So does the UK have a proper process in place? Is it adequate? As you said it has been under funded since 2010, a couple of quid chucked into it over the last few months doesn’t fix it, surely?
Regarding point 2 I think it was Noo-Noo and I corrected myself.
Regarding the rest of your response(s).
Look, believe it or not, I am not here to say I am right, or to wind people up. I am here to discuss things and I like to present a more open minded observation to the Status Quo on this forum.
There is so much back slapping on this thread, closely rivalled by the ignorance of looking facts in the face.
Whether the media portraying the issue are right or left wing, it is still an issue central to the Government. It is still an issue which needs addressing, or as I would put it ‘managed correctly’. How, I don’t know.
So, the rise in popularity of Far Right parties is based on sensationalised stories? Ok, that’s one way of looking at it. Let’s just jump on board the naivety of History.
Additionally, you cannot just be so speculative in a response/defence. You have to have provide some kind of fact or basis.
1 Like
By whom, the ones who choose to reply with snarky responses congratulating themselves on their supposed moral superiority and completely ignoring the facts, calling others pedantic when called out on that?
Again, who’s ignoring facts apart from the usual trolls? As far as I can see, everyone else is, and has been debating with their opinions based on their interpretation of facts.
Which issue? “Immigration” in general is such a nebulous problem. Is it a problem of the numbers of migrants? Is it a problem of the integration of migrants? Is it a problem with illegal immigration? Is it a problem with the asylum system? Is it a problem with principles? Is it a problem with how principles are applied? Is it a problem with supposedly incompatible cultures?
The main issue that I see is that the “issues” are ill-defined, and the right-wing rags use it to just generate a general xenophobia and borderline racism. Can’t call them brown people or Pakis? We’ll just tar them all with the brush of being “Muslim” then.
Ask me again when I have had the time to dig out the research showing (a) the pure numbers of headlines over the last few years demonising immigrants and Muslims, (b) the sociological research/polling showing that anti-immigrant attitudes correlates negatively with the ethnic diversity in a area, and (c) the research connecting the rise of far-right support with the volume of anti-immigrant rhetoric.
But you have to accept that in the area of social science research, there can often be a lack of a smoking gun, because it’s often impossible to come up with a directly causal link since you have limited ways in which to conduct controlled experiments.
But here’s something to whet your appetite on that while you wait for me to have the time to find that research: ‘We want our peace’: why is France’s far-right support such a rural affair? | France | The Guardian
Austerity is working I guess?
3 Likes
I don’t know if this is what you are getting at, but you can, of course enter a country illegally, and be deemed an illegal immigrant.
The point, which I’m not sure if you understand, is that as soon as a person claims asylum, then they are entitled to leave to remain and have their asylum claim processed. It is not legally possible to be an ‘illegal asylum seeker’.
Nor is there any legal requirement that an asylum seeker must travel by a legal route. And there is no requirement for an asylum seeker to claim asylum in the first safe country they enter.
When they have had their claim processes, if it’s deemed that the don’t qualify for asylum, then their legal status would revert to an illegal immigrant and the country would have the right to deport them.
The problem we have had for the last decade or do is that the Tories wound down the processing system, leaving anyone claiming asylum in a legal limbo, and adopting increasingly bizarre holding methods, such as legionnaires riddling boats, and the Rwanda scheme.
5 Likes
The best way to look at Farage and Reform is to totally ignore their bluster on immigration, and see it for what it really is - a way to get the proles onboard while they go about their real agenda.
If you look at their economic policies, it’s basically Liz Truss but worse. They are staunchly against any action on climate change. They don’t believe in human rights or the welfare state. They don’t want an NHS.
Ultimately Farage represents a political/business class that believes that rich people should pay very little tax, while operating with a deregulated economy that allows them to exploit anything - people, nature, natural resources - in the pursuit of more money than they already have.
I don’t think they really give that much of a shit about immigration. They aren’t committed ideologues on the matter. I just think it’s the logical thing to use to distract the proles, while they quietly dismantle all the barriers to rich people getting richer while poor people get poorer. If there was something better than immigration, then they’d use that.
Ultimately, that’s what Brexit was about. The shit about sovereignty, and immigration and controlling our borders, was always bollocks. It was about getting the UK away from the regulatory framework of Europe, and creating a low taxation, low regulation UK.
They are a lot fucking worse than a bunch of racists moaning about immigration, and we need to focus on the whole package, not just the headline stuff.
6 Likes
Immigration in the right measure of people offering the right skills which in turn offers the right contribution to society and the economy is a good thing, and a necessity.
Finding the right way of managing immigration is clearly difficult, and expensive.
The planned collaboration with France to set up a UK immigration centre their side of the channel seemed a logical step, but that plan seems to have just quietly disappeared.
With the right legal facilities set up, you’d probably see less demand for people trafficking on perilous boat trips, and those that still made the trip could probably be deemed “illegals”.
What’s not helpful is the blanket “no to immigrants” mobs, not the “take all immigrants” protestors who surprisingly all live in one bedroom bedsits
Oh, and you were doing so well.
2 Likes
So you think it’s helpful then?
In fairness, they used to smoke. I did. Progress of a sort.
No, I think you couldn’t resist throwing in a unfounded barb against people you disagree with in classic Dane style 
I mean, it was a strange experience reading that post and think ‘yep……that’s probably right….can’t disagree with that…that’s fair enough’ I’m sort of glad at the end you reverted to type.
1 Like
Maybe he was highlighting the difference between say someone who buys a ticket, enters UK on a valid visa, tourist etc then claim asylum and would have leave to remain beyond his tourist visa Vs someone who says enter UK illegally on a truck, gets caught and claims asylum? Is that a difference UK distinguished amongst it’s asylum seekers?
No, the method of entry is not a factor.
2 Likes
Oh boy. You are confusing completely different things, exactly as the RW press and Tory mp’s and Farage want you to.
An asylum seeker is NOT an immigrant. They are seeking asylum. Under international law ANYONE can seek asylum in ANY country that has signed the 1951 convention.
So questions. As the uk is a founding member of the 1951 convention, how does someone running from Afghanistan claim asylum in the UK while on the run?
Second, how do they get here without those hunting them knowing or preventing them from doing so?
Thirdly, how does the UK know who is running, wanting asylum here, where they are, why they are running before they even get here?
Now in the absence of all the above, because I already know there are no answers to the above, if someone that wants to enter the UK under the radar for whatever reason then that is a completely different issue but then the question how do you identify and seperate one from another?
The whole system is fine but open to be twisted through misinterpretation and misdirection exactly as has geen done. The UKs failure to
address the fundamental issues has left ut wide open to this abuse from racists, those seeking to create anger and division, criminal gangs and so on.
Sorry what? If you are running from Afghanistan do you think you’d book a package holiday to get out?
Sorry, so to answer the question, no. The issue is the systems of checks etc. has been torn down which leads it open to the abuse we’re seeing and including the examples you give.
I’ll now apologise if I’m being a bit short but it frustrates me enormously when something thats really quite simple but needs strong government involvement and resources has been ripped to shreds for nothing but personal / personal gain and those that actually suffer and are marginalised are those that need the most help. It has also opened the uk to yet more corruption and criminality.
3 Likes
You do know there is middle ground between people with racist mindsets and people who campaign or protest to allow ALL migrants entry regardless of background or circumstances?
I’m not sure if you’re replying to me or otherwise but I’ll respond or otherwise. There is no spectrum here, its about what is right and what isn’t. For once its pretty black and white.
I want controlled immigration. That is sensible and perfectly normal. At the same time I want those running from persecution to feel the uk is a safe haven. They are two completely different things.
Immigration and seeking asylum are two different issues that have been merged together into one clusterfuck of a mess that it really shouldnt be. But hey its serves Farage really well.
3 Likes