06-11-2013 12:11 AM
http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/tyneside-taxpayer-money-paying-ethiopian-6266510
As far as i know libraries and swimming pools are being closed on Tyneside because of cuts,if that is so this seems ludicrous.Mags,Pete heard anything about this?
07-11-2013 11:36 AM
The case was to determine whether or not councils were required to pay for the support if the person was an asylum seeker, basically to establish the legal position, it wasn't legal action just on behalf of those particular people.
A test case.
07-11-2013 3:31 PM
And according to the article in the Independent the council still haven't paid the fees the court has ruled that they must!
Bonkers
07-11-2013 5:20 PM
Also according to that article, he will be able to apply for indefinite leave to stay in a year's time.
Bit different from the Daily Mail's 'Failed asylum seeker'.
07-11-2013 11:30 PM
The more you explain it rationally, the more bonkers it becomes...
Stop digging!
07-11-2013 11:36 PM
@ronnybabes wrote:
The more you explain it rationally, the more bonkers it becomes...
Stop digging!
Can you explain which bit about this situation you find bonkers - - - - - and why?
08-11-2013 10:38 AM
It's quite simple.
When child goes on to further education, their parents are expected to help support them, where that child has been in care, the local authority act as their parents.
The two in question were in care, nothing bonkers about it.
08-11-2013 3:32 PM
Look on the bright side. Tyneside will have possibly thousands of households paying council tax that have no idea how they will pay for Christmas or for that fact any small perk in life. I've no doubt they are all over the moon at the idea of their council paying out this kind of money to favour just a couple.
That tiny turkey on Christmas day will proably taste a little off.
08-11-2013 6:47 PM
It's not just these two though - no doubt, like most other councils, Tyneside have many children in care and others who have left care but still being supported through their further education.
So what is special about these two that makes their support 'bonkers' or solely responsible for ruining people's Christmas.
Surely it couldn't be because they're not called something like Mike and Dave?
09-11-2013 1:07 AM
@bankhaunter wrote:It's quite simple.
When child goes on to further education, their parents are expected to help support them, where that child has been in care, the local authority act as their parents.
The two in question were in care, nothing bonkers about it.
Except if the Parents can't afford it due to financial circumstances then it doesn't happen.
Doesn't matter if they are dilligent hard working, tax paying individuals.
If the local authority can't afford it, it still will happen.
Not exactly an even playing field.
As I said BONKERS! !
09-11-2013 7:01 AM
Surely it couldn't be because they're not called something like Mike and Dave?
Err....I'm a bit perplexed by that comment, Creeky TBH - would you care to explain what you mean by it exactly because it looks very much to me as if you are implying that Not-another-one is a racist??????????????????????????????
Where have they made any mention of the boys names in their post???????????????????????
Surely everyone has the right to voice their own thoughts and opinions on a topical news story without having their personal integrity publicly questioned by you???????????????????
I think you owe them an apology!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
09-11-2013 8:02 AM
Nothing to do with their names, general opinion is fair enough their education being paid for, but flying lessons are a luxury and should be paid for by the one who wants them, not by councils who are having to cut basic services.
09-11-2013 8:25 AM
@ronnybabes wrote:
@bankhaunter wrote:It's quite simple.
When child goes on to further education, their parents are expected to help support them, where that child has been in care, the local authority act as their parents.
The two in question were in care, nothing bonkers about it.
Except if the Parents can't afford it due to financial circumstances then it doesn't happen.
Doesn't matter if they are dilligent hard working, tax paying individuals.
If the local authority can't afford it, it still will happen.
Not exactly an even playing field.
As I said BONKERS! !
So what do you want to do to make it a level playing field? - stop all assistance for youngsters that have been in care and then go onto university
Or maybe work out what proprtion of 'diligent hard working tax paying individuals' can't afford to assist their children and then draw balls out of a hat to see which of those youngsters who have been in care will be supported and which won't - wouldn't that be 'bonkers'?
09-11-2013 8:29 AM
@marg*e wrote:Nothing to do with their names, general opinion is fair enough their education being paid for, but flying lessons are a luxury and should be paid for by the one who wants them, not by councils who are having to cut basic services.
Hardly a luxury if you are doing pilot training at university!
09-11-2013 8:52 AM
Rather than some of you winging on about it, why not celebrate the fact that this young man has survived the traumas of not just one parent but two, and later his elder brother, all abandoning him and his younger brother. Can you imagine the emotional upheaval of dealing with all that... then to become a star pupil at school gaining university entrance with a Care Home background, rare indeed. I think that's a real achievement.
There is a difference between gaining a commercial pilots licence and a private pilots licence - the latter being thousands of pounds cheaper. He has opted for the private pilots licence and if he completes his university course then an airline will more than likely take him on and train him.
I really hope the Home Office gives him his "right to remain" next year because he's certainly proved so far that he deserves it.
He will then be repaying his loans through the tax system and contributing to the overall coffers that we all benefit from.
If he'd been a WASP this would never have been reported...
09-11-2013 9:24 AM
If he'd been a WASP this would never have been reported...
In fairness, Ihasa if the lad had accepted the university placement he was originally offered there would have been no story to report - the story only became newsworthy because of the court case.
And....am I the only one here who is getting a wee bit tired of all this 'reverse' bigotry?
It seems to me that nowadays no one is allowed to comment on anyone who is non-white or non-Christian etc. without the usual politically correct zealots finding some excuse to accuse them of being a racist.
09-11-2013 10:10 AM
It seems to me that nowadays no one is allowed to comment on anyone who is non-white or non-Christian etc. without the usual politically correct zealots finding some excuse to accuse them of being a racist.
I take your point Lola and there certainly is some truth in it - I am probably more guilty than most.
On the other hand it is hard to deny that very often the opportunity is taken to inject a racial/ethnic/immigrant element into many stories where it is actually irrelevant as well.
Remember the groups of men in the north-west who were convicted of grooming young girls and the reaction that caused and then read this-
"Every day across Britain, it seems, there's a new and horrific revelation of sexual abuse: last week we had the guilty plea of veteran TV presenter Stuart Hall, who confessed to 14 cases of indecent assault against 13 girls, the youngest only nine years old.
Days earlier the possible scale of child abuse in north Wales children's homes was revealed. We now know there were 140 allegations of historical abuse between 1963 and 1992. A total of 84 suspected offenders have been named, and it's claimed the abuse took place across 18 children's homes.
But after the shock has subsided and we have time to reflect on these revolting crimes, the main question in most reasonable people's minds must surely be: what is it about white people that makes them do this?
Jimmy Savile is alleged to have abused 300 young people, and in his case and in north Wales, the abuse could not have happened without a wide range of co-conspirators either grooming children or ensuring the truth never got out. Hardly a week goes by without another white man being arrested in connection with sexual abuse.
I'm beginning to feel sorry for whites. I have many white friends and I know most of them are wholly opposed to sexual abuse. But they must be worried that their whole community is getting a bad name. I can imagine that, every day, with each unfolding case, they must be hiding their face behind their hands, pleading: "Please, God, don't let it be a white person this time."
And with so many senior community figures implicated, many of us are starting to wonder what will happen to the next generation of whites. How will today's young whites learn that abuse is wrong when their role models are so tarnished?
First, though, we need to find out what's causing the problem. Is it something to do with white people's culture? Is it something to do with their loss of empire, and their new role in the world, as a diminished state desperately clinging to its glorious past? Do they seek to impose their last vestiges of power on the most vulnerable in society?
Or is it that, having spent so much of their history waging wars against each other, they cannot cope with the relative peace of the last half-century, and their frustration at not fighting is taken out on the weakest? I may have no evidence for this, but that's not going to stop me putting it out there as a cause.
Or maybe it's their religion? Child abuse in the priesthood has, of course, also been tolerated for decades, allowed to continue unpunished through a conspiracy of silence among the church hierarchy.
And despite the recent falls in attendance, Christianity still dominates European culture. And the Bible, which many whites still look to, has such verses as: "Do not withhold discipline from a child; if you strike him with a rod, he will not die. If you strike him with the rod, you will save his soul from Sheol [hell]." (Proverbs 23:13-14) It hardly fits with white society's claims to care for children. And even those who don't believe, such as Richard Dawkins, a senior cleric in the atheist community, have sought to downplay the gravity of child abuse, believing it's no worse than religion itself. As he wrote: "Horrible as sexual abuse no doubt was, the damage was arguably less than the long-term psychological damage inflicted by bringing the child up Catholic in the first place." Of course, what we really need now is for brave white community leaders to come out and distance themselves from the abusers.
Maybe, say, the new head of the Equality and Human Rights Commission should come out and admit the issue is "racial and cultural" and that she fears that "in those communities there were people who knew what was going on and didn't say anything, either because they're frightened or they're so separated from the rest of the communities". Or a white cabinet member could say: "There is a small minority of white men who believe that young children are fair game. And we have to be prepared to say that. You can only start solving a problem if you acknowledge it first." Or the head of a leading children's charity could say: "There is very troubling evidence that whites are overwhelmingly represented in the prosecutions for such offences." Yet none of this has happened. And this saddens me. Because until we hear those brave voices speaking out against abuse, what are we meant to think?
I urge white people to break this conspiracy of silence. Call on your leaders to show leadership. To show us all that you're not like the people who dominate the news headlines. That you really do care about protecting children.
You may think all the above is ridiculous; that I'm stirring ethnic tensions on an issue that is clearly about individuals and small groups of people and has nothing to do with race or religion. And that by making this spurious case I'm ignoring the core issue, which is that children, many of them in vulnerable situations, were terrorised and physically harmed by opportunistic men who were able to get away with their crimes for years. You'd be right.
But all of the above arguments were made within various parts of our print and broadcast media when similarly small numbers of Muslim men were revealed to be grooming young girls for sex. If you think the claims about white people are wrong, then so is the stereotyping of Britain's Muslims, and the widespread questioning of their culture and their religion, because of the perverted actions of a few.
Since the "black crime shock" tabloid stories of the 1980s, editors have known that stoking fears about misunderstood minorities is good for sales. If you object to this article, then you should understand how it feels to be a Muslim reading similar pieces pandering to Islamophobia day after day – and you should object to those too."
09-11-2013 10:58 AM
@*.*..lola..*.* wrote:If he'd been a WASP this would never have been reported...
In fairness, Ihasa if the lad had accepted the university placement he was originally offered there would have been no story to report - the story only became newsworthy because of the court case.
And....am I the only one here who is getting a wee bit tired of all this 'reverse' bigotry?
It seems to me that nowadays no one is allowed to comment on anyone who is non-white or non-Christian etc. without the usual politically correct zealots finding some excuse to accuse them of being a racist.
No your not the only one Lola.
But most that might think the same have gone because they got tired of that and more than that
Bit lost on where we are now Ron, but I agree fully with you too.
Letting people have their say without intense interrogation is a thing of the past it seems.
And then enormous posts might just further confuse the matter IMO. Oh dear!
If I may - if your out their MITZ, I wish you well.
09-11-2013 11:23 AM
Creeky my son is mixed race - his father is a british born muslim of Pakistani origin.
I have witnessed racism from all sides of the coin... from comforting my son when he's come in from Primary school crying because some white kids have called him a 'brown poo poo face' to witnessing a side of my ex on the day of the 9/11 bombings that shocked me to my very core.
I would never condone the incitement of hatred or violence against another race or religion but equally I abhor people who continually use the 'racism card' in an attempt to silence others and stop them from having an opinion.
BTW I still think you owe N-A-O an apology!!!!
09-11-2013 11:29 AM
Letting people have their say without intense interrogation is a thing of the past it seems.
That is also my general impression of the Round Table as it currently stands...sadly.
09-11-2013 12:08 PM
There is a difference between challenging statements, often opinions given as fact, and interrogation of those making the statement.
The RT has as long as I can remember always been a place where 'facts' have been questioned and challenged and long may it remain so.
NAO - if I have misinterpreted your post then I apologise for any offence caused and/or insult implied or inferred
I try not to aim my posts at individuals but rather at the posts they make.