Farage as PM? Could a Trump-style takeover happen in UK?

[RailWonderer]

So why are you so worried? It isn't your money.

It is when taxpayers pay for the NHS and other public bodies with overpaid bloated DEI departments. There is a case to be made for DEI reform rather than outright scrapping but I'm still skeptical of it's effectiveness in the first place.

So why vote for Farage or Trump if it is going to take them 40 years to get the brown people out? That seems quite a while! I maintain: who is next after the brown people? Someone will be next. There always are.

You can't assume any hardline stance on immigration is far right and racist. In Denmark the centre left have been hard on refugee migration the last few years they have been in power. It's simply a case of enforcing the nation's laws and making sure migration is low and sustainable. Nobody wants an exploding population with congestion, lack of hospital beds, school spaces, overcrowded transport and crowded streets all day long. I've seen in towns in and around London and Manchester what this has done - too much migration the UK will lose its cultural identity.

I am sure you would like that. The problem is your view seems thin and lacking in any intellectual rigour. You have no idea about my views. I am simply testing yours and you seem unable to offer anything beyond what you have seen on Richard Tice's twitter account.

I don't read his twitter but I don't recall making an argument for anything other than a more sweeping approach in politics to get ahead of real issues that centrist parties are incapable of tackling. UK politics is full of entrenched set-in-their-ways- back stabbing MPs, civil servants and careerists all serving their own interests and thinking about what speaking fees they can be paid after and which boards they can get appointed to after. Politics ought to be a calling, not a vocation. Trump doesn't need it - though his family certainly benefits from it - and fills his cabinet with people passionate about moving fast and breaking things. This is more the attitude the UK needs to take - it's cultural first and foremost.

 

[Harpo]

You can't assume any hardline stance on immigration is far right and racist.

Correct. But Farage’s dog-whistling verbal leakage continually gives the game away:

“He doesn’t understand our culture”
(Farage on Sunak)

“People in North London think farming is too white”.
(Farage on farmers’ IHT)

So, yes. Don’t assume it’s racist. But use all available evidence.

 

[The_Train]

Personally, I would not trust Reform to give us a stable government that aims to benefit all of the population (rather than a favoured minority.)

I've asked Reform supporters many times what Reform can offer the average person, to make our lives better, without using the words migrants or immigration. And strangely they cannot offer anything because everything about Reform's policy is designed around hate and division, targeting minority groups and vulnerable people and in no way actually having any sort of policy of how things will get better for those of us who just want to get on with life with a bit of money in our pockets. Their entire ethos is about what they can take away from people but with no detail of what they will do with that money.

That is more likely, but still unlikely. This relies on the Tories being able to rejuvenate themselves which involves sacking their leader, replacing them, and sacking that one, and so on.

The problem with a Tory-Reform coalition of any sort is that this will impact those people who are right of centre who generally vote Tory. I think a number of them would either throw a protest vote in Labour's direction or just not vote at all as they won't want to be seen as being a part of something involving a far right party like Reform.

I'm not anti benefits, I understand people sick or between jobs need some income to keep them going and it's already the lowest any country in Europe offers. The problem is the ballooning sickness benefits bill post Covid which is unlike any other European nation. Why has the UK suffered much worse - or has it? Was the nation really so unhealthy already or is it easier to falsely claim sickness benefits? This needs a study and claimants should need a doctors assessment to prevent abuse with a trust but verify approach where no one gets their benefits cut and they have a grace period to get a GP/specialist's assessment to continue claiming.

I guess you have never tried to claim benefits for being unfit to work through the DWP as you seem to be of the impression that someone can walk into the job centre, cough a couple of times, and walk out with thousands of pounds

 

[dosxuk]

fills his cabinet with people passionate about moving fast and breaking things

I would really rather not have people who don't give a hoot if they wreck a load of things running the country.

"Moving fast and breaking things" can kind of work when it's stuff that's not important like social media, or online games. It's a really bad idea when it is, like health care, education or air traffic control.

 

[dcbwhaley]

It is when taxpayers pay for the NHS and other public bodies with overpaid bloated DEI departments. There is a case to be made for DEI reform rather than outright Nobody wants an exploding population with congestion, lack of hospital beds, school spaces, overcrowded transport and crowded streets all day long. I've seen in towns in and around London and Manchester what this has done - too much migration the UK will lose its cultural identity.

And too little migration and UK will lose a viable infrastructure: shortage of doctors and nurses, teachers, bus drivers, building labourers. The aging indigenous population needs young immigrants to maintain society.

 

[The_Train]

And too little migration and UK will lose a viable infrastructure: shortage of doctors and nurses, teachers, bus drivers, building labourers. The aging indigenous population needs young immigrants to maintain society.

You mean Fred the Reform voter, with his one O Level, won't be able to replace the doctor he has voted to have forcibly removed from the country?

 

[nlogax]

Trump doesn't need it - though his family certainly benefits from it - and fills his cabinet with people passionate about moving fast and breaking things.

Wait.. you're serious? 'Move fast and break things' is a fine approach for tech companies to adopt. When applied to the government of the world's largest superpower.. it's just moronic.

 

[Magdalia]

It is when taxpayers pay for the NHS and other public bodies with overpaid bloated DEI departments. There is a case to be made for DEI reform rather than outright scrapping but I'm still skeptical of it's effectiveness in the first place.

Diversity policies are very effective, especially in a tight labour market where employers are competing for the best talent.

I heard an interview on the radio last week with Baroness Martha Lane Fox, president of British Chambers of Commerce. One statistic that she quoted stuck in my mind: in a survey of job recruits 76% of respondents said that the presence of diversity policies was a factor in their decisions on which companies/organisations to work for. Diversity policies have a positive impact on recruitment and retention.

This feeds through to performance: Baroness Lane Fox also quoted a study where businesses with a diversity policy performed 24% better than similar businesses that did not.

Furthermore, some of the most important parts of the employment market, in terms of getting GDP growth, are international. Here in the Fens there is already talk that international talent may now be more amenable to working in the UK than the USA because of their different approaches to diversity.

In the UK the public sector takes diversity a bit more seriously than the private sector, but that's a feature of employment law more generally, not diversity in particular. The public sector is more risk averse than the private sector about going to employment tribunal.

fills his cabinet with people passionate about moving fast and breaking things.

Truss and Kwarteng moved fast and they broke things. It isn't a good precedent.

 

[JGurney]

It is when taxpayers pay for the NHS and other public bodies with overpaid bloated DEI departments. ............ too much migration the UK will lose its cultural identity.

As far as I can see the main factor eroding British national culture is media-driven Americanisation, not the effects of migration.

For example, I have never come upon something called a "DEI department" anywhere in this country. I gather it is an American dialect term.

I note have have still avoided answering the earlier questions over whether you think that legal definition of sex which you called for should be based upon genotypical or phenotypical lines, or over whether you think people with CAIS would be legally defined as male or as female under your proposed law.

 

[Cross City]

It is when taxpayers pay for the NHS and other public bodies with overpaid bloated DEI departments.

[citation needed]

 

[jon0844]

As far as I can see the main factor eroding British national culture is media-driven Americanisation, not the effects of migration.

For example, I have never come upon something called a "DEI department" anywhere in this country. I gather it is an American dialect term.

I note have have still avoided answering the earlier questions over whether you think that legal definition of sex which you called for should be based upon genotypical or phenotypical lines, or over whether you think people with CAIS would be legally defined as male or as female under your proposed law.

Racists love the word DEI, and people here can say it instead of the N-word. Of course they pretend they just want the right person hired for the job with no favouritism, but then slip up when they admit they get scared if they see a black pilot on a plane. They only know the word because they've picked up on it from the right in the USA talking about it non-stop for at least a year or maybe more.

Trump quite openly spoke of 'black jobs' at a meeting of black journalists and there was surprisingly little pushback on it, possibly because - as ever - everyone seems terrified of him and what happens to them if they call him out on anything. Sadly, Trump WAS taking notes and is now spending much of his time going after everyone who ever said or did anything bad to him.

Recently the same racists have been quick to try and stop mentioning black or brown people and trip over themselves trying to think of alternatives, hence you get stuff like 'blind dwarves' working in air traffic control or other ridiculous nonsense.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 18 Feb 2025 ==

[citation needed]

Proof of there being a 'DEI department' would be a start!

 

[AY1975]

The problem with a Tory-Reform coalition of any sort is that this will impact those people who are right of centre who generally vote Tory. I think a number of them would either throw a protest vote in Labour's direction or just not vote at all

Or in the Lib Dems' direction, especially if they live in Tory/Lib Dem marginals (or in traditionally safe Tory seats that the LDs won for the first time in 2024 or where the LDs came a close second behind the Tories).

A lot of disillusioned traditional Tory voters would never vote Labour (or Green) but could potentially be persuaded to vote Lib Dem.

Maybe there should be a separate thread on the Lib Dems under Ed Davey, and one on the Green Party under its current leadership.

 

[telstarbox]

Larger UK firms do have DEI departments - for example Lloyds Bank and the FA.

Usually this is just activity which would already be part of a competent HR department - the law has changed several times in this area over the last few decades and companies need to make sure they are staying legal. It's not just about race, it includes gender pay gap, religious groups, accommodating disabled people, LGBT people etc.

 

[GusB]

It is when taxpayers pay for the NHS and other public bodies with overpaid bloated DEI departments. There is a case to be made for DEI reform rather than outright scrapping but I'm still skeptical of it's effectiveness in the first place.

Please provide specific examples of public bodies that have "DEI departments", then provide further details about those that you believe to be overpaid and bloated.

You can't assume any hardline stance on immigration is far right and racist. In Denmark the centre left have been hard on refugee migration the last few years they have been in power. It's simply a case of enforcing the nation's laws and making sure migration is low and sustainable. Nobody wants an exploding population with congestion, lack of hospital beds, school spaces, overcrowded transport and crowded streets all day long. I've seen in towns in and around London and Manchester what this has done - too much migration the UK will lose its cultural identity.

You use the term "refugee migration". Refugees and migrants aren't the same thing. Even if we could press a magic button that would stop the boats and halt all refugees attempting to come to the UK, it won't stop people migrating here.

You also say that the UK will lose its cultural identity - how, exactly? Where's the document that sets out in detail the UK Cultural Identity standards that we should all be conforming to?

 

[JGurney]

Larger UK firms do have DEI departments - for example Lloyds Bank and the FA.

The FA, as that link shows, use the usual British term 'Equality, diversity and inclusion' (or EDI). That usage is found in many UK businesses.

Lloyds do indeed seem to be putting in the American way round, although the article refers to a job title not a department name.

 

[RailWonderer]

Proof of there being a 'DEI department' would be a start!

[citation needed]

Please provide specific examples of public bodies that have "DEI departments", then provide further details about those that you believe to be overpaid and bloated.

I notice when I say things people don't like to hear they always ask for proof, which is never hard to find.
£27m p/a spent on dei. Where I worked (in the UK) the term DEI was explicitly used. Some companies have departments most mostly they are in the HR departments.

Civil Service Equality, Diversity and Inclusion Expenditure Guidance

www.gov.uk

£100k p/a +

Job Advert

www.jobs.nhs.uk

£50 k p/a

Vacancies

www.gmmh.nhs.uk

There was also an article in the Times stating that DEI workers in the NHS are paid far more than doctors, though I understand there are far more doctors than DEI chiefs. Even if the total annual diversity spend is small it still is the price of one new faculty building constructed per year.

 

[jon0844]

£27m per annum is so laughably small I cannot believe you're seriously stating that as an example of bloat. I mean it's a lot of money to me, but in the grand scheme of things it's a drop in the ocean.

when I say things people don't like to hear they always ask for proof, which is never hard to find.

I don't mind hearing it, but what you said is nonsense and now you've just proved it is nonsense with your own figures.

I could obviously look it up, but what is the annual NHS budget?

 

[RailWonderer]

£27m per annum is so laughably small I cannot believe you're seriously stating that as an example of bloat. I mean it's a lot of money to me, but in the grand scheme of things it's a drop in the ocean.



I don't mind hearing it, but what you said is nonsense and now you've just proved it is nonsense with your own figures.

I could obviously look it up, but what is the annual NHS budget?

It's about the principle, not the size.

 

[Harpo]

In the UK, we have robust equality legislation. It doesn’t specify quotas or insist that you have to employ any type or category of person, but rightly protects against exclusivity.

Like so many roles in HR or safety, you need specialists who guide line managers on legal compliance. It’s sound business sense to have them because the cost of getting it wrong can bring huge financial consequences.

 

[JGurney]

It's about the principle, not the size.

You introduced the term "bloated" which appears to refer to size.

 

[GusB]

I notice when I say things people don't like to hear they always ask for proof, which is never hard to find.
£27m p/a spent on dei. Where I worked (in the UK) the term DEI was explicitly used. Some companies have departments most mostly they are in the HR departments.

Civil Service Equality, Diversity and Inclusion Expenditure Guidance

www.gov.uk

It's interesting that you should cite the expenditure guidelines. I'll quote the summary here:

29. When executed well, activity on EDI brings value to the organisation. It can support efforts to attract and retain diverse talent from across all communities, promote exacting standards in leadership, and ensure value for money from talent and learning and development offers. This promotes a return of investment in initiatives around people delivery, for example, when seeking to address under-representation, tackle bullying, harassment and discrimination or deliver fair reward.


30. The measures set out in this guidance are to support the Civil Service achieve its aims effectively. This government is committed to Levelling Up by driving improvements in the day-to-day lives of all citizens, spending taxpayers’ money with care and providing excellent services. To deliver those commitments requires a Civil Service that can attract, retain and invest in talent wherever it is found. It is for this reason that we want the Civil Service to have a truly diverse workforce and culture of openness and inclusivity, as a means of delivering better outcomes to the citizens we serve.

That doesn't back your argument up particularly well! It also mentions nothing about £27m p/a - where did this figure come from?

£100k p/a +

Job Advert

www.jobs.nhs.uk

£50 k p/a

Vacancies

www.gmmh.nhs.uk

Did you actually read any of the job descriptions to see what was actually involved in these roles? I note that the former is paid at consultant level; that would suggest to me that a particular skillset is required and suitably qualified people are generally quite well paid.

You also say that the UK will lose its cultural identity - how, exactly? Where's the document that sets out in detail the UK Cultural Identity standards that we should all be conforming to?

I'd still be interested to read your answer to these questions.

 

[RailWonderer]

It's interesting that you should cite the expenditure guidelines. I'll quote the summary here:

That doesn't back your argument up particularly well! It also mentions nothing about £27m p/a - where did this figure come from?

https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2024-05-14/debates/24051433000007/CivilServiceEqualityDiversityAndInclusion

The review found that across 95 civil service organisations total EDI expenditure for the 2022-23 financial year was £27.1 million. We do not believe that this represents value for money.

Did you actually read any of the job descriptions to see what was actually involved in these roles? I note that the former is paid at consultant level; that would suggest to me that a particular skillset is required and suitably qualified people are generally quite well paid.

You're missing the point - why is this role even necessary? It might require the skills but why does somebody so skilled need to be wasted in DEI?

I'd still be interested to read your answer to these questions.

Answering that will open up more rabbit holes I've opened already I'm afraid. Grooming gangs and Islamic culture in large numbers. I'll just say that avoiding ghettoising - where these people all live in one big area together is bad for all, because a radical minority can influence a moderate majority. Spreading these populations out so they avoid big congregations allows for better assimilation. I am wording this carefully to avoid being misunderstood but with regards to cultural identity this is what I was thinking of.

 

[AlterEgo]

Civil Service Equality, Diversity and Inclusion Expenditure Guidance

www.gov.uk

£100k p/a +

Let's just take this one. This is a job aimed at NHS consultants and the job role explains that it is designed to improve clinical outcomes for women. Now, I thought from earlier in the thread you had great concern for women - at least, a type of woman you personally approve of. The person holding this job will effectively be a women's health champion already working in the field at a very high level. The role is designed to make - specifically women - healthier and have a better quality of life thanks to their interactions with the health service.

What is it that you object to about this job?

There was also an article in the Times stating that DEI workers in the NHS are paid far more than doctors, though I understand there are far more doctors than DEI chiefs.

These are often roles like the one you've linked which are open to people who are very senior physicians at the level of consultant, so yes, they will be paid more than junior doctors. We also don't pay doctors enough and are losing their skills elsewhere, but that doesn't seem to be your concern.

You're missing the point - why is this role even necessary? It might require the skills but why does somebody so skilled need to be wasted in DEI?

£27 million is a total drop in the ocean of the civil service's budget and government's spending. It may be that there is some waste - every function will have it if you look for it - but your laser focus on what bothers you when looking at the UK's trillion-pound annual spending is revealing.

 

[m0ffy]

You're missing the point - why is this role even necessary? It might require the skills but why does somebody so skilled need to be wasted in DEI?

I’m not entirely sure you actually understand the role of DEI teams, or how the equality act applies to employers. If you did, you’d know quotas aren’t permitted in GB (NI is a different matter for obvious reasons). They are part of the HR/personnel/people apparatus that maintains legal compliance. They have a remit for belonging and inclusion. They’ll usually run staff networks.
In large employers, the people team will usually be split into groups of specialists - this isn’t new - recruitment, employee relations, and business partnering have long been discreet roles. Are they a waste of money, too?

 

[Tetchytyke]

https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2024-05-14/debates/24051433000007/CivilServiceEqualityDiversityAndInclusion

So the only evidence you can find is failed former daytime TV presenter Esther McVey pulling a figure out of her arse?

Well that’s me convinced.

£27 million is a total drop in the ocean of the civil service's budget and government's spending.

And that’s assuming the figure is correct. The only reference I can find is in the reporting of Esther McVey’s comments.

I rather fear that Mrs Philip Davies might just be making stuff up again.

 

[GusB]

Answering that will open up more rabbit holes I've opened already I'm afraid. Grooming gangs and Islamic culture in large numbers. I'll just say that avoiding ghettoising - where these people all live in one big area together is bad for all, because a radical minority can influence a moderate majority.

Why have you linked grooming gangs and Islamic culture?

While there were some cases where people from non-white backgrounds were involved in grooming, it certainly does not apply to everyone from those communities and we should avoid tarring everyone with the same brush because of the actions of a few ban 'uns.

Grooming gangs and ethnicity: What does the evidence say?

Home Secretary Suella Braverman made several comments about the ethnicity of some high-profile gangs.

www.bbc.co.uk

But the suggestion that the ethnic background of the perpetrators plays an important part in abuse by gangs is hard to support, at least based on the current evidence.
The Home Office commissioned a study of the available data in 2020, external. It said:

• "The academic literature highlights significant limitations to what can be said about links between ethnicity and this form of offending."
• "Research has found that group-based child sexual exploitation offenders are most commonly white."
• "Some studies suggest an over-representation of Black and Asian offenders relative to the demographics of national populations."

It found there was limited research on offender identity and poor quality data, which made it difficult to draw conclusions, however "it is likely that no one community or culture is uniquely predisposed to offending".
A previous piece of research from 2015 found that of 1,231 perpetrators of "group and gang-based child sexual exploitation", 42% were white, 14% were defined as Asian or Asian British and 17% black.

Spreading these populations out so they avoid big congregations allows for better assimilation. I am wording this carefully to avoid being misunderstood but with regards to cultural identity this is what I was thinking of.

Muslims accounted for 6.5% of the population, according to the 2021 census (England and Wales).

Religion, England and Wales - Office for National Statistics

The religion of usual residents and household religious composition in England and Wales, Census 2021 data.

www.ons.gov.uk

There were increases in the number of people who described themselves as “Muslim” (3.9 million, 6.5% in 2021, up from 2.7 million, 4.9% in 2011) and “Hindu” (1.0 million, 1.7% in 2021, up from 818,000, 1.5% in 2011).

It's hardly surprising that people from other cultures gather in distinct communities. People who move to a foreign country may want to seek out others from the same culture, perhaps for a bit of support when they're finding their feet in a new land. Maybe they occasionally want to feel "at home" and speak their own language; they may wish to practice their own religion. I don't see it as anything to be afraid of.

I'm not quite sure I like the use of the word "assimilation", either; it suggests to me that they should have to give up their own culture entirely. I agree that integration is important, however.

 

[Yew]

It is when taxpayers pay for the NHS and other public bodies with overpaid bloated DEI departments.

No UK organisation has a "DEI" department.

 

[Cloud Strife]

You also say that the UK will lose its cultural identity - how, exactly? Where's the document that sets out in detail the UK Cultural Identity standards that we should all be conforming to?

I would also stress one thing: the idea that there's a "UK Cultural Identity" is hilarious to me as a Scot. We are clearly culturally different to the English, we have little in common with the Welsh, and Northern Ireland is just Ireland to the vast majority of us who don't get involved in sectarian nonsense.

 

[Three-Nine]

I think its worth pointing out that some of the DEI scaremongering in the US is operating on a different scale; some are claiming that schoolchildren are being taught to identify as cats and use litter boxes instead of toilets for example. It’s total, utter, complete rubbish of course but I just want to highlight that I think theres a difference in approach to the subject that may not be immediately obvious if you don’t follow US based news sources.

 

[oldman]

I would also stress one thing: the idea that there's a "UK Cultural Identity" is hilarious to me as a Scot. We are clearly culturally different to the English, we have little in common with the Welsh, and Northern Ireland is just Ireland to the vast majority of us who don't get involved in sectarian nonsense.

I don't like the phrase UK national identity, I prefer British, but I don't find the idea of a rigid binary divide between Scots and the rest at all 'hilarious'. Maybe you have spending too much time looking at the thistle.