There is a group on Facebook I recently joined called "Sack Margaret Hodge", given her recent comments.
What sticks in my throat is that last year she mentioned her worries about the increase in BNP votes in her area, which was a stupid thing to mention in public as it certainly increased the amount of BNP activists campaigning in her area. She has also made it clear that she is appeasing some of her Barking constituents. Not only that she is wrong. Housing needs are allocated by need.
16 comments:
Even ignoring how Hodge contributed to increasing the BNP vote in her area, by her own admission voters in her constituency include a significant number of BNP supporters and those persuaded by some of their arguments.
So for Hodge to duck behind the idea of "I'm just voicing the concerns of my constituents" seems somewhat mendacious...
I wouldn't be unhappy to see her drop off the benches of power.
"She has also made it clear that she is appeasing some of her Barking constituents. Not only that she is wrong."
God forbid that she does the job that her constituents elected her to do by representing their concerns instead of obeying the tyranny of the party line and the sinister elitists behind the ruling French Trotskyite Political Correctness orthodoxy.
However, Hodge should be sacked and put on trial for defamation of character and being an accessary to child abuse.
Spot on with this one. It's not often that MPs publicly criticise colleagues, especially if that MP is running for deupty leadership. But that's exactly what Johnson did. I don't think anyone picked up on Diane Abbott's comments on This Week that Hodge was a "spokesman for the BNP". Not that people should take much care of Abbott. For crying out loud she should have left the party years ago.
This is rather hard on Margaret.
If we go on not talking about these issues and being all PC, the bigots of the BNP will clean up in Labour areas.
Ordinary working people have real concerns and if people in our party start sacking anyone who dares to talk about these issues, they will simply think that all free speech has been done away with and flock to the BNP.
Simply shouting ya boo and calling Margaret names will only play into the hands of the extremists and make more previously loyal Labour voters think the party offers nothing for them.
Play into the hands of extremists? i think she's done that herself, dear! Hidge should be deselected by her local party. If I lived in Barking I'd be organising a deselection campaign as we speak.
Lisa, I totally agree. C4 Margaret Hodge was elected as a Labour Party Candidate and therefore should also be representing the Labour Party. This has not happened here. BaldockBaldrick, I think Alan Johnson attacked what Hodge did because it was indefencible. Anon, Margaret Hodge has already played into the hands of extremists so I think we have gone a bit beyond that moment. Amy I agree, she should face deselection
C4 Margaret Hodge was elected as a Labour Party Candidate and therefore should also be representing the Labour Party
A lame excuse on a par with that old chestnut "I was only obeying orders". Hodge's first duty is to serve the public interest, not the party line.
In what way is the fact that people vote Labour on the basis of the manifesto leaflets that go through their door to do with following orders?
You are simply giving the BNP more support by calling for Margaret to be sacked.
Most migrants to this country are economic migrants, not asylum seekers.
Here in Bristol we have working class former Labour voters whose kids cant get housing because there is huge demand for social housing (we have a huge and growing economic migrant population, same goes for other parts of the country).
The people who used to vote for us will not come back to us if all we do when someone like Margaret speaks a few home truths is say 'you cant say that, its racist, sack her blah blah balh'.
Try engaging with the real concerns of people, rather than knee jerk nonsense about Margaret.
Ask yourself why thousands of thousands of Labour people now vote BNP or stay at home.
When they see you trying to get people like Margaret sacked or saying that nobody in Labour should be to allowed to have the views she has expressed, they think 'well yep nobody cares about us, only immigrants'.
That is the reality and no amount of trendy bash Margaret stuff will change that.
The BNP are already taking comfort in Hodge's outspoken comments, do we let them get away with that? So do we give the BNP credibility by keeping her as a Govt Minister? The UK benefits from economic migration, even the Daily Mail have said that! But singling out immigrants in the way Hodge has done has done her, or any legitimate argument she may have had no favours whatsoever!
errr, by sacking her all you will do is make more Labour people turn away and join the BNP.
I know Labour people who used to leaflet for us here in Bristol who are totally let down by us as a party because they are all called racists by the politics students and other no nothing about real life trendy types who seem to dominate our party these days.
You are the BNPs recruiting agents, not the former Labour voters or Margaret Hodge.
The problem there is down to knee jerk reactions from students who were angry enough not to try and explain an alternative viewpoint
Although I don't agree with the way that Margaret Hodge raised the issue for Alan Johnson to say "There is no evidence whatsoever that immigrants are causing a problem with social housing." (as he does in the article you’ve linked to) is to sweep the issue under the carpet.
No, of course immigrants don't go to the front of the queue, but three things do happen.
1. Asylum seekers get dispersed around the country and then when they gain indefinite leave to remain return to the area where their own community is to receive support – often East London. They then live in overcrowded housing and consequently gain more points on housing registers or bidding systems and significantly add to the numbers on these lists.
2. Economic immigrants come to the country and stay in private rented accommodation for a couple of years until they pass the habitual residence test and are entitled to benefits/public support. They then join the Council housing register and add pressure to it.
3. Where there are children of refugees or economic immigrants (who have satisfied habitual residence) involved the whole family is likely to be classed as priority need and get housed straight away.
These three issues significantly exacerbate housing shortages in the London area. This means that someone who has been working all their lives and paying NI contributions and then loses their job or suffers a relationship breakdown and becomes homeless the local authority can do nothing to help apart from placing them on a housing register which will take 3-5 years to yield them a property. The first time in their lives that they need the safety net of the state it does not provide. The ‘contract’ at the heart of the welfare state has failed them
It’s true that the economy benefits from diverse economic immigration, but the social infrastructure takes years and years to catch up – the issues in public housing are repeated in health services in East London. I deplore racism and long to see more dialogue and story telling at community level so different communities understand where each other are coming from, but it is true that if you are a person that has been working in the UK for decades that the significant increase in immigration levels significantly reduces the chances of you getting housed quickly. To attack anyone says that as racist is not helpful, because we can’t address this housing crisis with practical solutions until we’ve acknowledged it and what many people feel is the root cause of it. If we don’t do this then the BNP will continue to look like the only party that’s dealing with issue head on.
A core group of dedicated members worked very hard to get Hodge de-selected, but she and her staff totally rigged the trigger ballot. The same core group are now paying the price.
Surely what Margaret Hodge said is not very different from the Government pointing out that some British muslims are attracted to extremist groups because they feel alienated from the rest of society?
Or is it just because she talked about the concerns of white people and that's just not the done thing...
No, its because she failed to use her common sense and inadvertently gave support to a political party that benefits from extremism and conflict
Post a Comment