Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Jim Waterson fingers Harringay Warehouse based estate agent for stirring racial hatred
In another effective piece of investigative Journalist Jim Waterson of London Centric has discovered that a small estate agency in a single storey office near the chimney of the former Maynards factory off Eade Road has been linked with an unpleasant series of mendacious TikTok videos that claimed illegal immigrants were being housed in expensive housing at the taxpayer's cost.
See a short video and read more at London Centric.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Elizabeth M
-
I'm under no illusion that being English is some amazing thing or indeed the reverse but your definition excludes simply millions of people who are perfectly entitled to identify as English by being born here and living all their lives here in London. Your ethnic purity test as put in your post has a really bad precedent and the reference to "foreign cultural practices" obviously excludes all non-Christians from being English - are you really saying Jews and Moslems cant be English?
-
Permalink Reply by Cynthia Brown
-
It is indeed amazing to be English. We have much to be proud of and to enjoy. That doesn't mean other people can't be proud of their own ethnicities.
Other people, with different ethnicities, born here with an entitlement to British citizenship are British. No-one is excluding them. They're just not English. That doesn't mean they're not welcome. They have their own identities.
There are loads of Jewish people who are English. Many have been here and integrated for hundreds of years. There were Jewish traders in England in medieval times and synagogues since the 1700s. They just have a different religion, like Catholics and pagans for instance.
-
-
-
Well said, Cynthia. At a time of rising anti-semitism it is good to see a young person saying what most decent people think. English Jews are part of our national fabric. They are 'us'.
-
-
-
@Brian - you dont seem to have read all Cynthia's posts. Her English purity test only applies once people are integrated - she excluded anyone of mixed heritage or with "foreign cultural practices". She wrongly assumes being Jewish is just a matter of religion. It isn't. She didnt respond on Moslems. I have drawn my own conclusions and am going to have nothing more to do with a test that would exclude me and my kids from being part of "us".
-
-
-
I can't speak for Cynthia but, without wishing to upset you, I suspect you might be reading too much into it. I don't see what she says as a purity test at all, just an observation that ethnicities are reasonably set and if people move to another country they'll usually have a different ethnicity to most local people there.
That's different to nationality which is generally determined by where you are born but it can also be acquired subsequently if you meet the legal criteria. British nationality can obviously be held by people with ethnicities that originate elsewhere. However, there are different views of course. Its like gender politics. There's the traditional view that gender is biologically determined and there's the view that it can be chosen.
Rest assured if you and your children have British passports that's all the proof any reasonable person needs that you're British. Ignore anyone who says otherwise.
-
-
Permalink Reply by Michael Anderson on
-
There are 42,300 nursing roles and 8,850 doctor vacancies in the NHS alone. How do you propose to fill them? Training to be a nurse takes three years, a doctor up to seven by the way.
-
-
There are always a certain number of vacancies in the NHS. Because of its size that number of vacancies appears larger than the number of people actually needed at any one time but putting all that aside some of the solutions to fill actual vacancies might include the following.
1. Prioritise British trained doctors for initial post-university placements and further specialty-specific training. The junior doctors strikes are not just about pay. There are many graduates of British medical schools who cannot find jobs because its often cheaper for Trusts to recruit more experienced staff from overseas (some of whose credentials are not exactly kosher).
2. Impose return of service obligations on British trained doctors. It is expensive to train them and having them emmigrate to Australia, New Zealand or Canada before the state can recoup the value of their training cost is a waste of money. The return of service obligations on RAF pilots or those imposed by large corporates who pay for expensive MBAs etc are models that could be followed.this could be waived for students who election to pay the full cost of their university education (way beyond the £9,000 annual contribution).
3. It doesn't take up to seven years to train a doctor as you say. It's generally longer and much longer for niche consultant roles which can see people reach their late 30s before becoming fully-qualified (often more so for women having time off child rearing). And training continues throughout their careers. Much of that is at a personal financial cost. There are opportunities to reduce the cost of professional development, insurances etc which would help the retention of British trained doctors and reduce vacancy numbers.
4. The requirement for nurses to complete a degree in nursing is relatively recent. Previously, most nursing training was provided on the job with additional more specialist skills and training opportunities provided as the nurses developed their competencies. Requiring all new nurses to have a university education has created an often unnecessary and expensive barrier to entry for aspiring British trained nurses. This could be removed as on the job entry level training was re-introduced over time.
5. Accommodation costs for young nurses and doctors eat up large parts of their income. Subsidised shared accommodation could be reintroduced expecially in London along with subsidised good quality cafeteria food. Yes, it would be expensive to reintroduce this but cheaper than the trail costs of importing foreign nurses on a permanent basis (both financial and cultural).
6. As mentioned above, we could wean ourselves off imported labour over time by only allowing foreign workers to fill domestic gaps on a temporary visa basis as guest workers. Bringing in excessive numbers of foreign workers to provide services to foreigners already here is akin to the spider swallowing the fly.
Yes, it takes time and money to fix a broken system.
I also wonder why the NHS is so large. Our population (at least the official one) is around 70m but our health service employs more people per capita than comparable western countries without better health outcomes. Its inefficient and throwing more money at it, unless very targeted, is like trying to fill the sink without a plug.
-
-
Based on Wikipedia, the NHS is the 7th largest organisation in the world!!!! If you think that other first world countries like France and Germany which have (at least officially) larger populations employ many fewer people in their health services you can see how inefficient the NHS must be.
-
-
Or that other countries simply don't employ everyone under one organisation.
-
-
Precisely. In France you can be sent to a separate organisation for scans or even radiotherapy for instance. The Institute Curie in Paris has one of the most advanced radiotherapy units in Europe for example, but is not part of the national hospital network They all still fall under the banner of universal healthcare even if they’re not employees of same organisation. The downside of that approach is administration between separate organisations which makes the UK model seem the epitome of efficiency!
The idea that we have a bloated heath care system is nonsense. We rank way down on doctors per head of population compared to our neighbours. While we have around 3 per1,000 the European average is around 4. We rank near the bottom. Only Poland has fewer
-
-
So we have fewer doctors per head of population than the European average but a much larger health service? And you claim the NHS is efficient!
The quality of procedures might be ok but the administration lets it down. That's one of the reasons that people who can elect to pay (or have their employers pay). They might get the same doctors treating them but they/their employers pay to avoid the administrative delays.
-
-
Permalink Reply by Clive Carter
-
LIKE all big organisations, there is likely to be at least some waste an inefficiency in our NHS. But I'm glad it's there. Rather than introduce a profit motive or bringing in more managers and accountants, let's improve it.
© 2026 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
