I don't know. It could be but I would suggest that

a) too soon to tell

b) you could argue that having an ongoing prosecution into 25 MPs while there is an election campaign is not the best strategy.

I now live in Lewisham. Used to live in Cambridge and did so when I joined HOL hence the name. If you're from Stirling I have no idea what it's like so can't comment. Lewisham however I like and feel has benefited from immigration and from inward immigration into London in general, like the majority of places where immigrants have settled in the UK in numbers. The places most tolerant of immigration are those most directly impacted by it. Public accounts also show that immigration has been a significant net benefit to the economy, not to mention public services. The issues of under-funding and overcrowding, and unemployment and national policy issues created and exacerbated by consecutive governments' failure to invest in education, services and infrastructure and made significantly worse by poorly handled monetary policy (QE) and fiscal policy (austerity).

My point about Nuttall was his use of casual lies in public about himself. My comment was only meant to reflect on him and his party.

They used fear and lies about immigration to win votes. See insert.

Who are you going to vote for Nick?

Are you going to have a massive internal struggle with it all like last year and then....to all our massive surprise vote how we all said you would?

Just being a cheeky fecker.

Well by living in the crap hole that is Lewisham you are at least living out your principles....I lived in Catford right next to it for a few years...I wonder if the cinema is still there.

My surname is Stirling, to answer the location name point.

Anyway you think that large scale inward immigration benefits the areas it impacts....Well, on a 'feeling' basis it will differ from individual to individual by I seriously differ.

'The places most tolerant of immigration are those most directly impacted by it.'

If you forgive me but this point is a little silly. In London over the last thirty years there has been significant flight from the capital of Londoners. My family was one of them. We left, like many, because we didn't like what London was turning into.

Now it stands to reason that if a lot of people who don't like what's happening leave and you have increasingly large numbers of new people...mostly foreign coming in then you are going to end up with a city that mostly contains foreigners and those who are happy living as a minority amongst foreigners.

So that point is....boringly simplistic and easy to explain.

What isn't easy to explain is the economic benefits or costs of immigration. This is because accessing a non biased report isn't easy. You think it results in a net benefit I don't. I have seen reports by lefty academics that say it's a benefit and I've seen reports suggesting it's a drain. MigrationWatch UK use the same data and state pretty much the opposite....obviously what is factored in results in different conclusions.

I can't be sure who the liars are with that one...I will just say I don't know on the economic front.

But what I will say is that increasing a population each year without being able to increase infrastructure spending in line with the increase in effect punishes the working classes. They also don't factor in the social cohesion point that many like me make....apparently my views don't matter.....Well, until there is a 'leave' or 'remain' tick box that is....Thank you Cameron it was the only decent fecking thing you ever did!

Those who blame governments for the disaster of not increasing funding in line with it create a false argument because the increases in tax takes are just not there in line with population increase....over the year it's a population increase the size of the city of Newcastle......someone is lying about something.

As a teacher I've seen the damage and extra difficulties the rate of population increase has had on teaching....I can only imagine what it's been like in other sectors....I've read the stories.

I think those who accuse others of 'casual racism' are apart of the divisive nature of this debate. It stigmatise debate and widen the divide not decrease it....It closed down debate for many years and in effect what you did was create Ukip by causing resentment.

What you call 'casual racism' is probably more preference. I know some call that racism but as they are rather easy with their labels I call them plonkers.

Edited by Stirlingsays (19 Apr 2017 2.49am)

But a sh-t load less debt than Labour would have had.

People will vote Tory because the alternative is a wishy washy weak mess of a CND leadership.

I haven't met anyone who thinks that Labour could negotiate a good deal for Britain.

I have issues myself with May....but in this general election it's a foregone conclusion.

And I'm sorry to say it Nick but the fault of where Labour is right now is down to people like yourself.