SnailyBoy Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 This is the best most logical post I have read in this subject so far. This country would never adopt such a stance though because there would be a brigade of opposition to it on the grounds that its racist or against human rights. The problem we have is that by our own laws and education we have been brain washed into thinking there is something wrong with wanting people to come here and only have the same opertunities as everyone else and conform to our way of life, if you even mention the Burqua for instance your automatically thrown into the BNP catagory by some to close your argument down. Are you assuming the the non-English speaker is from the Indian Sub Continent/Middle East? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DiDoDoDatDoe Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 DiDo(etc) - but can you define what you believe this to be? I would suggest that we each would have a different interpretation. No its not hard to grasp, we have laws that say people that are not allowed to live here under a certain criteria must go back to their country of origin, but yet after they have lived here a certain amount of time until its ascertained whether they meet that criteria or not you get a load of drum beaters over here saying how bad it would be to now send them back after they have 'settled in'. That sort of thing for a start should be stopped and frowned upone before we even start to even tackle the other complex issues, but if that is what you have to compete with, people being against the only bit of legislation we have to deal with the issue of Immigration then the rest of it does not even get debated properly for all of the scaremongering and name calling that surrounds it. People will stick you in the camp of the 'Get Tough on it all' BNP at the drop of an hat, but there is real debate to be had on the subject and these people that put you in that camp are not helping and in the end only leave the option of getting tough open to us to discuss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DiDoDoDatDoe Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 Are you assuming the the non-English speaker is from the Indian Sub Continent/Middle East? No. are you assuming I am because I use the example of a Burqua to outline my argument to mean I am against those peoples ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madasfish Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 No its not hard to grasp, we have laws that say people that are not allowed to live here under a certain criteria must go back to their country of origin, but yet after they have lived here a certain amount of time until its ascertained whether they meet that criteria or not you get a load of drum beaters over here saying how bad it would be to now send them back after they have 'settled in'. That sort of thing for a start should be stopped and frowned upone before we even start to even tackle the other complex issues, but if that is what you have to compete with, people being against the only bit of legislation we have to deal with the issue of Immigration then the rest of it does not even get debated properly for all of the scaremongering and name calling that surrounds it. People will stick you in the camp of the 'Get Tough on it all' BNP at the drop of an hat, but there is real debate to be had on the subject and these people that put you in that camp are not helping and in the end only leave the option of getting tough open to us to discuss. My apologies. I was actually looking for your interpretation of this part of your previous post -: and conform to our way of life, but highlighted all of the previous poost in error. Sorry. My question was to define "our way of life" -could you? do you think we would all believe it to be the same? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnailyBoy Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 No. are you assuming I am because I use the example of a Burqua to outline my argument to mean I am against those peoples ? Not at all, I just don't think you would be so vociferous if the person involved was a white European. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delayed Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 No its not hard to grasp, we have laws that say people that are not allowed to live here under a certain criteria must go back to their country of origin, but yet after they have lived here a certain amount of time until its ascertained whether they meet that criteria or not you get a load of drum beaters over here saying how bad it would be to now send them back after they have 'settled in'. That sort of thing for a start should be stopped and frowned upone before we even start to even tackle the other complex issues, but if that is what you have to compete with, people being against the only bit of legislation we have to deal with the issue of Immigration then the rest of it does not even get debated properly for all of the scaremongering and name calling that surrounds it. People will stick you in the camp of the 'Get Tough on it all' BNP at the drop of an hat, but there is real debate to be had on the subject and these people that put you in that camp are not helping and in the end only leave the option of getting tough open to us to discuss. The biggest problem in terms of what you are saying is that we are a part of the European Union and as such governed by E.U Law. Therefore, a lot of people that await deportation or are here illegally can apply to the European Court of Human Rights. A lot of would be migrants know this is the case. Therefore, we can be restricted in terms of implementing immigration law/policy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 Presumably the OP is saying his sister in law would not get job seekers allowance without answering some questions, If they are allowing some applicants to get the allowance wthout answering questions that is double standards. It should be up to the job seeker to provide the translator, not the benefit office. Years ago I used to collect pig swill from chinese restaurants. I had many enjoyable chats and discussions wth them over a cup of tea. I was in there once when a man from the council called round to inspect the kitchen and they immediately started speaking only chinese and cracked on that they couldn't understand him. After a few minutes he gave up and went away. They just grinned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Total Chaos Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 Easy solution to your problem, fill in the signing on forms saying you speak little if any english, you will then get the same results, but chose a far away first language, so it will be hard for them to find you an interpreter. Ancient Greek would be ideal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leah-Lacie Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 I know employers are not supposed to discriminate against anybody, but, seriously, if a person who is claiming JSA, goes for a job interview, and can't speak English, and wouldn't be able to deal with any customers, either in peson, or on the phone, as they are totally unable to communicate due to the language barrier - What chances do they have of getting a job - Unless it's a job that involves only using their own language of course. They are allowed to sign on and claim JSA without being quizzed, but, should they be allowed to claim it at all? They may well be 'job seeking' but the chances of actually getting one are very low. Can they even read the job adverts if they can't speak English? They can't fill an application form in, or write a CV in English. They certainly can't go into a shop / business and ask if there are jobs available. The system needs to be addressed IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 I bet if I looked at your posts that you would be one of the very people I have just talked of. Without any locical argument at all I bet you are the type of person to automaticaly shoot people down and skit at them for thinking anything different to what youve been brainwashed into believing. I am not going to pry into your past posts but I bet you are arnt you ? Wrong on all counts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.