boyfriday Posted September 22, 2011 Share Posted September 22, 2011 No, not by the AK-47 wielding Taliban, but by one of our own government ministers. "Essentially it's very unfair on both the local population and on the Nepalese, many of whom are wholly unfamiliar with our culture, don't speak English, don't appreciate the climate and I think have been lured here under false pretences." http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14989700 I bet the locals didn't think it was unfair when the Gurkha vets were standing up in line of fire to protect the society and values which they're beneficiaries of purely by accident of birth. The only thing unfair on the Gurkhas is their treatment by some of the locals, I doubt they would be troubled by a bit of harsh weather as the MP suggests. I had the misfortune to listen to Jeremy Vine's phone in yesterday, and amongst the calls were several from Aldershot residents who were deriding the Gurkha veterans, one of the choice comments was from a local who complained that they were taking over the local park-we're talking about old age pensioners sitting on park benches here, not lager swilling louts. Well as many here previously suspected the love affair with the Gurkhas couldn't last and it was obvious it wouldn't take long before they were being compared to the dregs of society. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conrod Posted September 22, 2011 Share Posted September 22, 2011 I think the Gurkhas are wonderful people, but the emotive campaign to allow them to stay here after their service was wrong. They came to fulfill a contract, after which they would return home. That's how it had always been, and what they signed up for. 10,000 people is too many to burden one consituency with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeMaquis Posted September 22, 2011 Share Posted September 22, 2011 10,000 people is too many to burden one consituency with. Is the 10,000 in Aldershot figure right? The BBC website says the Gurkhas' base in this country is near Folkestone and that there are 3,500 Gurkhas there. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14989700 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyfriday Posted September 22, 2011 Author Share Posted September 22, 2011 I think the Gurkhas are wonderful people, but the emotive campaign to allow them to stay here after their service was wrong. They came to fulfill a contract, after which they would return home. That's how it had always been, and what they signed up for. 10,000 people is too many to burden one consituency with. Generally we do get rather emotional about our men and women who risk their lives for a common good, there's enough chest beating that goes on around Remembrance Day that illustrates that. 10,000 might be many, but rather than point a grubby finger at the Gurkhas and seek their 'dispersal', the MP should be fighting their corner (as constituents) and seeking proper assistance from central government, assuming it hasn't been forthcoming already. I'm at a loss as to why some in the local community are so affronted, even if they do have to encounter a Gurkha walking down the High Street, or wait a bit longer in the hospital queue, it's a small price to pay compared to the sacrifices the Gurkhas have made over their long association fighting for the British Army. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conrod Posted September 22, 2011 Share Posted September 22, 2011 Generally we do get rather emotional about our men and women who risk their lives for a common good, there's enough chest beating that goes on around Remembrance Day that illustrates that. 10,000 might be many, but rather than point a grubby finger at the Gurkhas and seek their 'dispersal', the MP should be fighting their corner (as constituents) and seeking proper assistance from central government, assuming it hasn't been forthcoming already. I'm at a loss as to why some in the local community are so affronted, even if they do have to encounter a Gurkha walking down the High Street, or wait a bit longer in the hospital queue, it's a small price to pay compared to the sacrifices the Gurkhas have made over their long association fighting for the British Army. The price to pay was their salaries, which allowed them to save enough during their servcie to return to Nepal as relative multi-millionaires. That was the deal they signed up for, not to be granted the right to stay here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyfriday Posted September 22, 2011 Author Share Posted September 22, 2011 The price to pay was their salaries, which allowed them to save enough during their servcie to return to Nepal as relative multi-millionaires. That was the deal they signed up for, not to be granted the right to stay here.I'm afraid that's a grey area Conrod, the rules were changed in 2008 which appear to have placed onerous qualification criteria on Gurkhas applying for residency. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyfriday Posted September 22, 2011 Author Share Posted September 22, 2011 I think the Gurkhas are wonderful people, but the emotive campaign to allow them to stay here after their service was wrong. They came to fulfill a contract, after which they would return home. That's how it had always been, and what they signed up for. 10,000 people is too many to burden one consituency with. It's rather interesting that the MP sticking the boot in now, was the same one who championed their right to come here in 2009, perhaps when it had vote winning potential. How times change eh? Peter Carroll, from the Gurkha Justice Campaign, said the fight to allow them to stay in this country would continue with renewed vigour. He added: "The one group of people that has never let this country down has been let down today in a manner which is truly appalling." http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8014265.stm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretty_big Posted September 22, 2011 Share Posted September 22, 2011 Although I hate to admit it I agree with boyfriday on this one. In my opinion anyone who serves the crown should be allowed to stay...... Although my opinions after that will not be shared my many of the left wing on here...the edl have been active in supporting the ghurka's right to stay..... But I forgot the edl are racists..... Nuff said Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDeville Posted September 22, 2011 Share Posted September 22, 2011 Hi every gurkha we have met is nice and hard working, fact. pay was good when compared with Nepal. Good pension and most say it as a previlige and honour, so no one was forced. to give them all a right to stay in englan, there will be probs but look it like this, they are loads better than many so-called indignous people and people that come to the uk as they see it as a cash cow. The Gurkhas are hard working buying properties or living in privately rented homes- so they are more than welcome compared to some. They are more than welcome to come and live next door to us Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andygardener Posted September 22, 2011 Share Posted September 22, 2011 It's rather interesting that the MP sticking the boot in now, was the same one who championed their right to come here in 2009, perhaps when it had vote winning potential. How times change eh? http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8014265.stm Peter Caroll isn't an MP he's the spokesman for the Gurkha justice campaign. The MP who made the remarks is Gerald Howarth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.