Anna Soubry doesn’t get it

o-ANNA-SOUBRY-NIGEL-FARAGE-facebook

A small postscript to my piece about Any Questions, which you’ll find below.  There was a question about child abuse, and the recent scandals.  I took the opportunity to air a point that I know has been of great concern to UKIP members.  I started my reply more or less as follows:

“This discussion of child abuse was raised, of course, by the Rotherham scandal.  It’s worth noting that the Labour Council in Rotherham took decisive action to remove three foster children from two very competent and experienced foster parents, because those foster parents supported UKIP.  Yet they allowed serious child abuse to continue on an industrial scale for more than a decade”.

This seemed to shock a number of people, including Jonathan Dimbleby, who immediately cut in to ask whether I was sure of my facts.  I said I was sure.  Indeed thinking about it afterwards, I am a bit surprised and concerned that someone so in touch with the media and the news agenda as Jonathan Dimbleby felt the need to ask for confirmation.

Then Anna Soubry, in her response, said “Helmer’s remarks show that UKIP just doesn’t get it”.  I waited, agog to hear her explanation of just how my remarks showed any such thing.  But no further explanation was forthcoming.

So for the avoidance of doubt, and to ensure that Anna is entirely clear on the issue, let me spell it out plainly.  Here we have a Labour Council which was prepared to use its child protection powers in pursuit of its own particular political prejudices, but totally failed, over many years, to use them to protect children.  It is clear from Professor Alexis Jay’s report that those responsible for child protection in Rotherham ignored appeals from victims, ignored complaints from parents, and indeed ignored earlier reports which the Council itself had commissioned.  We can speculate about why they may have behaved in this way, but the fact is that they did, and their failure was utterly reprehensible.

This seems to me to be an important point to make, and I should be glad to hear from Anna quite how my remarks relate to her criticism.  I’m afraid, Anna, that we do get it.  And given that your parliamentary majority is only 390, perhaps that should worry you.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

47 Responses to Anna Soubry doesn’t get it

  1. Phil Richmond says:

    Anna Soubry was one of the reasons I left the Conservative Party. For the life of me I can see one conservative thing about her. On top of this she is a nasty human being.

    • David says:

      Yes I have to agree going by every appearance I have seen, she has a mean set to her mouth, but that is not unique amongst a number of mp,s. She may of course be an angel to live with, I will never know. I also surprised that she does not know the facts regarding this subject, still she is in Defence, so very defensive, which probably causes her agression.

  2. PJ says:

    Roger, you should know by now that Anna Soubry is simply still a newsreader that happens to be an MP as well (may the good Lord help us!) Think back to her meddlesome intervening when attached to the health dept-what did she do? Charged off, unofficially, to luxembourg to vote for Britain on some cigarette matter when Britain weren’t even going to bother sending anyone-hence her rapid removal from her Health Dept position. She is an interfering old bat that needs to be removed by the good people of Broxtowe-after all, she is fully in favour of a factory closing down and the loss of probably 540 jobs in her Nottingham area-though she has no idea of how to find them other jobs!
    The woman should return to news reading, not trying to make it!

    • ps3person says:

      Excellent comments PJ, aggression and a big mouth is an unattractive feature on anyone, but on a woman it strikes me as even less attractive, and Soubray demonstrates that with applomb!

    • Ex-expat Colin says:

      Anna Soubry + Austin Mitchell on Yorkshire TV and you were be told the hard facts fairly forfcefully..Yawn!!

  3. Linda Hudson says:

    truth hurts the guilty, always has, and always will!

  4. ian wragg says:

    No doubt CMD and Millipede would like to have all of us who support Ukip castrated. With their overwhelming entitlement to rule us, any intruder should be neutered.
    Anna Soubray is all that is wrong with the Tory party.

  5. Mike Dixon says:

    Soubray is just an attack dog without the ability to offer cogent arguments.Not sure why she is coming to the aid of Rotherham Labour politicians though.

  6. vera says:

    So let me get this straight – Soubray would rather defend Labour run Rotherham than agree with UKIP?

  7. Me_Again says:

    She’s a waste of space anyway. I seem to remember her outraged attack on us for saying the Bulgarians and Romanians would be queuing up to get here…..seems we were correct. They just didn’t all turn up on January1st like the superficial woman suggested we forecast.

    • catalanbrian says:

      UKIP exaggerated and lied by saying that there would be vast numbers of Romanians and Bulgarians arriving as a result of the lifting of the restrictions. This has not happened, so I cannot see that UKiP was correct.

      • David says:

        Depends what you see as ” vast numbers” there have been many thousands according to a prog on TV within the last month.

      • catalanbrian says:

        There have indeed been several thousand Romanians and Bulgarians moving to work in the UK, as is their right, but hardly the 29 million that at one time UKIP was dishonestly suggesting might move to the UK because they had the right to do so. And in answer to your next post how do you know that they were Bulgarians/Romanians? Did you ask them?

      • Me_Again says:

        We never, ever, ever, said that 29 million would come, only that they could if they wanted. Only people who can’t read properly thought that. What we did was point out the ludicrous EU regulations which allow it and look what happened:
        “The total number of workers in Britain from across all EU countries was 1,836,000 in the latest figures, a leap of 187,000 or 11 per cent in just three months.”
        and…..
        “Figures from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) showed workers from the two countries, which saw job market restrictions lifted at the start of the year, topped 150,000 for the first time.”
        I mean even you surely aren’t going to deny the ONS numbers are you?

        You stand corrected….again.

      • catalanbrian says:

        But your intention was to scare people into believing the 29 million figure. And of the 150,000 most were in the UK before restrictions were lifted. You stand corrected – again

      • Me_Again says:

        Don’t be even more stupid than usual Brian. A creature with the IQ of a shrimp would have worked out that we were banging on about our lack of control, nothing else. The simple ability [however unlikely] of 29 million folks deciding to up-tit and move here was what we were trying to portray. Our complete and UTTER inability to say NO because of the fcuked up EU is what we were trying to highlight.

        The fact is that you either didn’t get it -in which case I shall address you as el camaron in future- or you knew you were being disingenuous, which is most likely.

        Now despite my visceral dislike of you I wouldn’t think that you had the IQ of a shrimp and so….you were being disingenuous – again.

      • catalanbrian says:

        So the UKIP poster which stated “26 million people in Europe are looking for work. And whose jobs are they after.” didn’t exist then. Of course you will claim that you were only trying to highlight the fact that nationals of other EU member states can come here to work, but in reality you were just trying to scare those people with the IQ of a shrimp into voting for UKIP. And you were of course very successful at that, given the EU election result. Finally please be aware that I feel rather proud of the fact that you have a visceral dislike of me. I have no particular feelings one way or the other about you , other than to feel sorry for someone who is so deluded.

      • Me_Again says:

        Actually it was a bit tame really wasn’t it? We might not of mentioned the jobs bit at all, just the coming here bit. Still, I would expect/hope the majority would actually come here to try and work, then get a low paid job, then get the tax credits to top it up, have a couple of kids then get working families tax credits with the child element which effectively doubles the amount.

        So you are actually confessing to being El Camaron? Incidentally does anyone else notice the similarity between the name of our current prime minister, his stature in the world and the Spanish word for shrimp?

        We shall see whether the people were voting like shrimps or sensible folks next May, or maybe later if Scotland does its own thing. Finally I’m glad you have something to be proud of Brian, the EU hasn’t.

      • catalanbrian says:

        “We might not of….”. Tsch Tsch

      • Me_Again says:

        Yes slipping into colloquial vernacular…… oops……

      • You obviously haven’t checked the numbers lately! R.

      • catalanbrian says:

        The ONS states that there are some 150,000, but that’s hardly what UKIP was suggesting, What other numbers are there?

      • Me_Again says:

        UKIP simply suggested that it is extraordinarily stupid to be a part of a club which scoops up countries with massively lower GDP and allows them to countries anywhere in the club and claim all of the entitlements that nationality would give them.
        You are arguing a moot point.
        Look at the 150,000 [assume 140,000 are not dentists/docs or any other useful occupation], 140 x £500/m tax credits = £70 million
        Assume 100,000 have children, assume 2. this = £50 million
        Plus child benefit for the 2 = £13.5 on top
        Plus housing benefit for those who bring partners with them, let’s say 75,000.
        this = £30 million
        No doubt there are variances up or down but these numbers are not unreasonable, so the grand net cost for just those 150,000 is £163.5 million and this does not include pensions in the future. Add in the other eastern Europeans and it just goes from bad to worse…….
        Estimates put it around 5bn plus.

        Net benefit to the country [excluding those UK citizens who have been displaced] amounts to 140,000 sets of basic NI at about a quid a week a measly £7.28 million.

      • catalanbrian says:

        Rather fanciful figures methinks. We can all play this sort of numbers game but it really gets us nowhere. You, who are obsessively against immigration, will play the costs and disbenefits up, whereas I, who take a more reasonable approach, would play the benefits up. Clearly we will never agree.

      • Me_Again says:

        Off you go again….’obsessively’…..’reasonable’…..what’s a ‘disbenefit’ by the way? Perhaps you meant drawback?

        Anyway I am only opposed to profligate immigration of people who’s abilities we aren’t short of. Do you suppose for one minute that these people would come over here and work for peanuts if they didn’t get tax credits, working tax credits and child tax credits as well as child benefit and housing benefit?
        They couldn’t survive without them. WE are the ones paying for them to come and sweep up our benefits.
        Now if they came over here in a shortage profession or occupation then that is entirely different. Seasonal workers can go back to being seasonal workers with work permits as before the stupid treaty.

      • Why’s it more reasonable to play the benefits of immigration up? Either way, you are still playing.

  8. Lorna says:

    They have been allowed to come since 2007 but have had restrictions on access to “work, benefits system, the nhs and so on”. Now all restrictions ended on January 1 this year and Bulgarians and Romanians are now entitled to claim the same benefits and NHS care as other EU citizens. As of the first quarter of 2014 28,000 more were working in the UK compared to the same time last year.

    Key Figures Migration Statistics August 2014
    Net long-term migration to the UK was estimated to be 243,000 in the year ending March 2014, a statistically significant increase from 175,000 in the previous 12 months.
    While net migration has increased since the most recent low of 154,000 in the year ending September 2012, it remains below the peak of 320,000 in the year ending June 2005.
    560,000 people immigrated to the UK in the year ending March 2014, a statistically significant increase from 492,000 in the previous 12 months. Two-thirds of the increase is accounted for by immigration of EU citizens (up 44,000 to 214,000).
    An estimated 316,000 people emigrated from the UK in the year ending March 2014. Long-term emigration has been relatively stable since 2010.
    28,000 EU2 (Romanian and Bulgarian) citizens immigrated to the UK in the year ending March 2014, a statistically significant increase from 12,000 in the previous 12 months.
    There was a statistically significant increase in immigration for work (up 38,000 to 228,000), driven by increases for EU15 and EU2 citizens. Estimated employment of EU citizens was 17% higher in April to June 2014, compared to the same quarter in 2013.
    Immigration for study remained stable (177,000) in the year ending March 2014. Study visas granted in year ending June 2014 rose 7%, reflecting higher levels of university-sponsored applications (applications for other education sectors fell).
    265,000 non-EU citizens immigrated to the UK in the year ending March 2014. This ends a steady decline since the recent peak of 334,000 in 2011.
    Work and study visas granted rose 10% (+14,799) and 7% (+13,885) respectively in the year ending June 2014, compared to the previous year, following a decline since 2011. The increase in work visas was largely accounted for by skilled work (+11,744).
    There were 23,479 asylum applications (main applicants) in the year ending June 2014, similar to the previous 12 months (23,523), but low relative to the 2002 peak (84,132).

  9. Philip Rock says:

    Catalanbrian accuses UKIP of having lied when simply making a prediction. How can that be a lie?
    But more than that, the UKIP predictions it has turned out were SPOT ON!
    Furthermore, why did Catalanbrian even bother to mention this when it has no connection with your blog, which is about that nasty woman Soubray? It is totally irrelevant.
    I suspect Catalnbrian did not understand what he/she was reading: more English lessons required!

  10. David says:

    2 arrived at rear of my office, in the bushes on side of river, slept under a duvet for 2 days, penniless, jobless, left a load of litter, no economic benefit at all as far as I can judge. West Yorkshire town. Plenty more passing every day.

  11. The way things are going with the Conservatives, only nasty human beings like her will remain!!!

  12. Ex-expat Colin says:

    I think all that happened was that we lowered their benefits queue and so they could be exploited here. That’s apart from those exploiting our benefits system along with the weakness of the Italian/French border.

    I believe a load were moved out of Marble Arch underground a week or so back .Agressive begging.

    Anyway Farage explained the theory that the the whole Eastern EU states could (repeat could) arrive here. The next lot will be in by ferry across Hadrians Wall via New Scotland.

  13. Ian Terry says:

    Anna Soubry like a lot of her collegues in Westminster should remember:- It is not a crime to be ignorant. It is a crime to show it. When Dictatorship Scotland goes YES a week thursday the Territorial Army should be erecting border crossing points on every road and track into England.
    Get our boats out of Faslane into the USA and give the remainder of the UK the promise that:-
    Should for whatever reason it goes wrong in the future we the English get a vote to say if we want them back!!! From a week Thursday all we do is look after our own totally, give away nothing because the more we give the more they will want, just like all the immigrants that arrive on our shores daily.

  14. David says:

    Brian, there are certain facial features and general appearance, plus a bunch of similar guys also visited them one morning, each nation/area has certain features which considerably narrow it, down, and should I come across them I will direct them to your charitable self, sounds like you would be delighted to have them squatting in your garden. Using your garden, water feature for a toilet, then going, leaving duvet and rubbish on site.

  15. David says:

    Brian I have seen a good number of Rumanians interviewed on TV, here working, well educated, professionals, concert pianists amongst them, very talented, but we have no way of applying standards, choosing those which we need, that’s all we ask, regardless of where they come from, if you had been penniless, no job, would you have got into wherever you are?

  16. David says:

    Me again, thanks for coming up with the official figures, and counting eh.

  17. David says:

    Brian, so is 150,000 a vast number? Not to you..

  18. David says:

    Its the ones which come here “Not to work”, which are the main concern.

    • Me_Again says:

      David, they are the tip of the ‘cost’ iceberg. There are hundreds of thousands who come and get jobs which are low paid, even lower than UK citizens can legally have because they pay minimum wage WITH deductions to follow, which can knock it down to £2 an hour! UK citizens wouldn’t put up with it.
      More to the point, we then subsidise their stay by allowing them to claim tax credits [£500/m] and when they have a couple of kids, child tax credits [£500/m]. Then there’s housing benefit [£400ish/m] and child benefit [2 children £135/m]
      So you end up with greedy businessmen using slave labour to produce goods and the UK taxpayer bringing their wages up to a reasonable level WITH BENEFITS. net contribution to the exchequer is a minimal amount of NI contributions.

      So the real cost to the UK, NOT GAIN for the treasury, is in the billions each year. Meanwhile the UK citizens dole Q grows with the long term unemployed. These businesses won’t take on Brits [not because of poor work, just cost].
      Then there’s the latest kick in the groin for the workers of this country, the Zero hours contract!
      This could only have been thought of in America where working for nothing [intern] is the norm and generally abusing workers is too the norm.[You’re fired!]

      No UK citizen [bread winner] can take a zero hours contract because how the hell does anyone work out what they’re earning? When they earn a bit the benefits folk say they overpaid and claw it back, then they say they can’t help when there’s no work for a week or so.

      These are genuine examples from people who have come to me with their problems. I am staggered at the national level incompetence. Our own people are being forced into penury by a system designed to suit EU migrants and not local people. Yes of course there are those who wouldn’t work if they had a job handed to them but they are not the majority by any stretch of the imagination.

      • Flyinthesky says:

        The reality of the immigration situation is the benfit of immigrants is privatised, the cost is socialised. If companies had to take on the entire resposibility for an immigrant employee for the first five years there wouldn’t be any.
        It would be interesting to see an accurate CBA done as to what level of income has to be earned for an immigrant to be a net benefit. It would be way beyon unskilled pay levels.
        I don’t have an issue per se with immigration and the free movement of people on the condition they are self sufficient and a net benefit.
        This is where Camerons negotiations fall apart, legislation as it stands allows member states to export their own social liabilities, what’s no to like, and it’s the reason it will never be resolved within the eu, all the net recipient nations will vote for its contiuance.

      • Me_Again says:

        Totally agree Fly.

      • When analysing the costs & benefits of immigration, no one seems to account for the British workers displaced. Of course it’s not one-for-one — some of the employment is additional. But nonetheless some are displaced (I’ve seen estimates of one displaced per four immigrant workers), and that cost should be added to the debit side.

      • Me_Again says:

        Completely agree Roger. So many factors are ‘accidentally’ not included in the calculations which make it into the public domain in order to distort the benefit or minimise the effects. That’s why we need UKIP MEPs harping on about it and your researchers collating evidence -just the truth mind, we don’t need our own spin and behave like the others.

      • David says:

        Agree with all that, just one trip to a hospital, a bit of surgery and 1 whole years Tax & NI is gone.

  19. Malcolm Edward says:

    I find that the Conservative party is not very keen to attack the Labour party for its many misdeeds – hardly surprising when the Conservative party continues many of the things that Labour plagued our country with like mass immigration from people who do not want to live like us.
    I an incensed by what has happened in Rotherham, and I find it galling that a Tory MP should want to avoid the facts and attack UKIP. With people like Anna Soubry in the Conservative party, it has become as rotten as Labour, and the people who suffer are the indigenous population. The minimum response should be to throw the perpetrators out of this country and to sack the officials who turned a blind eye.
    It becomes more apparent that only UKIP is on our side whether you are a former labour or tory voter. And it is the once Conservative party that is splitting the conservative vote by becoming non-conservative.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s