Monday, December 23, 2013

. @RichardKing633 of UKIP Ilford may wish to note …

Richard King of Ilford UKIP had a letter published in the Ilford Recorder last week (19th December), left, in which he bemoans “the EU freedom of movement laws which are responsible for undefined, unplanned and uncontrolled immigation into Britain from [other] EU countries”.
He may wish to note, or maybe not, that the EU country with the highest number of its citizens living abroad is…….. the United Kingdom. Source United Nations, see below.
Of course, judging by Richard’s Twitter timeline, he may well dismiss these figures as being part of a Bilderberg or Agenda 21 conspiracy of mis-information, but what he cannot deny is that his stated policy will remove the current right of UK citizens to live, and find work, wherever they damn well please within the European Union.

37 comments:

  1. Lol. UK citizens + those from European and other countries have been living+working wherever they choose long before the EU freedom of movement came into existence, and this will continue for the benefit of all concerned long after the EU political super state has been forgotten and consigned to the mistakes bin of history ;) We do not need permission from an EU super state to live and work in another country ... just permission from the country concerned and the skills to pass the job interview ... But what we do need are the controls to protect our vulnerable citizens and millions of unemployed from the unsustainable pressure of UNCONTROLLED EU migration :) Just common sense really. UKIP are the only party committed to leaving the EU and having a sensible common sense CONTROLELD immigration policy which will benefit and protect all the people who live in the UK. Richard King, UKIP Ilford action group. www.ukip.org

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's very interesting Richard,
      If, as you say, there was no difference before we had freedom of movement within the EU, and there will be no difference after we [leave the EU] cease to have freedom of movement within the EU, then what exactly is your problem with something, that according to you, makes no difference at all?

      Delete
    2. Richard,
      If you are going to follow B21 on Twitter and comment here, be sure to wear your tin foil hat to protect against Agenda 21 conspiracy mind rays.

      Delete
    3. Of course there is a difference between a controlled immigration policy and the current UNCONTROLLED immigration policy imposed by the EU freedom of movement laws.
      Most of the 160 non-EU countries in the world have sensible CONTROLLED immigration policies (and so did Britain before). It's just common sense so a country can plan how to deliver efficient services to its people. I assume you understand the difference between "controlled" and "uncontrolled" ? A bit like the difference between a "good" idea and a "bad" idea :)

      Delete
    4. Yes, I do understand the difference between "controlled" and "uncontrolled". For example, comments here on this blog are controlled (moderated) and apart from spam and trolls there are very few that do not get published. On our Facebook Page comments are uncontrolled which is why you have been banned from there.
      Control is about limiting what people are allowed to do. It places restrictions on their activities. For example Health & Safety, legislation on employment, discrimination and equality and building regulations. Ah now there's a word, regulations, something your party calls "red tape" imposed upon us by the EU and wants rid of. But back to the point, if you want to control immigration from the EU, and as I have said on Twitter you are perfectly entitled to seek election on that platform, then you automatically control emigration and restrict the movement of UK citizens to the EU, which you don't seem to understand or recognise.

      Delete
    5. Thank you for BANNING ME from your Facebook, page and deleting my replies which were made in good faith in reply to the comment you made on my article in the Ilford Recorder. Non of my comments were rude or offensive, but simply expressed a different opinion.
      It is sad that you do not have more conviction in the veracity of your Agenda 21 position. If so, you would have had the confidence expose your ideas + manifesto to wider public discussion and critique... but obviously not. It does expose the weakness of the whole Agenda 21 position + the EU attempts to take over and control every aspect of our lives ... which is clearly NOT in the interests of our British national sovereign democracy. Democracy is the only civilised way we have to ensure our liberty.
      I hope you find the strength to publish this but suspect not :)

      Delete
    6. Richard,
      Far be it for me to point out to the readers here that it was you who unfriended me on Facebook earlier in the summer after I exposed some of your over-capitalised froth to some actual evidence on your timeline and in front of all your Ukipper friends. But we’ll leave that one aside for now.

      What I am doing here, let’s see if you can recognise it, is controlling incoming comments to B21s internet spaces until they can be vetted and issued a read permit, just like you want to control incoming people to your space, the UK. The only difference is that I have the power to implement my policy and you don’t, as yet. See our comments policy above just below the header bar.

      I must also dismiss your paranoid delusions by pointing out that all your comments, bar one, are published here on this blog where the readership and traffic is far greater than on our Facebook page. Plus I did not see the point of having to respond to your drivel in two places. The link from the Facebook page to this post and its comments, including yours, is still there.

      The hidden (not deleted) comment on Facebook which has not been published here is a link to a rather lengthy video which I have not, as yet had a chance to view – it is Christmas you know. When I have had the time to view it, and critique it, I will publish it here, or I may if it’s really potty devote a new post to it.

      I am rather pleased that you advocate democracy and liberty (freedom?) but still do not understand how you can complain that the “EU controls every aspect of our lives” while your primary objection to the EU appears to be its lack of control on freedom of movement, or how you square your abhorrence for controlling our lives with the controls proposed by a potential UKIP government?

      Delete
    7. I have read your "Comments Policy" and support it wholeheartedly :)
      At the core of UKIP's manifesto is its support for national British democracy and the right of voters to have their own sovereign Parliament to make all our own laws. This system, developed over a thousand years and exported to most other genuine democracies, enables the electorate to choose their own lawmakers (MPs) and gives them the right every few years to vote out the whole lot and elect a new group if their rulers get too arrogant, corrupt or enact policies which the voters consider against their interests.
      This is not how the EU parliamentary system works. British voters control 100% of the seats in the UK Parliament but the British electorate control less than 10% of the seats in the EU parliament. The EU and it’s parliament is now so large that British voters no longer have any direct control over the laws that are being made, and which we must obey. Voters have lost the ability to kick out these new EU rulers who live in Brussels. British sovereignty has been given away to the EU and we are now ruled by a remote group of foreign politicians over which we have no practical control.
      The EU system is also called “democracy” but is so in name only. It now makes no difference whether we British voters choose Conservative, Labour or Lib-Dem on our ballot ticket since it is the EU parliament makes our most important laws. Our powerless British Parliament merely rubber stamps the legislation and laws which have already been decided by the EU in Brussels. The EU Freedom of Movement (or EU open borders) is just one of these critical laws which we are forced to obey, but other EU legislation includes the European Convention on Human Rights, Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), Common Fisheries Policy, EU Arrest Warrant, EU Working Time, EU Carbon Emissions and every other aspect of our lives covering health care, police, finance and banking, industrial development, pensions, benefits, tax rates, etc. These EU laws have been written to benefit “the EU” and usually one or two specific nations (e.g. the CAP and France); many EU laws are against the interests and prosperity of Britain. UKIP agrees we need laws and regulations in all these areas but believes that all our law should be made by the UK Parliament elected by British voters, not made by unknown foreign politicians in Brussels in the interest of other nations.
      The EU’s intrinsic lack of democracy is structural and will only get worse as it continues to expand. It is already obvious to the citizens of many different EU states (such as Greece, Spain, Ireland, Italy, Portugal) that they no longer have the ability to govern themselves and are forced to follow the collective will of the EU state though the imposition of austerity and central command. History (European history in particular) has shown that centralising so much power in an unelected council of elites always ends in violence and disaster.
      The only solution is to the leave the EU. Britain does not need to be in a political union where we must all obey identical laws. Friendly democratic nations will make alliances and trade and prosper, and make their own laws. Nations can follow their own democratic paths based on the needs of their own society, cultures, religions and economic strengths.
      The EU path leads to ever less democracy and consequently to disaster!

      Delete
    8. So, WTF did we (I use the term loosely) elect UKIP MEPs for?

      “The EU’s intrinsic lack of democracy is structural and will only get worse as it continues to expand.”

      One could write a similar dissertation on the Union of Nations known as the UK. Where for several hundred years the people of Scotland, Cornwall, Northumberland, Wales and Northern Ireland etc have had to put up with Westminster (read Brussels) governments passing laws that they did not vote for. And as of recent developments the people of England have had the Midlothian question.

      All these people, along with Ireland (as part of the separation agreement), have had freedom of movement within UK borders for 100s of years.

      Did this cause any problems?

      (B&B vacancies – No Irish)

      Delete
    9. That's exactly why nations have evolved through history to be the size they are (all different), but the principal is well understood and generally agreed ... As you make any democratic electoral constituency larger it becomes less democratic and less accountable to local people and local issues. If the electoral constituency was the world we would probably all be following Chinese or Indo/Chinese law ... As the EU expands and grows British influence on law making recedes and we are forced to follow the laws made by foreigners. This way is not the LOCAL democracy that UKIP support. Nation states must be independent and make their own laws. Common sense. The UKIP way :)

      Delete
    10. And what of International Law, standards and protocols? Without which our global air and maritime transport systems would not work. How would trade fair?

      What we need is a system where laws and decisions are made at the lowest practical level, which btw is Green Party Policy. We have an Assembly for London wide issues, a government for national issues and the EU for continental issues. For global issues we have the UN and “summits”. Admittedly it doesn’t work too well at the moment and the EU needs major reform (also GP policy) but in terms of human evolution democracy has only just been born. Let’s not throw the baby out with the bath water eh?

      Delete
    11. Britain was supporting and formulating international law long before the autocratic EU came along. Britain was involved setting up the League of Nations after WW1 and subsequently the United Nations after WW2, but these bodies are not political unions like the EU. Members of the UN do not follow the same national laws. They have not ceded sovereignty to the UN.
      Your hierarchy of government might work if the EU stuck to CONTINENTAL issues ... but it doesn't. It is busy making 1000s of national laws and regulation which directly affect and overrule national and local lawmakers.
      You say "Admittedly it (the EU) doesn’t work too well at the moment and the EU needs major reform". Reform? You cannot reform a club where the other members love it just like it is, and you have less than 10% of the voting rights. The other members love it (not because it is good for Britain) but because they are either in charge making all the laws (like Germany) and getting very rich on it, or think they are in charge (like France), or they are receiving huge net contributions and subsidies to prop up their bust economies (like Greece, Spain, Italy, Ireland, Portugal), or they are receiving huge infrastructure grants (like all the new members) which often just enrich local politicians, so not surprising they all like the EU club. Unfortunately for us the UK situation is different. Britain pays in £55 million every single day to be in this corrupt club and for what? What benefits does Britain get? We don’t need to be in the EU political union to trade with the EU, or to work there, or to recruit workers from there. We have been doing this for decades long before the EU came along. There are 160 other non-EU countries in the world that are quite happily and prosperously trading with the EU without being a member. We must leave the EU and join them to regain our prosperity and democratic freedom as soon as possible.

      Delete
    12. Well Richard, we certainly would not be able to reform the EU from the outside.

      And neither has the UK given up its sovereignty to the EU.

      Britain, specifically Churchill, was also instrumental in setting up the European Court of Human Rights, which is based on British law, long before the EU or Common Market was formed. According to the video you posted earlier your party, UKIP, would withdraw from the ECHR. Since the ECHR is based on British Law you are going to be very busy in your first parliament removing all those nasty laws from the UK statute book. In other words a pointless soundbite that panders to far right xenophobes.

      I can’t remember who said this: “5,000 years of civilisation cannot override 5,000,000 years of evolution”. As I said, we humans are only just beginning this latest development. We need to nurture it and allow it to flourish. It’s not perfect, nothing ever is, but it won’t get any better if we bury our heads in the sand.

      See comment on other thread re trade.

      Delete
  2. This is very interesting but it doesn't break the figures down, for example it doesn't tell us how many of those born in the UK and living elsewhere, or born elsewhere and subsequently being granted UK citizenship, have actually returned to their parents' county of origin. It is not uncommon for people of West Indian descent to retire to the West Indies. Our neighbours have recently returned to Sri Lanka after living in the UK for over 30 years. As usual, statistics only give us a part of the picture.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hello Patsy,
      The thing about computers is that they are very much like a man's shed - you know the widget you want is in there but you just can't find it.
      There was another graphic [a map] showing the number of UK citizens living in other EU countries. If I remember correctly there was over a million in Spain, just short of a million in France with smaller numbers dotted around the other countries.

      Delete
    2. Far be it from me to delve into the contents of a man's shed.

      It would be helpful for the discussion to know how many UK citizens are living and working in the US, Australia etc.

      A few years before the UK joined what was then sold to us as the Common Market, a free tade area rather than a political federation, I worked for a year in France as part of my University course. It couldn't have been simpler - a visit to the French Embassy with the letter containing the job offer, and the visa was stamped into my passport.

      I have no truck with complaints about EU migrants taking work from our citizens. The real problem is with employers who pay less than a living wage and rely on incomers, who are prepared to live in conditions which most UK citizens abandoned soon after WW2, or UK workers who can make up the difference with tax credits, housing benefit etc., ensuring that taxpayers provide a subsidy to business.

      If I lived in a village in Gloucestershire, I and mine would probably be unaffectd by migration levels into the UK. However, living in London which is a magnet for all, I am concerned about the pressure on maternity services, school places, access to the NHS and housing.

      Delete
  3. Richard F King says " UKIP are the only party committed to leaving the EU" but surely Nigel Farrage has openly stated that UKIP are quite happy for the UK to remain in the EU, subject to renegotiation of our terms of membership to suit UKIP ...?

    Of course, whether such renegotiation is practical or even possible is a different matter ...

    It would help UKIP's cause if they all sang from the same hymn sheet ...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's Mr Cameron who thinks + pretends he can Re-negotiate with the EU NOT Nigel Farage. UKIP understand that the main EU members like their club just the way it is and that re-negotiation is impossible, and the EU have said so.

      Delete
  4. judging by the piece in the daily mail today its easier to get into England if you want to cream off the benefits money than it is to be a garlic trying to get in to england

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Far from being "benefit tourists", migrants contribute far more in taxes than they receive in welfare payments and public services. Of the 5.5 million people claiming working age benefits in February 2011, just 371,000 (6.4 per cent) were foreign nationals when they first arrived in the UK, meaning only 6.6 per cent of those born abroad receive benefits, compared to 16.6 per cent of UK nationals."

      http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2013/12/uk-wont-become-europes-biggest-economy-if-we-slash-immigration

      Delete
    2. UKIP will implement a sensible common sense CONTROLLED immigration policy (like we used to have in Britain). Uncontrolled immigration puts UNCONTROLLED pressure on our essential services. It is totally irresponsible for our Government to allow unknown, undefined, unplanned immigration into Britain. Britain needs immigration but it must be controlled, not an open borders free for all.
      Of course more migrants means more tax revenues and an increase in overall GDP, but the quality of people’s lives is not measured by GDP or tax revenues. GDP only measures the QUANTITY of things. People don’t care about GDP. People care about their jobs and wages and the quality of services, standard of care, waiting times in their hospitals, schools, housing, welfare, police, transport. If we doubled the UK population we would have much higher GDP and tax revenues but is anyone seriously suggesting that would increase the quality of life for our communities? UKIP is the only mainstream UK party committed to a sensible CONTROLLED common sense immigration policy.

      Delete
    3. Richard, the trouble with the "broken record" technique is that it loses traction every time you repeat it. You need to move on to "Fogging" oh you've already done that, "Negative inquiry", "Negative Assertion" and "I statements" ...

      Delete
  5. Get your UKIP Advent Calendar here
    http://action2014.org/

    ReplyDelete
  6. Another aspect of Richard King's letter is that UKIP Ilford “plans to ensure that everyone in Redbridge has the opportunity to vote for UKIP in the May local elections”.

    Those Redbridge residents who happen to be female may wish to consider that this may well be their last chance to do so if we extrapolate UKIPs regressive agenda towards women, viz:

    - Opposed to equal pay for women
    - Scrap maternity pay for women
    - Legalise discrimination based on gender

    The natural follow-on to such policies is surely to remove votes for women altogether and return to a 19th Century state of Great Britain, Empire and the workhouse.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Deliberate misrepresentation of alternative policies seems common place these days amongst the 3 old parties, and appears to have replaced the old skills of policy debate (which I guess is not surprising since all 3 party’s policies are so similar and are reading from the same pro-EU policy documents by which they are bound). UKIP believes women are strong enough to stand up for themselves in today’s world and generally do not need positive discrimination and patronising gender quotas to succeed. Many of the EU directives on women, gender and maternity issues may have been drafted for good reasons but have in practice had a terrible effect. Many small companies are now increasing LESS likely to take on women because of the numerous and complex EU directives. This has resulted in fewer opportunities for women. Likewise the EU working time directive has crippled the ability of many companies and organisations (such as the NHS) to effectively manage their work force. The EU arrest warrant was intended to allow criminals and terrorists to be extradited (powers which already existed for most countries) but in practice means that UK citizens can be arrested and deported to a foreign country (e.g. Greece) on the say so of a foreign magistrate, without any reference or hearing in a UK court or recourse to British justice. These are all examples of the Law of Consequences where good meaning people draft legislation which ends up adversely affecting the very people it was intended to help. The EU is a real factory of such legislation. UKIP fully support the rights of women, and women in the workplace. Childish corollaries and references to removing women’s vote are best left in the dreams of the real misogynists :)

      Delete
    2. So, women are fine so long as they stay in the kitchen and don't disrupt the real world with their PMT and babies ... keep digging Richard.

      Delete
    3. Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz......................

      Delete
  7. Can I ask Richard what plans UKIP have to re-generate places like Swindon and Sunderland when the Japanese car industry moves to Portugal or wherever after the UK leaves the EU. When senior Japanese executives were recently asked if they would stay in a non-EU UK (which would mean the UK would be subject to import tarrifs into Europe), they replied simply "Why would we want to?)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Portly One,
      Richard's reply is on his public Facebook page < Click

      Delete
  8. I confess to having flirted mentally with voting UKIP next May. However, the more I see of speeches made by their Leader the more he reminds me of speeches made in Munich and Nuremberg during the 1930s.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Why can't we get our heads around the fact that the only issue most people have with the EU, apart from the moans and groans we all have about whoever is governing us, is the influx of people from Eastern Europe. You can repeat until you are blue in the face all the statistics about how much the newcomers pay in tax, how few benefits they claim and how hard they work, the fact remains that many people feel threatened by the arrival of so many people in so short a time. Without this, UKIP would be flogging a dead horse. Very few people feel strongly enough about all the other EU policies to actually vote to leave. And may I remind you that, however tolerant you personally may be, however anxious you are to welcome people from Eastern Europe as a boost to the UK economy, you and I and readers of, and contributors to, this blog are unlikely to be representative of the population at large in a country where the bestselling newspapers are not the Guardian and the Independent but the Sun and the Daily Mail.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Judging by the reaction on Facebook to Nigel's suggestion that we should accept Syrian refugees I'm not sure that it is just Eastern Europeans that the Sun and DM readers don't like ...

      https://www.facebook.com/TheUKIP/posts/686810481340845

      Delete
    2. Oh do keep up B21. Nigel reassures UKIP supporters that he is a bigot.
      Christians only: Nigel Farage drops Syrian refugee call
      http://www.politics.co.uk/news/2013/12/30/christians-only-nigel-farage-drops-syrian-refugee-call

      Delete
    3. UKIP Leader Nigel Farage MEP on the Syrian refugees, Jeremy Vine, BBC Radio 2, 30.12.13
      DON'T READ THE TWISTED REPORTS AND MIS-TRUTHS, LISTEN TO THE ACTUAL RADIO BROADCAST.
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wXg2JY-9-5c

      Delete
    4. Yes readers, do listen to the actual broadcast and make your own judgement.

      Delete
  10. Could B21 please explain why, contrary to stated editorial policy, Richard King is apparently being permitted to turn this blog into a party political platform?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well, Morris. He is not “astroturfing” as he is not hiding his affiliation. We do allow political comment and debate, but I agree that his highly repetitive contributions have now developed to the point where they are tedious, possibly trolling, and other unpublished (and offensive) comments have also made that point. I have, however, rather enjoyed the opportunity to expose the “mis-truths and lies” spread by such people about Agenda 21 and also draw out the truth about UKIP. I think it is now time to call it a day and move on. He has his own Facebook page to play with.

      Ironic, isn’t it, that Barkingside 21 has controlled borders for comments. We welcome those who are prepared to make a positive contribution as opposed to those who just want to freeload on our hospitality.

      Delete