Posted May 7, 200916 yr A day after the Prime Minister personally intervened in the explosive row over the Gurkhas, Miss Lumley yesterday manoeuvred the Government into unprecedented public negotiations over the veterans' rights live on television. The actress, who has been campaigning for more Nepalese veterans to be allowed to settle in Britain, sprang an ambush on Phil Woolas the immigration minister, in a Westminster television studio. Standing alongside the minister, Miss Lumley declared that she and her campaigning allies will now help write new immigration rules for the Gurkhas. The minister and the actress ended up shoulder-to-shoulder after Miss Lumley signalled she was about to denounce the Government over its treatment of Gurkhas who had applied to settle in the UK. She had called a press conference to highlight the apparent rejection of immigration applications by several Gurkha veterans, including two decorated veterans of the Falklands War. When she arrived at the television studio, she encountered Mr Woolas. The two held an impromptu private meeting, where the minister reassured Miss Lumley that the rejected veterans' cases will automatically be reconsidered within weeks. The row centres on immigration rules for Gurkhas who retired before 1997, which were put in place last month and which campaigners say would severely limit the number of veterans able to settle in the country they fought for. Those rules triggered widespread public anger, and were condemned in a Commons vote last week. Following that vote, ministers have pledged to put in place new immigration rules for Gurkhas, rules due to be published by July. In the meantime, immigration officials are considering around 1,500 outstanding immigration applications from Gurkha veterans. Lawyers for some of those applicants yesterday received letters from the Home Office, which triggered Miss Lumley's initial dismay. The Daily Telegraph has seen copies of the two-page letters sent to the Gurkhas. They begin by explaining to the applicants that they do not meet the current criteria for entry. But they conclude: "While you do not qualify for settlement now, your case will be reconsidered when the next stage of reform has been finalised and I shall write to you again very soon after that." Mr Woolas said the letters had been sent because of a court ruling forcing the Government to update applicants. But he insisted they were not final or binding. He said: "This letter is not a letter of rejection. This is a letter explaining the legal process. He added that more than 100 of the outstanding Gurkha applicants have been granted permission to settle in Britain over the last week. Miss Lumley said that she had been reassured by the minister, and said the campaign had made "excellent progress" She added: "The minister has explained and I think we are all agreed that we are going to be able to help in the formulation of new guidelines, so that will be wonderful." Source: Daily Telegraph Is Joanna Lumley Labour's worst nightmare? She is doing a better job than the Tories :lol:
May 7, 200916 yr It does come to something when a TV actress has more impact than the Opposition. It's a similar thing to the Jamie Oliver thing we had over school dinners. Sometimes celebrity has it's uses.
May 8, 200916 yr From the absolutely ridiculous, uninformed comments of Micheal Caine, we now see the other end of the Celeb spectrum, the fantastic Joanna Lumley, clearly doing her homework and knows what she's talking about, and frankly I absolutely doff my cap to her for her advocacy of the Ghurkas... The Ghurkas are treated absolutely shabbily by the MOD, but it hasn't just been Nu Labor that has been responsible for this, the Ghurkas have always been treated like "second class soldiers", it really is utterly dreadful when you know the facts, an article in the current issue of Private Eye pretty much puts the point succinctly.... Ghurka widows only receive a fraction of the compensation and pension that a regular army wife does, it really is disgusting, so it's not only on citizenship that the Ghurkas are being screwed, it's over pension rights for widows and dependents also... What an absolutely despicable way to treat these people who have sacrificed life and limb for OUR country, this country should hang its head in shame.... The Ghurkas are the bravest of the brave, they serve with honour and dignity, you certainly wont hear anything about drunken Ghurkas getting into drunken fights with civvies in nightclubs will you...? On a Ghurka memorial outside the MOD it reads "Bravest of the brave, most generous of the generous, never had a country more faithful friends than you".... Perhaps, they should add the line "cheapest of the cheap" as well, eh.....? <_< So, while these b'astards in Parliament screw us over with their "expenses" and their second homes, I rather think given the choice, taxpayers would rather pay for the Ghurkas tbh..... The Ghurkas have actually done something for our country..... I just wonder how long our Ghurka friends will remain "faithful" to us given their absolutely shoddy treatment.... God, if this is how this country treats its friends..... :rolleyes:
May 8, 200916 yr It's a similar thing to the Jamie Oliver thing we had over school dinners. Sometimes celebrity has it's uses. Actually, there's evidence to suggest (as a friend of mine who IS a teacher told me..) that in some instances Jamie Oliver's campaign actually did more harm than good in the schools that were already providing well-balanced, healthy meals; through Oliver's campaign a lot of parents at this particular school became under the impression that ALL schools were selling sh!te, and opted their kids out of school meals, giving them money instead, and, er, guess what the kids spent that money on, three guesses..... :rolleyes: So, it wasn't ALL positive as it turned out....
May 8, 200916 yr From the absolutely ridiculous, uninformed comments of Micheal Caine, we now see the other end of the Celeb spectrum, the fantastic Joanna Lumley, clearly doing her homework and knows what she's talking about, and frankly I absolutely doff my cap to her for her advocacy of the Ghurkas... The Ghurkas are treated absolutely shabbily by the MOD, but it hasn't just been Nu Labor that has been responsible for this, the Ghurkas have always been treated like "second class soldiers", it really is utterly dreadful when you know the facts, an article in the current issue of Private Eye pretty much puts the point succinctly.... Ghurka widows only receive a fraction of the compensation and pension that a regular army wife does, it really is disgusting, so it's not only on citizenship that the Ghurkas are being screwed, it's over pension rights for widows and dependents also... What an absolutely despicable way to treat these people who have sacrificed life and limb for OUR country, this country should hang its head in shame.... The Ghurkas are the bravest of the brave, they serve with honour and dignity, you certainly wont hear anything about drunken Ghurkas getting into drunken fights with civvies in nightclubs will you...? On a Ghurka memorial outside the MOD it reads "Bravest of the brave, most generous of the generous, never had a country more faithful friends than you".... Perhaps, they should add the line "cheapest of the cheap" as well, eh.....? <_< So, while these b'astards in Parliament screw us over with their "expenses" and their second homes, I rather think given the choice, taxpayers would rather pay for the Ghurkas tbh..... The Ghurkas have actually done something for our country..... I just wonder how long our Ghurka friends will remain "faithful" to us given their absolutely shoddy treatment.... God, if this is how this country treats its friends..... :rolleyes: full agreement. my daughter actually worked on the case for the ghurkas, but unfortunately lost. theres something like 40,000 that would be eligible to come here and be supported by us... the government dont want that! actually, id not object myself to this imigration! as i see it...if they are willing to fight for this country, and risk their lives, then we should by reason and honour treat them with the respect and equality they deserve.
May 8, 200916 yr full agreement. my daughter actually worked on the case for the ghurkas, but unfortunately lost. theres something like 40,000 that would be eligible to come here and be supported by us... I'd rather support 40,000 Ghurkas than 40,000 chavs tbh, cant we send the chavs to Nepal......? :rolleyes: Oh, mind you, that would be unfair on the Nepalese really wouldn't it....? :lol:
May 8, 200916 yr TBH I think the country is full enough without another 40,000 arriving. All immigration should be stopped as we're an island with finite space. Edited May 8, 200916 yr by Crazy Chris
May 8, 200916 yr TBH I think the country is full enough without another 40,000 arriving. All immigration should be stopped as we're an island with finite space. Oh shut up you tart.... Do you honestly have to merely take a contrary position to a subject simply because myself and Rob have taken a position.... So, tell me, exactly what the fukk is your problem with letting in a group of people who have fought bravely, laid down their lives and made genuine sacrifices for this country... It's a hell of lot more than YOU'VE ever done mate..... <_< If, to accommodate 40,000 Ghurkas we have to dislodge 40,000 scrounging, useless chav scum, and maroon them on a desert island someplace, then if you ask me, it's a damn good swap...... -_-
May 8, 200916 yr My opinion's nothing to do with the fact that it's contrary to yours. The fact is we're overcrowded now. The waiting list for council houses stretches to years. We could never get one. Why? All the immigrants go immediately to the top of the queue. I was born here yet that counts for nothing. I said no more immigration at all without exception.
May 8, 200916 yr My opinion's nothing to do with the fact that it's contrary to yours. The fact is we're overcrowded now. The waiting list for council houses stretches to years. We could never get one. Why? All the immigrants go immediately to the top of the queue. I was born here yet that counts for nothing. I said no more immigration at all without exception. And you fail again to understand the Ghurkas are a special case because they, unlike the vast majority of immigrants here, have actually defended this country and contributed greatly to preserving it over the 120 years they've been connected to the UK armed forces..... There's a history there that you just dont seem to appreciate dude..... Probably because you're pig ignorant like most of this bloody country is, and you just sit there reading the Scum and watching Trisha and Jeremy fukkin' Kyle all day.... Seriously, if it came down to it, and it were up to me, there'd be 40,000 of the worst, maggoty, parasitical, knuckle-dragging, dole-scrounging, feral brat-sireing, chav scum in the land packing their bags right now.....
May 8, 200916 yr And you fail again to understand the Ghurkas are a special case because they, unlike the vast majority of immigrants here, have actually defended this country and contributed greatly to preserving it over the 120 years they've been connected to the UK armed forces..... There's a history there that you just dont seem to appreciate dude..... Probably because you're pig ignorant like most of this bloody country is, and you just sit there reading the Scum and watching Trisha and Jeremy fukkin' Kyle all day.... Actually I only sometimes watch Jeremy Kyle, never watch Trisha and am a tight Yorkshireman so don't buy a paper. :lol: I read them all every day in the library. I'm a busy man actually and keep tropical fish so there's always something to do. Edited May 8, 200916 yr by Crazy Chris
May 8, 200916 yr Oh shut up you tart.... Do you honestly have to merely take a contrary position to a subject simply because myself and Rob have taken a position.... So, tell me, exactly what the fukk is your problem with letting in a group of people who have fought bravely, laid down their lives and made genuine sacrifices for this country... It's a hell of lot more than YOU'VE ever done mate..... <_< If, to accommodate 40,000 Ghurkas we have to dislodge 40,000 scrounging, useless chav scum, and maroon them on a desert island someplace, then if you ask me, it's a damn good swap...... -_- And you fail again to understand the Ghurkas are a special case because they, unlike the vast majority of immigrants here, have actually defended this country and contributed greatly to preserving it over the 120 years they've been connected to the UK armed forces..... There's a history there that you just dont seem to appreciate dude..... Probably because you're pig ignorant like most of this bloody country is, and you just sit there reading the Scum and watching Trisha and Jeremy fukkin' Kyle all day.... Seriously, if it came down to it, and it were up to me, there'd be 40,000 of the worst, maggoty, parasitical, knuckle-dragging, dole-scrounging, feral brat-sireing, chav scum in the land packing their bags right now..... 100% agreement!
May 8, 200916 yr I'll admit I knew nothing at all about Gurkhas until the issue exploded last week, and tbh, I still don't really understand the issue THAT well. My basic understanding though is that people from ANY other country who fought in our Army are entitled to British citizenship... in which case, surely it's only fair that Gurkhas get it too?
May 8, 200916 yr My opinion's nothing to do with the fact that it's contrary to yours. The fact is we're overcrowded now. The waiting list for council houses stretches to years. We could never get one. Why? All the immigrants go immediately to the top of the queue. I was born here yet that counts for nothing. I said no more immigration at all without exception. http://www.uaf.org.uk/news.asp?choice=70522 Can we please stop peddling myths, especially when the Gurkhas would most reasonably have housing created for them? In all honesty, seeing as we have 60 million people, I really doubt another 40,000 would tax us all that much, especially considering all that they have done for us FFS!
May 8, 200916 yr Actually, there's evidence to suggest (as a friend of mine who IS a teacher told me..) that in some instances Jamie Oliver's campaign actually did more harm than good in the schools that were already providing well-balanced, healthy meals; through Oliver's campaign a lot of parents at this particular school became under the impression that ALL schools were selling sh!te, and opted their kids out of school meals, giving them money instead, and, er, guess what the kids spent that money on, three guesses..... :rolleyes: So, it wasn't ALL positive as it turned out.... Oh. Well that actually pleases me in a weird way. I've always thought of Oliver as a slightly sanctimonious git. TBH I think the country is full enough without another 40,000 arriving. All immigration should be stopped as we're an island with finite space. Others have put it a lot more eloquently, but you can't seriously put the Gurkhas on an equal footing to the bog-standard immigrant coming over to make some money? They've CONTRIBUTED, they DESERVE their place here.
May 9, 200916 yr Oh dear another row thats all we need huh? Rows are what the "Perspectives" forum is all about Lynda, we're discussing politics, religion, etc... You wont see me or Rob threatening to close down threads just because the Tory 'fans' upset the Labour 'fans' or whatever, know what I mean.....? :rolleyes:
Create an account or sign in to comment