Keir Starmer

[Phil Pascoe]

They lurched far right? They were barely right of centre, that's why they lost.

 

[Yorkieguy]

So what has Starmer not done exactly?

he is doing exactly what is possible: growing the capacity to process the asylum claims, increasing efforts to build international cooperation to stop the gangs and increased investment in intelligence.

Sadly the efforts to collaborate with France and mainland Europe on intelligence and diplomatic means have been severely curtailed due to Brexit.

Here's just a snippet of Starmer's commitment to the electorate:

Quote:

Labour will turn the page and restore order to the asylum system so that it operates swiftly, firmly, and fairly; and the rules are properly enforced. We will hire additional caseworkers to clear the Conservatives’ backlog and end asylum hotels, saving the taxpayer billions of pounds.

Labour will set up a new returns and enforcement unit, with an additional 1,000 staff, to fast-track removals to safe countries for people who do not have the right to stay here. We will negotiate additional returns arrangements to speed up returns and increase the number of safe countries that failed asylum seekers can swiftly be sent back to. And we will also act upstream, working with international partners to address the humanitarian crises which lead people to flee their homes, and to strengthen support for refugees in their home region.

Unquote.

Here, in full, is his 'STRONG FOUNDATIONS' manifesto commitments to voters prior to the election.

https://labour.org.uk/change/strong-foundations/

'Fast-track removals to safe countries'?
In the year ending June 2024, the top five countries of origin of people seeking asylum were Afghanistan, Iran, Pakistan, Vietnam and Bangladesh. (In terms of the number of asylum applications per head of population, the UK ranks 20th highest in Europe).

None of those are safe countries to which to return failed asylum seekers.

As of the end of June 2024, the UK's asylum backlog was 85,839 applications awaiting an initial decision. It has risen considerably since then. On average, 63% of applications to become refugees with an indefinite right to remain are successful. Hence, it's reasonable to assume that of those 85,839, 27% (23,176) will fail. With whom will Starmer 'negotiate to fast track removals of those who do not have the right to say here, so they can be 'swiftly sent back to'?

It's easy enough to send 'economic migrants' from Albania back there, but with whom is he going to negotiate in Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iran, (and with the Middle East a powder keg?)

How is he going to: 'work with international partners to address the Humanitarian crisis causing people to flee their homes?'

Ascertaining who doesn't have a right to be here is one thing - fast-tracking their removal to 'safe countries' is quite another.

It's never a wise thing to do to 'overpromise and underdeliver' as you look either incompetent or deceitful, or both.

I'm sure we'll await developments with interest.

 

[ey_tony]

Correct me if I'm wrong on this but hasn't Labour just announced that migrants will be housed in hotels for the next three years...if that is true then no doubt they will say that they didn't realise things were so bad!

 

[Jacob]

.......
I'm sure we'll await developments with interest......

Very uninteresting so far.
He's promised to "smash the gangs". Just another meaningless gesture to keep our Alf Garnetts happy.

 

[sploo]

They lurched far right? They were barely right of centre, that's why they lost.

I'm not sure that really passes a sanity check Phil; unless we'd consider previous Conservative governments to be "lefty" by comparison. Whilst there's always been an anti-European/anti-foreigner element in the Tory party, they'd always been just that - the nutters on the fringe (a loud fringe, but still the fringe). In recent years the Tories have cleansed themselves of any remotely moderate or intelligent members (e.g. Grieve, Stewart) and fully put the loons in charge. They tried so hard to turn the party into UKIP they forgot that UKIP was always a clown show, with a rotating door of terrible leaders (which is exactly what they've become).

 

[Chris152]

Interesting how the 'Starmer' thread has been reduced to immigration, an issue put firmly on the agenda by the Conservatives when they were in power, elevated by Farage and Reform and the right-wing media, when - let's face it - there are far bigger fish to fry in the UK and the world at the moment. Chattering while Rome burns/ deckchairs while the Titanic sinks etc.
It's a Tory issue, like the EU/ Brexit nonsense - designed to distract from the real issues that face us.

 

[Jacob]

Interesting how the 'Starmer' thread has been reduced to immigration, an issue put firmly on the agenda by the Conservatives when they were in power, elevated by Farage and Reform and the right-wing media, when - let's face it - there are far bigger fish to fry in the UK and the world at the moment. Chattering while Rome burns/ deckchairs while the Titanic sinks etc.
It's a Tory issue, like the EU/ Brexit nonsense - designed to distract from the real issues that face us.

It's a big vote catcher - there are a lot of Alf Garnetts!
Starmer doesn't have a policy so he just blags on along the same lines, freewheeling, waiting for inspiration.

 

[Jacob]

Also of concern, various well connected and credible people are saying in the serious media that the boats are an excellent way to smuggle extremists and terrorists into the country

Really? Surely it is like the worst possible way, judging by events so far. Doesn't make sense and sounds like more of the usual anti immigrant propaganda.

 

[Delaney]

And cheap housing and also highest levels of low skilled indigenous population. They have to start somewhere!
Vice versa the least depressed areas generally have the highest levels of high skilled immigrants / indigenous.

Absolutely untrue. Huge areas of public and private businesses would collapse entirely without the immigrant workforce, and there are shortages now.

Of course it has.

“They have to start somewhere”

When do the native population get to start?
How will they get worth while paying jobs
when they have to compete with people who will live 3/4 a bedroom?

There is no data to back up your ideological claims. We’ve had mass migration for nearly 20 years and no economic growth.
The burden on society though has gone through the roof. Every European country has done the figures and it is now conclusive that mass immigration is a net drain on the system.
It’s literally bankrupting us.
I even gave you the data from the OBR and the BBC to back it up and you ignored it.

You’re a total fantasist and utterly ideologically.

 

[Chris152]

You’re a total fantasist and utterly ideologically.

Utterly ideologically what?

 

[Spectric]

with the lovely news that the next Tory leader will be one of Badenoch or Jenrick

Both irrelevant because the winner will only ever be the leader of the remains of the tory opposition party and as mentioned it is thought the next potential tory PM may not have even been born yet. I can see the remains of the tory party dividing though because they seem to be so far apart in their views.

 

[Spectric]

I dont understand where this phrase "open borders comes from

Turn up in somewhere like the states or Australia uninvited and you are not welcomed, they have border control and enforce it. Here we have the RNLI acting as a ferry and seem to welcome them with open arms without asking questions or seeing their documents because they have been thrown overboard.

 

[ey_tony]

Interesting how the 'Starmer' thread has been reduced to immigration, an issue put firmly on the agenda by the Conservatives when they were in power, elevated by Farage and Reform and the right-wing media, when - let's face it - there are far bigger fish to fry in the UK and the world at the moment. Chattering while Rome burns/ deckchairs while the Titanic sinks etc.
It's a Tory issue, like the EU/ Brexit nonsense - designed to distract from the real issues that face us.

You don't suppose just for a moment that there might be a teeny weeny issue with migration in the UK which millions of open-eye Brits can actually see but the Wolfie Smiths and Woke Brigade can't?
It happens to be the number one issue on the agendas in many European countries right now so Britain is not unique in this respect so perhaps there just might be something in it.

It's interesting that in 2006 Muammah Gaddafi said: "We have 50 million Muslims in Europe. There are signs that Allah will grant Islam victory in Europe—without swords, without guns, without conquest—will turn it into a Muslim continent within a few decades."

He may have been wildly optimistic regarding his figures and time-scale but arguably the writing is on the wall and evidence suggests that Islam is an expanding ideology which can already be seen spreading throughout many parts of Africa today and the migration of followers of Islam who have migrated to Europe have no apparent intention of rejecting their beliefs and fully adopting Western values so their numbers will grow with their robust birth rates even if there wasn't any further migration of people of that faith into Europe which is highly unlikely.
This can and does have long term consequences in that migration patterns can and do eventually influence voting patterns once the ethnic numbers reach a critical mass.

We are already seeing ethnicity influencing local politics/voting in this country and the influence can only increase as politicians seek to appeal to the rise in the growing ethnic voter numbers.
Gaddafi's prediction regarding Europe may have been overly optimistic but I suspect that in a few decades time much of Africa will be Islamic at the rate it's expanding right now on that continent..

 

[spanner48]

Are you suggesting that we should invite and look after the women and children from the world's trouble spots?
That's very woke of you, congratulations, it's never too late to wake up!
The reason it's mostly chaps is because they tend to be stronger, fitter, more likely to find work. Then they can send money back home, or if they are staying can set up homes for their families, possibly earning enough to bring them here by safe means without risking their lives.
If you wanted to move to a foreign country would you first send your wife and kids to explore possibilities?

Yes

 

[spanner48]

migration watch is a Conservative propaganda site which contains misleading data.
Its president is President is Lord Green of Deddington, a Tory peer

https://workpermit.com/news/migration-watch-uk-criticised-misleading-uk-immigration-reports-20160629

migration observatory is a more impartial source of information

Since when is the "Migration Observatory' "a more impartial source of information" than Migration Watch? Or simply more to your peculiar tastes?

 

[Chris152]

You don't suppose just for a moment that there might be a teeny weeny issue with migration in the UK which millions of open-eye Brits can actually see but the Wolfie Smiths and Woke Brigade can't?
It happens to be the number one issue on the agendas in many European countries right now

Not the war taking place on European soil right now, then? Or the war in the Middle East that threatens to get out of hand very quickly?

There will be a significant issue with migration (of whichever sort) in due course as climate change forces massive numbers of people from their lands, and we need to be ready for that. But I do object to the politicisation of migrants, which no doubt is what we've been subject to recently.

 

[spanner48]

So when he says: it is mostly men that take the journey because it is too arduous and dangerous for women, children and the elderly............you consider that to be "parroted unfact based opinions"


So are you saying you dont believe that: women, children and elderly would find such a journey more difficult than men?

For women, rather the opposite. Because they can use sexual attraction - whether promissed or performed - to gain agency over people smugglers. Reports - unconfirmed - are that women starting the trek from Africa or the Near East towards Europe frequently take a long-term contraceptive before they start – with that in mind.

Except in unusual cases, men don't have that; they have to pay.

 

[spanner48]

thank you for the reply.

So your response indicates you think it fine Ukrainians are allowed here but not Syrians despite both have been subjected to the brutality of war.




In terms of the good old "safe country" false argument, let me address that once more:

when people get displaced due to war or persecution, the vast majority stay within the region, however the rest disperse over a wide area.

it is not unreasonable for such refugees to spread across a number of countries, just because UK is geographically furthest away does not mean by arbitrary good fortune no Syrian people should come here.

If you believe no refugees should come to UK, the please could you explain which country should take more and why


given that there is a Syrian community established here and people probably wanted to join with family members or friends here in the UK.

Yes, it is fine. The Ukrainians have been subjected to external military violence. Syrians are being treated - or mistreated - by their own government. If they don't like it, they should do something about it. Not run away, and then complain.

 

[sploo]

Both irrelevant because the winner will only ever be the leader of the remains of the tory opposition party and as mentioned it is thought the next potential tory PM may not have even been born yet. I can see the remains of the tory party dividing though because they seem to be so far apart in their views.

True, and hopefully they have at least a generation out of power - appropriate for the damage done over the last 14 years.

Still, it amazes me that the Tory party continues to throw excrement at a wall to see what sticks; despite earlier excrement clearly being, well, excrement. You think they'd learn.

 

[treeturner123]

Back to the man

I see he claimed his Uncle was torpedoed in the Falklands War. Was he serving on the Belgrano?

The truth needs to be told.

Or perhaps he was sunk by a sausage!!

Phil