Am I the only person (apart from the govt.) to conclude that Joanna Lumley is wrong about the gurkhas?

I'm not at all a supporter of this Labour government but . . .

(i) The gurkhas aren't necessarily "brave heroes". Some of them have been heroes but you don't become a "hero" just by joining the army.

(ii) The gurkhas are merceneries who get paid the going rate for their services. We know it's the going rate because of the numbers willing to volunteer.

(iii) The gurkhas knew what the terms and conditions were when they signed up.

(iv) We could see this as a form of outsourcing. If a British company outsources its call centre to India (for example) the workers in India don't get paid the same as UK workers; they get paid what the market dictates and they certainly don't get the right to settle in the UK at the end of their service.

(v) If the gurkhas have to have the same rights, pay and pensions as British soldiers, presumably we will be less inclined to hire them in the first place, which would be bad for people in Nepal who would want to join up in the future.

(vi) The gurkha campaign is being supported by The Sun, The Mail and the BNP, which is a reason in itself to be worried. Why are these people in favour of immigration all of a sudden?

emanwelgwent

I'm afraid you've rather missed the point.

The problem has to do with inequalities not between Gurkhas and regulars but between new Gurkhas and old Gurkhas. New Gurkhas have much more favourable requirements for immigration and old ones. Why should we distinguish between one person and another simply because of the date of their retirement? If there are to be restrictions on Gurhka immigration, then they should be rational and universal.

Why should a Gurkha who served in the Falklands be treated less favourably than one who served in Iraq?

Their position is not comparable to that of outsourced workers - they are in the service of the United Kingdom - not BT or Sky. Those who work at our embassies abroad also recieve immigration advantages. Nor are they the same as conventional mercenaries (like the Blackwater corporation in the US) - they are part of our armed forces. To Nepalis being a Gurkha is a matter of prestige as much as money.

The reason that the likes of the Sun and the Mail are supporting the Gurkhas is because they are populist - they change their position to match public opinion. I imagine the BNP are doing it so that people will believe their futile claims not to be racist.

The One

I don't think you know what you are talking about,So are you saying that the soldiers today that are getting killed or injured knew what they were signing up for.I don't agree with the Immigration of today but im sure your grandad or great grandad would not agree with your opinion.

Nemesis

I would instinctively suspect the Government of lying (yet again) when it refers to a deluge of applications - figures of up to 100,000 were bandied about, as against Lumley's figure of a few 1,000 many of whom I believe are already here.
I really don't know much about the validity of the Gurkhas claim but reckon their case is 100 times stronger than that of MILLIONS which this craven 'Government' has allowed in over the last decade - legally and illegally. They keep trying to float the idea of an 'amnesty' for many of these - to save the 20 years it would take to process (and bury their sheer incompetence and neglect). The public had no say in NuLabour's persistent love affair with a Multicultural Britain and it's doubly galling the widespread support for the Gurkhas is blandly ignored by a failed PM (as he continues to plead he's listening').

tinker

Are you really from this planet?

Major Disaster

No you are not the only one.

It's the only decision Brown has made which I agree with!

Like you said: they got paid for doing a job - like any mercenary.
What makes them any different?

Soon everyone who supposedly fought for Britain in some obscure time in the past will demand citizenship.

tony c

it comes down to one thing....

gratitude.

you must live a very lonely existence.

PETER T

Yes. Next question please

Gordon Clown PM of the UK

Yes you are the only one

jonthelier

no you are not the only one.

Crowkit

I can't begin to express just how offensive this question is.

uk_pindar

yep, its just you and the government

Ryan

people who fight for our country should be allowed to stay here they defended it but they not in favour of immigration because no 1 wants foreign people here who don't do nothing n take up our taxes but the Gurkha's did summat for us and that why so many people are in favour of help they should limit the immigration tho because they letting to many people in u don't see america doing that n look at them there fine jobs wise but we ain't were a small country we cant afford to look after half of europe who are coming in

Union_Dooz

good for the Uk/India

John

No you are not. It's not as if they volunteered in the army, like in Ancient Rome when people joined the army to gain citizenship.

GEORGE B

Course your not the only one You have" jon lier"above to join you
Don`t know what your maths are like , but thats at least 2 of you

Enter Your Message or Comment

User Name:
User Email:
Post a comment: