Gurkhas refused full settlement rights

Stinking British government, stinking British rules, stinking British regulations, stinking bloody country ran by a bunch of magots on the take.

 

To be honest a few years ago when this was raised, I thought, the figures are wrong...Both sides.

I guessed at the Ghurkas signing on as riflemen for 10 year periods and the amount of battalion since ww2 allowing for disbandment of most, and not forgetting most served in Hong Kong and others in Brunie who never saw the UK, and paid for by sultan of Brunei thus having no link to UK apart from the discipline, training and uniform...
So I was guessing with families around 80,000 would be granted the right if all regs to be lifted.

Again, many served in Brunei and were paid for by that countries Sultan.

So I was always confused by the figures mentioned by both sides.

However, if commonwealth forces qualify after 4 years why not Ghurkas, is this a pre 1997 rule?

What are the requirements for commonwealth soldiers serving in our forces in say the 70's? Do they serve for same 4 years and let in? If so there is a bloody good and clear case for letting all ghurkas in end of story.

I see the red line is drawn in such a way that officers, war pensioners, ie wounded or injured whilst serving, or certain medal owners will make it in if they so wish...thus not the majority of rilflemen...this in itself is going to be embarassing for govt, labour making it acceptable for a certain class of soldier to gain entry but not the lower class of soldier...well done Gordon...your clothes have fallen off again.

But surely the easiest thing is to look at immigration policy...regardless of colour or creed...You get points mate....you were or are a Ghurka, or you served in British armed forces...thats 50 points well done...Your dad was a ghurka serving the crown...well done, you get 45 points mate...you are Somalian with no links to the UK whatsover, ok, we have a list, your not exluded but you get 2 points for applying, no family 2 points, etc etc etc....its not racist, its not colour, its about acceptance of who this country has or had a relationship with. Ghurkas like all foreign nationals that serve in armed forces...welcome you get 50 points...by the way your now at top of the list...

Kenyan? Commonwealth country...10 points...thems the rules, thems the lists....

 

That is a sad situation Richard, I am disgusted at that "change the rules" being passed. Whazzzup up with that? Would that only apply to those Ghurkas who retired after the new rules are passed or would it only apply to new recruits? Or would this now apply to all those who had already retired but hadn't yet settled in Britain. I couldn't really tell from the article itself.

Mayhaps I'm just dense.

 

The way the Gurkhas, have been treated its bloody sickening they can fight, and die, get blown up, and lose limbs and suffer life time disabilities, they can be awarded this countries highest bravery award the VC AND HAVE BEEN A RECORD AMOUNT OF TIMES.But they cannot live and work in this country when retired from serving this country unlike every other soldier who serves in the British army.On the other hand come to this country in the back of a lorry, or to drive a bus as many Polish people do in Bristol, then yep pull up a chair and put your feet under the table NOT TO MENTION ALL THE SOMALIANSThis country is a bloody joke and sad thing is it aint ficking funny cmon Gordon do somthing right after all your a jock and im a taff and the english let us live here

 

I rather have all the Gurkha's here than the white east European trash this country seems to allow in.

Rational thinking and decisions have gone to the wall thanks to these career members of parliament.

 

I could not agree more, salute given for original post after 10 mins trying cheers for reps

 

Whilst I reserve my opinion on this matter may I suggest that you read the actual criteria that has been released by the government for Gurkhas to reside in the UK.

Some of what has been posted on this thread just isn't true, for example:

Like being wounded or receiving a bravery award - If you have then you are entitled to British Citizenship. That is related to Gurkhas who served before 1997.

The criteria for Gurkhas who served after 1997 is different.

Cheers

 

It's pretty sorry to not give those Ghurkas what they erned and so deserve. The same thing can be said about how the USA is treating Philppino Vets. Absolutely disgusting. I really hate to hear those soldiers crapped on by a Govt they loved, fought and in too many cases; died for.

I hope someday soon that they have the justice they deserve.

 

I have read the criteria set out by the powers that be and stand by what I said

 

Even if the facts and figures given by both sides don't add up, the fact is these men fought for Britain. Even if they never saw the UK, they still did the bidding of the British Government. And for this reason I think it is absolutely disgusting that they aren't being allowed to stay here.

The Ghurkas have a special place in the conciousness of Britain; everyone I know who has mentioned them has said how brave they are, and what amazing soldiers they are. An often used remark is "Don't mess with the Ghurkas". I'm glad to see so many are openly reviled by what the government has done.

While I am not against anyone coming to live in Britain, I do find it strange that someone can be guaranteed a place to stay and government funded income if they claim they are an ex-terrorist, yet someone who fought for this country isn't even allowed to stay here.

I actually can't fully describe how annoyed I am by this whole thing.

 

I have to agree with Joanna Lumley what a insult, they had to get a high court injunction to get the government response and what do they get? One piece of paper with a small number of bulletins on it.

 

As Drew says though, it needs a proper read....I was under the impression that any Ghurka, regardless of what year before or after, was now allowed entry if 1. war pensioner or 2. In receipt of VC, DSO, MC, or a mention in despatches qualified by a certain time served.

Is this not the case?

But I think Wtid has it even if expressed more emotionally than most, and why not, it is an emotional matter...I believe if I'm right both Wltd's father and my own grandfather served in Ghurka units so it does become more of a personal issue to some.

But yep Bombmer Harris has it right in his first two lines, in my own jaundiced view that knocks the nail on the head and is all that matters to me.

 

It's the fact that the Foreign & Commonwealth office or whoever is digging their heals in over 10000 people, not that I object to them but there are over 1.5million new Polish migrants in the country, but there are huge numbers of Sinti (Slovaks) who have sneaked in by pretending to be Czech nationals and are efectively out of control. (God I sound like that T~~t who edits the Daily mail)

Thank you Mr Brown you've managed to turn me into a racist.

~Steve

 

But thats the whole point Steve, thats their way of closing debate down. They do make those of us that have never had a problem, feel we are being racist if we air logical views now.

I think I saw this at the last election with Howard being closed down whenever he brought the subject up. Not that I'm a tory or a Daily Mail reader, that has nothing to do with it...But I feel guilty broaching the subject due to years of critisising others where racism was concerned.

I couldnt give a damn what colour or creed folk are, and to be honest I know we are abiding by EEC directives on foreign workers, but I do think we owe by history and fellowship a place to a Pakistani, Bangldeshi, West Indian or Indian above a Somalian, Pole or Lithuanian. So colour bar doesnt come into it with me.

The Ghurkas, I thought at first....what are the real numbers...they probably are a lot higher than admitted with families included, but then I think and acknowledge so what?

If its one for one, then I'll take a Nepalese hill fighter over any one else for a neighbour. Seconded by any other national from the Commonwealth above others. And I dont know why I have to feel guilty for wanting that to happen.

 

Duplicate

 

I don't have a problem with Poles vast majority are hard working and I worked with/supervised several during the the late 1980s that was during the solidarity time, so they were refugees. Many gave loyal service in WW2- for which they became British citizens which closes the circle. I certainly feel there is residual colour racism by some-one in a position of power.

The Slovaks however are different they seem to have no means of support, but all drive around in fairly decent cars in my region they are responsible for the about 95% of smak (not the soup) related crime- fortunately all in house-so to speak, but they need moving on. See I've done it again. "Moved on" -they are a Gypsey sub group.

This government has realy got to get a grip.

~Steve

 

Yeah I mentioned Poles, but the gist of my feelings are that I personally think Commonwealth before any other, be they Poles Slovaks Argentinians or Phillipinos.

Its a purely personal thing based on no scientific polling or mathematical propositions.

Just me.

 

Maybe they should convert to islam, that should fix it!


John.

 

I think we all know what your alluding to Ozjohn, but to be honest their religion has nothing to do with this.

Although if we were to take this to the ultimate conclusion, then hundreds of thousands on the Indian sub continent served the crown in British uniform in both world wars, some still living from the second conflict obviously, Hindu, Muslim, Sikh, even Budhist and Anglo Indian Christian. I suppose they could put a similar case for themselves and their families to any Ghurka who served in ww2.

But this is simply about the Ghurka and his ongoing service to the crown and this country, and the repect and debt we owe them as a group. I couldnt care less if all Ghurkas suddenly declared themselves Muslims or worshippors of the Jedi knights.
Their religion matters not.

 

Anyway....Happy two up day to all Anzacs today.