Off Topic Migrant crisis
- Thread starter Ubedizzy
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
I can see your point, but the problem is not a lack of housing at all. We have more housing than ever before and Kent is beginning to resemble legoland.
The problem is that there are too many people. And no party is even talking about that.
It doesn’t matter how many houses you build if you keep increasing the demand by increasing the size of the population.
So Mr Welby, the lawful government’s latest plan to slow illegal migration to the UK is morally unacceptable to you is it?
That’s fine, you are entitled to your opinion. However the vast majority of people in the UK want something done about the problem and they are right. Unchecked illegal immigration is the biggest single problem which this country faces, as it exacerbates almost every other problem which we also face.
So go away and come up with a plan to solve or at least reduce the problem and then come back and try to get that plan made into law if it has the required support.
In the meantime, stop interfering as you have no proposal which will deal with the problem and all you are able to do is complain about why other peoples proposals are wrong.
That’s fine, you are entitled to your opinion. However the vast majority of people in the UK want something done about the problem and they are right. Unchecked illegal immigration is the biggest single problem which this country faces, as it exacerbates almost every other problem which we also face.
So go away and come up with a plan to solve or at least reduce the problem and then come back and try to get that plan made into law if it has the required support.
In the meantime, stop interfering as you have no proposal which will deal with the problem and all you are able to do is complain about why other peoples proposals are wrong.
You’ve done it now Lardi - you’ve got me going on Nigel Farage, Brexit betrayal, illegal immigration etc
My opening post from the Migrant crisis thread from 23/11/21 reposted word for word. It all sounds so familiar, just change the names…….
No, not that one, the other one.
Fed up with the Tories having broken their promise (surely not) regarding taking back control of our borders, which pretty much won the referendum and the last general election, Nigel FARAGE is seriously considering returning to politics to highlight the issue and hold the government to account.
He has financial backing to start another new party and will directly challenge the government on this single issue. Now, say what you like about Nigel, but there is no denying that he is effective. I don’t believe that in modern times there has been a single individual who achieved what he did - in effect changing government policy, and altering the course of an entire nation. Like him or loathe him, agree or disagree with Brex*it, the Tories probably fear him more than Sir Keir.
25,000 known arrivals by boat across the channel so far this year and some days nearly 1,000 per day. That’s not immigration - it’s a bloody invasion.
So come on Boris and Priti, what exactly are you going to do to stop this tide of human misery washing up on our shores
Rishi & Suella aren't trying to stop the boats. They're trying to win the votes.
To be fair they need the cheap labour so that they can keep British workers pay as low as possible so that rich people can get even richer.
There are too many hell-holes on the planet, and there's only going to be more as climate change kicks in. Any politician who says they have the answer is lying. Rwanda is quite happy taking money for nothing atm, but with unemployment at 16% and an opposition party opposed to the idea, they won't be keeping plane loads of refugees any where.
I hear that some Home Office civil servants are planning to go on strike rather than implement the Rwanda policy.
I applaud their Humanity
but I don't think strike action is appropriate.
Fundamentally I think the objection of the civil servants is a conscientious one.
In my view the Rwanda policy is wrong.
So wrong, that it disturbs me on a basic level.
I find it as impossible to stomach as what happened in Germany in the first few weeks after Adolf Hitler was made Chancellor. Those actions (such as the opening of Dachau) were made possible and legitimised largely by armies of civil servants simply doing as they were told.
I would say I have a conscientious objection to the Rwanda policy.
And I believe the Home Office civil servants who have a conscientious objection to it should resign.
By all means write letters of resignation and publish them. Explain exactly the strength of feeling against a nauseating policy of fear-mongering and cruelty.
But don't diminish the fundamental principle by going on strike.
Your principles should matter more to you than your pensions.
This story does help to restore my faith in Human nature though.
Those civil servants are not prepared to just keep their heads down and carry out their instructions.
They are at least speaking up against what is unjust (even if it is found to be legal).
We in the UK in 2023 will not be led along the path to dehumanization and inhumanity.
I applaud their Humanity
but I don't think strike action is appropriate.Fundamentally I think the objection of the civil servants is a conscientious one.
In my view the Rwanda policy is wrong.
So wrong, that it disturbs me on a basic level.
I find it as impossible to stomach as what happened in Germany in the first few weeks after Adolf Hitler was made Chancellor. Those actions (such as the opening of Dachau) were made possible and legitimised largely by armies of civil servants simply doing as they were told.
I would say I have a conscientious objection to the Rwanda policy.
And I believe the Home Office civil servants who have a conscientious objection to it should resign.
By all means write letters of resignation and publish them. Explain exactly the strength of feeling against a nauseating policy of fear-mongering and cruelty.
But don't diminish the fundamental principle by going on strike.
Your principles should matter more to you than your pensions.
This story does help to restore my faith in Human nature though.
Those civil servants are not prepared to just keep their heads down and carry out their instructions.
They are at least speaking up against what is unjust (even if it is found to be legal).
We in the UK in 2023 will not be led along the path to dehumanization and inhumanity.
Last edited:
I’m sure you know that I’ll disagree with most of that Lardi, but that’s fine on Not 606 - no threats or abuse nor false accusations will follow I’m sure.I hear that some Home Office civil servants are planning to go on strike rather than implement the Rwanda policy.
I applaud their Humanity
Fundamentally I think the objection of the civil servants is a conscientious one.
In my view the Rwanda policy is wrong.
So wrong, that it disturbs me on a basic level.
I find it as impossible to stomach as what happened in Germany in the first few weeks after Adolf Hitler was made Chancellor. Those actions (such as the opening of Dachau) were made possible and legitimised largely by armies of civil servants simply doing as they were told.
I would say I have a conscientious objection to the Rwanda policy.
And I believe the Home Office civil servants who have a conscientious objection to it should resign.
By all means write letters of resignation and publish them. Explain exactly the strength of feeling against a nauseating policy of fear-mongering and cruelty.
But don't diminish the fundamental principle by going on strike.
Your principles should matter more to you than your pensions.
This story does help to restore my faith in Human nature though.
Those civil servants are not prepared to just keep their heads down and carry out their instructions.
They are at least speaking up against what is unjust (even if it is found to be legal).
We in the UK in 2023 will not be led along the path to dehumanization and inhumanity.
My question (to anyone who has a workable answer) as always will just be - if not the Rwanda policy, how would you deal with what is the most important and vital problem which this country faces. And I say this because if we don’t deal with it, the numbers will just increase for ever as they have been doing for years. We will end up with tens of thousands crossing the channel illegally each year if we don’t stop it and due to the numbers involved we will have no control whatsoever over who these people are. The percentage of genuine asylum seekers will keep diminishing and we will just get the dregs of humanity from across the entire world. How will that problem be solved please ?
It won't be solved, quite the reverse, when the number of hell-holes increases people will migrate to a more habitable part of the world.
Honest answer. But surely we can’t just let that happen ? It will be the end of this country as it has been known for decades or even a few centuries.
And the changes will all be for the worse and won’t be reversible and we will eventually have anarchy.
Surely the present and any future governments of the UK should be trying to do something about that, in which case why the opposition to Rwanda ?
Rwanda are quite happy to trouser all the millions of pounds we're giving them for nothing, but unemployment there is 16%, and the opposition are opposed to the scheme, so I don't see them accepting too many refugees and keeping them. Africa will gradually become uninhabitable anyway due to climate change. Rhetoric won't solve the problem despite what Suella would have us believe. Nuclear fusion will solve a lot of energy problems- about 50 years too late unless a miracle happens, which appears to be our only hope. I've given up worrying about it, do my best to cut emissions cut plastic usage etc, but the human race may be very intelligent individually but is very stupid collectively, and here we are!
But surely we have to try to stop the flow. So what might work if not a Rwanda type scheme ?
This is what I find so annoying. It’s so easy to criticise but finding a better solution is not so easy. A government of any persuasion can’t just say “Oh well, it’s a bit too difficult to try to solve, so we just won’t bother trying”.
Come on Lardi, you started me off again (!) - what’s the workable answer ?
I'm not sure about an alternative solution, but I am sure I would want it presented with some human compassion.
If Suella Braverman had said the Rwanda policy gives her no pleasure or pride but she feels it is a difficult thing yet one that has to be done, I could at least relate to her position, if still strongly disagreeing with it.
But she is on record as saying it is her dream to see those planes flying to Rwanda. She relishes the prospect.
That is cruel and heartless, and prejudiced.
The Rwanda policy is designed to instill fear.
Fear of being forcibly transported to a country which is famous for one thing only - the savage slaughter of a million men, women and children.
It's a despicable policy in my view. And to "dream" of seeing it implemented is profoundly immoral.
If Suella Braverman had said the Rwanda policy gives her no pleasure or pride but she feels it is a difficult thing yet one that has to be done, I could at least relate to her position, if still strongly disagreeing with it.
But she is on record as saying it is her dream to see those planes flying to Rwanda. She relishes the prospect.
That is cruel and heartless, and prejudiced.
The Rwanda policy is designed to instill fear.
Fear of being forcibly transported to a country which is famous for one thing only - the savage slaughter of a million men, women and children.
It's a despicable policy in my view. And to "dream" of seeing it implemented is profoundly immoral.
I’ll not get involved in what a particular politicians did or didn’t say and what any meaning is behind any words used. That’s just politics and this is not a political problem.
Whichever party is in power and whichever politician is Home Secretary and Prime Minister, they will face the same problem. And yet none of them have come up with any ideas about how to solve this problem. Deporting illegal immigrants to a less attractive foreign country as soon as they arrive in the UK, could work. We won’t know until we try it. No one comes up with a better solution, but we are unable to implement this idea.
All people do is complain about this attempt to deal with the problem, they don’t give an alternative.
And in the meantime we continue to see people with no right to be here and no reason to be here apart from greed flooding into this country and turning it into the type of cesspit that they have come from in the first place. Murderers, rapists, terrorists, fraudsters, child abusers, benefit scrounges, drainers of NHS budgets, those with no moral values, those that hate the UK, those that don’t want to live in a civilised western culture or abide by our laws and rules. They are all free to wash up on our shores, with no fear of being sent back, because people in this country are too slow to realise what is happening and what will happen in the future.
All those brave men and women who died during the two world wars have been betrayed. They fought for this country’s values and to preserve our way of life. They sacrificed everything to keep our country safe and just. And we are now just giving it all away without even trying to do anything about it or come up with ways to prevent it.
I might just about be ok but my children and any grandchildren will suffer because we aren’t dealing with the most urgent problem that the country faces. They will live in a totally different country to the one we have all enjoyed. And it will be far worse.
The People of this Country elected a Conservative Government that said it would deal with the problem.
Time after time Tory leaders have promised to cut net migration.
Now we hear that it takes 18 months to process an asylum claim here.
In Germany it takes 4 months.
The fact it takes a year and a half is in itself a magnet to migrants. They know that even if they are refused asylum here they'll still have more than enough time to plant roots. You can start a family and have a child in 18 months, and haver another one well on the way.
And now it turns out Government spending on Asylum has ballooned from £500m to £2billion in just four years.
The Government has proven itself utterly incompetent on this grave issue.
This is what I would do - if you want alternative ideas.
1. An amnesty for everyone already here. They aren't leaving anyway under the current system, to Rwanda or anywhere else.
The amnesty should clear the crippling asylum application backlog at a stroke.
I know this won't be popular. But if the backlog is never cleared nothing will ever get better.
2. Beef up the department responsible for processing applications. Double the staff.
Make it fit for purpose. Beef up the judges & courts that have to be incvolved as well.
3. Build holding accomodation (or detention centres if you want to call them that) in remote parts of the South East - near the Kent coast.
Make sure they are adequately staffed from a security and maintenance point of view so they can be kept clean and orderly, with medical facilities and everything else to ensure they are humane places, not cattle pens.
Or if really necessary build an arteficial offshore Island for this facility. The Chines build arteficial islands in the Pacific for military purposes. It can't be that difficult.
4. Make it clear to every asylum seeker that their claim will be processed in 60 days maximum - in most cases sooner.
No appeals, no European Court. Aim to reduce that maximum by 5 days per year with efficiency savings.
Everybody to be kept on site. Nobody disappears into the community.
5. If the application fails they go back to France.
Anybody who comes back again after failing an application gets no second chance. They are deported again the following day.
6. (maybe this should have come first) Make channels for legal migration & legitimate asylum applications fit for purpose.
Give refugees proper opportunities to apply to come to the UK legally, not on boats.
Yes, this is asking a lot.
But our leaders should be willing to achieve a lot.
They can't hide behind EU regs and rules anymore. They should step up and show some greatness.
Within a year the number of people coming over by boat will begin to drop.
And this would be fairer on genuine asylum seekers.
Within 60 days they would be accepted and free to begin a new life working and contributing in the UK.
And make sure all of the above is implemented with compassion and courtesy.
No room for anybody who enjoys mistreating people.
Time after time Tory leaders have promised to cut net migration.
Now we hear that it takes 18 months to process an asylum claim here.
In Germany it takes 4 months.
The fact it takes a year and a half is in itself a magnet to migrants. They know that even if they are refused asylum here they'll still have more than enough time to plant roots. You can start a family and have a child in 18 months, and haver another one well on the way.
And now it turns out Government spending on Asylum has ballooned from £500m to £2billion in just four years.
The Government has proven itself utterly incompetent on this grave issue.
This is what I would do - if you want alternative ideas.
1. An amnesty for everyone already here. They aren't leaving anyway under the current system, to Rwanda or anywhere else.
The amnesty should clear the crippling asylum application backlog at a stroke.
I know this won't be popular. But if the backlog is never cleared nothing will ever get better.
2. Beef up the department responsible for processing applications. Double the staff.
Make it fit for purpose. Beef up the judges & courts that have to be incvolved as well.
3. Build holding accomodation (or detention centres if you want to call them that) in remote parts of the South East - near the Kent coast.
Make sure they are adequately staffed from a security and maintenance point of view so they can be kept clean and orderly, with medical facilities and everything else to ensure they are humane places, not cattle pens.
Or if really necessary build an arteficial offshore Island for this facility. The Chines build arteficial islands in the Pacific for military purposes. It can't be that difficult.
4. Make it clear to every asylum seeker that their claim will be processed in 60 days maximum - in most cases sooner.
No appeals, no European Court. Aim to reduce that maximum by 5 days per year with efficiency savings.
Everybody to be kept on site. Nobody disappears into the community.
5. If the application fails they go back to France.
Anybody who comes back again after failing an application gets no second chance. They are deported again the following day.
6. (maybe this should have come first) Make channels for legal migration & legitimate asylum applications fit for purpose.
Give refugees proper opportunities to apply to come to the UK legally, not on boats.
Yes, this is asking a lot.
But our leaders should be willing to achieve a lot.
They can't hide behind EU regs and rules anymore. They should step up and show some greatness.
Within a year the number of people coming over by boat will begin to drop.
And this would be fairer on genuine asylum seekers.
Within 60 days they would be accepted and free to begin a new life working and contributing in the UK.
And make sure all of the above is implemented with compassion and courtesy.
No room for anybody who enjoys mistreating people.
Last edited:
Some good points Lardi, notably that the Tories have completely failed to deal with the issue, despite repeated promises that they would. But to be fair they have been blocked at every turn by judges, lawyers, civil servants, activists, ridiculous human rights laws, the French navy, the French Police, our own coast guard and RNLI etc etc etc. But it’s the governments job to overcome all that and they haven’t, so ultimately it’s down to them for not being tough enough. The problem is if they were tough enough then many of their own MP’s would vote against them and bring the government down. The British people are being betrayed by our politicians.
Your measures aren’t tough enough and wouldn’t work. Any plan which involves sending failed illegal migrants back to France won’t happen. France won’t take them back, so what would happen then ? You need a country to agree to take them - like Rwanda for example. We need to stop them getting here in the first place. Stop meeting French navy vessels at the sea border after they’ve escorted boats from the French shores. Stop the boats and turn them round, if need be drag them back into French waters - it’s easy enough to track the route they’ve come on. No Amnesty for the 160,000 illegal migrants already here - if they entered illegally lock them up indefinitely until they ask to go back. No benefits and no right to work EVER for anyone who entered illegally. No NHS treatment, no charity hand outs. They’ll soon stop wanting to come here and if France wants to be less severe then great, they can stay there instead.
Last edited:
Theer is no incentive for the Tories to get the immigration system under some sort of control - it generates votes for the Tories, and even though after 13 years in power, things are obviously worse, their voters will still see them as the way to control immigration.
A quick shout out to Brexit. When we were in the EU, the Dublin deal meant we could return dodgy immigrants relatively easily, but the oven ready deal we signed up to meant that particular avenue was closed. We could try to work with the French who offered a processing centre in calais as I understand, but Boris and Truss both thought they would do better by name calling.
In a lot of cases the Tories have closed legal routes to migration, blocking obvious cases like torture and death threats, as well as people who want to reunite with their families, hence the ganges providing illegal way's in have flourished. Listening to the disgusting Braverman whining that migrants should go down legal route's when she's closed as many as possible is a chilling way to remind oneself that Germany in the 1930's was doing similar things (they chose Mozambique rather than Rwanda, but birds of a feather etc).
A quick shout out to Brexit. When we were in the EU, the Dublin deal meant we could return dodgy immigrants relatively easily, but the oven ready deal we signed up to meant that particular avenue was closed. We could try to work with the French who offered a processing centre in calais as I understand, but Boris and Truss both thought they would do better by name calling.
In a lot of cases the Tories have closed legal routes to migration, blocking obvious cases like torture and death threats, as well as people who want to reunite with their families, hence the ganges providing illegal way's in have flourished. Listening to the disgusting Braverman whining that migrants should go down legal route's when she's closed as many as possible is a chilling way to remind oneself that Germany in the 1930's was doing similar things (they chose Mozambique rather than Rwanda, but birds of a feather etc).
By the way, rwanda has signed a deal to take 200 migrants, and expects to be able to send some of it's own in the opposite direction. Not really much of a deal to be honest.