LEAVE the Conservative Party and save your country!

Stevo_666

Jezyboy said:

pblakeney said:

Maybe if we hadn't contributed just so much to make some places in the world so shitty than this wouldn't be happening.

It's very on brand for the party of personal responsibility to try and wipe our hands of it though.

More than one poster has said that we are signed up to treaties that we have to honour by taking asylum seekers in and that we should make it easier for people to apply for asylum. Read between the lines and that is effectively saying 'come on in'.

So what other solutions do you suggest?

TheBigBean

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

wallace_and_gromit said:

Jezyboy said:

pblakeney said:

Maybe if we hadn't contributed just so much to make some places in the world so shitty than this wouldn't be happening.

It's very on brand for the party of personal responsibility to try and wipe our hands of it though.

I think there is a mutual pact between the Tories and Labour to not mention "cause and effect" in this area given the Blair regime's penchant for "intervention" in certain parts of the world.

Absolutely. Top 5 countries of origin for UK applications are:

Albania, Afghanistan (invaded then ran away), Iran (instigated a coup to overthrow the government because they had nationalised their oil industry), India (some history), and Iraq (invaded).

I don't think we invaded Albania,

Oh and there's Libya, too.

This isn't the best advert for the asylum system. Assuming it is Iraqi Kurds that make up the majority of Iraqi applications, then together with Albanians and Indians, that's a lot of people unlikely to be granted asylum.

The % granted asylum is pretty steady. Why do you think India shouldn't be on the list?

The percentage granted asylum does vary particularly by nationality. Albania and India are on the UK's safe country list. This means it is unlikely but not impossible that an applicant from those countries will be successful.

The increase in applications from those countries is a recent thing. In the case of India it is because Indian nationals can fly visa free to Serbia and the boat crossing to the UK is seen as far preferable to truck hiding.

rjsterry

Stevo_666 said:

Jezyboy said:

pblakeney said:

Maybe if we hadn't contributed just so much to make some places in the world so shitty than this wouldn't be happening.

It's very on brand for the party of personal responsibility to try and wipe our hands of it though.

More than one poster has said that we are signed up to treaties that we have to honour by taking asylum seekers in and that we should make it easier for people to apply for asylum. Read between the lines and that is effectively saying 'come on in'.

So what other solutions do you suggest?

You need to articulate the problem. What is *the problem* that you think needs solving?

sungod

kingstongraham said:

rick_chasey said:

If they believe their own hype that Britain is a worthy place to live in, why wouldn’t people want to come over?

So which is it?

Here's the other side in the Telegraph

https://twitter.com/SAshworthHayes/status/1692097319838114035

yep, i've seen several friends decide the uk isn't where they want to be since the brexit vote and the rolling incompetence/corruption of multiple brexiteer governments, last to leave are early 40s, just relocated to uae and will operate from there, he was on the sunday times rich list for 2-300 million, no more uk tax revenue, owes me a dinner too

the uk used to be high wage compared to similar economies, not anymore, the last guy i hired in pl is getting paid more than he'd get in the uk, next new hires will be de and ch, i no longer hire in uk due to brexit, sound business sense as most investment and growth is elsewhere, no more uk tax revenue

much as i enjoy london, even i'm thinking about non-dom and bailing from the uk in the next couple of years, nothing to do with iht nonsense, it's just become a high-tax country with low productivity, poor and still further declining public services, and increasingly corrupt government, both local and national, no sign of that changing

the uk is still way better than a war-torn/famine-stricken/totalitarian country, hence the extreme risk so many take to get here, but it's in steady decline with no sign of a government able to reverse the trend

super_davo

WRT leaving the UK, I think since 2016 we've had some of the worst governments in history, certainly my lifetime, and once swept out things will look markedly different.

I don't think Starmers Labour will be perfect, but they really can't be any worse.

Pross

Stevo_666 said:

Jezyboy said:

pblakeney said:

Maybe if we hadn't contributed just so much to make some places in the world so shitty than this wouldn't be happening.

It's very on brand for the party of personal responsibility to try and wipe our hands of it though.

More than one poster has said that we are signed up to treaties that we have to honour by taking asylum seekers in and that we should make it easier for people to apply for asylum. Read between the lines and that is effectively saying 'come on in'.

So what other solutions do you suggest?

Apart from it isn’t, it is simply allowing them to stay while their application is processed. If that finds they don’t meet the requirements for the right to remain then they get returned.

The way people talk about asylum in this debate you would think that any asylum seekers are being granted a British passport as soon as they make an application and are here forever.

It’s in everyone’s interest to make the process easier then we can return those who aren’t genuine refugees as quickly as possible.

First.Aspect

super_davo said:

WRT leaving the UK, I think since 2016 we've had some of the worst governments in history, certainly my lifetime, and once swept out things will look markedly different.

I don't think Starmers Labour will be perfect, but they really can't be any worse.

The only short term mechanism for boosting the economy is to rejoin the EU or do a Norway.

For reasons that escape me, no politician in the UK seems to want to tap into the increasing public sentiment towards that.

Consequently no government will be able to pull the UK out of its malaise, because as a potential trading partner to anyone else, who really gives a shjt about the UK? There's nothing we do thats not available next door, with 5 times the market size.

rjsterry

Pross said:

Stevo_666 said:

Jezyboy said:

pblakeney said:

Maybe if we hadn't contributed just so much to make some places in the world so shitty than this wouldn't be happening.

It's very on brand for the party of personal responsibility to try and wipe our hands of it though.

More than one poster has said that we are signed up to treaties that we have to honour by taking asylum seekers in and that we should make it easier for people to apply for asylum. Read between the lines and that is effectively saying 'come on in'.

So what other solutions do you suggest?

Apart from it isn’t, it is simply allowing them to stay while their application is processed. If that finds they don’t meet the requirements for the right to remain then they get returned.

The way people talk about asylum in this debate you would think that any asylum seekers are being granted a British passport as soon as they make an application and are here forever.

It’s in everyone’s interest to make the process easier then we can return those who aren’t genuine refugees as quickly as possible.

No, I'm happy for them to come on in. Anything to avoid the country turning into one big nursing home.

TheBigBean

Pross said:

Stevo_666 said:

Jezyboy said:

pblakeney said:

Maybe if we hadn't contributed just so much to make some places in the world so shitty than this wouldn't be happening.

It's very on brand for the party of personal responsibility to try and wipe our hands of it though.

More than one poster has said that we are signed up to treaties that we have to honour by taking asylum seekers in and that we should make it easier for people to apply for asylum. Read between the lines and that is effectively saying 'come on in'.

So what other solutions do you suggest?

Apart from it isn’t, it is simply allowing them to stay while their application is processed. If that finds they don’t meet the requirements for the right to remain then they get returned.

The way people talk about asylum in this debate you would think that any asylum seekers are being granted a British passport as soon as they make an application and are here forever.

It’s in everyone’s interest to make the process easier then we can return those who aren’t genuine refugees as quickly as possible.

It's not easy to return people especially when they don't have documents.

Stevo_666

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

Jezyboy said:

pblakeney said:

Maybe if we hadn't contributed just so much to make some places in the world so shitty than this wouldn't be happening.

It's very on brand for the party of personal responsibility to try and wipe our hands of it though.

More than one poster has said that we are signed up to treaties that we have to honour by taking asylum seekers in and that we should make it easier for people to apply for asylum. Read between the lines and that is effectively saying 'come on in'.

So what other solutions do you suggest?

You need to articulate the problem. What is *the problem* that you think needs solving?

Too many people coming to the UK illegally. Do I really need to spell it out?

Stevo_666

First.Aspect said:

Stevo_666 said:

First.Aspect said:

Stevo_666 said:

skyblueamateur said:

Stevo_666 said:

https://telegraph.co.uk/columnists/2023/08/15/channel-migrant-crisis-liberal-hypocrisy/

Quote in case paywalled:
Whenever anyone says migrants should stay in France, British centrists are furious. But logically they should agree

The row over small boats has been raging for a very long time. Yet there’s still one aspect of it that I don’t understand.

Since 2016, British liberals have given the consistent impression that the EU is an earthly paradise: prosperous, stable, forward-looking and inclusive. By contrast, they fume, Brexit Britain is a hateful, backward, crumbling, economically doomed dump.

Their position is clear. Yet, whenever anyone suggests that migrants should stay in France – the largest country in the EU – rather than cross the Channel to Britain, liberals are appalled. They react as if it’s unspeakably cruel and inhumane.

Logically, however, they should take the opposite view. They should think it’s cruel and inhumane to make the migrants stay in nasty old Britain, rather than the heavenly EU. If anything, British metropolitan liberals should be gathering in their tens of thousands to form a human barrier all the way along the Kent coast, in order to prevent migrants from entering – for their own good.

“Turn back immediately!” they should bellow through their loudhailers at every approaching dinghy. “Do not, repeat not, seek sanctuary in Britain! This country is a failing, bigoted, corrupt, austerity-ruined, sewage-sodden, virulently Islamophobic hellhole populated by ghastly Tory-voting gammon who worship statues of slave traders and despise anyone whose skin is any colour but crimson! So for pity’s sake, turn your boats around, and enjoy a glorious new life in elegant, cultured, joyously cosmopolitan France! We’d leap aboard and join you ourselves, if only the stupid Brexiteers hadn’t ended our freedom of movement!”

That at least would be logically consistent. Instead, however, British liberals are still outraged by Lee Anderson’s suggestion that migrants return to France. But why? Don’t they think these poor migrants have already suffered enough, without having to endure the misery of life in Brexit Britain? What makes liberals so eager to inflict this fresh horror upon these desperate, vulnerable people?

It seems dreadfully callous of them. I think it’s time they showed some compassion – by campaigning to shut our borders straight away.

You have to pay to read this drivel? Brilliant 😂

It made me smile. Taking the p1ss out of the Libs is a worthy cause, but behind the humour there isn a point

There really isn't Stevo, it is utter bilge.

I rest my case about lefties having a poor sense of humour.

You do realise you've backed up my point that the Torygraph is on a par with the Daily Mash?

I believe you only made that point now, after I pointed out theat lefties have no soh. Wonder why?

tailwindhome

Stevo_666 said:

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

Jezyboy said:

pblakeney said:

Maybe if we hadn't contributed just so much to make some places in the world so shitty than this wouldn't be happening.

It's very on brand for the party of personal responsibility to try and wipe our hands of it though.

More than one poster has said that we are signed up to treaties that we have to honour by taking asylum seekers in and that we should make it easier for people to apply for asylum. Read between the lines and that is effectively saying 'come on in'.

So what other solutions do you suggest?

You need to articulate the problem. What is *the problem* that you think needs solving?

Too many people coming to the UK illegally. Do I really need to spell it out?

How many people are coming illegally?

Stevo_666

First.Aspect said:

super_davo said:

WRT leaving the UK, I think since 2016 we've had some of the worst governments in history, certainly my lifetime, and once swept out things will look markedly different.

I don't think Starmers Labour will be perfect, but they really can't be any worse.

The only short term mechanism for boosting the economy is to rejoin the EU or do a Norway.

For reasons that escape me, no politician in the UK seems to want to tap into the increasing public sentiment towards that.

Consequently no government will be able to pull the UK out of its malaise, because as a potential trading partner to anyone else, who really gives a shjt about the UK? There's nothing we do thats not available next door, with 5 times the market size.

Its better to think long term. Besides, how likely is it that people will vote to rejoin when they realise that it will mean (amongst other things) full FOM and adopting the Euro?

First.Aspect

Stevo_666 said:

First.Aspect said:

super_davo said:

WRT leaving the UK, I think since 2016 we've had some of the worst governments in history, certainly my lifetime, and once swept out things will look markedly different.

I don't think Starmers Labour will be perfect, but they really can't be any worse.

The only short term mechanism for boosting the economy is to rejoin the EU or do a Norway.

For reasons that escape me, no politician in the UK seems to want to tap into the increasing public sentiment towards that.

Consequently no government will be able to pull the UK out of its malaise, because as a potential trading partner to anyone else, who really gives a shjt about the UK? There's nothing we do thats not available next door, with 5 times the market size.

Its better to think long term. Besides, how likely is it that people will vote to rejoin when they realise that it will mean (amongst other things) full FOM and adopting the Euro?

The UK would have enough clout to avoid the Euro. And I see FOM as something we lost.

Think long term. There is a looming birth rate crisis in the developed world and in about two generations we will be in competition for economic migrants.

Being xenophobic is collossally short sighted.

rjsterry

Stevo_666 said:

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

Jezyboy said:

pblakeney said:

Maybe if we hadn't contributed just so much to make some places in the world so shitty than this wouldn't be happening.

It's very on brand for the party of personal responsibility to try and wipe our hands of it though.

More than one poster has said that we are signed up to treaties that we have to honour by taking asylum seekers in and that we should make it easier for people to apply for asylum. Read between the lines and that is effectively saying 'come on in'.

So what other solutions do you suggest?

You need to articulate the problem. What is *the problem* that you think needs solving?

Too many people coming to the UK illegally. Do I really need to spell it out?

Well yes. It's not illegal to come to the UK to claim asylum, so who do you mean? People who overstay their visa? Why is it too many when it's a small percentage of overall immigration?

briantrumpet

First.Aspect said:

super_davo said:

WRT leaving the UK, I think since 2016 we've had some of the worst governments in history, certainly my lifetime, and once swept out things will look markedly different.

I don't think Starmers Labour will be perfect, but they really can't be any worse.

The only short term mechanism for boosting the economy is to rejoin the EU or do a Norway.

For reasons that escape me, no politician in the UK seems to want to tap into the increasing public sentiment towards that.

Consequently no government will be able to pull the UK out of its malaise, because as a potential trading partner to anyone else, who really gives a shjt about the UK? There's nothing we do thats not available next door, with 5 times the market size.

Genuinely sad that it seems to have come to that. Mr Cellophane territory.

Stevo_666

First.Aspect said:

Stevo_666 said:

First.Aspect said:

super_davo said:

WRT leaving the UK, I think since 2016 we've had some of the worst governments in history, certainly my lifetime, and once swept out things will look markedly different.

I don't think Starmers Labour will be perfect, but they really can't be any worse.

The only short term mechanism for boosting the economy is to rejoin the EU or do a Norway.

For reasons that escape me, no politician in the UK seems to want to tap into the increasing public sentiment towards that.

Consequently no government will be able to pull the UK out of its malaise, because as a potential trading partner to anyone else, who really gives a shjt about the UK? There's nothing we do thats not available next door, with 5 times the market size.

Its better to think long term. Besides, how likely is it that people will vote to rejoin when they realise that it will mean (amongst other things) full FOM and adopting the Euro?

The UK would have enough clout to avoid the Euro. And I see FOM as something we lost.

Think long term. There is a looming birth rate crisis in the developed world and in about two generations we will be in competition for economic migrants.

Being xenophobic is collossally short sighted.

Who's being Xenophobic? We want to bring in people who have skills and can contribute; unfortunately most of those who get smuggled across on small boats are unlikely to fit the bill.

Stevo_666

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

Jezyboy said:

pblakeney said:

Maybe if we hadn't contributed just so much to make some places in the world so shitty than this wouldn't be happening.

It's very on brand for the party of personal responsibility to try and wipe our hands of it though.

More than one poster has said that we are signed up to treaties that we have to honour by taking asylum seekers in and that we should make it easier for people to apply for asylum. Read between the lines and that is effectively saying 'come on in'.

So what other solutions do you suggest?

You need to articulate the problem. What is *the problem* that you think needs solving?

Too many people coming to the UK illegally. Do I really need to spell it out?

Well yes. It's not illegal to come to the UK to claim asylum, so who do you mean? People who overstay their visa? Why is it too many when it's a small percentage of overall immigration?

You're trying to deflect now. Seems you are in denial.

First.Aspect

Stevo_666 said:

First.Aspect said:

Stevo_666 said:

First.Aspect said:

super_davo said:

WRT leaving the UK, I think since 2016 we've had some of the worst governments in history, certainly my lifetime, and once swept out things will look markedly different.

I don't think Starmers Labour will be perfect, but they really can't be any worse.

The only short term mechanism for boosting the economy is to rejoin the EU or do a Norway.

For reasons that escape me, no politician in the UK seems to want to tap into the increasing public sentiment towards that.

Consequently no government will be able to pull the UK out of its malaise, because as a potential trading partner to anyone else, who really gives a shjt about the UK? There's nothing we do thats not available next door, with 5 times the market size.

Its better to think long term. Besides, how likely is it that people will vote to rejoin when they realise that it will mean (amongst other things) full FOM and adopting the Euro?

The UK would have enough clout to avoid the Euro. And I see FOM as something we lost.

Think long term. There is a looming birth rate crisis in the developed world and in about two generations we will be in competition for economic migrants.

Being xenophobic is collossally short sighted.

Who's being Xenophobic? We want to bring in people who have skills and can contribute; unfortunately most of those who get smuggled across on small boats are unlikely to fit the bill.

Who will be doing the unskilled jobs?

It isn't any of us is it? Unless we stop investing in HE.

Oh.

First.Aspect

Stevo_666 said:

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

Jezyboy said:

pblakeney said:

Maybe if we hadn't contributed just so much to make some places in the world so shitty than this wouldn't be happening.

It's very on brand for the party of personal responsibility to try and wipe our hands of it though.

More than one poster has said that we are signed up to treaties that we have to honour by taking asylum seekers in and that we should make it easier for people to apply for asylum. Read between the lines and that is effectively saying 'come on in'.

So what other solutions do you suggest?

You need to articulate the problem. What is *the problem* that you think needs solving?

Too many people coming to the UK illegally. Do I really need to spell it out?

Well yes. It's not illegal to come to the UK to claim asylum, so who do you mean? People who overstay their visa? Why is it too many when it's a small percentage of overall immigration?

You're trying to deflect now. Seems you are in denial.

He isn't, he's simply pointing out that if the doors and windows are open in the winter amd the heating on, turning the TV off at the wall isn't going to make very much difference to the energy bill.

First.Aspect

Stevo_666 said:

First.Aspect said:

Stevo_666 said:

First.Aspect said:

super_davo said:

WRT leaving the UK, I think since 2016 we've had some of the worst governments in history, certainly my lifetime, and once swept out things will look markedly different.

I don't think Starmers Labour will be perfect, but they really can't be any worse.

The only short term mechanism for boosting the economy is to rejoin the EU or do a Norway.

For reasons that escape me, no politician in the UK seems to want to tap into the increasing public sentiment towards that.

Consequently no government will be able to pull the UK out of its malaise, because as a potential trading partner to anyone else, who really gives a shjt about the UK? There's nothing we do thats not available next door, with 5 times the market size.

Its better to think long term. Besides, how likely is it that people will vote to rejoin when they realise that it will mean (amongst other things) full FOM and adopting the Euro?

The UK would have enough clout to avoid the Euro. And I see FOM as something we lost.

Think long term. There is a looming birth rate crisis in the developed world and in about two generations we will be in competition for economic migrants.

Being xenophobic is collossally short sighted.

Who's being Xenophobic? We want to bring in people who have skills and can contribute; unfortunately most of those who get smuggled across on small boats are unlikely to fit the bill.

And the gross stupidity of objecting to FOM in the first place was that the UK was one of the places most enriched by it, and got so much human resource without having to pay to train any of it.

I mean Stevo you aren't a moron I don't think, but you do need to get your hypnotist to snap their fingers.

rick_chasey

Stevo_666 said:

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

Jezyboy said:

pblakeney said:

Maybe if we hadn't contributed just so much to make some places in the world so shitty than this wouldn't be happening.

It's very on brand for the party of personal responsibility to try and wipe our hands of it though.

More than one poster has said that we are signed up to treaties that we have to honour by taking asylum seekers in and that we should make it easier for people to apply for asylum. Read between the lines and that is effectively saying 'come on in'.

So what other solutions do you suggest?

You need to articulate the problem. What is *the problem* that you think needs solving?

Too many people coming to the UK illegally. Do I really need to spell it out?

So is the solution then to create some legal routes?

Then it’s not illegal innnit

rick_chasey

Meanwhile not entirely unrelated.

https://x.com/jdportes/status/1692116915399847984?s=46&t=Q7O5dnx-0MXQv9qE3vz1vg

(It’s a graph)

briantrumpet

Is this what was supposed to happen?

https://twitter.com/edwinhayward/status/1692212494570319944

wallace_and_gromit

First.Aspect said:

...I see FOM as something we lost.

I'm sure you do. As do I. The problem is that for Brexiteers, FOM is an unacceptable imposition by unelected bureaucrats which must be avoided at all costs.

wallace_and_gromit

First.Aspect said:

For reasons that escape me, no politician in the UK seems to want to tap into the increasing public sentiment towards that [Norway style arrangement].

From what I read, the reason for that is that in the typical marginal constituency, the typical floating voter is Brexit-inclined. So both major parties stick to "making Brexit work" (or whatever the term is now) as they feel that without the support of these floating voters, they won't win the next GE.

I think Labour is being pessimistic tbh. Looking back to 1997, Labour felt compelled to adopt an anti-Euro strategy whereas with hindsight, they were going to win that GE by a long way, regardless of policies. And I think they would win the next GE on a more pragmatic platform as so many voter simply want a change from the incompetence that is the Tories' calling card these days.

Caveat - My skills as a political pundit are such that I ply my trade as an accountant, so the above could be cobblers!

rjsterry

Stevo_666 said:

First.Aspect said:

Stevo_666 said:

First.Aspect said:

super_davo said:

WRT leaving the UK, I think since 2016 we've had some of the worst governments in history, certainly my lifetime, and once swept out things will look markedly different.

I don't think Starmers Labour will be perfect, but they really can't be any worse.

The only short term mechanism for boosting the economy is to rejoin the EU or do a Norway.

For reasons that escape me, no politician in the UK seems to want to tap into the increasing public sentiment towards that.

Consequently no government will be able to pull the UK out of its malaise, because as a potential trading partner to anyone else, who really gives a shjt about the UK? There's nothing we do thats not available next door, with 5 times the market size.

Its better to think long term. Besides, how likely is it that people will vote to rejoin when they realise that it will mean (amongst other things) full FOM and adopting the Euro?

The UK would have enough clout to avoid the Euro. And I see FOM as something we lost.

Think long term. There is a looming birth rate crisis in the developed world and in about two generations we will be in competition for economic migrants.

Being xenophobic is collossally short sighted.

Who's being Xenophobic? We want to bring in people who have skills and can contribute; unfortunately most of those who get smuggled across on small boats are unlikely to fit the bill.

What's your basis for this claim? I'd say someone with enough initiative and wits to get themselves across a continent unaided and with no access to conventional transport shows considerable skill and perseverance.

rjsterry

Stevo_666 said:

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

Jezyboy said:

pblakeney said:

Maybe if we hadn't contributed just so much to make some places in the world so shitty than this wouldn't be happening.

It's very on brand for the party of personal responsibility to try and wipe our hands of it though.

More than one poster has said that we are signed up to treaties that we have to honour by taking asylum seekers in and that we should make it easier for people to apply for asylum. Read between the lines and that is effectively saying 'come on in'.

So what other solutions do you suggest?

You need to articulate the problem. What is *the problem* that you think needs solving?

Too many people coming to the UK illegally. Do I really need to spell it out?

Well yes. It's not illegal to come to the UK to claim asylum, so who do you mean? People who overstay their visa? Why is it too many when it's a small percentage of overall immigration?

You're trying to deflect now. Seems you are in denial.

Denial about what? You seem to be struggling to say what you mean.

I'm very clearly and explicitly pro-immigration. It's an economic necessity. If there's still a labour shortage after we give out over 1 million visas in a year *that's* a problem. The numbers claiming asylum are small enough to make no material difference to that so we are just left with the manufactured problems of people smuggling and temporary accommodation.

TheBigBean

briantrumpet said:

Is this what was supposed to happen?

https://twitter.com/edwinhayward/status/1692212494570319944

Which paradise land should we all go it?

pblakeney

TheBigBean said:

briantrumpet said:

Is this what was supposed to happen?

https://twitter.com/edwinhayward/status/1692212494570319944

Which paradise land should we all go it?

One of those in our wonderful Empire obviously.