|
22 Jun 15 - 01:32 PM (#3718263) Subject: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: GUEST,Kampervan So, we recruit nurses from outside the EU cos we're desperately short of nurses, we pay them as little as we can get away with then, after 6 years, we kick them out cos they're not earning more than £35,000. So we recruit nurses from outside the EU cos we're.............!! What sort of idiots think that this is a good way to tackle immigration? |
|
22 Jun 15 - 01:47 PM (#3718266) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: GUEST,# Read up on the Canadian 'Temporary Foreign Workers' program. BTW, we have a Conservative government. |
|
22 Jun 15 - 01:49 PM (#3718267) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: Jim Carroll Cutting one's nose off to keep England safe for Little Englanders Details from this mornings Times JIm Carroll Immigration rules will leave UK short of nurses Kat Lay Health Correspondent Thousands of foreign nurses working in Britain face deportation because of changes to immigration rules, wasting millions of pounds spent to recruit them and intensifying a severe short¬age of nursing staff, a report warns. Research from the Royal College of Nursing shows that 3, 365 nurses now working in Britain, recruited at a cost of £20.19 million, could be forced to leave from 2017. People from outside the European Economic Area must now be earning £35, 000 or more before they are allowed to stay in the UK beyond six years, a sum far beyond the salary most nurses will reach in that time. The college fears that if nursing shortages force hospitals to recruit more from overseas, by 2020 there could be almost 30, 000 nurses in the same position, employed at a cost of almost £180 million. Peter Carter, chief executive and general secretary of the RCN, said: "The rules for healthcare workers will cause chaos for the NHS and other care services. At a time when demand is in¬creasing, the UK is perversely making it harder to employ staff from overseas.. "The NHS has spent millions hiring nurses from overseas in order to provide safe staffing levels. These rules will mean that money has just been thrown down the drain. " He said it was illogical to lose their skills and knowledge, and have to recruit replacements, adding: "Without a change to these immigration rules the NHS will continue to pay millions of pounds temporarily to rent nurses from overseas. " FGM |
|
22 Jun 15 - 01:58 PM (#3718272) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: GUEST,achmelvich yet more evidence that those in power in this country are just having a laugh at us while trashing the place |
|
22 Jun 15 - 02:23 PM (#3718274) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: akenaton The point is, they should be cutting down on immigration from inside the EU and keeping the nurses from ex commonwealth countries. They should also be training or own young unemployed people.......but in the first instance, THEY CAN@T and in the second instance THEY WON'T |
|
22 Jun 15 - 02:33 PM (#3718277) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: Jim Carroll "The point is, they should be cutting down on immigration from inside the EU and keeping the nurses from ex commonwealth countries." Why - on second thoughts, don't bother - I already know. THe commonwealth immigrants come cheaper and are not as well organised. If there is a shortage, as there obviously is, if Britain wasin any way progressive (nearly wrote "liberal" there - silly me!) it shouldn't matter a toss where they come from - it doesn't to most human beings. Jim Carroll |
|
22 Jun 15 - 02:38 PM (#3718278) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link you would have thought that if they spend a fortune from overseas to recruit, that the money might have been spent on training uk unemployed. might it be that not enough uk unemployed want to train to be nurses ?. |
|
22 Jun 15 - 03:02 PM (#3718285) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: Jim Carroll THere is a shortage now - why on earth should where the nurse come from matter? The idea of trawling the job centres for applicants is ludicrous the situation now Jim Carroll |
|
22 Jun 15 - 03:29 PM (#3718289) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: DMcG Pete: it was reported today that roughly half the people who applied for training places had to be refused because there are insufficient. I grow weary of constant claims the unemployed don't want to work.I am sure there are some but there are many I know who are highly educated but cannot find a place |
|
22 Jun 15 - 03:37 PM (#3718291) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: Keith A of Hertford The foreign nurses in my experience have been lovely, dedicated and hard working professionals. It does seem wrong to send them away after they have settled. Even more wrong was the policy to steal nurses trained at the expense of poor countries, just because it is cheaper than training our own people. |
|
22 Jun 15 - 03:38 PM (#3718292) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: DMcG I was cut short somehow. I know of some who searched for years here then found positions abroad. That does not fit these "work shy" claims in my view |
|
22 Jun 15 - 03:50 PM (#3718295) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: GUEST why on earth should where the nurse come from matter From the perspective of a patient or service provider I don't see why it should matter. However, I think we (the public) should have acccess to a very clear statement as to why the policy is to rely on nurses from abroad rather than train enough of our own. We can't change the past, and I am fairly pro-EU, but it niggles that, as an ex colonial power, we cannot give a better deal to residents of the Commonwealth. |
|
22 Jun 15 - 03:54 PM (#3718296) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: GUEST,03:50 (agreeing with Keith for a change) If we are trying to save money we could pay to train them at home and make sure we train more than we hire here. Both economies gain. |
|
22 Jun 15 - 04:25 PM (#3718300) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: Richard Bridge It is also offensive to deport only those who have failed to achieve an income of £35,000 or more. Perhaps if fewer people were greedy we might have a better society - but the con-servatives respect only the rich. |
|
22 Jun 15 - 04:28 PM (#3718301) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: Jack Campin There will be even more carers in nursing homes in that position than there are nurses. I could name half a dozen I know personally. And care staff NEVER earn as much as 35,000 pounds, even after a lifetime career. Mass deportations like that will devastate care for the elderly. |
|
22 Jun 15 - 04:28 PM (#3718302) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: GUEST,03:50 On further thought, a six-year rule could be a perfectly good way of giving the opportunity for some decent money and experience to go home with. The problem being poor NHS planning. |
|
22 Jun 15 - 04:32 PM (#3718304) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: Richard Bridge PS - the logical problem with suggestions to stop recruiting foreign nurses and train more "English" ones is that it takes between three and five years to qualify as a nurse: - http://www.nhscareers.nhs.uk/explore-by-career/nursing/training-to-be-a-nurse/ So there would be a three to five year period during which there would be far too few nurses. Of course a government trying to do anything other than cut expenditure might decide to spend the money on the training while still recruiting, and reduce recruitment as qualification numbers rose, so that natural wastage in numbers would be filled by the new recruits. |
|
22 Jun 15 - 07:48 PM (#3718330) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: Jim Carroll "I know who are highly educated but cannot find a place" Perhaps they don't fancy wiping arses and emptying bedpan during abominable shift hours for crap wages. Doesn't seem to have occurred to too many people not put in the position. Work is a means of feeding your family, nothing more, for most people - if the wages on offer don't fit the bill (literally), it's little more than slavery to force people to do it - it's a rotten hobby if you don't enjoy it. Jim Carroll |
|
22 Jun 15 - 07:50 PM (#3718332) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: McGrath of Harlow The median annual wage for Registered Nurses is £23,026. That means 50% get less than half that. None of them get anywhere near £35,000. 90% get less than £31,000. The fact that this is a vicious and stupid policy won't get the Tories to drop it, obviously. And right now they won't be worried about making people hate and despise them. But maybe in two years after their 12 vote majority has been whittled down a bit and this is supposed to take effect they might get cold feet. Without Filipino nurses I reckon I'd have died a couple of years ago. None of them will be getting paid anything like £35,000. |
|
23 Jun 15 - 03:26 AM (#3718370) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: GUEST,Cookie crumbleth The logic is from the government that has promised 5,000 more nurses and 5,000 more doctors.... Despite that planning for training for nursing has to be five years ahead of need and doctors between eight years (the very quickest time from uni to quickest training completion, (GP and histopathologist) to fifteen years (cardiovascular surgeons and certain sub speciality.) The somewhat good news being that you still get doctors and nurses during that time, and 70% of hospital doctors are still in some form of training (foundation, core and registrar) but it cannot be sorted at the drop of a hat. Nurses are the real issue here, and also some semi skilled healthcare workers, especially the healthcare assistants we perceive as nurses anyway. But also some allied healthcare professionals such as physios, speech & language etc. When the nursing trade union, for genuine good intent, forced through making nursing a graduate profession, nursing degrees were suddenly on the table. It is known that academically, these are the least difficult to attain, although on the job work is a large part of it, and it isn't easy in that way. Yet the attrition rate is high. Why? Well one reason is that nursing is promoted as a way to get a degree without the tuition fees rather than as a vocational career. Many leave after graduation. McMusket has recently returned from India and Pakistan on behalf of a Scottish government incentive to try to fill doc vacancies. Meanwhile, our education system simply cannot produce candidates of sufficient numbers for the extremely hard medical school journey, which precludes many would be docs and many nurses no longer have the vocational impetus. The many who do meanwhile are underpaid, undervalued and subjected to protocol led work that strips them of their ability to use their training and common sense. Still. That isn't a UK exclusive problem. The lack of joined up thinking between Home Office and Dept of Health is. And it is a real one. |
|
23 Jun 15 - 05:18 AM (#3718380) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: Richard Bridge Ah, I see the post eater is active again. The top of the band 6 pay scale for nurses fails to reach the requisite £35,000 pa. |
|
23 Jun 15 - 04:12 PM (#3718547) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: GUEST,Some Musket or other Just a word of caution Bridge. If you class a nurse by their hands on work, then most nurses are indeed nurses. Including those in charge of wards (known as sisters or equivalent) who are usually band 7 or matrons (or equivalent) on band 8 a, b or c depending on management / workload. Ironically, due to bank and shortage of nurses, most nurses, at the risk of any form of social or family life, work much longer than the 37 hours per week the AFC bands are calculated on. The catch 22 here is that if numbers increase, overtime falls and the numbers if nurses whose family budgets rely on regular overtime are staggering according to successive polls and surveys by Nursing Times and RCN. The answer? Dunno. But patient safety alone precluded carrying on as they have to at present. A proper rather than as done at present look at how work is carried out, duties of particular grades and stopping upskilling nurses to be cheap de skilled doctors would be a start. |
|
23 Jun 15 - 05:09 PM (#3718560) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: Vic Smith I have seen at first hand recruiting teams from the NHS (and from other European countries) in action in The Gambia, offering wages which are not good by our standards but when expressed in the local currency seem like impossible riches to the Gambians. The cost of living in Europe is not expressed properly so the nurses leave - and deprive one of the poorest countries in the world of their much needed medical staff. These nurses have been trained at the expense of a third world country which no longer benefits from its investment in human resources. The situation is worse with doctors in The Gambia. Most of them qualify in Europe, America and India. Very few return after qualification. On my regular visits to The Gambia over the years, I have had occasion to go to the M.R.C. (Medical Research Centre) on a number of occasions. Each time I have been seen by a Cuban doctor. I asked why all the doctors in the Gambia seem to be Cuban. The answer runs something like this - When you go for an interview for a doctor's post in Cuba, the questions that the interview panel will ask you will always be the same and one will be 'where have you worked since qualifying?' If the answer does not include at least 3 years in a third-world country then you can forget a doctor's job in Cuba. But then the Cubans are communists and don't have the enlightened thinking of Western European governments. |
|
23 Jun 15 - 05:30 PM (#3718565) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: GUEST UK Aid to Gambia... |
|
24 Jun 15 - 03:39 AM (#3718625) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: GUEST,Sodding cookie! Interesting Vic. You may notice quite a few South African doctors over here. There is a reason why both here and Germany, there are more than you would expect and Cuba is in the equation. Cuba has always had a good medical school and is recognised by most professional registration bodies. This makes getting jobs in other countries easier. A trade pact was set up between South Africa and Cuba, the upshot being visa free travel for work between them and many qualifying doctors in Cuba have moved to South Africa after qualifying as consultants. This has driven the wage down there leading to many South African doctors moving to fill vacancies elsewhere, especially here and Germany. So.., Cuba and South Africa spend the training money, Europe and Aussie /Kiwi get the benefit. Buggered if I know the answer either.... |
|
24 Jun 15 - 04:11 AM (#3718631) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: vectis And if you go to hospital here in New Zealand most of the doctors and nurses seem to be ex-pat Brits and South Africans. The situation is similar in Oz. So GB trains nurses and pays them such crap wages that they debunk to NZ and OZ where they have a better lifestyle, higher wages and are actually appreciated. Then the UK has to import nurses that may not be as well trained or used to following strict protocols as the UK trained nurses. Barmy bonkers thinking from them in charge, of every colour and political persuasion. |
|
24 Jun 15 - 04:24 AM (#3718633) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: GUEST,And again True, although the pay parity is somewhat complicated and better lifestyle isn't always the same as better purchasing power, or real terms pay. When we were in NZ a few years ago for a friend's wedding, Mrs Musket had recently qualified as a consultant surgeon with a speciality that put her in demand. We could easily have moved to NZ. However, whilst the home we could have bought (we got as far as looking in estate agent windows in Christchurch) meant that for less than what our home was worth, we could have a villa overlooking the sea and enough for a ski chalet inland.... The actual pay was considerably less, even though if we just relied on her income, our lifestyle would have been super. I applaud the idea that our friend, a midwife, can earn a very respectable wage in NZ, and yes, by comparison The UK doesn't pay enough at the lower end of the scale, and overtime / bank often makes up the difference. I suppose this harks back to the days of a very female and second household income profession. Changing society has not led to changing value of professions! By the way, whilst we decided to stay in The UK, we visit from time to time and it remains one of my favourite holiday destinations. |
|
24 Jun 15 - 12:54 PM (#3718719) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: DMcG One thing that hasn't been raised is what makes nurses such a special case? The rationale would seem to be that at some point it could be extended to all immigrants in the public sector. I oppose it for nurses, and I'd oppose any extension equally, but I'm blowed if I can see any solid reason why the two groups are treated differently. |
|
24 Jun 15 - 01:08 PM (#3718725) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: GUEST,Kampervan I don't know the detail, but apparently the policy applies to everyone coming to this country to work unless their occupation is specifically exempted from the regulation. They've chosen not to exempt nurses. |
|
24 Jun 15 - 01:27 PM (#3718728) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: Jim Carroll "One thing that hasn't been raised is what makes nurses such a special case?" How about the vital job they do, the reluctance our indigenous people have in working in such conditions for such pay and the acute shortage, which is quite likely to undermine the health system - with the resulting (sometimes fatal) results. I'm sure it isn't necessary to put up the statistics (again) of how things stand at the present time and how many life-saving workers will be lost if this squalid bunch of Little Englanders have thier way! As far as the appallingly fortress- Britain policy towards all immigrants (from a country which roamed the planet looking for people to exploited for many centuries) - that speaks for itself. Jim Carroll |
|
24 Jun 15 - 01:36 PM (#3718732) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: DMcG You misunderstand me, Jim. What I meant was why is all the news about the nurses being affected, when - as Kampervan correctly informed me - it applies to lots of others as well. That is not to distract from nurses in any way. I am concerned that we could get into a position of saying the nurses are a special case and should be excluded from this policy, but it's ok to throw out - for example - an American friend of mine who has worked as a postman for years. The whole thing is a bad policy and should be challenged as such, not by saying we can tolerate it being slightly less bad if certain groups are excluded. |
|
24 Jun 15 - 02:55 PM (#3718741) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: Jim Carroll "You misunderstand me, Jim." Sorry if I did. For me, the bringing about of a situation where essential workers are thrown out of the country at a time when they are desperately needed, emphasises the sickness (pun intended) of a society that puts its own prejudices over the health and well-being of the population in general (let alone the humanity of accepting immigrants as a general principle). It seems even to have occurred to the right wing gutter press that this is an incredibly stupid move from the point of view of the self-interest of the British people. One of the things I most enjoyed about living in Liverpool, Manchester and London, when I lived in Britain was their cosmopolitan nature - that would include your American postman friend. Apologies again if I misunderstood you Jim Carroll |
|
24 Jun 15 - 03:21 PM (#3718748) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: Keith A of Hertford Britain policy towards all immigrants Exceptionally welcoming I expect you mean, despite our being about the most densely populated country on Earth already, and with a desperate housing crisis, overwhelmed services and straining infrastructure. That is why so many seek to come here, and so few seek to leave. "Britain is a deeply racist country" you said. No it is not. There are few more tolerant nationalities. |
|
24 Jun 15 - 03:48 PM (#3718752) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: GUEST,Ifor I dont think for one moment that we are a densely populated country. Try taking the train from London to South Wales and you pass through miles of countryside. Or take a look at Scotland and its Highlands in particular.There are more deer than people it seems to me. What we do have are deeply racist paries like the Tories and UKIP and other parties like the Labour Party pandering to racism and the right wing racists. The Metroplitan Police admitted it was institutionally racist while the imprisonment of black and brown people including children into detention centres like Yarlswood is a disgusting racist practice. Migrant workers certainly did not cause our housing crisis. They did not cause the underinvestment in our creaking infrastructure and social services are being put under strain because of the cutbacks and sackings in our public services. Migrant workers are an essential part of our NHS and also harvest the food that British Agriculture depends on. It is true that many people in this country are far more tolerant than the mainstream parties allow for. We saw that on the huge march against Austerity in London last saturday which had a big anti racist component. The march and its anti racist message definitely cheeered me up and we have everything to play for in the coming months and years ahead. Ifor |
|
24 Jun 15 - 04:12 PM (#3718753) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: Keith A of Hertford England is in the top three. |
|
24 Jun 15 - 04:17 PM (#3718754) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: Keith A of Hertford Top five. |
|
24 Jun 15 - 04:42 PM (#3718760) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: GUEST Top thirty |
|
24 Jun 15 - 04:45 PM (#3718761) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: Dave the Gnome Mainland UK is 18th. The whole UK is outside the top 50. England is 5 or 6 depending who you read. Whichever way you look at it we are not that densely populated. |
|
24 Jun 15 - 04:46 PM (#3718763) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: GUEST https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_population_density England is about 413 people/km2 |
|
24 Jun 15 - 04:49 PM (#3718764) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: GUEST http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2530125/This-worryingly-crowded-isle |
|
24 Jun 15 - 04:52 PM (#3718766) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: Dave the Gnome Sorry, me misreading. Been a long day :-( We are 51st if you count small states, dependencies etc. 18th if you only count larger countries. Even then the difference is striking. The highest is Bangladesh at over 2,800 people per square mile while the UK is a measly 679. |
|
24 Jun 15 - 07:34 PM (#3718790) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: McGrath of Harlow The United Kingdom comes in as at 53 in wikipedia's list of countries by population density. Why make sweeping and inaccurate claims like 'being about the most densely poplated country on Earth" when a few seconds googling can show they aren't true? It's just lazy. People who come here and use their abilities are a bonus to a country, and that's the overwhelming majority of immigrants. They get born and raised and learn stuff at the expense of some other country, and then come here and we benefit from it. Problems that arise because of the way we run stuff like housing and schooling and social provision arise because the people we put in charge couldn't organise a piss-up in a brewery. It's not the fault of immigrants - especially those like nurses and care workers and builders who help those things to be better than they otherwise would be. |
|
24 Jun 15 - 07:55 PM (#3718796) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: Jim Carroll " It's just lazy." Sorry to disagree with you Mac - it isn't, far from it. It's politically motivated agenda driving. They have the facts - they will ignore them Jim Carroll |
|
25 Jun 15 - 04:10 AM (#3718836) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: GUEST,This cookie issue.. Just a point regarding "why nurses?" Possibly because despite the shortage, both political parties rattled on in the election about pledges to magic thousands of nurses out of thin air. This Home Office idea of not playing game with one of their own pledges is what is being highlighted here. As ever, quality and safety of people at their most vulnerable is merely a side issue, as is the upheaval and uprooting of families. Regardless of income, rules changed last year over bringing dependent relatives over. Many doctors from the Sub India region have aged parents to deal with and hitherto, if they could demonstrate that they could care for them and not be a burden, they could be included on the visa / work permit. Now they can't, resulting in a few hundred having to leave their posts when work permits are due for review. We also have the ludicrous situation of, for instance, a registrar doctor who has lived here for years, paid taxes, raised their family here, having to physically leave whilst applying for a new post that they will probably get anyway. Cost of flights and two months living in a hotel near Mumbai airport.... Home Office and Dept of Health aren't that far between each other. I could walk it in minutes..... |
|
25 Jun 15 - 05:11 AM (#3718841) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: Keith A of Hertford McGrath, Why make sweeping and inaccurate claims like 'being about the most densely poplated country on Earth" when a few seconds googling can show they aren't true? It's just lazy. No, it is accurate and correct. Our population has increased dramatically since 2008, when this appeared in the Telegraph, "Beyond Europe, England's population density is among the highest in the world for major countries. England ranks third in density after Bangladesh (1,045 per sq km) and South Korea (498 per sq km)." "The figures were obtained in a parliamentary answer from the Office of National Statistics. In 2008 the average number of people per square kilometre in Britain was 253, rising to 395 in England. Latest figures from Holland show that its population density was 395 a square kilometre in 2002 and 393 in 2005. It is estimated that English population density will rise to 464 people for every square kilometre by 2031. The population density in England is already almost double the level in Germany and quadruple that in France. The only country in the European Union with greater crowding is the tiny island of Malta, which only has 400,000 people, most of whom live around the port of Valletta. England has taken its position as the most crowded country in Europe at a point when the risk of economic recession has led to growing concerns over diminishing numbers of jobs and pressure on public services." http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/2967374/England-is-most-crowded-country-in-Europe.html |
|
25 Jun 15 - 05:41 AM (#3718844) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: GUEST,Derrick As always with statistics it depends on interpretation. The density of population in the UK is 265 per square kilometre. The density in England is 413 per square kilometre. If you are a little Englander you are right to say we are the most densely populated. If you are a UK citizen we are not. |
|
25 Jun 15 - 06:31 AM (#3718846) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: Jim Carroll OVERCROWDING IN BRITAIN - A CURRENT COMMENT Jim Carroll |
|
25 Jun 15 - 06:46 AM (#3718848) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: Keith A of Hertford Yes Jim, there is still some green left, but England is the third most densely populated major country on Earth. That is an objective fact. To say England is overcrowded would be a subjective statement. Perhaps one objective measure would be the amount of rainwater per person. In the SE of England we have less than parched Sudan. "The Environment Agency has described most of south-east England as suffering from 'serious water stress'. Water stress happens when the amount of water available isn't enough to meet the demand, " ". In England and Wales, there is only 1334 cubic metres of water available per person per year. That's about half the amount that hotter countries like Italy and Spain have. In the Thames Valley, in southern England, there are only 266 cubic metres per person " http://www.acegeography.com/managing-our-water-supplies.html |
|
25 Jun 15 - 07:47 AM (#3718854) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: Jim Carroll "Yes Jim, there is still some green left, but England is the third most densely populated major country on Earth." No it isn't, it is, by statistical accounts, the 53rd - you've been givn those statistics several times. The problems of "overpopulation" is in fact, the failure of the relevant private (used to be Government, until they were privatised) bodies to do their job properly. Water is a typical example - can't remember when I last drank a glass of tap-water, for fear of being poisoned. Can still remember the local scare when we turned our taps on in Wandsworth only to end upo with a sink-full of wriggling worms. The fact that profit is now the measure of success for these private industries is why we have so many panics - s.f.a. to do with immigration. The article (which you have studiously ignored) on "overcrowded" Britain concedes that immigrants have had an adverse effect on wage levels - this has everything to to with predatory employers who use immigrants as a means to drive down wage levels - as old at least as The Irish Famine when mineowners used Famine refugees to reduce miners' wages In the past, Britons emigrating elsewhere inorder to "civilise" the world caused massive cultural and economic provblems - many countries, such as Pakistan, Israel, Ireland and a huge slice of the continent of Africa, are still struggling to mop up the mess left behind by the previous tenants You claimed that Britain was the most overcrowded country in the world - utter rubbish and pure invention. Immigration has proved beneficial, even essential to Britain - most of the problems connected with it are caused bt small-minded bigotry and Xenophobia Isn't that always the case? Jim Carroll |
|
25 Jun 15 - 08:10 AM (#3718858) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: Keith A of Hertford I love visiting Ireland where you live Jim. So unspoiled. The population of London alone is double that of your whole country Jim, so spare us the lectures. |
|
25 Jun 15 - 08:12 AM (#3718860) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: Keith A of Hertford Jim, No it isn't, it is, by statistical accounts, the 53rd - you've been givn those statistics several times. Telegraph 2008, " England's population density is among the highest in the world for major countries. England ranks third in density after Bangladesh (1,045 per sq km) and South Korea (498 per sq km)." |
|
25 Jun 15 - 08:28 AM (#3718863) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: Jim Carroll You have had the official crrent statistics - I gave them, as did McGrath - others have referred to them The Daily Telegraph (with it's 7-year -old claim, is the mouthpiece of the Conservative party - they would say that, wouldn't they? "I love visiting Ireland where you live Jim." I assume that you are inferring that foreigners "spoil" places they choose to live in - bit of a cat-out-of-the-bag, doncha think. All those nasty foreiners spoiling the formerly green and pleasant land of Bradford, Toxteth, Clapham, Southall, Brixton.... Give us a break!! Jim Carroll |
|
25 Jun 15 - 08:50 AM (#3718870) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: Spleen Cringe Hey Keith, if the UK is too overcrowded to cope, why not deport all those pesky foreign nurses and doctors? The collapse of the health system would soon lead to a population decline. We used to have the black death and the plague to keep the population in check - with a bit of judicious health worker related expulsion activity, maybe we could have a return to those good old days. Maybe because I live in the north of England, (rather than the overrated south east, whose citizens often seem to think that their preoccupations and bugbears should be shared by those of us living elsewhere in the country), I don't get the sense I live somewhere that overcrowded. Sure, Manchester is a big, busy city, but you don't expect cities to be tranquil oases. Look what surrounds us, though - the Peaks, the Dales, the Moors, the Lakes, North Wales - hardly spoiled by overcrowding. |
|
25 Jun 15 - 08:56 AM (#3718871) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: Keith A of Hertford Is UK too overcrowded? I only said it was about the most densely populated country on Earth. " England's population density is among the highest in the world for major countries. England ranks third in density after Bangladesh (1,045 per sq km) and South Korea (498 per sq km)." As Jim stated, that was seven years ago. The density has increased considerably since then. |
|
25 Jun 15 - 08:57 AM (#3718872) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: Spleen Cringe The point being that if you can break the UK down to its constituent parts to try to argue that England is disproportionately overpopulated, why not break it down even further and admit that the 'problem' is a South East one, not an English or British one. And why may that be? Perhaps due to years of Londoncentricity by politicians, policy makers and business? Immigration tend to follows this, rather than create it. |
|
25 Jun 15 - 08:59 AM (#3718873) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: Jim Carroll This now seems to have degenerated to "You don't have to live with them" - where it should have been in the first place Jim Carroll |
|
25 Jun 15 - 09:03 AM (#3718874) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: Spleen Cringe So are you saying that the English part of the country is densely populated but not overcrowded? I hadn't realised you were not quoting your sources to make a pejorative point about immigration. Apologies for misunderstanding your intentions... |
|
25 Jun 15 - 09:07 AM (#3718876) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: Spleen Cringe Sorry, Jim, that last post was responding to Keith not you. Me, I like it here in multicultural Manchester working in the multicultural NHS. |
|
25 Jun 15 - 09:10 AM (#3718877) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: GUEST Wherever we rank cramming more people into a country that probably can't feed itself, and doesn't export much that you could put your hand on doesn't seem sustainable. What happens if the City of London gets outflanked by somewhere else and magic money dries up ? Can these nurses qualify for citizenship before the 6 years is up ? Or is the trick to move them on before they need healthcare and pensions ? |
|
25 Jun 15 - 09:11 AM (#3718878) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: Keith A of Hertford England is a country, and it is the third most densely populated of all comparable countries on Earth. Why does stating that make you people so angry? This from a very Left wing organisation, OK Jim? Bangladesh The Palestinian territories Taiwan South Korea The Netherlands England We have long since overtaken Netherlands, and "Palestinian Territories" is hardly a comparable country if a country at all. Likewise Taiwan, so third it is. https://leftoutside.wordpress.com/what-have-immigrants-ever-done-for-us/is-the-ukengland-the-most-densely-populated-country-in-the-world/ |
|
25 Jun 15 - 09:17 AM (#3718880) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: GUEST,Derrick Keith, My passport issued by the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland gives my nationality as British Citizen. Great Britain consists of England, Scotland, and Wales. Your statistics refer to England only and are incorrect when applied to the union of which I am a citizen, or has England achieved independence with out anyone but you noticing it. Using the statistics for England only, whilst correct for England, are a dubious way of making your point when we all live in, and governed by the UK government. |
|
25 Jun 15 - 09:22 AM (#3718881) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: Keith A of Hertford England is a country. So is Scotland. Try denying that In Glasgow and see how long you last. " England's population density is among the highest in the world for major countries. England ranks third in density after Bangladesh (1,045 per sq km) and South Korea (498 per sq km)." |
|
25 Jun 15 - 09:49 AM (#3718886) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: GUEST We have long since overtaken Netherlands, and "Palestinian Territories" is hardly a comparable country if a country at all. Likewise Taiwan, so third it is. Taiwan has a population of 23 million. That is more than the Netherlands. So fourth. The population of Singapore (a country) is more than that of Ireland. So fifth. Also Mauritius. And so it goes on. |
|
25 Jun 15 - 09:54 AM (#3718890) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: GUEST,Derrick I have not denied that England is a country,I am trying to make the point as others have also done,is that we all live in a Union of countries. Your population density argument applies only to England,the proposed regulations concerning length of stay and earnings will affect all of the Union and will cause the same problems to all,particularly in the nursing field. |
|
25 Jun 15 - 10:26 AM (#3718891) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: Jim Carroll ", I like it here in multicultural Manchester working in the multicultural NHS." Me too - unlike grossly hard-done-by and overcrowded Hertford. ""Hertford is at the confluence of four river valleys: the Rib, Beane and Mimram join the River Lea at Hertford to flow south toward the Thames as the Lee Navigation, after Hertford Castle Weir.The shared valley of the Lea and the Beane is called Hartham Common and this provides a large park to one side of the town centre running towards Ware and lying below the ridge upon which Bengeo is situated. The town centre still has its medieval layout with many timber-framed buildings hidden under later frontages, particularly in St Andrew Street. Hertford suffers from traffic problems despite the existence of the 1960s A414 bypass called Gascoyne Way which passes close to the town centre. Plans have long existed to connect the A10 with the A414, by-passing the town completely. Nevertheless, the town retains very much a country-town feel, despite lying only 19.2 miles (30.9 km) north of Central London. This is aided by its proximity to larger towns such as Harlow, Bishop's Stortford and Stevenage where modern development has been focused." The Facts: "Removing the capitals shows that outside the largest cities in their respective countries, the population density is much less, between 35 and 8 people per sq km. The most dramatic changes can be seen in Belgium, at Brussels, simultaneously the capital of Belgium and the EU, and the UK, where the population density would be 32 people per sq km less. Removing London from England's figures is even more drastic: only 347 per sq km, 60 people per km squared less. The Netherlands appears to have a more equitable population distribution across the country. The conclusions from this exercise appear clear: first, England is not the most densely populated state in Europe (by a distance); second, the UK is densely populated though, even on a global scale, but is still outside the world top ten; third, it does not make sense to count England separately from the rest of the UK unless this is done for every country; fourth, certain regions have a large impact on overall density, as with Brussels in Belgium and London in the UK; fifth, without historical context, it is very difficult to understand why populations in states are as they are – it is likely the the UK has been very densely populated since the nineteenth century. Finally, newspapers are writing stories to sell papers and use data in a haphazard way to strengthen their narratives. It is important not to take media statistics at face value as doing so will push agendas that contain falsehoods at their heart. Information may be beautiful but in the wrong hands it is also dangerous." TAVISTOCK INSTITUTE 51st "This from a very Left wing organisation," You've had the opinions on overcrowding and the advantages of immigration from the very right wing Daily telegraph (25 Jun 15 - 06:31 AM) OK Keith? Jim Carroll |
|
25 Jun 15 - 10:31 AM (#3718892) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: Jim Carroll In case you missed it, here it is again Jim Carroll BRITAIN HAS 'MASSES OF ROOM' FOR MORE PEOPLE, OBR says Stephen Nickell, one of the leaders at the Office for Budget Responsibility, says that people who say Britain can't take more migrants because it is a 'small island' are wrong By Steven Swinford, Senior Political Correspondent 12:34PM GMT 10 Dec 2014 The NHS would be in "dire" straits without immigrants and Britain has "masses of room" for more people, Britain's official economic forecaster has warned. Stephen Nickell, one of the leaders of the Office for Budget Responsibility, said that the urban area of Surrey occupies less space than its golf courses as he rejected claims there was not enough room for migrants. He said that immigration does not have a particularly bad or good impact on the economy, but that people's objections relate to pressure on public services. He said: "One argument said we're a small island, not much room. On the other hand, of course, there's masses of room. The urbanised part of Britain occupies less than 10% of the surface area. The urbanised part of Surrey occupies less of Surrey than golf courses. "Since more immigrants mean more housing, more roads, more airports, more incinerators, more of this being required, and since the evidence would suggest that people by and large don't like these things, especially if they are near them, that's the key issue about immigration that people may wish to face up to. However, he conceded that immigration has suppressed the pay of low-skilled workers. He said: "The pay of unskilled workers, particularly in the service sector, has been held back to some extent – not to a massive extent, but to some extent – by unskilled immigration." Sir John Major, the former Conservative Prime Minister, said at a speech in Berlin earlier this year that "our small island simply cannot absorb the present and projected numbers at current speed |
|
25 Jun 15 - 11:12 AM (#3718897) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: Keith A of Hertford Yes Jim, we have masses of room left, some of it still green and unspoiled like most of your country. I merely state that England is about the most densely populated country on Earth. Some people do say that the Earth itself has become over populated. |
|
25 Jun 15 - 11:25 AM (#3718901) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: Jim Carroll "Yes Jim, we have masses of room left, some of it still green and unspoiled like most of your country." I've lived in three major cities in Britain Keith - for 25, 4 and 17 years respectively - that would include three of large council estates - how many have you lived in? Doyou dare try to use the fact that I now live in rural Ireland as an argument, not from the soft underbelly of England. You appear to have been nowhere and experiences nothing - Little Britain writ large You have the facts - you have the statistics - (not opinions and not made up) - yours are made-up nonsense and you have been given the proof that they are. "Some people do say that the Earth itself has become over populated." Some people do - I can only imagine with a degree of horror what your solution for that one would be. Another corner you've painted yourself into, it would appear. Jim Carroll |
|
25 Jun 15 - 11:44 AM (#3718906) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: Jim Carroll "and 17 years " Should read - "30 years" Jim Carroll |
|
25 Jun 15 - 02:47 PM (#3718920) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: Keith A of Hertford Jim, all I said was that England is about the most densely populated country. It is. It ranks third. Get over it. |
|
25 Jun 15 - 03:44 PM (#3718925) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: Dave the Gnome I merely state that England is about the most densely populated country on Earth. Bangladesh. 2800 per square mile. UK - 493 per square mile. You talk through your arse, Keith, simply to gain political points. Sad fucker. |
|
25 Jun 15 - 05:21 PM (#3718941) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: Keith A of Hertford I did not say the most densely populated Dave. I said about the most. England is the third most densely populated country. As the Daily Telegraph said some years ago now, " England's population density is among the highest in the world for major countries. England ranks third in density after Bangladesh (1,045 per sq km) and South Korea (498 per sq km)." I was not making any "political point" at all. "Sad fucker" Dave. |
|
25 Jun 15 - 06:25 PM (#3718958) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: Steve Shaw I'm a bit late, but hear hear, Ifor. |
|
25 Jun 15 - 07:53 PM (#3718972) Subject: RE: BS: Deporting poorly paid nurses From: Jim Carroll "Jim, all I said was that England is about the most densely populated country." No it isn't - you have the statistics - it's around 52nd You have now entered into your 'Dalek' stage, mindlessly repeating what has been blown out of the water. "I did not say the most densely populated Dave." Now you are openly lying. (24 Jun 15 - 03:21 PM) "despite our being about the most densely populated country on Earth already" Can't speak for anybody else, but as far as I am concerned, your behaviour on these threads it now totally out of control. It's been handy enough in the past, first by demolishing all your agands, them demolishing your credibility. Been there - done that --time to move on. Jim Carroll |