Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Remove the UK from the 1951 Refugee Convention. Job done " And then Europe would not cooperate in any way. So nothing would change - in fact, it would make it worse. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Remove the UK from the 1951 Refugee Convention. Job done And then Europe would not cooperate in any way. So nothing would change - in fact, it would make it worse." We don't need EU support, we need a deterrent to stop the crossings and we then have no returns. Something like this from a post I just made, it was tongue in cheek but I think shows where there is a will... Leave the convention and free up the jails, fast track court cases for unlawful entry, jail the first 20 for 4 - 5 years each and we will see a sudden stop. I have seen this somewhere before, and it worked a bloody treat in restoring law and order and taking back control of the streets in no time at all. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Remove the UK from the 1951 Refugee Convention. Job done And then Europe would not cooperate in any way. So nothing would change - in fact, it would make it worse. We don't need EU support, we need a deterrent to stop the crossings and we then have no returns. Something like this from a post I just made, it was tongue in cheek but I think shows where there is a will... Leave the convention and free up the jails, fast track court cases for unlawful entry, jail the first 20 for 4 - 5 years each and we will see a sudden stop. I have seen this somewhere before, and it worked a bloody treat in restoring law and order and taking back control of the streets in no time at all. " Leave the convention and free up the jails? Really, That's your plan? We can't house our own convicts currently. We do not have the judicial capacity to fast track 86,460 applications on top of normal criminal cases. Jail the first 20 and everybody else will stop coming? !!!!! Wow! Sorted then. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Remove the UK from the 1951 Refugee Convention. Job done And then Europe would not cooperate in any way. So nothing would change - in fact, it would make it worse. We don't need EU support, we need a deterrent to stop the crossings and we then have no returns. Something like this from a post I just made, it was tongue in cheek but I think shows where there is a will... Leave the convention and free up the jails, fast track court cases for unlawful entry, jail the first 20 for 4 - 5 years each and we will see a sudden stop. I have seen this somewhere before, and it worked a bloody treat in restoring law and order and taking back control of the streets in no time at all. Leave the convention and free up the jails? Really, That's your plan? We can't house our own convicts currently. We do not have the judicial capacity to fast track 86,460 applications on top of normal criminal cases. Jail the first 20 and everybody else will stop coming? !!!!! Wow! Sorted then. " Going literal are you? Free up your mind, it has worked, in fact it took the thugs off the streets, why can't they do the same here? What is different, breaking the law is breaking the law and if you want to come down hard on it we have a successful precedent to follow. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Remove the UK from the 1951 Refugee Convention. Job done And then Europe would not cooperate in any way. So nothing would change - in fact, it would make it worse. We don't need EU support, we need a deterrent to stop the crossings and we then have no returns. Something like this from a post I just made, it was tongue in cheek but I think shows where there is a will... Leave the convention and free up the jails, fast track court cases for unlawful entry, jail the first 20 for 4 - 5 years each and we will see a sudden stop. I have seen this somewhere before, and it worked a bloody treat in restoring law and order and taking back control of the streets in no time at all. Leave the convention and free up the jails? Really, That's your plan? We can't house our own convicts currently. We do not have the judicial capacity to fast track 86,460 applications on top of normal criminal cases. Jail the first 20 and everybody else will stop coming? !!!!! Wow! Sorted then. Going literal are you? Free up your mind, it has worked, in fact it took the thugs off the streets, why can't they do the same here? What is different, breaking the law is breaking the law and if you want to come down hard on it we have a successful precedent to follow." Oh dear have to go with the emotives to try to prove your point? How very playground. We do not have the judicial capacity to fast track 86,460 applications on top of normal criminal cases. There, Mind freed for the facts.  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Remove the UK from the 1951 Refugee Convention. Job done And then Europe would not cooperate in any way. So nothing would change - in fact, it would make it worse. We don't need EU support, we need a deterrent to stop the crossings and we then have no returns. Something like this from a post I just made, it was tongue in cheek but I think shows where there is a will... Leave the convention and free up the jails, fast track court cases for unlawful entry, jail the first 20 for 4 - 5 years each and we will see a sudden stop. I have seen this somewhere before, and it worked a bloody treat in restoring law and order and taking back control of the streets in no time at all. Leave the convention and free up the jails? Really, That's your plan? We can't house our own convicts currently. We do not have the judicial capacity to fast track 86,460 applications on top of normal criminal cases. Jail the first 20 and everybody else will stop coming? !!!!! Wow! Sorted then. Going literal are you? Free up your mind, it has worked, in fact it took the thugs off the streets, why can't they do the same here? What is different, breaking the law is breaking the law and if you want to come down hard on it we have a successful precedent to follow. Oh dear have to go with the emotives to try to prove your point? How very playground. We do not have the judicial capacity to fast track 86,460 applications on top of normal criminal cases. There, Mind freed for the facts. "I have been very clear in the idea of it being a deterrent, you can’t recognise this and argue such an outcome of every person will need to be jailed, I bow out under the rule of Twain. Toodles | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Remove the UK from the 1951 Refugee Convention. Job done And then Europe would not cooperate in any way. So nothing would change - in fact, it would make it worse. We don't need EU support, we need a deterrent to stop the crossings and we then have no returns. Something like this from a post I just made, it was tongue in cheek but I think shows where there is a will... Leave the convention and free up the jails, fast track court cases for unlawful entry, jail the first 20 for 4 - 5 years each and we will see a sudden stop. I have seen this somewhere before, and it worked a bloody treat in restoring law and order and taking back control of the streets in no time at all. Leave the convention and free up the jails? Really, That's your plan? We can't house our own convicts currently. We do not have the judicial capacity to fast track 86,460 applications on top of normal criminal cases. Jail the first 20 and everybody else will stop coming? !!!!! Wow! Sorted then. Going literal are you? Free up your mind, it has worked, in fact it took the thugs off the streets, why can't they do the same here? What is different, breaking the law is breaking the law and if you want to come down hard on it we have a successful precedent to follow. Oh dear have to go with the emotives to try to prove your point? How very playground. We do not have the judicial capacity to fast track 86,460 applications on top of normal criminal cases. There, Mind freed for the facts.
I have been very clear in the idea of it being a deterrent, you can’t recognise this and argue such an outcome of every person will need to be jailed, I bow out under the rule of Twain. Toodles
But I didn't say that did I?
As each person will need to be processed for return ***We do not have the judicial capacity to fast track 86,460 *****applications****** on top of normal criminal cases.****
As proof of that I further said:
***Jail the first 20 and everybody else will stop coming? !!!!! *****
So. Clearly I was not talking about ****jailing**** but ****applications****.
"🤣 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Remove the UK from the 1951 Refugee Convention. Job done And then Europe would not cooperate in any way. So nothing would change - in fact, it would make it worse. We don't need EU support, we need a deterrent to stop the crossings and we then have no returns. Something like this from a post I just made, it was tongue in cheek but I think shows where there is a will... Leave the convention and free up the jails, fast track court cases for unlawful entry, jail the first 20 for 4 - 5 years each and we will see a sudden stop. I have seen this somewhere before, and it worked a bloody treat in restoring law and order and taking back control of the streets in no time at all. Leave the convention and free up the jails? Really, That's your plan? We can't house our own convicts currently. We do not have the judicial capacity to fast track 86,460 applications on top of normal criminal cases. Jail the first 20 and everybody else will stop coming? !!!!! Wow! Sorted then. Going literal are you? Free up your mind, it has worked, in fact it took the thugs off the streets, why can't they do the same here? What is different, breaking the law is breaking the law and if you want to come down hard on it we have a successful precedent to follow. Oh dear have to go with the emotives to try to prove your point? How very playground. We do not have the judicial capacity to fast track 86,460 applications on top of normal criminal cases. There, Mind freed for the facts.
I have been very clear in the idea of it being a deterrent, you can’t recognise this and argue such an outcome of every person will need to be jailed, I bow out under the rule of Twain. Toodles"But I didn't say that did I? As each person will need to be processed for return ***We do not have the judicial capacity to fast track 86,460 *****applications****** on top of normal criminal cases.**** As proof of that I further said: ***Jail the first 20 and everybody else will stop coming? !!!!! ***** So. Clearly I was not talking about ****jailing**** but ****applications****. Avoid slovenliness of form. Mark Twain. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Remove the UK from the 1951 Refugee Convention. Job done And then Europe would not cooperate in any way. So nothing would change - in fact, it would make it worse. We don't need EU support, we need a deterrent to stop the crossings and we then have no returns. Something like this from a post I just made, it was tongue in cheek but I think shows where there is a will... Leave the convention and free up the jails, fast track court cases for unlawful entry, jail the first 20 for 4 - 5 years each and we will see a sudden stop. I have seen this somewhere before, and it worked a bloody treat in restoring law and order and taking back control of the streets in no time at all. Leave the convention and free up the jails? Really, That's your plan? We can't house our own convicts currently. We do not have the judicial capacity to fast track 86,460 applications on top of normal criminal cases. Jail the first 20 and everybody else will stop coming? !!!!! Wow! Sorted then. Going literal are you? Free up your mind, it has worked, in fact it took the thugs off the streets, why can't they do the same here? What is different, breaking the law is breaking the law and if you want to come down hard on it we have a successful precedent to follow. Oh dear have to go with the emotives to try to prove your point? How very playground. We do not have the judicial capacity to fast track 86,460 applications on top of normal criminal cases. There, Mind freed for the facts.
I have been very clear in the idea of it being a deterrent, you can’t recognise this and argue such an outcome of every person will need to be jailed, I bow out under the rule of Twain. Toodles
But I didn't say that did I?
As each person will need to be processed for return ***We do not have the judicial capacity to fast track 86,460 *****applications****** on top of normal criminal cases.****
As proof of that I further said:
***Jail the first 20 and everybody else will stop coming? !!!!! *****
So. Clearly I was not talking about ****jailing**** but ****applications****.
Avoid slovenliness of form. Mark Twain. "Have a lovely evening 🤦🏼♂️ | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Remove the UK from the 1951 Refugee Convention. Job done And then Europe would not cooperate in any way. So nothing would change - in fact, it would make it worse. We don't need EU support, we need a deterrent to stop the crossings and we then have no returns. Something like this from a post I just made, it was tongue in cheek but I think shows where there is a will... Leave the convention and free up the jails, fast track court cases for unlawful entry, jail the first 20 for 4 - 5 years each and we will see a sudden stop. I have seen this somewhere before, and it worked a bloody treat in restoring law and order and taking back control of the streets in no time at all. Leave the convention and free up the jails? Really, That's your plan? We can't house our own convicts currently. We do not have the judicial capacity to fast track 86,460 applications on top of normal criminal cases. Jail the first 20 and everybody else will stop coming? !!!!! Wow! Sorted then. Going literal are you? Free up your mind, it has worked, in fact it took the thugs off the streets, why can't they do the same here? What is different, breaking the law is breaking the law and if you want to come down hard on it we have a successful precedent to follow. Oh dear have to go with the emotives to try to prove your point? How very playground. We do not have the judicial capacity to fast track 86,460 applications on top of normal criminal cases. There, Mind freed for the facts.
I have been very clear in the idea of it being a deterrent, you can’t recognise this and argue such an outcome of every person will need to be jailed, I bow out under the rule of Twain. Toodles
But I didn't say that did I?
As each person will need to be processed for return ***We do not have the judicial capacity to fast track 86,460 *****applications****** on top of normal criminal cases.****
As proof of that I further said:
***Jail the first 20 and everybody else will stop coming? !!!!! *****
So. Clearly I was not talking about ****jailing**** but ****applications****.
Avoid slovenliness of form. Mark Twain.
Have a lovely evening 🤦🏼♂️"As I always do.  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"https://news.sky.com/story/labour-detention-plan-not-likely-to-stop-small-boats-says-former-head-of-border-force-13200836 ***Labour detention plan not likely to stop small boats, says former head of Border Force Tony Smith, a former director general of the UK Border Force, said Labour's plan will only result in "modest removals" and a returns agreement with the EU is needed.*** Does anybody have a plan? " The United Nations predicts another 1,200,000,000 migrants into Europe by 2070-80 due to war and climate change When this lot try coming it will look like D day We’ve seen nothing yet. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
""Everybody has a plan until they get punched in the mouth" - Mike Tyson" Ear biting? He'll be useful then.  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Here’s a plan…turn the UK into a third world country with no welfare support or health system where only the very rich have any power and can exploit workers how they wish, ensure the rivers are full of shit…then nobody will want to come "That's not working either. Been like that for long enough to have an effect if it was going to. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Here’s a plan…turn the UK into a third world country with no welfare support or health system where only the very rich have any power and can exploit workers how they wish, ensure the rivers are full of shit…then nobody will want to come "Novel idea 💡 Almost there | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"How about ... do what the people say or want. Perhaps it's the people who control the country not the mps, might catch on" What do they want? How many of then want it? What about those over there that want something different? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"How about ... do what the people say or want. Perhaps it's the people who control the country not the mps, might catch on" Last time the people were asked what they wanted to do. It was a fucking disaster. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Remove the UK from the 1951 Refugee Convention. Job done And then Europe would not cooperate in any way. So nothing would change - in fact, it would make it worse. We don't need EU support, we need a deterrent to stop the crossings and we then have no returns. Something like this from a post I just made, it was tongue in cheek but I think shows where there is a will... Leave the convention and free up the jails, fast track court cases for unlawful entry, jail the first 20 for 4 - 5 years each and we will see a sudden stop. I have seen this somewhere before, and it worked a bloody treat in restoring law and order and taking back control of the streets in no time at all. Leave the convention and free up the jails? Really, That's your plan? We can't house our own convicts currently. We do not have the judicial capacity to fast track 86,460 applications on top of normal criminal cases. Jail the first 20 and everybody else will stop coming? !!!!! Wow! Sorted then. Going literal are you? Free up your mind, it has worked, in fact it took the thugs off the streets, why can't they do the same here? What is different, breaking the law is breaking the law and if you want to come down hard on it we have a successful precedent to follow. Oh dear have to go with the emotives to try to prove your point? How very playground. We do not have the judicial capacity to fast track 86,460 applications on top of normal criminal cases. There, Mind freed for the facts.
I have been very clear in the idea of it being a deterrent, you can’t recognise this and argue such an outcome of every person will need to be jailed, I bow out under the rule of Twain. Toodles
But I didn't say that did I?
As each person will need to be processed for return ***We do not have the judicial capacity to fast track 86,460 *****applications****** on top of normal criminal cases.****
As proof of that I further said:
***Jail the first 20 and everybody else will stop coming? !!!!! *****
So. Clearly I was not talking about ****jailing**** but ****applications****.
Avoid slovenliness of form. Mark Twain.
Have a lovely evening 🤦🏼♂️
As I always do. "Can I ask how you would get documents to return these people to their country of origin if they are not forthcoming with their place of birth etc or just plain lie about their nationality so obtaining any form of travel document is almost impossible. Its my understanding that unless the country they claim to originate actually accepts them as a national they go absolutely nowhere. Thanks god the company my husband works for arranges all his work visas or he'd never go anywhere.  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The fixation with “send them back”and you can, you can’t, is astonishing. The challenge is to prevent the crossings in the first instance and to do that we need a deterrent, slowing the numbers or even stopping crossings all together that issue goes away. Deterrent is the only way forward. " Cooperative neighbours would help too. The dinghies used in Channel crossings are sourced in Turkey and trucked across the European continent unhindered. This happened before and after Brexit, so no benefit of being in the EU. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The fixation with “send them back”and you can, you can’t, is astonishing. The challenge is to prevent the crossings in the first instance and to do that we need a deterrent, slowing the numbers or even stopping crossings all together that issue goes away. Deterrent is the only way forward. Cooperative neighbours would help too. The dinghies used in Channel crossings are sourced in Turkey and trucked across the European continent unhindered. This happened before and after Brexit, so no benefit of being in the EU." That would be nice but unfortunately as you point out that help was never really forthcoming. The focus needs to be on the resolution and not to be pulled into emotive gobbledygook by refugee support agencies and charities that are making a very good living out of helping people get here illegally. For the people reading this that have just started to lose their shit, I’m talking about illegal / should not be here, not genuine refugees who are very low in number. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"No they don’t. Yet it should be so easy to secure territorial integrity of an island and manage migration properly. I think it’s better they face reality that they are not really asylum seekers but economic migrants trying anyway possible to get in and then address it properly. Here in UAE every single migrant pays fees to come, has to have medical tests that again you must pay for and then gets an ID card lasting 2,3 or 10 years depending on how much value you bring. You cannot participate in society without an ID card, nothing works, so there’s no illegal immigration . Government sets the number each year they allow in , 1.8% of population currently and then organised infra , housing and medical expansion projects for those numbers. UK makes it too attractive with all the free stuff and no need to work and indefinitely leave to remain It really isn’t that complicated, strategic policy, middle management / project management stuff." The UAE manages to do all that because they aren't signatories to the 1951 Convention, and so have leeway to create any border policy they like. The UK, as a signatory, can't do that. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"How about ... do what the people say or want. Perhaps it's the people who control the country not the mps, might catch on Last time the people were asked what they wanted to do. It was a fucking disaster. "  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The fixation with “send them back”and you can, you can’t, is astonishing. The challenge is to prevent the crossings in the first instance and to do that we need a deterrent, slowing the numbers or even stopping crossings all together that issue goes away. Deterrent is the only way forward. Cooperative neighbours would help too. The dinghies used in Channel crossings are sourced in Turkey and trucked across the European continent unhindered. This happened before and after Brexit, so no benefit of being in the EU." You seem very well informed? Maybe Interpol could do with your intel | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"No they don’t. Yet it should be so easy to secure territorial integrity of an island and manage migration properly. I think it’s better they face reality that they are not really asylum seekers but economic migrants trying anyway possible to get in and then address it properly. Here in UAE every single migrant pays fees to come, has to have medical tests that again you must pay for and then gets an ID card lasting 2,3 or 10 years depending on how much value you bring. You cannot participate in society without an ID card, nothing works, so there’s no illegal immigration . Government sets the number each year they allow in , 1.8% of population currently and then organised infra , housing and medical expansion projects for those numbers. UK makes it too attractive with all the free stuff and no need to work and indefinitely leave to remain It really isn’t that complicated, strategic policy, middle management / project management stuff. The UAE manages to do all that because they aren't signatories to the 1951 Convention, and so have leeway to create any border policy they like. The UK, as a signatory, can't do that." I’m not sure I buy this. I don’t know the details of that 1951 convention without doing a bit of research but I would guess these things are not overly prescriptive? They are principal based and say we must contribute to the global problem of asylum? But I would imagine every country has the right to protect its own citizens first, correct? And then devise appropriate policies for the implementation of the 1951 policy? I Set numbers? Not just allow francs to push everything this way when they are already present in a safe country? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Can I ask how you would get documents to return these people to their country of origin if they are not forthcoming with their place of birth etc or just plain lie about their nationality so obtaining any form of travel document is almost impossible. Its my understanding that unless the country they claim to originate actually accepts them as a national they go absolutely nowhere. Thanks god the company my husband works for arranges all his work visas or he'd never go anywhere. "Precisely this. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"No they don’t. Yet it should be so easy to secure territorial integrity of an island and manage migration properly. I think it’s better they face reality that they are not really asylum seekers but economic migrants trying anyway possible to get in and then address it properly. Here in UAE every single migrant pays fees to come, has to have medical tests that again you must pay for and then gets an ID card lasting 2,3 or 10 years depending on how much value you bring. You cannot participate in society without an ID card, nothing works, so there’s no illegal immigration . Government sets the number each year they allow in , 1.8% of population currently and then organised infra , housing and medical expansion projects for those numbers. UK makes it too attractive with all the free stuff and no need to work and indefinitely leave to remain It really isn’t that complicated, strategic policy, middle management / project management stuff. " Now all of this I agree with. On top of that if someone can effectively buy there way in why would the pay the gangs for a place in an overcrowded boat. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"how about higher tax rates for immigrants to reduce the appeal of staying in the country?" I’d say this and no access to benefits for two years would be a deterrent. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The fixation with “send them back”and you can, you can’t, is astonishing. The challenge is to prevent the crossings in the first instance and to do that we need a deterrent, slowing the numbers or even stopping crossings all together that issue goes away. Deterrent is the only way forward. Cooperative neighbours would help too. The dinghies used in Channel crossings are sourced in Turkey and trucked across the European continent unhindered. This happened before and after Brexit, so no benefit of being in the EU. You seem very well informed? Maybe Interpol could do with your intel "Yes, 90% of dinghies used in Channel crossings are sourced in Turkey. There have been official attempts to curtail the trade, but without success. The Germans (one of the main land routes) argue there is nothing illegal in transporting dinghies across their territory. This is the mentality we are up against. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"how about higher tax rates for immigrants to reduce the appeal of staying in the country? I’d say this and no access to benefits for two years would be a deterrent. " what are you meaning by benefits? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I don’t know the details of that 1951 convention without doing a bit of research but I would guess these things are not overly prescriptive? They are principal based and say we must contribute to the global problem of asylum? But I would imagine every country has the right to protect its own citizens first, correct? And then devise appropriate policies for the implementation of the 1951 policy? I Set numbers? Not just allow francs to push everything this way when they are already present in a safe country?" The convention says that if a person is in a country, and they meet the criteria, that country *must* grant asylum. There are no exceptions that allow limits to be placed on numbers. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Also, 1951 Convention does not provide an individual, whom is granted refugee status, with a right to permanent residence." It does. It doesn't grant a right to citizenship, but it does grant a right to remain in the asylum country for life, as well as being granted the same travel privileges as normal citizens. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"how about higher tax rates for immigrants to reduce the appeal of staying in the country? I’d say this and no access to benefits for two years would be a deterrent. " I think it’s important that if we did this we also do what we can to help people into employment, and perhaps help them settle in areas with high numbers of job vacancies. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"https://news.sky.com/story/labour-detention-plan-not-likely-to-stop-small-boats-says-former-head-of-border-force-13200836 ***Labour detention plan not likely to stop small boats, says former head of Border Force Tony Smith, a former director general of the UK Border Force, said Labour's plan will only result in "modest removals" and a returns agreement with the EU is needed.*** Does anybody have a plan? " How about this. I've heard of a gaff in Africa, or somewhere foreign, called Rwanda. Apparently, the place had a few problems years ago but now is a lovely holiday resort, bit like a sort of Benidorm, but safer and with less mobility scooters. If anyone tips up to the UK and claims asylum they will be flown away to Rwanda, fed, watered, looked after and housed in a decent place while their asylum claim is considered, staff in UK could interview via zoom etc or be located on site. If asylum is granted, they can be flown back to UK on return flights, if not, these economic migrants, sorry asylum seekers, will be given a choice of a flight back to their home country or stay in Rwanda and start a new life there. Not too sure if there are many benefits available in Rwanda but who knows... There you go, all sorted. Next international problem please. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"how about higher tax rates for immigrants to reduce the appeal of staying in the country? I’d say this and no access to benefits for two years would be a deterrent. I think it’s important that if we did this we also do what we can to help people into employment, and perhaps help them settle in areas with high numbers of job vacancies." train them in digital careers so they are free to go to other countries to live, with the bonus of helping the nation by bringing the wages of the sector down to a more realistic level. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"how about higher tax rates for immigrants to reduce the appeal of staying in the country? I’d say this and no access to benefits for two years would be a deterrent. I think it’s important that if we did this we also do what we can to help people into employment, and perhaps help them settle in areas with high numbers of job vacancies." Agreed | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"how about higher tax rates for immigrants to reduce the appeal of staying in the country? I’d say this and no access to benefits for two years would be a deterrent. I think it’s important that if we did this we also do what we can to help people into employment, and perhaps help them settle in areas with high numbers of job vacancies. train them in digital careers so they are free to go to other countries to live, with the bonus of helping the nation by bringing the wages of the sector down to a more realistic level." So you will utilise foreign labour to reduce the pay scales for UK workers in certain sectors. Wow, not heard anyone trying to reduce people's pay. If you personally want a pay reduction, chat to your bosses, sure they will be delighted. Probably best you discuss reducing pay scales with your colleagues first, unless you like trips to A&E. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"how about higher tax rates for immigrants to reduce the appeal of staying in the country? I’d say this and no access to benefits for two years would be a deterrent. I think it’s important that if we did this we also do what we can to help people into employment, and perhaps help them settle in areas with high numbers of job vacancies. train them in digital careers so they are free to go to other countries to live, with the bonus of helping the nation by bringing the wages of the sector down to a more realistic level. So you will utilise foreign labour to reduce the pay scales for UK workers in certain sectors. Wow, not heard anyone trying to reduce people's pay. If you personally want a pay reduction, chat to your bosses, sure they will be delighted. Probably best you discuss reducing pay scales with your colleagues first, unless you like trips to A&E. "the nations IT bill for government institutions is the one of the highest contributors to departmental spending, mostly due to there being a skill shortage. reducing the skill shortage is what's required to lessen the expenditure. train a proportion of immigrants in that sector along with the already discussed higher rate of taxes for immigrants will kurb austerity more quickly. like the tory's love saying 'it's the economy stupid' | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"how about higher tax rates for immigrants to reduce the appeal of staying in the country? I’d say this and no access to benefits for two years would be a deterrent. I think it’s important that if we did this we also do what we can to help people into employment, and perhaps help them settle in areas with high numbers of job vacancies. train them in digital careers so they are free to go to other countries to live, with the bonus of helping the nation by bringing the wages of the sector down to a more realistic level. So you will utilise foreign labour to reduce the pay scales for UK workers in certain sectors. Wow, not heard anyone trying to reduce people's pay. If you personally want a pay reduction, chat to your bosses, sure they will be delighted. Probably best you discuss reducing pay scales with your colleagues first, unless you like trips to A&E.
the nations IT bill for government institutions is the one of the highest contributors to departmental spending, mostly due to there being a skill shortage. reducing the skill shortage is what's required to lessen the expenditure. train a proportion of immigrants in that sector along with the already discussed higher rate of taxes for immigrants will kurb austerity more quickly. like the tory's love saying 'it's the economy stupid'"Oh right. Maybe you have your pay cut and help the government save money. I work in the oil and gas industry and have no intention of offering suggestions to cut my pay, bonus or expenses. I leave that in your capable hands. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Remove the UK from the 1951 Refugee Convention. Job done " I agree. Then any illegals that come here should be returned, immediately, to their country of origin. All this faffing about has gone in too long. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Remove the UK from the 1951 Refugee Convention. Job done I agree. Then any illegals that come here should be returned, immediately, to their country of origin. All this faffing about has gone in too long." So. What country are 'they' from? It's common practice to destroy their ID's Passports etc. Because they know, it is so much harder for them to be deported. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"how about higher tax rates for immigrants to reduce the appeal of staying in the country? I’d say this and no access to benefits for two years would be a deterrent. I think it’s important that if we did this we also do what we can to help people into employment, and perhaps help them settle in areas with high numbers of job vacancies." I do hope British born can access the same traning and support in to employment, the same as anyone coming in to the country.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I work in the oil and gas industry and have no intention of offering suggestions to cut my pay, bonus or expenses. I leave that in your capable hands. "what evs trevs | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"how about higher tax rates for immigrants to reduce the appeal of staying in the country? I’d say this and no access to benefits for two years would be a deterrent. I think it’s important that if we did this we also do what we can to help people into employment, and perhaps help them settle in areas with high numbers of job vacancies. I do hope British born can access the same traning and support in to employment, the same as anyone coming in to the country.." they already can dude .... it's called school | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Remove the UK from the 1951 Refugee Convention. Job done I agree. Then any illegals that come here should be returned, immediately, to their country of origin. All this faffing about has gone in too long. So. What country are 'they' from? It's common practice to destroy their ID's Passports etc. Because they know, it is so much harder for them to be deported." Languages understood could be one way of finding the region. Should they refuse to give country of origin, then we should send them anywhere that would have them. If from the Indian Sub Continent, then ask them to choose between India, Pakistan or Bangladesh. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Remove the UK from the 1951 Refugee Convention. Job done I agree. Then any illegals that come here should be returned, immediately, to their country of origin. All this faffing about has gone in too long. So. What country are 'they' from? It's common practice to destroy their ID's Passports etc. Because they know, it is so much harder for them to be deported. Languages understood could be one way of finding the region. Should they refuse to give country of origin, then we should send them anywhere that would have them. If from the Indian Sub Continent, then ask them to choose between India, Pakistan or Bangladesh. " So how many African nations still have a good grounding in speaking French? How many Indians from India speak English? How many Algerians speak French? etc How many people live in one country now but came from another originally, so speak the language of their former country. How is this going to prove where they are from !?! Now choose a country to go back to? What do you think the country they choose will say about that? This is your plan? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"We have a navy,or should have a navy. Let them patrol our boarder and repell/destroy any invaders. I mean, let's not beat about the bush. They are not fleeing wartorn France. They are invading our country and should face the consequences which have faced many other invading forces over the centuries. " They are seeking asylum. It’s not invading and it’s not against the law. I would imagine (hope) that our new Government will soon start to re-open offshore processing centres so that the hard of thinking crowd won’t have anything to point at in the sea. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"We have a navy,or should have a navy. Let them patrol our boarder and repell/destroy any invaders. I mean, let's not beat about the bush. They are not fleeing wartorn France. They are invading our country and should face the consequences which have faced many other invading forces over the centuries. They are seeking asylum. It’s not invading and it’s not against the law. I would imagine (hope) that our new Government will soon start to re-open offshore processing centres so that the hard of thinking crowd won’t have anything to point at in the sea." Asylum from France? I mean I know things are getting bad there (re, immigration) but it is not so bad that they have to risk their lives to invade this country. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Remove the UK from the 1951 Refugee Convention. Job done" "I agree. Then any illegals that come here should be returned, immediately, to their country of origin. All this faffing about has gone in too long." "So. What country are 'they' from? It's common practice to destroy their ID's Passports etc. Because they know, it is so much harder for them to be deported." If we've removed ourselves from the 1951 convention, we can deport them to any place that will take them. Like, for instance, a friendly African country. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"We have a navy,or should have a navy. Let them patrol our boarder and repell/destroy any invaders. I mean, let's not beat about the bush. They are not fleeing wartorn France. They are invading our country and should face the consequences which have faced many other invading forces over the centuries. " We’re notoriously not very good at repelling invasions, ask the Romans, Jutes, Angles, Saxons, Vikings, French Normans, and Dutch. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Also, 1951 Convention does not provide an individual, whom is granted refugee status, with a right to permanent residence. Yet everybody knows that if you manage to stay in the UK for three years you are given ILR - Indefinite leave to remain this is a government policy of the UK and nothing to do with the convention. And this is probably the single thing make in the UK so attractive economic migrants something that you will never get in the UAE no matter how much you contribute or how long you stay you’ll never be granted permanent residency & the benefits that come with that. " What happened with the Windrush saga then? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Remove the UK from the 1951 Refugee Convention. Job done I agree. Then any illegals that come here should be returned, immediately, to their country of origin. All this faffing about has gone in too long. So. What country are 'they' from? It's common practice to destroy their ID's Passports etc. Because they know, it is so much harder for them to be deported. If we've removed ourselves from the 1951 convention, we can deport them to any place that will take them. Like, for instance, a friendly African country." Name one? Rwanda? or . . ? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Reading this, it would appear all the UKs problems come from about 20000 people annually crossing from France? In a population of 66 million 20000 is sod all. I don't think the problem lays here, I think it's in the 30 plus years of neglect that the regions have endured through lack of investment. The plan should be to borrow like hell and invest in infrastructure in the regions so all people can have the opportunity to earn a living wage without the crutch of welfare support. " It is more like 40k a year, and year on year gains. To say it is nothing compared to the population of the whole country is really missing the fundamental issues, in fact it is akin to put your fingers in your ears and closing your eyes. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"To deter destruction of ID we must award those with ID, something like better living quarters while waiting to be assessed." If you turn out to be an economic migrant with ID or not, you will be deported. So it's better to dump your ID and play the 'long game' of confusion and hope. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
""The Labour government has set up a new returns and enforcement unit, with up to 1,000 new staff to speed up removals for those with no right to be here." Job done ... Next ..." If there are paid £30k each there’s a £30 million annual wage bill Next | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"How's that going? "How long has it been ? Rather like climate change innit | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
""The Labour government has set up a new returns and enforcement unit, with up to 1,000 new staff to speed up removals for those with no right to be here." Job done ... Next ..." They will have more staff but they will face the same problems, like what do you do with failed asylum seekers who arrived from places like Syria and Iran. Hopefully some gang smashing will be happening as promised to stop it happening at all. Or, like when the Tories were in office, is any mention of this topic simply a diversion from other problems | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
""The Labour government has set up a new returns and enforcement unit, with up to 1,000 new staff to speed up removals for those with no right to be here." Job done ... Next ... If there are paid £30k each there’s a £30 million annual wage bill Next " Better bloody not be! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
""The Labour government has set up a new returns and enforcement unit, with up to 1,000 new staff to speed up removals for those with no right to be here." Job done ... Next ... They will have more staff but they will face the same problems, like what do you do with failed asylum seekers who arrived from places like Syria and Iran. Hopefully some gang smashing will be happening as promised to stop it happening at all. Or, like when the Tories were in office, is any mention of this topic simply a diversion from other problems" It really is laughable, Tory and now Labour conning the public The asylum applications with the home office, as of June 2023, the total ‘work in progress’ asylum caseload consisted of 215,500 cases. Of these, 138,000 cases were awaiting an initial decision, 5,100 were awaiting the outcome of an appeal, and approximately 41,200 cases were subject to removal action | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
