Now Sajid Javid suffers racist abuse from Corbyn supporters.

Many in this country want less migrants , are they racist trisher?

My point being that illegal immigrants don't all come from different 'races'.

If the terms racism and racist are used indiscriminately, which I think they are to some extent, they become ineffective in pushing change because they don't mean anything worth worrying about.

The areas of the country that seem to want less immigration seem usually to be the areas that do not have many migrants.
We are an ageing population and we need young people, most immigrants are young, we need them.
The target to bring immigration number down to the tens of thousands is unreasonable and unworkable.
We should be creating a welcoming environment not a hostile environment.
We should also be accepting more refugees, not talking about them as "a swarm" or similar.

I said at the time of the referendum and still say it, people fear migration , not because they are racist but they fear losing jobs, housing, their community. We need to understand their fears not condemn them as racist.

But, as I’ve said before, in the bigger cities where immigration is highest, there was a large majority voting Remain. It’s the rural areas - which are less affected by immigration - that voted Leave.
So people who live among and work among immigrants are not worried about the effects of immigrants taking their jobs or their housing. They know the reality.
It’s fear of the unknown in more rural areas. (Scotland has different issues).

Good you accept it is fear not racism .

Fear of immigrants of different races can result in racism though.

Immigrants will be of different races surely and can result does not mean will result

Baggs I commented about the mistreatment of women at Yarls Wood and not about their detention. Although it is perhaps significant that a substantial number are released without charge and not deported- after a substantial period in prison of course.
The chief inspector said the fact that two-thirds of the women at the removal centre were released after a period of detention rather than deported “raised questions about the justification for detention in the first place”.

He renewed his predecessor’s call for a strict time limit, saying when the inspection took place, 15 detainees had been held for between six months and a year, and one had recently been held in detention for more than three years.

But Clarke chose to highlight his concerns about the detention of women despite professional evidence of torture, rape and trafficking.
Nothing to do with racism of course!

These poor women have been abused because they're women. Yes they're at the mercy of those running and working at Yarls Wood because they've been detained while their status is confirmed.

It is appalling that this has been happening and so many have been detained unnecessarily, but their abuse isn't because of their race, it's because of their gender.

Smileless2012 how many white women do you supose are imprisoned in Yarls Wood? And that is not the opinion of black women
A dossier compiled by the Black Women’s Rape Action Project (BWRAP) brought together powerful testimony about a culture of racism and abuse at Yarl’s Wood from 2005 to 2015. Cristel Amiss, from the organisation, said: “There have been consistent reports of the same atrocious treatment – ranging from racist abuse to allegations of rape and sexual abuse and there’s been a systematic cover-up of this both by Serco, which runs the centre, and the government, which gives Serco the contract
So institutionalised and racist policies established and supported by this government.

I agree smileless,

trisher, I quote you: "So lemongrove you don't accept that the mistreatment of women in Yarls Wood is racist"

Your emphasis on Yarls Wood was racism. What you said (see above) implies the women were/are mistreated because of racism.

My response was that they are there because they are deemed to be illegal immigrants. If they shouldn't be detained because they are asylum seekers, that is a separate issue from your emphasis on racism. The whole emphasis of the post from which that quote is taken was, yes, you guessed it, racism.

Well said, smileless.

I wasn't sure if my memory served me right that asylum seekers are detained while their claims are checked out.

Trisher quoted: But Clarke chose to highlight his concerns about the detention of women despite professional evidence of torture, rape and trafficking.

This does not imply that the torture, rape and trafficking was happening at Yarls Wood even if it implies that there was good evidence that the women's claims as to why they were in the UK were true.

How would trafficking happen at a detention centre anyhow?

I suspect that if some of the women were detained longer than was ideal, this was due to inefficiency of the asylum process and/or bad management at the centre. Those are bad and should be improved but they are not racist.

I'm willing to be persuaded otherwise by good evidence but until that appears I'm sticking with Carl Sagan's "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence". You haven't provided that Trisher.

If most of the women at Yarls Wood are black that says more about the countries they've come from than it does about the UK.

To take this thread back in regard to some remarks, I certainly did not think that Labour would storm through these local council elections. The last time many of these seats were contested as in two thousand fourteen when Labour hit their high water mark in council seats won.

However, in 2016 the conservatives did very well, taking many Councils from Labour and proved to be the encouragement that brought Theresa May to the decision to go for a General Election in 2017. When the election campaign began the conservatives had those gains in mind and a Twenty point lead in the polls and were expecting to "wipe Labour out".

In the above, we all know what happened in that Election as Theresa May lost her overall majority and had to "buy" her way out of trouble by doing a deal with the Northern Ireland DUP party by "shaking the magic money tree" which cost British taxpayer many millions.

Therefore, should a General Election be forced on this government later this year as many believe could be the case, it can be argued that the Labour party will be starting from a far stronger position than they did in 2017.

However, no one should ever count their chickens before they are hatched as it is Interesting times we live in (LOL)

2014. The labour leader was Ed Milliband

2016. The labour leader was Corbyn

mmmmm

Yes and Corbyn did very well did he not anniebach.

This did me a giggle - are May and Corbyn stuck with each other and are we stuck with them. ?

Problem for both leaders would be that Brexit will undoubtedly be the major debate in the forthcoming months in Parliament. However, many cross party alliances have formed over several major issues surrounding Brexit which means their would be no overall majority or party unity for either Theriesa May or Jeremy Corbyn in those palimenterary votes. The foregoing could force a general election late this year many feel.

So, you could say they are stuck with each other in what is a "right ole mess" anniebach. Heaven help us all I am beginning to think.

^ It’s the rural areas - which are less affected by immigration - that voted Leave.^
So people who live among and work among immigrants are not worried about the effects of immigrants taking their jobs or their housing. They know the reality.
It’s fear of the unknown in more rural areas.

Not always though, mh
Some rural areas which have seen a lot of immigration from the EU have felt overwhelmed because GP services, schools, etc have not coped well with the high numbers of immigrant workers. Areas such as East Anglia voted Brexit. Larger towns in the East of England tended to vote remain but the rural areas voted decisively to leave.

Parts of Lincolnshire have a large immigrant population, it also had the highest leave vote 75%