The BBC

[MD_HM]

Once again, who has said this? Stop making stuff up, it's tiresome and deflects from any meaningful debate.

It's very relevant and actually the thing that's in debate.

IF Lineker had just tweeted he didn't agree with the policy none of this would have happened, there wouldn't be any issue and no one would have taken any notice of the tweet.

There are two reasons why his tweet has caused the fuss it has:

1) it makes reference and comparison to Nazi Germany which many have taken offence to as it's a very sensitive subject that shouldn't be used to score political points.

2) Due to point 1 getting it unnecessary attention the factual inaccuracies in the tweet have also been highlighted. Within this, it's playing down a very serious subject that your average person on the street that has no political sway feels strongly about.

The issue with both points is it plays down the problem, makes all the individuals out to be victims and vulnerable which isn't the reality.

My point is, I am not saying the government have got it right but they are trying to find a solution to a big problem.

Agreeing with the comparisons basically admits you don't see any problem, that is the real danger when people with huge following make such comments.

Most people are not political (including myself) I think both labour and conservative are bad choices and all parties will screw you in one way or another.

John Barnes is another who is being disingenuous, the only comparison being with Syrian and Ukrainian refugees as it suits his argument but no mention of all those arriving on boats from other countries.

I'll stand by the point that most people are not bad, most people don't mind helping those in genuine need however and it's a BIG however not all on these boats fit into this category.

That doesn't mean we shouldn't help anyone but we have got to find a way to stop the others and that starts when everyone can agree there is a problem.

[MD_HM]

And just as I know you all love stats:

In January to September 2022, half of small boat arrivals were from just these two nationalities - Albanians (35%) and Afghans (15%), as shown in Figure 4. In the latest quarter alone (July to September 2022), 45% of small boat arrivals were Albanian (9,076), and there were days where as many as 80% of arrivals were Albanian.

This doesn't include those arriving by boats who have disappeared so are not included on the stats as they were undetected.

But there is no problem...

[steps]

Apparently the BBC have gone back to Lineker cap in hand as ITV were offering big money for him to join them.

Didn’t think they have rights to much football though. Maybe the odd FA Cup game here and there, and international games?

[The Straw]

This whole sorry affair has been very unappealing.

[last.caress]

Apparently... ITV were offering big money for him to join them. Didn’t think they have rights to much football though. Maybe the odd FA Cup game here and there, and international games?

ITV would doubtless have given Mr. Lineker plenty of other primetime stuff on top of their more limited football output. I'm pretty sure he hosted a gameshow for them not so long ago (like, in the last year maybe), as did Ian Wright.

[Hummer_I_mean_Hammer]

Problem with 'celeb' posting stuff and it being circulated in the media, is that there's no simple way to 'de-friend', or 'ignore' them. It ends up being bloody everywhere.

I have no interest in anything that some ex-footballer, love island person, or other so called two-bob celeb has to say.

[old fart]

And just as I know you all love stats:

In January to September 2022, half of small boat arrivals were from just these two nationalities - Albanians (35%) and Afghans (15%), as shown in Figure 4. In the latest quarter alone (July to September 2022), 45% of small boat arrivals were Albanian (9,076), and there were days where as many as 80% of arrivals were Albanian.

This doesn't include those arriving by boats who have disappeared so are not included on the stats as they were undetected.

But there is no problem...

Source?

[Hummer_I_mean_Hammer]

Source?

Brave enough to be doing the crossing sober, but to be doing it while drinking, wow...

[SammyLeeWasOffside]

Source?

Times, Independent or less trust worthy the home office.

[Het-Field]

A rather humbling and embarrassing end of the affair for BBC, and an almost unequivocal victory for Linekar. In truth, this raises more questions than provides answers around The BBC, and has shone an uncomfortable light.

[Johnny Byrne's Boots]

A rather humbling and embarrassing end of the affair for BBC, and an almost unequivocal victory for Linekar. In truth, this raises more questions than provides answers around The BBC, and has shone an uncomfortable light.

In the short term certainly. They'll get their revenge with the 'independent' review.

[bubbles1966]

"BBC media correspondent David Sillito has just been explaining what this all means for the corporation and Gary Lineker on the BBC News Channel.

He says the agreement the two parties have reached on this matter effectively "kicks the can down the road".

He adds that Lineker may be back on air, but he has agreed not to tweet about party political matters while a review of the BBC's social media guidance takes place."


It's a can of worms that will spill into the employment set up about highly suspect 'freelancing'.

At some point, government (and it may be Labour in due course), are going to ask 'how can the likes of Gary Lineker and Lorraine Kelly get away with claiming they don't work as employees for the BBC and ITV, especially with the tax advantages?'

In a broad sense, someone turning up to work, 36/39 weeks a year to the same place, doing the same job, at the same time every week under instruction and direction does not appear to be appreciably different to someone who has a job at a school.

[MD_HM]

Source?

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistic ... mall-boats

[Monkeybubbles]

It's very relevant and actually the thing that's in debate.

IF Lineker had just tweeted he didn't agree with the policy none of this would have happened, there wouldn't be any issue and no one would have taken any notice of the tweet.

There are two reasons why his tweet has caused the fuss it has:

1) it makes reference and comparison to Nazi Germany which many have taken offence to as it's a very sensitive subject that shouldn't be used to score political points.

2) Due to point 1 getting it unnecessary attention the factual inaccuracies in the tweet have also been highlighted. Within this, it's playing down a very serious subject that your average person on the street that has no political sway feels strongly about.

The issue with both points is it plays down the problem, makes all the individuals out to be victims and vulnerable which isn't the reality.

My point is, I am not saying the government have got it right but they are trying to find a solution to a big problem.

Agreeing with the comparisons basically admits you don't see any problem, that is the real danger when people with huge following make such comments.

Most people are not political (including myself) I think both labour and conservative are bad choices and all parties will screw you in one way or another.

John Barnes is another who is being disingenuous, the only comparison being with Syrian and Ukrainian refugees as it suits his argument but no mention of all those arriving on boats from other countries.

I'll stand by the point that most people are not bad, most people don't mind helping those in genuine need however and it's a BIG however not all on these boats fit into this category.

That doesn't mean we shouldn't help anyone but we have got to find a way to stop the others and that starts when everyone can agree there is a problem.

You've accused people a couple of times of "wanting to let everyone in" and "thinking there isn't a problem".

Maybe you could answer my simple question. Who said that? I'm a big wet Liberal lefty greeny, and most of my circle are even wetter, but I don't know a single person who thinks that immigration isn't a problem.


Also, I thought that being offended by something that doesn't affect you is the domain of the snowflake? Why should you or anyone be offended by Lineker's language, but not by Braverman's?

[Hummer_I_mean_Hammer]

It's a can of worms that will spill into the employment set up about highly suspect 'freelancing'.

Government might well get back at him through HMRC, but if he has decent representation and given their history of losing these 'big' cases, I very much doubt it.

[Coops]

My point is, I am not saying the government have got it right but they are trying to find a solution to a big problem.

I don't agree. I think they are trying to deflect attention from their failings in other areas by pretending they are getting tough on a contentious issue because they think it will gain popular support. They know that what they are proposing isn't legal or workable, which is why they have already started with the "left wing lawyers" narrative.

[bubbles1966]

Government might well get back at him through HMRC, but if he has decent representation and given their history of losing these 'big' cases, I very much doubt it.

Probably, but I'd guess it paves the way for some redrafting of the rules/guidance/law etc.

The BBC is a de facto public sector organisation and I know other bits of the public sector were cracking down on 'self employment' that risked looking bogus and refusing to pass public sector funds over to the affected individuals as a consequence. It was trying to move people onto regularised, employee contracts that were compliant with standard tax arrangements.

[Jabsco79]

I dearly wish a cessation on use of the term ‘talent’ to describe their on screen pundits for this particular show.

[SammyLeeWasOffside]

I don't agree. I think they are trying to deflect attention from their failings in other areas by pretending they are getting tough on a contentious issue because they think it will gain popular support. They know that what they are proposing isn't legal or workable, which is why they have already started with the "left wing lawyers" narrative.

Being in goverment Day 1, Module 1. Module 2 is announce you will fix something that someone else already fixed.

[old fart]

It's very relevant and actually the thing that's in debate.

IF Lineker had just tweeted he didn't agree with the policy none of this would have happened, there wouldn't be any issue and no one would have taken any notice of the tweet.

There are two reasons why his tweet has caused the fuss it has:

1) it makes reference and comparison to Nazi Germany which many have taken offence to as it's a very sensitive subject that shouldn't be used to score political points.

2) Due to point 1 getting it unnecessary attention the factual inaccuracies in the tweet have also been highlighted. Within this, it's playing down a very serious subject that your average person on the street that has no political sway feels strongly about.

1)No reference at all to Nazi Germany
2) What factual inaccuracies are there?

When told he was being “out of order” by a responder in a now deleted tweet, Lineker added: “There is no huge influx. We take far fewer refugees than other major European countries.This is just an immeasurably cruel policy directed at the most vulnerable people in language that is not dissimilar to that used by Germany in the 30s, and I’m out of order?”

We take more refugees than other major countries?
It's not cruel if there are no legal routes and if you get here you can't claim asylum ever?
The language used by the home Secretary & deputy chairman of the ConservativeParty in the House of commons is not similar to the language used in the Reichstag to demonise in 1930's Gernany?