The issue is the lack of council houses
I think the stats for last year showed that there wasn't even enough new council houses built to represent one new on for each council. Then with the numbers still being sold (im not against people being able to buy their own council houses..just think the money the council get should go to buy a new one)
The list works by priorotising those who need it most, and I'm sorry but generaly recent immigrants tend to be in the most needy situation. I dont want to live in a country where anyone (no matter where they are from) are forced to live in the conditions alot of these immigrants would be forced to live in..you know think turn of the last century 10 people sharing a bed type thing. Put it this way, if I went to France, was destitute living in awefull conditions, ide rather me be put in housing than a frenchman in better circumstances being put in before me just out the virtue of where he was born..
Just because your born in a country doesnt mean you can take your citizenship for granted.. that BNP leaflet has "Dunkirk" "Falklands" etc. at the top.. I was unaware that by sheer virtue of being born here that I had contributed to those conflicts. The people that actually died in those conflicts laid down their lives for ideals that the BNP dont share.
THe issue is the shortage of council houses, not the people that are being put in them
OOps sorry, bit of a rant there.. not aimed at you, just throwing it out there!
(
Jorvic, Mon 18 May 2009, 16:07,
Reply)
"Just because your born in a country doesnt mean you can take your citizenship for granted"
er, wut?
(
Avast is still alive!!!!, Mon 18 May 2009, 16:22,
Reply)
"We've Earnt It"
How? just because my mum happened to drop me here?
I didnt fight in Dunkirk.. my great grandad was in the first war, he was from an imigrant family.. he earnt it, not me. If contributed fuck all to this country, im a tad young you see, what makes me better than any immigrant..just because I just happened to be born here?
There are plenty of "immigrants" that contribute a hell of alot more to this nation than me..
thats what I mean about taking citizenship for granted. i feel lucky to live in this country. despite a few of its nigles.. who am i to stand in the way of some one wanting to come here to make a better life for the selves like my ancesters did. We are all "immigrants"..
Sorry, I get wound up by the BNP, and alot of notions of Britishness etc. etc.
(
Jorvic, Mon 18 May 2009, 16:35,
Reply)
so what you are saying then
is that some one who has lived here all there life, paid tax and NI towards building council houses and nhs etc should be a lower priority in re access to these services than someone who has just come here to take advantage of these things? and then, what if their parents and grandparents lived here, paying in. my grandparents lived thru and were involved in ww2* and the austerity years that came after. im pretty shure they were paying in for a system that would allow me to have free healthcare etc. i just do not agree that anyone who comes here should get priority, especially as some just come her to use the NHS, and bring theier rellys over to use the nhs.
i am not actually against immigration, and i cannot stand the BNP, but some of the stuff that goes on now is just taking the piss out of us.
* you know the joke which goes here...
(
Avast is still alive!!!!, Mon 18 May 2009, 16:43,
Reply)
Your missing the point
The priority is need.. not nationality
And don't even get me started on the increadable contribution other nations (where it just happens the majority of our immigrants have come from) gave to ournation, not just during the wars but also when we bled them dry through empire.
I'm not going to demand a service at the detriment of someone who needs it more just because of what my grand parents did.
No im gratfull for their contribution because we can live in a country where we have an NHS which is blind to your nationality, race etc. and a country that treats refugees, those requiring assylum with care.
I could try explain further, but i need to get back to my revision.
essentialy you are creating a fictitious situation where some one who like you say contributed NI, tax, etc who is in a worse situation than an immigrant who has just arrived, and the immigrant gets the house/service. The point is, under the system as it stands, THAT does not happen, services are handed out according to who needs it most. it just happens that most immigrants are more in need that "native british people".
im strugling to make my self clear, sorry
I just have to say again, the issue isnt with how services are dealt out. Its the infrastructure and funding which is lacking.
(
Jorvic, Mon 18 May 2009, 16:53,
Reply)
how am i missing the point?
"...who is in a worse situation than an immigrant who has just arrived, and the immigrant gets the house/service. The point is, under the system as it stands, THAT does not happen."
er, yes it does. i read all the time of people getting priviledged treatment ahead of british people. even the authorities involved didn't deny the stories. what you are essentially sayinmg is that anyone can come here in any state and expect to go to the top of the housing list as they are homeless. well yes, they left their home to come here so they have no home here, but they would get a property ahead of someone british who has lost their home due to the economic situation. is that a fair system then?
(
Avast is still alive!!!!, Mon 18 May 2009, 16:59,
Reply)
If you show me some of those examples, Ill be more than happy to say I'm wrong
Im just pointing out in principle services should only be distributed out of need. (choosing the example that birth, ancestry etc is irrelevent in my opinion)
If some one is this country and they need help they should get it on an eaqual level on a basis of need.
Now on the other hand if you have a problem with people being in this country and therefor representing competition for service. You're now talking about BNP and Conservative attitudes to immigration and assylum. WHich is a different discusion entirely. Ie. if you accept immigration, and the concept of assylum you have to accept the downside that they require the same services that everyone else does.
(
Jorvic, Mon 18 May 2009, 17:39,
Reply)
I used to work in social housing
Put it like this-
when you apply for housing, you fill out forms saying things like if you have children under 10, or a disability, or are a carer, are homeless, are unemployed, etc. This goes towards prioritising your need. You don't enter a bit on how long you or your ancestors have lived in the country- because it's irrelevant in terms of getting the people who need to be housed most into social housing. So a person that is homeless with kids will be prioritised over someone who wants to move out of their mum's house.
To do anything else would create an underclass, and would be ultimately worse for society as a whole, with children living on the streets or in 19th century conditions because they are deemed not as equal.
(, Mon 18 May 2009, 17:05, Reply)
Double this^
.
(
sir_spicious2000 Crap I've watched: www.filmplop.blogspot.com/, Mon 18 May 2009, 20:18,
Reply)
Exactly
If we've given an immigrant citizenship, we should treat them under the same rules as we do everyone else, because they're a citizen now. Otherwise you end up with a weird two-tier system where some citizens are being systematically treated worse than others.
(, Mon 18 May 2009, 16:28, Reply)