adamandfiona

Micatyro,

My Dad (63) hadn't been living abroad, but became homeless after selling his house in a very depressed area of Middlesbrough (he only got 5000 GBP for it) he moved down to London to live with my Sister, but this didn't work out. He returned back to Middlesbrough and walked into the Council Housing Offices and told them he had nowhere to live.

That same day (he didn't even have to spend a night in a hostel), they gave him a 1 bed flat in a secure block for 40 GBP a week. It was even in a better area than where he previously lived. The flat was carpeted and decorated. All he had to do was get fridge, cooker etc. The flat is now his for as long as he wants to rent it.

Middlesbrough council has a website. www.Middlesbrough.gov.uk I think and on it they advertise properties that are available to rent, you can even email them directly. I realise your Father may not want to settle in the Middlesbrough area, but I hope this helps.

Fiona

Lucy Johnson

[QUOTE]The majority of those people aren't asking for a "free ride" - they've made National Insurance contributions for their entire working - unlike some who arrive in the country able to claim all manner of benefit without ever having contributed a penny/QUOTE]

Hmmm... Britain a benefit haven? Don't make me laugh! For one thing, Britain is way behind the rest of Europe in terms of social support - as any female pensioner in the UK will tell you. Wake up! Getting benefits is not that easy, and when you do get them life on them is a miserable existance. Here's a revelation for some of you, and I know it may come as a shock, but people who depend on the welfare state are POOR, they don't eat so well, they don't live as long.

Now, reading back through the thread, I've picked up on little remarks that betray shocking attitudes which have largely gone unchallanged. Having worked alongside both refugees AND economic migrants ( and lets not be crass enough to confuse the two) I have not met a single one who wanted to sponge off the system. And there are plenty of people within British society who do not contribute a penny towards the system. They hire tax lawyers and have off-shore accounts. So please, people, don't say things that are just not true. Immigrants to Britain are very rarely ever unskilled. In fact, Britain's infrastructure was largely built by immigrants (Irish, Asian, West Indian etc.) Less than 1% of immigrants claim benefits compared with 5% of the general population. But the money that THAT costs the state is a drop in the ocean compared with tax fraud.

I am an economic migrant. Scotland has no jobs. Fact. So I had to go abroad to find a job where I would get some kind of professional development. When I eventually return to the UK, I hope to bring with me a wealth of experience and ideas than I would not have got working in miserable working conditions in the UK. But I don't want to be selective. If it's okay for me to take my skills to another country, then its okay for other people to take their skills to mine. To suggest otherwise, particularly after the British empire and ESPECIALLY on a site of this nature just smacks of double-standards. But then, as I've trotted my way across the globe, I've discovered that that is what the british are famous for!

Pulaski

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Lucy Johnson
Is Pune anywhere near Cloud-Cuckoo Land?

Lucy Johnson

No, but it has a radio station called Reality FM.

kubwasana

I find this an eccentric posting - confusing and confused and with a decided undercurrent of bitterness.

"Britain a benefit haven? Don't make me laugh!"
================
(I suspect that might be a difficult task!)
I was not making the case that it was a "benefits haven" for those who live here and have made contributions throughout their entire working lives. But certainly to people from relatively poorer countries often breaking regulations to enter this country it IS a land flowing with goodies. Perhaps you would explain why, rather than remaining in their first country of entry, Italy, Spain, France or Germany they absolutely insist on coming here?
Is it for our literary heritage? Our courtesy and quaint customs? Devonshire cream teas?
===================
"For one thing, Britain is way behind the rest of Europe in terms of social support - as any female pensioner in the UK will tell you.
.......and when you do get them life on them is a miserable existance. Here's a revelation for some of you, and I know it may come as a shock, but people who depend on the welfare state are POOR,..."
=====================

I don't require having this drawn to my attention. Those who have paid the premiums for decades deserve the payout! They must resent the lesser amount available to them because of those who have NOT made any contributions but are handed the same benefits. Come to where I live and you can see recent arrivals driving their new cars to collect benefits! ======================

" Having worked alongside both refugees AND economic migrants ( and lets not be crass enough to confuse the two) I have not met a single one who wanted to sponge off the system."

When you return - IF you return - DO contact me. I'll open your eyes! I could introduce you to a social worker who might have a
point of view to enlighten you. In particular this person is involved with "economic immigrants". Few people would begrudge authentic ASYLUM seekers getting refuge here.

"And there are plenty of people within British society who do not contribute a penny towards the system. They hire tax lawyers and have off-shore accounts. So please, people, don't say things that are just not true."

I wish I knew how to get away with that! The computerised cross-referencing now in place makes an escape from contributions a formidable task. Perhaps you mean to say they contribute as they are required to do so, but in addition resort to stashing savings elsewhere. I suspect those who maintain offshore accounts and can afford to employ special tax lawyers are few and far between, representing only a minute, elite percentage of the population.
Many people living and working abroad - yourself for instance - maintain "offshore" accounts quite legitimately, conserving savings from the income on which they have already paid tax.

However, if you choose to lash out at "offshore" activities I suggest you train your big guns on no other than - our own hypocritical government! Pledged as it is to a policy of "no new taxes" (A charade in itself as it has sneaked in over sixty of them!) it is desperate to increase the tax take by closing off any loopholes, including "offshore" investing. There have even been hints to the effect that some financial establishments in the Channel Islands have reached an unwritten agreement to filter back to London some of their allegedly "confidential" information about clients' activities.
BUT Inland Revenue and Customs and Excise ( the latter in particular have far more extensive powers to raid and investigate than the police and are feared by most owners of small businesses who can be hit for the tiniest transgressions) have scaled new heights of hypocrisy. They have sold off literally hundreds of IR and Customs properties to Mapeley, a company based in the tax haven of Bermuda! (One wonders if it was this spectacular sale that brought the Head of C & E, Richard Broadbent, a knighthood in the birthday honours list.)


"Immigrants to Britain are very rarely ever unskilled."

You're entitled to an opinion. From such a distance how have you been able to research this startling revelation?

"Britain's infrastructure was largely built by immigrants (Irish, Asian, West Indian etc.)..."

We are talking about NOW - with massive housing, transport, health and pension overloads - not about the situation over half a century ago!

" Less than 1% of immigrants claim benefits compared with 5% of the general population. But the money that THAT costs the state is a drop in the ocean compared with tax fraud. "

Please share the source of your information.

"I am an economic migrant. Scotland has no jobs."

Really?

" If it's okay for me to take my skills to another country, then its okay for other people to take their skills to mine. "

If they have the skills, that's a recommendation but doesn't automatically ensure legal entry. Most other countries are extremely difficult for Brits to enter, or hadn't you realised?

"To suggest otherwise, particularly after the British empire and ESPECIALLY on a site of this nature just smacks of double-standards. But then, as I've trotted my way across the globe, I've discovered that that is what the british are famous for!"

"British Empire"! That's going back a bit! And what is implied by your words "And after..."? It wasn't all exploitation and whipping the native, you know! The British left in place sound infrastructures - roads, railways, airports, telecommunications, judicial systems.
Take a long, hard look at the contemporary map of Africa.
Make a note of the number of countries driven into grinding poverty over the last 60 years by tyrannical dictators, corruption, unsound economic policies, lavish spending on grandiose but futile projects. Count those which are riven by internicine warfare both religious and political and ask yourself if there can't be thousands of poor people in those countries who wouldn't look back on the "hideous" days of empire as a golden age of full stomachs and no unexplained disappearances!
You and I have obviously trotted across very different parts of the globe!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Lucy Johnson

Fortunately, little Lucy (what a silly thing to say, I must have really rattled your cage) stands a very low chance of losing it because she reads and augments her international experience with the insights of history. You should know that I laugh easily, but I believe there is a time to be serious, especially when attitudes such as YOURS go unchallenged. There are few people in Decca, or Bengal who would subscribe to your view of British colonial rule. Or Ireland for that matter. The British legacy – and I would include Ireland and Scotland in this – is one of ethnic cleansing, forced relocation, drugs running, slavery and yes, disappearances. If the countries you mention continue these practices it is because they learned them from experts, and were encouraged to do so by western democracies who wanted to ‘protect their interests’. And there is not one that does not have a history of colonial rule.

I don’t think you can be blamed for your view, typical of someone who cannot see the parallels between what has happened in Britain with those atrocities that take place in other parts of the world. It may have escaped your attention, but there has been a long running intractable armed conflict of religio-politcal nature, exacerbated by Westminster mismanagement, which had it occurred in Africa people like yourself would no doubt pull out as evidence that the ‘fuzzi-wuzzies cannot govern themselves�. You would also ignore the (recent) practice of illegal detainment of Irish Catholics “Internment�), and the present practice of raiding homes and ‘disappearing’ families whose cases have not yet reached the end of the asylum legal process. They are taken to concentration camps which are called (in chillingly Orwellian language) “detention centres.� Unfortunately, you have not been taught the real history of our country, or choose to see it as a paragon of civilization. Unfortunately, the rest of us, including those who have suffered tremendously at the hands of their own governments, and now face appalling assaults on their dignity at the hand of ours, have to live in a British culture which is devoid of Devonshire cream teas and home county middleclass morality.

As for your social worker friend, it doesn’t surprise me. The British are famous for institutionalising both xenophobia and racism, and the Social Work department is no exception. Just now, their favorite thing is throwing asylum seekers – irrespectoive of their legal status – out onto the streets (clearly contravening their responsibilities for ‘duty of care’ (Social Work Act 1966). As for your globetrotting experiences, the paradigm is certainly true in your case – that proximity does not lead to understanding.

Lucy Johnson

It has just occured to me, that if you are a mass murderer and a tyrant, all you need to do is build some roads, (even if they are for the purpose of making invasion and exploitation easier) and your sins are forgiven! The question is, is it the highway to heaven or the road to hell?

Englishmum

Lucy, you seem to have such a hatred of the British. I've recently visited India and met a few locals. At least four Indians I had a conversation with praised the Brits for implementing the infrastructure of the railways and justice system. They also praised the Brits for introducing the English language which is an enormous economic benefit to India; not only for the Indians who have moved overseas and taken hi-tec or medical jobs, but thousands of jobs are being created right now in India in call centres. Those jobs were formerly being done in the UK and US but labour is much cheaper in India - and grads are lining up to take the relatively well paid jobs there.

I don't know your nationality but I imagine that if you're British you will be heading off to the British Embassy or consulate at the earliest opportunity to renounce your citizenship.

kubwasana

You know, Lucy, there is something very strange about the tone of your postings and your attitude towards your home country. Not that I believe everything British is best although it certainly has many admirable qualities. But the barely concealed contempt in which you hold it in both an historical and contemporary perspective is more than criticism; it has the whiff of hatred about it. Just as you failed to reply to my question about the source of your quoted statistics, you haven't chosen to give us any detail about those newly-acquired "skills" you will be bringing back from Pune to Scotland when the time comes. However, your writings would suggest to me that a shudder would run down your spine at the very thought of living here again cheek by jowl with these islands populated by intolerant, xenophobic racists.
What would you suggest one does with thousands of people swarming into the country claiming to be seeking "asylum"?
Offer us some sensible alternatives to providing them with accommodation in camps whilst the authentic cases are sifted from the bogus ones. Your claim that they are hideously Orwellian is exaggeration. Were I a genuine asylum seeker, my life in danger, I would be only too grateful to accept any food and shelter provided whilst my plight was checked.
If you are an illegal in anybody else's country I doubt they would house you until such time as your status could be confirmed, particularly when the whereabouts of many thousands of "illegals" were not known. Once your visa or permit expired, you would be OUT unless you had made careful provision. Indeed, most other countries would not admit you without a return air ticket and possibly proof of your financial position.
I do not think that Britain is a paragon of civilisation. It has many faults. Yet there are many qualities that others envy about this nation. Of course our history is not unblemished, but I have to make this point - that we had no option but to go through centuries of the learning by trial and error. Others are fortunate in that they do not have go through this lengthy process. They can take the short cut, avoiding the errors we made, and adopting the positive ideas that have developed. Thus contemporary tyrants do NOT have to mimic any errors we may have committed in the past. This is a ludicrous excuse for what appears to be almost your endorsement for their often murderous policies.
I have not been to Dacca but I would have thought they at least had a good word for us. I recall we sent massive aid some years ago when they suffered appalling flooding and disease - although it was the military that grabbed most of the relief aid before it could reach the ordinary people.
I don't understand the religio-political warfare raging at Westminster to which you refer. Forgive my ignorance. As for the post-script you added, quite frankly I find this so puerile I can't bring myself to comment.
(My reference to Little Lucy Locket was obviously not apparent to you.)

Lucy Johnson

Actually, I consider myself to be a patriot - in the sense that real patriots subject their own nations to scrutiny. I do not hate my country: it is precisely because I love it that I feel genuine pain when I see those who govern us behaving like those from the sickest of societies. I do not believe that British influence was benign or kindly during the colonial rule - and building a railway station and giving a legal system does not constitute justification of oppression, subjugation and theft - even Hitler and Stalin built roads and established rule of law, you know. However your reactionary response of saying that I am self-hating Brit is fairly typical and I expected it.

You must understand that in India they have a proverb that the guest is second to God. So naturally people will praise your country. Actually live here and study the impact of colonialism, listen to people's stories etc. and you get a clearer picture. It usually starts with "Give us our diamond back, and everything else you nicked as well." As a patriot, and one who loves my country, we should be vigilant with ourselves. We cannot afford to be selective with either our morality or our compassion. Middle-class Germany of the thirties was no wicked than British society today, yet they colluded in the murder of twelve million people. If Yarlswood is at one end of the spectrum, and Auswitz at the other, we should not be praising Yarlswood for being so gentle (although recent news points to regime there which is anything but gentle ) we should be outraged at the fact that we are on the spectrum at all.

I was, of course, referring to Northern Ireland, a conflict born out if the impacts of British Colonialism if ever their was one, and the parallels I drew between the actions of the British state and those of our former colonies, not because I condone their actions, but precisely because their actions are abhorrent and should be condemned in WHATEVER nation they are carried out. As I said before, the countries with the worst human rights abuses have the common denominator of a history of colonial rule, developed countries (Britain being near the top of the list) produce the arms and these nations use them. Daily, we collaborate in the debasement of humanity, both at home and abroad. Isn't it my duty, then, as someone who loves my country, to also take responsibility for its actions.

Like many people, you have the idea that the system of asylum processing is free and fair, which it is not. Actually the odds are stacked against the applicant, which is more concerned with keeping people (brown people especially) out of the UK. Your views I notice are peppered with tabloid language of swarms and floods of refugees - in spite of the fact that the vast majority of refugees are cared for in the third world. Detention centres are illegal under the Geneva conventions, and if you have ever been inside one (which I doubt) you would notice that the conditions there are worse than maximum security gaol. When I see these places, and when I observe the hearings the people, then yes, I do feel ashamed of my nation.

Shame is the natural emotion of a true patriot.

Lucy Johnson

Oh, sorry about the stats. I meant to put these links in the last couple of postings so you can check the numbers for yourself.

http://www.cre.gov.uk/gdpract/refuge.html
http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/immigration1.html

kubwasana

The banging of your drum becomes rather boring as you hammer out the same old tune but just in a different key.
You employ interesting techniques in your discussion – repetition of your own views without making any concessions, ignoring numerous points which you find either contrary to your beliefs or just unanswerable.
I asked what alternative you could propose to maintaining immigrants into this country while their status is checked.
Your creative contribution was – zilch.
Whilst you would have us pursue what sounds remarkably like a virtual “open door� policy where this country is concerned, do you not accept this is a strictly one-way traffic? Britons wishing to settle elsewhere have to jump through hoops in their efforts to relocate in other countries – occupying jobs for which no local person is qualified; owning a business guaranteeing to employ a minimum number of local nationals. Even when not occupying jobs - retiring, perhaps – owning property and being financially independent are insufficient. There are still rituals to go through before residence is permitted – usually renewable at intervals. Furthermore, in most cases, such people are more or less accepted “on tolerance� . Were they to behave “inappropriately� or indulge in anything considered undesirably political they would be shown the door and repatriated very rapidly.
Unlike this country many of these are large nations with masses of space not suffering the same stresses on housing, transport or medical care.
You apparently have nothing to say about this observation.
You emphasise, correctly, that we can ALL grasp the vital difference between an illegal immigrant and an asylum seeker, but still offer no solution as to how to treat “illegals�. In other countries, of course, they would be escorted to the border without much ceremony.
Again I’m afraid I have to repeat that had I fled from a country in which my life was at risk and found sanctuary elsewhere, I would be quite prepared – especially if I were without funds – to suffer the discomfort of being accommodated in less than ideal surroundings until such time as my status was confirmed; a much more acceptable option than death on my native soil!
In continuing to pour scorn on British colonial history which, apparently, boasted no saving graces you make the startling accusation that the countries with the worst records on human rights were formerly British colonies.
What a preposterous theory. Preposterous and inaccurate.
Liberia? China? Angola? Indonesia? The Philippines?
Zaire? Mocambique? Cambodia? North Vietnam? Argentina (Remember “los desaparecidos�?) Paraguay? Surinam?
Total nonsense, Lucy. Supposing that your assertion had been correct (which it wasn’t, of course) would you really have us believe the British administration “tutored� potential holders of senior office in tyranny, subjugation of the population, denials of human rights and intimidation?
Are the ordinary people in India still preoccupied over the Koh i Noor diamond? I would have doubted it. In fact I would have imagined events of much more recent history – Mrs Gandhi’s imprisonment of the entire Opposition and the nefarious business dealings of her son, Sanjay, would have had more impact on their daily lives. However, I am not here to criticise other peoples’ countries – but in all honesty you set the pace!
You highlight the faults of your fellow-Britons with very little to be said in their favour. Is it not paradoxical that the most earnest desire of so MANY people is to come to this unappealing country populated by such distasteful people – as you tell us, intolerant, racist, xenophobic with “shocking attitudes�.
It would appear illogical to me.
I admit to resenting your putting words in my mouth.(“Fuzzy wuzzies� is a term I would never contemplate using!) at the same time accusing me of being a reactionary, and resorting to “tabloidspeak�.
Your arrogance and inaccuracy are surpassed only by your impertinence. .
I shall not post further on this particular board as we clearly have no meeting points and I believe that any others reading it – should they be doing so – are at risk of death by terminal boredom. ,

Lucy Johnson

I think we have both been guilty of reactionary statements, and, had you read my words rather than just assuming you known what I'm talking about, you would have noticed that I said that there is not one country with disasterous human rights records that did not also have a history of colonial rule. Notice, I did not say exclusively BRITISH colonial rule - merely that by its nature, the impacts of ANY kind of colonialism were a disaster for human rights.

I believe, not in an open door policy, but in a fair systems which is not racistly stacked against the applicant. It is ilegal to imprision people if they have committed no crime, and this action places us on a par with the worst countries. I suggest you read round the issue so that you can enage in it with a more enlightened attitude. And also visit a dentention centre.

whisky

Blimey - don't you pair go on!!!!!!

Pulaski

As opposed to what has happened in most countries in Africa over the past sixty years, and is still going on today in many of them, where there are civil wars with massacres of civilians, routine arrests for political dissidents, military coups, and forcible removal of people from their homes and land who aren't represented in the government (not just whites in Rhodesia, but other racial/ tribal groups in other countries, Christians and Muslims etc.)

I am not aware of anything in British colonialism in Africa that comes even close the brutalities inflicted by Africans on their fellows.