Surely that Mirror article is a spoof? Harman would know that the EU would never stand for that "policy".
Panic and desperation do strange things to a person`s mind!
You get the difference between a manifesto and being interviewed on the Andrew Marr show don't you E-cafc? I think it's fair to say that one is a statement of position and the other is responding to questions, more of a discussion. You do seem to be straining really hard to make a point and finding one for yourself.
No you got it all wrong. Am not straining to make anything. As for your arrogant little question, of course I know the difference, do you?
You tell me? If it isn`t UKIP then it must be one of the others lol. To be honest with you I am not interested in which party you put your trust. It`s your choice. Just leave it now eh?
that is a very strange response. do you understand the concept of discussion and debate? where people put forward different views and thoughts and we all listen, contribute and learn. your approach seems to be putting forward your view then get angry with anyone who disagrees. do you ever wonder if your view might be wrong from time to time? i do, that is how i learn and understand new things.
you mention british values. my guess is that your interpretation of that is different to mine. almost certainly mine are not the same as ukip. mine are based around tolerance regardless of colour, creed, religion, gender or anything else, caring for your neighbour, diplomacy, looking out for the weak and down trodden, using imagination and invention for the good of all. what's yours?
Hey guys. It's been a really great discussion, which we can't always have. Let's keep the discussion going, without any nastiness. (Yes, I know I'm not a moderator, but it would be a shame to end a good discussion, where everyone can view their opinions and get them read/heard).
For me this is a really interesting point. What exactly are British values? It's a topic that comes up endlessly yet there is no agreement on what is meant. Can anyone out there come up with a working definition?
You are right Covered End, it has been a good thread up to now. Just a couple of people who like to think they can have their personal little dig on someone who doesn`t share their views. Henry, am not interested!
Covered End, you've asked me some questions directly, so I will attempt to answer them here: Chizz, do you priortise your own family before others, or do you make sure others come before your family ?What's important is what is right for everyone. I don't myself or my family to benefit at the expense of others. I know that's a concept that people might have difficulty with. But I would prefer to live in an inclusive society where everyone benefits, than a society where some people's advantages are driven by the misfortune of others.
Foreigners can use the NHS, as long as they have medical insurance. I can't see what's wrong with this. Why should we allow anyone in the world, the opportunity to use a very expensive service for free ? There's a couple of reasons behind this. 1. because the health of everyone in this country benefits the health of everyone in this country. Think about ebola - at that's topical - if someone you know, or work with, is infected by ebola, you - sooner or later - are going to suffer. You can't have the attitude "if I am ok, then everything's ok". We *all* benefit, when we *all* benefit. 2. If healthcare is restricted from one part of society, in order to benefit from healthcare, *you* have to prove you are entitled. I don't want to have to prove that I am entitled; I certainly don't want my Mum to worry about whether she can prove she's entitled.
Surely, if you're in an office, on a bus, a train or a plane, your journey is more enjoyable if you know that you're not surrounded by people with infections that can't - or can't afford to - get treated?
How would you feel this afternoon, if you are rushed to hospital with severe pains and are greeted by no one that can speak English and aren't actually qualified doctors at all ? That's why I said it's important that healthcare professionals can speak English (and other British languages). You and I are in agreement. It's important that healthcare professionals can communicate with their patients. Where I differ from the UKIP stand-point is that the language requirement should not be written in such a way that it *only* includes foreign staff.
"UKIP recognises and values an overarching, unifying British culture, which is open and inclusive to anyone who wishes to identify with Britain and British values, regardless of their ethnic or religious background"
Once again it's opinion isn't it ? You feel it is wrong for a British government to want a British culture, which is open and inclusive to anyone, who wishes to identify with Britain and British values.No I don't. What I *do* find "wrong" is a party having a manifesto - a serious, political document - that includes a phrase like "British values" without saying what it is. This is a dangerous area, unless it's properly explained. What determines what is British?
Which of these people best defines someone who identifies with Britain and British values? Person A - let's call him James - who goes to church gives to charity, works hard? Or person B - let's call him Mohamed - A Somali-born Muslim who "comes over here", gets a free education, but spends most of his time, as an adult, out of the country?
Let me ask you one question in return. Will removing ourselves from the EU solve all of the problems you identify?
(By the way, if anyone's interested, of course, Person A is Jimmy Savile and Person B is Mo Farah).
You are right Covered End, it has been a good thread up to now. Just a couple of people who like to think they can have their personal little dig on someone who doesn`t share their views. Henry, am not interested!
british values are at the heart of the debate about ukip. in my mind it means many things to lots of people. when i read it in the context on ukip i see it as code for "we don't like foreigners", particularly when you look at the sort of thing some of farage's deputies say who are much more explicit in their views. so mine was a genuine question. you say you want british values, what are they?
You tell me? If it isn`t UKIP then it must be one of the others lol. To be honest with you I am not interested in which party you put your trust. It`s your choice. Just leave it now eh?
that is a very strange response. do you understand the concept of discussion and debate? where people put forward different views and thoughts and we all listen, contribute and learn. your approach seems to be putting forward your view then get angry with anyone who disagrees. do you ever wonder if your view might be wrong from time to time? i do, that is how i learn and understand new things.
you mention british values. my guess is that your interpretation of that is different to mine. almost certainly mine are not the same as ukip. mine are based around tolerance regardless of colour, creed, religion, gender or anything else, caring for your neighbour, diplomacy, looking out for the weak and down trodden, using imagination and invention for the good of all. what's yours?
henry, I think your values are fine and I agree with them. Whilst I can't say what Nigel Farage would say, I don't see why he would disagree. You can hold these values and still want to limit immigration, can't you ?
I agree with your views, but if The Valley was a 27,000 sell out at the next game, I don't think Charlton should let in another couple of thousand, whatever their colour, creed, religion, or gender they are.
If you think letting in more people is detrimental to the people in there, then you shouldn't do it and you certainly shouldn't continue to do it, with no possible prospect of ever stopping more people entering.
For me this is a really interesting point. What exactly are British values? It's a topic that comes up endlessly yet there is no agreement on what is meant. Can anyone out there come up with a working definition?
Not sure a definition or rule book exists but I guess it might involve things like having a grasp of the English language (or Welsh), not burning the St G's or the Union flag, being respectful of Christian beliefs, not trying to implement Sharia law, not living in secular communities.
Others may articulate it better.
Imagine going to live overseas yourself and think how you would like to act, integrate and be perceived....those types pf values I imagine.
You tell me? If it isn`t UKIP then it must be one of the others lol. To be honest with you I am not interested in which party you put your trust. It`s your choice. Just leave it now eh?
that is a very strange response. do you understand the concept of discussion and debate? where people put forward different views and thoughts and we all listen, contribute and learn. your approach seems to be putting forward your view then get angry with anyone who disagrees. do you ever wonder if your view might be wrong from time to time? i do, that is how i learn and understand new things.
you mention british values. my guess is that your interpretation of that is different to mine. almost certainly mine are not the same as ukip. mine are based around tolerance regardless of colour, creed, religion, gender or anything else, caring for your neighbour, diplomacy, looking out for the weak and down trodden, using imagination and invention for the good of all. what's yours?
henry, I think your values are fine and I agree with them. Whilst I can't say what Nigel Farage would say, I don't see why he would disagree. You can hold these values and still want to limit immigration, can't you ?
I agree with your views, but if The Valley was a 27,000 sell out at the next game, I don't think Charlton should let in another couple of thousand, whatever their colour, creed, religion, or gender they are.
If you think letting in more people is detrimental to the people in there, then you shouldn't do it and you certainly shouldn't continue to do it, with no possible prospect of ever stopping more people entering.
actually, i have not said anything about immigration. i think there needs to be a sensible policy in place which supports those who need it and brings in the necessary skills to allow the economy to grow. this is hugely difficult to achieve as it is a very complex issue. why do you think no government has got the balance right yet? it is not for trying. farage's ideas are far too simplistic and destined to fail for many, many reasons.
I don't think farage does have the same view as me about british values. his comments about romanian vs italian neighbours demonstrates his lack of tolerance. his picking on hiv as an illness to exclude, but no other long term illness shows a lack of care (with hints of homophobia).
You tell me? If it isn`t UKIP then it must be one of the others lol. To be honest with you I am not interested in which party you put your trust. It`s your choice. Just leave it now eh?
that is a very strange response. do you understand the concept of discussion and debate? where people put forward different views and thoughts and we all listen, contribute and learn. your approach seems to be putting forward your view then get angry with anyone who disagrees. do you ever wonder if your view might be wrong from time to time? i do, that is how i learn and understand new things.
you mention british values. my guess is that your interpretation of that is different to mine. almost certainly mine are not the same as ukip. mine are based around tolerance regardless of colour, creed, religion, gender or anything else, caring for your neighbour, diplomacy, looking out for the weak and down trodden, using imagination and invention for the good of all. what's yours?
henry, I think your values are fine and I agree with them. Whilst I can't say what Nigel Farage would say, I don't see why he would disagree. You can hold these values and still want to limit immigration, can't you ?
I agree with your views, but if The Valley was a 27,000 sell out at the next game, I don't think Charlton should let in another couple of thousand, whatever their colour, creed, religion, or gender they are.
If you think letting in more people is detrimental to the people in there, then you shouldn't do it and you certainly shouldn't continue to do it, with no possible prospect of ever stopping more people entering.
But if they were paying customers and extra seats were built what is the problem?
You tell me? If it isn`t UKIP then it must be one of the others lol. To be honest with you I am not interested in which party you put your trust. It`s your choice. Just leave it now eh?
that is a very strange response. do you understand the concept of discussion and debate? where people put forward different views and thoughts and we all listen, contribute and learn. your approach seems to be putting forward your view then get angry with anyone who disagrees. do you ever wonder if your view might be wrong from time to time? i do, that is how i learn and understand new things.
you mention british values. my guess is that your interpretation of that is different to mine. almost certainly mine are not the same as ukip. mine are based around tolerance regardless of colour, creed, religion, gender or anything else, caring for your neighbour, diplomacy, looking out for the weak and down trodden, using imagination and invention for the good of all. what's yours?
henry, I think your values are fine and I agree with them. Whilst I can't say what Nigel Farage would say, I don't see why he would disagree. You can hold these values and still want to limit immigration, can't you ?
I agree with your views, but if The Valley was a 27,000 sell out at the next game, I don't think Charlton should let in another couple of thousand, whatever their colour, creed, religion, or gender they are.
If you think letting in more people is detrimental to the people in there, then you shouldn't do it and you certainly shouldn't continue to do it, with no possible prospect of ever stopping more people entering.
But if they were paying customers and extra seats were built what is the problem?
Where will the new seats be built, will it affect the view, what if there aren't any stewards or car parking spaces for the extra people, perhaps there isn't enough paper for the extra programmes and what happens when those 2,000 have kids - should we build more seats again?
For me this is a really interesting point. What exactly are British values? It's a topic that comes up endlessly yet there is no agreement on what is meant. Can anyone out there come up with a working definition?
Not sure a definition or rule book exists but I guess it might involve things like having a grasp of the English language (or Welsh), not burning the St G's or the Union flag, being respectful of Christian beliefs, not trying to implement Sharia law, not living in secular communities.
Others may articulate it better.
Imagine going to live overseas yourself and think how you would like to act, integrate and be perceived....those types pf values I imagine.
That's why UKIP including phrases like "British values" and "Political correctness" in manifestos or statements makes them look ridiculous. It is meaningless without definition.
Covered End, you've asked me some questions directly, so I will attempt to answer them here: Chizz, do you priortise your own family before others, or do you make sure others come before your family ?What's important is what is right for everyone. I don't myself or my family to benefit at the expense of others. I know that's a concept that people might have difficulty with. But I would prefer to live in an inclusive society where everyone benefits, than a society where some people's advantages are driven by the misfortune of others.
Foreigners can use the NHS, as long as they have medical insurance. I can't see what's wrong with this. Why should we allow anyone in the world, the opportunity to use a very expensive service for free ? There's a couple of reasons behind this. 1. because the health of everyone in this country benefits the health of everyone in this country. Think about ebola - at that's topical - if someone you know, or work with, is infected by ebola, you - sooner or later - are going to suffer. You can't have the attitude "if I am ok, then everything's ok". We *all* benefit, when we *all* benefit. 2. If healthcare is restricted from one part of society, in order to benefit from healthcare, *you* have to prove you are entitled. I don't want to have to prove that I am entitled; I certainly don't want my Mum to worry about whether she can prove she's entitled.
Surely, if you're in an office, on a bus, a train or a plane, your journey is more enjoyable if you know that you're not surrounded by people with infections that can't - or can't afford to - get treated?
How would you feel this afternoon, if you are rushed to hospital with severe pains and are greeted by no one that can speak English and aren't actually qualified doctors at all ? That's why I said it's important that healthcare professionals can speak English (and other British languages). You and I are in agreement. It's important that healthcare professionals can communicate with their patients. Where I differ from the UKIP stand-point is that the language requirement should not be written in such a way that it *only* includes foreign staff.
"UKIP recognises and values an overarching, unifying British culture, which is open and inclusive to anyone who wishes to identify with Britain and British values, regardless of their ethnic or religious background"
Once again it's opinion isn't it ? You feel it is wrong for a British government to want a British culture, which is open and inclusive to anyone, who wishes to identify with Britain and British values.No I don't. What I *do* find "wrong" is a party having a manifesto - a serious, political document - that includes a phrase like "British values" without saying what it is. This is a dangerous area, unless it's properly explained. What determines what is British?
Which of these people best defines someone who identifies with Britain and British values? Person A - let's call him James - who goes to church gives to charity, works hard? Or person B - let's call him Mohamed - A Somali-born Muslim who "comes over here", gets a free education, but spends most of his time, as an adult, out of the country?
Let me ask you one question in return. Will removing ourselves from the EU solve all of the problems you identify?
(By the way, if anyone's interested, of course, Person A is Jimmy Savile and Person B is Mo Farah).
Chizz, I agree with a lot of what you say, but I doubt you would pay for my kids to go to university instead of yours.
Once again, I suppose a lot of it depends on someone's definition of society. I would say, for the point of this discussion, society should be our society in Britain. You would appear to be saying that society should be the whole of Europe or perhaps even the whole world.
I don't believe Britain should or can afford to pay for society meaning the whole of Europe or the world, for everyone that want to live here.
I've no idea, re your concerns for your mum benefiting from NHS care. The proof could possibly be something quite simple, like a NI number for example. Yes, if there was a health emergency like someone suspected of having ebola, then common sense should prevail and they would be assisted. The greater movement of people in and out of the UK has given rise to TB being on the rise I believe and someone I know, contracted this not long ago. I'm not sure if that is the only disease that was all but eradicated in Britain, but are now rising again.
I agree with you wholeheartedly on let's define British values, but you seem to infer that you are opposed to British values. You certainly seem to be quite aggitated when British values are mentioned. It seems unhealthy to be concerned with wanting British values if you're British. It almost appears that some people have self loathing (not necessarily you).
I have no problems with the people living in the UK, whatever their creed, colour, religion etc, so long as they are willing to integrate and not try and impose their laws on us. let's live and let live. When I go abroad, I respect that countries laws and values. I wouldn't try to drink alcohol in a country where it was illegal for instance. If I was in a country where my wife should be "covered up", we would respect that. I wouldn't tell her to walk down the street in a mini skirt. If you move to another country you should be prepared to live by that countries laws & values. You shouldn't say I disagree with those values, they are wrong and refuse to live by them.
Removing ourselves from the EU of course will not resolve many of the issues and I'm not convinced we should leave the EU. What we should be having and moreover what the politicians should be having and should have been having for 20 years, is a grown up and mature debate on these issues, as we are having today. Instead of politicians stifling debate and calling people racists, bigots and xenophobes for wanting to have a mature debate.
Great discussion. It's a pity the politicians can't do the same.
Quick straw poll for all sides in this debate. What figure of population do you consider constitutes "full" in relation to the 50,000 odd square miles available in England?
"Never full" is ok if that's what you think. (You are entitled to take account of all the infrastructure needed to support growing population including free education, health care, roads and railways, state benefits and retirement pensions, state funded civil service pensions and so on as well as quality of life for future generations. )
This is a question that rarely gets asked and hardly ever gets answered.
Covered End, you've asked me some questions directly, so I will attempt to answer them here: Chizz, do you priortise your own family before others, or do you make sure others come before your family ?What's important is what is right for everyone. I don't myself or my family to benefit at the expense of others. I know that's a concept that people might have difficulty with. But I would prefer to live in an inclusive society where everyone benefits, than a society where some people's advantages are driven by the misfortune of others.
Foreigners can use the NHS, as long as they have medical insurance. I can't see what's wrong with this. Why should we allow anyone in the world, the opportunity to use a very expensive service for free ? There's a couple of reasons behind this. 1. because the health of everyone in this country benefits the health of everyone in this country. Think about ebola - at that's topical - if someone you know, or work with, is infected by ebola, you - sooner or later - are going to suffer. You can't have the attitude "if I am ok, then everything's ok". We *all* benefit, when we *all* benefit. 2. If healthcare is restricted from one part of society, in order to benefit from healthcare, *you* have to prove you are entitled. I don't want to have to prove that I am entitled; I certainly don't want my Mum to worry about whether she can prove she's entitled.
Surely, if you're in an office, on a bus, a train or a plane, your journey is more enjoyable if you know that you're not surrounded by people with infections that can't - or can't afford to - get treated?
How would you feel this afternoon, if you are rushed to hospital with severe pains and are greeted by no one that can speak English and aren't actually qualified doctors at all ? That's why I said it's important that healthcare professionals can speak English (and other British languages). You and I are in agreement. It's important that healthcare professionals can communicate with their patients. Where I differ from the UKIP stand-point is that the language requirement should not be written in such a way that it *only* includes foreign staff.
"UKIP recognises and values an overarching, unifying British culture, which is open and inclusive to anyone who wishes to identify with Britain and British values, regardless of their ethnic or religious background"
Once again it's opinion isn't it ? You feel it is wrong for a British government to want a British culture, which is open and inclusive to anyone, who wishes to identify with Britain and British values.No I don't. What I *do* find "wrong" is a party having a manifesto - a serious, political document - that includes a phrase like "British values" without saying what it is. This is a dangerous area, unless it's properly explained. What determines what is British?
Which of these people best defines someone who identifies with Britain and British values? Person A - let's call him James - who goes to church gives to charity, works hard? Or person B - let's call him Mohamed - A Somali-born Muslim who "comes over here", gets a free education, but spends most of his time, as an adult, out of the country?
Let me ask you one question in return. Will removing ourselves from the EU solve all of the problems you identify?
(By the way, if anyone's interested, of course, Person A is Jimmy Savile and Person B is Mo Farah).
Chizz, I agree with a lot of what you say, but I doubt you would pay for my kids to go to university instead of yours.
Once again, I suppose a lot of it depends on someone's definition of society. I would say, for the point of this discussion, society should be our society in Britain. You would appear to be saying that society should be the whole of Europe or perhaps even the whole world.
I don't believe Britain should or can afford to pay for society meaning the whole of Europe or the world, for everyone that want to live here.
I've no idea, re your concerns for your mum benefiting from NHS care. The proof could possibly be something quite simple, like a NI number for example. Yes, if there was a health emergency like someone suspected of having ebola, then common sense should prevail and they would be assisted. The greater movement of people in and out of the UK has given rise to TB being on the rise I believe and someone I know, contracted this not long ago. I'm not sure if that is the only disease that was all but eradicated in Britain, but are now rising again.
I agree with you wholeheartedly on let's define British values, but you seem to infer that you are opposed to British values. You certainly seem to be quite aggitated when British values are mentioned. It seems unhealthy to be concerned with wanting British values if you're British. It almost appears that some people have self loathing (not necessarily you).
I have no problems with the people living in the UK, whatever their creed, colour, religion etc, so long as they are willing to integrate and not try and impose their laws on us. let's live and let live. When I go abroad, I respect that countries laws and values. I wouldn't try to drink alcohol in a country where it was illegal for instance. If I was in a country where my wife should be "covered up", we would respect that. I wouldn't tell her to walk down the street in a mini skirt. If you move to another country you should be prepared to live by that countries laws & values. You shouldn't say I disagree with those values, they are wrong and refuse to live by them.
Removing ourselves from the EU of course will not resolve many of the issues and I'm not convinced we should leave the EU. What we should be having and moreover what the politicians should be having and should have been having for 20 years, is a grown up and mature debate on these issues, as we are having today. Instead of stifling debate and calling people racists bigots and xenophobes for wanting to have a mature debate.
Great discussion. It's a pity the politicians can't do the same.
Very, very interesting. Let me call out a couple of points in particular.
First, you say that you're not convinced we should leave the EU. I am under the impression that that is, indeed, a central tenet of UKIP's policy - the single thing they hold most important.
Second (and without meaning for this to get in a tit-for-tat), but can you define what "British values" are? If it's important to UKIP, then they should make it clear exactly what they mean. (Example, for David Cameron, foreign aid is important. So, he decided and declared that the UK would give 0.7% of the country's GDP to foreign aid. Couldn't be clearer. Some might not be happy about that, but he explained it clearly and unambiguously). So, can UKIP do the same with "British values"? Can you tell me what you mean by "British values"? If you can, then great - maybe I will agree with them, maybe I won't. But, a policy driven by ambiguity and misunderstanding does no-one any good.
Covered End, you've asked me some questions directly, so I will attempt to answer them here: Chizz, do you priortise your own family before others, or do you make sure others come before your family ?What's important is what is right for everyone. I don't myself or my family to benefit at the expense of others. I know that's a concept that people might have difficulty with. But I would prefer to live in an inclusive society where everyone benefits, than a society where some people's advantages are driven by the misfortune of others.
Foreigners can use the NHS, as long as they have medical insurance. I can't see what's wrong with this. Why should we allow anyone in the world, the opportunity to use a very expensive service for free ? There's a couple of reasons behind this. 1. because the health of everyone in this country benefits the health of everyone in this country. Think about ebola - at that's topical - if someone you know, or work with, is infected by ebola, you - sooner or later - are going to suffer. You can't have the attitude "if I am ok, then everything's ok". We *all* benefit, when we *all* benefit. 2. If healthcare is restricted from one part of society, in order to benefit from healthcare, *you* have to prove you are entitled. I don't want to have to prove that I am entitled; I certainly don't want my Mum to worry about whether she can prove she's entitled.
Surely, if you're in an office, on a bus, a train or a plane, your journey is more enjoyable if you know that you're not surrounded by people with infections that can't - or can't afford to - get treated?
How would you feel this afternoon, if you are rushed to hospital with severe pains and are greeted by no one that can speak English and aren't actually qualified doctors at all ? That's why I said it's important that healthcare professionals can speak English (and other British languages). You and I are in agreement. It's important that healthcare professionals can communicate with their patients. Where I differ from the UKIP stand-point is that the language requirement should not be written in such a way that it *only* includes foreign staff.
"UKIP recognises and values an overarching, unifying British culture, which is open and inclusive to anyone who wishes to identify with Britain and British values, regardless of their ethnic or religious background"
Once again it's opinion isn't it ? You feel it is wrong for a British government to want a British culture, which is open and inclusive to anyone, who wishes to identify with Britain and British values.No I don't. What I *do* find "wrong" is a party having a manifesto - a serious, political document - that includes a phrase like "British values" without saying what it is. This is a dangerous area, unless it's properly explained. What determines what is British?
Which of these people best defines someone who identifies with Britain and British values? Person A - let's call him James - who goes to church gives to charity, works hard? Or person B - let's call him Mohamed - A Somali-born Muslim who "comes over here", gets a free education, but spends most of his time, as an adult, out of the country?
Let me ask you one question in return. Will removing ourselves from the EU solve all of the problems you identify?
(By the way, if anyone's interested, of course, Person A is Jimmy Savile and Person B is Mo Farah).
Chizz, I agree with a lot of what you say, but I doubt you would pay for my kids to go to university instead of yours.
Once again, I suppose a lot of it depends on someone's definition of society. I would say, for the point of this discussion, society should be our society in Britain. You would appear to be saying that society should be the whole of Europe or perhaps even the whole world.
I don't believe Britain should or can afford to pay for society meaning the whole of Europe or the world, for everyone that want to live here.
I've no idea, re your concerns for your mum benefiting from NHS care. The proof could possibly be something quite simple, like a NI number for example. Yes, if there was a health emergency like someone suspected of having ebola, then common sense should prevail and they would be assisted. The greater movement of people in and out of the UK has given rise to TB being on the rise I believe and someone I know, contracted this not long ago. I'm not sure if that is the only disease that was all but eradicated in Britain, but are now rising again.
I agree with you wholeheartedly on let's define British values, but you seem to infer that you are opposed to British values. You certainly seem to be quite aggitated when British values are mentioned. It seems unhealthy to be concerned with wanting British values if you're British. It almost appears that some people have self loathing (not necessarily you).
I have no problems with the people living in the UK, whatever their creed, colour, religion etc, so long as they are willing to integrate and not try and impose their laws on us. let's live and let live. When I go abroad, I respect that countries laws and values. I wouldn't try to drink alcohol in a country where it was illegal for instance. If I was in a country where my wife should be "covered up", we would respect that. I wouldn't tell her to walk down the street in a mini skirt. If you move to another country you should be prepared to live by that countries laws & values. You shouldn't say I disagree with those values, they are wrong and refuse to live by them.
Removing ourselves from the EU of course will not resolve many of the issues and I'm not convinced we should leave the EU. What we should be having and moreover what the politicians should be having and should have been having for 20 years, is a grown up and mature debate on these issues, as we are having today. Instead of politicians stifling debate and calling people racists, bigots and xenophobes for wanting to have a mature debate.
Great discussion. It's a pity the politicians can't do the same.
Quick straw poll for all sides in this debate. What figure of population do you consider constitutes "full" in relation to the 50,000 odd square miles available in England?
"Never full" is ok if that's what you think. (You are entitled to take account of all the infrastructure needed to support growing population including free education, health care, roads and railways, state benefits and retirement pensions, state funded civil service pensions and so on as well as quality of life for future generations. )
This is a question that rarely gets asked and hardly ever gets answered.
Nobody got an opinion on this then?
Nope, it would appear not. I would say we have enough people living here, bearing in mind everything that has already been mentioned. However, that shouldn't mean pulling up the drawbridge and no one as far as I'm aware is suggesting it should.
It means having controlled immigration to fill the skill sets required.
Not one person in favour of the EU has said that they are opposed to continuing with unlimited immigration from the EU, apart from Prague who has conceded that I may have a point, that he hadn't previously considered.
Herein lies the biggest problem. If the EU were willing to reconsider their policies with some sensible flexibility, then many of these issues would go away.
The generation I come from would not need to define "British values" it would be an instinct, a common sense about fairness and tolerance.
My relatives in Plumstead live alongside all kinds of races with no problem, we have mixed race in our family. However, they think it is unfair that residents move in who happen to be immigrants and think its OK to leave unwanted mattresses and furniture in the street. My relatives call the council and pay for a collection if they have anything to dispose of, why doesn't everyone do the same?
If anyone gave this as an example of not observing British values you would be ridiculed by the intelligencia, but to ordinary people who have always lived a considerate peaceful and tolerant life who are experiencing disruption and devaluing of their living conditions by the behaviour of those simply not accustomed to living in ordered social conditions, it resonates with their feelings. It's not suggesting that British people can't also demonstrate the same behaviour, it is just that when those ignorant of our norms of behaviour are those from abroad and simply unaware, do we try and promote our norms or do we just accept that's what they do and we just accept it? UKIP are saying to these people we understand what you are experiencing and it is not racism to want higher standards of behaviour regardless of creed or race. Other parties are pretending all is sweetness and light frightened to slip up uttering any criticism of other creeds, but it doesn't resonate with those experiencing the everyday problems. Because you can't define something well doesn't mean you can't feel it and British values is a feeling some understand, not a definition on google.
Chizz, I've said before (you must have missed it), that I've never voted for UKIP and likely never will.
However, they make many points that the other parties have refused to discuss for about 20 years and if they had UKIP would not exist.
I am not convinced that we should leave the EU, but their one rule for all, doesn't seem to work IMO. We have people lining up to come here, whilst many EU countries have people leaving in droves. This should not be able to continue indefinitely imo. However, under EU rules it will continue indefinitely.
Also, things like a uniform interest rate doesn't work when one country is booming and another is in recession.
Yes the EU also holds many benefits. It is not black and white.
No, I'm no more clear on an adequate definition of British values than anyone else and wouldn't even attempt to define these. Surely, that's down to the politicians ? I agree UKIP should define British values.Certainly, it would aid discussion.
My point is though, that some people seem to be opposed to "British values" whether the phrase has been adequately defined or not.
With respect, the point is Dipenhall, if it's in a manifesto then we must assume that UKIP would bring in legislation to fulfill their manifesto pledge, so at some point "British values" must be defined. You can't say in an act of parliament "We all know what it means" - it simply must be clarified it and it appears that even we, a small group of people, would not be able to come to agreement on what it means.
Chizz, I've said before (you must have missed it), that I've never voted for UKIP and likely never will.
However, they make many points that the other parties have refused to discuss for about 20 years and if they had UKIP would not exist.
I am not convinced that we should leave the EU, but their one rule for all, doesn't seem to work IMO. We have people lining up to come here, whilst many EU countries have people leaving in droves. This should not be able to continue indefinitely imo. However, under EU rules it will continue indefinitely.
Also, things like a uniform interest rate doesn't work when one country is booming and another is in recession.
Yes the EU also holds many benefits. It is not black and white.
No, I'm no more clear on an adequate definition of British values than anyone else and wouldn't even attempt to define these. Surely, that's down to the politicians ? I agree UKIP should define British values.Certainly, it would aid discussion.
My point is though, that some people seem to be opposed to "British values" whether the phrase has been adequately defined or not.
Chizz, I've said before (you must have missed it), that I've never voted for UKIP and likely never will.
However, they make many points that the other parties have refused to discuss for about 20 years and if they had UKIP would not exist.
I am not convinced that we should leave the EU, but their one rule for all, doesn't seem to work IMO. We have people lining up to come here, whilst many EU countries have people leaving in droves. This should not be able to continue indefinitely imo. However, under EU rules it will continue indefinitely.
Also, things like a uniform interest rate doesn't work when one country is booming and another is in recession.
Yes the EU also holds many benefits. It is not black and white.
No, I'm no more clear on an adequate definition of British values than anyone else and wouldn't even attempt to define these. Surely, that's down to the politicians ? I agree UKIP should define British values.Certainly, it would aid discussion.
My point is though, that some people seem to be opposed to "British values" whether the phrase has been adequately defined or not.
Chizz, I've said before (you must have missed it), that I've never voted for UKIP and likely never will.
However, they make many points that the other parties have refused to discuss for about 20 years and if they had UKIP would not exist.
I am not convinced that we should leave the EU, but their one rule for all, doesn't seem to work IMO. We have people lining up to come here, whilst many EU countries have people leaving in droves. This should not be able to continue indefinitely imo. However, under EU rules it will continue indefinitely.
Also, things like a uniform interest rate doesn't work when one country is booming and another is in recession.
Yes the EU also holds many benefits. It is not black and white.
No, I'm no more clear on an adequate definition of British values than anyone else and wouldn't even attempt to define these. Surely, that's down to the politicians ? I agree UKIP should define British values.Certainly, it would aid discussion.
My point is though, that some people seem to be opposed to "British values" whether the phrase has been adequately defined or not.
Are The Germans opposed to German values ?
Are The French opposed to French values ?
Why are Brits opposed to British values ?
I am certainly not opposed to British values - I simply do not know what the phrase refers to.
It's like "Victorian values" - totally meaningless. Or, at the very least, subject to complete misunderstanding. Does "Victorian values" mean "being part of a family" or "sending children up chimneys"?
Likewise, does "British values" mean "adhering to the rule of law"; or "being intolerant of foreigners"?
Until I know what it means, I don't know if I am for it or against it. And, for as long as Farage brandished the catch-all phrase around without determining what it means, I think it's a very dangerous, divisive and probably deliberate provocation.
You tell me? If it isn`t UKIP then it must be one of the others lol. To be honest with you I am not interested in which party you put your trust. It`s your choice. Just leave it now eh?
that is a very strange response. do you understand the concept of discussion and debate? where people put forward different views and thoughts and we all listen, contribute and learn. your approach seems to be putting forward your view then get angry with anyone who disagrees. do you ever wonder if your view might be wrong from time to time? i do, that is how i learn and understand new things.
you mention british values. my guess is that your interpretation of that is different to mine. almost certainly mine are not the same as ukip. mine are based around tolerance regardless of colour, creed, religion, gender or anything else, caring for your neighbour, diplomacy, looking out for the weak and down trodden, using imagination and invention for the good of all. what's yours?
henry, I think your values are fine and I agree with them. Whilst I can't say what Nigel Farage would say, I don't see why he would disagree. You can hold these values and still want to limit immigration, can't you ?
I agree with your views, but if The Valley was a 27,000 sell out at the next game, I don't think Charlton should let in another couple of thousand, whatever their colour, creed, religion, or gender they are.
If you think letting in more people is detrimental to the people in there, then you shouldn't do it and you certainly shouldn't continue to do it, with no possible prospect of ever stopping more people entering.
But if they were paying customers and extra seats were built what is the problem?
Where will the new seats be built, will it affect the view, what if there aren't any stewards or car parking spaces for the extra people, perhaps there isn't enough paper for the extra programmes and what happens when those 2,000 have kids - should we build more seats again?
Imo if it benefited the club in terms of additional income then the answer is yes. Essentially this is the problem. In any other walk of life would a company turn away customers? If the problem is limited capacity, then capacity is created.
For me this is a really interesting point. What exactly are British values? It's a topic that comes up endlessly yet there is no agreement on what is meant. Can anyone out there come up with a working definition?
Not sure a definition or rule book exists but I guess it might involve things like having a grasp of the English language (or Welsh), not burning the St G's or the Union flag, being respectful of Christian beliefs, not trying to implement Sharia law, not living in secular communities.
Others may articulate it better.
Imagine going to live overseas yourself and think how you would like to act, integrate and be perceived....those types pf values I imagine.
So, what does it take for a weird middle eastern cult to become central to British values? It seems odd to me that you would automatically rule one in and one out. As for "not living in secular societies", what does mean? Will we all be forced to believe the hocus pocus that is handed down to us or will we live under some medieval system where church and state are linked?
Regarding "British values" the debate I would pay to see on what they are, would be Farage vs Danny Boyle. As I mentioned earlier today, Carswell tried to attach UKIP to the London Olympic ceremony values. Nice political stroke, Dougie boy, but it won't stand five minutes of close scrutiny, especially if defended by anyone other than yourself.
For me this is a really interesting point. What exactly are British values? It's a topic that comes up endlessly yet there is no agreement on what is meant. Can anyone out there come up with a working definition?
1) Any problem can be overcome with enough tea or alcohol 2) A belief in the importance of queueing whenever possible 3) Discussing the weather is a useful conversation opener with someone you don't know well. 4) If there's an opportunity to take the piss out of friends or be facetious, then it will be taken
Comments
you mention british values. my guess is that your interpretation of that is different to mine. almost certainly mine are not the same as ukip. mine are based around tolerance regardless of colour, creed, religion, gender or anything else, caring for your neighbour, diplomacy, looking out for the weak and down trodden, using imagination and invention for the good of all. what's yours?
(Yes, I know I'm not a moderator, but it would be a shame to end a good discussion, where everyone can view their opinions and get them read/heard).
Chizz, do you priortise your own family before others, or do you make sure others come before your family ?What's important is what is right for everyone. I don't myself or my family to benefit at the expense of others. I know that's a concept that people might have difficulty with. But I would prefer to live in an inclusive society where everyone benefits, than a society where some people's advantages are driven by the misfortune of others.
Foreigners can use the NHS, as long as they have medical insurance. I can't see what's wrong with this.
Why should we allow anyone in the world, the opportunity to use a very expensive service for free ?
There's a couple of reasons behind this. 1. because the health of everyone in this country benefits the health of everyone in this country. Think about ebola - at that's topical - if someone you know, or work with, is infected by ebola, you - sooner or later - are going to suffer. You can't have the attitude "if I am ok, then everything's ok". We *all* benefit, when we *all* benefit. 2. If healthcare is restricted from one part of society, in order to benefit from healthcare, *you* have to prove you are entitled. I don't want to have to prove that I am entitled; I certainly don't want my Mum to worry about whether she can prove she's entitled.
Surely, if you're in an office, on a bus, a train or a plane, your journey is more enjoyable if you know that you're not surrounded by people with infections that can't - or can't afford to - get treated?
How would you feel this afternoon, if you are rushed to hospital with severe pains and are greeted by no one that can speak English and aren't actually qualified doctors at all ? That's why I said it's important that healthcare professionals can speak English (and other British languages). You and I are in agreement. It's important that healthcare professionals can communicate with their patients. Where I differ from the UKIP stand-point is that the language requirement should not be written in such a way that it *only* includes foreign staff.
"UKIP recognises and values an overarching, unifying British culture, which is open and inclusive to anyone who wishes to identify with Britain and British values, regardless of their ethnic or religious background"
Once again it's opinion isn't it ? You feel it is wrong for a British government to want a British culture, which is open and inclusive to anyone, who wishes to identify with Britain and British values.No I don't. What I *do* find "wrong" is a party having a manifesto - a serious, political document - that includes a phrase like "British values" without saying what it is. This is a dangerous area, unless it's properly explained. What determines what is British?
Which of these people best defines someone who identifies with Britain and British values? Person A - let's call him James - who goes to church gives to charity, works hard? Or person B - let's call him Mohamed - A Somali-born Muslim who "comes over here", gets a free education, but spends most of his time, as an adult, out of the country?
Let me ask you one question in return. Will removing ourselves from the EU solve all of the problems you identify?
(By the way, if anyone's interested, of course, Person A is Jimmy Savile and Person B is Mo Farah).
I agree with your views, but if The Valley was a 27,000 sell out at the next game, I don't think Charlton should let in another couple of thousand, whatever their colour, creed, religion, or gender they are.
If you think letting in more people is detrimental to the people in there, then you shouldn't do it and you certainly shouldn't continue to do it, with no possible prospect of ever stopping more people entering.
Others may articulate it better.
Imagine going to live overseas yourself and think how you would like to act, integrate and be perceived....those types pf values I imagine.
I don't think farage does have the same view as me about british values. his comments about romanian vs italian neighbours demonstrates his lack of tolerance. his picking on hiv as an illness to exclude, but no other long term illness shows a lack of care (with hints of homophobia).
Once again, I suppose a lot of it depends on someone's definition of society. I would say, for the point of this discussion, society should be our society in Britain. You would appear to be saying that society should be the whole of Europe or perhaps even the whole world.
I don't believe Britain should or can afford to pay for society meaning the whole of Europe or the world, for everyone that want to live here.
I've no idea, re your concerns for your mum benefiting from NHS care. The proof could possibly be something quite simple, like a NI number for example. Yes, if there was a health emergency like someone suspected of having ebola, then common sense should prevail and they would be assisted. The greater movement of people in and out of the UK has given rise to TB being on the rise I believe and someone I know, contracted this not long ago. I'm not sure if that is the only disease that was all but eradicated in Britain, but are now rising again.
I agree with you wholeheartedly on let's define British values, but you seem to infer that you are opposed to British values. You certainly seem to be quite aggitated when British values are mentioned. It seems unhealthy to be concerned with wanting British values if you're British. It almost appears that some people have self loathing (not necessarily you).
I have no problems with the people living in the UK, whatever their creed, colour, religion etc, so long as they are willing to integrate and not try and impose their laws on us. let's live and let live. When I go abroad, I respect that countries laws and values. I wouldn't try to drink alcohol in a country where it was illegal for instance. If I was in a country where my wife should be "covered up", we would respect that. I wouldn't tell her to walk down the street in a mini skirt. If you move to another country you should be prepared to live by that countries laws & values. You shouldn't say I disagree with those values, they are wrong and refuse to live by them.
Removing ourselves from the EU of course will not resolve many of the issues and I'm not convinced we should leave the EU. What we should be having and moreover what the politicians should be having and should have been having for 20 years, is a grown up and mature debate on these issues, as we are having today. Instead of politicians stifling debate and calling people racists, bigots and xenophobes for wanting to have a mature debate.
Great discussion. It's a pity the politicians can't do the same.
First, you say that you're not convinced we should leave the EU. I am under the impression that that is, indeed, a central tenet of UKIP's policy - the single thing they hold most important.
Second (and without meaning for this to get in a tit-for-tat), but can you define what "British values" are? If it's important to UKIP, then they should make it clear exactly what they mean. (Example, for David Cameron, foreign aid is important. So, he decided and declared that the UK would give 0.7% of the country's GDP to foreign aid. Couldn't be clearer. Some might not be happy about that, but he explained it clearly and unambiguously). So, can UKIP do the same with "British values"? Can you tell me what you mean by "British values"? If you can, then great - maybe I will agree with them, maybe I won't. But, a policy driven by ambiguity and misunderstanding does no-one any good.
To you, what does "British values" mean?
However, that shouldn't mean pulling up the drawbridge and no one as far as I'm aware is suggesting it should.
It means having controlled immigration to fill the skill sets required.
Not one person in favour of the EU has said that they are opposed to continuing with unlimited immigration from the EU, apart from Prague who has conceded that I may have a point, that he hadn't previously considered.
Herein lies the biggest problem. If the EU were willing to reconsider their policies with some sensible flexibility, then many of these issues would go away.
My relatives in Plumstead live alongside all kinds of races with no problem, we have mixed race in our family. However, they think it is unfair that residents move in who happen to be immigrants and think its OK to leave unwanted mattresses and furniture in the street. My relatives call the council and pay for a collection if they have anything to dispose of, why doesn't everyone do the same?
If anyone gave this as an example of not observing British values you would be ridiculed by the intelligencia, but to ordinary people who have always lived a considerate peaceful and tolerant life who are experiencing disruption and devaluing of their living conditions by the behaviour of those simply not accustomed to living in ordered social conditions, it resonates with their feelings. It's not suggesting that British people can't also demonstrate the same behaviour, it is just that when those ignorant of our norms of behaviour are those from abroad and simply unaware, do we try and promote our norms or do we just accept that's what they do and we just accept it? UKIP are saying to these people we understand what you are experiencing and it is not racism to want higher standards of behaviour regardless of creed or race. Other parties are pretending all is sweetness and light frightened to slip up uttering any criticism of other creeds, but it doesn't resonate with those experiencing the everyday problems. Because you can't define something well doesn't mean you can't feel it and British values is a feeling some understand, not a definition on google.
However, they make many points that the other parties have refused to discuss for about 20 years and if they had UKIP would not exist.
I am not convinced that we should leave the EU, but their one rule for all, doesn't seem to work IMO.
We have people lining up to come here, whilst many EU countries have people leaving in droves. This should not be able to continue indefinitely imo. However, under EU rules it will continue indefinitely.
Also, things like a uniform interest rate doesn't work when one country is booming and another is in recession.
Yes the EU also holds many benefits. It is not black and white.
No, I'm no more clear on an adequate definition of British values than anyone else and wouldn't even attempt to define these. Surely, that's down to the politicians ? I agree UKIP should define British values.Certainly, it would aid discussion.
My point is though, that some people seem to be opposed to "British values" whether the phrase has been adequately defined or not.
Are The Germans opposed to German values ?
Are The French opposed to French values ?
Why are Brits opposed to British values ?
It's like "Victorian values" - totally meaningless. Or, at the very least, subject to complete misunderstanding. Does "Victorian values" mean "being part of a family" or "sending children up chimneys"?
Likewise, does "British values" mean "adhering to the rule of law"; or "being intolerant of foreigners"?
Until I know what it means, I don't know if I am for it or against it. And, for as long as Farage brandished the catch-all phrase around without determining what it means, I think it's a very dangerous, divisive and probably deliberate provocation.
And an example would be ?
2) A belief in the importance of queueing whenever possible
3) Discussing the weather is a useful conversation opener with someone you don't know well.
4) If there's an opportunity to take the piss out of friends or be facetious, then it will be taken
:-)