Farage’s Political Earthquake Begins to Rattle Britain’s Foundations

[nauseus]

2 hours ago, johnnybangkok said:

https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/commentaries/family-fortunes-the-uks-new-income-requirement-for-partner-visas/
 

Yeah ‘cos Googling is hard. 

 

 

As deviation is easy.

 

You add a link for visa requirements for legal migrants after your post about refugees! 

 

Not the same thing at all. Muppet Show in progress.

[nauseus]

2 hours ago, newbee2022 said:

Do you think, there is no war in Middle East??😳

 

Your question mark almost made me wonder. 

[johnnybangkok]

28 minutes ago, Stocky said:

Sorry but you're wrong there.

If I wanted to move back to the UK and take my Thai wife with for longer than 180 days per year she needs to apply for a Spouse Visa. Currently the requirements are either I have a job with an income of at least £29,000 per annum (can be combined income if wife had employment too), or savings of at least £65,000. The financial requirements were brought in in 2012 by the Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition.

What part are we not getting? Yes you have to prove that you can sustain you and your wife and that you are not going to be a burden to the state (because she is Thai after all) but if you can’t do that then you personally can still go back. 
Obviously no government is going to let a penniless national rock up with a bint from Nana and expect to pay for her but the requirements are reasonable and achievable. 

[youreavinalaff]

1 minute ago, johnnybangkok said:

What part are we not getting? Yes you have to prove that you can sustain you and your wife and that you are not going to be a burden to the state (because she is Thai after all) but if you can’t do that then you personally can still go back. 
Obviously no government is going to let a penniless national rock up with a bint from Nana and expect to pay for her but the requirements are reasonable and achievable. 

£65k in savings. The amount you said was imaginary. What is it? Imaginary or a requirement?

[newbee2022]

28 minutes ago, nauseus said:

 

Your question mark almost made me wonder. 

Why.

It's what I learned at school. 

[nauseus]

38 minutes ago, newbee2022 said:

Why.

It's what I learned at school. 

 

School?

[Stocky]

3 hours ago, johnnybangkok said:

What part are we not getting? Yes you have to prove that you can sustain you and your wife and that you are not going to be a burden to the state (because she is Thai after all) but if you can’t do that then you personally can still go back. 
Obviously no government is going to let a penniless national rock up with a bint from Nana and expect to pay for her but the requirements are reasonable and achievable. 

I'm perfectly aware of the requirements to take a foreign spouse to the UK, so there's nothing I'm 'not getting'. However, the bit I don't get is your sudden change of tune from the post I responded to which said 65k savings was imaginary, it isn't. 

[johnnybangkok]

20 minutes ago, Stocky said:

I'm perfectly aware of the requirements to take a foreign spouse to the UK, so there's nothing I'm 'not getting'. However, the bit I don't get is your sudden change of tune from the post I responded to which said 65k savings was imaginary, it isn't. 

 

“No, a British citizen does not need £65,000 to sponsor their Thai wife for a UK Spouse Visa. The minimum income requirement is £29,000 per year, or £88,500 in cash savings held for at least 6 months.”

 

ok?

 

 

 

 

[Patong2021]

On 5/2/2025 at 10:50 PM, Eloquent pilgrim said:

 

Well I’m sure a Reform Council will not give free rein to the muslim rape gangs that are still operating with impunity all over the UK, in the same way that both Labour and Tory councils have; hope that doesn’t upset you too much.

 

 

How would a Reform Council or any council for that matter be able to do what you describe?  Which one of their powers would a local council use?   The only policing related power that a local council has is in respect to the  Power to install and maintain equipment with view to preventing and detecting crime in own area (e.g.  surveillance cameras). This would not accomplish what you demand.

 

[newbee2022]

7 hours ago, nauseus said:

 

School?

Yes, you don't know what it is? You never went to school?

[BritManToo]

9 hours ago, johnnybangkok said:

What are you talking about? Seriously stop making up nonsense. 
Your Thai wife is still YOUR wife. Perhaps you might have to jump through a few more hoops to prove that but she still remains YOUR wife so if you want to go back to the UK, there’s nothing they can do to stop you. You’re just making up nonsense or you are literally daft enough to believe the cr@p people are feeding you. You don’t need this imaginary 65k you keep cr@pping on about. It’s all in your head and if I may be so bold, you should perhaps have it looked at. 

As far as I know to bring my foreign spouse to the UK, I will need to prove an annual income of over 29,000GBP or a minimum cash savings of 88,500GBP, sorry the 65k I was quoting was raised last year.

[Stocky]

9 hours ago, johnnybangkok said:

What are you talking about? Seriously stop making up nonsense. 
Your Thai wife is still YOUR wife. Perhaps you might have to jump through a few more hoops to prove that but she still remains YOUR wife so if you want to go back to the UK, there’s nothing they can do to stop you. You’re just making up nonsense or you are literally daft enough to believe the cr@p people are feeding you. You don’t need this imaginary 65k you keep cr@pping on about. It’s all in your head and if I may be so bold, you should perhaps have it looked at. 

 

5 hours ago, johnnybangkok said:

 

“No, a British citizen does not need £65,000 to sponsor their Thai wife for a UK Spouse Visa. The minimum income requirement is £29,000 per year, or £88,500 in cash savings held for at least 6 months.”

 

ok?

 

 

Thanks for the update, it was 65k prior to this years increase, it has never been imaginary as your prior post stated, nor do you have any right to bring a foreign wife to the UK, they can indeed stop you.

[James105]

8 hours ago, Patong2021 said:

 

How would a Reform Council or any council for that matter be able to do what you describe?  Which one of their powers would a local council use?   The only policing related power that a local council has is in respect to the  Power to install and maintain equipment with view to preventing and detecting crime in own area (e.g.  surveillance cameras). This would not accomplish what you demand.

 

 

Have you not noticed how loud Reform have been with just 4 MPs?  I suspect they will become a lot louder with all these councillors, councils and now mayors in their party.   Obviously there is limits on what councils can do when the incompetent clowns in government have the real power, but they can certainly demonstrate wastefulness in the councils and be transparent about what money is being spent on (I doubt any rainbow colored zebra crossings will be painted in Reform areas for example), they can resist illegal migrants being put in hotels in their council areas causing those migrants to be housed in Labour voting areas which will in turn highlight how bad the problem is, which of course in turn will lead to those areas turning to Reform.    

 

Next year the areas which Reform were favorites to win will get their turn to vote in the local elections as Labour were too scared to let them vote this year.   What do you think Labour will achieve within a year to prevent Reform gobbling up the majority of councils in England and Wales?  Smash the gangs perhaps?  Fix the foundations?  Go further and faster?   Or <insert your nonsense 3 word slogan here>?   

[JAG]

9 hours ago, Patong2021 said:

 

How would a Reform Council or any council for that matter be able to do what you describe?  Which one of their powers would a local council use?   The only policing related power that a local council has is in respect to the  Power to install and maintain equipment with view to preventing and detecting crime in own area (e.g.  surveillance cameras). This would not accomplish what you demand.

 

They don't have specific powers, but they do have considerable influence. It certainly appears that local councils, and the agencies which they control, have in the past used that influence to umh, curtail,  the prosecution of the "grooming gangs"

[youreavinalaff]

10 hours ago, johnnybangkok said:

 

 

“No, a British citizen does not need £65,000 to sponsor their Thai wife for a UK Spouse Visa. The minimum income requirement is £29,000 per year, or £88,500 in cash savings held for at least 6 months.”

 

ok?

 

 

 

 

The requirements aren't imaginary then. Right?

 

There is a difference between the requiremrnts for a Btitish national and a refugee. Right?

[Patong2021]

33 minutes ago, JAG said:

They don't have specific powers, but they do have considerable influence. It certainly appears that local councils, and the agencies which they control, have in the past used that influence to umh, curtail,  the prosecution of the "grooming gangs"

I offer that a professional police force and  professional  prosecutor's office should not be influenced by local councils when it comes to carrying out their responsibilities. If they are, then the problem lies in large part with the police and prosecutors. As we know from the Pakistani grooming gangs fiasco in Rochdale, there was  gross ineptitude on the part of the Greater Manchester police. They failed to investigate allegations. The Children were even collected at care homes. The police and prosecutors must be independent to address the possibility that local councils which are responsible for local care homes do not have  council members who see the homes as convenient child sex larders.  The councils can certainly  call for investigations into criminal activities, but they do that now.

 

[Patong2021]

1 hour ago, James105 said:

 

Have you not noticed how loud Reform have been with just 4 MPs?  I suspect they will become a lot louder with all these councillors, councils and now mayors in their party.   Obviously there is limits on what councils can do when the incompetent clowns in government have the real power, but they can certainly demonstrate wastefulness in the councils and be transparent about what money is being spent on (I doubt any rainbow colored zebra crossings will be painted in Reform areas for example), they can resist illegal migrants being put in hotels in their council areas causing those migrants to be housed in Labour voting areas which will in turn highlight how bad the problem is, which of course in turn will lead to those areas turning to Reform.    

 

Next year the areas which Reform were favorites to win will get their turn to vote in the local elections as Labour were too scared to let them vote this year.   What do you think Labour will achieve within a year to prevent Reform gobbling up the majority of councils in England and Wales?  Smash the gangs perhaps?  Fix the foundations?  Go further and faster?   Or <insert your nonsense 3 word slogan here>?   

 

I expect that some of the Reform council members will prove to be embarrassments. Many were not well vetted. Others may find that dealing with rubbish collection, parking complaints and so on will be rather exhausting and annoying. The citizens who regularly appear at council meetings to complain  are often a few cards short of a full deck. The election will not change the realities of dealing with some  lazy council workers who will rely on their union to  protect them. It is easy to criticize council members, and it doesn't matter if Lib Dem or Labour or Tory because they all have to deal with some very tiresome and stupid people.

[JAG]

1 hour ago, Patong2021 said:

I expect that some of the Reform council members will prove to be embarrassments. Many were not well vetted.

Just how well vetted was the Labour councillor currently (and it seems indefinitely!) awaiting trial for calling, in public, for throats to be slit?

[James105]

1 hour ago, Patong2021 said:

I expect that some of the Reform council members will prove to be embarrassments. Many were not well vetted. Others may find that dealing with rubbish collection, parking complaints and so on will be rather exhausting and annoying. The citizens who regularly appear at council meetings to complain  are often a few cards short of a full deck. The election will not change the realities of dealing with some  lazy council workers who will rely on their union to  protect them. It is easy to criticize council members, and it doesn't matter if Lib Dem or Labour or Tory because they all have to deal with some very tiresome and stupid people.

 

It's weird how Reform councillors are being held to some kind of standard that is not applied to Labour.  It's not as if Reform have ousted the creme de la creme of politicians.   Labour have set the embarrassment bar so high I don't even know if it is possible for Reform to reach it.  

 

If Reform make efforts to cut wastage of taxpayer money or resist illegal migrants staying in taxpayer funded hotels and the Unions stand in their way who do you think the public will blame?   If the purple haired nose ring wearing weirdos turn up to protest with their placards who do you think the public will side with?   The Labour/Tory uni-party have failed.  They continue to fail.   It will take a monumental effort for Reform to do a worse job in either the council or government.  

 

[Photoguy21]

On 5/3/2025 at 9:15 AM, Chomper Higgot said:

Reform now move from a party complaining about other people’s failures to deliver to a party that must now itself deliver.

 

Reform’s failure to vet their candidates who are now in public office and therefore open to public scrutiny is going to make for some interesting times ahead.

 

 

Exactly. As they say put up or shut up

[Eloquent pilgrim]

13 hours ago, Patong2021 said:

 

How would a Reform Council or any council for that matter be able to do what you describe?  Which one of their powers would a local council use?   The only policing related power that a local council has is in respect to the  Power to install and maintain equipment with view to preventing and detecting crime in own area (e.g.  surveillance cameras). This would not accomplish what you demand.

 

 

 

Well, that’s a fair enough question, and in answer I would say that local Councils (can) have a huge impact. They are directly responsible for, and provide funding for, Social welfare services, which importantly includes Children’s services under the 1989 Children Act. It has emerged from the rape gang scandal, that many council care services were negligent in their responsibilities; many reports of young girls in care being picked up from care homes by older Pakistani men in cars, without it even being questioned, let alone reported; which is completely unacceptable, I’m sure you would agree.

 

Local councils also liaise with the local police to raise (or not - as it would seem with the rape gangs) concerns that have been raised with them by members of the public, or care services.

 

The problem with the Labour councils has been the indoctrination of protecting the muslim vote that has filtered down from the very top of the party. This has just manifested itself in the shape of Labour MP and leader of the House of Commons, Lucy Powell; she interrupted a commentator on BBC Radio 4’s Any Questions, who dared to mentioned the rape gangs scandal, to say “Oh, we want to blow that little trumpet now, do we? Let’s get that dog whistle out, shall we?”

 

This was utterly appalling, especially for a woman and leader of the House to say, and there are calls for her to resign; she was forced to apologise, and two-tier will no doubt stand by her, but to quote Maya Angelou "When someone shows you who they are - believe them the first time"

 

 

 

 

[Eloquent pilgrim]

4 hours ago, JAG said:

They don't have specific powers, but they do have considerable influence. It certainly appears that local councils, and the agencies which they control, have in the past used that influence to umh, curtail,  the prosecution of the "grooming gangs"

 

Absolutely, and we have just seen where the influence on these Labour councils comes from. Labour MP and leader of the House of Commons, Lucy Powell, has just recently interrupted a commentator on BBC Radio 4’s Any Questions, who dared to mentioned the rape gangs scandal to say “Oh, we want to blow that little trumpet now, do we? Let’s get that dog whistle out, shall we?” 

 

….. disgraceful woman, and one right at the top of the Labour team designated with the task of protecting the muslim vote, rather than protecting the young white girls that are the victims; this is why Labour won’t open a full national public enquiry into the rape gangs.

 

 

 

[CG1 Blue]

On 5/3/2025 at 2:08 PM, Chomper Higgot said:

One of the things they’ll need to deliver on is housing.

They can't do much worse than Labour. Landlords are being incentivised to evict private tenants (under section 21) to make way for illegal immigrants. 

 

No wonder the boats keep on coming. 

 

Landlords offered five-year full rent deals to house asylum seekers

https://landlordknowledge.co.uk/landlords-offered-five-year-full-rent-deals-to-house-asylum-seekers/

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

40 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

They can't do much worse than Labour. Landlords are being incentivised to evict private tenants (under section 21) to make way for illegal immigrants. 

 

No wonder the boats keep on coming. 

 

Landlords offered five-year full rent deals to house asylum seekers

https://landlordknowledge.co.uk/landlords-offered-five-year-full-rent-deals-to-house-asylum-seekers/

 

 

The privatization of housing provision was a Tory flagship policy.

 

And yet one more Tory privatization policy that has failed.

 

Anyway, back to housing being one of the issues newly elected Reform Councilors will need to deal with.

[JAG]

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The privatization of housing provision was a Tory flagship policy.

 

And yet one more Tory privatization policy that has failed.

 

Anyway, back to housing being one of the issues newly elected Reform Councilors will need to deal with.

I am sorry, but I fail to see the connection between a past Tory policy on "privatisation of housing provision" and "Landlords are being incentivised to evict private tenants (under section 21) to make way for illegal immigrants. "

[Bkk Brian]

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The privatization of housing provision was a Tory flagship policy.

 

And yet one more Tory privatization policy that has failed.

 

Anyway, back to housing being one of the issues newly elected Reform Councilors will need to deal with.

Anyway, back to housing being one of the issues newly elected Reform Councilors will need to deal with.

 

Do you think these newly elected Councilors will want to start on the actual wishes of the electorate that voted them in after Labour failed so badly at them?

 

I'm sure you know what those wishes are right? 

[BritManToo]

Town and Parish councils have no authority over planning.

It's all down to district councils.

 

So it would depend on which type of council the new councillors were elected.

 

@CG1 Blue

And the five year rent deals have been on offer for the past 20 years. Good deal too, council takes your house, pays you the rent, does all maintenance at their cost, hands it back fully restored five years later. Zero work or risk for the landlord.

[CG1 Blue]

2 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The privatization of housing provision was a Tory flagship policy.

 

And yet one more Tory privatization policy that has failed.

 

Anyway, back to housing being one of the issues newly elected Reform Councilors will need to deal with.

It was intended to help address the shortage of housing for UK citizens and reduce homelessness. Not to house thousands of young male chancers turning up on small boats. 

And Labour are in government now. They decide if Tory initiatives stay or go. 

 

These election results will give Reform a louder voice regarding all these incentives for thousands of young men to cross the channel every year. 

[youreavinalaff]

10 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

It was intended to help address the shortage of housing for UK citizens and reduce homelessness. Not to house thousands of young male chancers turning up on small boats. 

 

Incorrect. The link you posted even proves it.

[Eloquent pilgrim]

On 5/3/2025 at 9:27 AM, johnnybangkok said:

I’m done with you and your very obvious Islamophobia and your even more obvious one sided, bigoted view. There’s no objectivity and there’s certainly no desire to understand.

 

This is typical of left wing shallow thinkers, for whom the recently invented word “Islamophobia” is a heaven sent tool for censoring, or better still, shutting down, any criticism of Islam.

 

Rather than admit there is a problem, and have a conversation about the myriad issues that many people think Islam brings to western civilisation, like terrorism, FGM, homophobia, misogyny, inter-cousin marriage, and rape gangs, you choose to try and shut down any conversation about it.

 

There is no phobia attached to my fear of Islam, or my revulsion at practices like female genital mutilation, honour killings and rape gangs, but you hide behind using the term Islamophobia; three other posters on here have called me Islamophobic, and all three of them are antisemites, but that’s probably just a coincidence, eh ?