I'm not British born Mr Nigel Farage, I'm as British you are. Your comments are offensive and racist. I would be frightened to live in a country run by you'"
Awe shoot, here we go again. The evil far right Reform recruiting....Nadhim Zahawi, that's a terrifying step forward towards their fascist dictatorship!
As recently as a few days ago Farage was saying only British born people should get tax payer funded 'benefits', so does these mean Zahawi is not going to be entitled to any expenses?
Sorry am lost here, what do you mean? Farage is saying the tax payer should not be funding foreign born nationals, Zahawi is not only a foreign born national, he is somebody who has abused this privilege before.
I mean imagine if your average a foreigner on benfits had been found to have conned the tax payer out millions of pounds through a number of tax and electricity scams, do you think Farage would be welcoming them with open arms?
The sad truth is to some politicans poor people are 'on BENEFITS' and rich people 'have EXPENSES'.
I'm citing it as a similar principle. MPs' expenses are costs incurred carrying out their job as MPs. It's not claiming benefits and it's not even anything like claiming benefits.
Again, MPs being reimbursed for costs is not a form of benefits. It would be more like if your blind mate needed specific equipment for a task and his employer bought it for him or let him claim the money back as an expense if he purchased it himself. It's not coming from the DWP.
If I had to travel to a different company office for a meeting I too would be reimbursed by my employer as would your mate. Citizenship or status are not a factor here and it would be entirely up to my employer what method of travel they deem acceptable.
Benefits (the kind we get from the DWP) are different to business expenses and employer reimbursements. These are not the same thing. One is a form of social security and the other is specific costs pertaining to your job paid for by your employer.
If you read the article about the stables' energy bill you'll see it was supposedly an error which he promised to pay back.
OK sure but this is just like my point about poor people being 'on BENEFITS' and rich people 'having EXPENSES'.
I mean if you or I tried to defraud the electricity company or the tax payer out of thousands of pounds we would'nt be simply allowed to 'pay it back'.
I once accidentally walked out of Tesco without paying for a 2 pinter of milk and it took be six months, and the threat of telling my journalist mates about it to get them to drop it.
It's not about being rich or poor. I'm not exactly wealthy and I can still claim business expenses at my job. It's about where the money is coming from and what it's for. MPs' expense claims are (at least supposed to be) reimbursements for costs they incur as MPs. They are not welfare or social security.
At the end of the day, preventing the foreign-born from claiming benefits would not mean they can no longer claim expenses from their employer. These are not the same thing legally or even in principle, as explained. Zahawi would not have to lose his ability to claim expenses for things to be consistent. This is nonsensical.
I once accidentally walked out of Tesco without paying for a 2 pinter of milk and it took be six months, and the threat of telling my journalist mates about it to get them to drop it
What on Earth has this got to do with benefits and business expenses? Never mind, I understand what you're arguing now. If I claimed an expense I wasn't supposed to and admitted it was a mistake I would probably be asked to pay it back or have it taken from my wages. It's unlikely I'd have charges filed against me. I've seen this happen at work before and at worst people have gotten sacked. If you claimed a tax credit in error and were overpaid following a self assessment HMRC will often allow you to pay it back without serious consequences. But still, none of this is relevant to benefits vs. expenses.
I mean if you or I tried to defraud the electricity company or the tax payer out of thousands of pounds we would'nt be simply allowed to 'pay it back'.
Neither were the members of both Houses jailed in connection with the expenses scandal.
This guys cares about one thing and it is protecting his wealth. He dresses it up with fancy rhetoric but that’s it. To the point that he’s willing to join an explicitly anti-migration party that is stuffed full with racists and bigots.
This debate was held in 2014, back in the days when "mass immigration" meant 195,000 people arriving here net, rather than 906,000 in 2023. That latter number is enough to change anyone's view on the issue.
I do still think that accepting too many ex-Tories is a bad move for Farage, although I suspect he's banking on most potential Reform voters simply not noticing/caring, whilst Reform benefits from the experience (in government) of the former Tories, and possibly also new introductions to donors etc.
That number remains eye watering. It should be brought up every time Conservatives get any form of momentum in polling. They should be through the floor by numbers.
So the actions of the government he was a member of traumatised him so much that he completely changed his views on immigration? Why did he do it so conveniently after being kicked out of the government and the parliament, and not while still being there?
I made the point about numbers to illustrate the change in numbers since that debate - because I think the reality of that might have hit home, and changed some minds.
It would’ve been a reasonable position if he wasn’t in the government that caused the Boriswave, without ever speaking against it.
And BTW, the immigration numbers are roughly the same now as when this debate was held.
Let’s be honest - he is simply adopting whatever views he thinks will be the most beneficial for him. No matter what my own views on immigration are, I would never trust him to represent them honestly.
The 906,000 included 100,000s of Ukrainians and Hong Kongers. Boris Johnson also relaxed visa rules to ensure a plentiful supply of labour after Brexit. The country having just voted for a bunch Singapore-on-Thames toffs to deliver a Brexit deal that massively restricted migration! Hah! Who’d a thunk that these lame Thatcherite tribute acts would fail to deliver. I am sure Nigel Farage will buck this trend.
I do wonder sympathetically about "immigrants and minorities" in how they handle the modern political shift.
Always accused of "pulling up the ladder" which seems an awkward metaphor as well.
I think Kemi had this issue. I guess they could be all in on assimilation. But assimilation has been so regularly denounced and the reality of trying to assimilate to a nation that has lost coherence is impossible.
I can see the hyper multicultural position makes sense. From an identity perspective. But at a national political level its come apart. The logic of it is no shared culture.
I've been on the 'voting reform because they're not tories or labour and not socialist' train. It's been delayed several times, the toilets are out of order and there are no seats available. This really is the replacement bus service. At this rate I may just spoil my vote for the first time.
Nigel Farage was on the opposite side of this debate 11 years ago too, so Zahawii is joining the party thought the immigration terrible when he thought it was good.
Snapshot of Nadhim Zahawi: Immigration Is Good For Britain. submitted by ITMidget:
An archived version can be found here or here. or here
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
“A vote for Reform is a vote for change, we are different than the Tories”
I'm always disappointed when Ann Widdecombe is left off these lists, although I suppose she's a spokesperson not candidate.
Somehow Ann Widdecombe returned
It's like a checklist of all the grifters.
Just off the top of my head
Laila Cunningham, Reform London mayoral candidate and former Conservative councillor
Linden Kemkaran, Reform Kent council leader, former Conservative party candidate
Actually so funny how you don’t see they will f the country over just like every other political party we have
Sycophants
[deleted]
Is this that stupid US libertarian definition of left which was basically having a government is left wing?
[deleted]
No true Scotsman. This is what the modern right is; your idealised version of conservatism doesn't exist in the mainstream anymore, if it ever did.
[deleted]
Delusional, but whatever.
Source?
Zahawi with other classics such as;
https://x.com/SaulStaniforth/status/2010678218064355385?s=20
Awe shoot, here we go again. The evil far right Reform recruiting....Nadhim Zahawi, that's a terrifying step forward towards their fascist dictatorship!
I mean, he was either lying about how he felt then, or he's lying now and being a shameless opportunist. Either way it's a bad look for Reform.
The answer to all of that is:
Yes!
Shameless opportunism for some, Temu flags for everyone else!
You're absolutely right to point this out.
If anything, they're a step towards a Russia-style gangster oligarchy.
True story: I used to believe fairly strongly that we needed to have mass immigration. And then recently I very much changed my mind
So that’s nice
As recently as a few days ago Farage was saying only British born people should get tax payer funded 'benefits', so does these mean Zahawi is not going to be entitled to any expenses?
Why would it? MPs' expenses aren't benefits. Even non-citizens on temporary work visas can use company credit cards and claim back business expenses.
Are you seriously comparing charging something to the tax payer with using a company credit card?
Isn't that what you did?
Sorry am lost here, what do you mean? Farage is saying the tax payer should not be funding foreign born nationals, Zahawi is not only a foreign born national, he is somebody who has abused this privilege before.
I mean imagine if your average a foreigner on benfits had been found to have conned the tax payer out millions of pounds through a number of tax and electricity scams, do you think Farage would be welcoming them with open arms?
The sad truth is to some politicans poor people are 'on BENEFITS' and rich people 'have EXPENSES'.
I'm citing it as a similar principle. MPs' expenses are costs incurred carrying out their job as MPs. It's not claiming benefits and it's not even anything like claiming benefits.
So my foreign born blind mate who gets the upper mobility component of pip to pay for a taxi to take him to work is on 'benefits'?
But multi-millionaire Zahawi who gets a taxi to work is on 'expenses'?
And one is OK to cut but the other isn't? I wonder which one the general public would prefer we cut? Maybe we should have a referendum on it?
MPs cannot claim expenses for general commuting.
Again, MPs being reimbursed for costs is not a form of benefits. It would be more like if your blind mate needed specific equipment for a task and his employer bought it for him or let him claim the money back as an expense if he purchased it himself. It's not coming from the DWP.
Of course not, but say if they have to go to Wales they are allowed to get the tax payer to fund a chauffeur-driven limousine?
Oh and I almost forgot by foreign born blind mate also has a horse, maybe he can get them a heated stable on our expense?
If I had to travel to a different company office for a meeting I too would be reimbursed by my employer as would your mate. Citizenship or status are not a factor here and it would be entirely up to my employer what method of travel they deem acceptable.
Benefits (the kind we get from the DWP) are different to business expenses and employer reimbursements. These are not the same thing. One is a form of social security and the other is specific costs pertaining to your job paid for by your employer.
If you read the article about the stables' energy bill you'll see it was supposedly an error which he promised to pay back.
OK sure but this is just like my point about poor people being 'on BENEFITS' and rich people 'having EXPENSES'.
I mean if you or I tried to defraud the electricity company or the tax payer out of thousands of pounds we would'nt be simply allowed to 'pay it back'.
I once accidentally walked out of Tesco without paying for a 2 pinter of milk and it took be six months, and the threat of telling my journalist mates about it to get them to drop it.
It's not about being rich or poor. I'm not exactly wealthy and I can still claim business expenses at my job. It's about where the money is coming from and what it's for. MPs' expense claims are (at least supposed to be) reimbursements for costs they incur as MPs. They are not welfare or social security.
At the end of the day, preventing the foreign-born from claiming benefits would not mean they can no longer claim expenses from their employer. These are not the same thing legally or even in principle, as explained. Zahawi would not have to lose his ability to claim expenses for things to be consistent. This is nonsensical.
What on Earth has this got to do with benefits and business expenses?Never mind, I understand what you're arguing now. If I claimed an expense I wasn't supposed to and admitted it was a mistake I would probably be asked to pay it back or have it taken from my wages. It's unlikely I'd have charges filed against me. I've seen this happen at work before and at worst people have gotten sacked. If you claimed a tax credit in error and were overpaid following a self assessment HMRC will often allow you to pay it back without serious consequences. But still, none of this is relevant to benefits vs. expenses.Neither were the members of both Houses jailed in connection with the expenses scandal.
This guys cares about one thing and it is protecting his wealth. He dresses it up with fancy rhetoric but that’s it. To the point that he’s willing to join an explicitly anti-migration party that is stuffed full with racists and bigots.
Remember when he accidentally forgot there was an industrial stables attached to his cottage when having his energy bill expensed?
Shit that was him?
This debate was held in 2014, back in the days when "mass immigration" meant 195,000 people arriving here net, rather than 906,000 in 2023. That latter number is enough to change anyone's view on the issue.
I do still think that accepting too many ex-Tories is a bad move for Farage, although I suspect he's banking on most potential Reform voters simply not noticing/caring, whilst Reform benefits from the experience (in government) of the former Tories, and possibly also new introductions to donors etc.
Farage shouldn’t accept any Tory who was in Boris cabinet. Problem is known as Boriswave for a reason.
That number remains eye watering. It should be brought up every time Conservatives get any form of momentum in polling. They should be through the floor by numbers.
So the actions of the government he was a member of traumatised him so much that he completely changed his views on immigration? Why did he do it so conveniently after being kicked out of the government and the parliament, and not while still being there?
I don't know, I'm not him.
I made the point about numbers to illustrate the change in numbers since that debate - because I think the reality of that might have hit home, and changed some minds.
It would’ve been a reasonable position if he wasn’t in the government that caused the Boriswave, without ever speaking against it.
And BTW, the immigration numbers are roughly the same now as when this debate was held.
Let’s be honest - he is simply adopting whatever views he thinks will be the most beneficial for him. No matter what my own views on immigration are, I would never trust him to represent them honestly.
Last year it had fallen back to 204,000 yet Reform voters seem stuck in 2023 for some reason 🤔
Okay? It was 204,00 last year and falling.
Feel free to blame Boris, Brexit, Russia and China for the various reasons this was so anonymously high.
But as with many bad / one-off / historic events, we have to course correct from where we are now rather than trying to turn back the clock.
The 906,000 included 100,000s of Ukrainians and Hong Kongers. Boris Johnson also relaxed visa rules to ensure a plentiful supply of labour after Brexit. The country having just voted for a bunch Singapore-on-Thames toffs to deliver a Brexit deal that massively restricted migration! Hah! Who’d a thunk that these lame Thatcherite tribute acts would fail to deliver. I am sure Nigel Farage will buck this trend.
I do wonder sympathetically about "immigrants and minorities" in how they handle the modern political shift.
Always accused of "pulling up the ladder" which seems an awkward metaphor as well.
I think Kemi had this issue. I guess they could be all in on assimilation. But assimilation has been so regularly denounced and the reality of trying to assimilate to a nation that has lost coherence is impossible.
I can see the hyper multicultural position makes sense. From an identity perspective. But at a national political level its come apart. The logic of it is no shared culture.
Pulling up the ladder is objectively a good thing to do. We've seen what our home countries are and we don't want that here.
Lets all be honest here, bro is just after a stable pay check after his disaster of a mini budget. He should be unemployable at this point
I've been on the 'voting reform because they're not tories or labour and not socialist' train. It's been delayed several times, the toilets are out of order and there are no seats available. This really is the replacement bus service. At this rate I may just spoil my vote for the first time.
I vote Reform but if this lot keeps on infiltrating the party I will not vote Reform anymore.
Never Tory again.
From 11 years ago. You seem a bit desperate.
Nigel Farage was on the opposite side of this debate 11 years ago too, so Zahawii is joining the party thought the immigration terrible when he thought it was good.
Or just speaking the facts. You obviously don’t get it.
Attributing someone's own words to.. themselves! The sheer cheek of it.
Facts rarely care about your feelings.