/ EU Ref. Result Still Corbyn's Fault?

This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
krikoman - on 10 Oct 2016
From the New Statesman of all places.

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2016/10/broadcasters-were-biased-during-eu-referendum-...

"Ever get the feeling you've been cheated?"
4
John Clinch (Ampthill) - on 10 Oct 2016
In reply to krikoman:

What I have learnt is that a major weakness of a referendum is that know one is left to to "honour" commitments made. You might as well lie as there is no way of anyone to account

Re the link. Yes the broadcasters failed us

But the print media had a huge impact. Look at Liverpool voting to remain. They don't buy the Sun there do they....
3
The New NickB - on 10 Oct 2016
In reply to krikoman:

I'm not sure why you would be surprised that it is in the New Statesman. I agree with most of it, but it is clear that Corbyn's lack of engagement and lukewarm position was a problem for Remain campaign. Alan Johnson has many qualities, but he is a pretty peripheral figure these days and it's not surprising that when Labour had a seemingly uninterested leader the Remain narrative became a Tory one.
2
krikoman - on 10 Oct 2016
In reply to The New NickB:

> I'm not sure why you would be surprised that it is in the New Statesman. I agree with most of it, but it is clear that Corbyn's lack of engagement and lukewarm position was a problem for Remain campaign. Alan Johnson has many qualities, but he is a pretty peripheral figure these days and it's not surprising that when Labour had a seemingly uninterested leader the Remain narrative became a Tory one.

I'm sorry did you read the article? Since it clearly states they (Labour) didn't get any air time to put forward their views, so how exactly were they to "engage"?
4
krikoman - on 10 Oct 2016
In reply to John Clinch (Ampthill):

> But the print media had a huge impact. Look at Liverpool voting to remain. They don't buy the Sun there do they....

A good point, and you're right, the question I suppose is where does most of the influence come from TV or print.
2
The New NickB - on 10 Oct 2016
In reply to krikoman:

> I'm sorry did you read the article? Since it clearly states they (Labour) didn't get any air time to put forward their views, so how exactly were they to "engage"?

Yes, I read the article. I then considered the points it made and set out an alternative argument for the single point I disagreed with.
3
winhill - on 10 Oct 2016
In reply to krikoman:

> From the New Statesman of all places.

> www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2016/10/broadcasters-were-biased-during-eu-referendum-...

> "Ever get the feeling you've been cheated?"

Corbyn even allowed Cameron to muscle in and take the lion share of the headlines over Jo Cox's death, he's just useless. Don't blame the media, it just shows what a clueless tw*t he is.

Blaming someone else just looks weaker and weaker.
7
MG - on 10 Oct 2016
In reply to krikoman:
Perhaps tricky to get airtime if you are on holiday at the relevantl time!
Post edited at 21:06
krikoman - on 11 Oct 2016
In reply to winhill:

> Blaming someone else just looks weaker and weaker.

It's not him who's doing the blaming though is it.

As for blaming someone, how come you're happy for JC to blamed when it was mainly a Conservative idea, backed by more Tories than you could shake a sick at? Talk about bias FFS!!
2
summo on 11 Oct 2016
In reply to krikoman:

> I'm sorry did you read the article? Since it clearly states they (Labour) didn't get any air time to put forward their views, so how exactly were they to "engage"?

Corbyn wasn't exactly pushing himself out in the media, no Question Time or Any Questions appearances etc... he preferred his little rallies with his friends. You get the Media coverage that your efforts deserve.
3
summo on 11 Oct 2016
In reply to MG:

> Perhaps tricky to get airtime if you are on holiday at the relevantl time!

he wasn't on holiday, he was talking one to one with the people, about his open and honest view of politics, it just happened it was mostly one to one with his wife, or close friends.
2
krikoman - on 11 Oct 2016
In reply to summo:

> Corbyn wasn't exactly pushing himself out in the media, no Question Time or Any Questions appearances etc... he preferred his little rallies with his friends. You get the Media coverage that your efforts deserve.

Your right, I'm sorry, it was ALL his fault.

And yet still a higher percentage of Labour supporters voted remain, than Conservative.

Just imagine what would happen if he was supported by the rest of the PLP.

You blinkers are phenomenal, where to you get them.
11
summo on 11 Oct 2016
In reply to krikoman:

> Your right, I'm sorry, it was ALL his fault.

How many prime time politic shows on radio or TV, such as question time has he been on as leader of the opposition? if Corbyn doesn't do any radio or tv shows, they have nothing to broadcast.

> You blinkers are phenomenal, where to you get them.

Islington market.
1
Bjartur i Sumarhus on 11 Oct 2016
In reply to krikoman:
I agree with the others that Corbyn is rarely (if ever?) seen on Question Time, Andrew Marr/Andrew Neil type politics shows and is more often shown at some local husting type event avoiding the cameras. Rightly or wrongly, this doesn't reach out to such a wide audience and doesn't get the tv media onside IMO
Post edited at 10:45
1
KevinD - on 11 Oct 2016
In reply to Bjartur i Sumarhus:

Thank f*ck may was busy campaigning whilst he wasn't.
Bellie on 11 Oct 2016
In reply to krikoman:

Ironically, folk lay blame at Corbyn's door for his measured tone during the campaign. But if the whole referendum campaign had been conducted in such a way, the outcome might have been different.

Instead the clowns were out, throwing as many whoppers as they could at each other, pandering to the folk for whom truth means little and opinion all.

It was all just too giddy, like we'd never been given a chance to decide on anything before, and the MP's and interested parties, were so sh!t scared that the public were involved, that it became a free for all to see who could scare us the most into voting one way or the other.
GrahamD - on 11 Oct 2016
In reply to Bellie:

> Ironically, folk lay blame at Corbyn's door for his measured tone during the campaign. But if the whole referendum campaign had been conducted in such a way, the outcome might have been different.

If the whole referendum had been conducted like that, we probably wouldn't have noticed it.
2
summo on 11 Oct 2016
In reply to Bellie:

Corbyn should have become the voice of reason on tv then, not hide at craft markets.
4
Bellie on 11 Oct 2016
In reply to summo:

Not much chance of airtime for reasonable debate, when you can focus instead on the Farages, and the Goves/Johnsons making larger than life representations.

I think that was the thrust of the Lab MPs argument that he couldn't cut through the choss to make reasoned arguments. Part of that was his own doing from his past negative stance with regard to the media, but much was the media itself, focussing on the whole debate being a big tory in-fight, and a UKIP dream campaign.

I honestly think much of the media did not give a toss what any labour MP thought, given that they weren't part of the main act.

1
krikoman - on 12 Oct 2016
In reply to Bellie:

Have a like.

and it wasn't just Corbyn that didn't get air time, Alan Johnson and many of the PLP against Corbyn got plenty of air time when dissing JC yet had little or no air time to discuss the referendum.
3
krikoman - on 12 Oct 2016
In reply to GrahamD:

> If the whole referendum had been conducted like that, we probably wouldn't have noticed it.

And we might have had a better result for all of us.
3
RyanOsborne - on 12 Oct 2016
In reply to Bellie:

> Not much chance of airtime for reasonable debate, when you can focus instead on the Farages, and the Goves/Johnsons making larger than life representations.

Exactly, unless you were a cotastrophist, the media weren't interested.

If only every politician had taken JC's stance of 'I'm 7/10 on the EU, let's discuss what's good and bad about it so people can make a calm decision'.

Instead we had DC saying WW3 would break out if we left, Farage pointing at posters of Syrian refugees and Johnson promoting the view that we could give the NHS 350m a week if we left, all of which was bullshit lies that fed a ridiculous debate that led to a less well informed decision being made.
Big Ger - on 12 Oct 2016
In reply to krikoman:

Nothing in this thread is challenging my view that Jezza is less use than a chocolate teapot.
8
RyanOsborne - on 12 Oct 2016
In reply to Big Ger:

So are you disappointed that Jezza's opposition has forced the government to have transparent parliamentary scrutiny of the government's intentions for Brexit?
1
krikoman - on 12 Oct 2016
In reply to Big Ger:

> Nothing in this thread is challenging my view that Jezza is less use than a chocolate teapot.

I don't doubt it doesn't, when you're closed to ideas, you're closed to the future, but that's you're choice. It's just nice to know some fact now and again.
3
Big Ger - on 12 Oct 2016
In reply to RyanOsborne:

His opposition, or the remainders opposition forced it. I do not see much of the godlike hand of Jezza at play here.
3
Big Ger - on 12 Oct 2016
In reply to krikoman:
That's funny, does anyone and everyone who has a different opinion to you automatically become closed to the future or new ideas?

There's been some clear and reasoned arguments made here for his ineffectiveness, but I'm sure someone as closed to new ideas and the future as you are has been blinded to them.

Since I have been back in the UK I have watched the news virtually constantly. For the "leader" of the opposition to be virtually invisible during all.That re, and at this stage of the Brexit debate, shows either personal ineffectiveness, or party ineffectuality, you choose which it is.
Post edited at 09:45
4
RyanOsborne - on 12 Oct 2016
In reply to Big Ger:
> His opposition, or the remainders opposition forced it. I do not see much of the godlike hand of Jezza at play here.

No-one said anything godlike had happened. I said his opposition has forced the government to have transparent parliamentary scrutiny of the government's intentions for Brexit. Do you not agree that's true? Is the opposition not led by JC?

I think what's clear is that you, like Summo, dislike JC out of habit rather than for any logical reason.
Post edited at 09:45
3
Big Ger - on 12 Oct 2016
In reply to RyanOsborne:

I do not think Jezza is leading the opposition in any meaningful way. I think any forcing of the governments hand has been done by the combined cross party remain forces.

What is clear is that you, like most of the Jezza fan club are blind to the mans ineffective uselessness.
4
summo on 12 Oct 2016
In reply to RyanOsborne:


> I think what's clear is that you, like Summo, dislike JC out of habit rather than for any logical reason.

I dislike him because by and large as leader of the labour party he is completely ineffective in leading the party and taking up the critical role of opposing and applying scrutiny to the government in power. If it was still the Tory/Libdem coalition it would matter less, but the current slim majority have total control because the other 200 plus MPs and their leader aren't mounting any meaningful opposition.

If labour had a leader of some standing, they could probably lure more Tory or SNP MPs onto their side and the tories could be challenged on many things which most people on this site would like? So whilst people keep supporting Corbyn, despite how useless he is, then the Tories will keep putting in place policies which most people don't like, so don't blame the tories, blame Corbyn. He takes the title, he takes the extra pay etc.. no doubt he won't have issue drifting into the Lords in a few years time, so he needs to do the job now.
4
GrahamD - on 12 Oct 2016
In reply to RyanOsborne:


> Instead we had DC saying WW3 would break out if we left,

We didn't, you know. Paraphrasing, taking out of context and exagerating the projections made by the remain supporters was obviously a very successful tactic by Brexit and the press. Very few people as far as I can tell actually listened to what Cameron and Osborne actually said. I don't recall Cameron going round in a bus with WW3 on the side, do you ?
2
RyanOsborne - on 12 Oct 2016
RyanOsborne - on 12 Oct 2016
In reply to summo:

> So whilst people keep supporting Corbyn, despite how useless he is, then the Tories will keep putting in place policies which most people don't like,

Do you honestly not see any policies which Labour have successfully opposed under Corbyn?
1
Big Ger - on 12 Oct 2016
In reply to RyanOsborne:

Examples please.
3
Matt250 on 12 Oct 2016
Corbyn has no grounds to complain about a lack of media coverage when he refuses to appear live on BBC R4's Today program. I believe he's appeared on it once on a pre-recorded interview in September 2016 which was a bit late to have a meaningful impact on the EU referendum.

I may be biased in thinking it's important but it does have daily listening figures of around 7 million people and frequently has world leaders and other top level politicians as guests who debate their messages and views. I can't think of a better way to get a message across to large swathes of the electorate as what is said also gets picked up by other media sources.

According to the presenters they frequently asked him on and he refused although I've no idea how true this is. The only anecdotal evidence I can say is the Labour shadow chancellor was twice asked if Corbyn wanted to come on the show.

This is why people say he doesn't engage with the wider electorate. Personally I think it demonstrates a serious lack of confidence in his own abilities and message.
1
RyanOsborne - on 12 Oct 2016
In reply to Big Ger:
> Examples please.

I was hoping you'd say that

Tax credit cuts

Disabled PIPs

Academisation of all schools

Child poverty indicators

Sunday trading hours

And it's only a matter of time on Grammar schools

But most importantly, they've led the turn around in the public's (and conservative party's) view on austerity economics.

Edit: Sorry, forgot - transparency of EU negotiations!
Post edited at 10:55
4
gman2012 on 12 Oct 2016
In reply to RyanOsborne:

> Instead we had DC saying WW3 would break out if we left, Farage pointing at posters of Syrian refugees and Johnson promoting the view that we could give the NHS 350m a week if we left, all of which was bullshit lies that fed a ridiculous debate that led to a less well informed decision being made.

When did DC say WW3 would break out?
GrahamD - on 12 Oct 2016
In reply to RyanOsborne:

> Well our country's fine media outlets seem pretty unequivocal on it:


Even given the fact that the press were largely Brexit, they still managed to tell the difference between "Would" (your word) and "Could" (their word). Which rather proves the point: Irrespective of what was atually said, people are convinced that something else was said.
2
summo on 12 Oct 2016
In reply to RyanOsborne:
> Do you honestly not see any policies which Labour have successfully opposed under Corbyn?

of the MPs who could present a decent public face, sound credible without falling into momentum soundbites the minute the mic. was on them, most have left or been booted out of the shadow cabinet. So no I can't. So much has happened in the previous 12 months in UK politics and labour have spent 99% of that time fighting each other. The SNP and back benches tories have swung things far more than labour.
Post edited at 10:46
2
RyanOsborne - on 12 Oct 2016
In reply to summo:

> So no I can't.

Think you've proven my point.
1
muppetfilter - on 12 Oct 2016
In reply to RyanOsborne:

Where was the clear Labour voice stating that the disintegration of the NHS , overcrowding of Schools and other infrastructure was mainly down to Tory underfunding not unrestricted migration. They categorically failed to do this over and over again when given a platform, what could have been a Tory Policy duck hunt was a complete damp Squib.
I guess the only golden lining for labour is that all the MPs with private healthcare company links will make a fortune once they bail out of politics.
RyanOsborne - on 12 Oct 2016
In reply to muppetfilter:

> Where was the clear Labour voice stating that the disintegration of the NHS , overcrowding of Schools and other infrastructure was mainly down to Tory underfunding not unrestricted migration. They categorically failed to do this over and over again when given a platform, what could have been a Tory Policy duck hunt was a complete damp Squib.

I'd like to see them take a stronger stance on promoting migration too, but I think it's pretty toxic at the moment, especially with the news that 50% of the UK population have anti immigration views, so I can see why they'd take a softer approach.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/world/almost-half-of-the-british-public-has-antiimmigrant-views-a3363...
3
muppetfilter - on 12 Oct 2016
In reply to RyanOsborne:

Having watched my industrys wages plumit due to cheap migrant labour im one of that 50%....
Labour failed to address the very seperate issue that unrestricted migration hits the working class the hardest in respect to Wages,Jobs, Housing and school places.
1
timjones - on 12 Oct 2016
In reply to krikoman:

> I'm sorry did you read the article? Since it clearly states they (Labour) didn't get any air time to put forward their views, so how exactly were they to "engage"?

You don't "get" airtime you earn it by promoting a strong message.
4
FactorXXX - on 12 Oct 2016
In reply to krikoman:

That suggests, that Corbyn was personally pro-active in supporting Remain by attending meetings, etc. and that those meetings, etc. weren't subsequently reported in the media.
Is that the case?
1
GrahamD - on 12 Oct 2016
In reply to muppetfilter:

> Having watched my industrys wages plumit due to cheap migrant labour im one of that 50%....

How long is your memory ? I can't remember when we didn't have cheap migrant labour, be it Irish, Asian, West Indian, East European fruit pickers etc.


2
muppetfilter - on 12 Oct 2016
In reply to GrahamD:

My memory is still pretty good thanks, I can remember back to a time where it took more than a 30 wizz air ticket to get a job in the UK.
2
krikoman - on 12 Oct 2016
In reply to Big Ger:

> That's funny, does anyone and everyone who has a different opinion to you automatically become closed to the future or new ideas?

No not really, not all the time.

> There's been some clear and reasoned arguments made here for his ineffectiveness, but I'm sure someone as closed to new ideas and the future as you are has been blinded to them.

The thing is though he's simultaneously pronounced ineffectual and the greatest cause. Just because you don't like him doesn't mean it was his fault, the fault lies with David Cameron, who without his bravado we wouldn't be in the shit we're in now.

Then there's the issue of the lies, on both sides, which were presented as facts. JC was the ONLY one who can out of it with ANY credibility, yet people still see fit in trying to make him the scapegoat.

It seems to me people want to be lied to.
4
krikoman - on 12 Oct 2016
In reply to FactorXXX:

> That suggests, that Corbyn was personally pro-active in supporting Remain by attending meetings, etc. and that those meetings, etc. weren't subsequently reported in the media.

> Is that the case?

Isn't that what the article suggests, not just JC though but Labour in general.

The thing is it doesn't really matter, because it's all JCs fault anyhow.

It really doesn't matter what he or anyone else said, it was the media that controlled the debate and it was them that decided what was shown on TV.

They should be hounding EVERYONE in and out about the promises they made and what they intend to do about them.
2
krikoman - on 12 Oct 2016
In reply to timjones:

> You don't "get" airtime you earn it by promoting a strong message.

By strong message, do you mean barefaced lies?
3
ads.ukclimbing.com
FactorXXX - on 12 Oct 2016
In reply to krikoman:

Isn't that what the article suggests, not just JC though but Labour in general.

So which of Corbyn's meetings, etc. weren't reported?
andyfallsoff - on 12 Oct 2016
In reply to krikoman:

That is a fair point on the referendum coverage - the only way to get attention did seem to be to shout loudly (whether true or not), which is probably why people think the whole campaign was dishonest on both sides (because the more nuanced views got less airtime).

However I think it is fair to say that Corbyn doesn't consider Brexit the biggest issue, which I personally find shocking. E.g. it wasn't a specific debate topic at the Labour conference, and it hasn't been the focus of Corbyn's questions at PMQs. I don't think this makes Brexit "Corbyn's fault" - the world isn't as simple as to mean that a single person can or should be blamed - but it is reasonable to question whether Corbyn could have done more, and I think it is hard to conclude that Corbyn did all he could.
GrahamD - on 12 Oct 2016
In reply to muppetfilter:

> My memory is still pretty good thanks, I can remember back to a time where it took more than a 30 wizz air ticket to get a job in the UK.

Well OK, the journey cost has come down but what else has changed since we actively encouraged Irish navvies, or boat loads from Jamaica or East African Asians ? Crop pickers were always eastern European.

We have always actively encouraged cheap immigrant labour - its not a new phenomenan and its certainly not exclusively an EU one.
2
muppetfilter - on 12 Oct 2016
In reply to GrahamD:
I think you hit the nail on the head, we encouraged low wage workers to fill specific niches like crop picking and used to issue temporary visas for this . I dont know if you recall Labours laughable 2003 prediction of between 5000-15000 workers coming into the UK rather than the millions we have experienced. This has economically displaced native workers rather than plug skills and cheap labour gaps.

Maybe this demolition of native working class jobs and housing has been the reason Corbyn kept his gob shut ?
Post edited at 13:35
RyanOsborne - on 12 Oct 2016
In reply to muppetfilter:

> This has economically displaced native workers rather than plug skills and cheap labour gaps.

I think it's way more nuanced than that. I'm sat opposite two good engineers, one from Spain and one from Greece, who both plugged skills shortages in my team, and both are great. I'm sure what you're saying does happen in some instances, but my experiences, both at work and personally, of immigration have been completely positive.
2
krikoman - on 12 Oct 2016
In reply to muppetfilter:

> I think you hit the nail on the head, we encouraged low wage workers to fill specific niches like crop picking and used to issue temporary visas for this . I dont know if you recall Labours laughable 2003 prediction of between 5000-15000 workers coming into the UK rather than the millions we have experienced. This has economically displaced native workers rather than plug skills and cheap labour gaps.

> Maybe this demolition of native working class jobs and housing has been the reason Corbyn kept his gob shut ?

Interesting that you blame Labour for this, since 2014 (only four years after the Tories were in charge again) and 2015 saw the highest immigration figures since 1975. I'm sure it's still their fault though, eh?

https://www.migrationwatchuk.org/statistics-net-migration-statistics
2
Big Ger - on 12 Oct 2016
In reply to RyanOsborne:

So do tell how you feel Cornyn has provided credible opposition on those issues? As far as I can tell his piss poor performance has given the Tories an open goal to shoot at.
2
RyanOsborne - on 12 Oct 2016
In reply to Big Ger:

> So do tell how you feel Cornyn has provided credible opposition on those issues? As far as I can tell his piss poor performance has given the Tories an open goal to shoot at.

Eh? They've shot it in the wrong goal then, because they've u-turned, under opposition by Corbyn's labour party on all of them (except Grammar School of course, but I think that's in the pipeline).
2
Big Ger - on 12 Oct 2016
In reply to RyanOsborne:

Yes, they have made turns on them. But that was more due to public and internal pressure than any action from Comrade Corbyn.
3
RyanOsborne - on 12 Oct 2016
In reply to Big Ger:
> Yes, they have made turns on them. But that was more due to public and internal pressure than any action from Comrade Corbyn.

What's your evidence for that?

Think you've confirmed your habitual hatred of Corbyn there.
Post edited at 14:58
2
KevinD - on 12 Oct 2016
In reply to RyanOsborne:

> Think you've confirmed your habitual hatred of Corbyn there.

Its interesting comparing and contrasting him and Krikoman. Both seem equally fanatical and unconcerned with details with regards to Corbyn. Just on the flipside of each other.
1
RyanOsborne - on 12 Oct 2016
In reply to KevinD:

> Its interesting comparing and contrasting him and Krikoman. Both seem equally fanatical and unconcerned with details with regards to Corbyn. Just on the flipside of each other.

I'm not sure either of them will like your comparison
Big Ger - on 12 Oct 2016
In reply to RyanOsborne:
My only evidence is how I see these situations developing, and Corbyn's ineffectual response to them.

But fanboys like you wouldn't see things that way.

The fact that you need to raise some imagined "hate" on my part just confirms your religious devotion to Jesus Corbyn.

ETA: why on earth do you think I would "hate" the man who is the biggest gift to right of centre politics since the blessed Maggie?
Post edited at 16:24
4
timjones - on 12 Oct 2016
In reply to krikoman:

> By strong message, do you mean barefaced lies?

You can have a strong message that is true.
timjones - on 12 Oct 2016
In reply to krikoman:

> Interesting that you blame Labour for this, since 2014 (only four years after the Tories were in charge again) and 2015 saw the highest immigration figures since 1975. I'm sure it's still their fault though, eh?


What do you make of the huge rise between 1997 and 2007?
FactorXXX - on 12 Oct 2016
In reply to krikoman:

Corbyn dallied while The EU was spurned...
RyanOsborne - on 12 Oct 2016
In reply to timjones:

> You can have a strong message that is true.

Would be interesting to see how many were reported in the mainstream media during the EU referendum campaigns.
timjones - on 12 Oct 2016
In reply to RyanOsborne:

> Would be interesting to see how many were reported in the mainstream media during the EU referendum campaigns.

We will probably have to wait for a few years to judge the accuracy of some of the claims
Lusk - on 12 Oct 2016
In reply to GrahamD:

> How long is your memory ? I can't remember when we didn't have cheap migrant labour, be it Irish, Asian, West Indian, East European fruit pickers etc.

Do remember when they were confronted by signs on doors and windows saying, "No Blacks" or "No Irish"?
We've come along way since those days.
The trouble now is the unprecedented huge rise in immigration since the late 90s.
People are just concerned about the numbers.
Shani - on 12 Oct 2016
In reply to Lusk:
> Do remember when they were confronted by signs on doors and windows saying, "No Blacks" or "No Irish"?

There is little evidence that there ever was. The most common photo you see of this emerged in the late 80s with no provenance. Contemporary documents from the 50s and 60s on BOTH sides of the Irish Sea NEVER mention the phenomena. It is likely Republican propaganda.

(I'm not disputing anti Irish sentiment- or indeed anti English sentiment in Eire, as our friendship has been tested over the last 1000 years).
Post edited at 20:26
Lusk - on 12 Oct 2016
In reply to Shani:

Irish aside ...
I come from near Bradford and the term 'Paki bashing' was absolutely rife in those days (70s).
I'm just saying that out and out racism is a lot less than that it was 30, 40, 50 years ago.
Shani - on 12 Oct 2016
In reply to Lusk:
> I come from near Bradford and the term 'Paki bashing' was absolutely rife in those days (70s).

> I'm just saying that out and out racism is a lot less than that it was 30, 40, 50 years ago.

Yeah, I'm a kid of the 70s as well and racist language was rife in my working class estate....and anti German sentiment amongst the older generations.*

Social media, globalisation, widespread travel etc... have definitely improved things but there are still a few ignorants, a few uneducated and a few dinosaurs out there.

*(I spent time in Deiniolen as a 6yo in the 70s and met explicit anti-English sentiments at school.)
Post edited at 20:47
krikoman - on 12 Oct 2016
In reply to timjones:

> What do you make of the huge rise between 1997 and 2007?

That still doesn't make the two consecutive rises in 2014 and 2015 go away or be Labour fault does it FFS!!!

They only happen to be the highest too, of course this was probably Jeremy's fault, nothing to do with the Tories at all.

It's no wonder we're f*cked the amount of self deception there is in the country.
3
Postmanpat on 12 Oct 2016
In reply to krikoman:

> That still doesn't make the two consecutive rises in 2014 and 2015 go away or be Labour fault does it FFS!!!

>
Partly it does. Once you have a "critical mass" of immigrants there is a larger pull factor for others and it is easier for them to enter as kin etc. It was under Labour that this level was reached. This was partly inevitable through EU membership but increased by the decision to allow early entry of East Europeans and much looser entry terms for non EU immigrants.
So the 2014-15 were partly the after effects of Labour policy.

Will you be demonstrating out the US embassy along with the peace loving Jezzer?
1
timjones - on 13 Oct 2016
In reply to krikoman:

Surely allowing the party political blame game to blind you to the real reasons for the upward trend is the ultimate self deception?
krikoman - on 13 Oct 2016
In reply to Postmanpat:

> Partly it does. Once you have a "critical mass" of immigrants there is a larger pull factor for others and it is easier for them to enter as kin etc. It was under Labour that this level was reached. This was partly inevitable through EU membership but increased by the decision to allow early entry of East Europeans and much looser entry terms for non EU immigrants.

> So the 2014-15 were partly the after effects of Labour policy.
So the previous 3 years of Tory rule had nothing to do with it then ?
We have to wait 3 years for the immigration under Labour to take it's toll, sound very sensible.

> Will you be demonstrating out the US embassy along with the peace loving Jezzer?

Too busy working for protest, though protesting for peace isn't such a bad thing. Surly we'd all like to live in a peaceful world (except arms traders of course).
2
krikoman - on 13 Oct 2016
In reply to timjones:

> Surely allowing the party political blame game to blind you to the real reasons for the upward trend is the ultimate self deception?

and the real reason is?
1
timjones - on 13 Oct 2016
In reply to krikoman:

> and the real reason is?

At least partly demand for labour to do the physical, dirty work or anti-social hours that we have become less wiling to do as we seek to better ourselves.

There will be other reasons and I suspect that you are smart enough to know that. Sadly you prefer to use the graph to throw a bit of mud at another political party.

The graph clearly shows a steady rise since 1997 that checked for a few years post 2008 before coming back onto the same broad trend over the last 2 years.

Have you ever considered that you might be guilty of a bit of self deception ;)
krikoman - on 13 Oct 2016
In reply to timjones:
> The graph clearly shows a steady rise since 1997 that checked for a few years post 2008 before coming back onto the same broad trend over the last 2 years.

> Have you ever considered that you might be guilty of a bit of self deception ;)

There's no deception at all, I didn't say there was less immigration under Labour, indeed it wasn't really a problem under Labour. It became a problem under the Tories.

The point I was making, was exactly that, there's no GOOD party in relation to immigration, they both failed to curb it (if that's your criteria for failing).

Frankly I think immigration has been good for the UK but to blame any particular party seems ludicrous. apart from the fact you have PMs saying they are going to control it, who then don't!!
Post edited at 22:45
3
timjones - on 14 Oct 2016
In reply to krikoman:
> There's no deception at all, I didn't say there was less immigration under Labour, indeed it wasn't really a problem under Labour. It became a problem under the Tories.

> The point I was making, was exactly that, there's no GOOD party in relation to immigration, they both failed to curb it (if that's your criteria for failing).

> Frankly I think immigration has been good for the UK but to blame any particular party seems ludicrous. apart from the fact you have PMs saying they are going to control it, who then don't!!

Why do you keep making this a question about political parties?

The graph shows that there has been steady upward tend over the last 20 years which only checked for a few years after the economic downturn in 2008. I'm not going to check the exact years when Labour were in government, but I trust that we can agree that labour have been in government for a significant proportion of those 20 years?

If you believe that immigration is a problem then you are deceiving yourself when you claim that "indeed it wasn't really a problem under Labour. It became a problem under the Tories."

Take those party political blinkers off and consider the issues instead of whose "team" is winning!
Post edited at 10:26
muppetfilter - on 14 Oct 2016
In reply to timjones:

Its like turning the taps on and blaming the overflow for the bath being full...
krikoman - on 14 Oct 2016
In reply to timjones:

> Why do you keep making this a question about political parties?

If you read the thread, you'll see I wasn't teh one who brought up the "blaming of the parties"

See here, Mr. Muppet @ 13:33 Wed.

Most of what I've been saying is it wasn't any parties fault!!!

> If you believe that immigration is a problem then you are deceiving yourself when you claim that "indeed it wasn't really a problem under Labour. It became a problem under the Tories."

I don't believe it's a problem for most people.

What I was alluding to was the perception of it being a problem, which manifest itself under the Tories and this flame has been fanned for some time by the press and some MPs themselves.

1
Postmanpat on 14 Oct 2016
In reply to krikoman:

> So the previous 3 years of Tory rule had nothing to do with it then ?

>
Not really, no.

> Too busy working for protest, though protesting for peace isn't such a bad thing. Surly we'd all like to live in a peaceful world (except arms traders of course).
>
Obviously, so maybe Jezzer and stw should campaign for peace rather than against the US.

RyanOsborne - on 14 Oct 2016
In reply to Big Ger:

> But fanboys like you wouldn't see things that way.

Jez I can.

This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.