Off Topic Political Debate

100% this

 

Yes it does.... Not to say that we should go that route. The issue here is the island mentality and we are running out of space, the whole thing needs to be managed that's all.

 

There is no reason to suggest this will happen. Nevertheless the countries in which brits live should have the right to determine the benefit or otherwise of their immigrants. The current government has never proposed forcibly ejecting EU citizens from the UK so why would other countries?

 

That's even more of a necessity here, where the latest population figures show that there are 100,800 people living on an island of 48 square miles. It would be interesting to see how it would be affected if they changed the criteria for obtaining housing qualifications to what they were when I first moved here. Unless you could buy one of the expensive homes on the island, or were essentially employed (doctors, teachers etc.) than you had to live here for 20 years before you got your housing qualifications and were entitled to buy. If you were non-qualified, the rents were higher and the places not as good quality. I was lucky that my ex-wife was born here, so I had qualifications by marriage. When we got divorced, even though the period had been reduced to 15 years by then (it's now 10) and I'd lived here 12, by proving that I was a permanent resident of the island throughout our marriage I was given special dispensation. I'm not sure if the decision by Housing would have been the same if it had been a childless marriage.

 

So the UK government has lost it's appeal against fast-track asylum appeals. It doesn't matter if you think the decision is right or wrong, it does show that the justice system and government are not one and the same thing.

 

I seem to remember when I did Brit Con for A level the fact that our judicial system was independent of govt was considered a great strength

 

If you choose to reply to my comments, at least address the comments. They are illegal immigrants because they have not applied for visa's to visit this country and they attempt to entry this country by illegal means i.e. breaking into trucks and cars. If they are genuine asylum seekers why do they not apply for asylum in the first country that they feel safe in? Why do they not feel safe to apply for asylum in Greece, Turkey, Italy, Germany, Austria or France? Because its all bullshit, they are economic migrants that attempt to enter this country illegally and then lie and cheat to stay. Why is it the vast majority of these people camped out outside Calais are young men? These are not people seeking refuge, they are seeking a better life and this country does not have the resources to cater for immigration on this scale.
I see further down the spurious argument about this country not being able to support the return of it's citizens, why would they situation occur? If this country left the EU or severely restricted economic immigration, whoever said it would mean returning 1000's of immigrants already here? Perhaps getting rid of a few hundred Romanian pickpockets (they can stay a bit longer in Barcelona instead of London) would be a good thing.
Do we really want this country turning further into a country with a huge black economy with citizens completely invisible until they turn up needing the resources the rest of us fund?
My response to all those who do not believe that uncontrolled economic immigration into this country is not a problem, well you give some of them a bedroom and a seat at your table.

 

From the look of the tone of most of this you would imagine that the whole World is trying to get into the UK. Last year there were 30,000 applications for asylum in the UK - 200,000 in Germany ! Do you expect countries like Italy, Greece, Turkey etc. to carry the whole burden alone simply because of their geographical location ? Before you automatically use the apparent assumption that Bulgarian or Rumanian immigrants are 'pickpockets' (simply by virtue of their nationality) or anything similar - or that they are more inclined to criminality than any other grouping in the UK, an element of evidence is necessary.

 

They should at least process asylum seekers as per the Dublin agreement in those countries. Why are the French Police not processing these illegals immigrants camped outside Calais? They should be photographed and have their finger prints taken at the very minimum. Again these people are not claiming asylum, they are economic immigrants that are transiting across Europe illegally - I expect those countries to deal with them correctly.
Again you twist my words, I did not say Romanian immigrants are all pickpockets, I said the country would be better place if a few hundred of them were deported. It is a fact that the majority of pickpockets arrested in London are of Eastern European origin and of those a significant number are Romanian - however you should have looked deeper into my comment regarding Barcelona which has become the pickpocket capital of Europe.
There was an interesting programme a few months ago fronted by Trevor Phillips who argued that the Police were becoming handicapped because of fears of race and equality laws - in this programme he showed some of the numbers of street crime in London and a significant majority of detected crime is carried out by immigrants. One fascinating facts was that because of the low key policing now in place in Brixton and South London, it has allowed Columbian drug gangs to take over the drugs trade formally "owned" by the Yardies.
Sorry if you do not like some of the facts regarding the streets of London and the Cities of this country - but it is the reality of Britain in 2015!

 

I cannot see why a decision taken by the German government has anything to do with the right of the elected British government to determine how many immigrants our country wishes to take in? The UK has a proud tradition of helping refugees. However, most of those queuing up to arrive here are, as previously described, economic migrants. The EU created the ill thought out schengen agreement, they should now clear up the mess of its porous borders.The economic migrants must be returned to their departure point to avoid others risking their lives trying to reach a fantasy utopia.

 

Just to get the picture straight on Rumania. There are 101, 000 of them in the UK. In Italy, 1,131,839, in Spain 721,445, in Germany 700,000 and in France 200,000 - altogether around 3.5 million in Western Europe. It does not appear from these figures that they have shown any real disposition towards the UK as their preferred destination (I wonder why). In Germany 80% of all immigrants from Rumania are in jobs requiring social insurance contributions. This is just to counteract the prevalent stereotype a little - if the Rumanians were naturally criminal by nature then those countries which have more of them would be suffering in direct proportion - and that is not the case. OK. the majority of people on the move are doing it for economic reasons - but this is nothing new. Over 6 million Britons have done the same thing in my lifetime - not to mention the millions of Germans, Irish, English etc. who did the same thing in the past ie. arrived at somewhere like Ellis Island (NY) without documents and with only the hope of a better future. People have always tried to escape from poverty, and would you demonize them for this. Maybe it would be more to the point to analyse the reasons for that poverty and the role the west has played in that.

 

I believe that part of the problem with the people in Calais is due to the system operated in this country. Asylum seekers are dealt with on a regional basis by the prefecture, so there can be different interpretations of the law depending on where they apply. There is a list of countries where it is thought there is no conflict that sends people out of their home country, so if they are caught entering the country they are put back on the boat or plane and refused admission.
To obtain a temporary residence while an asylum application is considered, it is required that the person supplies an address where they can be contacted. Usually this means getting into a reception centre reserved for applicants, but here comes the real problem, the wait to get into one of these centres is about 12 months, so it is easier to disappear and turn up in Calais.
There was a TV programme here asking why they thought getting to the UK would give them a better life and the conclusion was that they believed it was easier to find illegal employment in the UK than France. I can quite believe this as I managed a large building project in Bristol which was raided by the immigration forces. They turned up with two coaches, locked the gates to the site, and then rounded up a hundred or so sub-contractors workers. They drove off with them for questioning and later in the day about twenty returned.

 

This is one reason for the attraction of the UK. Frenchie, the other is language. Whether the UK is in or outside of the EU is not important to this, also the economic situation is not the main issue. In so many countries English is the first 'foreign' language learned, and it is natural to try to go somewhere where you think you can communicate. Also many people may think that learning English in England is a good stepping stone to one day going to the USA. Canada, Australia etc.

 

I'm sure the french authorities fully understand the implication for the migrants to qualify for temporary residence, they are obviously making it as difficult as possible to qualify for benefits. They hope as many migrants as possible reach the UK, unfortunately this only encourages more to make the effort.

 

You and I have no idea how many Romanians are in Britain or in any other EU country - they have the free right of passage across EU borders and there is no way to measure it. You sound just like Blair and Blunkett when they stated how many Poles were in Britain.
I have been waiting for the "evil Empire" argument...troule is it does not explain the illegal immigrants from Nigeria who have had decades of massive oil revenues to secure a future for their people. I suppose the next point will be the guild complex soe slavery....but better be careful on that one!

 

You may be right on not knowing the numbers of Rumanians in the UK. but you are not right here in reference to other EU countries. Germany knows the figure to be 700,000 not because of anything to do with borders but rather because every person in every kind of accomodation or residence is registered here - you have to register with the 'Einwohneramt' every time you change your address here and without this you have no chance of a job of any description. So Germany would be able to calculate numbers at any time - not sure what the situation would be in other EU countries. I was not referring to evil empires of the past but rather to those of the present. A few examples here - the World Bank made the privatization of water a condition before several African countries could take out further loans - result, the costs of water increased about tenfold in Sierra Leone (there water actually costs about 40% of the average income - result, people leave. Toppling of stable regimes with no idea of what is to follow ie. Gaddafi, thus preventing all possibility of a stable 'African' solution. Or maybe also the effects of global warming making some places uninhabitable - areas of so called desertification which will cause even more people to try to leave - and will places like Britain (with its 10 tons of Co2 emissions per head, per year) just shake their heads and say 'nothing to do with us' ?

 

With hindsight the toppling of Gaddafi, Saddam Hussein, and supporting the war against Bashar Al- Assad has been a disaster for the security of western countries. It was a massive mistake trying to impose our style of democracy in these tribal countries. Looking at the situation from purely self interest most of these nasty dictators actually were friendly with the west. Although the UK played its full part in this, it is not feasible to take in the large amount of displaced inhabitants as migrants.

 

1) Agreed a great miscalculation. Ironically Hussein virtually forced the hand of the western powers and started them on this path
2) Sad but true.....
3) Agreed

 

The summary being that it is ok. for Britain to interfere on the World stage as a type of global policeman behind the USA - but not to face up to the resulting responsibilities. Would you apply the same principle to global warming ? ie. that when whole areas of the Earth have become uninhabitable - we - who belong to the main culprits, should collectively wash our hands of all responsibility for the millions who will be fleeing in that scenario.

 

YES we have to face up to our global responsibilities.