The Labour Government

blueinsa said:
The 3 out means that France will actually send 3 in so it’s a joke of a policy that is simply not going to work
Click to expand...
It’s not designed to work.

The government has no intention of doing anything that will work, because that would require a clear plan and the desire and determination to implement it, even if it upsets a few lefties along the way. All the evidence to date suggests they’re incapable of doing anything like that.

It’s designed simply to provide a few weeks of respite for this government, or failing that, to serve as a reference for ministers when they’re getting grilled about it during media interviews. It’s a diversion. Nothing more than that.
 
Brewster's millions said:
It’s not designed to work.

The government has no intention of doing anything that will work, because that would require a clear plan and the desire and determination to implement it, even if it upsets a few lefties along the way. All the evidence to date suggests they’re incapable of doing anything like that.

It’s designed simply to provide a few weeks of respite for this government, or failing that, to serve as a reference for ministers when they’re getting grilled about it during media interviews. It’s a diversion. Nothing more than that.
Click to expand...
Ok
 
bluenova said:
I won't address everything in that post, but "A few months later they are going back on holiday which you are paying for." this is not true.

If you're an asylum seeker you can't travel. If you get refugee status, you can apply to travel, but not using your own passport. The Home Office have to give you permission, and it would almost always specifically exclude a return to the country you claimed asylum from.

If you've been in the UK as a refugee for more than 5 years (or 10 in some cases), you may be able to apply for indefinite leave to remain, which gives you a more settled status, and allows more normal travel. However, you are still almost certainly not allowed to visit the country you left.

ps. just an aside - people who make the kind of journey that is required to get to the UK from the likes of Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan etc., tend not to be looking for an easy life on benefits. In my experience, they're some of the most resourceful people around, and are usually desperate to work.
Click to expand...
So this story is just made up then is it?
news.sky.com

Afghans relocated to UK 'staged torture videos' and 'holiday in Afghanistan', ex-interpreter says

"The only threat is unemployment," the source, who has direct knowledge of the government's relocation scheme, tells Sky News.
news.sky.com news.sky.com

 
blueinsa said:
Not interested in Rwanda.

That government is rightly finished and this one promised they had the answers.
Click to expand...
I think you missed my point. Those being sent our way will have been pre screened in France and may have reasonable grounds to settle ( they may well not be granted). If they are, then they would be legal and, we can control the numbers of legal migration through other means.

If we’re honest. There is only one way to stop the boats and that’s to capsize them. Those looking to come over on the boats have consistently said, there is no deterrent that would stop them.

Therefore, we need to manage their arrival better than we have been
 
John John said:
I am sitting here laughing.
Look at Arsenal Fucking advertising Visit Rwanda all over their stadium. It seems if you want to go on holiday it's very safe if you want to deport someone there it's very dangerous Which one is it ?
The British are being taken for a ride . Granting asylum to people because the place they live is dangerous . A few months later they are going back on holiday which you are paying for.
Forget everything else .
The system as it is is unsustainable Britain is already one of the most densely populated countries and take into account that most of those arriving have fuck all to offer in the way of skillsets then we are heading for a total disaster. What about the hundreds of thousands who are in their 40s or more how will they pay for a pension in the future. How will they get dentist doctors treatments?. How many dependents will they send for? and who will pay for their upkeep.
The UK is fucked
Click to expand...
Fucking rubbish all the way through.
 
mosssideblue said:
I think you missed my point. Those being sent our way will have been pre screened in France and may have reasonable grounds to settle ( they may well not be granted). If they are, then they would be legal and, we can control the numbers of legal migration through other means.

If we’re honest. There is only one way to stop the boats and that’s to capsize them. Those looking to come over on the boats have consistently said, there is no deterrent that would stop them.

Therefore, we need to manage their arrival better than we have been
Click to expand...
Even if I were to accept that we can’t actually stop them (which I don’t) then I don’t accept that nothing can be done to solve the problem. The issue is ONLY that successive governments have either had no desire to fix it, or lacked the political will.

They won’t come if they stop wanting to come. So how could we bring that about? Create a massive detention centre on a remote island in Shetland, and leave them there for years pending processing, but providing free transport back to their country of origin for anyone who wants to give up. Just one idea that would work. But the government lacks the will to do it.
 
Chippy_boy said:
Even if I were to accept that we can’t actually stop them (which I don’t) then I don’t accept that nothing can be done to solve the problem. The issue is ONLY that successive governments have either had no desire to fix it, or lacked the political will.

They won’t come if they stop wanting to come. So how could we bring that about? Create a massive detention centre on a remote island in Shetland, and leave them there for years pending processing, but providing free transport back to their country of origin for anyone who wants to give up. Just one idea that would work. But the government lacks the will to do it.
Click to expand...
To do as you suggest would be ridiculously expensive don’t you think, as well as needing people willing to support them whilst there
 
Brewster's millions said:
It’s not designed to work.

The government has no intention of doing anything that will work, because that would require a clear plan and the desire and determination to implement it, even if it upsets a few lefties along the way. All the evidence to date suggests they’re incapable of doing anything like that.

It’s designed simply to provide a few weeks of respite for this government, or failing that, to serve as a reference for ministers when they’re getting grilled about it during media interviews. It’s a diversion. Nothing more than that.
Click to expand...
Personally I think the scheme makes them look like a bunch of incompetent buffoons.
 
mosssideblue said:
Not if the infrastructure isn’t already there which it probably isn’t
Click to expand...
Come off it, we wouldn't be building the next Four Seasons. Sheds and a barbed wire fence would do. Thinking about it, we wouldn't need the fence - they aren't swimming off Shetland.

Anyway it's academic - it's not happening. We're stuck with 1,000 per day coming in until Labour leave office.
 
Gray said:
Personally I think the scheme makes them look like a bunch of incompetent buffoons.
Click to expand...
I don’t disagree with you. But they needed to be seen as doing something given the traction Reform is gaining from the issue, and I would still argue that they would be in a worse position if they had done nothing.

As I said the scheme is simply a diversion to deflect from the truth of the matter, which is that the government has no idea how to stem the flow, and in effect no intention to do so given the measures that would be required to be effective.

It’s simply a fig leaf that they can hide behind for a few months, and any criticism is attributed to it being a trial scheme. The government will just be hoping that the weather turns soon and that the numbers begin to drop off, so that they then have a few months over the winter to dream up some other white elephant.
 
Brewster's millions said:
I don’t disagree with you. But they needed to be seen as doing something given the traction Reform is gaining from the issue, and I would still argue that they would be in a worse position if they had done nothing.

As I said the scheme is simply a diversion to deflect from the truth of the matter, which is that the government has no idea how to stem the flow, and in effect no intention to do so given the measures that would be required to be effective.

It’s simply a fig leaf that they can hide behind for a few months, and any criticism is attributed to it being a trial scheme. The government will just be hoping that the weather turns soon and that the numbers begin to drop off, so that they then have a few months over the winter to dream up some other white elephant.
Click to expand...
What would you suggest as a solution?
 
Chippy_boy said:
Even if I were to accept that we can’t actually stop them (which I don’t) then I don’t accept that nothing can be done to solve the problem. The issue is ONLY that successive governments have either had no desire to fix it, or lacked the political will.

They won’t come if they stop wanting to come. So how could we bring that about? Create a massive detention centre on a remote island in Shetland, and leave them there for years pending processing, but providing free transport back to their country of origin for anyone who wants to give up. Just one idea that would work. But the government lacks the will to do it.
Click to expand...
So very expensive indefinite illegal detention of people who have committed no crime who might be able to escape in facilities that don’t yet exist and how big would the facility be big enough for the current people or big enough for the current people plus those that come next year and the year after ? and you think that’s a viable option
 
Is there a reason why we don't just open up application centres abroad to apply for asylum here and say that's the only way they will be accepted?
We could then agree on a figure to be accepted each year and it would allow them all the be vetted.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top