which seats? There aren't any.

torres said:

Which seats? There aren't any.

Click to expand...

There's shed loads of them Torres.

Name them then. There aren't any.

torres said:

Name them then. There aren't any.

Click to expand...

Torres Norf, Torry South, Torez West, Tory East

torres said:

Name them then. There aren't any.

Click to expand...

But seriously - are you gonna give me £100 if I go and name 1? I could you know, but I can't be bothered cos you are in some sort of petulent denial...

If there is one and if there are many bumping then figures then i'll apologise here and now.

I thought you were after political debate on this rather then one-up bollocks. But you show me the ones bumping the figures - the 10-20% uncontested please.

torres said:

If there is one and if there are many bumping then figures then i'll apologise here and now.

I thought you were after political debate on this rather then one-up bollocks. But you show me the ones bumping the figures - the 10-20% uncontested please.

Click to expand...

I do not know of any research on the issue but I know that they exist, and there are enough of them. How many %wise I do not know, but there are lots of them even if it is a small %.

There aren't any The only uncontested seat was in wiltshire. You're bullshitting. Anyone seriously following the BNPs electoral fortunes over the last 10 years knows that this is lazy bollocks. Not true. Please don't base things on what you *expect* (or would like) to happen. Or you'll get left behind.

torres said:

There aren't any The only uncontested seat was in Calne. You're bullshitting. Anyone seriously following the BNPs electoral fortunes over the last 10 years knows that this is lazy bollocks. Not true. Please don't base things on what you *expect* (or would like) to happen. Or you'll get left behind.

Click to expand...

Here's 2003 then Mr Know it all;

http://greataycliffe.sedgefield.gov...s/electoral-services/election-results-2003.en

Quite a few 'no contests' and that in one small borough council... There are more...

Uh....you've found no uncontested seats and none that boost the BNPs vote nationally - unless you count 84 votes as inflating the figures. keep aiming at the wrong target though.