Tony Walley – On My Stoke-on-Trent Soapbox

I haven’t had a good old rant for a while and while life in Stoke-on-Trent isn’t that bad, some of the issues attracting national press coverage is getting me slightly hot under the collar.

Asylum Seekers ““ A Home From Home?

Birmingham City Council, the country’s largest Local Authority, has decided that it will not house anymore Asylum Seekers in the future.

Birmingham City Council will not renew its five-year contract with the UK Border Agency, meaning not a single immigrant will be granted asylum there by the public sector after June next year.

The Councillor in charge of housing, Cllr John Lines, said that the move was not to save money, neither was it racist or political. He said it was designed to protect Brummies.

“Hundreds of Brummies, hundreds of my people are in B&Bs instead of council-provided homes. Why should that be? My people have got to come first.

“The asylum seekers arrive here, they have a blooming family and they keep having children – it’s a burden on the system.

“If people say I’m racist then I’d say we’ve got Brummies of all colours here, third or fourth generation Asians and blacks, but if you say I’m putting Birmingham people first, then, yes, I am.”

Cllr Lines is a Conservative Councillor and is the Cabinet Member for Housing and it seems that his concerns are spreading.

Wolverhampton are also considering ending their agreement with the UK Border Agency.

In the past year, some 1000 Asylum Seekers have been settled in Birmingham but the Agency has only paid for the housing of 200 of them.

Britain’s second city has an estimated 6500 homeless, some living rough on the streets.

To me it is refreshing for a mainstream politician to come out and make his city’s sons and daughters his No 1 priority. It matters not about creed or colour, it’s about looking after your own in times of need.

In Stoke-on-Trent , at the end of December 2009, there were 515 Asylum Seekers [not including their dependents] housed in the City. Most were living in accommodation not supplied by our City Council.

In a progressive society, we should give asylum to the most needy cases. All civil societies across the world should help shoulder the burden.

Asylum and Immigration are inevitable but must be kept to levels where the native population do not feel second best.

The Politics of the far right have prospered on the lies and myths their supporters have perpetrated that have gone unchallenged by our mainstream political parties.

At the last general election, immigration was forced to the top of the agenda. Politicians actually started to recognise [not that they didn't know, they just chose to ignore it] that the issue was a real concern to Joe & Josie Public. It doesn’t make our society racist, it just means that our population have genuine concerns for theirs, and their children’s future.

If there is an ongoing debate on asylum and immigration, with our mainstream politicians taking the lead [Ed Miliband didn't shy away from the issue during the Labour Leadership Contest], the move to the far right will become a distant memory of the past.

The politics of hate, division and intolerance can be put to bed once and for all!

Tuition Fees

My son voted for Nick Clegg’s “Ëœlets rid the country of tuition fees’ Lib Dems at the last election ““ Oh how we laughed!

The LibDem u-turn on this policy has to be one of the most shameful political episodes in our history.
How many voters [particularly the young ones voting for the very first time] were duped by this promise?

An independent review of student finance, which is due to come out tomorrow, is expected to recommend removing the cap on university fees altogether, which could see some “Ëœhigh performing’ universities charge up to £10,000 per year.

The report will recommend a fee of around £7000 from as early as 2012. Graduates that go on to earn high salaries will repay their student loans at a higher rate of interest.

The government says it can no longer afford the system: for every £100 a student borrows to defer the payment of tuition fees until after graduation, the government pays about £35. This, it says, is unsustainable.

Added to this, there has been a 16% year-on-year rise in applications for university.

If there is no revolt among the Liberal Democrats over this issue it will prove just what levels Clegg and his ilk will sink to, to get a modicum of power and to hold on to it at any cost.

My other concern is one of unfairness.

It is unfair that Scotland were allowed to abolish tuition fees back in 2000. This has created a division across the UK that can not be justified.

How can it be right for families in Scotland to benefit massively at the expense of every other young person across the United Kingdom.

Cameron should lead on his “Ëœwe’re all in this together’ mandate and force the Scottish Parliament to re-introduce tuition fees as a matter of urgency.

The other real danger in all this is that there will be a real possibility of creating a “Ëœclass’ mentality among the students of our nation.

The richest and most affable young men and women rather than the most able and talented will be able to fund the £10k for the Oxbridge courses.

Education has all been about inclusiveness for the past god knows how many years and that “Ëœevery child matters’ ““ That is of course until they are old enough to be forced to enter into a university culture that is built upon the ability to pay.

Isn’t it bad enough that we saddle our young graduates with massive debt before they have earned a penny? Now they will have to pay double for that privilege along with being ostracised from courses where the next band of politicians may come from.

Have Your Say

  • Gary Elsby

    Tony, if you’ll recall, in my far reaching election leaflet, I claim that 2 1/2 Million people are homeless in the UK (some sleep rough). I’m so ashamed of this that I further wrote, on this blog and to 42,500 homes, that 1 million social houses should be built to house ‘some of them’.
    The actual figure is 2 million homes.
    I went on and on…”This would create hundreds of thousands of new jobs, millions of paid hours and tens of thousands of apprenticeships”.
    I carried this through the Labour channels before I was relieved of duty and it sailed through to Conference where it was buried somewhere on the M25.

    Nothing is new and shit politicians haven’t got a clue for an answer.

    ‘There are millions of children sleeping rough throughout the world tonight. Not one of them is in Cuba’(billboard Havana airport, Cuba)

    Inspiration is easy to find and nothing is particularly clever or good about a Brummie apologist doing a bit of careerism clap trap.
    let’s hear his answer for the home-less, after all, you’ve heard mine.

  • Ian Norris

    Will Birminghams lead in ending its contract with Border Agency have much of an impact if 80% of Asylum Seekers are not housed by the Border Agency?

    To me it looks like a very political more, and not sure how it will prevetn far right votes?

    When does Stoke on Trents contact end, and are there calls for it not to renewed, but as again if mayority in Stoke are not housed Border Agency does it matter?

  • Bill Cawley

    It will be interesting how the Browne changes will impact upon local Universities esp Staffordshire. I suppose there has always been a division between the Russell group and the rest, but will this gap increase and you have in the bottom half of the Guardian league table of Universities falling further behind.

    What will be the point of having 30 k of debt and being unable to get a job commiserate with your talents esp if you stick around in Stoke?

  • Nicky Davis

    Asylum Seekers ““ A Home From Home?

    I find it rather revealing that councils have these contracts to reserve a housing quota specifically for asylum seekers in the first place. Surely it would be better to allocate housing fairly according to needs criteria. Even better to have sufficient housing.

    So, if so called “Ëœright winged’ politicians complain of unfairness of asylum seekers being housed in preference to locals, this is racist lies and myths (even if it’s true), hate, division and intolerance, whilst if “Ëœmainstream’ politicians say the same thing it is genuine concern for their and their children’s future? I don’t get it. This sounds awfully discriminatory to me. Can’t we just do away with this unnecessary “Ëœleft/right’ bickering and have a more sensible united discussion?

    Tuition Fees

    Politicians should stick to their election promises. It is a shameful affront to democracy when they don’t! Any libdem (or anyone in fact) who promised to vote against a rise in tuition fees who goes back on this should be booted out. We need a recall mechanism where the electorate can do this, just based on the fact their MP is a liar (at some risk of booting out much of parliament). Voters weren’t so much duped as just didn’t have any choice. The Browne report started under labour, the tories will jump at it if it shifts government debt onto poor individuals and some traitorous libdems will shirk their responsibility to the electorate and betray them. So what was the poor young (or old) voter meant to do? I predict a handful more green MPs next election, in areas of high student population, because the greens seem to be the only ones with a half decent education policy.

    As for Scotland, we shouldn’t force them to re-introduce tuition fees, we should follow them and abolish them.

    I used to quite like Vince Cable, I’ve got over that now. Shame on him. As well as the lies there is the plan to enforce an exit fee on the loan! So how on Earth isn’t this a graduate tax then? The difference with a loan is it can be paid off, but if it’s made nigh on impossible to do this then it’s not only no different, it also encourages a bad debt habit in the future generation. It makes me think I should bypass the whole thing and lend or give my kids the “Ëœstudent loan’ money myself. But of course that’s what the tories want. And if I couldn’t sustain enough income to fund my kids higher education then s*d my family, we don’t matter.

    This is what we’ve come to, replace the grant I and Vince and others were fortunate enough to get with a small fee and loan at good rates, escalating to a large fee and higher interest rates, with of course the “Ëœoption’ to not take out a loan, thus state support for students is removed. What a state we are in. Oh but we can’t afford something as unimportant as education claim the government. But we can let the banks and hugely high earners get away without contributing enough tax, we can squander money on unnecessary expenses and purchases and trident and wars interfering in other countries business instead of concentrating on our own mess and we can inflict the burden on society’s younger generation who have enough of our messes to sort out already. They are all so very screwed up these politicians.

  • salman

    why is it that Birmingham “welcomed” the conservative party who have proposed massive cuts in public services and some in attendance fleeced us the tax payers (again, remember the MPs expenses scandal)

    “Councillor Mike Whitby booked a suite at Birmingham’s Hyatt Hotel for four nights at a cost of £2,000 even though he has a chauffeur-driven car to ferry him about”

    this same conservative party who have been in power in brum for the last couple of years according to Cllr John Lines have now produced over 7500 homeless in the city, now say 190 families arnt welcome here because they are a burden on the finances and somehow its their fault that we have a housing problem

    hmmm sounds like the tories know they re gonna be unpopular with their cuts agenda, so a bit of scapegoating may save their hides, it may let them off for a couple of weeks but 190 scapegoats (asylum seekers) cant be blamed for the 25/40% cuts we face

    but hey at least its buisness as usual in relation to massive bonuses for bankers!!

  • Bill Cawley

    I think the tuition fees hike is bad news for the non Russell Universitie group of universities and rather proves the foolishness of expanding univeristy places in the first place. What is the evidence that having 50% of the young graduates improves economic performance? I think the Swiss do very well on 8% of the young graduates. What will happen is that they young will be burden with about 30 k of debt and if you are going to have that burden what is the point of going if you end up with a job that you could have done anyway? Anyone looked at the sort of jobs on offer in Stoke lately? All right if you want to sit behind a till, man a call centre or move pallets around. If you go to a place like Staffs come out with a lower second then you might as well not go, or am a being too cynical?

  • tonyjohnt

    The idea, so glaringly obvious, is to price poor people out of university. As far as the Eton mafia are concerned, the poor should either do shit jobs for shit wages, or join the army of “scroungers” who threaten the employed with replacement. Really Bill – we’ve been here before.

    Viva Chile! Rescuing their trapped miners. An engineering marvel that has cost a fortune. How lucky those miners are to be in Chile, a country many Brits would consider third world.

    Had it happened here, Cameron, Osborne, Clegg (spit) and Cable would have been leaning over the engineers’ shoulders with calculators saying it can’t be done.

    If they can make the country so vile in 5 months – imagine what they can do in 5 years!