UKIP - merged threads

[compo90]

 

Nope.

 

The coalition HAS reduced immigration from non EU countries. UKIP's stance is that many highly qualified non EU citizens are barred from entry while we have a open door policy from the EU, which includes many low skilled migrants.

 

The coalition have had to do something to try and reduce immigration, and whilst it's impossible to restrict migration from the EU they have had to make reductions from other areas.

 

There seems to be a massive amount of misinformation on UKIP's immigration policy. Quite simply, if there's a need for skills which is unable to be filled by British citizens then they have no problem with bringing in suitably qualified foreign nationals to fill that skills gap, from wherever that may be. It's all about matching the skill set and filling the gaps. A highly qualified doctor from India, Africa or Australia would be welcome if he/she would help fill a shortfall of doctors in the NHS. A boatload of non skilled chancers from Europe are not.

The reasons are clear, and obvious.

We have a workforce who are more than capable of filling low skilled jobs, but successive governments, Labour in the main, have kept them reliable on the state and thereby turned them into part of their core vote. Meanwhile they have an on tap tide of cheap European labour willing to work for low wages and poor conditions. It's a win win situation for the parties, and dare I say it, the bosses of the businesses that employ them.

Why do you think all parties and many big business owners want to stay in the EU? The argument that we'd lose trade is ridiculous, it simply won't happen. Europe need us as a trading partner, and indeed we need them too. However, we do NOT need to be in a political union to be able to trade with other EU countries. When the politicians say we'll lose jobs by leaving the EU what they really mean is that we'll lose our pool of cheap foreign labour.

But of course we won't.

If a company cannot fulfill it's needs with UK workers there would still be nothing to stop them recruiting abroad, all it would do is put the emphasis on employers to source employees locally. It would also force government to confront any skills shortages with a proper education and training package. At the moment it's all to easy to turn a blind eye and carry on importing labour when what we really need is a total rethink on the reasons why we're in the situation we are at the moment.

If we have to import doctors and nurses we have to ask ourselves why. It's the same situation with low skilled workers. Again we have to ask why we aren't getting British citizens into jobs that foreign labour will snap up. Then we need to deal with the reasons why, which involves difficult decisions and investment. Something government are reticent to do, it could cost them votes, and after all it's easier and cheaper to simply import labour.

What I was trying to say, just more eloquently said.

 

What he said is why I'm voting ukip. I live with the harsh realities of eu immigration/membership/job problems now.

[Biggsy]

UKIP for me too(I know they won't get in,yet,)

I've been a life long labour man,but that open door policy........

[compo90]

UKIP for me too(I know they won't get in,yet,)

I've been a life long labour man,but that open door policy........

Biggsy, well done on not being blinded by former voting habits...... Its those life long voters that are part of the problem, voting as they have always done, as their fathers did and not really understanding why they voted tory/labour............ If you see what the two main parties actually want it gets scarey

[overandunder2012]

Nothing like getting the correct advice from the people who know

http://www.ukip.org/contact

cheers mate

[overandunder2012]

 

 

Why don't you ask your local Tory/Lib Dem and Labour representatives?

 

After all it would be them who have put in place any legislation regarding your question. It's interesting that it's the coalition who have reduced the number of non EU migrants to this country, not UKIP. In fact UKIP would want to forge closer links with non EU countries, predominantly those who are members of the Commonwealth. I would think therefore that their position regards your question would likely be more relaxed than that of the present government.

thank you, yes ukip cant be blamed for the ridiculous rules that stop an englishman living with his spouse in his own country

[Psyxologos]

 

Unregulated immigration has lead to the mess that is the NHS/schools/welfare/benefit systems being swamped and unusable, and budgets being tossed out of the window.

 

 

No it has not. Or, better put, no, it is not a major, let alone the main reason for the dire state Education, Health and Social Services are at the moment. It is the successive Labour and Conservative governments' utter and complete failure to invest, modernise and make these services efficient, up to date and effective. It is the lack of long term planning that brought these services to the state they are today.

 

EU migrants are a reality throughout the union. There is a very large number of British people living in Spain for example. They are over 65, have worked all their life in the UK and now enjoy retirement by the sea in Spain. Have these people ever contributed a single Euro to Spain during their working life? The answer is most certainly not, but they still enjoy free healthcare, police protection, and everything else a Spanish person does. They still receive their pension in the UK, meaning they don't have to pay tax in their actual country of residence other than property tax (I am not sure if such a tax even exists in Spain). As these people are older, their medical needs are often higher, but I do not hear anyone in the UK accusing them of health tourism, or abusing a healthcare system they never contributed a single penny to. I forgot, they are not EU immigrants, health tourists etc though, they are 'ex pats', because they are British.

[krugerandsmith]

 

Nope.

 

The coalition HAS reduced immigration from non EU countries. UKIP's stance is that many highly qualified non EU citizens are barred from entry while we have a open door policy from the EU, which includes many low skilled migrants.

 

The coalition have had to do something to try and reduce immigration, and whilst it's impossible to restrict migration from the EU they have had to make reductions from other areas.

 

There seems to be a massive amount of misinformation on UKIP's immigration policy. Quite simply, if there's a need for skills which is unable to be filled by British citizens then they have no problem with bringing in suitably qualified foreign nationals to fill that skills gap, from wherever that may be. It's all about matching the skill set and filling the gaps. A highly qualified doctor from India, Africa or Australia would be welcome if he/she would help fill a shortfall of doctors in the NHS. A boatload of non skilled chancers from Europe are not.

The reasons are clear, and obvious.

We have a workforce who are more than capable of filling low skilled jobs, but successive governments, Labour in the main, have kept them reliable on the state and thereby turned them into part of their core vote. Meanwhile they have an on tap tide of cheap European labour willing to work for low wages and poor conditions. It's a win win situation for the parties, and dare I say it, the bosses of the businesses that employ them.

Why do you think all parties and many big business owners want to stay in the EU? The argument that we'd lose trade is ridiculous, it simply won't happen. Europe need us as a trading partner, and indeed we need them too. However, we do NOT need to be in a political union to be able to trade with other EU countries. When the politicians say we'll lose jobs by leaving the EU what they really mean is that we'll lose our pool of cheap foreign labour.

But of course we won't.

If a company cannot fulfill it's needs with UK workers there would still be nothing to stop them recruiting abroad, all it would do is put the emphasis on employers to source employees locally. It would also force government to confront any skills shortages with a proper education and training package. At the moment it's all to easy to turn a blind eye and carry on importing labour when what we really need is a total rethink on the reasons why we're in the situation we are at the moment.

If we have to import doctors and nurses we have to ask ourselves why. It's the same situation with low skilled workers. Again we have to ask why we aren't getting British citizens into jobs that foreign labour will snap up. Then we need to deal with the reasons why, which involves difficult decisions and investment. Something government are reticent to do, it could cost them votes, and after all it's easier and cheaper to simply import labour.

 

Spot on.

[krugerandsmith]

 

No it has not. Or, better put, no, it is not a major, let alone the main reason for the dire state Education, Health and Social Services are at the moment. It is the successive Labour and Conservative governments' utter and complete failure to invest, modernise and make these services efficient, up to date and effective. It is the lack of long term planning that brought these services to the state they are today.

 

EU migrants are a reality throughout the union. There is a very large number of British people living in Spain for example. They are over 65, have worked all their life in the UK and now enjoy retirement by the sea in Spain. Have these people ever contributed a single Euro to Spain during their working life? The answer is most certainly not, but they still enjoy free healthcare, police protection, and everything else a Spanish person does. They still receive their pension in the UK, meaning they don't have to pay tax in their actual country of residence other than property tax (I am not sure if such a tax even exists in Spain). As these people are older, their medical needs are often higher, but I do not hear anyone in the UK accusing them of health tourism, or abusing a healthcare system they never contributed a single penny to. I forgot, they are not EU immigrants, health tourists etc though, they are 'ex pats', because they are British.

 

Maybe that's because they don't get it. Can any expats in Spain enlighten us?

[poontang]

I'm afraid your assumptions on UK expats living in Spain are completely wrong.

 

Up until recently the UK government picked up the bill for expats medical bills. As of last year they have to have private medical insurance.

[Dead-Eyed Duck]

 

No it has not. Or, better put, no, it is not a major, let alone the main reason for the dire state Education, Health and Social Services are at the moment. It is the successive Labour and Conservative governments' utter and complete failure to invest, modernise and make these services efficient, up to date and effective. It is the lack of long term planning that brought these services to the state they are today.

 

EU migrants are a reality throughout the union. There is a very large number of British people living in Spain for example. They are over 65, have worked all their life in the UK and now enjoy retirement by the sea in Spain. Have these people ever contributed a single Euro to Spain during their working life? The answer is most certainly not, but they still enjoy free healthcare, police protection, and everything else a Spanish person does. They still receive their pension in the UK, meaning they don't have to pay tax in their actual country of residence other than property tax (I am not sure if such a tax even exists in Spain). As these people are older, their medical needs are often higher, but I do not hear anyone in the UK accusing them of health tourism, or abusing a healthcare system they never contributed a single penny to. I forgot, they are not EU immigrants, health tourists etc though, they are 'ex pats', because they are British.

 

You simply do not seem to understand the state of the UK economy....

 

If the money was there the politicians would take the easy route of investing heavily in education, health and social services, etc., etc. Remember the famous quote of an outgoing Labour Government - The money has all gone...

 

We have no idea whatsoever how many illegal immigrants there are in the UK. Most arrive by air, and as such are totally not monitored. No doubt many join existing families that are already here, and add to the pressure on services. I am sure that if I was an illegal immigrant established here I would want my family back home to join the land of relative milk and honey.

 

This has got nothing to do about racism, or antagonism against migrants who have an appalling state of life in their home countries - it is all about the ability of the UK to fund this uncontrolled influx whilst the UK economy gets back on track.

 

Back in the 1960's I well remember a teacher explaining to my class that it was the intention to get the average class size below 30 pupils so that education could be improved. Ha! Not much changed then, and it is all to do with finances, and how we spend the little that we have.

Edited April 20, 2015 by Dead-Eyed Duck

[FalconFN]

I think the two of you are talking about 2 different things, EU migrants (by their nature they are uncontrolled - that's the point) and non EU migrants, in particular illegal non EU immigrants.

 

All parties want to stop illegal immigration, ukip don't have the monopoly on that one, the difference is that ukip want to stop legal immigration from the EU.

 

Edit to add that your point about investment is only partially valid as Labour did invest heavily in education, particularly infrastructure, and the NHS as that is what they do. Without the crash the Tories would still have cut investment in the public sector, its what they do, but the scale of cuts had been unprecedented because labour left them little choice. Whoever gets in this time will have to continue the cuts, there is no doubt about that.

Edited April 20, 2015 by FalconFN

[Gordon R]

Psyxologos - Nigel Farage was slated by the micro brains on the TV debate for bringing up the cost of immigrants on the NHS.

 

At the moment, we have health service tourists (EU or non-EU). They just arrive, get NHS treatment and medicine, without paying in the same as the rest of the population. They can be a disproportionate drain on limited resources. I worry about people who cannot see it. They need a reality check.

[compo90]

Psyxologos - Nigel Farage was slated by the micro brains on the TV debate for bringing up the cost of immigrants on the NHS.

 

At the moment, we have health service tourists (EU or non-EU). They just arrive, get NHS treatment and medicine, without paying in the same as the rest of the population. They can be a disproportionate drain on limited resources. I worry about people who cannot see it. They need a reality check.

Well said

 

Mention was made of all the brits in spain.

 

My understanding from people I know, you have to pay for everything privately except policing. (Health service)

 

And that loads of them are now trying to sell up and come home!

 

Those people in my opinion did as rats do......abandon a sinking ship.

 

Also when we discussed a points system for immigration, usa, new zealand and australia.......if you have enough money to support yourself you are welcome (I.e. Rich) now pensioners aren't rich, but are usually mortgage free so have cash for a home, and a monthly pension (those who have paid into a private one) which meets all of their needs, as such they are low or no cost immigrants

[FalconFN]

Psyxologos - Nigel Farage was slated by the micro brains on the TV debate for bringing up the cost of immigrants on the NHS.At the moment, we have health service tourists (EU or non-EU). They just arrive, get NHS treatment and medicine, without paying in the same as the rest of the population. They can be a disproportionate drain on limited resources. I worry about people who cannot see it. They need a reality check.

The problem is that nobody knows the actual numbers or the actual cost. There is plenty of conjecture but it is very hard to be precise. Some put the cost at £20 million and some at £1 billion if we take the average as £500 million then immigrants could cost the NHS 0.4% of the NHS budget - but that is assuming that 100% of immigrants don't work whereas around 70% of immigrants are employed so they are paying into the system, so that is a shade over 0.1% of the NHS budget being spent on non UK unemployed. Although a problem, on the grand scale of things it gets a disproportionate amount of media coverage.

 

I think the biggest problem is seen locally in a relatively small number of places where newly arrived non British stretch an inflexible NHS which decreases services to everyone in the area. This is a highly visible effect that quite rightly annoys people but is not indicative of the whole country and just as much a reflection of the inability of the NHS to cope with change as with anything else.

[AVB]

How is it that UK citizens in Spain or France need to pay for their treatment yet EU citizens in the UK get free healthcare? Is the former true in which case is it a case of the UK interpreting and enforcing rules differently (which is the case with the Human Rights act) or is it not the case?

[islandgun]

How is it that UK citizens in Spain or France need to pay for their treatment yet EU citizens in the UK get free healthcare? Is the former true in which case is it a case of the UK interpreting and enforcing rules differently (which is the case with the Human Rights act) or is it not the case?

[Pushkin]

I'm a bit curious about some of the statements made by folks in this thread. Can some of you clarify this particular point for me? Which Prime Minister have we ever had who was "One of us" a man who was/is well aware of what we - the working man in the street goes through - has to put up with as regards working conditions and so on and so on? To my knowledge and understanding - we have never had one of these?

 

It would be great to have this clarified.

Pushkin

[keg]

The last one was a woman... Mrs T.

[Bangon]

This is why to vote UKIP

http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/#density

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/10927865/UK-has-had-fastest-growing-population-in-Europe-for-a-decade-official-figures.html

 

http://www.countrymeters.info/en/United_Kingdom_%28UK%29/

Edited April 20, 2015 by Bangon

[islandgun]

The last one was a woman... Mrs T.

research chemist oxford, then trained as barrister

[Glenshooter]

research chemist oxford, then trained as barrister

Anyone can be a research chemist. If you're smart enough.

[keg]

She was. What i like is that there was no "Dynasty" before that, We all know she was the daughter of a grocer but came from a very humble background.

 

In fairness,Tony Blair came from quite a humble background a generation or so back, it was his father and himself that started going places. Too many MPs of all colours seem to lawyers.

[Glenshooter]

Too many MPs of all colours seem to lawyers.

Certainly seems to be the case and I would think that practising the 'cut and thrust of law' would be good training for debate in parliament - and climbing the political ladder. Arm wrestling champions (as an example) are probably less prepared.

Politicians are, and need to be, smart people, and that generally biases their backgrounds.

[keg]

I don't disagree, but smart people can be qualified in other areas. It's also the fact that they go straight into politics rather than getting some life experience first.

 

It's one of the reasons i like DC, Eton and Oxbridge! 12 "O" levels and 3 "A" levels

[Dead-Eyed Duck]

Anyone can be a research chemist. If you're smart enough.

 

Ditto brain surgeon, astrophysicist, astronaut.

 

Perhaps I detect that you are not a fan of Mrs T?