Friday afternoon conversations

Huddled around the lone telephone in Meeting Room Twelve, how we end up talking about the potentially explosive subjects of immigration and living on the dole escapes me, but once the first, tentative blows are struck, it all takes off from there. There is me – very Nigerian, Ahmed – devout Muslim, Pakistani – born, but as English as they come and Steph – part free thinker, part new-ager, also British. We are waiting for the phone call which will initiate a teleconference – one which should have started a full ten minutes earlier.

Immigration and immigrants have been on the front pages again (are they not always on there these days?) – the Prime Minister has been seeking to regain the front foot on the subject by proposing a raft of changes aimed at projecting a tougher stance; stricter financial conditions for sponsoring spouses and a revamped citizenship test amongst others.

Interestingly, next to the surfeit of Poles in our building, the bitterest vitriol is reserved for people living on the dole. Ahmed and Steph both agree that the government is too soft on people living on the dole and argue that quite a few of the jobs filled by Poles (and other Africans) in our office building could conceivably be done by Brits, if the benefits system didn’t reward laziness. I counter with the argument that a civilised government owes a duty of care to its citizens. I add that I suspect that the crimes are less serious than they would be if people were driven by hunger to desperation.

Steph agrees with the crime rate argument but insists that the freebies effectively incentivise not working. [Apparently merely being an unwed mother with three children could net a woman around about £30k/yr in benefits, which would be what a Graduate RustGeek would get after the first year of working at KOX Corp].

Ahmed is less tolerant of either argument, and insists that a sense of entitlement is what is to blame. Try eking out a living in Pakistan  – he says, and you’ll have no grounds to complain about not being able to buy Jordan trainers. That sentiment might have its merits, but I suspect it is a gross simplification. Ahmed’s sausage soft hands and penchant for milky weak tea are hardly posters for eking out a living by any standard.

These are difficult conversations to have. As the one immigrant whose strongest only claim to Britishness is being conceived between swigs of coffee and PhD research on a November night in Bristol in the 70s [I was born in an obscure Nigerian town by the way, so this obscure fact doesn’t count], I am as much at ease as an old woman when dry bones are mentioned in a proverb. They reassure me though that I am different. Just how different I am, and for how long that difference will last remains to be seen, but I suspect I will always be a different sort of ‘them‘ – not that I am keen to ever become ‘us‘ though.

Thirty minutes later, our meeting is still yet to start. All that is on my mind is to get this meeting over with and kick start the weekend.

Advertisements

7 thoughts on “Friday afternoon conversations

  1. Interesting conversation about immigrants. My argument would be that there should be a balance between both ends i.e. between the dole system and enforcing laws that would reduce some incentives. Speaking of which, the "dole" system can be paralleled to the "food stamps" system in America.

    I enjoyed reading this. It's the way you write…there's something about it. Keep writing. 🙂

    Like

    • If I were not so dark skinned, I would be blushing beetroot red.. Thanks for stopping by…

      Its a difficult balance to achieve I think. On one hand, there is a duty of care to the children who through no fault of theirs have been brought into the world by 'irresponsible adults'. On the other hand, there have to be incentives to work.

      Where the costs of the bare necessities are so high that the difference between the cost of providing them and the after-tax earnings of the sorts of jobs these people can aspire to is small, it is a losing battle providing an incentive.

      Like

  2. It's complicated. Like you said, a civilized society should see to the welfare of its citizens. The challenge lies in finding that balance that Jaycee mentioned. It can be very tricky indeed. On the one hand, I understand where they (the government) are coming from and the frustrations they must feel. It's just unfortunate that so many law abiding immigrants have to suffer the burnt of their knee jerk reactions.

    Er you were born in the 70's? Wow. Didn't know you were that….young.

    Cheers!

    Like

  3. I counter with the argument that a civilised government owes a duty of care to its citizens. I add that I suspect that the crimes are less serious than they would be if people were driven by hunger to desperation.

    ~gbam ~gbam. That is why places like Nigeria have higher crime rates than these countries. Crimes borne out of hunger not out of jobless creativity.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s