Leave a comment

lieutenanth July 11 2007, 09:12:51 UTC
Why is this a good thing?

Reply

lieutenanth July 12 2007, 13:10:51 UTC
As a second language, sure, but that's hardly my point: my point is that if I take your arguments to be true (which I don't), then it is us that should be attempting to be linguistically compatible with the enormous polity around us, rather than insisting that they all speak our language.

Reply

dwinsper July 12 2007, 13:14:44 UTC
Well, yes, we should, if we're trying to move into their country. Strangely enough, we're not.

Reply

dwinsper July 11 2007, 12:37:49 UTC
What Jack said. I have no problems with people being culturally different, but if you cannot communicate in the country you're living in, it causes a hell of a lot of problems, most of which stem from the segregation it forces.

Reply

lieutenanth July 11 2007, 15:12:33 UTC
Sure, but that is not a good enough reason in my book to compel people by law to learn the language before arrival.

Reply

dwinsper July 11 2007, 15:21:45 UTC
Meh, I don't think we really need that much of a reason. It's our official language and hell, it's the de facto international language to boot. Want to move to the UK? Learn English. It's not that much to ask, really.

Reply

lieutenanth July 12 2007, 09:14:20 UTC
Sure, but that is not a good enough reason in my book to compel people by law to learn the language before arrival.

Reply

dwinsper July 12 2007, 12:52:00 UTC
Making them learn the language after arrival is much more problematic. How long do you give them? What if they've sold up before moving and no longer have a home to go to? Who the hell is going to fund all the lessons? (Personally, I'd push for giving them something like a student loan) How much more will the public outcry be? Kicking somebody out tends to get more attention than not letting somebody in.

Reply

lieutenanth July 12 2007, 13:08:21 UTC
This is exactly why it's stupid to legislate either way. Just let people get on with their lives! Most will learn English without being legally compelled, because it's the sensible thing to do. The few that don't probably have a good reason not to.

And c'mon, we've never had a problem with the media complaining that we're deporting too many foreigners.

Reply

dwinsper July 12 2007, 13:18:22 UTC
This is exactly why it's stupid to legislate either way. Just let people get on with their lives! Most will learn English without being legally compelled, because it's the sensible thing to do. The few that don't probably have a good reason not to.
This is where our viewpoints differ. I'm not in favour of letting any Tom, Dick and Harry move in. I have nothing against requiring people to speak the native language if they want to move in, it seems a rather minimal requirement.

Do you have the figures on how many people we let move in and then end up deporting? I imagine it's not actually that high.

Reply

lieutenanth July 12 2007, 16:16:15 UTC
No I don't, but I'd be very surprised if it was greater than the low hundreds per year, and probably more like in the low tens.

But then, the number of people emigrating to the UK from outside the EU is also small (not as small, clearly), mostly because we already make it fairly hard to get in unless you have a job to come to. Which means that we are already not importing "any Tom, Dick or Harry", we're importing smart people who have useful skills to share in the UK (and be taxed upon the profits thereof!).

I have nothing against requiring people to speak the native language if they want to move in, it seems a rather minimal requirement.The linked article was not talking about the original immigrant, but that immigrant's family. Of course if you're coming to the UK you will almost certainly be required to speak English in your job, but if you are that immigrant's spouse or child, then there is a far less immediate requirement. It is substantially easier (and cheaper) to study ESOL in the UK than anywhere else in the world, ( ... )

Reply


Leave a comment

Up