That depends whether they passd through any safe countries to get here.

So determined to finish the issue they “sat on their hands”. I hope the Ghurkas are grateful.

Bit of acting and TV celebrity will do the trick!

Worked for that dissimulator Blair.

Surallan for London Mayor.
Lumley for PM.

Perhaps all aspiring politicians should book themselves in for a course at RADA, as opposed to learning how to help real people with real problems? Bit of acting and TV celebrity will do the trick!

“Screw you. I’m Lab supporting the Gurkhas. But fed up with Tory lies – how many Gs did they home? 0!”

Worth pointing out that pre-97 the Gurkha regiments were based in Hong Kong, and that Gurkhas were awarded Hong Kong citizenship. This had been the case since, I believe, WW2 – and there were certainly a lot of Gurkhas in HK when I was there. Rather obviously that solution ended in 97, and the question for Labour to answer was what to do next. Blaming the Tories doesn’t get us very far on this.

On a wider point, how politically dense to you have to be not to realise that Gurkhas+Joanna Lumley > Phil Woolas+Gordon Brown?

Actions speak louder than words – what Salter says is hardly ever what Salter does.

To this day he will tell anyone who listens that he opposed the invasion of Iraq, but that’s not borne out by his voting record.

I described his ‘opposition’ to the governments plans for a third runway at Heathrow at the time as “pandering to popular sentiment in a strategic constituency for his party” and nothing could be more true in a general sense. Immigration, animal rights, gay rights, drugs, pornography, expenses – take your pick it’s all grist to his ability to pile up votes. In fact you’d be hard-pressed to discover what lines he wouldn’t cross.

I’ve been unlucky enough to have him as my local MP and there are umpteen examples of him lying, bullying and worse, as I have experienced first hand and has been documented by numerous sources. I was a fool to help him into office in 97 (the campaign was my first experience of politics up close) but I soon learnt about the beast that had been created.

Salter’s abstention on the Gurkhas is perfectly in line with his ploy of making a big show of ideals but habitually choosing expediency. It makes him look like the voice of reason, but it is entirely cynical.

Until RBC changed to NOC he ruled the council like it was his personal fiefdom, with personal ‘friends’ in all the strategic offices from chief executive down to the ground. He is in politics for himself and has a strategic job within the party based on his ability to con voters into giving their support. And as your response shows he is anybody’s poodle.

Salter claims he is a reason why Labour is successful (or the reason locally), but in my view he is a prime example of what is wrong with the party and why any success they have is not necessarily in the public interest and will only ever be temporary – at least for that we can be hopeful.

http://www.ukvisas.gov.uk/en/ecg/chapter29/

There is so much emotional nonsense about this Ghurka issue, I’m struggling to find facts. Anyone able to point to an unbiased source?

#26 What sort of record do national socialists have when they gain power?

No worries. I have yet to address the whole question of Osama Saeeds’ candidacy for Glasgow Central, y’know, to my own satisfaction. However, what is pretty clear is that his main opponent, Anas Sarwar owes his candidacy to nepotism. (His father is the incumbent MP). Last year I railed against the potential Clinton / Bush duopoly of the Presidency, so I am not exactly a happy bunny to see it closer to hand. Notwithstanding that, neither am I happy to read this, which even if you remove the slurs, ought to be answered:

http://www.hurryupharry.org/2009/04/25/quilliam-offends-the-snp/#comments

I am a tad surprised, to say the least, that he didn’t comment on it.

That’s because it isn’t what I wrote. I deliberately stated: “Spending on education and health is not a moral issue, because it is expedient on any government to fund them, and the argument is how much.”

Again off-topic, but there is no shame in tactically voting SNP to prevent Labour domination, particularly as the Liberal coalition in Scotland had served its course. I am sorry if I implied otherwise!

I’m simply unsure that a party that swings wildly into corporatism when it feels like it, or the recent candidate selection of an apologist for radical Islamist groups such as those that attacked Glasgow airport and Hizb-ut-Tahrir who were active at my university until November <a href=(unconvincing rebuttal here), can be really said to have moral authority among the liberal left.

You’re introducing arguments that aren’t relevant. The Gurkha issue is regarding one main issue and that is that the courts ruled that the government needed to make provision for these people and they failed to make an adequate provision.

No.

No shame whatsoever.

If you check out their policies, absent independence, they probably reflect more about what this site claims to be than any other political party. It ain’t the BNP-lite or summat.

chavscum @ 25,

You’d probably claim it is an emotional case – what exactly is wrong with that btw – but putting your life on the line for this great country of ours (sarcasm alert) seems to me to carry obligations somewhat beyond normal employment law. But, there you go, the French can do it for the Foreign Legionnaires, within three years of enlistment or quicker if you are wounded. They call it “Français par le sang versé” (”French by spilled blood”), which has an attractive ring to it….

And I, for one, would have allowed the Iraq interpreters in too.

Obviously, some of you want a World without borders and others want to destroy British identity and culture through immigration, so the questions are for the more reasoned readers. Thanks.

Off topic, I know, but just to reply to you.

Despite being a member, I’m a bit ambivalent about the SNP. However, on the major issues they tick all the right boxes for me. Having lived my entire life on the basis that I would never join a club that would have me, I overcame that and signed up.

So, my membership is a bit provisional, really.

My basic arguement is that the SNP manifesto contains a lot of left wing policies that I’d like to see implemented, and that within a UK context all I can foresee is them being damned to oblivion. Y’know nuclear weapons, immigration, stuff like that. So, my idea, for what it’s worth, is that I’ll vote SNP until independence and then revert to voting Liberal.

This is known as tactical voting.

The real question is whether the liberal left can either a) as Labour members have any hope of convincing the New Labour cadre to stand down at the autumn conference, which I find highly, HIGHLY unlikely, or b) accept that it is Lib Dems that can finally offer effective opposition to the next Conservative government and move to back them in their areas, either in hope of “waking Labour up” or in stopping the slide of illiberal and wilfully damaging legislation that has followed many years of good service and accomplishments, and threatens to be permanently derailed by a Tory government promising more of the same.

We really need a sense of moral direction on the liberal left and we are certainly not getting it from a Party that is exercised more about power than it is about politics.

I would seriously suggest that this site ought to back the Liberal Party until such times as the Labour Party comes back to it’s senses. Meanwhile, I’ll keep voting SNP.