Are these people *seriously* thinking they could take in total strangers, people who may or may not even be able to speak English? You don't know who they are or what problems they might have. What about cultural differences?
We or rather the EU could build new garden cities, towns and villages complete with infrastructure. Just as the UK did after the second world war across the UK including in Scotland and just as the UK continued to do in another two phases and is planning to once again do by creating new garden cities in England complete with infrastructure. Across the UK 32 towns and 2 cities have been built since the second world war complete with infrastructure that now have a combined total population of over 2.7 million.
Scotland towns built after the second world war
1947 East Kilbride population 74,395
1948 Glenrothes population 39,277
1955 Cumbernauld population 49,664
1962 Livingston population 56,269
1966 Irvine population 39,527
Pray tell...........just where do you intend "storing" these refugees until all this great EU building is finished?
Are these people *seriously* thinking they could take in total strangers, people who may or may not even be able to speak English? You don't know who they are or what problems they might have.
As far as I'm concerned if these people are stupid enough to agree to take in migrants into their home, they can do it for all I care!
Well, as someone who lives in "the Berkshire" I can say with confidence, that spare land we have is used for farming, for making things and for water. There are also towns such as Hungerford, Newbury, Thatcham, Theale, Reading, Twyford (Berks), Maidenhead, Bracknell, Crowthorne, Wokingham, Windsor & Eaton, Ascot, and Slough.
These are pretty small towns except Newbury, Reading, Maidenhead and Wokingham and Slough so there isn't much room.
Why do you think England operates differently to Scotland?
Same with North Yorkshire. What are we going to do kill all the livestock and not grow crops anymore. I do despair at the lack of understanding of the countryside by so many in this country. I was brought up in South Lincolnshire where every scrap of land is now farmed. The land is ploughed right up to the roadside.
We or rather the EU could build new garden cities, towns and villages complete with infrastructure. Just as the UK did after the second world war across the UK including in Scotland and just as the UK continued to do in another two phases and is planning to once again do by creating new garden cities in England complete with infrastructure. Across the UK 32 towns and 2 cities have been built since the second world war complete with infrastructure that now have a combined total population of over 2.7 million.
Scotland towns built after the second world war
1947 East Kilbride population 74,395
1948 Glenrothes population 39,277
1955 Cumbernauld population 49,664
1962 Livingston population 56,269
1966 Irvine population 39,527
And the inhabitants of those new towns were people displaced from Glasgow and similar areas due to the necessary tearing down of masses of unfit Glasgow/Paisley homes and tenements. In other words, native Scots.
I'm an Irvine boy myself, so I know the history and the demographics of the town from then to now.
And Irvine wasn't a new town: it was and is an ancient town dating back to Roman times and before, on whose northern half was built the New Town part in the 60's. As a Glasgow overspill. Locals like myself know the streets that act as the before and after, the demarcation line between old Irvine and new Irvine.
Pray tell...........just where do you intend "storing" these refugees until all this great EU building is finished?
In refugee camps. There are huge refugee camps in Turkey, Jordan and Iraq. So if they are capable of setting up refugee camps the EU should be too. Alternatively or in addition people could volunteer to put people up or there could even be housing allocation as was done during the second world war, starting with empty properties.
Given the population of the EU is 503 million even millions of refugees are a small fraction of a percent increase. So the problem is not insurmountable.
As far as I'm concerned if these people are stupid enough to agree to take in migrants into their home, they can do it for all I care!
I agree, but they should also take on the role of sponsor just in case this arrangement doesn't work out. Don't want these so called refugees adding to the already over burdened public purse do we?.
Well, as someone who lives in "the Berkshire" I can say with confidence, that spare land we have is used for farming, for making things and for water. There are also towns such as Hungerford, Newbury, Thatcham, Theale, Reading, Twyford (Berks), Maidenhead, Bracknell, Crowthorne, Wokingham, Windsor & Eaton, Ascot, and Slough.
These are pretty small towns except Newbury, Reading, Maidenhead and Wokingham and Slough so there isn't much room.
Why do you think England operates differently to Scotland?
Indeed. The population of Berkshire doubled from the mid-1950s to 80s and has since more than doubled again. Converted studio flats in mid-range Maidenhead are around £600 a month to rent, 2 bed flats in reasonable condition start at about £1,000 a month. The arrival of Crossrail will hike these prices.
It is definitely a cheaper option for government to place refugees not living with Bob Geldof in those less dense areas of the UK where rents and building land prices are lower and the available housing stock is proportionately greater.
In refugee camps. There are huge refugee camps in Turkey, Jordan and Iraq. So if they are capable of setting up refugee camps the EU should be too. Alternatively or in addition people could volunteer to put people up or there could even be housing allocation as was done during the second world war, starting with empty properties.
Given the population of the EU is 503 million even millions of refugees are a small fraction of a percent increase. So the problem is not insurmountable.
Good luck with that - clearly you haven't been watching recent events.
Good luck with that - clearly you haven't been watching recent events.
Recent events have been Germany opening its borders laying on trains and welcoming refugees and saying they expect 800,000 refugees to arrive in Germany a single year. It would not be surprising of the EU minus those nations with opt outs came up with a common EU refugee policy. Possibly including joint recognition of refugee status and freedom of movement for refugees.
Recent events have been Germany opening its borders laying on trains and welcoming refugees and saying they expect 800,000 refugees to arrive in Germany a single year. It would not be surprising of the EU minus those nations with opt outs came up with a common EU refugee policy. Possibly including joint recognition of refugee status and freedom of movement for refugees.
And perhaps you can tell us how exactly Germany is going to cope with 800,000 people THIS YEAR? they don't seem to know yet. There will be trouble down the line when the migrants don't get everything they are expecting. They are people who "demand" and intimidate. They've got exactly what they wanted through acting illegally, rudely and u gratefully. I've just watched them on the news grabbing gifts from Germans and hardly giving eye contact or a smile let alone thanking them.
The way all the protests against immigrants and the fire bombings of hostels in Germany have been completely forgotten because there have been pictures of Germans greeting "migrants at the stations" is completely irresponsible.
I do wonder if this a Merkal version of the leftwing here "rubbing diversity in the faces of the rightwing"?
But she is so wrong if it is, Germans are not fundamentally tolerant and they are very arrogant.
Eventually the guilt over WW2 will be fogotten, and meanwhile large numbers of unwanted minority ethnic people have been placed in the country. The population of those who remember is falling.
There was a report linked here from German television about poor Germans literally being moved from very, very poor housing in order that it is demolished to build new for the migrants.
Nobody in the whole report from presenters to those affected was anything but ethnic German.
That simply wouldn't/couldn't happen here, no producer here would even consider that type of report on that type of issue without including some minority ethnic input.
I think Labour did the same here in that they opened the immigration flood-gates purely to spite the center and right wing. This wreckless behavoir has meant that primary schools are swamped, social housing is now impossible to come by and the burden on the benefits and health services is far to great.
Exactly dave. Good old dave with the facts as always. It's all about the money.
And i'll say it again to those who doubted me. Scotland is not capable of taking in thousands of migrants. Just because you look at our map and you see hundreds of miles of empty land doesn't mean we can take in more people. Our country works a certain way. That land is used for water and farming and making things and many other things and here in Glasgow it's just too busy as it is. There's just not enough houses and we don't have the money to build more houses.
England has always been very welcoming to visitors, especially London, a lot of them love London. What about the shires down in England. The Yorkshire, the Berkshire, the other ones too. There is lots of land there for building houses or thousands of caravans. Make one big huge caravan park. And Wales has lots of space too. I think this needs to be thought out.
So Scotland's too 'busy' and has lots of country but uses it, and needs more housing, but England and Wales can sort it out. If ever there was a NIMBY and I'm alright Jack statement, this is it. And some people wonder why the Scots aren't always universally popular!
Are the people joining the poll agreeing to house the deserting troops, sorry refugees, also going to feed and water them? Are they also going to pay for their health care and that of the inevitable multiple off-spring ? If so thats very noble of you, it a lttle naive
Are the people joining the poll agreeing to house the deserting troops, sorry refugees, also going to feed and water them? Are they also going to pay for their health care and that of the inevitable multiple off-spring ? If so thats very noble of you, it a lttle naive
Apparently not! I asked the same question and was told they would be RENTING these rooms and the govt would be paying. There was me thinking they were totally compassionate, caring people. I can't imagine inviting someone to stay and then charging them for it.
I signed Jim Nash's much more reasonable "Please control immigration appropriately" petition, but as yet the Government website hasn't given it the go-ahead. But despite the rather strong BNP-type wording on the petition you mention, why has no one actually heavily publicised it in the way the pro-immigration petition was promoted? In a supposedly balanced country how come everything has been really one sided?
Recent events have been Germany opening its borders laying on trains and welcoming refugees and saying they expect 800,000 refugees to arrive in Germany a single year. It would not be surprising of the EU minus those nations with opt outs came up with a common EU refugee policy. Possibly including joint recognition of refugee status and freedom of movement for refugees.
Or - on the other hand, recent events have been a daft move by the German Chancellor, declaring that Germany would accept these migrants, thus ensuring that none would stay in places made available (camps) in Hungary and refuse to register in any country other than Germany. So they have laid on trains.
Said Chancellor did so in the belief that she could then order each member nation of the EU to take a "quota" of these migrants whether they (the countries or the migrants) like it or not.
You know, can't quite put my finger on it, but there's something about Germany, Trains and Quotas ringing a bell.
She made the decision, she (and Germany) has to cope with the aftermath - time tell Ms Merkel to jog off.
We or rather the EU could build new garden cities, towns and villages complete with infrastructure. Just as the UK did after the second world war across the UK including in Scotland and just as the UK continued to do in another two phases and is planning to once again do by creating new garden cities in England complete with infrastructure. Across the UK 32 towns and 2 cities have been built since the second world war complete with infrastructure that now have a combined total population of over 2.7 million.
Scotland towns built after the second world war
1947 East Kilbride population 74,395
1948 Glenrothes population 39,277
1955 Cumbernauld population 49,664
1962 Livingston population 56,269
1966 Irvine population 39,527
They were all part of the slum clearance programmes that ran post war until almost the present day. The population of Cumbernauld and East Kilbride rose whilst the population of Glasgow dwindled. Part of the cost was deferred by the land in the inner cities which became available for redevelopment and the jobs that existed were transferred. Currently with the houses in sheds we are accruing the potential for the slums reappearing and we will have the whole thing to do all over again.
Transferring people within a country to a new development is by no means the same as creating new developments that will house people transferred from another country.
I signed Jim Nash's much more reasonable "Please control immigration appropriately" petition, but as yet the Government website hasn't given it the go-ahead. But despite the rather strong BNP-type wording on the petition you mention, why has no one actually heavily publicised it in the way the pro-immigration petition was promoted? In a supposedly balanced country how come everything has been really one sided?
I Will sign Jims as soon as its up and running. I wasn't keen on the wording of the main one but it is doing the trick for now.
Or - on the other hand, recent events have been a daft move by the German Chancellor, declaring that Germany would accept these migrants, thus ensuring that none would stay in places made available (camps) in Hungary and refuse to register in any country other than Germany. So they have laid on trains.
Said Chancellor did so in the belief that she could then order each member nation of the EU to take a "quota" of these migrants whether they (the countries or the migrants) like it or not.
You know, can't quite put my finger on it, but there's something about Germany, Trains and Quotas ringing a bell.
She made the decision, she (and Germany) has to cope with the aftermath - time tell Ms Merkel to jog off.
Merkel won't just 'jog off' but the in/out vote for Europe next year will be interesting.
There's no need to be so rude, I have been out and only just seen this reply.
Thank you.
The reason I asked was the reports of a falling population and labour shortage. Which, because of all the other reports about the UK and the population increase and reports about massive unemployment amongst youngsters in Europe, is hard to reconcile.
If Germany needs people, why doesn't it recruit within Europe?
Is that such an outrageous proposition?
Isn't that the point of the free movement rules?
There's no need to be so rude, I have been out and only just seen this reply.
Thank you.
The reason I asked was the reports of a falling population and labour shortage. Which, because of all the other reports about the UK and the population increase and reports about massive unemployment amongst youngsters in Europe, is hard to reconcile.
If Germany needs people, why doesn't it recruit within Europe?
Is that such an outrageous proposition?
Isn't that the point of the free movement rules?
Good Question. You would think that the Eastern Europeans that are coming here would be more than welcome there and probably closer culturally.
Comments
This.
Pray tell...........just where do you intend "storing" these refugees until all this great EU building is finished?
As far as I'm concerned if these people are stupid enough to agree to take in migrants into their home, they can do it for all I care!
Same with North Yorkshire. What are we going to do kill all the livestock and not grow crops anymore. I do despair at the lack of understanding of the countryside by so many in this country. I was brought up in South Lincolnshire where every scrap of land is now farmed. The land is ploughed right up to the roadside.
And the inhabitants of those new towns were people displaced from Glasgow and similar areas due to the necessary tearing down of masses of unfit Glasgow/Paisley homes and tenements. In other words, native Scots.
I'm an Irvine boy myself, so I know the history and the demographics of the town from then to now.
And Irvine wasn't a new town: it was and is an ancient town dating back to Roman times and before, on whose northern half was built the New Town part in the 60's. As a Glasgow overspill. Locals like myself know the streets that act as the before and after, the demarcation line between old Irvine and new Irvine.
Given the population of the EU is 503 million even millions of refugees are a small fraction of a percent increase. So the problem is not insurmountable.
I agree, but they should also take on the role of sponsor just in case this arrangement doesn't work out. Don't want these so called refugees adding to the already over burdened public purse do we?.
Indeed. The population of Berkshire doubled from the mid-1950s to 80s and has since more than doubled again. Converted studio flats in mid-range Maidenhead are around £600 a month to rent, 2 bed flats in reasonable condition start at about £1,000 a month. The arrival of Crossrail will hike these prices.
It is definitely a cheaper option for government to place refugees not living with Bob Geldof in those less dense areas of the UK where rents and building land prices are lower and the available housing stock is proportionately greater.
Good luck with that - clearly you haven't been watching recent events.
And perhaps you can tell us how exactly Germany is going to cope with 800,000 people THIS YEAR? they don't seem to know yet. There will be trouble down the line when the migrants don't get everything they are expecting. They are people who "demand" and intimidate. They've got exactly what they wanted through acting illegally, rudely and u gratefully. I've just watched them on the news grabbing gifts from Germans and hardly giving eye contact or a smile let alone thanking them.
I think Labour did the same here in that they opened the immigration flood-gates purely to spite the center and right wing. This wreckless behavoir has meant that primary schools are swamped, social housing is now impossible to come by and the burden on the benefits and health services is far to great.
Merkel is behaving as if she is insane.
So Scotland's too 'busy' and has lots of country but uses it, and needs more housing, but England and Wales can sort it out. If ever there was a NIMBY and I'm alright Jack statement, this is it. And some people wonder why the Scots aren't always universally popular!
Getting on towards 76,000 now
Apparently not! I asked the same question and was told they would be RENTING these rooms and the govt would be paying. There was me thinking they were totally compassionate, caring people. I can't imagine inviting someone to stay and then charging them for it.
I signed Jim Nash's much more reasonable "Please control immigration appropriately" petition, but as yet the Government website hasn't given it the go-ahead. But despite the rather strong BNP-type wording on the petition you mention, why has no one actually heavily publicised it in the way the pro-immigration petition was promoted? In a supposedly balanced country how come everything has been really one sided?
Or - on the other hand, recent events have been a daft move by the German Chancellor, declaring that Germany would accept these migrants, thus ensuring that none would stay in places made available (camps) in Hungary and refuse to register in any country other than Germany. So they have laid on trains.
Said Chancellor did so in the belief that she could then order each member nation of the EU to take a "quota" of these migrants whether they (the countries or the migrants) like it or not.
You know, can't quite put my finger on it, but there's something about Germany, Trains and Quotas ringing a bell.
She made the decision, she (and Germany) has to cope with the aftermath - time tell Ms Merkel to jog off.
They were all part of the slum clearance programmes that ran post war until almost the present day. The population of Cumbernauld and East Kilbride rose whilst the population of Glasgow dwindled. Part of the cost was deferred by the land in the inner cities which became available for redevelopment and the jobs that existed were transferred. Currently with the houses in sheds we are accruing the potential for the slums reappearing and we will have the whole thing to do all over again.
Transferring people within a country to a new development is by no means the same as creating new developments that will house people transferred from another country.
I Will sign Jims as soon as its up and running. I wasn't keen on the wording of the main one but it is doing the trick for now.
Merkel won't just 'jog off' but the in/out vote for Europe next year will be interesting.
This one's catching up too. 49,000 now
https://www.change.org/p/uk-government-swap-katie-hopkins-for-50-000-refugees
There's no need to be so rude, I have been out and only just seen this reply.
Thank you.
The reason I asked was the reports of a falling population and labour shortage. Which, because of all the other reports about the UK and the population increase and reports about massive unemployment amongst youngsters in Europe, is hard to reconcile.
If Germany needs people, why doesn't it recruit within Europe?
Is that such an outrageous proposition?
Isn't that the point of the free movement rules?
Good Question. You would think that the Eastern Europeans that are coming here would be more than welcome there and probably closer culturally.