Priti Patel!!

John67

Well-known member
Is she as dim as she appears? She got caught trying to do some kind of dodgy deal with the Israeli Military without declaring her intentions to the government. All the while pretending to be on a family holiday and was rightly sacked - should have been a Police Investigation. Now, with righteous conviction, states that Boris is not a racist and those that are economically inactive must fill those crappy jobs that would usually be filled by immigrants!! Many of those people are carers or disabled or live in areas like Middlesbrough but the positions will be all over the UK. I wonder if she actually thinks before she speaks, or even if she thinks at all.
 
Is she as dim as she appears? She got caught trying to do some kind of dodgy deal with the Israeli Military without declaring her intentions to the government. All the while pretending to be on a family holiday and was rightly sacked - should have been a Police Investigation. Now, with righteous conviction, states that Boris is not a racist and those that are economically inactive must fill those crappy jobs that would usually be filled by immigrants!! Many of those people are carers or disabled or live in areas like Middlesbrough but the positions will be all over the UK. I wonder if she actually thinks before she speaks, or even if she thinks at all.
I rarely agree with anything she says but I can't see what's wrong with the unemployed becoming employed if they are physically capable. Are you suggesting immigrants are in some way inferior to the British.
 
I agreed with Blindschool. I do not see the issue asking people who are on work seeking benefit such as JSA or seeking work under UC to do these jobs. It is like you are saying these people are better than the immigrants doing them. Also they are not gonna start busing people all over the country to do them. You can’t say oh well there’s a cleaning job in London I know you live in Stockton but can you do it. Don’t see your point at all
 
Not at all. She is just a dog whistle politician that has not thought the policy through, which is slightly worrying as she will be the Minister responsible for implementing it. It is all very well and good to state that this badly thought through policy will solve the issue of economic activity, but it quite clearly wont if she does not understand why those people are ' economically inactive' in the first place. Do you believe that swathes of people who are carers, or disabled or with families could suddenly move and take up jobs they are physically or geographically incapable of taking?
 
88% of the "economically inactive" are students, carers, retired or rich enough not to work. Doesn't leave a lot over, does it?
 
No one is being asked to move. Nor will they be. I don’t know where your going with this. Are you envisaging families being hauled on trains like nazi Germany and forced to other parts of the country to work?
 
'Many of those people are carers or disabled or live in areas like Middlesbrough but the positions will be all over the UK'

Tory thinking for some time, you can just up sticks and move to where you're needed, regardless of whether you can actually afford to or not. There'll always be the jackbooted Cooper and Co to make sure your benefits are stopped if you disobey.

Suggested by one of Thatcher's first governments I believe, was it Norman Tebbit?
 
'Many of those people are carers or disabled or live in areas like Middlesbrough but the positions will be all over the UK'

Tory thinking for some time, you can just up sticks and move to where you're needed, regardless of whether you can actually afford to or not. There'll always be the jackbooted Cooper and Co to make sure your benefits are stopped if you disobey.

Pathetic. Actually just making up scenarios that don’t exist.
 
No one is being asked to move. Nor will they be. I don’t know where your going with this. Are you envisaging families being hauled on trains like nazi Germany and forced to other parts of the country to work?

Nobody is saying that. What they are saying though (and this is the subtext) is that the proportion of unemployed that are able to work and are actively seeking work will have the choice to either move or be stripped of any benefits. But then the whole notion relies on the red herring that there're loads of jobs that unskilled immigrants are taking jobs away from people. They aren't in any meangful or material number. It's been debunked over and over again.

It is also a fact that EU immigrants are net contributors to the economy. They help it grow and prosper. That in turn stimulates job creation. And of course we know that many skilled migrants don't want to come to or remain in a country that treats people in this way. How do we replace those outgoing skills, some of which supply vital services in the NHS which is already short staffed.

But at least it appeals to the Britain First, UKIP population.
 
Nobody is saying that. What they are saying though (and this is the subtext) is that the proportion of unemployed that are able to work and are actively seeking work will have the choice to either move or be stripped of any benefits.

But this is not true either. Its scaremongering at its finest. Unless a policy or some proposal has been put forward to state this then it doesn't exist.
 
Patel is just happy introducing nasty polices to support her paymasters. The policy would have prevented here parents from coming here.
Earlier this week, in clamping down of drug takers, ‘there is no such thing as dabbling in drugs’. Forgetting, of course, half her colleagues have.
What she meant was ‘no such thing as dabbling if you are black or outside the metropolitan elite’
 
But this is not true either. Its scaremongering at its finest. Unless a policy or some proposal has been put forward to state this then it doesn't exist.

It is true. The Universal Credit sanctions refer. Someone that fails to apply or to accept paid work is potentially subject to sanctions.
 
It is true. The Universal Credit sanctions refer. Someone that fails to apply or to accept paid work is potentially subject to sanctions.

True but you stated further up they would be faced with a choice of moving or be stripped of any benefits. There is no policy regarding that. Under the UC sanctions you refer to you have missed the section regarding how far a customer is expected to travel. It is not sufficient distance to need to relocate
 
There are a lot of eu people doing jobs that british workers used to do they moved en masse into distribution centres for the supermarkets forcing the brits out because they would not complain about working conditions, they accepted minimum wage without a fuss and there was nobody standing up for the British workers.
 
There are a lot of eu people doing jobs that british workers used to do they moved en masse into distribution centres for the supermarkets forcing the brits out because they would not complain about working conditions, they accepted minimum wage without a fuss and there was nobody standing up for the British workers.
Attestations please.
 
Just how would people from Teesside be able to afford to live in London, for instance. Or to afford to commute to do the thousands of jobs filled there by foreign workers ,living maybe short term and often in very poor conditions. Or to take another example - archaeologists - over 70% are foreign workers - why? Well we closed down lots of the University courses and even before that there are very few A Levels, and even fewer GCSE's for example. So, how do you reverse a situation that you have created by concentrating on STEM subjects.
I am only using archaeology because it is an example I know about.
 
Back
Top