No limits to immigration

[TomTomKent]

Hi Glyn,

Like it or not, the fact is that without "unelected pressure groups", from the Peasants Revolt to the Chartists to the Suffragettes et al, we would still be living in country of such inequalities that neither you nor I nor 90% of the population would even have the right to vote, not unless you happen to own, say, half of Essex!!!

Best wishes,

Zodiac.

Nope, because with out pressure groups the parliment would still be unelected and selected by the king, with the pure reason for giving him money to fund wars. You would have the privalege to say aye or nay, not a right.

Good point though.

[Limehouse]

Just as a matter of interest, Limehouse, what's the thinking behind this?

Having a seatbelt on surely wouldn't restrict his plying for hire would it?

Hi Stephen

My husband tells me it's to do with the need to frequently leave the cab to assist passengers with luggage and to help passengers in wheelchairs etc. The cab lobby was very strong back in the days when they passed the seatbelt law and cabbies managed to get the same exemption given to the emergency services.

[TomTomKent]

Just as a matter of interest, Limehouse, what's the thinking behind this?

Having a seatbelt on surely wouldn't restrict his plying for hire would it?

It is somewhat archaic now, and many ignore it. But I believe it was due to issues with wearing old fashioned seatbelts for extended periord. What might be a minor chaffe for a few hours on one long trip for regular drivers could be a constant irritant for those who wore the belt for 35 hours every week.

[Zodiac]

Pressure Groups

Equality before the law,is the principle under which each individual is subject to the same laws.I.e the law is the same for you as it is for me.

Pressure groups are the unelected, who ,while not passing statutes of parliament,nevertheless influence,cajol, bully others to conform to their ideas and principles.

Hi Glyn,

Like it or not, the fact is that without "unelected pressure groups", from the Peasants Revolt to the Chartists to the Suffragettes et al, we would still be living in country of such inequalities that neither you nor I nor 90% of the population would even have the right to vote, not unless you happen to own, say, half of Essex!!!

Best wishes,

Zodiac.

[Stephen Thomas]

My husband is a Licensed London Cabbie. Under the law he is exempt from the seat belt law when he is plying for hire. Most other people have to wear a seatbelt when driving but he does not - when he is plying for hire.

Just as a matter of interest, Limehouse, what's the thinking behind this?

Having a seatbelt on surely wouldn't restrict his plying for hire would it?

[TomTomKent]

I am struggling with the idea that pressure groups are something "from the last ten years". Perhaps Glyn missed Mary Whitehouse, suffrage movements, the peasant uprisings...

As for religious equality, the sikh allowances could be argued as an equality measure; an allowance to ensure one does not have to choose between faith or riding a motorbike. Of course if a siekh attempts to prance around a village centre with a short staff or clubs they would be arrested. Let alone a longsword. Once again it is one rule for morris dancers and pagans, another for others... or in the case of royalty it is a completely different law when it comes to catholics.

[HelenaWojtczak]

People here in the UK would be up in arms if it was suggested they couldn't exercise their right to emigrate to Spain to retire when they wanted to etc.

When I read Jen's comment I just HAD to share this with you all: a few weeks back I was chatting with some strange woman in the swimming pool and she said that she was so sick and tired of all the bloody immigrants in this country, taking our jobs, social housing, etc etc that she intended to join her son in Spain, where he is a builder.

She honestly could not see her own hypocrisy!

[babybird67]

ahhh ok

thanks Julie...it wasn't just me missing the point then...just that there was no point to miss.. thanks for that.

[Limehouse]

sorry Glyn you've lost me now. What is the point? What does the Sikh religion have to do with immigration? And what does their exemption from the helmet regulation have to do with immigration?

Absolutely nothing Jen.

I know at least ten Sikhs - they are all British and none of them rides a motorcycle.

[Limehouse]

Equality before the law,is the principle under which each individual is subject to the same laws.I.e the law is the same for you as it is for me.

But this is not always the case. My husband is a Licensed London Cabbie. Under the law he is exempt from the seat belt law when he is plying for hire. Most other people have to wear a seatbelt when driving but he does not - when he is plying for hire. So - presuming you are not a London Cabbie too - the law is different for him and you.

[babybird67]

sorry Glyn you've lost me now. What is the point? What does the Sikh religion have to do with immigration? And what does their exemption from the helmet regulation have to do with immigration?

[glyn]

Two, there are no convictions of which you speak since a Sikh believer is legally exempt from wearing a helmet, therefore no rules have been broken, therefore no convictions follow.

Which is exactly the point.

[glyn]

Equality before the law,is the principle under which each individual is subject to the same laws.I.e the law is the same for you as it is for me.

Pressure groups are the unelected, who ,while not passing statutes of parliament,nevertheless influence,cajol, bully others to conform to their ideas and principles.If you havent seen the evidence of that in recent years.You havent been looking.
Exceptions made for religious purposes is precisely the point.It doesnt alter the fact that there is not equality under the law.There should be no exceptions....you want to drive motorcycle? fine-get a helmet.
I didnt say a Sikh was necessarilly an immigrant,he could well be an essex born caucasian wo for whatever reason wanted to become a Sikh..it changes nothing.
If exceptions are made for religious beliefs,then why not exceptions for political beliefs also and so on and so forth?

[babybird67]

What race has more convictions for non compliance with road safety rules? (i.e specifically , not wearing a crash helmet while riding a motor cycle)1. non Sikh.....2. Sikh The answer is obvious,and of course you know why...

This is utter rubbish Glyn.

One, Sikhs are not a race, it's a religion.

Two, there are no convictions of which you speak since a Sikh believer is legally exempt from wearing a helmet, therefore no rules have been broken, therefore no convictions follow.

[TomTomKent]

First of all: Being a Sikh does not make you "foreign" or "not British". Your "exageration" assumes that "sikh" must equate to "immigrant". The motorcycle ruling was an exception made for religious reasons. If you want to join an established religion with simaler rules go ahead. It will have nothing to do with your immigration status.

Secondly: Exactly which laws are changed by anybody who is "unelected"? British law is changed in parliment (Elected) or the European Parliment (also elected).