UKIP - The Future - Volume 3
Discussion
Mrr T said:
FiF said:
Appreciate the difficulties with asylum seekers but taking one example mentioned before. Asylum seekers arrested for walking up a motorway after they've bunked out of the lorry they'd used to enter country. Border agency contacted who said release on the grounds they should agree to make their own way turn up and report for processing 80 miles away. Does that sound like an effective organisation properly resourced?
Sounds good planning to me. They know he will turn up because this will entitle him to benefits. So saves the costs of sending an officer 80 miles to pick him up.Esseesse said:
Mrr T said:
FiF said:
Appreciate the difficulties with asylum seekers but taking one example mentioned before. Asylum seekers arrested for walking up a motorway after they've bunked out of the lorry they'd used to enter country. Border agency contacted who said release on the grounds they should agree to make their own way turn up and report for processing 80 miles away. Does that sound like an effective organisation properly resourced?
Sounds good planning to me. They know he will turn up because this will entitle him to benefits. So saves the costs of sending an officer 80 miles to pick him up.FiF said:
Zod said:
Mr GrimNasty said:
Has the C4 program "UKIP the first 100 days" been mentioned - an imaginary impact of what will happen with Nigel as PM?
How can this be allowed so close to the election? It could seriously influence public opinion based on complete prejudiced fiction, one way or the other.
I think it is outrageous and would be whichever party it covered.How can this be allowed so close to the election? It could seriously influence public opinion based on complete prejudiced fiction, one way or the other.
It will, in this case, simply harden attitudes and intensify spats. Each will have their prejudices reinforced.
Middle ground waverers, some will be put off, some will react the opposite way.
Whatever happens it cheapens the whole election debate.
I'll decide after I've watched it, but from the trailer I saw yesterday, it looks likely to be a hatchet job on UKIP.
Just to state - I'm no supporter of UKIP, so this isn't a knee-jerk-kipper reaction...
Mrr T said:
Esseesse said:
Mrr T said:
FiF said:
Appreciate the difficulties with asylum seekers but taking one example mentioned before. Asylum seekers arrested for walking up a motorway after they've bunked out of the lorry they'd used to enter country. Border agency contacted who said release on the grounds they should agree to make their own way turn up and report for processing 80 miles away. Does that sound like an effective organisation properly resourced?
Sounds good planning to me. They know he will turn up because this will entitle him to benefits. So saves the costs of sending an officer 80 miles to pick him up.No
For most of these people, getting benefits (and staying) is the wrong result for the public.Since we do not allow asylum seekers to work we have to pay benefits. What else should we do?Most peoples problem I would imagine is that most are not true asylum seekers, unless we think that in any of the EU countries that they pass through to get to the UK pose a risk to their life, they are economic migrants and as such should not be treated as asylum seekers.
Mrr T said:
Esseesse said:
Mrr T said:
FiF said:
Appreciate the difficulties with asylum seekers but taking one example mentioned before. Asylum seekers arrested for walking up a motorway after they've bunked out of the lorry they'd used to enter country. Border agency contacted who said release on the grounds they should agree to make their own way turn up and report for processing 80 miles away. Does that sound like an effective organisation properly resourced?
Sounds good planning to me. They know he will turn up because this will entitle him to benefits. So saves the costs of sending an officer 80 miles to pick him up.PRTVR said:
Most peoples problem I would imagine is that most are not true asylum seekers, unless we think that in any of the EU countries that they pass through to get to the UK pose a risk to their life, they are economic migrants and as such should not be treated as asylum seekers.
well said, but so obvious, why does it need saying?NicD said:
PRTVR said:
Most peoples problem I would imagine is that most are not true asylum seekers, unless we think that in any of the EU countries that they pass through to get to the UK pose a risk to their life, they are economic migrants and as such should not be treated as asylum seekers.
well said, but so obvious, why does it need saying?Both left and right seem unable to call it what it is...
Apologies if repost but couldn't spot it on last few pages, anyhow, Nigel Farage's appeal to Briton in the Telegraph.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/nigel-far...
Great article. Go Nige!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/nigel-far...
Great article. Go Nige!
jogon said:
Apologies if repost but couldn't spot it on last few pages, anyhow, Nigel Farage's appeal to Briton in the Telegraph.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/nigel-far...
Great article. Go Nige!
How many of his target audience do you think read the Telegraph? He needs to get in the Sun and the Mirror to get to them.http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/nigel-far...
Great article. Go Nige!
Zod said:
How many of his target audience do you think read the Telegraph? He needs to get in the Sun and the Mirror to get to them.
Ha you should read the comments buddy all 4436 of them - start by 'oldest' first as you will find 'best' does not always produce the correct results for some reason or another. They can hide behind the questionable 'weighted' opinion polls for only so long.
In the last two days we have seen two polls one showing UKIP on 23% and the other 13% - the difference been the former doesn't have UKIP listed as 'other'.
Edited by jogon on Thursday 12th February 18:39
zygalski said:
All this talk of the importance of issues like immigration is massively overplayed by our frothy-mouthed PH kipper clan.
After all, predictions are that UKIP get 2 seats out of 650 in May. Even I understand that if immigration & our membership of the EU were the key criteria when deciding to vote, then UKIP would expect rather more than 0.3% representation in the HoC.
The possibility of reduced immigration is not the only reason to wish to leave the EU; indeed one could even be in favour of large-scale immigration and still wish to leave.After all, predictions are that UKIP get 2 seats out of 650 in May. Even I understand that if immigration & our membership of the EU were the key criteria when deciding to vote, then UKIP would expect rather more than 0.3% representation in the HoC.
Anyone doubting the degree to which EU institutions affect people and Government policies in the UK should read the reports linked from the page below. They are the result of over two years of research by civil servants throughout Government into the areas of regulation and law informed and/or controlled by the EU, referred to as 'competences'.
In my opinion, no-one should consider themselves qualified to offer an opinion on Britain's EU membership until they have read them.
https://www.gov.uk/review-of-the-balance-of-compet...
jogon said:
Zod said:
How many of his target audience do you think read the Telegraph? He needs to get in the Sun and the Mirror to get to them.
Ha you should read the comments buddy all 4436 of them - start by 'oldest' first as you will find 'best' does not always produce the correct results for some reason or another. They can hide behind the questionable 'weighted' opinion polls for only so long.
In the last two days we have seen two polls one showing UKIP on 23% and the other 13% - the difference been the former doesn't have UKIP listed as 'other'.
Edited by jogon on Thursday 12th February 18:39
jogon said:
Ha you should read the comments buddy all 4436 of them - start by 'oldest' first as you will find 'best' does not always produce the correct results for some reason or another.
They can hide behind the questionable 'weighted' opinion polls for only so long.
In the last two days we have seen two polls one showing UKIP on 23% and the other 13% - the difference been the former doesn't have UKIP listed as 'other'.
Questionable use of statistics?They can hide behind the questionable 'weighted' opinion polls for only so long.
In the last two days we have seen two polls one showing UKIP on 23% and the other 13% - the difference been the former doesn't have UKIP listed as 'other'.
Edited by jogon on Thursday 12th February 18:39
There have actually 24 polls between the one giving 23% and the end of yesterday (i.e. before you posted). Some, but not all of those listed UKIP separately - for example 2 from Lord Ashcroft putting UKIP at 15%.
The questionable weighting is just you, picking the highest UKIP poll of the year (and probably longer)
JustAnotherLogin said:
Questionable use of statistics?
There have actually 24 polls between the one giving 23% and the end of yesterday (i.e. before you posted). Some, but not all of those listed UKIP separately - for example 2 from Lord Ashcroft putting UKIP at 15%.
The questionable weighting is just you, picking the highest UKIP poll of the year (and probably longer)
I am on YouGov and I never received my survey this week and when they do send them they are nothing to do with politics just your TV viewing habits or how often and where you eat out, it has been like that since the first and last survey I received since choosing 'other' and the choosing 'UKIP'. There have actually 24 polls between the one giving 23% and the end of yesterday (i.e. before you posted). Some, but not all of those listed UKIP separately - for example 2 from Lord Ashcroft putting UKIP at 15%.
The questionable weighting is just you, picking the highest UKIP poll of the year (and probably longer)
The weighted opinion polls will be exposed that is for sure..
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff