It's not just about Brexit

[Tall Paul]

Asylum seekers aren't illegal immigrants.

[martin_p]

It's not right wing to be concerned about illegal immigration.

It's not right wing to be concerned about billion pound,
10 years contracts being handed out by a government that claimed theyd stop illegal immigration.

It's not right wing to be angry that illegal immigrants are being molly coddled in 4 star hotels, in spar hotels in Cheshire in top rated hotels in Hoylake and taken on stadium tours of Anfield all at the tax payers expense.

It's not right wing to believe that all this will only encourage the inhumane exploitation by people traffickers who are making millions, being part of this billion pound racket.

As Nigel Farage says there needs to be the political will to stop this

Australia solved the illegal migration. They made it policy that anyone arriving on their shores using illegal routes, would never ever be given Australian citizenship.

Its been revealed that a nice hotel in Priti Patel's constituency is booked up for 12 months or so as it been seconded for housing "asylum seekers" at the tax payers expense

With billion pound 10 year contracts being dished out,its clear there's no political will to stop the disgusting trade in human beings.

You told us this would change once we left the EU, ‘taking control of our own borders’. Buyers remorse?

[RingoMcCartney]

Put 10p in the machine, get a Daily Mail headline.

Pay a people trafficker upto £5000, get a 4 star hotel and a tour of Anfiled.

Pay a people trafficker upto £5000 and Serco are awarded a 4 billion pound 10 year contract.

Pay a people trafficker upto £5000 hotel chains see their properties fullybbooked up during an economic downturn for 12 months

Fill a rubber dinghy up with 20 illegal immigrants at , say 5 grand a pop, get a wealthy exploitative people trafficker.

[RingoMcCartney]

Asylum seekers aren't illegal immigrants.

Those who have entered the country unlawfully are illegal immigrants.

Do want to end the evil trade of people trafficking?

[RingoMcCartney]

You told us this would change once we left the EU, ‘taking control of our own borders’. Buyers remorse?

No.

Voter and tax payers anger.

[martin_p]

No.

Voter and tax payers anger.

You won, get over it!

[RingoMcCartney]

You won, get over it!

I have, take your own advice.

[martin_p]

I have, take your own advice.

But you’re angry, you said it yourself. Brexit not what you hoped for?

[RingoMcCartney]

But you’re angry, you said it yourself. Brexit not what you hoped for?

Brexit is entirely different to the inept handling of illegal immigration.

Angry about tax payer billions being blown on the illegal immigration and people trafficking industry.

Happy about Brexit.

Hope that clears things up. Doubt it will , you'll stay true to form and be unable to take "yes" for and answer.

[dsr]

Well there’s the smoking gun that proves Williamson asked Ofqual to come up with an algorithm.

There's no smoking gun about Williamson asking Ofqual to come up with an algorithm. An algorithm is just a set of rules for finding a solution to a problem - of course he told them to do that.

The knock on Williamson is that when Ofqual came up with a stupid algorithm, he didn't spot that it was stupid.

[TheFamilyCat]

No.

Voter and tax payers anger.

You voted for them. If you'd stuck with the party you are a fully paid up member of, Nigel Farage could right now be sat atop his gun tower on the White Cliffs machine-gunning rubber dinghies into oblivion.

[martin_p]

There's no smoking gun about Williamson asking Ofqual to come up with an algorithm. An algorithm is just a set of rules for finding a solution to a problem - of course he told them to do that.

Plenty thinking he didn’t. Besides it was more than just asking for a set of rules, it set the framework for the rules, using the exam centres (I.e. schools) judgement supplemented by other evidence. It was the setting of the impossible task. For people to have a go at Ofqual for not achieving the impossible doesn’t seem very fair.

[Paul Waine]

Well there’s the smoking gun that proves Williamson asked Ofqual to come up with an algorithm.

Looks like a lot of smoke blowing out of Williamson's letter to Ofqual, doesn't it, martin.

I've picked out a few paras and underlined what I see are the key sentences.

I don't see it say that Ofqual should create an algorithm that gets things so wrong for a number of students, that forces "fails" because someone 3 years ago at the same school failed. Interesting, I also don't see where it says "please favour fee paying schools...."

(I've not read the select ctte paper, yet).

I understand that the decision to cancel, and not reschedule, this year's exam
series will give rise to concern that this year's GCSE, AS and A level students will
be disadvantaged in comparison to previous and future years. Therefore, despite
the cancellation of exams, it is Government policy that this year's cohort of GCSE,
AS and A level students be issued a set of results this summer in order to allow
them to progress to further study or employment.

As such, it is Government policy that these students should be issued with
calculated results based on their exam centres’ judgements of their ability in the
relevant subjects, supplemented by a range of other evidence. A number of
students will already have completed non-exam assessments in some subjects
and, where that evidence usually counts towards a grade, it should be taken into
account in generating centres’ judgements.

In order to mitigate the risk to standards as far as possible, the approach should
be standardised across centres. Ofqual should also mandate the method of
calculating final grades based on the evidence provided for each student. Ofqual
should ensure, as far as is possible, that qualification standards are maintained
and the distribution of grades follows a similar profile to that in previous years.

It is important that students should have access to a right of appeal if they believe
the process was not followed correctly in their case. Ofqual should therefore
develop such an appeal process, focused on whether the process used the right
data and was correctly applied, rather than seeking to overturn teachers’
professional judgement on individual students’ ability.

[martin_p]

I’m not sure what point you’re trying to make Paul, but here are some other quotes, all from this thread.

of course, it has something to do with Williamson. It also says a lot for the poor STEM knowledge and understanding amongst our senior civil servants and Ofqual. (Other examples are available). There is "no way" an algorithm can "model" A-level grades for individual students. It is "statistical nonsense" to think that this can be done.

How do you know the civil servants weren’t just responding to a request to come up with some sort of algorithm?

How do I know? That's not how it works, Martin.

Then a link is posted to a letter from Williamson to Ofqual asking them to come up with an algorithm, an algorithm that you your self said was ‘statistical nonsense to think that this could be done’ yet it’s somehow Ofqual’s fault for failing to make the impossible possible!

[dsr]

Plenty thinking he didn’t. Besides it was more than just asking for a set of rules, it set the framework for the rules, using the exam centres (I.e. schools) judgement supplemented by other evidence. It was the setting of the impossible task. For people to have a go at Ofqual for not achieving the impossible doesn’t seem very fair.

If you are asked to do the impossible then you need to say it's impossible. Not come up with a botched job.

What are you objecting to in that letter? Seems to me like a well framed request. Maybe it was impossible, maybe it wasn't, but I don't see what there is in it that would be cause for criticism.

[martin_p]

If you are asked to do the impossible then you need to say it's impossible. Not come up with a botched job.

What are you objecting to in that letter? Seems to me like a well framed request. Maybe it was impossible, maybe it wasn't, but I don't see what there is in it that would be cause for criticism.

I’m not criticising the letter just those on here that think this was all Ofqual’s idea and that the minister played no part in deciding an algorithm was needed. It wouldn’t surprise me one bit if Ofqual officials did point out that this wouldn’t work, I know from experience that the response to such worries are met with ‘JFDI’. The Education select committee certainly had a lot of misgivings about such an approach that were seemingly ignored.

[aggi]

Asylum seekers aren't illegal immigrants.

Farage purposely obfuscates this so the chance of Ringo understanding it is slim to none.

[Paul Waine]

I’m not sure what point you’re trying to make Paul, but here are some other quotes, all from this thread.

Then a link is posted to a letter from Williamson to Ofqual asking them to come up with an algorithm, an algorithm that you your self said was ‘statistical nonsense to think that this could be done’ yet it’s somehow Ofqual’s fault for failing to make the impossible possible!

Hi martin, can you point out where Williamson's letter to Ofqual asks them to "come up with an algorithm?" I've just pulled up the link again, searched for "algorithm" and got "not found."

Do you work in Dept of Ed? Do the words in Williamson's letter suggest to you that he wanted an algorithm? and, particularly one that produced the results that we saw last week?

[Paul Waine]

I’m not criticising the letter just those on here that think this was all Ofqual’s idea and that the minister played no part in deciding an algorithm was needed. It wouldn’t surprise me one bit if Ofqual officials did point out that this wouldn’t work, I know from experience that the response to such worries are met with ‘JFDI’. The Education select committee certainly had a lot of misgivings about such an approach that were seemingly ignored.

Oh, so martin, you are criticising me for thinking that this was Ofqual's algorithm? Re the Select Ctte, did Ofqual tell them that they were being asked to "do the impossible?" or that they had reservations or there were gaps or weaknesses in the way they were proposing to do it?

As early, I've not read the 33 pages of the Select Ctte report, just the Summary. Am I missing something?

The important thing is the individual's exam grades. It's the grades achieved that either get them into the uni of their choice or stops them getting in. The algorithm didn't do that - and couldn't do that. It's reported that Ofqual declined assistance from people with "expert" knowledge of statistics in developing their algorithm.

[dsr]

Hi martin, can you point out where Williamson's letter to Ofqual asks them to "come up with an algorithm?" I've just pulled up the link again, searched for "algorithm" and got "not found."

Do you work in Dept of Ed? Do the words in Williamson's letter suggest to you that he wanted an algorithm? and, particularly one that produced the results that we saw last week?

An algorithm is a set of rules that provides a solution. He doesn't use the word algorithm, but that's what he's asking for.

Where it all went wrong is that somewhere down the line the producers of this algorithm appear to have forgotten that the rules can include "if it looks wrong, look at it again". The computer should not have just churned out marks and been deemed to be correct. It should have had an automatic function whereby if the total grade of an individual was (say) three points lower than predicted, it must be looked at by a human. They apparently produced a fully automated algorithm which was bound to go wrong.

With hindsight, they should have broadly speaking allowed schools whose overall results were within some degree of previous year (say 10% above or less, perhaps?) to go through on the nod. Then, of the schools with a bigger improvement that that, look at the GCSE results from two years ago and see if there was a similar good year - if there was, then once again, go through on the nod. Only then do they need to look in more details at the schools with no obvious reasons for the unusually good results and look into why. They have had 4 months clear to do all this.

Another way they went wrong was making it too detailed. Saying a school can't have an A in Maths because they didn't have an A in maths last year? In any statistical distribution, over 10% of the population are outliers with unusual results. If outliers are banned by the system, then automatically you say those 10% are wrong before you start on the rest.

There is bound to be grade improvement on the estimates. The most honest and realistic teacher in the world, with a child on the cusp between B and C, will predict B. Half those children would have got B and half C; with the teacher predictors, they nearly all get B. So be it. There is no practical way round that. All they needed to prevent was grade hyper-inflation.

[RingoMcCartney]

Farage purposely obfuscates this so the chance of Ringo understanding it is slim to none.

Quality sneering their aggi.

A YouGov poll this week has shown that 73% of Britons see illegal immigration as a serious issue.

Meanwhile , it seems that the Woke Left are pretty relaxed about the multi million pound human exploitation industry that goes from strength to strength.

Theres so many on the tax payer funded gravy train . The people traffickers, the 4 star hotel and heath spar chains, Liverpool FC , the human rights lawyers and all at our expense.

Have you recently bought shares in Serco have you ? They rose by 6% one day recently? You have haven't you!

[martin_p]

Hi martin, can you point out where Williamson's letter to Ofqual asks them to "come up with an algorithm?" I've just pulled up the link again, searched for "algorithm" and got "not found."

Do you work in Dept of Ed? Do the words in Williamson's letter suggest to you that he wanted an algorithm? and, particularly one that produced the results that we saw last week?

Yes, I only need to copy and paste from your own post.

‘ As such, it is Government policy that these students should be issued with
calculated results based on their exam centres’ judgements of their ability in the
relevant subjects, supplemented by a range of other evidence.’

And

‘ Ofqual should also mandate the method of
calculating final grades based on the evidence provided for each student. Ofqual
should ensure, as far as is possible, that qualification standards are maintained
and the distribution of grades follows a similar profile to that in previous years.’

Now if you don’t think that is asking for an ‘algorithm’ I respectfully suggest you look up the word.

[martin_p]

Oh, so martin, you are criticising me for thinking that this was Ofqual's algorithm? Re the Select Ctte, did Ofqual tell them that they were being asked to "do the impossible?" or that they had reservations or there were gaps or weaknesses in the way they were proposing to do it?

As early, I've not read the 33 pages of the Select Ctte report, just the Summary. Am I missing something?

The important thing is the individual's exam grades. It's the grades achieved that either get them into the uni of their choice or stops them getting in. The algorithm didn't do that - and couldn't do that. It's reported that Ofqual declined assistance from people with "expert" knowledge of statistics in developing their algorithm.

No I’m criticising you for dismissing in such an off hand manner my suggestion that Ofqual may have been asked to produce an algorithm, ‘that’s not how it’s done’. It there, in black and white, in a letter. That’s exactly how it was done. You’d be better off admitting you were wrong rather than the pitiful ‘ah, but he never actually used the word algorithm’.

[Paul Waine]

An algorithm is a set of rules that provides a solution. He doesn't use the word algorithm, but that's what he's asking for.

Where it all went wrong is that somewhere down the line the producers of this algorithm appear to have forgotten that the rules can include "if it looks wrong, look at it again". The computer should not have just churned out marks and been deemed to be correct. It should have had an automatic function whereby if the total grade of an individual was (say) three points lower than predicted, it must be looked at by a human. They apparently produced a fully automated algorithm which was bound to go wrong.

With hindsight, they should have broadly speaking allowed schools whose overall results were within some degree of previous year (say 10% above or less, perhaps?) to go through on the nod. Then, of the schools with a bigger improvement that that, look at the GCSE results from two years ago and see if there was a similar good year - if there was, then once again, go through on the nod. Only then do they need to look in more details at the schools with no obvious reasons for the unusually good results and look into why. They have had 4 months clear to do all this.

Another way they went wrong was making it too detailed. Saying a school can't have an A in Maths because they didn't have an A in maths last year? In any statistical distribution, over 10% of the population are outliers with unusual results. If outliers are banned by the system, then automatically you say those 10% are wrong before you start on the rest.

There is bound to be grade improvement on the estimates. The most honest and realistic teacher in the world, with a child on the cusp between B and C, will predict B. Half those children would have got B and half C; with the teacher predictors, they nearly all get B. So be it. There is no practical way round that. All they needed to prevent was grade hyper-inflation.

Hi dsr, I agree the "spirit of" what you say. Ofqual's algorithm is "dumb" in the sense that it's the wrong answer to the wrong problem. Clever people - and we hope that we have clever people in our public bodies - shouldn't (try to) implement "dumb" solutions. It's kind of "funny" that this is the Education Department and the Office of Qualifications. However, this "wrong solution" to the "wrong problem" runs through our public bodies. There are a number of more egregious examples - though we can keep those for another time. The first requirement for exam results is fair results for individual students. I'd have quite happily "let go" the secondary goal of "no grade inflation" because that can only be achieved by sacrificing the first goal.

[aggi]

Quality sneering their aggi.

A YouGov poll this week has shown that 73% of Britons see illegal immigration as a serious issue.

Meanwhile , it seems that the Woke Left are pretty relaxed about the multi million pound human exploitation industry that goes from strength to strength.

Theres so many on the tax payer funded gravy train . The people traffickers, the 4 star hotel and heath spar chains, Liverpool FC , the human rights lawyers and all at our expense.

Have you recently bought shares in Serco have you ? They rose by 6% one day recently? You have haven't you!

You were the one who voted for this, not me.

The point, which you clearly don't understand given your previous posts, is that there is a difference between illegal immigrants and asylum seekers. What Farage was mainly referring to in his fairly evidence free video that you lapped up and parroted weren't illegal immigrants but he prefers that emotive term.

[RingoMcCartney]

Been listening to Talkradio ( officially the fastest growing conversation based radio station in the world)

A guy rang in. His daughter is a charity worker in South Sudan. She's dealing with water shortage, famine and Coronavirus. People traffickers are turning up in far flung villages showing them footage that's been sent back by illegal immigrants of 4 star hotels and Anfield stadium tours. These people have no means of paying the thousands demanded by the exploitative traffickers for getting them to the UK. Apart from the few cattle that their family owns. The family are then left in the clutches of the people traffickers at one end. They are using the cattle as a down payment for their "services" . They are told that the UK government will give them money. However in reality at this end, the rest if the debt will be secured by those who reach these shores working in the black economy under the threat of "consequences" for their family members should they not work in slave like conditions in places like the back streets of Leicester.

The guy said that the people traffickers are making the perilous situation in places like Sudan even worse. Whole villages are losing their young men capable of working the fields to grow crops or even defending their families from tribal feuds.

This has to stop.

[ksrclaret]

It must be true if it was on the radio.

[RingoMcCartney]

You were the one who voted for this, not me.

The point, which you clearly don't understand given your previous posts, is that there is a difference between illegal immigrants and asylum seekers. What Farage was mainly referring to in his fairly evidence free video that you lapped up and parroted weren't illegal immigrants but he prefers that emotive term.

If you could show me the box that I put a "X" next to that said " I want illegal immigration and billions of taxpayers money spent on it" I'd be surprised.

They are arriving on these shores unlawfully. They have no paperwork and are not going through the recognised channels that 100s of 1000s of legal migrants go through each year

If you can't accept they're illegal immigrants I can only presume where ever you call home, you have neither a front door , nor a back door.

[aggi]

If you could show me the box that I put a "X" next to that said " I want illegal immigration and billions of taxpayers money spent on it" I'd be surprised.

They are arriving on these shores unlawfully. They have no paperwork and are not going through the recognised channels that 100s of 1000s of legal migrants go through each year

If you can't accept they're illegal immigrants I can only presume where ever you call home, you have neither a front door , nor a back door.

It's not my fault you didn't research who you were voting for. Although I doubt it would have made any difference, you're willing to sacrifice plenty to the great god Brexit. Just look at all the fuss people kicked up about Corbyn being a "terrorist sympathiser" who happily voted for Claire Fox.

Those hotels that you're banging on about, they're hosting asylum seekers, not illegal immigrants. Feel free to provide actual evidence (facts, not a bloke on the radio or a video from Garage) to show differently.

[TheFamilyCat]

Been listening to Talkradio ( officially the fastest growing conversation based radio station in the world)

A guy rang in. His daughter is a charity worker in South Sudan. She's dealing with water shortage, famine and Coronavirus. People traffickers are turning up in far flung villages showing them footage that's been sent back by illegal immigrants of 4 star hotels and Anfield stadium tours. These people have no means of paying the thousands demanded by the exploitative traffickers for getting them to the UK. Apart from the few cattle that their family owns. The family are then left in the clutches of the people traffickers at one end. They are using the cattle as a down payment for their "services" . They are told that the UK government will give them money. However in reality at this end, the rest if the debt will be secured by those who reach these shores working in the black economy under the threat of "consequences" for their family members should they not work in slave like conditions in places like the back streets of Leicester.

The guy said that the people traffickers are making the perilous situation in places like Sudan even worse. Whole villages are losing their young men capable of working the fields to grow crops or even defending their families from tribal feuds.

This has to stop.

Are they all leaving their 4* hotels in the morning to go and do their slave jobs and coming back again each evening? Is nobody checking what they're up to?

[RingoMcCartney]

It's not my fault you didn't research who you were voting for. Although I doubt it would have made any difference, you're willing to sacrifice plenty to the great god Brexit. Just look at all the fuss people kicked up about Corbyn being a "terrorist sympathiser" who happily voted for Claire Fox.

Those hotels that you're banging on about, they're hosting asylum seekers, not illegal immigrants. Feel free to provide actual evidence (facts, not a bloke on the radio or a video from Garage) to show differently.

Tell you what. You show me where I "voted for this" .

And then you provide evidence that those being put up in 4 star hotels, health spars in Cheshire, being given guided tours of Anfield at the expense of billions of pounds if tax payers hard earned. Didnt arrive here illegally thanks to multi billion pound inhumane people trafficking first.

You didn't answer.

Do you have shares in Serco ?

Do you have a front or back door that would allow uninvited guests to walk through and try and remain in your home unlawfully ? You see they much prefer your home from the one they could have had in France, Belgium, Holland, Italy, Spain, Greece, Turkey.

[RingoMcCartney]

Are they all leaving their 4* hotels in the morning to go and do their slave jobs and coming back again each evening? Is nobody checking what they're up to?

The ones in the luxury accommodation are the ones we know about. By its very nature, the illegal black economy is under ground and unknown.

[TheFamilyCat]

Tell you what. You show me where I "voted for this" .

And then you provide evidence that those being put up in 4 star hotels, health spars in Cheshire, being given guided tours of Anfield at the expense of billions of pounds if tax payers hard earned. Didnt arrive here illegally thanks to multi billion pound inhumane people trafficking first.

You didn't answer.

Do you have shares in Serco ?

Do you have a front or back door that would allow uninvited guests to walk through and try and remain in your home unlawfully ? You see they much prefer your home from the one they could have had in France, Belgium, Holland, Italy, Spain, Greece, Turkey.

Ringo the champion of the little people - pretends he's opposed to human trafficking but trips himself up by revealing that it's where they end up that he is really bothered about.

[RingoMcCartney]

The Woke Left are far too busy with their gesture politics and virtue signalling to bring themselves to actually condemn illegal immigration and the whole multi billion pound industry that's being built around it.

[TheFamilyCat]

The ones in the luxury accommodation are the ones we know about. By its very nature, the illegal black economy is under ground and unknown.

They're being trafficked just to live in hotels?

Another question. Surely the point of trafficking is making sure those being trafficked are actually being delivered to the, not left to fend for themselves in a pedal on the English Channel.

Are you sure you know the differences between victims of trafficking and asylum seekers?

[RingoMcCartney]

Ringo the champion of the little people - pretends he's opposed to human trafficking but trips himself up by revealing that it's where they end up that he is really bothered about.

It's not as if ending up in luxury accommodation at the the expense if the tax payer acts as a magnet and used as a twisted promo video by the exploitative multi million pound gravy train riding people trafficking gangs is it?

[RingoMcCartney]

They're being trafficked just to live in hotels?

Another question. Surely the point of trafficking is making sure those being trafficked are actually being delivered to the, not left to fend for themselves in a pedal on the English Channel.

Are you sure you know the differences between victims of trafficking and asylum seekers?

You clearly havent been listening to the harrowing stories from people with first hand experience of the trafficking gangs bullying and coercion that goes on. Perhaps youd be more inclined to condemn.

[RingoMcCartney]

No condemnation just what sounds like at best, communal blind eye turning at worst tacit approval.

[Tall Paul]

lol Ringo

[TheFamilyCat]

Just remember Ringo, your vote helped to let this happen.

Just like your vote let Blair fight an illegal war.

I bet you celebrated his election victory just like you celebrated Boris's.

Hopefully you'll learn from this but I doubt it.

[TheFamilyCat]

You clearly havent been listening to the harrowing stories from people with first hand experience of the trafficking gangs bullying and coercion that goes on. Perhaps youd be more inclined to condemn.

One of them had their hubcaps nicked when they were at Anfield. Truly harrowing for them.

[tiger76]

Brexit: UK hopeful of EU trade deal next month, says No 10https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-53812015

There's still grounds to be optimistic about some form of trade deal being agreed, but the UK will have to show flexibility in certain demands to get a deal, given this government's record of digging it's heels in I wouldn't hold out much hope of a compromise being reached anytime soon.

[RingoMcCartney]

Just remember Ringo, your vote helped to let this happen.

Just like your vote let Blair fight an illegal war.

I bet you celebrated his election victory just like you celebrated Boris's.

Hopefully you'll learn from this but I doubt it.

Still no condemnation of inhumane people trafficking and the modern day slavery it feeds. No criticism of the profiteering of the likes of Serco to the tune of billions of tax payers money. To the 4star hotel and spar chains making millions being fully booked up. No questioning of the morals of the fat cat human rights lawyers , living high on the hog by putting legal hurdle after hurdle in front of the Home office after asylum requests have rejected.

None of that. Just strawman arguement, deflection, whataboutery and ignorance of what's actually going on.

I wonder why condemnation of this billion pound misery based industry isn't forthcoming from the Woke Left?

The Woke Left are disproportionately white, middle class, educated, and higher than average earners. Looks like they're a consequence of that "white privilege " that they so despise, to me!

I guess they're too preoccupied with guilt for condemnation.

[aggi]

Tell you what. You show me where I "voted for this" .

And then you provide evidence that those being put up in 4 star hotels, health spars in Cheshire, being given guided tours of Anfield at the expense of billions of pounds if tax payers hard earned. Didnt arrive here illegally thanks to multi billion pound inhumane people trafficking first.

You didn't answer.

Do you have shares in Serco ?

Do you have a front or back door that would allow uninvited guests to walk through and try and remain in your home unlawfully ? You see they much prefer your home from the one they could have had in France, Belgium, Holland, Italy, Spain, Greece, Turkey.

If you're not able to look at the track record of the party that you're voting for and take a good guess at what they'll be doing going forward then it's not my fault. Why would I have shares in Serco (I don't), you're the one voting for the party that gives them all the money, not me. Do you have shares in Serco?

Here's your evidence, https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/h ... 48746.html

While many of the claims Mr Farage makes in his video are a difficult blend of muddled figures and statistics used to defend his points of view, his assertion that the hotel is populated by illegal immigrants appears to be among the easiest to debunk.

The Britannia-owned Bromsgrove Hotel and Spa is, like a number of hotels across the country, being used to temporarily house asylum seekers – according to the government and the site’s operators, Serco.

Unlike irregular migrants who may be in breach of the law, asylum seekers are those attempting to legitimately and legally make a claim to sanctuary in the UK – for example to escape persecution.

Now it's your turn to provide evidence (although I assume you won't break the habit of a lifetime).

[Paul Waine]

Brexit: UK hopeful of EU trade deal next month, says No 10https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-53812015

There's still grounds to be optimistic about some form of trade deal being agreed, but the UK will have to show flexibility in certain demands to get a deal, given this government's record of digging it's heels in I wouldn't hold out much hope of a compromise being reached anytime soon.

"EU chief negotiator Michel Barnier will have dinner with UK counterpart David Frost on Tuesday evening, with talks set to conclude on Friday."

Got to ask, have they asked for the "eat out to help out" menu?

Enjoy your dinner, Barnier and Frost. I'm also "eating out and helping out" this evening.

[TheFamilyCat]

Still no condemnation of inhumane people trafficking and the modern day slavery it feeds. No criticism of the profiteering of the likes of Serco to the tune of billions of tax payers money. To the 4star hotel and spar chains making millions being fully booked up. No questioning of the morals of the fat cat human rights lawyers , living high on the hog by putting legal hurdle after hurdle in front of the Home office after asylum requests have rejected.

None of that. Just strawman arguement, deflection, whataboutery and ignorance of what's actually going on.

I wonder why condemnation of this billion pound misery based industry isn't forthcoming from the Woke Left?

The Woke Left are disproportionately white, middle class, educated, and higher than average earners. Looks like they're a consequence of that "white privilege " that they so despise, to me!

I guess they're too preoccupied with guilt for condemnation.

Yeah, I feel terrible guilt for voting the tories in to make this happen.... oh, wait now.

"The Woke Left" your new one-phrase-fits-all name for anyone who disagrees with you. "Remoaners" was getting just a bit tedious.

[jrgbfc]

"Woke" seems to be the new phrase the right use to attempt to bully people who dare to have a different opinion or political view to them.

[TheFamilyCat]

"Woke" seems to be the new phrase the right use to attempt to bully people who dare to have a different opinion or political view to them.

Fortunately, although I am white and educated i'm not middle class nor an above average earner so I don't fit the profile and can escape the bullying.

[martin_p]

If you could show me the box that I put a "X" next to that said " I want illegal immigration and billions of taxpayers money spent on it" I'd be surprised.

They are arriving on these shores unlawfully. They have no paperwork and are not going through the recognised channels that 100s of 1000s of legal migrants go through each year

If you can't accept they're illegal immigrants I can only presume where ever you call home, you have neither a front door , nor a back door.

Are you still requiring evidence that leaving the EU won’t reduce ‘human trafficking’? Asking for a friend.

[SammyBoy]

I always wondered what Ringo would move onto once he realised Brexit wasn’t going to fill the void. Pretty predictable really.