Griffin and BNP strategy

[durruti02]

No, it's to encourage debate.

but it doesn't does it? posting facts and stats etc moves debate on .. not nonsense like that

 

[dash_two]

Shitty jobs that no Brit will touch are performed by immigrants and migrant workers. Who else is going to do this work? Unless you've created an army of robots to do those jobs, that is...

Such was the situation faced by Japan in the 1950s and 1960s when there was a shortage of labour affecting industrial output. They could have gone down the import-cheap-labour route, but instead chose the automation route. This seems to have served Japan pretty well.

Another example: the Earl of Shaftesbury eventually succeeded in pushing through a bill in 1864 putting an end to children working as chimney sweeps. Did the chimneys of London then become permanently clogged because there were no more tiny children to squeeze into them? No, the master chimney sweeps just invented longer brushes and brooms so a full-size man could do the job.

In general, cheap labour is highly replaceable by better technology and organisation.

 

[audiotech]

You and nino seem desperate to avoid any kind of open debate.
One of the most annoying things is when people throw out frankly pathetic accusations of racism.
Is there really any point to an anti BNP campaign that insists anybody who has concerns about present day immigration policies, is as bad as the BNP?

Hang on, I have not thrown out, pathetic, or otherwise, accusations of 'racism' and I have not insisted that anyone who has 'concerns' about present day immigration policies is as bad as the BNP.

I keep asking what the 'concerns' are over immigration, but get no adequate answer to that simple question.

What are your 'concerns' becky about immigration?

 

[audiotech]

the question i ask MC and nino is .. are you saying immigrants ( not new ones but all .. including after 5 years) do NOT ever get housing??

Most people from abroad (including virtually all asylum seekers) do not qualify for council housing. Although, as is clear "...certain people from abroad are eligible for council housing" - usually those that have been granted refugee status, or who have been given exceptional leave to remain.

Doesn't mean they get a council house of course and those that are on offer are usually where no one else wants to live.

Current restrictions on EU citizens suggests that:

There is no housing eligibility for anyone whose only right of residence is via Art 6 (right of residence for initial 3 months) and the qualification on illness or accident in Art 7(a) does mean that an EU citizen receiving Income Support may be entitled to housing assistance, which was pretty much not the case, but only if this is demonstrably a temporary period due to illness or accident, so it is also likely that an intention to return to work or workseeking will need to be shown.

Right to assistance does not mean they get allocated a house either. It means they are given advice from an Housing Advice Centre. Which could be a list of Housing Associations for example, or private landlords where they can apply.

Very few immigrants are eligible for housing assistance. Even those that do receive some help and are allocated housing, are usually those granted refugee status.

EU citizens (migrants) are not eligible for any assistance it seems. Although there is an article which talks about eligibility, initially for three months, but this involves very strict criteria and importantly, Art 24(2) allows a derogation from the general rule such that there is no social assistance for this 3 month period. So, it seems EU migrants have no rights at all to social housing.

 

[audiotech]

but it doesn't does it? posting facts and stats etc moves debate on .. not nonsense like that

Posting facts and stats is a new venture for you though ain't it.

 

[nino_savatte]

the question i ask MC and nino is .. are you saying immigrants ( not new ones but all .. including after 5 years) do NOT ever get housing??

They take their place on the housing list like everyone else. Are you familiar with the former Royal Overseas Club on Newington Green or the Parkside Hotel (now being refurbished) on Clapham Common? Both places house large numbers of refugees and immigrants, who are all waiting to be housed. I know, I used to work for both Lambeth and Islington Councils. Need to know more?

 

[durruti02]

They take their place on the housing list like everyone else. Are you familiar with the former Royal Overseas Club on Newington Green or the Parkside Hotel (now being refurbished) on Clapham Common? Both places house large numbers of refugees and immigrants, who are all waiting to be housed. I know, I used to work for both Lambeth and Islington Councils. Need to know more?

of course i am aware of the digusting conditions many migrants and refugees have to suffer ..

but i have asked you this before .. as an ex housing officer please tell us .. how do migrants then get housed or are you saying NO migrants ever get housed .. which sesm to be not the case ... this is very important in any argument against the BNP that we are clear about this ..

my understanding .. and it is ONLY that .. (i can NOT back it up with facts) .. is that every year tens of thousends of migrants who have been e.g. given secure status for whatever reason, will get LA housing under priority rules .. another issue that particularly confuses me is entitlement to homeless families without secure status .. is there any?

you say " They take their place on the housing list like everyone else" .. but that i sthen surely the point .. that if they have families and are in shit accomodation they will then be ahead in the queue of a young couple living at each others parents? No?

 

[durruti02]

Most people from abroad (including virtually all asylum seekers) do not qualify for council housing. Although, as is clear "...certain people from abroad are eligible for council housing" - usually those that have been granted refugee status, or who have been given exceptional leave to remain.

Doesn't mean they get a council house of course and those that are on offer are usually where no one else wants to live.

Current restrictions on EU citizens suggests that:

There is no housing eligibility for anyone whose only right of residence is via Art 6 (right of residence for initial 3 months) and the qualification on illness or accident in Art 7(a) does mean that an EU citizen receiving Income Support may be entitled to housing assistance, which was pretty much not the case, but only if this is demonstrably a temporary period due to illness or accident, so it is also likely that an intention to return to work or workseeking will need to be shown.

Right to assistance does not mean they get allocated a house either. It means they are given advice from an Housing Advice Centre. Which could be a list of Housing Associations for example, or private landlords where they can apply.

Very few immigrants are eligible for housing assistance. Even those that do receive some help and are allocated housing, are usually those granted refugee status.

EU citizens (migrants) are not eligible for any assistance it seems. Although there is an article which talks about eligibility, initially for three months, but this involves very strict criteria and importantly, Art 24(2) allows a derogation from the general rule such that there is no social assistance for this 3 month period. So, it seems EU migrants have no rights at all to social housing.

so what figures are there on this??? .. is it possible to know how many 'exceptional leave' do get RSL housing?? or how many refugees?

p.s. on EU i think you are wrong .. Shelter seem to suggest if you are working you are eligible. it is the A8 and A2 countries there seems to be a dispute about .. i think


p.s. in the south mate there is NOWHERE that no one wants to live .. hard to let finished in the 1980's

 

[durruti02]

The US government does not appear to be particularly serious about stopping Mexican immigration. The fences and patrols are probably just a cosmetic sop to redneck opinion. (I think the distinction between 'legal' and 'illegal' immigration is a bogus one btw.) Certainly most Americans don't think that the current immigration bill being debated in the Senate will have any real effect on the situation:

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/just_16_believe_senate_bill_will_reduce_illegal_immigration

Of more interest is the situation in Finland, which you might guess would be chock-full of Russians seeking work nowadays. But numbers of Russian immigrants remain fairly modest and it is doubtful that this is down to the Finns having some super-effective border fence. More likely it is because the Finnish labour market is very highly regulated.

Beyond that, the Finns seem to have a reasonably successful economy and society (at least in terms of wealth distribution, health and crime stats), so it's not obvious what they would need lots of immigration for. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

interesting post .. but no replies!

 

[durruti02]

Let's look at the meat of your argument.

the right of communities to decide who and how people shoud live in those communities

Sounds fine, but one major problem here is that it ain't gonna happen under the present system. For the community to decide on these matters the first thing that they need to do is take power. Now, you are not calling for that are you? So, all I see you doing is coming out with an empty slogan, which fails far short of the possibility's you promise.

You then follow one empty slogan with another:

'Workers should not allow bosses to cut wages and jobs'? If only they had the luxury of that choice ffs. The reality is that bosses do this and it is only by organising with other workers against these attacks on conditions and pay that there is likely to be a reversal of the employers dictats. Arguing that 'workers should put pressure on bosses to employ locally' is both divisive and pits worker against worker.

Finally, of course it is racist to use the terms: "get the blacks and slavs in to do our dirty work", but no one has said that have they? It is also racist to believe that "the blacks and slavs" are only capable of doing that type of work. Which is clearly not the case.

to say it aint gonna happen is strange .. i thought you were a socialist? aand indeed the rest fo the paragraph shows who , to me , you do not undertsand how to get from A to B politically. How does a community take power? to me i can not see anay other route than by one step at a time .. by demanding what they need as a community ..


and OF COURSE the same goes for the workplace .. you think i do not know this??? ive been a shoppy on the council for nigh on 20 years!! fuck me the problems are impressed on my head in very large letters!!

no one and especially myself has EVER argued for division amongst workers in this country?? where do you get that from??? .. and sorry but you are teaching me to suck eggs mate .. what you propose is exactly what i have been arguing for years on urban!!

you seem to suggest though that while obviously we should make international links as trade unions, that IF our bosses were dismissing us and bringing in cheap labour, that somehow we should not oppose this as it would create 'division' . please correct me if i have got you wrong here. And exactly who is it being divisive with, by arguing that local kids should get jobs?? Your logic to me leads to saying it would be divisive to argue against moving work overseas


i am obviously being polemic as regards 'black and slavs' .. but do you not think it is of interest or in any way problematic that the left argue that it is ok to have 'black and slavs' doing shitty work as the chavs won't do it??

 

[Columbine]

It is quite clear that Griffin has correctly analysed the weakness of the left on immigration, and pushed a great deal on this issue without being overtly racist.

It is down to the left to combat this , or risk sinking into the middle class freak show of the SWP and Respect.

 

[tbaldwin]

It is quite clear that Griffin has correctly analysed the weakness of the left on immigration, and pushed a great deal on this issue without being overtly racist.

It is down to the left to combat this , or risk sinking into the middle class freak show of the SWP and Respect.

He may have done. But lets not forget Griffin is someone who has been in far right groups for over 20 years. Overt racists who have always tried to use Immigration.
But most of the concern over mass immigration in the UK presently concerns white immigration from new eu states and Australia and South Africa.
This gives them a few problems as well.

 

[nino_savatte]

my understanding .. and it is ONLY that .. (i can NOT back it up with facts) .. is that every year tens of thousends of migrants who have been e.g. given secure status for whatever reason, will get LA housing under priority rules .. another issue that particularly confuses me is entitlement to homeless families without secure status .. is there any?

you say " They take their place on the housing list like everyone else" .. but that i sthen surely the point .. that if they have families and are in shit accomodation they will then be ahead in the queue of a young couple living at each others parents? No?

I've worked in housing for 3 local authorities and in each of those authorities I have not witnessed queue-jumping. All applicants are treated exactly the same.

Do you understand how the housing allocation system works? Those with the greatest need get the highest priority. By "greatest need", I mean those people with serious health conditions or who are living in seriously overcrowded conditions.

I gave some examples of LA temporary accommodation (B&Bs, former hotels etc) on either this thread or another.

To claim that "immigrants are taking housing from 'natives'" is to accept myth over facts. This is one of auldest lies put about by the far right.

 

[audiotech]

so what figures are there on this??? .. is it possible to know how many 'exceptional leave' do get RSL housing?? or how many refugees?

p.s. on EU i think you are wrong .. Shelter seem to suggest if you are working you are eligible. it is the A8 and A2 countries there seems to be a dispute about .. i think


p.s. in the south mate there is NOWHERE that no one wants to live .. hard to let finished in the 1980's

Well there's a few estates where I am where no one wants to live and plenty of tower blocks too. There's even some demolition going on in some of the larger estates.

On the EU? Think what you like, but the legalese you posted suggests otherwise. The present political climate only will only make it clearer on the issue of social housing for migrants - not eligible.

I don't have any figures for refugees, or those with exceptional leave to remain being allocated social housing. A tiny percentage of the total housing stock I would think.

 

[audiotech]

to say it aint gonna happen is strange .. i thought you were a socialist? aand indeed the rest fo the paragraph shows who , to me , you do not undertsand how to get from A to B politically. How does a community take power? to me i can not see anay other route than by one step at a time .. by demanding what they need as a community ..


and OF COURSE the same goes for the workplace .. you think i do not know this??? ive been a shoppy on the council for nigh on 20 years!! fuck me the problems are impressed on my head in very large letters!!

no one and especially myself has EVER argued for division amongst workers in this country?? where do you get that from??? .. and sorry but you are teaching me to suck eggs mate .. what you propose is exactly what i have been arguing for years on urban!!

you seem to suggest though that while obviously we should make international links as trade unions, that IF our bosses were dismissing us and bringing in cheap labour, that somehow we should not oppose this as it would create 'division' . please correct me if i have got you wrong here. And exactly who is it being divisive with, by arguing that local kids should get jobs?? Your logic to me leads to saying it would be divisive to argue against moving work overseas


i am obviously being polemic as regards 'black and slavs' .. but do you not think it is of interest or in any way problematic that the left argue that it is ok to have 'black and slavs' doing shitty work as the chavs won't do it??

In response to your "the right of communities to decide who and how people should live in those communities" I said: that ain't gonna happen under the present system.

You might think it's gonna happen with your "one step at a time" reformist approach, but for people to be able to make a decision like that, first there will first have to be a seismic shift in power away from the present set-up.

As I said, workers putting pressure on bosses to employ locally is divisive and will pit worker against worker.

As for your:

...IF our bosses were dismissing us and bringing in cheap labour, that somehow we should not oppose this as it would create 'division' . please correct me if i have got you wrong here.

Yes you are wrong. I was active around the Grunwicks dispute (and others)and had no problem opposing the bosses there bringing in cheap, scab labour. That dispute created unity, particularly from miners and postal workers, which was then sabotaged by the then leaders of the TUC and some in the Labour party.

No one here is arguing that local kids should not get jobs, but there is a difficulty here with your proposals. What about kids who are not local to where these jobs are? Who in the 'community' will be making these decisions? What criteria is to be used to say yes to some and no to others?

It would be problematic if:

the left argue that it is ok to have 'black and slavs' doing shitty work as the chavs won't do it

It all depends who you mean when you say "the left"? Some on the left oppose further immigration controls. Others say let local kids do these jobs.

 

[durruti02]

I've worked in housing for 3 local authorities and in each of those authorities I have not witnessed queue-jumping. All applicants are treated exactly the same.

Do you understand how the housing allocation system works? Those with the greatest need get the highest priority. By "greatest need", I mean those people with serious health conditions or who are living in seriously overcrowded conditions.

I gave some examples of LA temporary accommodation (B&Bs, former hotels etc) on either this thread or another.

To claim that "immigrants are taking housing from 'natives'" is to accept myth over facts. This is one of auldest lies put about by the far right.

Thank you for starting to explain how it works. I am still confused though.

You say all applicants are 'treated exactly the same' .. but then say its about greatest need .. so they are not treated teh same are they??

From what you have said though i see nothing that contradicts the assertion that a young local couple with secure (if cramped) accomodation at their mums and dads will NOT get housed and will see immigrants ( from wherever) get housed IF they are in 'greater need' e.g. childen .. in fact you actually back up this assertion in your second paragraph ..

it is clearly a lie to say 'immigrants are taking houses from natives' .. but it seems that immigrants with residency WILL get housed before locals who are not in greater need .. please confirm or deny this for us

 

[durruti02]

triple post!

 

[durruti02]

double post

 

[durruti02]

Well there's a few estates where I am where no one wants to live and plenty of tower blocks too. There's even some demolition going on in some of the larger estates.

On the EU? Think what you like, but the legalese you posted suggests otherwise. The present political climate only will only make it clearer on the issue of social housing for migrants - not eligible.

I don't have any figures for refugees, or those with exceptional leave to remain being allocated social housing. A tiny percentage of the total housing stock I would think.

firstly i think this post shows how different things are where you live than in the south east .. you have neither the absolute shortage of hosuing nor the large scale immigration that we do in london and the south east . i think you often do not take this into account .. i suspect i seem to generlaise to the whole country .. if i do i am wrong to do so but i know that

second i was not "think[ing] what you like " .. i was qouting Shelter .. though from what i have read i do think you are wrong .. try this link

https://www.advicenow.org.uk/fileLibrary/pdf/EEA_110806_Final.pdf
or http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/actionnetwork/A2202373
http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/actionnetwork/A2202373

i think you are really not seeing how this is working in the south east ... to say the affect is tiny is simply wrong

 

[nino_savatte]

Thank you for starting to explain how it works. I am still confused though.

You say all applicants are 'treated exactly the same' .. but then say its about greatest need .. so they are not treated teh same are they??

From what you have said though i see nothing that contradicts the assertion that a young local couple with secure (if cramped) accomodation at their mums and dads will NOT get housed and will see immigrants ( from wherever) get housed IF they are in 'greater need' e.g. childen .. in fact you actually back up this assertion in your second paragraph ..

it is clearly a lie to say 'immigrants are taking houses from natives' .. but it seems that immigrants with residency WILL get housed before locals who are not in greater need .. please confirm or deny this for us

Durutti, stop playing games. Have you ever worked for a local authority or are you still swallowing the bigoted myths put about by soi-disant 'experts'?

You refuse to acknowledge the lies and the myths put about regarding social housing provision. Read this carefully: THERE IS NO QUEUE JUMPING. IMMIGRANTS ARE NOT GIVEN PRIORITY TREATMENT.

There is no confusion, other than the one that you have deliberately constructed for yourself.

 

[dash_two]

Interesting article about precisely this subject by Geoff Dench and Kate Gavron in the Guardian:

There was hostility [on the part of 'white' East Londoners] to real and imagined Bangladeshi customs and personal habits, alleged insularity or un-neighbourly behaviour. But by far the largest number of complaints arose in relation to Bangladeshi claims on the welfare state, their rights and entitlements. Many of these complaints were implausible or involved serious ignorance of how welfare procedures operated; but others were based on a real sense of injustice over the way the allocation of social housing appeared to be slanted preferentially to Bangladeshi needs.

http://society.guardian.co.uk/socialexclusion/story/0,,1704158,00.html

 

[JimPage]

and to add to this, Gordon Brown has issued, at the GMB conference, an openly racist "British Jobs for British Workers" plea

Any ideas which Nazi group, until recontly, wa using this as a slogan.....

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/n...objectid=19251506&siteid=66633-name_page.html

 

[JimPage]

http://bnp-leadership-challenge.blogspot.com/

hmmmm....

 

[tbaldwin]

and to add to this, Gordon Brown has issued, at the GMB conference, an openly racist "British Jobs for British Workers" plea

Any ideas which Nazi group, until recontly, wa using this as a slogan.....

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/n...objectid=19251506&siteid=66633-name_page.html

"British jobs for British workers" may have been used by racists but it is not racist.
It is something that most British workers Black or white agree with...You seem like another old left dinosaur lost in the past.......

 

[tbaldwin]

Durutti, stop playing games. Have you ever worked for a local authority or are you still swallowing the bigoted myths put about by soi-disant 'experts'?

You refuse to acknowledge the lies and the myths put about regarding social housing provision. Read this carefully: THERE IS NO QUEUE JUMPING. IMMIGRANTS ARE NOT GIVEN PRIORITY TREATMENT.

There is no confusion, other than the one that you have deliberately constructed for yourself.

The Homeless persons act means it is often easier for people freshly arrived from Turkey to get housing than it is for people who have lived here all their lives who may have Turkish parents..

Explain to people if you will how so many council estates in London have so many recent immigrants in the flats.

 

[tbaldwin]

Well there's a few estates where I am where no one wants to live and plenty of tower blocks too. There's even some demolition going on in some of the larger estates.

.

Interesting point while the madness of the free market reigns...You have an overcrowded south east,getting more and more built up....And they are knocking houses down up norf....
Thats what happens when you leave things to the free market MC5.......
But you should realise that as you CLAIM to be a Socialist...........

 

[nino_savatte]

The Homeless persons act means it is often easier for people freshly arrived from Turkey to get housing than it is for people who have lived here all their lives who may have Turkish parents..

Explain to people if you will how so many council estates in London have so many recent immigrants in the flats.

You're talking out of your bigoted arse again, fuckwit. Have you worked in housing for local authorities? No. So shut the fuck up.

Oh and your use of the Homeless Persons Act is a strawman. Back of the class.

 

[nino_savatte]

"British jobs for British workers" may have been used by racists but it is not racist.
It is something that most British workers Black or white agree with...You seem like another old left dinosaur lost in the past.......

It is used by racists and it is still used by racists. But then you would deny that there is an underlying current of xenophobia and racism to the anti-immigration argument.

And you have the fucking cheek to get offended whenever anyone suggests that your posts contain racist undertones. You do it to yourself.

 

[tbaldwin]

You're talking out of your bigoted arse again, fuckwit. Have you worked in housing for local authorities? No. So shut the fuck up.

erm What a fantastic arguement...."Have you worked in housing for local authorities?"

Good stuff. So if i havent i should shut the fuck up eh....Perhaps if you have never been an MP you should not be allowed to speak about politics?

Great Libertarian you turned out to be....

 

[tbaldwin]

It is used by racists and it is still used by racists. But then you would deny that there is an underlying current of xenophobia and racism to the anti-immigration argument.

And you have the fucking cheek to get offended whenever anyone suggests that your posts contain racist undertones. You do it to yourself.

1 Do you really after all this time think there is an anti immigration arguement or different arguements....Some are Racist yes Nino and some are totally opposed to Racism and view the way that Rich countries poach skilled workers from poorer countries as indefensible...
You do realise there is a difference between those arguements dont you?