General election

The Homebrew Forum

Help Support The Homebrew Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Which party will you vote for

  • Labour

  • Conservative

  • Reform

  • Green

  • SNP

  • Lib Dem

  • Still on the fence.

  • Plaid cymru

  • Local Independant


Results are only viewable after voting.
Wow straying off the topic ever so slightly


Agree migration and legal migration has deliberately been confused for political effect.

My view is pretty simple yes you have to accept a certain level of refugees who can not return to their home country that is not really the issue. But the insane system that means you can only claim asylum when actually in the UK is the issue.

Legal migration this is the big numbers and well to boil this down to primary school logic you can only have as many extra people enter the country as the infrastructure will support.

Not saying you should not have movement of people but there has to be enough leaving to offset the ones arriving. It's basic logic if you do not have houses, schools, doctors transport, jobs to support an increase in population then it's irresponsible and damaging to continue to increase numbers
 
Wow straying off the topic ever so slightly
Agree migration and legal migration has deliberately been confused for political effect.
My view is pretty simple yes you have to accept a certain level of refugees who can not return to their home country that is not really the issue. But the insane system that means you can only claim asylum when actually in the UK is the issue.
Legal migration this is the big numbers and well to boil this down to primary school logic you can only have as many extra people enter the country as the infrastructure will support.
Not saying you should not have movement of people but there has to be enough leaving to offset the ones arriving. It's basic logic if you do not have houses, schools, doctors transport, jobs to support an increase in population then it's irresponsible and damaging to continue to increase numbers

Spot on ODNT we cannot keep taking huge numbers we can only take as many extra people the infrastructure will support, it will be interesting to see what Labour will put in place to achieve this and keep the balance right.
 
Spot on ODNT we cannot keep taking huge numbers we can only take as many extra people the infrastructure will support, it will be interesting to see what Labour will put in place to achieve this and keep the balance right.
But how do we establish how many the infrastructure will support?
Our schools are crumbling and class sizes too large / schools, especially Gove's free schools, are closing because there aren't enough pupils.
The NHS is on its knees and there aren't enough medical staff to clear the backlog / there are thousands of doctors unemployed because the funds are not there to employ thm

What is the truth????

My feeling is that if young, fit, immigrants, especially asylum seekers were welcomed, we'd put them to work doing stuff that needs doing and they'd pay the taxes necessary to put the infrastructure back on its feet. These people are not uneducated nomads from some benighted backwater somewhere, they're trained professionals and skilled artisans. Why shouldn't they be? How else would they pay the traffickers? They worked in the countries they're fleeing from!
 
Last edited:
But how do we establish how many the infrastructure will support?
Our schools are crumbling and class sizes too large / schools, especially Gove's free schools, are closing because there aren't enough pupils.
The NHS is on its knees and there aren't enough medical staff to clear the backlog / there are thousands of doctors unemployed because the funds are not there to employ thm

What is the truth????

My feeling is that if young, fit, immigrants, especially asylum seekers were welcomed, we'd put them to work doing stuff that needs doing and they'd pay the taxed necessary to put the infrastructure back on its feet. These people are not uneducated nomads from some benighted backwater somewhere, they're trained professionals and skilled artisans. Why shouldn't they be? How else would they pay the traffickers? They worked in the countries they're fleeing from!
That is why we need a structured plan highlighting where skills gaps exist like other countries do and use migration to assist grow the economy. This is the part that missing it's all or nothing need to take the stupid politics and and vile hatred and out of the discussion and have a grown up approach to migration in a positive sense linked to what the infrastructure can actually support.
Pointless to bring skilled people in if you have no housing or associated infrastructure to support them
 
But how do we establish how many the infrastructure will support?

I totally agree with your post and that question is the big one one thing is for sure the Tories couldn't manage it and i doubt very much Labour will make much difference.
 
My view is and it is only my view, this path we are on with the NHS started way back in the 60s with Macmillon who wanted to privatise it he failed then Thacther tried and failed, the logical conclusion is destroy it bit by bit and that's why it is not being fixed, we are at a point were the public say enough is enough and fight for it or the public will start taking private health insurance out
 
My view is and it is only my view, this path we are on with the NHS started way back in the 60s with Macmillon who wanted to privatise it he failed then Thacther tried and failed, the logical conclusion is destroy it bit by bit and that's why it is not being fixed, we are at a point were the public say enough is enough and fight for it or the public will start taking private health insurance out
Hard to argue with your thinking there, hard to defend the way the NHS has declined, but something has to give, it can not keep going this way
 
Eight Reform UK candidates have made a wide range of offensive remarks online about women in the past, the BBC can reveal. (BBC News)

The remarks include disparaging comments about the murdered MP Jo Cox, former Prime Minister Theresa May, and a black reality TV contestant.

The comments were posted between 2011 and 2023.

Reform UK and the candidates involved have all been approached for comment.

Earlier this week, the party said it planned to sue a company it hired to vet potential MPs.

This article contains strong language.

Among the candidates whose comments the BBC has uncovered is Simon Moorehead, standing in Inverclyde and Renfrewshire West, who wrote on X: "[Jo] Cox was a dreadful woman, with bad ideas".
He then added: "No-one wanted her dead though".

Mark Cole, the candidate in Harwich and North Essex, said in a Facebook post: "Accidently switched on to X-Factory. The only thing worth watching is the black bint.... whoever she is."
Mr Cole deleted this comment after being approached by the BBC.

Andrew Banwell, the candidate for Thornbury and Yate, referred to Mrs May on X as “Merkels Bitch”.
Angela Merkel formerly served as German chancellor, with her tenure overlapping with Mrs May’s time in Downing Street.

Malcolm Cupis, the candidate for Melksham and Devizes, accused women dancing in a music video posted on Youtube of "behaving like a gutter slut" and referred to one woman as a "malignant old hag".
Mr Cupis told the BBC he stood by his comments.
He said of the music video: “This disgusting performance should not be available to… children. It demeans girls and encourages misogyny in boys.”
“’Gutter sluts’ is actually nothing in comparison to what the performers describe themselves as,” he said.
He told the BBC the "hag" comment was an "intemperate" warning against someone else's use of social media. He added that he did not regret it and would not apologise.
“People want politicians who speak plainly, who are not constrained by political correctness,” he said. “The media needs to stop the endless witch hunt against politicians who make human errors.”

John Edwards, the candidate for Southampton Test, referred to women appearing on ITV2's Love Island as "thick tarts" and the former leader of the Liberal Democrats Jo Swinson as a "gobby bird".

Sam Woods-Brass, the candidate for Houghton and Sunderland South, shared a photo of a raw chicken and said it reminded him of an erotic image of his girlfriend.
He then deleted the post after being approached by the BBC.

Ian Gribbin, the candidate for Bexhill and Battle, who we previously revealed had written that the UK should have stayed neutral in World War Two, posted a series of comments on the UnHerd website which included saying: “Right now all men pay for all women: we pay 80% of tax and you take out 80%. The fact you’re able to write on a technological device is all down to us.
“The cultural feminisation of the west is a disaster of epic proportions. We have elevated female characteristics – especially neuroticism, to the highest levels. Hysteria is now common place. The evidence from repeated psychologically testing is that women are appalling at taking criticism.
“Modern feminism belongs in the sewer of self hate from which it came: you say it yourself, you’re all jealous of the perceived freedoms of men.”

Emmett Jenner, the candidate for Ynys Mon, who shared a post from Conservative Party Headquarters which read: “PM: I want girls who are growing up today to know that they can achieve anything they want.”
Mr Jenner commented on the post: “Like fertilising eggs & providing Y chromosomes.”
In response to a request for comment, Mr Jenner told the BBC: “That is/was a parody account and you can see it is taking the Michael out of the Conservatives.
"I wouldn't take anything on there at face value, it's all deliberately provocative windups meant to elicit embarrassing responses.”

Reform UK has already faced criticism about social media posts by some of its candidates that have emerged since the start of the campaign.
This week, the party threatened to take legal action against Vetting.com - a company it hired in April at a cost of £144,000 to vet hundreds of would-be candidates.
Party chairman Richard Tice accused the firm of having "promised a deep dive" but delivering "absolutely nothing".
Vetting.com said in a statement it had expected the election to be in autumn and that it would have had all summer to complete the work.
It also said its automated systems needed the consent of the candidates involved to carry out the necessary checks.
Asked about the vetting issues in a BBC Panorama interview which aired on Friday, Mr Farage said: "Frankly, they [Reform UK] were so desperate for people to stand that people stood, and then we employed a big vetting company who didn't do the job.
"I can assure you that when the Labour Party go through those that apply, when the Conservative Party go through those that apply, they have to reject many."
He also said the party had had "an awful lot of candidates being stitched up in the most extraordinary way, with quotes taken out of context".
 
Last edited:
23 June 2024, 00:40 BST

Updated 1 hour ago


A fourth senior Conservative is being looked into by the Gambling Commission over bets allegedly placed on the date of the general election.

The Sunday Times reported that the party's chief data officer Nick Mason allegedly placed dozens of bets, which the paper says could have generated winnings of thousands of pounds.
A spokesman for Mr Mason told the BBC that it would not be appropriate to comment during an investigation but he denied wrongdoing.
Mr Mason, who is also a Conservative councillor in Herefordshire, has now taken a leave of absence from his Tory party role, 11 days from election day on 4 July.
The Conservative Party said it was "not permitted to discuss any matters related" to any Gambling Commission investigation.
Labour's campaign coordinator Pat McFadden has written to the commission asking it to make "public the names of other figures you are investigating relating to this matter".
"With postal ballots already being sent out, many millions of people will be casting their vote this week. They deserve to have all relevant facts about this scandal at their disposal when doing so," he wrote.
The BBC has previously reported that two Conservative election candidates and another party official are also being investigated.
Both Laura Saunders and Craig Williams have confirmed they were being investigated by the Gambling Commission.
Ms Saunders, the party’s candidate in Bristol North West, has worked for the Tories since 2015.
Ms Saunders's partner is the Conservative director of campaigning Tony Lee, who is also being looked at over an alleged bet. He has taken a leave of absence from his job.
The allegations of gambling on the election date first emerged against one of Prime Minister Rishi Sunak’s closest aides, Mr Williams, who reportedly placed a £100 bet on a July polling day three days before the date was named.

Full articel - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c511nv3pjd6o
 
Its going to cost them a lot more now :D
I have a feeling that this is going to be like the expenses fiasco. I wonder if this has been going on for a long time (ie, previous elections) and those involved got away with it, and told their mates, who also did it and told their mates etc etc until it was "an open server". Then they got found out.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/crgggw4qkxzo seems to imply there are even more than the 4 that we know about
 

Labour candidate 'not intimidated' as office smashed​


1719171591068.png


A Labour parliamentary candidate has told vandals "you don't intimidate me" after the window and door of her office were smashed.

Walthamstow candidate Stella Creasy took to social media to post images of what police described as "entirely unacceptable" damage.

The Metropolitan Police said the office on Orford Road, in the north-east London constituency, was targeted between 03:10 and 03:30 BST.

An "urgent" investigation was under way, the force added, as it shared CCTV images of a hooded man it wanted to speak to who was seen in the area at the time of the incident.

Ms Creasy, who won the seat in the last four general elections, called for the "strongest penalties for such an anti-democratic attack".

Addressing those responsible for the damage, she wrote on X, external, formerly known as Twitter: "You don’t intimidate me and you don’t belong in the political process.

"Same as those circulating malicious and false leaflets.

"Police already on this to find you - will press for the strongest penalties... and I know Walthamstow won’t be cowed or influenced by your violence either."

Det Supt Dion Brown said officers were following up "active lines of inquiry".

He appealed for witnesses to contact police.

A Labour spokesperson said: "We completely condemn any intimidation tactics towards candidates of any party.

"It is vital to our democracy that parliamentary candidates are able to campaign freely."

1719171669276.png
1719171631172.png
 
Spot on ODNT we cannot keep taking huge numbers we can only take as many extra people the infrastructure will support, it will be interesting to see what Labour will put in place to achieve this and keep the balance right.
I have a feeling that migration figures also include the large influx of overseas students on 3-year visas 680,000 in 21-22. I am fairly sure I saw a breakdown of migrants entering the UK which included students and short-term workers.
 
I have a feeling that migration figures also include the large influx of overseas students on 3-year visas 680,000 in 21-22. I am fairly sure I saw a breakdown of migrants entering the UK which included students and short-term workers.

I have nothing against overseas students, but they do need to be included in overall figures as previous comments have said its irresponsible to keep allowing the population to rise beyond the infrastructure and support levels, that overloads the system, not the fault of the immigrant, a fault of the government for allowing them entry.

Students for example, they pay a lot to come here, it should be a requirement of the university to ensure they have accommodation and put something back into the local services to offset the increase in demand, rather than just fund the university.
 
I have nothing against overseas students, but they do need to be included in overall figures as previous comments have said its irresponsible to keep allowing the population to rise beyond the infrastructure and support levels, that overloads the system, not the fault of the immigrant, a fault of the government for allowing them entry.

Students for example, they pay a lot to come here, it should be a requirement of the university to ensure they have accommodation and put something back into the local services to offset the increase in demand, rather than just fund the university.

This is where I think that the government could/should explain the thinking behind such a high volume of student visas. I get the feeling that it's a sizeable benefit for the UK that outweighs the costs, but even when looking I can't find a good answer.

For example, students pay £776 per year of their course for an Immigration Health Surcharge, which gives them access to NHS services. Is that a net input or is it a drain on the NHS? I don't know.

They also bring tens of thousands of pounds into the country while they're here. Exports like this are very valuable economically as each student is paying between £10k and £30k on fees alone - that's £6bn a year in to the country.
 
Back
Top