LEAVE the Conservative Party and save your country!

skyblueamateur

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

briantrumpet said:

kingstongraham said:

rjsterry said:

I see the performatively stupid Anderson and co are talking bollox about immigration again.

I suppose one should marvel that the party has chosen to dig in on the policy on which almost nobody thinks they are succeeding. Still, when you have nothing else to say...

It's dishonest for the news to bowdlerise his comments. The deputy Conservative chairman said they should "fuck off back to France" and number 10 has confirmed they support his comments.

So only the PM supporting obscenity which was in support of a policy which is in flagrant breach of international law. What's the problem?

Aligning himself with the EU to keep you happy.

They're indeed just as bad.

Yes and clearly my point is irrelevant whataboutism, but I do find the endless cries about international law and EU superiority to be a bit tedious.

Small consolation in that I don't think we've let a small trawler full of people sink while we sat on our hands

The EU-Turkey agreement is a better example rather than rogue coastguards.

True.

The key point is that making things a bit uncomfortable is not going to deter people. But then the whole thing is designed to fail. If it actually worked they would lose the one talking point they have left.

So what do you think the solution is?

To migration in general? There isn't one. It's a fundamental part of human nature. May as well try to hold back the tide. What we experience in this country is a small part of a small part of global migration, so we should stop whining about it and just deal with it. We accept vastly more people through the visa system than via asylum applications so the government clearly isn't bothered about migration generally. Removing most practical routes to claiming asylum has created the specific Channel problem and directed migrants to the very smugglers the government implausibly claim to want to stop. Re-establish those routes and that removes the need to cross seas in boats. Process applications in a timely manner with perhaps some interim work permit so that people can support themselves and the need for hotels and barges diminishes.

That do?

Great post!

Stevo_666

webboo said:

Stevo_666 said:

briantrumpet said:

kingstongraham said:

rjsterry said:

I see the performatively stupid Anderson and co are talking bollox about immigration again.

I suppose one should marvel that the party has chosen to dig in on the policy on which almost nobody thinks they are succeeding. Still, when you have nothing else to say...

It's dishonest for the news to bowdlerise his comments. The deputy Conservative chairman said they should "fuck off back to France" and number 10 has confirmed they support his comments.

So only the PM supporting obscenity which was in support of a policy which is in flagrant breach of international law. What's the problem?

To be fair, he was only referring to the ones that were moaning about the conditions. Which is maybe why he hit a bit of a raw nerve in Cake Stop

Given the amount of times you mention nerves in your posts, should we be calling you Shaking Stevo.🤣

That's quite witty for you Webby.

And it's good to see you're reading all of my posts

TheBigBean

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

briantrumpet said:

kingstongraham said:

rjsterry said:

I see the performatively stupid Anderson and co are talking bollox about immigration again.

I suppose one should marvel that the party has chosen to dig in on the policy on which almost nobody thinks they are succeeding. Still, when you have nothing else to say...

It's dishonest for the news to bowdlerise his comments. The deputy Conservative chairman said they should "fuck off back to France" and number 10 has confirmed they support his comments.

So only the PM supporting obscenity which was in support of a policy which is in flagrant breach of international law. What's the problem?

Aligning himself with the EU to keep you happy.

They're indeed just as bad.

Yes and clearly my point is irrelevant whataboutism, but I do find the endless cries about international law and EU superiority to be a bit tedious.

Small consolation in that I don't think we've let a small trawler full of people sink while we sat on our hands

The EU-Turkey agreement is a better example rather than rogue coastguards.

True.

The key point is that making things a bit uncomfortable is not going to deter people. But then the whole thing is designed to fail. If it actually worked they would lose the one talking point they have left.

So what do you think the solution is?

To migration in general? There isn't one. It's a fundamental part of human nature. May as well try to hold back the tide. What we experience in this country is a small part of a small part of global migration, so we should stop whining about it and just deal with it. We accept vastly more people through the visa system than via asylum applications so the government clearly isn't bothered about migration generally. Removing most practical routes to claiming asylum has created the specific Channel problem and directed migrants to the very smugglers the government implausibly claim to want to stop. Re-establish those routes and that removes the need to cross seas in boats. Process applications in a timely manner with perhaps some interim work permit so that people can support themselves and the need for hotels and barges diminishes.

That do?

Sounds like you have widened the working holiday visa.

rjsterry

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

briantrumpet said:

kingstongraham said:

rjsterry said:

I see the performatively stupid Anderson and co are talking bollox about immigration again.

I suppose one should marvel that the party has chosen to dig in on the policy on which almost nobody thinks they are succeeding. Still, when you have nothing else to say...

It's dishonest for the news to bowdlerise his comments. The deputy Conservative chairman said they should "fuck off back to France" and number 10 has confirmed they support his comments.

So only the PM supporting obscenity which was in support of a policy which is in flagrant breach of international law. What's the problem?

Aligning himself with the EU to keep you happy.

They're indeed just as bad.

Yes and clearly my point is irrelevant whataboutism, but I do find the endless cries about international law and EU superiority to be a bit tedious.

Small consolation in that I don't think we've let a small trawler full of people sink while we sat on our hands

The EU-Turkey agreement is a better example rather than rogue coastguards.

True.

The key point is that making things a bit uncomfortable is not going to deter people. But then the whole thing is designed to fail. If it actually worked they would lose the one talking point they have left.

So what do you think the solution is?

To migration in general? There isn't one. It's a fundamental part of human nature. May as well try to hold back the tide. What we experience in this country is a small part of a small part of global migration, so we should stop whining about it and just deal with it. We accept vastly more people through the visa system than via asylum applications so the government clearly isn't bothered about migration generally. Removing most practical routes to claiming asylum has created the specific Channel problem and directed migrants to the very smugglers the government implausibly claim to want to stop. Re-establish those routes and that removes the need to cross seas in boats. Process applications in a timely manner with perhaps some interim work permit so that people can support themselves and the need for hotels and barges diminishes.

That do?

Sounds like you have widened the working holiday visa.

Perhaps. If we're going to run the country on the basis of well over 1/3 of adults being economically inactive, that sounds like a useful thing at first glance.

TheBigBean

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

briantrumpet said:

kingstongraham said:

rjsterry said:

I see the performatively stupid Anderson and co are talking bollox about immigration again.

I suppose one should marvel that the party has chosen to dig in on the policy on which almost nobody thinks they are succeeding. Still, when you have nothing else to say...

It's dishonest for the news to bowdlerise his comments. The deputy Conservative chairman said they should "fuck off back to France" and number 10 has confirmed they support his comments.

So only the PM supporting obscenity which was in support of a policy which is in flagrant breach of international law. What's the problem?

Aligning himself with the EU to keep you happy.

They're indeed just as bad.

Yes and clearly my point is irrelevant whataboutism, but I do find the endless cries about international law and EU superiority to be a bit tedious.

Small consolation in that I don't think we've let a small trawler full of people sink while we sat on our hands

The EU-Turkey agreement is a better example rather than rogue coastguards.

True.

The key point is that making things a bit uncomfortable is not going to deter people. But then the whole thing is designed to fail. If it actually worked they would lose the one talking point they have left.

So what do you think the solution is?

To migration in general? There isn't one. It's a fundamental part of human nature. May as well try to hold back the tide. What we experience in this country is a small part of a small part of global migration, so we should stop whining about it and just deal with it. We accept vastly more people through the visa system than via asylum applications so the government clearly isn't bothered about migration generally. Removing most practical routes to claiming asylum has created the specific Channel problem and directed migrants to the very smugglers the government implausibly claim to want to stop. Re-establish those routes and that removes the need to cross seas in boats. Process applications in a timely manner with perhaps some interim work permit so that people can support themselves and the need for hotels and barges diminishes.

That do?

Sounds like you have widened the working holiday visa.

Perhaps. If we're going to run the country on the basis of well over 1/3 of adults being economically inactive, that sounds like a useful thing at first glance.

I think working holiday visas are excellent things. I would hope the EU will see the light one day, but irrespective of that I think eligibility should be widened. That said, I'm not sure including everyone would work very well, and as such, I think your idea doesn't work.

rjsterry

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

briantrumpet said:

kingstongraham said:

rjsterry said:

I see the performatively stupid Anderson and co are talking bollox about immigration again.

I suppose one should marvel that the party has chosen to dig in on the policy on which almost nobody thinks they are succeeding. Still, when you have nothing else to say...

It's dishonest for the news to bowdlerise his comments. The deputy Conservative chairman said they should "fuck off back to France" and number 10 has confirmed they support his comments.

So only the PM supporting obscenity which was in support of a policy which is in flagrant breach of international law. What's the problem?

Aligning himself with the EU to keep you happy.

They're indeed just as bad.

Yes and clearly my point is irrelevant whataboutism, but I do find the endless cries about international law and EU superiority to be a bit tedious.

Small consolation in that I don't think we've let a small trawler full of people sink while we sat on our hands

The EU-Turkey agreement is a better example rather than rogue coastguards.

True.

The key point is that making things a bit uncomfortable is not going to deter people. But then the whole thing is designed to fail. If it actually worked they would lose the one talking point they have left.

So what do you think the solution is?

To migration in general? There isn't one. It's a fundamental part of human nature. May as well try to hold back the tide. What we experience in this country is a small part of a small part of global migration, so we should stop whining about it and just deal with it. We accept vastly more people through the visa system than via asylum applications so the government clearly isn't bothered about migration generally. Removing most practical routes to claiming asylum has created the specific Channel problem and directed migrants to the very smugglers the government implausibly claim to want to stop. Re-establish those routes and that removes the need to cross seas in boats. Process applications in a timely manner with perhaps some interim work permit so that people can support themselves and the need for hotels and barges diminishes.

That do?

Sounds like you have widened the working holiday visa.

Perhaps. If we're going to run the country on the basis of well over 1/3 of adults being economically inactive, that sounds like a useful thing at first glance.

I think working holiday visas are excellent things. I would hope the EU will see the light one day, but irrespective of that I think eligibility should be widened. That said, I'm not sure including everyone would work very well, and as such, I think your idea doesn't work.

You suggested the working holiday visa, not me. If that's not quite the right answer I'm sure there are others.

TheBigBean

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

briantrumpet said:

kingstongraham said:

rjsterry said:

I see the performatively stupid Anderson and co are talking bollox about immigration again.

I suppose one should marvel that the party has chosen to dig in on the policy on which almost nobody thinks they are succeeding. Still, when you have nothing else to say...

It's dishonest for the news to bowdlerise his comments. The deputy Conservative chairman said they should "fuck off back to France" and number 10 has confirmed they support his comments.

So only the PM supporting obscenity which was in support of a policy which is in flagrant breach of international law. What's the problem?

Aligning himself with the EU to keep you happy.

They're indeed just as bad.

Yes and clearly my point is irrelevant whataboutism, but I do find the endless cries about international law and EU superiority to be a bit tedious.

Small consolation in that I don't think we've let a small trawler full of people sink while we sat on our hands

The EU-Turkey agreement is a better example rather than rogue coastguards.

True.

The key point is that making things a bit uncomfortable is not going to deter people. But then the whole thing is designed to fail. If it actually worked they would lose the one talking point they have left.

So what do you think the solution is?

To migration in general? There isn't one. It's a fundamental part of human nature. May as well try to hold back the tide. What we experience in this country is a small part of a small part of global migration, so we should stop whining about it and just deal with it. We accept vastly more people through the visa system than via asylum applications so the government clearly isn't bothered about migration generally. Removing most practical routes to claiming asylum has created the specific Channel problem and directed migrants to the very smugglers the government implausibly claim to want to stop. Re-establish those routes and that removes the need to cross seas in boats. Process applications in a timely manner with perhaps some interim work permit so that people can support themselves and the need for hotels and barges diminishes.

That do?

Sounds like you have widened the working holiday visa.

Perhaps. If we're going to run the country on the basis of well over 1/3 of adults being economically inactive, that sounds like a useful thing at first glance.

I think working holiday visas are excellent things. I would hope the EU will see the light one day, but irrespective of that I think eligibility should be widened. That said, I'm not sure including everyone would work very well, and as such, I think your idea doesn't work.

You suggested the working holiday visa, not me. If that's not quite the right answer I'm sure there are others.

Your proposal was to make it easier to get to the UK and to allow those seeking asylum to work while waiting for a decision. Even if the government ramped up the number of case workers and judges, the full legal process would still take years. So, in effect, you would be offering an easy opportunity to work in the UK for a number of years.

There is no easy answer and a lot of these things have been explored before. The process has simply evolved a bit, so that there is now a boat crossing industry rather than a truck hiding one.

pblakeney

The boat crossing industry has evolved because of the system being shiite.
Speed the process up and the issue would largely go away.

First.Aspect

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

briantrumpet said:

kingstongraham said:

rjsterry said:

I see the performatively stupid Anderson and co are talking bollox about immigration again.

I suppose one should marvel that the party has chosen to dig in on the policy on which almost nobody thinks they are succeeding. Still, when you have nothing else to say...

It's dishonest for the news to bowdlerise his comments. The deputy Conservative chairman said they should "fuck off back to France" and number 10 has confirmed they support his comments.

So only the PM supporting obscenity which was in support of a policy which is in flagrant breach of international law. What's the problem?

Aligning himself with the EU to keep you happy.

They're indeed just as bad.

Yes and clearly my point is irrelevant whataboutism, but I do find the endless cries about international law and EU superiority to be a bit tedious.

Small consolation in that I don't think we've let a small trawler full of people sink while we sat on our hands

The EU-Turkey agreement is a better example rather than rogue coastguards.

True.

The key point is that making things a bit uncomfortable is not going to deter people. But then the whole thing is designed to fail. If it actually worked they would lose the one talking point they have left.

So what do you think the solution is?

To migration in general? There isn't one. It's a fundamental part of human nature. May as well try to hold back the tide. What we experience in this country is a small part of a small part of global migration, so we should stop whining about it and just deal with it. We accept vastly more people through the visa system than via asylum applications so the government clearly isn't bothered about migration generally. Removing most practical routes to claiming asylum has created the specific Channel problem and directed migrants to the very smugglers the government implausibly claim to want to stop. Re-establish those routes and that removes the need to cross seas in boats. Process applications in a timely manner with perhaps some interim work permit so that people can support themselves and the need for hotels and barges diminishes.

That do?

Sounds like you have widened the working holiday visa.

Perhaps. If we're going to run the country on the basis of well over 1/3 of adults being economically inactive, that sounds like a useful thing at first glance.

I think working holiday visas are excellent things. I would hope the EU will see the light one day, but irrespective of that I think eligibility should be widened. That said, I'm not sure including everyone would work very well, and as such, I think your idea doesn't work.

You suggested the working holiday visa, not me. If that's not quite the right answer I'm sure there are others.

Your proposal was to make it easier to get to the UK and to allow those seeking asylum to work while waiting for a decision. Even if the government ramped up the number of case workers and judges, the full legal process would still take years. So, in effect, you would be offering an easy opportunity to work in the UK for a number of years.

There is no easy answer and a lot of these things have been explored before. The process has simply evolved a bit, so that there is now a boat crossing industry rather than a truck hiding one.

I don't see the issue. They are either going to be eventually granted asylum or not. And they are still in the UK in the interim either way.

This is all about making the UK as unattractive as our international human rights obligations allow. Let's not pretend otherwise.

kingstongraham

pblakeney said:

The boat crossing industry has evolved because of the system being shiite.
Speed the process up and the issue would largely go away.

I don't know how you work that out.

The boat crossings are surely happening because they are currently the least risky way of successfully reaching the UK to claim asylum.

If processing were quicker, that would still be the case.

TheBigBean

First.Aspect said:

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

briantrumpet said:

kingstongraham said:

rjsterry said:

I see the performatively stupid Anderson and co are talking bollox about immigration again.

I suppose one should marvel that the party has chosen to dig in on the policy on which almost nobody thinks they are succeeding. Still, when you have nothing else to say...

It's dishonest for the news to bowdlerise his comments. The deputy Conservative chairman said they should "fuck off back to France" and number 10 has confirmed they support his comments.

So only the PM supporting obscenity which was in support of a policy which is in flagrant breach of international law. What's the problem?

Aligning himself with the EU to keep you happy.

They're indeed just as bad.

Yes and clearly my point is irrelevant whataboutism, but I do find the endless cries about international law and EU superiority to be a bit tedious.

Small consolation in that I don't think we've let a small trawler full of people sink while we sat on our hands

The EU-Turkey agreement is a better example rather than rogue coastguards.

True.

The key point is that making things a bit uncomfortable is not going to deter people. But then the whole thing is designed to fail. If it actually worked they would lose the one talking point they have left.

So what do you think the solution is?

To migration in general? There isn't one. It's a fundamental part of human nature. May as well try to hold back the tide. What we experience in this country is a small part of a small part of global migration, so we should stop whining about it and just deal with it. We accept vastly more people through the visa system than via asylum applications so the government clearly isn't bothered about migration generally. Removing most practical routes to claiming asylum has created the specific Channel problem and directed migrants to the very smugglers the government implausibly claim to want to stop. Re-establish those routes and that removes the need to cross seas in boats. Process applications in a timely manner with perhaps some interim work permit so that people can support themselves and the need for hotels and barges diminishes.

That do?

Sounds like you have widened the working holiday visa.

Perhaps. If we're going to run the country on the basis of well over 1/3 of adults being economically inactive, that sounds like a useful thing at first glance.

I think working holiday visas are excellent things. I would hope the EU will see the light one day, but irrespective of that I think eligibility should be widened. That said, I'm not sure including everyone would work very well, and as such, I think your idea doesn't work.

You suggested the working holiday visa, not me. If that's not quite the right answer I'm sure there are others.

Your proposal was to make it easier to get to the UK and to allow those seeking asylum to work while waiting for a decision. Even if the government ramped up the number of case workers and judges, the full legal process would still take years. So, in effect, you would be offering an easy opportunity to work in the UK for a number of years.

There is no easy answer and a lot of these things have been explored before. The process has simply evolved a bit, so that there is now a boat crossing industry rather than a truck hiding one.

I don't see the issue. They are either going to be eventually granted asylum or not. And they are still in the UK in the interim either way.

This is all about making the UK as unattractive as our international human rights obligations allow. Let's not pretend otherwise.

It depends whether you are making it easier to come to the UK or not. If the offer is that you can hop on a plane, claim asylum and work for a few years, then it will have a material impact on the number of claims.

If the offer is that after the boat crossing, those seeking asylum are able to work, it might not materially change the number of applications. Although that said, if you look at the number of Iraqi Kurds who make the crossing despite being ineligible for asylum in many countries (and therefore unlikely to be awarded it in the UK), it does show that people will willing cross the channel for a few years of work.

But yes, you are right. It is all about making the UK unattractive in a world of other countries being better at it.

pblakeney

kingstongraham said:

pblakeney said:

The boat crossing industry has evolved because of the system being shiite.
Speed the process up and the issue would largely go away.

I don't know how you work that out.

The boat crossings are surely happening because they are currently the least risky way of successfully reaching the UK to claim asylum.

If processing were quicker, that would still be the case.

The current situation is people arrive knowing that they will be here for years before they are processed, and can "go missing" in the meantime.
Make that days and any likely to be refused won't bother.

TheBigBean

pblakeney said:

kingstongraham said:

pblakeney said:

The boat crossing industry has evolved because of the system being shiite.
Speed the process up and the issue would largely go away.

I don't know how you work that out.

The boat crossings are surely happening because they are currently the least risky way of successfully reaching the UK to claim asylum.

If processing were quicker, that would still be the case.

The current situation is people arrive knowing that they will be here for years before they are processed, and can "go missing" in the meantime.
Make that days and any likely to be refused won't bother.

Would you be happy with that for a justice system that might affect you? Maybe minor cases such as robbery could be done in 24 hours and more major ones could be wrapped up in 48 hours.

rjsterry

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

briantrumpet said:

kingstongraham said:

rjsterry said:

I see the performatively stupid Anderson and co are talking bollox about immigration again.

I suppose one should marvel that the party has chosen to dig in on the policy on which almost nobody thinks they are succeeding. Still, when you have nothing else to say...

It's dishonest for the news to bowdlerise his comments. The deputy Conservative chairman said they should "fuck off back to France" and number 10 has confirmed they support his comments.

So only the PM supporting obscenity which was in support of a policy which is in flagrant breach of international law. What's the problem?

Aligning himself with the EU to keep you happy.

They're indeed just as bad.

Yes and clearly my point is irrelevant whataboutism, but I do find the endless cries about international law and EU superiority to be a bit tedious.

Small consolation in that I don't think we've let a small trawler full of people sink while we sat on our hands

The EU-Turkey agreement is a better example rather than rogue coastguards.

True.

The key point is that making things a bit uncomfortable is not going to deter people. But then the whole thing is designed to fail. If it actually worked they would lose the one talking point they have left.

So what do you think the solution is?

To migration in general? There isn't one. It's a fundamental part of human nature. May as well try to hold back the tide. What we experience in this country is a small part of a small part of global migration, so we should stop whining about it and just deal with it. We accept vastly more people through the visa system than via asylum applications so the government clearly isn't bothered about migration generally. Removing most practical routes to claiming asylum has created the specific Channel problem and directed migrants to the very smugglers the government implausibly claim to want to stop. Re-establish those routes and that removes the need to cross seas in boats. Process applications in a timely manner with perhaps some interim work permit so that people can support themselves and the need for hotels and barges diminishes.

That do?

Sounds like you have widened the working holiday visa.

Perhaps. If we're going to run the country on the basis of well over 1/3 of adults being economically inactive, that sounds like a useful thing at first glance.

I think working holiday visas are excellent things. I would hope the EU will see the light one day, but irrespective of that I think eligibility should be widened. That said, I'm not sure including everyone would work very well, and as such, I think your idea doesn't work.

You suggested the working holiday visa, not me. If that's not quite the right answer I'm sure there are others.

Your proposal was to make it easier to get to the UK and to allow those seeking asylum to work while waiting for a decision. Even if the government ramped up the number of case workers and judges, the full legal process would still take years. So, in effect, you would be offering an easy opportunity to work in the UK for a number of years.

There is no easy answer and a lot of these things have been explored before. The process has simply evolved a bit, so that there is now a boat crossing industry rather than a truck hiding one.

I don't have a problem with people staying for 2 years on a temporary basis and then either extending that with a longer visa, starting on their way to citizenship or returning home. I think the distinction between visa migration and asylum is somewhat artificial anyway. I also think the idea that 'everyone' would come here is nonsense. We already accept vastly more people through conventional immigration, so why worry about a few more?

rjsterry

pblakeney said:

kingstongraham said:

pblakeney said:

The boat crossing industry has evolved because of the system being shiite.
Speed the process up and the issue would largely go away.

I don't know how you work that out.

The boat crossings are surely happening because they are currently the least risky way of successfully reaching the UK to claim asylum.

If processing were quicker, that would still be the case.

The current situation is people arrive knowing that they will be here for years before they are processed, and can "go missing" in the meantime.
Make that days and any likely to be refused won't bother.

It's never going to be days; that is just unrealistic. But there is room for improvement and nothing to gain from not letting people work in the meantime.

First.Aspect

TheBigBean said:

First.Aspect said:

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

briantrumpet said:

kingstongraham said:

rjsterry said:

I see the performatively stupid Anderson and co are talking bollox about immigration again.

I suppose one should marvel that the party has chosen to dig in on the policy on which almost nobody thinks they are succeeding. Still, when you have nothing else to say...

It's dishonest for the news to bowdlerise his comments. The deputy Conservative chairman said they should "fuck off back to France" and number 10 has confirmed they support his comments.

So only the PM supporting obscenity which was in support of a policy which is in flagrant breach of international law. What's the problem?

Aligning himself with the EU to keep you happy.

They're indeed just as bad.

Yes and clearly my point is irrelevant whataboutism, but I do find the endless cries about international law and EU superiority to be a bit tedious.

Small consolation in that I don't think we've let a small trawler full of people sink while we sat on our hands

The EU-Turkey agreement is a better example rather than rogue coastguards.

True.

The key point is that making things a bit uncomfortable is not going to deter people. But then the whole thing is designed to fail. If it actually worked they would lose the one talking point they have left.

So what do you think the solution is?

To migration in general? There isn't one. It's a fundamental part of human nature. May as well try to hold back the tide. What we experience in this country is a small part of a small part of global migration, so we should stop whining about it and just deal with it. We accept vastly more people through the visa system than via asylum applications so the government clearly isn't bothered about migration generally. Removing most practical routes to claiming asylum has created the specific Channel problem and directed migrants to the very smugglers the government implausibly claim to want to stop. Re-establish those routes and that removes the need to cross seas in boats. Process applications in a timely manner with perhaps some interim work permit so that people can support themselves and the need for hotels and barges diminishes.

That do?

Sounds like you have widened the working holiday visa.

Perhaps. If we're going to run the country on the basis of well over 1/3 of adults being economically inactive, that sounds like a useful thing at first glance.

I think working holiday visas are excellent things. I would hope the EU will see the light one day, but irrespective of that I think eligibility should be widened. That said, I'm not sure including everyone would work very well, and as such, I think your idea doesn't work.

You suggested the working holiday visa, not me. If that's not quite the right answer I'm sure there are others.

Your proposal was to make it easier to get to the UK and to allow those seeking asylum to work while waiting for a decision. Even if the government ramped up the number of case workers and judges, the full legal process would still take years. So, in effect, you would be offering an easy opportunity to work in the UK for a number of years.

There is no easy answer and a lot of these things have been explored before. The process has simply evolved a bit, so that there is now a boat crossing industry rather than a truck hiding one.

I don't see the issue. They are either going to be eventually granted asylum or not. And they are still in the UK in the interim either way.

This is all about making the UK as unattractive as our international human rights obligations allow. Let's not pretend otherwise.

It depends whether you are making it easier to come to the UK or not. If the offer is that you can hop on a plane, claim asylum and work for a few years, then it will have a material impact on the number of claims.

If the offer is that after the boat crossing, those seeking asylum are able to work, it might not materially change the number of applications. Although that said, if you look at the number of Iraqi Kurds who make the crossing despite being ineligible for asylum in many countries (and therefore unlikely to be awarded it in the UK), it does show that people will willing cross the channel for a few years of work.

But yes, you are right. It is all about making the UK unattractive in a world of other countries being better at it.

I tend towards thinking people are going to come anyway. It isn't like the UK would be offering a new life and career. Hey come to the UK and you too could earn minimum wage picking fruit. Fantastic, that's worth drowning for.

First.Aspect

I have a question about Rishi's anti inflation policies (which don't exist).

If China has a period of deflation, which now appears possible, does that radiate out to the rest of the world? e.g. us.

pblakeney

TheBigBean said:

pblakeney said:

kingstongraham said:

pblakeney said:

The boat crossing industry has evolved because of the system being shiite.
Speed the process up and the issue would largely go away.

I don't know how you work that out.

The boat crossings are surely happening because they are currently the least risky way of successfully reaching the UK to claim asylum.

If processing were quicker, that would still be the case.

The current situation is people arrive knowing that they will be here for years before they are processed, and can "go missing" in the meantime.
Make that days and any likely to be refused won't bother.

Would you be happy with that for a justice system that might affect you? Maybe minor cases such as robbery could be done in 24 hours and more major ones could be wrapped up in 48 hours.

I think the legal system should work ASAP too if you want to start another conversation.
The quicker refusal can be done the better for all and more of a deterrent. Are we saying it won't make any difference so why bother trying? Fine. Stop moaning about them coming.

super_davo

Bearing in mind that Jenricks statement was the first time the government had intimated that processing slowly was being used as a deterrent, I am not sure how effective a deterrent it could possibly be. Is anyone attempting that crossing going to be aware? Or care if they were?

As 75% of claims are accepted, isn't it in everyone's interest to send the 25% back and get the 75% supporting themselves so you don't have to, as soon as possible?

We've got government by Daily Mail.

rjsterry

First.Aspect said:

I have a question about Rishi's anti inflation policies (which don't exist).

If China has a period of deflation, which now appears possible, does that radiate out to the rest of the world? e.g. us.

🤣🤣

The pretence that he can do more than minimally affect inflation is probably one of bigger lies this government has told.

rjsterry

Particular favourite of the immigration discourse was Alex Chalk MP KC telling other lawyers to keep their political opinions on immigration policy to themselves.

Championing free speech all the way.

surrey_commuter

First.Aspect said:

I have a question about Rishi's anti inflation policies (which don't exist).

If China has a period of deflation, which now appears possible, does that radiate out to the rest of the world? e.g. us.

It is a good question and I would say that as it is driven by a lack of demand then yes it should help lower global rates of inflation (note that I have not used the word deflation)

wallace_and_gromit

UK GDP for Q2 "surprises on the upside" at +0.2% (vs consensus of zero growth) and +0.5% in June alone, albeit aided by a "bounceback" from the extra Bank Holiday in May.

This isn't posted as pro-Tory tub-thumping, but merely to highlight how persistent the UK economy is at beating pessimistic forecasts.

Stevo_666

wallace_and_gromit said:

UK GDP for Q2 "surprises on the upside" at +0.2% (vs consensus of zero growth) and +0.5% in June alone, albeit aided by a "bounceback" from the extra Bank Holiday in May.

This isn't posted as pro-Tory tub-thumping, but merely to highlight how persistent the UK economy is at beating Cake Stop forecasts.

FTFY.

wallace_and_gromit

Stevo_666 said:

wallace_and_gromit said:

UK GDP for Q2 "surprises on the upside" at +0.2% (vs consensus of zero growth) and +0.5% in June alone, albeit aided by a "bounceback" from the extra Bank Holiday in May.

This isn't posted as pro-Tory tub-thumping, but merely to highlight how persistent the UK economy is at beating Cake Stop forecasts.

FTFY.

Not just Cake Stop forecasts. If the forecasters at the IMF had any sense of professional pride they would resign and take up basket weaving.

But seriously, I guess it's just human nature that more attention is paid to the extreme forecasts (which currently are the pessimistic ones) than more conservative ones, and so forecasters err to the extreme end of the scale.

"Shock! Horror! UK heading for a recession" is always likely to generate more clicks / sales than "UK to economy to continue plodding along, better than some peers, worse than others".

Stevo_666

wallace_and_gromit said:

Stevo_666 said:

wallace_and_gromit said:

UK GDP for Q2 "surprises on the upside" at +0.2% (vs consensus of zero growth) and +0.5% in June alone, albeit aided by a "bounceback" from the extra Bank Holiday in May.

This isn't posted as pro-Tory tub-thumping, but merely to highlight how persistent the UK economy is at beating Cake Stop forecasts.

FTFY.

Not just Cake Stop forecasts. If the forecasters at the IMF had any sense of professional pride they would resign and take up basket weaving.

But seriously, I guess it's just human nature that more attention is paid to the extreme forecasts (which currently are the pessimistic ones) than more conservative ones, and so forecasters err to the extreme end of the scale.

"Shock! Horror! UK heading for a recession" is always likely to generate more clicks / sales than "UK to economy to continue plodding along, better than some peers, worse than others".

True, it also gives some people a justification to get their 'I told you so' t-shirts printed

First.Aspect

Stevo you are getting awfully excited about +0.2% +/- 0.1%, instead of a predicted +0.1% +/- 0.1%.

Statistically, they aren't all that much different. As in, by some measures, not different at all.

wallace_and_gromit

Stevo_666 said:

wallace_and_gromit said:

Stevo_666 said:

wallace_and_gromit said:

UK GDP for Q2 "surprises on the upside" at +0.2% (vs consensus of zero growth) and +0.5% in June alone, albeit aided by a "bounceback" from the extra Bank Holiday in May.

This isn't posted as pro-Tory tub-thumping, but merely to highlight how persistent the UK economy is at beating Cake Stop forecasts.

FTFY.

Not just Cake Stop forecasts. If the forecasters at the IMF had any sense of professional pride they would resign and take up basket weaving.

But seriously, I guess it's just human nature that more attention is paid to the extreme forecasts (which currently are the pessimistic ones) than more conservative ones, and so forecasters err to the extreme end of the scale.

"Shock! Horror! UK heading for a recession" is always likely to generate more clicks / sales than "UK to economy to continue plodding along, better than some peers, worse than others".

True, it also gives some people a justification to get their 'I told you so' t-shirts printed

The Guardian made me chuckle today. Its reporting of the GDP stats was, on the whole, quite reasonable, highlighting the resilience of the UK economy and its repeated beating of forecasts. It even highlighted that on a monthly basis, the UK's GDP is now 0.3% higher than immediately pre-pandemic i.e. Feb 2020.

But of course it then had to through some tofu at the faithful by highlighting that on a quarterly basis, the UK's economic performance was the worst amongst the G7 since before the pandemic (Q4 2019) Whilst understandable (the faithful need to hear what they want to hear) this rather glosses over two things:

1 - The UK's economic peers at the moment are realistically EU / Eurozone countries which are similarly exposed to the impact of gas prices, against whom, the UK's performance is currently quite favourable, what with the Eurozone being in recession and the outlook for Germany being somewhat challenging

2 - The major element of the UK's underperformance since Q4 2019 relates to the time period up to Q2 2020, the major component of which was the Pandemic. So the statistic relating to current GDP vs Q4 2019 GDP is more a measure of how badly economies were affected by the Pandemic than of current economic performance or event recent economic performance.

Jezyboy

Tbf I presume the telegraphs reporting will be similarly cherry-picky.

Stevo_666

First.Aspect said:

Stevo you are getting awfully excited about +0.2% +/- 0.1%, instead of a predicted +0.1% +/- 0.1%.

Statistically, they aren't all that much different. As in, by some measures, not different at all.

I'm not, it's the t-shirt wannabes that do that every time there's some bad news.