Keir Starmer

[ey_tony]

Got to page 4 before the asylum seekers came out.

The alternative is to bury one's head in the sand and pretend that no problem exists with regard to migration, be it legal or otherwise.
In this alternative world the UK can indefinitely continue to subsume all of the people who turn up on its doorstep claiming asylum with no effects and we all live happily with fulfilled lives ever after.

Then unfortunately we have the real world where clearly there isn't enough suitable housing/infrastructure to adequately service the people who already live here, where taxes will need to be increased in order just to fund extra infrastructure to meet the needs of the people already living here let alone the need for the migrants coming here. This government has now admitted that they got it wrong like most things so far and migrants awaiting processing will be housed in hotels for the next three years.
Annually the costs of housing the migrants in hotels alone is around the same amount as the cost of the winter fuel payment for the entire pensioners of this country.

The fact is that there is indeed a problem with migration and it's not going to go away unless it is addressed.
Let's look at this logically.
Given the alleged price of a place on the criminal gang's boats just to come daily across the Channel, costs are often several times more than official flights to the UK from the homeland or adjoining countries of those who come here seeking asylum, then why would they choose a method fraught with danger to arrive here risking their lives in the process if they had documents etc which would effectively fast track them through the UK's official migration channels if they were eligible to receive asylum?
Something smells fishy and they can't ALL have lost their identity papers/passports on their way here surely?

The people of this country have an expectation to know who enters their country with regard to the migrant's complete criminal and health background. In the UK, cases of HIV infections for instance are at a 15 year high, with over 50% of those infections found in the migrant population (legal and otherwise) who were infected outside of the UK.
Once here migrants will receive retroviral medication costing the taxpayer many thousands of pounds per year per person. This is certainly not saying that those who arrive on boats are the carriers of the HIV virus but there is an increased risk given that many migrants arriving by boats are of African descent from regions where HIV is rife.

The whole issue of migration and controlling the numbers entering the UK needs a grown up debate not some EU nonsense. The UK has been a soft touch for far too long and it's the taxpayers who are losing out and footing the bill.
If anyone disagrees with my views fine, I am quite happy to calmly debate the issue with them as the economics of the issue alone means that the people of the UK will have to accept lower living standards and higher taxes as there is no other way of funding the immigration policies we have in place right now.

 

[Sean33]

Sticking you back on Ignore. Bye.

Can you tell me how you do that, stick people on ignore ?

 

[Blackswanwood]

Can you tell me how you do that, stick people on ignore ?

Click on their avatar and you're presented with the options of giving them a gift, following them or ignoring them.

 

[Spectric]

We want good quality politicians. We know we don't have them. The question is why.

That is a good question but very true, we have lost politicians that were true to themselves and stood by their convictions but it was not all great. We only think we had much better politicians in the past because the current bunch are really inept and achieving even higher levels of incompetance and stupidity so making the past ones look better.

I'm personally not a Reform voter nor right wing but it's not difficult to see why the people are sick and tired of our governments doing nothing while our welfare system is being milked by fake asylum seekers. We're not talking about genuine refugees fleeing persecution, they deserve our help.
We are talking about the thousands of perfectly healthy young men paying criminals to get them across the Channel in small boats supposedly leaving their families behind in war torn regions while seeking asylum here in the UK.

But unless we take a gamble on something different then how can you expect real change, the slide into the abyss will just continue as the two party system continues in going round in circles ever downwards. Many of these so called asylum seekers are really just taking the pee, what about the albanian burglar who got locked up, let out early and deported, sneaked back in and got married to some lithuanian, had a kid and now cannot be deported so continues his crime spree. Are we really now that stupid ?

The answer whether or not you like it is that this country doesn't have the capacity in the form of infrastructure and finances to service the people already living here let alone 1000s of migrants turning up on our doorstep week after week.

Bang on because every system has a capacity that it can maintain, exceed that limit and then something has to give and just filling up our country with deadweights will capsize the boat.

All we need to do is look around and mimic another countries immigraton system, if we follow say Australia then no one can say we are not complying with any rules and there system seems to work.

 

[Noel]

Click on their avatar and you're presented with the options of giving them a gift, following them or ignoring them.

Could do with a few more options ..................

 

[Phil Pascoe]

Could do with a few more options ..................

Surely the Israelis could devise something interesting?

 

[ey_tony]

That is a good question but very true, we have lost politicians that were true to themselves and stood by their convictions but it was not all great. We only think we had much better politicians in the past because the current bunch are really inept and achieving even higher levels of incompetance and stupidity so making the past ones look better.


But unless we take a gamble on something different then how can you expect real change, the slide into the abyss will just continue as the two party system continues in going round in circles ever downwards. Many of these so called asylum seekers are really just taking the pee, what about the albanian burglar who got locked up, let out early and deported, sneaked back in and got married to some lithuanian, had a kid and now cannot be deported so continues his crime spree. Are we really now that stupid ?


Bang on because every system has a capacity that it can maintain, exceed that limit and then something has to give and just filling up our country with deadweights will capsize the boat.

All we need to do is look around and mimic another countries immigraton system, if we follow say Australia then no one can say we are not complying with any rules and there system seems to work.

Good points.
The initial problem is that politicians try to be all things to all people and you what they say about the Jack of All Trades. They're ALL too scared to tell it like it is and so they try and wing it like this bunch of no-hope clowns in power right now.
Everyone complained about the Tories but when all the leaves were brushed away, underneath it revealed they at least had a plan even if it was tenuous...this lot don't seem to have a brush let alone a plan and are lurching from one crisis to the next.

I've never looked at Farage and his crew's actual political agenda as an alternative but it can't be worse than this lot and I can see his party building up a credible opposition to this shower which to be fair wouldn't be hard.

I read about the Albanian crook today...you couldn't make it up, it's extracting the urine good and proper and is yet another reason why the UK should dissociate itself from UNHCR.
Before we can protect our society from outsiders we need the mechanism in place whereby no Tom **** or Harry ( substitute your preferred names by all means) can enter this country illegally or commit crime and be allowed to stay.
We shouldn't be giving these people citizenship for at least 10 years after arriving here and if they commit serious crimes during that period, then they forfeit their right to remain in the UK and are sent packing to whence they came.
It's not unreasonable. It's a consequence of their own actions and if they knew that before committing serious crimes then they have only themselves to blame and we should bear no responsibility for whatever happens to them.
As you say, such as Australia's system/criteria for migration seems to work so why not mimic that. It certainly can't be worse than what we have right now.

Labour promised they would build 1.5 million homes in this parliament once they got into power. Given they've been in power now for over three months that means they should have 75,000 homes nearing completion by now or a total of 150,000 ready for occupation by January 2025 or approximately 450,000 ready by December 2025.
They have as much chance of doing that as I have of juggling soot.
If Labour can't fix things like they said they would then they should resign on principle and another election be held but this time featuring politicians who are prepared to actually tell the truth and have an actually plan acceptable to the British public not the rubbish this lying toe-rag and bunch of muppets told electorate in order to be elected.
It must be the worst start for any party in government that I can recall and there have been some bad ones but this is the pits and Starmer is the worst leader I can recall, even far worse than Michael Foot.

He should take the knee which he's good at and apologise to the people of the UK for misleading them but sadly he won't.

 

[RobinBHM]

The whole issue of migration and controlling the numbers entering the UK needs a grown up debate not some EU nonsense. The UK has been a soft touch for far too long and it's the taxpayers who are losing out and footing the bill.

I agree it does need a grown up debate.

If you think there are too many people arriving her claiming asylum, which country do you think should take more?

 

[RobinBHM]

As you say, such as Australia's system/criteria for migration seems to work

I am not entirely sure Australia's model of offshoring asylum seekers to Nauru where they are suffering appalling abuse and neglect is a great model.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

It's a great model if it stops the next lot arriving. That's what it's for.

 

[Mickjay]

Good points.
The initial problem is that politicians try to be all things to all people and you what they say about the Jack of All Trades. They're ALL too scared to tell it like it is and so they try and wing it like this bunch of no-hope clowns in power right now.
Everyone complained about the Tories but when all the leaves were brushed away, underneath it revealed they at least had a plan even if it was tenuous...this lot don't seem to have a brush let alone a plan and are lurching from one crisis to the next.

I've never looked at Farage and his crew's actual political agenda as an alternative but it can't be worse than this lot and I can see his party building up a credible opposition to this shower which to be fair wouldn't be hard.

I read about the Albanian crook today...you couldn't make it up, it's extracting the urine good and proper and is yet another reason why the UK should dissociate itself from UNHCR.
Before we can protect our society from outsiders we need the mechanism in place whereby no Tom **** or Harry ( substitute your preferred names by all means) can enter this country illegally or commit crime and be allowed to stay.
We shouldn't be giving these people citizenship for at least 10 years after arriving here and if they commit serious crimes during that period, then they forfeit their right to remain in the UK and are sent packing to whence they came.
It's not unreasonable. It's a consequence of their own actions and if they knew that before committing serious crimes then they have only themselves to blame and we should bear no responsibility for whatever happens to them.
As you say, such as Australia's system/criteria for migration seems to work so why not mimic that. It certainly can't be worse than what we have right now.

Labour promised they would build 1.5 million homes in this parliament once they got into power. Given they've been in power now for over three months that means they should have 75,000 homes nearing completion by now or a total of 150,000 ready for occupation by January 2025 or approximately 450,000 ready by December 2025.
They have as much chance of doing that as I have of juggling soot.
If Labour can't fix things like they said they would then they should resign on principle and another election be held but this time featuring politicians who are prepared to actually tell the truth and have an actually plan acceptable to the British public not the rubbish this lying toe-rag and bunch of muppets told electorate in order to be elected.
It must be the worst start for any party in government that I can recall and there have been some bad ones but this is the pits and Starmer is the worst leader I can recall, even far worse than Michael Foot.

He should take the knee which he's good at and apologise to the people of the UK for misleading them but sadly he won't.

If Labour did do as you suggest and call another election where are the "politicians who are prepared to actually tell the truth" going to come from, they weren't available at any previous election in my lifetime!
Be careful what you wish for.

 

[Billy_wizz]

That is a good question but very true, we have lost politicians that were true to themselves and stood by their convictions but it was not all great. We only think we had much better politicians in the past because the current bunch are really inept and achieving even higher levels of incompetance and stupidity so making the past ones look better.


But unless we take a gamble on something different then how can you expect real change, the slide into the abyss will just continue as the two party system continues in going round in circles ever downwards. Many of these so called asylum seekers are really just taking the pee, what about the albanian burglar who got locked up, let out early and deported, sneaked back in and got married to some lithuanian, had a kid and now cannot be deported so continues his crime spree. Are we really now that stupid ?


Bang on because every system has a capacity that it can maintain, exceed that limit and then something has to give and just filling up our country with deadweights will capsize the boat.

All we need to do is look around and mimic another countries immigraton system, if we follow say Australia then no one can say we are not complying with any rules and there system seems to work.

Isn't Australia a tad more difficult to get to from there neighbours in a boat?

 

[TRITON]

What about people who come and don’t claim asylum? Are they not illegally entering the country. I suppose your argument is that they are not an immigrant unless they officially apply.

Which is exactly what I said, give or take. It is those who failed the asylum process who are then classed as illegal.
Which is pretty much the same as not looking to try to claim asylum in the first place. Really I think your point is splitting hairs.

 

[Billy_wizz]

I agree it does need a grown up debate.

If you think there are too many people arriving her claiming asylum, which country do you think should take more?

The real question is how do we work out exactly who needs to come and who just want to get out of there perfectly safe country for other reasons

 

[RobinBHM]

It's a great model if it stops the next lot arriving. That's what it's for.

personally Im not too keen on our government inflicting suffering on to others

I like to think of the quote by Tony Benn:

"The way a government treats refugees is very instructive because it shows you how they would treat the rest of us if they thought they could get away with it."

 

[RobinBHM]

Which is exactly what I said, give or take. It is those who failed the asylum process who are then classed as illegal.

I hope you dont mind but I have a quote here which suggests this is not the case:

"If your claim for asylum is rejected, it also doesn’t mean you have done anything illegal – it just means you haven’t been able to meet the very strict criteria to prove your need for protection as a refugee."

https://www.refugee-action.org.uk/facts-about-asylum/

 

[Chris152]

Labour promised they would build 1.5 million homes in this parliament once they got into power. Given they've been in power now for over three months that means they should have 75,000 homes nearing completion by now or a total of 150,000 ready for occupation by January 2025 or approximately 450,000 ready by December 2025.

Clearly, things can't happen like that. Surely you understand that and are just pretending not to? It's a whole term over which things have to change.

I think assuming extreme positions has become the norm in the UK. Where fault is found, misrepresent it to the extreme, pretend it's the devil's work. That needs to stop if we're to return to a position where people can think clearly. Brexit, populism, radicalisation through misinformation through the popular press and internet, we're on a very slippery slope.

 

[RobinBHM]

The real question is how do we work out exactly who needs to come and who just want to get out of there perfectly safe country for other reasons

I am not sure that is "the real question"


the vast majority of people who have fled from where live, stay in a neighbouring country, but they cant all remain in the region it would cause it to collapse, so the remainder that are displaced disperse over a wide area.

refugees have the right to choose where they want to claim asylum and some come to the UK


I understand it when people say "I dont want any coming here" but the result of that claim is somewhere else must take more...........and the people who say "I dont want them here" can never provide an answer to that.

 

[RobinBHM]

Labour promised they would build 1.5 million homes in this parliament once they got into power. Given they've been in power now for over three months that means they should have 75,000 homes nearing completion by now or a total of 150,000 ready for occupation by January 2025 or approximately 450,000 ready by December 2025.

so using your argument the Labour party mustve built 821 homes by the time they had been in power for 24 hours

 

[AJB Temple]

The issue with housebuilding is that so far Labour, who have allegedly been "fully costing" and planning for years, have not explained how they are going to achieve any housebuilding at all. We have no idea what there actual plan is. What we do know is:

• Developers don't see building social housing as economic
• Nor do they see building "affordable" homes as all that different
• Financing is not attractive to investors (for reasons that become clear below)
• The people who need these homes cannot afford to buy them
• Interest rates are far too high for affordable mortgages
• So somebody needs to buy them as rental properties
• But local authorities have no budget or funding for this
• Private landlords are being actively hounded out of the rental market not encouraged to invest
• There is a shortage of skilled construction workers and other necessary trades
• The planning system is very unhelpful for getting buildings erected speedily
• Sewerage networks and other vital facilities are at capacity in many areas - no instant fix
• You can't just build lots of houses - you need infrastructure
• This includes medical, schooling, roads, services etc. Takes time and money
• Social housing is often needed in more depressed areas - where there are fewer jobs
• There will be resistance to housing spread in many local communities - labour can force it but will alienate voters
• and so on.

Labour have been very naive with this. But we have a new cabinet and PM with little if any useful business experience.