The Labour Party

Alan Harper's Tash said:
The asylum seekers wouldn’t even have to move far and they’d have jobs!
Click to expand...
Asylum seekers do not have a national insurance number so therefore cannot legally work until their case is heard, when they will probably be given leave to remain, at which point they will no longer be an asylum seeker.
Unfortunately from application to hearing, the delay is much too long.
Maybe the new government can do something about that.
 
law74 said:
Asylum seekers do not have a national insurance number so therefore cannot legally work until their case is heard, when they will probably be given leave to remain, at which point they will no longer be an asylum seeker.
Unfortunately from application to hearing, the delay is much too long.
Maybe the new government can do something about that.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I used the wrong terminology, but I did mean the asylum seekers who have had their cases heard and received their leave to remain. The rest of what you say is also what I meant too..

It wasn’t as snappy though.
 
Sale Moor Blue said:
It's a massive failure from the tories and the Rwanda scheme has cost tax payers an absolute fortune and hasn't worked.
Problem is the labour solution probably won't work either. I think it’s a national disgrace to be honest. I won't be voting for anyone.
Click to expand...
Labour’s plan is the only plan that will work. Re-open legal routes for asylum seekers and process them in a timely manner. That completely eradicated the need to make the dangerous crossing and those who, and not within the legislation, are then extradited back to their own country.

It’s a simple plan, but the only one.
 
Bigga said:
Perhaps... Just hear me out... Perhaps if Western govs stopped regime change/ installing puppets for their own interests, it would stop a lot of displacement and... wait for it... stop most migrants seeking safety either economically or from war or both.

Why not just trade fairly for resources instead of just taking them...?

Silly radical idea, I know...
Click to expand...
It’s a great idea. Just need to tell those Russian, Chinese and other entities to stop doing it as well. While we’re at it, let’s stop climate change, which is a huge contributor.

Oh, how we’d love to live in that perfect world.
 
Mrs MB is very wise
She concluded by saying families can pick up a relative and shove them in any care home they fancy, the NHS can’t. Sadly we don’t do enough as a society to look after our own relatives.

It’s really sad as a society we don’t care for our own, it was often the women who cared for sick relations but now the women are all out working full time they have to work and care for their children at the same time. there has been a big shift in wages men do not earn enough any more to cover essential household expenses women are forced out to work.

Society has changed and the “social care” bill has come into force personally the word social is wrong often people are sick and need nursing care, instead of going home a care home is found for them because social services can’t put in place a package of home care that they are entitled to, the money just isn’t there anymore
 
Be careful what you wish for.... Be very careful, 25 years of uninterrupted Labour rule and Wales is broken mess, education poor, longest NHS waiting lists, industry falling apart, corrupt first minister who has accepted corrupt donations, sacked a minister without an inquiry/investigation and deleted evidence around the COVID inquiry... Like I say, be careful what you wish for as according to KS Wales is the blueprint for the UKs future. https://www.facebook.com/share/v/7sAsr54T4ndrV1SU/
 
BigJoe#1 said:
Be careful what you wish for.... Be very careful, 25 years of uninterrupted Labour rule and Wales is broken mess, education poor, longest NHS waiting lists, industry falling apart, corrupt first minister who has accepted corrupt donations, sacked a minister without an inquiry/investigation and deleted evidence around the COVID inquiry... Like I say, be careful what you wish for as according to KS Wales is the blueprint for the UKs future. https://www.facebook.com/share/v/7sAsr54T4ndrV1SU/
Click to expand...

Couldn’t have summarised the last ten years of Tory corruption and mismanagement any better than this. Time for change. Vote Labour (or tactically).
 
The Future’s Blue! said:
Labour’s plan is the only plan that will work. Re-open legal routes for asylum seekers and process them in a timely manner. That completely eradicated the need to make the dangerous crossing and those who, and not within the legislation, are then extradited back to their own country.

It’s a simple plan, but the only one.
Click to expand...
Re-open which legal routes? By international law there are no legal routes because the UK does not need to recognise an asylum claim whilst an asylum seeker is in France. Our obligations begin when somebody enters the UK, why should the taxpayer pay to go beyond this?

Not a single country in the world does this differently either. Countries in Europe don't have border posts in African countries to stop the Mediterranean crossings.

Asylum seekers currently have the right to apply for asylum in the country that they're currently in. It just so happens however that there is water between us and France but there is also water between the USA and France. Should the USA also have a border post in France just in case asylum seekers fancy living in the USA too?

Nobody is crossing the Channel alone, they're doing it because they're being trafficked by criminal gangs. Disrupt the gangs and make it difficult and you reduce the flow of people. Labour has the right idea to attack this problem which is to treat it for what it is, a criminal act which can be stopped.
 
inbetween said:
Re-open which legal routes? By international law there are no legal routes because the UK does not need to recognise an asylum claim whilst an asylum seeker is in France. Our obligations begin when somebody enters the UK, why should the taxpayer pay to go beyond this?

Not a single country in the world does this differently either. Countries in Europe don't have border posts in African countries to stop the Mediterranean crossings.

Asylum seekers currently have the right to apply for asylum in the country that they're currently in. It just so happens however that there is water between us and France but there is also water between the USA and France. Should the USA also have a border post in France just in case asylum seekers fancy living in the USA too?

Nobody is crossing the Channel alone, they're doing it because they're being trafficked by criminal gangs. Disrupt the gangs and make it difficult and you reduce the flow of people. Labour has the right idea to attack this problem which is to treat it for what it is, a criminal act which can be stopped.
Click to expand...

But they could do this. And it would go a long way in solving the issue of channel crossings.

If they land on our shores they can claim asylum, so treat a processing centre in France as ‘our shores’. It would save lives.
 
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