[RoryS]

(Original post by Maddog Jones)
Crap bill.

NAY

[toronto353]

(Original post by internetguru)
It may be poorly written but ideas such as blocking EU free movement and having a sensible policy on refugees is necessary. You bill lacks both of these and is why it will not pass the house.

Any such policy needs to be properly negotiated with our allies and partners. If we are to block free movement (and indeed this is potentially one of the few benefits of the EU that we have free movement), then we must follow the proper channels.

(Original post by Maddog Jones)
Crap bill.

NAY

(Original post by wizardtop)
Its also a no from me.

Actually giving reasons behind your no votes will help to improve this Bill. Opposing and giving no reason for opposing is not helpful. You might as well not bother posting if you're simply going to say 'Nay/ no' and just vote in the lobby.

[SciFiRory]

why would I want to "improve" an ignorant, bigoted, elitist, disgustingly right wing bill?

the best way to "improve" this would be to give it a unanimous rejection from the house.

[Maddog Jones]

(Original post by toronto353)
Actually giving reasons behind your no votes will help to improve this Bill. Opposing and giving no reason for opposing is not helpful. You might as well not bother posting if you're simply going to say 'Nay/ no' and just vote in the lobby.

I believe I did give a reason - it's crap.

[tehFrance]

Awful bill, no just no. Hell no. **** no.

[Bax-man]

(Original post by SciFiBoy)
why would I want to "improve" an ignorant, bigoted, elitist, disgustingly right wing bill?

the best way to "improve" this would be to give it a unanimous rejection from the house.

Right wing? This isn't right wing. Protectionism (which is what immigration restrictions are) has historically been a preserve of the left. The right (as in those who favour free markets and enterprise) should consistently oppose restrictions on the movement of people.

[Keckers]

(Original post by Bax-man)
Right wing? This isn't right wing. Protectionism (which is what immigration restrictions are) has historically been a preserve of the left. The right (as in those who favour free markets and enterprise) should consistently oppose restrictions on the movement of people.

Right wing and left are terms which are so corrupted that it's completely useless to argue the semantics of them. Leave that to the tabloid press.

[SciFiRory]

(Original post by Bax-man)
Right wing? This isn't right wing. Protectionism (which is what immigration restrictions are) has historically been a preserve of the left. The right (as in those who favour free markets and enterprise) should consistently oppose restrictions on the movement of people.

I know very few people on the Left would be anything over than disgusted by this bill, I don't particularly even like the concept of nation states.

when does the Right ever actually do that though? other than a few (interestingly very quite about it) Libertarians that is? most of your lot seem to despise "immigrants" with a passion, it was also the Right who coined "deserving poor" which is a repulsive concept clearly evident here as well.

[Bax-man]

(Original post by SciFiBoy)


I know very few people on the Left would be anything over than disgusted by this bill, I don't particularly even like the concept of nation states.

when does the Right ever actually do that though? other than a few (interestingly very quite about it) Libertarians that is? most of your lot seem to despise "immigrants" with a passion, it was also the Right who coined "deserving poor" which is a repulsive concept clearly evident here as well.

Could you name the core values that for you constitute "the right" and "the left"? It might seem like a ridiculous question, but I've a point.

[SciFiRory]

(Original post by Bax-man)
Could you name the core values that for you constitute "the right" and "the left"? It might seem like a ridiculous question, but I've a point.

well to be fair they are pretty vague terms, but generally as I have always understood it, left wing means libertarian social views coupled with socialistic/welfare statish economic views. right wing generally means Capitalist economic views to varying degrees and more authoritarian social views.

[HarveyCanis]

Absolutely not a chance. Definite nay. Disturbing to say the least.

[Bax-man]

(Original post by SciFiBoy)
well to be fair they are pretty vague terms, but generally as I have always understood it, left wing means libertarian social views coupled with socialistic/welfare statish economic views. right wing generally means Capitalist economic views to varying degrees and more authoritarian social views.

So let's suppose I'm a social liberal but a free marketeer through and through. Regulation is harmful and should be halted. Taxes should be as low as possible on the rich and poor. Government has no role involving itself in labour markets. Would you class me as being "right wing"? Similarly imagine someone who is an authoritarian social conservative, yet opposes markets in all their forms and advocates welfarism and socialism. Are they right wing?

Finally, where does this Bill fall? Is it an economic Bill (because it is essentially wage protectionism) or a social one (the movement of people)?

[SciFiRory]

(Original post by Bax-man)
So let's suppose I'm a social liberal but a free marketeer through and through. Regulation is harmful and should be halted. Taxes should be as low as possible on the rich and poor. Government has no role involving itself in labour markets. Would you class me as being "right wing"? Similarly imagine someone who is an authoritarian social conservative, yet opposes markets in all their forms and advocates welfarism and socialism. Are they right wing?

that is a fair point, I suppose technically you would be Left Wing socially and Right Wing economically if that makes sense, rather than just generally being one or the other.

[RoryS]

(Original post by toronto353)
Actually giving reasons behind your no votes will help to improve this Bill. Opposing and giving no reason for opposing is not helpful. You might as well not bother posting if you're simply going to say 'Nay/ no' and just vote in the lobby.

Change the record please...

It's up to the MP whether they decide to rant on about something for hours or just confirm their opinion on a particular bill. Some of us don't have the time to write an essay analysing every bill that passes through the Commons.

[SciFiRory]

(Original post by Bax-man)
Finally, where does this Bill fall? Is it an economic Bill (because it is essentially wage protectionism) or a social one (the movement of people)?

both I would say, though I would be opposed to it on both counts, iv'e never been entirely clear of what protectionism is, but generally things people say it is don't always seem like the kind of Socialism I believe in. (im very very left wing socially and economically )

[toronto353]

(Original post by RoryS)
Change the record please...

It's up to the MP whether they decide to rant on about something for hours or just confirm their opinion on a particular bill. Some of us don't have the time to write an essay analysing every bill that passes through the Commons.

I am sorry, but I hardly think, especially for these more experienced members, that writing a few sentences explaining their decision and offering suggestions on how to improve any Bill is too taxing. If people can't find time within the two to six days (and the first reading tends to be towards the six day mark) to write a simple reply, then they should give other more active members their seat.

[RoryS]

(Original post by toronto353)
I am sorry, but I hardly think, especially for these more experienced members, that writing a few sentences explaining their decision and offering suggestions on how to improve any Bill is too taxing. If people can't find time within the two to six days (and the first reading tends to be towards the six day mark) to write a simple reply, then they should give other more active members their seat.

Well, this bill is clearly pretty bad so I think we have a right too in this thread in particular.

[toronto353]

(Original post by RoryS)
Well, this bill is clearly pretty bad so I think we have a right too in this thread in particular.

So you've stated in ask a coalition that you will aim to take on board people's views to improve your Bill. So this requires people giving their opinions agreed? If so, then why should anyone bother given that you won't pay the author of this Bill the same courtesy and explain why you think it's bad? If you won't offer criticism and advice as to how you think that it should be improved, then people won't bother doing the same for your Bill later.

[RoryS]

(Original post by toronto353)
So you've stated in ask a coalition that you will aim to take on board people's views to improve your Bill. So this requires people giving their opinions agreed? If so, then why should anyone bother given that you won't pay the author of this Bill the same courtesy and explain why you think it's bad? If you won't offer criticism and advice as to how you think that it should be improved, then people won't bother doing the same for your Bill later.

For your benefit Toronto:

1) Firstly, I think the Bill is poorly written/organised/formatted. This makes it a difficult read and doesn't comply with HOC Law and/or the Bill Writing Guide stickied.

2) Immigrants are not a burden. They could bring wealth to the country and new ideas for business here in the UK, which we currently do not have.

3) There are hardly any jobs currently paying a salary of over £25,000. You do realise we are in a BIG recession not being improved, by this current Tory Government.

4) Jobs will not be permanent for immigrants. Where lots of the immigrants will work is in small businesses, and lots of these businesses are closing at an alarming rate because of limited support from the government.

[toronto353]

(Original post by RoryS)
For your benefit Toronto:

1) Firstly, I think the Bill is poorly written/organised/formatted. This makes it a difficult read and doesn't comply with HOC Law and/or the Bill Writing Guide stickied.

2) Immigrants are not a burden. They could bring wealth to the country and new ideas for business here in the UK, which we currently do not have.

3) There are hardly any jobs currently paying a salary of over £25,000. You do realise we are in a BIG recession not being improved, by this current Tory Government.

4) Jobs will not be permanent for immigrants. Where lots of the immigrants will work is in small businesses, and lots of these businesses are closing at an alarming rate because of limited support from the government.

Perfect. That response can help the author of this Bill to redraft it.