Boat crossings have massively taken off since Starmer came to office and scrapped Rwanda, something which seems to have gone entirely uncommented upon by mainstream media.
If we really did get well over 700 people crossing yesterday then that's a totally open border and utterly unsustainable.
But 'smashing the criminal gangs'??
WHY IS THIS GOING TOTALLY UNREPORTED
Surely it couldn't be because MSM were happy to use illegal migration as a stick to beat the Tories with, but are damned if they want Starmer to suffer any bad press, surely?
It was on the radio this morning when I was walking to work.
Yeah, and Jenrick did a tweet, right?
It's nowhere on the BBC or The Times or other papers or bulletins of record.
Nowhere.
So the BBC are obliged to report Jenrick's tweets?
Are you thick?
No, but I will concede that you're the most well placed judge of such things.
You've suggested, at the same time, that this might be a figment of Jenrick's imagination and managed to spectacularly miss the point at the same time. Either you're doing this deliberately to insult my intelligence, or you're thick.
Which one is it?
I suggest you work on your reading skills. You've obviously misread spectacularly.
You might have a point were it not for the fact that near scores of your fellow travellers posted upthread the primary source for the 700 crossings yesterday.
700. I mean, SEVEN HUNDRED IN A DAY.
I mean.. what the fuck?
Is it the first time there's been seven hundred or more in a day?
No, we've had plenty worse days. The record is over 1,000
I'm not sure why @Casino_Royale has exploded on this issue, today, in that context. However, as a veteran thread-hijacker I'd like to congratulate him on superbly hijacking a thread, and making us all talk about what he wants to talk about. Bravo
To be fair, I exploded over those days as well.
I'm particularly irritated now by the fact it's being shrugged off and is accelerating.
This year will almost certainly be the highest on record and no-one seems to give a fuck now Starmer is in power.
Why should they?
I don't recall Starmer giving a fuck while in Opposition either, so rather consistent.
It was Tory xenophobes that were ramping it up as a news story. And they're no longer in office.
You think I'm a xenophobe?
Is that your argument?
No.
I think Braverman, Badenoch, Jenrick etc are and they're the ones who were making this a big news story and so was Sunak (whom I don't think is a xenophobe, but is instead weak and a bit of a weathervane so went along with the narrative).
Now that Braverman etc are out of office, this isn't a big news story anymore.
Do you not remember how big a story asylum was during the Blair government when none of these people were in politics?
I remember it briefly being a story and much less of one than it has been in recent years.
Iraq, civil liberties, war on terror, the economy etc I remember being much bigger stories for longer.
Because he didn't mess around and actually cut the numbers and deported more people after it became an issue:
2003: "Blair 'guarantees' asylum-seeker figures will halve"
And how did he do that?
With an array of restrictive policies designed to deter people from coming here in the first place. Removing access to benefits and rights to appeal against denied claims etc.
However, Blair was not facing boats, which are hard to stop
We could reform the home guard....who would come if they knew they had to face private frasier
So this seems to be the explanation/excuse for the reduction in gold medals:
UK Sport chair Katherine Grainger says Great Britain's success in Paris is "extraordinary", but Team GB have moved past the era of "winning at all costs".
The five-time Olympic medal winner says creating a positive environment for the athletes is just as important as finishing on the podium.
"It is about winning well, not winning at any cost," Grainger, who leads the body responsible for allocating funding to sports for each Olympic cycle.
Boat crossings have massively taken off since Starmer came to office and scrapped Rwanda, something which seems to have gone entirely uncommented upon by mainstream media.
If we really did get well over 700 people crossing yesterday then that's a totally open border and utterly unsustainable.
But 'smashing the criminal gangs'??
WHY IS THIS GOING TOTALLY UNREPORTED
Surely it couldn't be because MSM were happy to use illegal migration as a stick to beat the Tories with, but are damned if they want Starmer to suffer any bad press, surely?
It was on the radio this morning when I was walking to work.
Yeah, and Jenrick did a tweet, right?
It's nowhere on the BBC or The Times or other papers or bulletins of record.
Nowhere.
So the BBC are obliged to report Jenrick's tweets?
Are you thick?
No, but I will concede that you're the most well placed judge of such things.
You've suggested, at the same time, that this might be a figment of Jenrick's imagination and managed to spectacularly miss the point at the same time. Either you're doing this deliberately to insult my intelligence, or you're thick.
Which one is it?
I suggest you work on your reading skills. You've obviously misread spectacularly.
You might have a point were it not for the fact that near scores of your fellow travellers posted upthread the primary source for the 700 crossings yesterday.
700. I mean, SEVEN HUNDRED IN A DAY.
I mean.. what the fuck?
Is it the first time there's been seven hundred or more in a day?
No, we've had plenty worse days. The record is over 1,000
I'm not sure why @Casino_Royale has exploded on this issue, today, in that context. However, as a veteran thread-hijacker I'd like to congratulate him on superbly hijacking a thread, and making us all talk about what he wants to talk about. Bravo
To be fair, I exploded over those days as well.
I'm particularly irritated now by the fact it's being shrugged off and is accelerating.
This year will almost certainly be the highest on record and no-one seems to give a fuck now Starmer is in power.
Why should they?
I don't recall Starmer giving a fuck while in Opposition either, so rather consistent.
It was Tory xenophobes that were ramping it up as a news story. And they're no longer in office.
You think I'm a xenophobe?
Is that your argument?
No.
I think Braverman, Badenoch, Jenrick etc are and they're the ones who were making this a big news story and so was Sunak (whom I don't think is a xenophobe, but is instead weak and a bit of a weathervane so went along with the narrative).
Now that Braverman etc are out of office, this isn't a big news story anymore.
Fair enough, but I think it is a big news story and a solution must be found.
I think it's a gaping hole in our legal infrastructure exploited by people traffickers and smugglers.
It's entirely illiberal to let it continue, particularly if it threatens to chip away at liberalism itself if unresolved.
Fund the courts. Process claims quickly. Deport quickly where it fails. Allow, indeed encourage, any claimants waiting more than a month to work and support themselves.
Thereby saying to all the world, "Hey, just get to the UK in a boat and they let you work and earn money in a few weeks, you basically get citizenship, oh, and all healthcare is free at point of use, just go to the A&E it's amazing, and the locals don't seem to mind and anyone that complains is put in jail"
Not only is this is an act of grievous national self-harm, it is also monumentally unfair on all the LEGAL migrants who jump through hoops to get settled status, and follow the letter of the law, over many months - and yet these jokers just climb on a dinghy in Dunkirk and bingo, they're in
Then don't complain about the billions spent on hotels if you object to solutions.
I have offered solutions. A sane but ruthless version of Rwanda, or leave the ECHR and tow them back to France. One of those two
Each was offered the Tories and Reform respectively, and were rejected at the ballot box by the British voters, including yourself if we believe your claim that you voted for Starmer.
And fair enough, let's see how Labour deal with it (SPOILER: badly)
However I cannot be accused of "not having solutions" because I offer two
So this seems to be the explanation/excuse for the reduction in gold medals:
UK Sport chair Katherine Grainger says Great Britain's success in Paris is "extraordinary", but Team GB have moved past the era of "winning at all costs".
The five-time Olympic medal winner says creating a positive environment for the athletes is just as important as finishing on the podium.
"It is about winning well, not winning at any cost," Grainger, who leads the body responsible for allocating funding to sports for each Olympic cycle.
I partly agree; but given that abuse of athletes that has occurred in many UK sports over the years, neither do I want a 'winning at any cost' environment.
Boat crossings have massively taken off since Starmer came to office and scrapped Rwanda, something which seems to have gone entirely uncommented upon by mainstream media.
If we really did get well over 700 people crossing yesterday then that's a totally open border and utterly unsustainable.
But 'smashing the criminal gangs'??
WHY IS THIS GOING TOTALLY UNREPORTED
Surely it couldn't be because MSM were happy to use illegal migration as a stick to beat the Tories with, but are damned if they want Starmer to suffer any bad press, surely?
It was on the radio this morning when I was walking to work.
Yeah, and Jenrick did a tweet, right?
It's nowhere on the BBC or The Times or other papers or bulletins of record.
Nowhere.
So the BBC are obliged to report Jenrick's tweets?
Are you thick?
No, but I will concede that you're the most well placed judge of such things.
You've suggested, at the same time, that this might be a figment of Jenrick's imagination and managed to spectacularly miss the point at the same time. Either you're doing this deliberately to insult my intelligence, or you're thick.
Which one is it?
I suggest you work on your reading skills. You've obviously misread spectacularly.
You might have a point were it not for the fact that near scores of your fellow travellers posted upthread the primary source for the 700 crossings yesterday.
700. I mean, SEVEN HUNDRED IN A DAY.
I mean.. what the fuck?
Is it the first time there's been seven hundred or more in a day?
No, we've had plenty worse days. The record is over 1,000
I'm not sure why @Casino_Royale has exploded on this issue, today, in that context. However, as a veteran thread-hijacker I'd like to congratulate him on superbly hijacking a thread, and making us all talk about what he wants to talk about. Bravo
To be fair, I exploded over those days as well.
I'm particularly irritated now by the fact it's being shrugged off and is accelerating.
This year will almost certainly be the highest on record and no-one seems to give a fuck now Starmer is in power.
Why should they?
I don't recall Starmer giving a fuck while in Opposition either, so rather consistent.
It was Tory xenophobes that were ramping it up as a news story. And they're no longer in office.
You think I'm a xenophobe?
Is that your argument?
No.
I think Braverman, Badenoch, Jenrick etc are and they're the ones who were making this a big news story and so was Sunak (whom I don't think is a xenophobe, but is instead weak and a bit of a weathervane so went along with the narrative).
Now that Braverman etc are out of office, this isn't a big news story anymore.
Are you aware how much we spend on housing and hosting these people?
No.
I'm guessing its a rounding error on overall expenditure and would be a lot less if asylum were granted (or rejected) and people could either work or be removed from the country.
Keeping people of working age in the country but denying them the right to legally work is utter madness.
It is £4.3 billion a year and rising fast. We spend £6m a DAY on hotels. Insane
The reason we don't speedily grant them asylum and the right to work is because that would be yet another pull factor, and we would get even more boat people than before. So your solution is no solution at all, and would, in fact, make things worse
Yes it is insane.
How much do European countries that can process applications within weeks not years pay on hotels, so that we can make an accurate comparison between the two systems?
In the good old days, if I remember correctly, our immigration system worked quite well.
Then the Home Secretary of the day, a certain Michael Howard, decided that there were too many civil servants, so he cut the numbers.
Nowadays there are not enough to cope with the work.
Conservative lack of foresight goes back a long way.
Boat crossings have massively taken off since Starmer came to office and scrapped Rwanda, something which seems to have gone entirely uncommented upon by mainstream media.
If we really did get well over 700 people crossing yesterday then that's a totally open border and utterly unsustainable.
But 'smashing the criminal gangs'??
WHY IS THIS GOING TOTALLY UNREPORTED
Surely it couldn't be because MSM were happy to use illegal migration as a stick to beat the Tories with, but are damned if they want Starmer to suffer any bad press, surely?
It was on the radio this morning when I was walking to work.
Yeah, and Jenrick did a tweet, right?
It's nowhere on the BBC or The Times or other papers or bulletins of record.
Nowhere.
So the BBC are obliged to report Jenrick's tweets?
Are you thick?
No, but I will concede that you're the most well placed judge of such things.
You've suggested, at the same time, that this might be a figment of Jenrick's imagination and managed to spectacularly miss the point at the same time. Either you're doing this deliberately to insult my intelligence, or you're thick.
Which one is it?
I suggest you work on your reading skills. You've obviously misread spectacularly.
You might have a point were it not for the fact that near scores of your fellow travellers posted upthread the primary source for the 700 crossings yesterday.
700. I mean, SEVEN HUNDRED IN A DAY.
I mean.. what the fuck?
Is it the first time there's been seven hundred or more in a day?
No, we've had plenty worse days. The record is over 1,000
I'm not sure why @Casino_Royale has exploded on this issue, today, in that context. However, as a veteran thread-hijacker I'd like to congratulate him on superbly hijacking a thread, and making us all talk about what he wants to talk about. Bravo
To be fair, I exploded over those days as well.
I'm particularly irritated now by the fact it's being shrugged off and is accelerating.
This year will almost certainly be the highest on record and no-one seems to give a fuck now Starmer is in power.
Why should they?
I don't recall Starmer giving a fuck while in Opposition either, so rather consistent.
It was Tory xenophobes that were ramping it up as a news story. And they're no longer in office.
You think I'm a xenophobe?
Is that your argument?
No.
I think Braverman, Badenoch, Jenrick etc are and they're the ones who were making this a big news story and so was Sunak (whom I don't think is a xenophobe, but is instead weak and a bit of a weathervane so went along with the narrative).
Now that Braverman etc are out of office, this isn't a big news story anymore.
Fair enough, but I think it is a big news story and a solution must be found.
I think it's a gaping hole in our legal infrastructure exploited by people traffickers and smugglers.
It's entirely illiberal to let it continue, particularly if it threatens to chip away at liberalism itself if unresolved.
Fund the courts. Process claims quickly. Deport quickly where it fails. Allow, indeed encourage, any claimants waiting more than a month to work and support themselves.
Thereby saying to all the world, "Hey, just get to the UK in a boat and they let you work and earn money in a few weeks, you basically get citizenship, oh, and all healthcare is free at point of use, just go to the A&E it's amazing, and the locals don't seem to mind and anyone that complains is put in jail"
Not only is this is an act of grievous national self-harm, it is also monumentally unfair on all the LEGAL migrants who jump through hoops to get settled status, and follow the letter of the law, over many months - and yet these jokers just climb on a dinghy in Dunkirk and bingo, they're in
Then don't complain about the billions spent on hotels if you object to solutions.
I have offered solutions. A sane but ruthless version of Rwanda, or leave the ECHR and tow them back to France. One of those two
Each was offered the Tories and Reform respectively, and were rejected at the ballot box by the British voters, including yourself if we believe your claim that you voted for Starmer.
And fair enough, let's see how Labour deal with it
However I cannot be accused of "not having solutions" because I offer two
Boat crossings have massively taken off since Starmer came to office and scrapped Rwanda, something which seems to have gone entirely uncommented upon by mainstream media.
If we really did get well over 700 people crossing yesterday then that's a totally open border and utterly unsustainable.
But 'smashing the criminal gangs'??
WHY IS THIS GOING TOTALLY UNREPORTED
Surely it couldn't be because MSM were happy to use illegal migration as a stick to beat the Tories with, but are damned if they want Starmer to suffer any bad press, surely?
It was on the radio this morning when I was walking to work.
Yeah, and Jenrick did a tweet, right?
It's nowhere on the BBC or The Times or other papers or bulletins of record.
Nowhere.
So the BBC are obliged to report Jenrick's tweets?
Are you thick?
No, but I will concede that you're the most well placed judge of such things.
You've suggested, at the same time, that this might be a figment of Jenrick's imagination and managed to spectacularly miss the point at the same time. Either you're doing this deliberately to insult my intelligence, or you're thick.
Which one is it?
I suggest you work on your reading skills. You've obviously misread spectacularly.
You might have a point were it not for the fact that near scores of your fellow travellers posted upthread the primary source for the 700 crossings yesterday.
700. I mean, SEVEN HUNDRED IN A DAY.
I mean.. what the fuck?
Is it the first time there's been seven hundred or more in a day?
No, we've had plenty worse days. The record is over 1,000
I'm not sure why @Casino_Royale has exploded on this issue, today, in that context. However, as a veteran thread-hijacker I'd like to congratulate him on superbly hijacking a thread, and making us all talk about what he wants to talk about. Bravo
To be fair, I exploded over those days as well.
I'm particularly irritated now by the fact it's being shrugged off and is accelerating.
This year will almost certainly be the highest on record and no-one seems to give a fuck now Starmer is in power.
Why should they?
I don't recall Starmer giving a fuck while in Opposition either, so rather consistent.
It was Tory xenophobes that were ramping it up as a news story. And they're no longer in office.
You think I'm a xenophobe?
Is that your argument?
No.
I think Braverman, Badenoch, Jenrick etc are and they're the ones who were making this a big news story and so was Sunak (whom I don't think is a xenophobe, but is instead weak and a bit of a weathervane so went along with the narrative).
Now that Braverman etc are out of office, this isn't a big news story anymore.
Fair enough, but I think it is a big news story and a solution must be found.
I think it's a gaping hole in our legal infrastructure exploited by people traffickers and smugglers.
It's entirely illiberal to let it continue, particularly if it threatens to chip away at liberalism itself if unresolved.
Fund the courts. Process claims quickly. Deport quickly where it fails. Allow, indeed encourage, any claimants waiting more than a month to work and support themselves.
That isn't enough of an answer, because it's not controlling numbers.
What you're effectively arguing for is for turning illegal migration into legal migration faster via a largely uncontrollable and unlimited mechanism.
Applying for asylum is not illegal, much as you may wish it so.
The legal parameters of what qualifies as asylum are drawn so broadly that the position is politically unsustainable.
So this seems to be the explanation/excuse for the reduction in gold medals:
UK Sport chair Katherine Grainger says Great Britain's success in Paris is "extraordinary", but Team GB have moved past the era of "winning at all costs".
The five-time Olympic medal winner says creating a positive environment for the athletes is just as important as finishing on the podium.
"It is about winning well, not winning at any cost," Grainger, who leads the body responsible for allocating funding to sports for each Olympic cycle.
Graham Thorpe, the former England cricketer, died after being struck by a train in Surrey.
An inquest is due to open into Thorpe’s death on Tuesday, after his family revealed he took his own life following a long battle with depression and anxiety.
Telegraph Sport understands that Thorpe died last Sunday morning after being hit by a train in east Surrey.
A spokesman for Surrey Coroner said: “We can confirm that the Coroner has received a referral for a Mr Graham Thorpe from the British Transport Police. A post mortem examination has been undertaken and Mr Thorpe’s body released to his family.”
I know he's getting a lot of sympathy because he's famous, but I'd give a heck of a lot more sympathy to the train driver, and all the railway staff who had to deal with the consequences of the choice of his means of death.
Not that controversial. An awful lot of railway employees have to deal with the aftermath of a ‘one under’ every year, and it’s not nice to put it politely. Many drivers end up long term sick and in need of counselling as a result.
An old friend of mine had the subsidiary role of going onto the site of such incidents and checking the site was ready for trains to run again (if vehicles are involved, infrastructure can be damaged). He saw body pieces hundreds of metres down the track from the incident, and talked of cleaners finding body pieces on/under trains when they got to depot.
And anecdotally, drivers have committed suicide after such incidents.
It's one of the reasons I'm narrowly in favour of assisted suicide; but that in itself is troublesome.
Yes, I've heard the same.
It's utterly horrid.
I worked in a tube depot for a couple of years and it certainly is the case and, as your figures show these are really underreported. Over 4 a day.
The effect on people can be dramatic.
These people,have to live with this for the rest of their lives.
Boat crossings have massively taken off since Starmer came to office and scrapped Rwanda, something which seems to have gone entirely uncommented upon by mainstream media.
If we really did get well over 700 people crossing yesterday then that's a totally open border and utterly unsustainable.
But 'smashing the criminal gangs'??
WHY IS THIS GOING TOTALLY UNREPORTED
Surely it couldn't be because MSM were happy to use illegal migration as a stick to beat the Tories with, but are damned if they want Starmer to suffer any bad press, surely?
It was on the radio this morning when I was walking to work.
Yeah, and Jenrick did a tweet, right?
It's nowhere on the BBC or The Times or other papers or bulletins of record.
Nowhere.
So the BBC are obliged to report Jenrick's tweets?
Are you thick?
No, but I will concede that you're the most well placed judge of such things.
You've suggested, at the same time, that this might be a figment of Jenrick's imagination and managed to spectacularly miss the point at the same time. Either you're doing this deliberately to insult my intelligence, or you're thick.
Which one is it?
I suggest you work on your reading skills. You've obviously misread spectacularly.
You might have a point were it not for the fact that near scores of your fellow travellers posted upthread the primary source for the 700 crossings yesterday.
700. I mean, SEVEN HUNDRED IN A DAY.
I mean.. what the fuck?
Is it the first time there's been seven hundred or more in a day?
No, we've had plenty worse days. The record is over 1,000
I'm not sure why @Casino_Royale has exploded on this issue, today, in that context. However, as a veteran thread-hijacker I'd like to congratulate him on superbly hijacking a thread, and making us all talk about what he wants to talk about. Bravo
To be fair, I exploded over those days as well.
I'm particularly irritated now by the fact it's being shrugged off and is accelerating.
This year will almost certainly be the highest on record and no-one seems to give a fuck now Starmer is in power.
Why should they?
I don't recall Starmer giving a fuck while in Opposition either, so rather consistent.
It was Tory xenophobes that were ramping it up as a news story. And they're no longer in office.
You think I'm a xenophobe?
Is that your argument?
No.
I think Braverman, Badenoch, Jenrick etc are and they're the ones who were making this a big news story and so was Sunak (whom I don't think is a xenophobe, but is instead weak and a bit of a weathervane so went along with the narrative).
Now that Braverman etc are out of office, this isn't a big news story anymore.
Fair enough, but I think it is a big news story and a solution must be found.
I think it's a gaping hole in our legal infrastructure exploited by people traffickers and smugglers.
It's entirely illiberal to let it continue, particularly if it threatens to chip away at liberalism itself if unresolved.
Fund the courts. Process claims quickly. Deport quickly where it fails. Allow, indeed encourage, any claimants waiting more than a month to work and support themselves.
That isn't enough of an answer, because it's not controlling numbers.
What you're effectively arguing for is for turning illegal migration into legal migration faster via a largely uncontrollable and unlimited mechanism.
After 14 years of rightly critiquing the Tory party and its horrendous failures on migration and asylum, the remarkable thing is that the Left hasn't actually thought about the subject at all. The comment above yours is an example. The logic of a 13 year old, unable to extrapolate events
This is what I suspected before the election, yet I hoped I was wrong, I hoped they really had developed some clever answers
They haven't. This is why I believe this subject - migration/asylum - will shred this government to pieces in short order. They are clueless, and all their instincts tell them to make the problem WORSE
Even worse, amongst their natural supporter base - who are out in force on here this evening - you see exactly the same phenomena, if not more so.
If they are representative, and both form their social and professional circles and supply the votes to put them in office, it explains why it makes it even harder for them to think yet alone put into force effective policy.
Boat crossings have massively taken off since Starmer came to office and scrapped Rwanda, something which seems to have gone entirely uncommented upon by mainstream media.
If we really did get well over 700 people crossing yesterday then that's a totally open border and utterly unsustainable.
But 'smashing the criminal gangs'??
WHY IS THIS GOING TOTALLY UNREPORTED
Surely it couldn't be because MSM were happy to use illegal migration as a stick to beat the Tories with, but are damned if they want Starmer to suffer any bad press, surely?
It was on the radio this morning when I was walking to work.
Yeah, and Jenrick did a tweet, right?
It's nowhere on the BBC or The Times or other papers or bulletins of record.
Nowhere.
So the BBC are obliged to report Jenrick's tweets?
Are you thick?
No, but I will concede that you're the most well placed judge of such things.
You've suggested, at the same time, that this might be a figment of Jenrick's imagination and managed to spectacularly miss the point at the same time. Either you're doing this deliberately to insult my intelligence, or you're thick.
Which one is it?
I suggest you work on your reading skills. You've obviously misread spectacularly.
You might have a point were it not for the fact that near scores of your fellow travellers posted upthread the primary source for the 700 crossings yesterday.
700. I mean, SEVEN HUNDRED IN A DAY.
I mean.. what the fuck?
Is it the first time there's been seven hundred or more in a day?
No, we've had plenty worse days. The record is over 1,000
I'm not sure why @Casino_Royale has exploded on this issue, today, in that context. However, as a veteran thread-hijacker I'd like to congratulate him on superbly hijacking a thread, and making us all talk about what he wants to talk about. Bravo
To be fair, I exploded over those days as well.
I'm particularly irritated now by the fact it's being shrugged off and is accelerating.
This year will almost certainly be the highest on record and no-one seems to give a fuck now Starmer is in power.
Why should they?
I don't recall Starmer giving a fuck while in Opposition either, so rather consistent.
It was Tory xenophobes that were ramping it up as a news story. And they're no longer in office.
You think I'm a xenophobe?
Is that your argument?
No.
I think Braverman, Badenoch, Jenrick etc are and they're the ones who were making this a big news story and so was Sunak (whom I don't think is a xenophobe, but is instead weak and a bit of a weathervane so went along with the narrative).
Now that Braverman etc are out of office, this isn't a big news story anymore.
Fair enough, but I think it is a big news story and a solution must be found.
I think it's a gaping hole in our legal infrastructure exploited by people traffickers and smugglers.
It's entirely illiberal to let it continue, particularly if it threatens to chip away at liberalism itself if unresolved.
Fund the courts. Process claims quickly. Deport quickly where it fails. Allow, indeed encourage, any claimants waiting more than a month to work and support themselves.
Thereby saying to all the world, "Hey, just get to the UK in a boat and they let you work and earn money in a few weeks, you basically get citizenship, oh, and all healthcare is free at point of use, just go to the A&E it's amazing, and the locals don't seem to mind and anyone that complains is put in jail"
Not only is this is an act of grievous national self-harm, it is also monumentally unfair on all the LEGAL migrants who jump through hoops to get settled status, and follow the letter of the law, over many months - and yet these jokers just climb on a dinghy in Dunkirk and bingo, they're in
Then don't complain about the billions spent on hotels if you object to solutions.
I have offered solutions. A sane but ruthless version of Rwanda, or leave the ECHR and tow them back to France. One of those two
Each was offered the Tories and Reform respectively, and were rejected at the ballot box by the British voters, including yourself if we believe your claim that you voted for Starmer.
And fair enough, let's see how Labour deal with it
However I cannot be accused of "not having solutions" because I offer two
So do others, even if you dislike them.
The advantage of my solutions is that, if they work, they would stop the boats
The disadvantage of your solution, "process them quickly and let them work!" - is that it would not only fail, it would actually make the problem even worse, as it would be a massive invitation to even more people to try and get to Britain, where you are given the de facto rights of a citizen in a few weeks (work, free healthcare, etc)
You need to eat more brain-friendly nutrients, perhaps the entirely meat diet is not good for cognition
So this seems to be the explanation/excuse for the reduction in gold medals:
UK Sport chair Katherine Grainger says Great Britain's success in Paris is "extraordinary", but Team GB have moved past the era of "winning at all costs".
The five-time Olympic medal winner says creating a positive environment for the athletes is just as important as finishing on the podium.
"It is about winning well, not winning at any cost," Grainger, who leads the body responsible for allocating funding to sports for each Olympic cycle.
£2.5 billion a year on providing hotels for asylum seekers.
It's not a huge amount in Government terms - Newham alone spends £40 million a year on the provision of temporary accommodation for homeless British people.
I've yet to hear a coherent answer to the primary question of how you "stop the boats". The toughest of Tory Home Secretaries failed miserably and with Rwanda (or similar) seemingly off the table what is or should be the solution?
I'm sure plenty have draconian solutions and the real immigration question is the level of legal immigration about which we can do something (if Starmer so wished).
There is clearly a need for a much more rapid processing of asylum applications which seemed to atrophy in the last months of the previous Government (Rwanda?).
Boat crossings have massively taken off since Starmer came to office and scrapped Rwanda, something which seems to have gone entirely uncommented upon by mainstream media.
If we really did get well over 700 people crossing yesterday then that's a totally open border and utterly unsustainable.
But 'smashing the criminal gangs'??
WHY IS THIS GOING TOTALLY UNREPORTED
Surely it couldn't be because MSM were happy to use illegal migration as a stick to beat the Tories with, but are damned if they want Starmer to suffer any bad press, surely?
It was on the radio this morning when I was walking to work.
Yeah, and Jenrick did a tweet, right?
It's nowhere on the BBC or The Times or other papers or bulletins of record.
Nowhere.
So the BBC are obliged to report Jenrick's tweets?
Are you thick?
No, but I will concede that you're the most well placed judge of such things.
You've suggested, at the same time, that this might be a figment of Jenrick's imagination and managed to spectacularly miss the point at the same time. Either you're doing this deliberately to insult my intelligence, or you're thick.
Which one is it?
I suggest you work on your reading skills. You've obviously misread spectacularly.
You might have a point were it not for the fact that near scores of your fellow travellers posted upthread the primary source for the 700 crossings yesterday.
700. I mean, SEVEN HUNDRED IN A DAY.
I mean.. what the fuck?
Is it the first time there's been seven hundred or more in a day?
No, we've had plenty worse days. The record is over 1,000
I'm not sure why @Casino_Royale has exploded on this issue, today, in that context. However, as a veteran thread-hijacker I'd like to congratulate him on superbly hijacking a thread, and making us all talk about what he wants to talk about. Bravo
To be fair, I exploded over those days as well.
I'm particularly irritated now by the fact it's being shrugged off and is accelerating.
This year will almost certainly be the highest on record and no-one seems to give a fuck now Starmer is in power.
Why should they?
I don't recall Starmer giving a fuck while in Opposition either, so rather consistent.
It was Tory xenophobes that were ramping it up as a news story. And they're no longer in office.
You think I'm a xenophobe?
Is that your argument?
No.
I think Braverman, Badenoch, Jenrick etc are and they're the ones who were making this a big news story and so was Sunak (whom I don't think is a xenophobe, but is instead weak and a bit of a weathervane so went along with the narrative).
Now that Braverman etc are out of office, this isn't a big news story anymore.
Fair enough, but I think it is a big news story and a solution must be found.
I think it's a gaping hole in our legal infrastructure exploited by people traffickers and smugglers.
It's entirely illiberal to let it continue, particularly if it threatens to chip away at liberalism itself if unresolved.
Fund the courts. Process claims quickly. Deport quickly where it fails. Allow, indeed encourage, any claimants waiting more than a month to work and support themselves.
That isn't enough of an answer, because it's not controlling numbers.
What you're effectively arguing for is for turning illegal migration into legal migration faster via a largely uncontrollable and unlimited mechanism.
After 14 years of rightly critiquing the Tory party and its horrendous failures on migration and asylum, the remarkable thing is that the Left hasn't actually thought about the subject at all. The comment above yours is an example. The logic of a 13 year old, unable to extrapolate events
This is what I suspected before the election, yet I hoped I was wrong, I hoped they really had developed some clever answers
They haven't. This is why I believe this subject - migration/asylum - will shred this government to pieces in short order. They are clueless, and all their instincts tell them to make the problem WORSE
Even worse, amongst their natural supporter base - who are out in force on here this evening - you see exactly the same phenomena, if not more so.
If they are representative, and both form their social and professional circles and supply the votes to put them in office, it explains why it makes it even harder for them to think yet alone put into force effective policy.
And remember, Britain's taxes, already at an historic high, are going UP to pay for all this lunacy
YOU will pay for their crazy incompetence. YOU will pay all those massive hotel bills and social housing costs for asylum seekers
£2.5 billion a year on providing hotels for asylum seekers.
It's not a huge amount in Government terms - Newham alone spends £40 million a year on the provision of temporary accommodation for homeless British people.
I've yet to hear a coherent answer to the primary question of how you "stop the boats". The toughest of Tory Home Secretaries failed miserably and with Rwanda (or similar) seemingly off the table what is or should be the solution?
I'm sure plenty have draconian solutions and the real immigration question is the level of legal immigration about which we can do something (if Starmer so wished).
There is clearly a need for a much more rapid processing of asylum applications which seemed to atrophy in the last months of the previous Government (Rwanda?).
At least you, @stodge , at least recognise there is a question that needs answering.
Boat crossings have massively taken off since Starmer came to office and scrapped Rwanda, something which seems to have gone entirely uncommented upon by mainstream media.
If we really did get well over 700 people crossing yesterday then that's a totally open border and utterly unsustainable.
But 'smashing the criminal gangs'??
WHY IS THIS GOING TOTALLY UNREPORTED
Surely it couldn't be because MSM were happy to use illegal migration as a stick to beat the Tories with, but are damned if they want Starmer to suffer any bad press, surely?
It was on the radio this morning when I was walking to work.
Yeah, and Jenrick did a tweet, right?
It's nowhere on the BBC or The Times or other papers or bulletins of record.
Nowhere.
So the BBC are obliged to report Jenrick's tweets?
Are you thick?
No, but I will concede that you're the most well placed judge of such things.
You've suggested, at the same time, that this might be a figment of Jenrick's imagination and managed to spectacularly miss the point at the same time. Either you're doing this deliberately to insult my intelligence, or you're thick.
Which one is it?
I suggest you work on your reading skills. You've obviously misread spectacularly.
You might have a point were it not for the fact that near scores of your fellow travellers posted upthread the primary source for the 700 crossings yesterday.
700. I mean, SEVEN HUNDRED IN A DAY.
I mean.. what the fuck?
Is it the first time there's been seven hundred or more in a day?
No, we've had plenty worse days. The record is over 1,000
I'm not sure why @Casino_Royale has exploded on this issue, today, in that context. However, as a veteran thread-hijacker I'd like to congratulate him on superbly hijacking a thread, and making us all talk about what he wants to talk about. Bravo
To be fair, I exploded over those days as well.
I'm particularly irritated now by the fact it's being shrugged off and is accelerating.
This year will almost certainly be the highest on record and no-one seems to give a fuck now Starmer is in power.
Why should they?
I don't recall Starmer giving a fuck while in Opposition either, so rather consistent.
It was Tory xenophobes that were ramping it up as a news story. And they're no longer in office.
You think I'm a xenophobe?
Is that your argument?
No.
I think Braverman, Badenoch, Jenrick etc are and they're the ones who were making this a big news story and so was Sunak (whom I don't think is a xenophobe, but is instead weak and a bit of a weathervane so went along with the narrative).
Now that Braverman etc are out of office, this isn't a big news story anymore.
Fair enough, but I think it is a big news story and a solution must be found.
I think it's a gaping hole in our legal infrastructure exploited by people traffickers and smugglers.
It's entirely illiberal to let it continue, particularly if it threatens to chip away at liberalism itself if unresolved.
Fund the courts. Process claims quickly. Deport quickly where it fails. Allow, indeed encourage, any claimants waiting more than a month to work and support themselves.
Thereby saying to all the world, "Hey, just get to the UK in a boat and they let you work and earn money in a few weeks, you basically get citizenship, oh, and all healthcare is free at point of use, just go to the A&E it's amazing, and the locals don't seem to mind and anyone that complains is put in jail"
Not only is this is an act of grievous national self-harm, it is also monumentally unfair on all the LEGAL migrants who jump through hoops to get settled status, and follow the letter of the law, over many months - and yet these jokers just climb on a dinghy in Dunkirk and bingo, they're in
Then don't complain about the billions spent on hotels if you object to solutions.
I have offered solutions. A sane but ruthless version of Rwanda, or leave the ECHR and tow them back to France. One of those two
Each was offered the Tories and Reform respectively, and were rejected at the ballot box by the British voters, including yourself if we believe your claim that you voted for Starmer.
And fair enough, let's see how Labour deal with it
However I cannot be accused of "not having solutions" because I offer two
So do others, even if you dislike them.
The advantage of my solutions is that, if they work, they would stop the boats
The disadvantage of your solution, "process them quickly and let them work!" - is that it would not only fail, it would actually make the problem even worse, as it would be a massive invitation to even more people to try and get to Britain, where you are given the de facto rights of a citizen in a few weeks (work, free healthcare, etc)
You need to eat more brain-friendly nutrients, perhaps the entirely meat diet is not good for cognition
You keep saying "it would actually make the problem even worse", without specifying which problem you are referring to.
If the £4 billion in hotel etc costs becomes instead £400 million as people are only held without right to work for weeks rather than months, then the problem of the £4 billion would have got better wouldn't it?
Or is the problem you refer to the people? As that's not the argument you were making, though it seems to be your actual bugbear.
£2.5 billion a year on providing hotels for asylum seekers.
It's not a huge amount in Government terms - Newham alone spends £40 million a year on the provision of temporary accommodation for homeless British people.
I've yet to hear a coherent answer to the primary question of how you "stop the boats". The toughest of Tory Home Secretaries failed miserably and with Rwanda (or similar) seemingly off the table what is or should be the solution?
I'm sure plenty have draconian solutions and the real immigration question is the level of legal immigration about which we can do something (if Starmer so wished).
There is clearly a need for a much more rapid processing of asylum applications which seemed to atrophy in the last months of the previous Government (Rwanda?).
I’m not sure Rwanda wouldn’t have worked. Had all new irregular arrivals been guaranteed a trip there, it would have made the whole endeavour far less appealing. It was never truly tested as a deterrent because the policy was stuck in the courts.
I'm at a boutique family hotel and the number of hot yummy mummies is off the scale. They all have kids called Alfie and Oscar and call the evening meal "supper" - you get the picture.
Yes, I'm happily married but boy oh boy are they hot. They take care of themselves and know how to dress - such that one can easily mentally undress.
Look at this chart. Why did the numbers crossing the Channel suddenly jump from 2019? And it's not a small change.
It's not a change in government policy here in the UK. There are push and pull factors, so what's changed with the push factors? Syria and the Arab Spring happened thirteen years ago. So why the sudden uptick?
Boat crossings have massively taken off since Starmer came to office and scrapped Rwanda, something which seems to have gone entirely uncommented upon by mainstream media.
If we really did get well over 700 people crossing yesterday then that's a totally open border and utterly unsustainable.
But 'smashing the criminal gangs'??
WHY IS THIS GOING TOTALLY UNREPORTED
Surely it couldn't be because MSM were happy to use illegal migration as a stick to beat the Tories with, but are damned if they want Starmer to suffer any bad press, surely?
It was on the radio this morning when I was walking to work.
Yeah, and Jenrick did a tweet, right?
It's nowhere on the BBC or The Times or other papers or bulletins of record.
Nowhere.
So the BBC are obliged to report Jenrick's tweets?
Are you thick?
No, but I will concede that you're the most well placed judge of such things.
You've suggested, at the same time, that this might be a figment of Jenrick's imagination and managed to spectacularly miss the point at the same time. Either you're doing this deliberately to insult my intelligence, or you're thick.
Which one is it?
I suggest you work on your reading skills. You've obviously misread spectacularly.
You might have a point were it not for the fact that near scores of your fellow travellers posted upthread the primary source for the 700 crossings yesterday.
700. I mean, SEVEN HUNDRED IN A DAY.
I mean.. what the fuck?
Is it the first time there's been seven hundred or more in a day?
No, we've had plenty worse days. The record is over 1,000
I'm not sure why @Casino_Royale has exploded on this issue, today, in that context. However, as a veteran thread-hijacker I'd like to congratulate him on superbly hijacking a thread, and making us all talk about what he wants to talk about. Bravo
To be fair, I exploded over those days as well.
I'm particularly irritated now by the fact it's being shrugged off and is accelerating.
This year will almost certainly be the highest on record and no-one seems to give a fuck now Starmer is in power.
Why should they?
I don't recall Starmer giving a fuck while in Opposition either, so rather consistent.
It was Tory xenophobes that were ramping it up as a news story. And they're no longer in office.
You think I'm a xenophobe?
Is that your argument?
No.
I think Braverman, Badenoch, Jenrick etc are and they're the ones who were making this a big news story and so was Sunak (whom I don't think is a xenophobe, but is instead weak and a bit of a weathervane so went along with the narrative).
Now that Braverman etc are out of office, this isn't a big news story anymore.
Are you aware how much we spend on housing and hosting these people?
No.
I'm guessing its a rounding error on overall expenditure and would be a lot less if asylum were granted (or rejected) and people could either work or be removed from the country.
Keeping people of working age in the country but denying them the right to legally work is utter madness.
It is £4.3 billion a year and rising fast. We spend £6m a DAY on hotels. Insane
The reason we don't speedily grant them asylum and the right to work is because that would be yet another pull factor, and we would get even more boat people than before. So your solution is no solution at all, and would, in fact, make things worse
Yes it is insane.
How much do European countries that can process applications within weeks not years pay on hotels, so that we can make an accurate comparison between the two systems?
In the good old days, if I remember correctly, our immigration system worked quite well.
Then the Home Secretary of the day, a certain Michael Howard, decided that there were too many civil servants, so he cut the numbers.
Nowadays there are not enough to cope with the work.
Conservative lack of foresight goes back a long way.
Nope. The asylum system worked well long after Howard was Home Secretary. The highest number of asylum seekers post millennium in any one year was in 2002. That was higher than anything we have experienced since. And yet the system coped well back then. It is only since the tail end of the Coalition (or even just after) that it started to go badly wrong.
According to the refugee council, in 2014 the number of cases processed within 6 months of arrival was 87%. By 2020 that was down to 20%. It is now slightly improved to 32% but that is still miles away from where it was. And they can't blame pressure on the system from more applicants. In 2022 and 2023 there were significantly fewer applicants than in 2002.
So right direction of blame, but wrong set of Tories.
The most significant domestic news for today - which I think I'm the only one to mention so far - is Labour publishing plans to grant councils compulsory purchase powers for green belt land, without their being required to pay for excessive planning gain.
That has the potential to shift the dial.
So, legalised theft then? That is shifting the dial somewhat.
Land without planning permission (current state) is worth X; with permission is worth multiples of X. Market value is actually X plus a bit - with the premium representing a possibility it will get permission later. I think it's that price they are going for.
It can’t be that mathematically
If they issue a CPO the probability approaches 100%. If they don’t it approaches zero.
Exactly. It's probably not a huge premium on the agricultural value of the land but it does exist and the premium would continue to exist if the speculator sold the land on because there is always a possibility of development on green belt land.
No you are taking the option value from the owner.
Boat crossings have massively taken off since Starmer came to office and scrapped Rwanda, something which seems to have gone entirely uncommented upon by mainstream media.
If we really did get well over 700 people crossing yesterday then that's a totally open border and utterly unsustainable.
But 'smashing the criminal gangs'??
WHY IS THIS GOING TOTALLY UNREPORTED
Surely it couldn't be because MSM were happy to use illegal migration as a stick to beat the Tories with, but are damned if they want Starmer to suffer any bad press, surely?
It was on the radio this morning when I was walking to work.
Yeah, and Jenrick did a tweet, right?
It's nowhere on the BBC or The Times or other papers or bulletins of record.
Nowhere.
So the BBC are obliged to report Jenrick's tweets?
Are you thick?
No, but I will concede that you're the most well placed judge of such things.
You've suggested, at the same time, that this might be a figment of Jenrick's imagination and managed to spectacularly miss the point at the same time. Either you're doing this deliberately to insult my intelligence, or you're thick.
Which one is it?
I suggest you work on your reading skills. You've obviously misread spectacularly.
You might have a point were it not for the fact that near scores of your fellow travellers posted upthread the primary source for the 700 crossings yesterday.
700. I mean, SEVEN HUNDRED IN A DAY.
I mean.. what the fuck?
Is it the first time there's been seven hundred or more in a day?
No, we've had plenty worse days. The record is over 1,000
I'm not sure why @Casino_Royale has exploded on this issue, today, in that context. However, as a veteran thread-hijacker I'd like to congratulate him on superbly hijacking a thread, and making us all talk about what he wants to talk about. Bravo
To be fair, I exploded over those days as well.
I'm particularly irritated now by the fact it's being shrugged off and is accelerating.
This year will almost certainly be the highest on record and no-one seems to give a fuck now Starmer is in power.
Why should they?
I don't recall Starmer giving a fuck while in Opposition either, so rather consistent.
It was Tory xenophobes that were ramping it up as a news story. And they're no longer in office.
You think I'm a xenophobe?
Is that your argument?
No.
I think Braverman, Badenoch, Jenrick etc are and they're the ones who were making this a big news story and so was Sunak (whom I don't think is a xenophobe, but is instead weak and a bit of a weathervane so went along with the narrative).
Now that Braverman etc are out of office, this isn't a big news story anymore.
Fair enough, but I think it is a big news story and a solution must be found.
I think it's a gaping hole in our legal infrastructure exploited by people traffickers and smugglers.
It's entirely illiberal to let it continue, particularly if it threatens to chip away at liberalism itself if unresolved.
Fund the courts. Process claims quickly. Deport quickly where it fails. Allow, indeed encourage, any claimants waiting more than a month to work and support themselves.
Thereby saying to all the world, "Hey, just get to the UK in a boat and they let you work and earn money in a few weeks, you basically get citizenship, oh, and all healthcare is free at point of use, just go to the A&E it's amazing, and the locals don't seem to mind and anyone that complains is put in jail"
Not only is this is an act of grievous national self-harm, it is also monumentally unfair on all the LEGAL migrants who jump through hoops to get settled status, and follow the letter of the law, over many months - and yet these jokers just climb on a dinghy in Dunkirk and bingo, they're in
Then don't complain about the billions spent on hotels if you object to solutions.
I have offered solutions. A sane but ruthless version of Rwanda, or leave the ECHR and tow them back to France. One of those two
Each was offered the Tories and Reform respectively, and were rejected at the ballot box by the British voters, including yourself if we believe your claim that you voted for Starmer.
And fair enough, let's see how Labour deal with it
However I cannot be accused of "not having solutions" because I offer two
So do others, even if you dislike them.
The advantage of my solutions is that, if they work, they would stop the boats
The disadvantage of your solution, "process them quickly and let them work!" - is that it would not only fail, it would actually make the problem even worse, as it would be a massive invitation to even more people to try and get to Britain, where you are given the de facto rights of a citizen in a few weeks (work, free healthcare, etc)
You need to eat more brain-friendly nutrients, perhaps the entirely meat diet is not good for cognition
You keep saying "it would actually make the problem even worse", without specifying which problem you are referring to.
If the £4 billion in hotel etc costs becomes instead £400 million as people are only held without right to work for weeks rather than months, then the problem of the £4 billion would have got better wouldn't it?
Or is the problem you refer to the people? As that's not the argument you were making, though it seems to be your actual bugbear.
The problem is people coming on boats. We all know there are various pull and push factors. Both are crucial
The pull factors are: Britain's relative attractiveness as a destination, things like free instant healthcare, no ID cards, the English language, plus BAME communities in situ into which you can melt, and so on
If you add to that "they process you quickly so you can go straight into work" you are basically giving them the rights of a British citizen, in weeks. That is a massive new pull factor, and would likely lead to an explosion in numbers coming
So while your plan would work in the instant short term, emptying the hotels, in the medium and long term it would make everything much worse, as more people come, and even more, and you let them all work, and then even more come and then you've got 300,000 crossing the Channel in a year, all wanting and expecting to work, and all illegal
I'm at a boutique family hotel and the number of hot yummy mummies is off the scale. They all have kids called Alfie and Oscar and call the evening meal "supper" - you get the picture.
Yes, I'm happily married but boy oh boy are they hot. They take care of themselves and know how to dress - such that one can easily mentally undress.
Look at this chart. Why did the numbers crossing the Channel suddenly jump from 2019? And it's not a small change.
It's not a change in government policy here in the UK. There are push and pull factors, so what's changed with the push factors? Syria and the Arab Spring happened thirteen years ago. So why the sudden uptick?
One theory is that we successfully closed off the land crossing - ie the lorries in the Chunnel
So then one bright spark thought: Hold on, why don't we simply cross in a boat, and they did, and it was easy, and no one could stop them as it risked drowning them. And, the French were probably quite happy to see them go. And then everyone copied those pioneers
Bill Kristol @BillKristol · 6h We've all offered advice to Harris-Walz on how to defend themselves on this or lay out an agenda on that. But I dunno, they're doing fine. Maybe they should just keep on being cheerful and upbeat? Spend this week celebrating our Olympics team, then a patriotic Dem convention?
Look at this chart. Why did the numbers crossing the Channel suddenly jump from 2019? And it's not a small change.
It's not a change in government policy here in the UK. There are push and pull factors, so what's changed with the push factors? Syria and the Arab Spring happened thirteen years ago. So why the sudden uptick?
Look at this chart. Why did the numbers crossing the Channel suddenly jump from 2019? And it's not a small change.
It's not a change in government policy here in the UK. There are push and pull factors, so what's changed with the push factors? Syria and the Arab Spring happened thirteen years ago. So why the sudden uptick?
One theory is that we successfully closed off the land crossing - ie the lorries in the Chunnel
So then one bright spark thought: Hold on, why don't we simply cross in a boat, and they did, and it was easy, and no one could stop them as it risked drowning them. And, the French were probably quite happy to see them go. And then everyone copied those pioneers
I'm at a boutique family hotel and the number of hot yummy mummies is off the scale. They all have kids called Alfie and Oscar and call the evening meal "supper" - you get the picture.
Yes, I'm happily married but boy oh boy are they hot. They take care of themselves and know how to dress - such that one can easily mentally undress.
Not sure they're as hot as my wife though.
Become a Mormon.
I sometimes wonder if I have a problem.
Either lots of men are the same, and just keep it quiet, or I need a lot of cold showers.
Look at this chart. Why did the numbers crossing the Channel suddenly jump from 2019? And it's not a small change.
It's not a change in government policy here in the UK. There are push and pull factors, so what's changed with the push factors? Syria and the Arab Spring happened thirteen years ago. So why the sudden uptick?
One theory is that we successfully closed off the land crossing - ie the lorries in the Chunnel
So then one bright spark thought: Hold on, why don't we simply cross in a boat, and they did, and it was easy, and no one could stop them as it risked drowning them. And, the French were probably quite happy to see them go. And then everyone copied those pioneers
Look at this chart. Why did the numbers crossing the Channel suddenly jump from 2019? And it's not a small change.
It's not a change in government policy here in the UK. There are push and pull factors, so what's changed with the push factors? Syria and the Arab Spring happened thirteen years ago. So why the sudden uptick?
I'm at a boutique family hotel and the number of hot yummy mummies is off the scale. They all have kids called Alfie and Oscar and call the evening meal "supper" - you get the picture.
Yes, I'm happily married but boy oh boy are they hot. They take care of themselves and know how to dress - such that one can easily mentally undress.
Not sure they're as hot as my wife though.
Become a Mormon.
I sometimes wonder if I have a problem.
Either lots of men are the same, and just keep it quiet, or I need a lot of cold showers.
Er, I think most men are the same. The male libido is excessive, and designed to send you a bit mad, like putting a 3000CC engine in a Hillman Imp
As Kingsley Amis memorably said, "I know why I like large breasts, I just don't understand why I like them so MUCH"
It also helps that they are slim, posh, with shapely legs, well manicured feet and shimmering hair - and have mainly today been wearing tasteful crop tops and skirts. Some bikinis.
Basically, the battle lines in the East and South of the country are *nearly* frozen, but not *actually* frozen, and the Russians are still advancing - slowly, but advancing. The Ukranians have done the math and despite moving the draft age down to 24-ish from 27-ish, I think have worked out that they don't know how to stop it. So they need to do some lateral thinking.
The intent of the Russian incursion is twofold: i) persuade the UKR people that they are still in the fight, and ii) try to get the Russians to divert forces away from the occupied zones. It's not a bad idea, but it's the action of somebody who isn't winning.
I'm curious about T&P . He sounds good, but makes mistakes: such as stating that Ukraine might make a number of distributed 50 milliwatt power stations. Only nine orders of magnitude out...
There are many potential reasons for this incursion; the chances are that it will not just be one, but a combination that made the potential risk versus reward balance worthwhile. Those two options are potentials, but there are many others, such as the potential to disrupt Russian logistics; or grab the Kursk NPP (unlikely...) or to have land to exchange for Ukrainian land, or many others we do not know of. As another example; this incursion adds many more targets for long-range weapons into Russia.
It also offers potentially an alternative route to liberate Ukrainian land via bypassing Russia's minefields.
Also it turns the battlefield to one that plays on Ukraine's strengths - when it comes to mobile warfare rather than frozen warfare, Ukraine has the technological edge.
Capturing huge areas of land for little loss is an interesting type of “not winning”.
Look at this chart. Why did the numbers crossing the Channel suddenly jump from 2019? And it's not a small change.
It's not a change in government policy here in the UK. There are push and pull factors, so what's changed with the push factors? Syria and the Arab Spring happened thirteen years ago. So why the sudden uptick?
One theory is that we successfully closed off the land crossing - ie the lorries in the Chunnel
So then one bright spark thought: Hold on, why don't we simply cross in a boat, and they did, and it was easy, and no one could stop them as it risked drowning them. And, the French were probably quite happy to see them go. And then everyone copied those pioneers
Literally that simple. No one had tried it before
It's fucking BREXIT you stupid fool!
Making the UK more attractive, you mean?
So why is the year with the highest number of asylum seekers reaching the UK in the last quarter century not any of the years since Brexit but 2002 - when, as I seem to recall, we were still firmly within the EU?
Bill Kristol @BillKristol · 6h We've all offered advice to Harris-Walz on how to defend themselves on this or lay out an agenda on that. But I dunno, they're doing fine. Maybe they should just keep on being cheerful and upbeat? Spend this week celebrating our Olympics team, then a patriotic Dem convention?
Yeh!!! This is a Hope vs Fear election now imho and they need to do fun, joy, bright future, hope etc etc.
Next four years not whether 2020 was stolen.
The real test will come with her policy platforms. Trumps crazy protectionist policies will help no one. Hopefully she will see his policies as an open goal.
The most significant domestic news for today - which I think I'm the only one to mention so far - is Labour publishing plans to grant councils compulsory purchase powers for green belt land, without their being required to pay for excessive planning gain.
That has the potential to shift the dial.
So, legalised theft then? That is shifting the dial somewhat.
Land without planning permission (current state) is worth X; with permission is worth multiples of X. Market value is actually X plus a bit - with the premium representing a possibility it will get permission later. I think it's that price they are going for.
It can’t be that mathematically
If they issue a CPO the probability approaches 100%. If they don’t it approaches zero.
Exactly. It's probably not a huge premium on the agricultural value of the land but it does exist and the premium would continue to exist if the speculator sold the land on because there is always a possibility of development on green belt land.
No you are taking the option value from the owner.
I don’t see how the situation of the land speculators is any different to stock market speculators, buying shares on anticipation of a takeover bid.
100% speculation. A high risk, high reward gamble.
I’m amazed this issue has any traction at all with supposed free market capitalists.
I assume anyone making this argument has skin in the game.
I'm at a boutique family hotel and the number of hot yummy mummies is off the scale. They all have kids called Alfie and Oscar and call the evening meal "supper" - you get the picture.
Yes, I'm happily married but boy oh boy are they hot. They take care of themselves and know how to dress - such that one can easily mentally undress.
I'm at a boutique family hotel and the number of hot yummy mummies is off the scale. They all have kids called Alfie and Oscar and call the evening meal "supper" - you get the picture.
Yes, I'm happily married but boy oh boy are they hot. They take care of themselves and know how to dress - such that one can easily mentally undress.
Not sure they're as hot as my wife though.
Become a Mormon.
I sometimes wonder if I have a problem.
Either lots of men are the same, and just keep it quiet, or I need a lot of cold showers.
Er, I think most men are the same. The male libido is excessive, and designed to send you a bit mad, like putting a 3000CC engine in a Hillman Imp
As Kingsley Amis memorably said, "I know why I like large breasts, I just don't understand why I like them so MUCH"
I'm at a boutique family hotel and the number of hot yummy mummies is off the scale. They all have kids called Alfie and Oscar and call the evening meal "supper" - you get the picture.
Yes, I'm happily married but boy oh boy are they hot. They take care of themselves and know how to dress - such that one can easily mentally undress.
Not sure they're as hot as my wife though.
Become a Mormon.
I sometimes wonder if I have a problem.
Either lots of men are the same, and just keep it quiet, or I need a lot of cold showers.
Er, I think most men are the same. The male libido is excessive, and designed to send you a bit mad, like putting a 3000CC engine in a Hillman Imp
As Kingsley Amis memorably said, "I know why I like large breasts, I just don't understand why I like them so MUCH"
I'm at a boutique family hotel and the number of hot yummy mummies is off the scale. They all have kids called Alfie and Oscar and call the evening meal "supper" - you get the picture.
Yes, I'm happily married but boy oh boy are they hot. They take care of themselves and know how to dress - such that one can easily mentally undress.
£2.5 billion a year on providing hotels for asylum seekers.
It's not a huge amount in Government terms - Newham alone spends £40 million a year on the provision of temporary accommodation for homeless British people.
I've yet to hear a coherent answer to the primary question of how you "stop the boats". The toughest of Tory Home Secretaries failed miserably and with Rwanda (or similar) seemingly off the table what is or should be the solution?
I'm sure plenty have draconian solutions and the real immigration question is the level of legal immigration about which we can do something (if Starmer so wished).
There is clearly a need for a much more rapid processing of asylum applications which seemed to atrophy in the last months of the previous Government (Rwanda?).
At least you, @stodge , at least recognise there is a question that needs answering.
Many others haven't even begun that journey.
Thank you for the kind word.
It's not one question - it's a whole overflowing dinghy worth of questions sinking halfway across the Channel in truth.
Just as a start, and it's no more than that - what is it that we really want? We've traditionally used cheap labour to grow the economy (that's how the Industrial Revolution got started and the post-war economic boom). If we don't want cheap labour, are we prepared to accept the consequences in terms of relative economic decline?
Immigrants often do the work the British won't do - cleaning the streets and offices, looking after the sick and elderly. In essence, if we don't import people to wipe our bottoms when we can't, who will wipe our bottoms?
That's the economic dilemma - then there's the cultural dilemma of bringing into the country people who aren't like us, who have different cultures and customs. Go back 60-70 years and see how well Caribbean immigrants were treated in some parts of London. Inter racial tension is nothing new. Intra communal tension is.
Yet we don't have enough housing for the people already here (nor prisons for those already here who commit crimes for which they should be incarcerated) so councils spend millions on temporary accommodation for families who "should" have decent places to live but can't afford to rent let alone buy at the exorbitant prices the housing market demands.
Millions, however, are reliant on the rising value of their property, their only significant asset, to fund a later lifestyle to which they aspire. Selling the family home and downsizing pays for the cruises and the nice lunches where they spend money and are often served by cheap migrant labour employed by organisations to keep costs down.
It's all inter-connected, immigration, housing, health, economic and social policy, the very capitalist model under which we currently operate. The problem is too often they are compartmentalised whereas a holistic approach is needed.
I'm at a boutique family hotel and the number of hot yummy mummies is off the scale. They all have kids called Alfie and Oscar and call the evening meal "supper" - you get the picture.
Yes, I'm happily married but boy oh boy are they hot. They take care of themselves and know how to dress - such that one can easily mentally undress.
Not sure they're as hot as my wife though.
Become a Mormon.
I sometimes wonder if I have a problem.
Either lots of men are the same, and just keep it quiet, or I need a lot of cold showers.
Er, I think most men are the same. The male libido is excessive, and designed to send you a bit mad, like putting a 3000CC engine in a Hillman Imp
As Kingsley Amis memorably said, "I know why I like large breasts, I just don't understand why I like them so MUCH"
The tits here are fucking fantastic. Fantastic.
I'm sorry, 21stC and all that.
But, millions of years of evolution and that and.. FANTASTIC.
It also helps that they are slim, posh, with shapely legs, well manicured feet and shimmering hair - and have mainly today been wearing tasteful crop tops and skirts. Some bikinis.
I'm at a boutique family hotel and the number of hot yummy mummies is off the scale. They all have kids called Alfie and Oscar and call the evening meal "supper" - you get the picture.
Yes, I'm happily married but boy oh boy are they hot. They take care of themselves and know how to dress - such that one can easily mentally undress.
Look at this chart. Why did the numbers crossing the Channel suddenly jump from 2019? And it's not a small change.
It's not a change in government policy here in the UK. There are push and pull factors, so what's changed with the push factors? Syria and the Arab Spring happened thirteen years ago. So why the sudden uptick?
One theory is that we successfully closed off the land crossing - ie the lorries in the Chunnel
So then one bright spark thought: Hold on, why don't we simply cross in a boat, and they did, and it was easy, and no one could stop them as it risked drowning them. And, the French were probably quite happy to see them go. And then everyone copied those pioneers
Literally that simple. No one had tried it before
It's fucking BREXIT you stupid fool!
Making the UK more attractive, you mean?
Ahaha nice try. So by your logic, before Brexit it was:
"I've risked my life to escape the Taliban, left my family behind, blown my life savings on getting to Europe, but OMG I'm not going to the UK where they are under the yoke of the EU. Oh no, I'd rather stay here in France, in the, er, EU"
I can see why you struggle with a lot of this if that's your thought process.
I'm at a boutique family hotel and the number of hot yummy mummies is off the scale. They all have kids called Alfie and Oscar and call the evening meal "supper" - you get the picture.
Yes, I'm happily married but boy oh boy are they hot. They take care of themselves and know how to dress - such that one can easily mentally undress.
Not sure they're as hot as my wife though.
Become a Mormon.
Just rereading O'Brian's HMS Surprise. Reminded that Dr Maturin recommended the radical ablation of the peccant member and its accessories. Also worked wonders for the temperament.
I'm at a boutique family hotel and the number of hot yummy mummies is off the scale. They all have kids called Alfie and Oscar and call the evening meal "supper" - you get the picture.
Yes, I'm happily married but boy oh boy are they hot. They take care of themselves and know how to dress - such that one can easily mentally undress.
Not sure they're as hot as my wife though.
Epic last-minute pullback, sir: chapeau
I am a master of my craft.
Although you have left some element of doubt in there.
I'm at a boutique family hotel and the number of hot yummy mummies is off the scale. They all have kids called Alfie and Oscar and call the evening meal "supper" - you get the picture.
Yes, I'm happily married but boy oh boy are they hot. They take care of themselves and know how to dress - such that one can easily mentally undress.
Not sure they're as hot as my wife though.
Become a Mormon.
I sometimes wonder if I have a problem.
Either lots of men are the same, and just keep it quiet, or I need a lot of cold showers.
Er, I think most men are the same. The male libido is excessive, and designed to send you a bit mad, like putting a 3000CC engine in a Hillman Imp
As Kingsley Amis memorably said, "I know why I like large breasts, I just don't understand why I like them so MUCH"
The tits here are fucking fantastic. Fantastic.
I'm sorry, 21stC and all that.
But, millions of years of evolution and that and.. FANTASTIC.
Well, I have to say it makes a change from debating AI.
Boat crossings have massively taken off since Starmer came to office and scrapped Rwanda, something which seems to have gone entirely uncommented upon by mainstream media.
If we really did get well over 700 people crossing yesterday then that's a totally open border and utterly unsustainable.
But 'smashing the criminal gangs'??
WHY IS THIS GOING TOTALLY UNREPORTED
Surely it couldn't be because MSM were happy to use illegal migration as a stick to beat the Tories with, but are damned if they want Starmer to suffer any bad press, surely?
It was on the radio this morning when I was walking to work.
Yeah, and Jenrick did a tweet, right?
It's nowhere on the BBC or The Times or other papers or bulletins of record.
Nowhere.
So the BBC are obliged to report Jenrick's tweets?
Are you thick?
No, but I will concede that you're the most well placed judge of such things.
You've suggested, at the same time, that this might be a figment of Jenrick's imagination and managed to spectacularly miss the point at the same time. Either you're doing this deliberately to insult my intelligence, or you're thick.
Which one is it?
I suggest you work on your reading skills. You've obviously misread spectacularly.
You might have a point were it not for the fact that near scores of your fellow travellers posted upthread the primary source for the 700 crossings yesterday.
700. I mean, SEVEN HUNDRED IN A DAY.
I mean.. what the fuck?
Is it the first time there's been seven hundred or more in a day?
No, we've had plenty worse days. The record is over 1,000
I'm not sure why @Casino_Royale has exploded on this issue, today, in that context. However, as a veteran thread-hijacker I'd like to congratulate him on superbly hijacking a thread, and making us all talk about what he wants to talk about. Bravo
To be fair, I exploded over those days as well.
I'm particularly irritated now by the fact it's being shrugged off and is accelerating.
This year will almost certainly be the highest on record and no-one seems to give a fuck now Starmer is in power.
Why should they?
I don't recall Starmer giving a fuck while in Opposition either, so rather consistent.
It was Tory xenophobes that were ramping it up as a news story. And they're no longer in office.
You think I'm a xenophobe?
Is that your argument?
No.
I think Braverman, Badenoch, Jenrick etc are and they're the ones who were making this a big news story and so was Sunak (whom I don't think is a xenophobe, but is instead weak and a bit of a weathervane so went along with the narrative).
Now that Braverman etc are out of office, this isn't a big news story anymore.
Fair enough, but I think it is a big news story and a solution must be found.
I think it's a gaping hole in our legal infrastructure exploited by people traffickers and smugglers.
It's entirely illiberal to let it continue, particularly if it threatens to chip away at liberalism itself if unresolved.
Fund the courts. Process claims quickly. Deport quickly where it fails. Allow, indeed encourage, any claimants waiting more than a month to work and support themselves.
Thereby saying to all the world, "Hey, just get to the UK in a boat and they let you work and earn money in a few weeks, you basically get citizenship, oh, and all healthcare is free at point of use, just go to the A&E it's amazing, and the locals don't seem to mind and anyone that complains is put in jail"
Not only is this is an act of grievous national self-harm, it is also monumentally unfair on all the LEGAL migrants who jump through hoops to get settled status, and follow the letter of the law, over many months - and yet these jokers just climb on a dinghy in Dunkirk and bingo, they're in
Then don't complain about the billions spent on hotels if you object to solutions.
I have offered solutions. A sane but ruthless version of Rwanda, or leave the ECHR and tow them back to France. One of those two
Each was offered the Tories and Reform respectively, and were rejected at the ballot box by the British voters, including yourself if we believe your claim that you voted for Starmer.
And fair enough, let's see how Labour deal with it
However I cannot be accused of "not having solutions" because I offer two
So do others, even if you dislike them.
The advantage of my solutions is that, if they work, they would stop the boats
The disadvantage of your solution, "process them quickly and let them work!" - is that it would not only fail, it would actually make the problem even worse, as it would be a massive invitation to even more people to try and get to Britain, where you are given the de facto rights of a citizen in a few weeks (work, free healthcare, etc)
You need to eat more brain-friendly nutrients, perhaps the entirely meat diet is not good for cognition
You keep saying "it would actually make the problem even worse", without specifying which problem you are referring to.
If the £4 billion in hotel etc costs becomes instead £400 million as people are only held without right to work for weeks rather than months, then the problem of the £4 billion would have got better wouldn't it?
Or is the problem you refer to the people? As that's not the argument you were making, though it seems to be your actual bugbear.
The problem is people coming on boats. We all know there are various pull and push factors. Both are crucial
The pull factors are: Britain's relative attractiveness as a destination, things like free instant healthcare, no ID cards, the English language, plus BAME communities in situ into which you can melt, and so on
If you add to that "they process you quickly so you can go straight into work" you are basically giving them the rights of a British citizen, in weeks. That is a massive new pull factor, and would likely lead to an explosion in numbers coming
So while your plan would work in the instant short term, emptying the hotels, in the medium and long term it would make everything much worse, as more people come, and even more, and you let them all work, and then even more come and then you've got 300,000 crossing the Channel in a year, all wanting and expecting to work, and all illegal
Ya see?
You say "illegal", but your real worry is they're not illegal, which is the problem for you.
I say if they're illegal they should be deported. If they're legal they should be allowed to work.
Telling people they can stay in the country, but can't work, so need to live off taxpayers is the worst of all worlds.
Look at this chart. Why did the numbers crossing the Channel suddenly jump from 2019? And it's not a small change.
It's not a change in government policy here in the UK. There are push and pull factors, so what's changed with the push factors? Syria and the Arab Spring happened thirteen years ago. So why the sudden uptick?
Bill Kristol @BillKristol · 6h We've all offered advice to Harris-Walz on how to defend themselves on this or lay out an agenda on that. But I dunno, they're doing fine. Maybe they should just keep on being cheerful and upbeat? Spend this week celebrating our Olympics team, then a patriotic Dem convention?
Yeh!!! This is a Hope vs Fear election now imho and they need to do fun, joy, bright future, hope etc etc.
Next four years not whether 2020 was stolen.
The real test will come with her policy platforms. Trumps crazy protectionist policies will help no one. Hopefully she will see his policies as an open goal.
He wants to put the price of goods in WalMart up 50% should do it.
I'm at a boutique family hotel and the number of hot yummy mummies is off the scale. They all have kids called Alfie and Oscar and call the evening meal "supper" - you get the picture.
Yes, I'm happily married but boy oh boy are they hot. They take care of themselves and know how to dress - such that one can easily mentally undress.
Not sure they're as hot as my wife though.
Become a Mormon.
I sometimes wonder if I have a problem.
Either lots of men are the same, and just keep it quiet, or I need a lot of cold showers.
Er, I think most men are the same. The male libido is excessive, and designed to send you a bit mad, like putting a 3000CC engine in a Hillman Imp
As Kingsley Amis memorably said, "I know why I like large breasts, I just don't understand why I like them so MUCH"
The tits here are fucking fantastic. Fantastic.
I'm sorry, 21stC and all that.
But, millions of years of evolution and that and.. FANTASTIC.
Well, I have to say it makes a change from debating AI.
Boat crossings have massively taken off since Starmer came to office and scrapped Rwanda, something which seems to have gone entirely uncommented upon by mainstream media.
If we really did get well over 700 people crossing yesterday then that's a totally open border and utterly unsustainable.
But 'smashing the criminal gangs'??
WHY IS THIS GOING TOTALLY UNREPORTED
Surely it couldn't be because MSM were happy to use illegal migration as a stick to beat the Tories with, but are damned if they want Starmer to suffer any bad press, surely?
It was on the radio this morning when I was walking to work.
Yeah, and Jenrick did a tweet, right?
It's nowhere on the BBC or The Times or other papers or bulletins of record.
Nowhere.
So the BBC are obliged to report Jenrick's tweets?
Are you thick?
No, but I will concede that you're the most well placed judge of such things.
You've suggested, at the same time, that this might be a figment of Jenrick's imagination and managed to spectacularly miss the point at the same time. Either you're doing this deliberately to insult my intelligence, or you're thick.
Which one is it?
I suggest you work on your reading skills. You've obviously misread spectacularly.
You might have a point were it not for the fact that near scores of your fellow travellers posted upthread the primary source for the 700 crossings yesterday.
700. I mean, SEVEN HUNDRED IN A DAY.
I mean.. what the fuck?
Is it the first time there's been seven hundred or more in a day?
No, we've had plenty worse days. The record is over 1,000
I'm not sure why @Casino_Royale has exploded on this issue, today, in that context. However, as a veteran thread-hijacker I'd like to congratulate him on superbly hijacking a thread, and making us all talk about what he wants to talk about. Bravo
To be fair, I exploded over those days as well.
I'm particularly irritated now by the fact it's being shrugged off and is accelerating.
This year will almost certainly be the highest on record and no-one seems to give a fuck now Starmer is in power.
Why should they?
I don't recall Starmer giving a fuck while in Opposition either, so rather consistent.
It was Tory xenophobes that were ramping it up as a news story. And they're no longer in office.
You think I'm a xenophobe?
Is that your argument?
No.
I think Braverman, Badenoch, Jenrick etc are and they're the ones who were making this a big news story and so was Sunak (whom I don't think is a xenophobe, but is instead weak and a bit of a weathervane so went along with the narrative).
Now that Braverman etc are out of office, this isn't a big news story anymore.
Fair enough, but I think it is a big news story and a solution must be found.
I think it's a gaping hole in our legal infrastructure exploited by people traffickers and smugglers.
It's entirely illiberal to let it continue, particularly if it threatens to chip away at liberalism itself if unresolved.
Fund the courts. Process claims quickly. Deport quickly where it fails. Allow, indeed encourage, any claimants waiting more than a month to work and support themselves.
Thereby saying to all the world, "Hey, just get to the UK in a boat and they let you work and earn money in a few weeks, you basically get citizenship, oh, and all healthcare is free at point of use, just go to the A&E it's amazing, and the locals don't seem to mind and anyone that complains is put in jail"
Not only is this is an act of grievous national self-harm, it is also monumentally unfair on all the LEGAL migrants who jump through hoops to get settled status, and follow the letter of the law, over many months - and yet these jokers just climb on a dinghy in Dunkirk and bingo, they're in
Then don't complain about the billions spent on hotels if you object to solutions.
I have offered solutions. A sane but ruthless version of Rwanda, or leave the ECHR and tow them back to France. One of those two
Each was offered the Tories and Reform respectively, and were rejected at the ballot box by the British voters, including yourself if we believe your claim that you voted for Starmer.
And fair enough, let's see how Labour deal with it
However I cannot be accused of "not having solutions" because I offer two
So do others, even if you dislike them.
The advantage of my solutions is that, if they work, they would stop the boats
The disadvantage of your solution, "process them quickly and let them work!" - is that it would not only fail, it would actually make the problem even worse, as it would be a massive invitation to even more people to try and get to Britain, where you are given the de facto rights of a citizen in a few weeks (work, free healthcare, etc)
You need to eat more brain-friendly nutrients, perhaps the entirely meat diet is not good for cognition
You keep saying "it would actually make the problem even worse", without specifying which problem you are referring to.
If the £4 billion in hotel etc costs becomes instead £400 million as people are only held without right to work for weeks rather than months, then the problem of the £4 billion would have got better wouldn't it?
Or is the problem you refer to the people? As that's not the argument you were making, though it seems to be your actual bugbear.
The problem is people coming on boats. We all know there are various pull and push factors. Both are crucial
The pull factors are: Britain's relative attractiveness as a destination, things like free instant healthcare, no ID cards, the English language, plus BAME communities in situ into which you can melt, and so on
If you add to that "they process you quickly so you can go straight into work" you are basically giving them the rights of a British citizen, in weeks. That is a massive new pull factor, and would likely lead to an explosion in numbers coming
So while your plan would work in the instant short term, emptying the hotels, in the medium and long term it would make everything much worse, as more people come, and even more, and you let them all work, and then even more come and then you've got 300,000 crossing the Channel in a year, all wanting and expecting to work, and all illegal
Ya see?
You say "illegal", but your real worry is they're not illegal, which is the problem for you.
I say if they're illegal they should be deported. If they're legal they should be allowed to work.
Telling people they can stay in the country, but can't work, so need to live off taxpayers is the worst of all worlds.
As @williamglenn rightly says, you are basically arguing for open borders, yet trying not to admit it, thereby tying yourself in knots. I honestly have no idea why you take this position, given that you are - I believe - a hardworking UK taxpayer and its your honest money that will fund this insanity. But, if this is what you want, this is what you will get
Look at this chart. Why did the numbers crossing the Channel suddenly jump from 2019? And it's not a small change.
It's not a change in government policy here in the UK. There are push and pull factors, so what's changed with the push factors? Syria and the Arab Spring happened thirteen years ago. So why the sudden uptick?
One theory is that we successfully closed off the land crossing - ie the lorries in the Chunnel
So then one bright spark thought: Hold on, why don't we simply cross in a boat, and they did, and it was easy, and no one could stop them as it risked drowning them. And, the French were probably quite happy to see them go. And then everyone copied those pioneers
Literally that simple. No one had tried it before
It's fucking BREXIT you stupid fool!
Making the UK more attractive, you mean?
Ahaha nice try. So by your logic, before Brexit it was:
"I've risked my life to escape the Taliban, left my family behind, blown my life savings on getting to Europe, but OMG I'm not going to the UK where they are under the yoke of the EU. Oh no, I'd rather stay here in France, in the, er, EU"
I can see why you struggle with a lot of this if that's your thought process.
The most significant domestic news for today - which I think I'm the only one to mention so far - is Labour publishing plans to grant councils compulsory purchase powers for green belt land, without their being required to pay for excessive planning gain.
That has the potential to shift the dial.
So, legalised theft then? That is shifting the dial somewhat.
Land without planning permission (current state) is worth X; with permission is worth multiples of X. Market value is actually X plus a bit - with the premium representing a possibility it will get permission later. I think it's that price they are going for.
It can’t be that mathematically
If they issue a CPO the probability approaches 100%. If they don’t it approaches zero.
Exactly. It's probably not a huge premium on the agricultural value of the land but it does exist and the premium would continue to exist if the speculator sold the land on because there is always a possibility of development on green belt land.
No you are taking the option value from the owner.
I don’t see how the situation of the land speculators is any different to stock market speculators, buying shares on anticipation of a takeover bid.
100% speculation. A high risk, high reward gamble.
I’m amazed this issue has any traction at all with supposed free market capitalists.
I assume anyone making this argument has skin in the game.
Boat crossings have massively taken off since Starmer came to office and scrapped Rwanda, something which seems to have gone entirely uncommented upon by mainstream media.
If we really did get well over 700 people crossing yesterday then that's a totally open border and utterly unsustainable.
But 'smashing the criminal gangs'??
WHY IS THIS GOING TOTALLY UNREPORTED
Surely it couldn't be because MSM were happy to use illegal migration as a stick to beat the Tories with, but are damned if they want Starmer to suffer any bad press, surely?
It was on the radio this morning when I was walking to work.
Yeah, and Jenrick did a tweet, right?
It's nowhere on the BBC or The Times or other papers or bulletins of record.
Nowhere.
So the BBC are obliged to report Jenrick's tweets?
Are you thick?
No, but I will concede that you're the most well placed judge of such things.
You've suggested, at the same time, that this might be a figment of Jenrick's imagination and managed to spectacularly miss the point at the same time. Either you're doing this deliberately to insult my intelligence, or you're thick.
Which one is it?
I suggest you work on your reading skills. You've obviously misread spectacularly.
You might have a point were it not for the fact that near scores of your fellow travellers posted upthread the primary source for the 700 crossings yesterday.
700. I mean, SEVEN HUNDRED IN A DAY.
I mean.. what the fuck?
Is it the first time there's been seven hundred or more in a day?
No, we've had plenty worse days. The record is over 1,000
I'm not sure why @Casino_Royale has exploded on this issue, today, in that context. However, as a veteran thread-hijacker I'd like to congratulate him on superbly hijacking a thread, and making us all talk about what he wants to talk about. Bravo
To be fair, I exploded over those days as well.
I'm particularly irritated now by the fact it's being shrugged off and is accelerating.
This year will almost certainly be the highest on record and no-one seems to give a fuck now Starmer is in power.
Why should they?
I don't recall Starmer giving a fuck while in Opposition either, so rather consistent.
It was Tory xenophobes that were ramping it up as a news story. And they're no longer in office.
You think I'm a xenophobe?
Is that your argument?
No.
I think Braverman, Badenoch, Jenrick etc are and they're the ones who were making this a big news story and so was Sunak (whom I don't think is a xenophobe, but is instead weak and a bit of a weathervane so went along with the narrative).
Now that Braverman etc are out of office, this isn't a big news story anymore.
Fair enough, but I think it is a big news story and a solution must be found.
I think it's a gaping hole in our legal infrastructure exploited by people traffickers and smugglers.
It's entirely illiberal to let it continue, particularly if it threatens to chip away at liberalism itself if unresolved.
Fund the courts. Process claims quickly. Deport quickly where it fails. Allow, indeed encourage, any claimants waiting more than a month to work and support themselves.
Thereby saying to all the world, "Hey, just get to the UK in a boat and they let you work and earn money in a few weeks, you basically get citizenship, oh, and all healthcare is free at point of use, just go to the A&E it's amazing, and the locals don't seem to mind and anyone that complains is put in jail"
Not only is this is an act of grievous national self-harm, it is also monumentally unfair on all the LEGAL migrants who jump through hoops to get settled status, and follow the letter of the law, over many months - and yet these jokers just climb on a dinghy in Dunkirk and bingo, they're in
Then don't complain about the billions spent on hotels if you object to solutions.
I have offered solutions. A sane but ruthless version of Rwanda, or leave the ECHR and tow them back to France. One of those two
Each was offered the Tories and Reform respectively, and were rejected at the ballot box by the British voters, including yourself if we believe your claim that you voted for Starmer.
And fair enough, let's see how Labour deal with it
However I cannot be accused of "not having solutions" because I offer two
So do others, even if you dislike them.
The advantage of my solutions is that, if they work, they would stop the boats
The disadvantage of your solution, "process them quickly and let them work!" - is that it would not only fail, it would actually make the problem even worse, as it would be a massive invitation to even more people to try and get to Britain, where you are given the de facto rights of a citizen in a few weeks (work, free healthcare, etc)
You need to eat more brain-friendly nutrients, perhaps the entirely meat diet is not good for cognition
You keep saying "it would actually make the problem even worse", without specifying which problem you are referring to.
If the £4 billion in hotel etc costs becomes instead £400 million as people are only held without right to work for weeks rather than months, then the problem of the £4 billion would have got better wouldn't it?
Or is the problem you refer to the people? As that's not the argument you were making, though it seems to be your actual bugbear.
The problem is people coming on boats. We all know there are various pull and push factors. Both are crucial
The pull factors are: Britain's relative attractiveness as a destination, things like free instant healthcare, no ID cards, the English language, plus BAME communities in situ into which you can melt, and so on
If you add to that "they process you quickly so you can go straight into work" you are basically giving them the rights of a British citizen, in weeks. That is a massive new pull factor, and would likely lead to an explosion in numbers coming
So while your plan would work in the instant short term, emptying the hotels, in the medium and long term it would make everything much worse, as more people come, and even more, and you let them all work, and then even more come and then you've got 300,000 crossing the Channel in a year, all wanting and expecting to work, and all illegal
Ya see?
You say "illegal", but your real worry is they're not illegal, which is the problem for you.
I say if they're illegal they should be deported. If they're legal they should be allowed to work.
Telling people they can stay in the country, but can't work, so need to live off taxpayers is the worst of all worlds.
As @williamglenn rightly says, you are basically arguing for open borders, yet trying not to admit it, thereby tying yourself in knots. I honestly have no idea why you take this position, given that you are - I believe - a hardworking UK taxpayer and its your honest money that will fund this insanity. But, if this is what you want, this is what you will get
I'm saying our taxes should not fund insanity - but its the current failure of a system that is insane.
The insanity is telling people that they can stay in the country, for years, but can't work legally so end up living off the taxpayer. And since they're here, they inevitably are free not just to be taking taxes but working in the black economy so are making money from being here.
Saying either be deported or get a job is not insane.
If they're here legally, they should be allowed to work. If they're here illegally, they should be able to be deported.
Boat crossings have massively taken off since Starmer came to office and scrapped Rwanda, something which seems to have gone entirely uncommented upon by mainstream media.
If we really did get well over 700 people crossing yesterday then that's a totally open border and utterly unsustainable.
But 'smashing the criminal gangs'??
WHY IS THIS GOING TOTALLY UNREPORTED
Surely it couldn't be because MSM were happy to use illegal migration as a stick to beat the Tories with, but are damned if they want Starmer to suffer any bad press, surely?
It was on the radio this morning when I was walking to work.
Yeah, and Jenrick did a tweet, right?
It's nowhere on the BBC or The Times or other papers or bulletins of record.
Nowhere.
So the BBC are obliged to report Jenrick's tweets?
Are you thick?
No, but I will concede that you're the most well placed judge of such things.
You've suggested, at the same time, that this might be a figment of Jenrick's imagination and managed to spectacularly miss the point at the same time. Either you're doing this deliberately to insult my intelligence, or you're thick.
Which one is it?
I suggest you work on your reading skills. You've obviously misread spectacularly.
You might have a point were it not for the fact that near scores of your fellow travellers posted upthread the primary source for the 700 crossings yesterday.
700. I mean, SEVEN HUNDRED IN A DAY.
I mean.. what the fuck?
Is it the first time there's been seven hundred or more in a day?
No, we've had plenty worse days. The record is over 1,000
I'm not sure why @Casino_Royale has exploded on this issue, today, in that context. However, as a veteran thread-hijacker I'd like to congratulate him on superbly hijacking a thread, and making us all talk about what he wants to talk about. Bravo
To be fair, I exploded over those days as well.
I'm particularly irritated now by the fact it's being shrugged off and is accelerating.
This year will almost certainly be the highest on record and no-one seems to give a fuck now Starmer is in power.
Why should they?
I don't recall Starmer giving a fuck while in Opposition either, so rather consistent.
It was Tory xenophobes that were ramping it up as a news story. And they're no longer in office.
You think I'm a xenophobe?
Is that your argument?
No.
I think Braverman, Badenoch, Jenrick etc are and they're the ones who were making this a big news story and so was Sunak (whom I don't think is a xenophobe, but is instead weak and a bit of a weathervane so went along with the narrative).
Now that Braverman etc are out of office, this isn't a big news story anymore.
Fair enough, but I think it is a big news story and a solution must be found.
I think it's a gaping hole in our legal infrastructure exploited by people traffickers and smugglers.
It's entirely illiberal to let it continue, particularly if it threatens to chip away at liberalism itself if unresolved.
Fund the courts. Process claims quickly. Deport quickly where it fails. Allow, indeed encourage, any claimants waiting more than a month to work and support themselves.
Thereby saying to all the world, "Hey, just get to the UK in a boat and they let you work and earn money in a few weeks, you basically get citizenship, oh, and all healthcare is free at point of use, just go to the A&E it's amazing, and the locals don't seem to mind and anyone that complains is put in jail"
Not only is this is an act of grievous national self-harm, it is also monumentally unfair on all the LEGAL migrants who jump through hoops to get settled status, and follow the letter of the law, over many months - and yet these jokers just climb on a dinghy in Dunkirk and bingo, they're in
Then don't complain about the billions spent on hotels if you object to solutions.
I have offered solutions. A sane but ruthless version of Rwanda, or leave the ECHR and tow them back to France. One of those two
Each was offered the Tories and Reform respectively, and were rejected at the ballot box by the British voters, including yourself if we believe your claim that you voted for Starmer.
And fair enough, let's see how Labour deal with it
However I cannot be accused of "not having solutions" because I offer two
So do others, even if you dislike them.
The advantage of my solutions is that, if they work, they would stop the boats
The disadvantage of your solution, "process them quickly and let them work!" - is that it would not only fail, it would actually make the problem even worse, as it would be a massive invitation to even more people to try and get to Britain, where you are given the de facto rights of a citizen in a few weeks (work, free healthcare, etc)
You need to eat more brain-friendly nutrients, perhaps the entirely meat diet is not good for cognition
You keep saying "it would actually make the problem even worse", without specifying which problem you are referring to.
If the £4 billion in hotel etc costs becomes instead £400 million as people are only held without right to work for weeks rather than months, then the problem of the £4 billion would have got better wouldn't it?
Or is the problem you refer to the people? As that's not the argument you were making, though it seems to be your actual bugbear.
The problem is people coming on boats. We all know there are various pull and push factors. Both are crucial
The pull factors are: Britain's relative attractiveness as a destination, things like free instant healthcare, no ID cards, the English language, plus BAME communities in situ into which you can melt, and so on
If you add to that "they process you quickly so you can go straight into work" you are basically giving them the rights of a British citizen, in weeks. That is a massive new pull factor, and would likely lead to an explosion in numbers coming
So while your plan would work in the instant short term, emptying the hotels, in the medium and long term it would make everything much worse, as more people come, and even more, and you let them all work, and then even more come and then you've got 300,000 crossing the Channel in a year, all wanting and expecting to work, and all illegal
Ya see?
You say "illegal", but your real worry is they're not illegal, which is the problem for you.
I say if they're illegal they should be deported. If they're legal they should be allowed to work.
Telling people they can stay in the country, but can't work, so need to live off taxpayers is the worst of all worlds.
It's not so much telling people that they can stay, as the physical reality that they are here and we can't send them anywhere. (And given that the asylum backlog is currently of the order of 100 000 people, sending them to Rwanda in batches of 200 until they disperse of their own accord looks opitmistic.)
It's all very well to have the political power to say that something should happen, but if you can't actually make it happen, it's all a bit hollow.
Look at this chart. Why did the numbers crossing the Channel suddenly jump from 2019? And it's not a small change.
It's not a change in government policy here in the UK. There are push and pull factors, so what's changed with the push factors? Syria and the Arab Spring happened thirteen years ago. So why the sudden uptick?
One theory is that we successfully closed off the land crossing - ie the lorries in the Chunnel
So then one bright spark thought: Hold on, why don't we simply cross in a boat, and they did, and it was easy, and no one could stop them as it risked drowning them. And, the French were probably quite happy to see them go. And then everyone copied those pioneers
Literally that simple. No one had tried it before
It's fucking BREXIT you stupid fool!
Making the UK more attractive, you mean?
Ahaha nice try. So by your logic, before Brexit it was:
"I've risked my life to escape the Taliban, left my family behind, blown my life savings on getting to Europe, but OMG I'm not going to the UK where they are under the yoke of the EU. Oh no, I'd rather stay here in France, in the, er, EU"
I can see why you struggle with a lot of this if that's your thought process.
And what’s your logic for Brexit being to blame?
My logic is simple. Total lack of incentive on the part of the French to help prevent any boats. Quite the opposite in fact. We told them we were leaving because we didn't like them; they said well fuck-you then. We'd have done the same if the roles were reversed.
I'm at a boutique family hotel and the number of hot yummy mummies is off the scale. They all have kids called Alfie and Oscar and call the evening meal "supper" - you get the picture.
Yes, I'm happily married but boy oh boy are they hot. They take care of themselves and know how to dress - such that one can easily mentally undress.
Not sure they're as hot as my wife though.
Become a Mormon.
Just rereading O'Brian's HMS Surprise. Reminded that Dr Maturin recommended the radical ablation of the peccant member and its accessories. Also worked wonders for the temperament.
I'm at a boutique family hotel and the number of hot yummy mummies is off the scale. They all have kids called Alfie and Oscar and call the evening meal "supper" - you get the picture.
Yes, I'm happily married but boy oh boy are they hot. They take care of themselves and know how to dress - such that one can easily mentally undress.
Not sure they're as hot as my wife though.
Become a Mormon.
I sometimes wonder if I have a problem.
Either lots of men are the same, and just keep it quiet, or I need a lot of cold showers.
Not just you.
I met the love of my life and I still couldn't keep the snake inside the pet store.
I'm at a boutique family hotel and the number of hot yummy mummies is off the scale. They all have kids called Alfie and Oscar and call the evening meal "supper" - you get the picture.
Yes, I'm happily married but boy oh boy are they hot. They take care of themselves and know how to dress - such that one can easily mentally undress.
Not sure they're as hot as my wife though.
Become a Mormon.
Just rereading O'Brian's HMS Surprise. Reminded that Dr Maturin recommended the radical ablation of the peccant member and its accessories. Also worked wonders for the temperament.
I can't remember, was that before or after he met and fell in love with Diana Villiers? It would certainly have saved him a deal of pain and trouble, but deprived readers of a lot of engagement with the books.
Boat crossings have massively taken off since Starmer came to office and scrapped Rwanda, something which seems to have gone entirely uncommented upon by mainstream media.
If we really did get well over 700 people crossing yesterday then that's a totally open border and utterly unsustainable.
But 'smashing the criminal gangs'??
WHY IS THIS GOING TOTALLY UNREPORTED
Surely it couldn't be because MSM were happy to use illegal migration as a stick to beat the Tories with, but are damned if they want Starmer to suffer any bad press, surely?
It was on the radio this morning when I was walking to work.
Yeah, and Jenrick did a tweet, right?
It's nowhere on the BBC or The Times or other papers or bulletins of record.
Nowhere.
So the BBC are obliged to report Jenrick's tweets?
Are you thick?
No, but I will concede that you're the most well placed judge of such things.
You've suggested, at the same time, that this might be a figment of Jenrick's imagination and managed to spectacularly miss the point at the same time. Either you're doing this deliberately to insult my intelligence, or you're thick.
Which one is it?
I suggest you work on your reading skills. You've obviously misread spectacularly.
You might have a point were it not for the fact that near scores of your fellow travellers posted upthread the primary source for the 700 crossings yesterday.
700. I mean, SEVEN HUNDRED IN A DAY.
I mean.. what the fuck?
Is it the first time there's been seven hundred or more in a day?
No, we've had plenty worse days. The record is over 1,000
I'm not sure why @Casino_Royale has exploded on this issue, today, in that context. However, as a veteran thread-hijacker I'd like to congratulate him on superbly hijacking a thread, and making us all talk about what he wants to talk about. Bravo
To be fair, I exploded over those days as well.
I'm particularly irritated now by the fact it's being shrugged off and is accelerating.
This year will almost certainly be the highest on record and no-one seems to give a fuck now Starmer is in power.
Why should they?
I don't recall Starmer giving a fuck while in Opposition either, so rather consistent.
It was Tory xenophobes that were ramping it up as a news story. And they're no longer in office.
You think I'm a xenophobe?
Is that your argument?
No.
I think Braverman, Badenoch, Jenrick etc are and they're the ones who were making this a big news story and so was Sunak (whom I don't think is a xenophobe, but is instead weak and a bit of a weathervane so went along with the narrative).
Now that Braverman etc are out of office, this isn't a big news story anymore.
Fair enough, but I think it is a big news story and a solution must be found.
I think it's a gaping hole in our legal infrastructure exploited by people traffickers and smugglers.
It's entirely illiberal to let it continue, particularly if it threatens to chip away at liberalism itself if unresolved.
Fund the courts. Process claims quickly. Deport quickly where it fails. Allow, indeed encourage, any claimants waiting more than a month to work and support themselves.
Thereby saying to all the world, "Hey, just get to the UK in a boat and they let you work and earn money in a few weeks, you basically get citizenship, oh, and all healthcare is free at point of use, just go to the A&E it's amazing, and the locals don't seem to mind and anyone that complains is put in jail"
Not only is this is an act of grievous national self-harm, it is also monumentally unfair on all the LEGAL migrants who jump through hoops to get settled status, and follow the letter of the law, over many months - and yet these jokers just climb on a dinghy in Dunkirk and bingo, they're in
Then don't complain about the billions spent on hotels if you object to solutions.
I have offered solutions. A sane but ruthless version of Rwanda, or leave the ECHR and tow them back to France. One of those two
Or let people work and pay for themselves.
We can't tow people back to France without France's consent - France is a sovereign country.
I'm at a boutique family hotel and the number of hot yummy mummies is off the scale. They all have kids called Alfie and Oscar and call the evening meal "supper" - you get the picture.
Yes, I'm happily married but boy oh boy are they hot. They take care of themselves and know how to dress - such that one can easily mentally undress.
Not sure they're as hot as my wife though.
Become a Mormon.
I sometimes wonder if I have a problem.
Either lots of men are the same, and just keep it quiet, or I need a lot of cold showers.
Not just you.
I met the love of my life and I still couldn't keep the snake inside the pet store.
What do women and swimming pools have in common?
They both cost a lot of money to maintain for the amount of time you spend inside them.
Boat crossings have massively taken off since Starmer came to office and scrapped Rwanda, something which seems to have gone entirely uncommented upon by mainstream media.
If we really did get well over 700 people crossing yesterday then that's a totally open border and utterly unsustainable.
But 'smashing the criminal gangs'??
WHY IS THIS GOING TOTALLY UNREPORTED
Surely it couldn't be because MSM were happy to use illegal migration as a stick to beat the Tories with, but are damned if they want Starmer to suffer any bad press, surely?
It was on the radio this morning when I was walking to work.
Yeah, and Jenrick did a tweet, right?
It's nowhere on the BBC or The Times or other papers or bulletins of record.
Nowhere.
So the BBC are obliged to report Jenrick's tweets?
Are you thick?
No, but I will concede that you're the most well placed judge of such things.
You've suggested, at the same time, that this might be a figment of Jenrick's imagination and managed to spectacularly miss the point at the same time. Either you're doing this deliberately to insult my intelligence, or you're thick.
Which one is it?
I suggest you work on your reading skills. You've obviously misread spectacularly.
You might have a point were it not for the fact that near scores of your fellow travellers posted upthread the primary source for the 700 crossings yesterday.
700. I mean, SEVEN HUNDRED IN A DAY.
I mean.. what the fuck?
Is it the first time there's been seven hundred or more in a day?
No, we've had plenty worse days. The record is over 1,000
I'm not sure why @Casino_Royale has exploded on this issue, today, in that context. However, as a veteran thread-hijacker I'd like to congratulate him on superbly hijacking a thread, and making us all talk about what he wants to talk about. Bravo
To be fair, I exploded over those days as well.
I'm particularly irritated now by the fact it's being shrugged off and is accelerating.
This year will almost certainly be the highest on record and no-one seems to give a fuck now Starmer is in power.
Why should they?
I don't recall Starmer giving a fuck while in Opposition either, so rather consistent.
It was Tory xenophobes that were ramping it up as a news story. And they're no longer in office.
You think I'm a xenophobe?
Is that your argument?
No.
I think Braverman, Badenoch, Jenrick etc are and they're the ones who were making this a big news story and so was Sunak (whom I don't think is a xenophobe, but is instead weak and a bit of a weathervane so went along with the narrative).
Now that Braverman etc are out of office, this isn't a big news story anymore.
Fair enough, but I think it is a big news story and a solution must be found.
I think it's a gaping hole in our legal infrastructure exploited by people traffickers and smugglers.
It's entirely illiberal to let it continue, particularly if it threatens to chip away at liberalism itself if unresolved.
Fund the courts. Process claims quickly. Deport quickly where it fails. Allow, indeed encourage, any claimants waiting more than a month to work and support themselves.
Thereby saying to all the world, "Hey, just get to the UK in a boat and they let you work and earn money in a few weeks, you basically get citizenship, oh, and all healthcare is free at point of use, just go to the A&E it's amazing, and the locals don't seem to mind and anyone that complains is put in jail"
Not only is this is an act of grievous national self-harm, it is also monumentally unfair on all the LEGAL migrants who jump through hoops to get settled status, and follow the letter of the law, over many months - and yet these jokers just climb on a dinghy in Dunkirk and bingo, they're in
Then don't complain about the billions spent on hotels if you object to solutions.
I have offered solutions. A sane but ruthless version of Rwanda, or leave the ECHR and tow them back to France. One of those two
Or let people work and pay for themselves.
We can't tow people back to France without France's consent - France is a sovereign country.
I see a third possibility...
Will avenge 958 years of humiliation as well.
It’s simple
1) Conditions for refugees are intolerable in the camps around Calais 2) This makes France a failed state 3) Various treaties give us a legal claim to France. 4) France has oil
Comments
The EU warns of "legal obligations" if Musk does not take action to prevent the spread of "disinformation."
https://x.com/allenanalysis/status/1823057692409409961
However I cannot be accused of "not having solutions" because I offer two
@MrHarryCole
NEW: Kamala Harris is now the favourite to win the Presidency on the
@BetfairExchange
We had this on the last thread. Do keep up MSM!!
Then the Home Secretary of the day, a certain Michael Howard, decided that there were too many civil servants, so he cut the numbers.
Nowadays there are not enough to cope with the work.
Conservative lack of foresight goes back a long way.
https://www1.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2024/08/08/crossover-happened-over-night/
That's why it needs to change.
The effect on people can be dramatic.
These people,have to live with this for the rest of their lives.
I remain a master strategist.
https://x.com/DarthPutinKGB/status/1822929188107571490
If they are representative, and both form their social and professional circles and supply the votes to put them in office, it explains why it makes it even harder for them to think yet alone put into force effective policy.
The disadvantage of your solution, "process them quickly and let them work!" - is that it would not only fail, it would actually make the problem even worse, as it would be a massive invitation to even more people to try and get to Britain, where you are given the de facto rights of a citizen in a few weeks (work, free healthcare, etc)
You need to eat more brain-friendly nutrients, perhaps the entirely meat diet is not good for cognition
It's not a huge amount in Government terms - Newham alone spends £40 million a year on the provision of temporary accommodation for homeless British people.
I've yet to hear a coherent answer to the primary question of how you "stop the boats". The toughest of Tory Home Secretaries failed miserably and with Rwanda (or similar) seemingly off the table what is or should be the solution?
I'm sure plenty have draconian solutions and the real immigration question is the level of legal immigration about which we can do something (if Starmer so wished).
There is clearly a need for a much more rapid processing of asylum applications which seemed to atrophy in the last months of the previous Government (Rwanda?).
YOU will pay for their crazy incompetence. YOU will pay all those massive hotel bills and social housing costs for asylum seekers
Two generations of a family killed by Russia - and Putin's - madness.
And I might actually agree with them.
Nobody should be forced to share a prison with Donald Trump.
It is the heat.
Or the gin.
Many others haven't even begun that journey.
If the £4 billion in hotel etc costs becomes instead £400 million as people are only held without right to work for weeks rather than months, then the problem of the £4 billion would have got better wouldn't it?
Or is the problem you refer to the people? As that's not the argument you were making, though it seems to be your actual bugbear.
Anton Gerashchenko
@Gerashchenko_en
·
4h
Donald Trump's interview with Elon Musk will take place tonight at 8p.m. ET
What could possibly go wrong!!!
Yes, I'm happily married but boy oh boy are they hot. They take care of themselves and know how to dress - such that one can easily mentally undress.
Not sure they're as hot as my wife though.
Look at this chart. Why did the numbers crossing the Channel suddenly jump from 2019? And it's not a small change.
It's not a change in government policy here in the UK. There are push and pull factors, so what's changed with the push factors? Syria and the Arab Spring happened thirteen years ago. So why the sudden uptick?
https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/briefings/people-crossing-the-english-channel-in-small-boats/
According to the refugee council, in 2014 the number of cases processed within 6 months of arrival was 87%. By 2020 that was down to 20%. It is now slightly improved to 32% but that is still miles away from where it was. And they can't blame pressure on the system from more applicants. In 2022 and 2023 there were significantly fewer applicants than in 2002.
So right direction of blame, but wrong set of Tories.
It's outrageous that Labour have had five whole weeks in office now and haven't sorted this issue out.
The pull factors are: Britain's relative attractiveness as a destination, things like free instant healthcare, no ID cards, the English language, plus BAME communities in situ into which you can melt, and so on
If you add to that "they process you quickly so you can go straight into work" you are basically giving them the rights of a British citizen, in weeks. That is a massive new pull factor, and would likely lead to an explosion in numbers coming
So while your plan would work in the instant short term, emptying the hotels, in the medium and long term it would make everything much worse, as more people come, and even more, and you let them all work, and then even more come and then you've got 300,000 crossing the Channel in a year, all wanting and expecting to work, and all illegal
Ya see?
So then one bright spark thought: Hold on, why don't we simply cross in a boat, and they did, and it was easy, and no one could stop them as it risked drowning them. And, the French were probably quite happy to see them go. And then everyone copied those pioneers
Literally that simple. No one had tried it before
@BillKristol
·
6h
We've all offered advice to Harris-Walz on how to defend themselves on this or lay out an agenda on that. But I dunno, they're doing fine. Maybe they should just keep on being cheerful and upbeat? Spend this week celebrating our Olympics team, then a patriotic Dem convention?
https://x.com/BillKristol/status/1822970564161442086
===
Yeh!!! This is a Hope vs Fear election now imho and they need to do fun, joy, bright future, hope etc etc.
Next four years not whether 2020 was stolen.
Either lots of men are the same, and just keep it quiet, or I need a lot of cold showers.
https://news.sky.com/story/pm-has-spoken-to-iran-president-to-de-escalate-tensions-in-middle-east-13196154
As Kingsley Amis memorably said, "I know why I like large breasts, I just don't understand why I like them so MUCH"
Phwoar.
100% speculation. A high risk, high reward gamble.
I’m amazed this issue has any traction at all with supposed free market capitalists.
I assume anyone making this argument has skin in the game.
Do you?
Classic text on this kind of thing.
It's not one question - it's a whole overflowing dinghy worth of questions sinking halfway across the Channel in truth.
Just as a start, and it's no more than that - what is it that we really want? We've traditionally used cheap labour to grow the economy (that's how the Industrial Revolution got started and the post-war economic boom). If we don't want cheap labour, are we prepared to accept the consequences in terms of relative economic decline?
Immigrants often do the work the British won't do - cleaning the streets and offices, looking after the sick and elderly. In essence, if we don't import people to wipe our bottoms when we can't, who will wipe our bottoms?
That's the economic dilemma - then there's the cultural dilemma of bringing into the country people who aren't like us, who have different cultures and customs. Go back 60-70 years and see how well Caribbean immigrants were treated in some parts of London. Inter racial tension is nothing new. Intra communal tension is.
Yet we don't have enough housing for the people already here (nor prisons for those already here who commit crimes for which they should be incarcerated) so councils spend millions on temporary accommodation for families who "should" have decent places to live but can't afford to rent let alone buy at the exorbitant prices the housing market demands.
Millions, however, are reliant on the rising value of their property, their only significant asset, to fund a later lifestyle to which they aspire. Selling the family home and downsizing pays for the cruises and the nice lunches where they spend money and are often served by cheap migrant labour employed by organisations to keep costs down.
It's all inter-connected, immigration, housing, health, economic and social policy, the very capitalist model under which we currently operate. The problem is too often they are compartmentalised whereas a holistic approach is needed.
I'm sorry, 21stC and all that.
But, millions of years of evolution and that and.. FANTASTIC.
"I've risked my life to escape the Taliban, left my family behind, blown my life savings on getting to Europe, but OMG I'm not going to the UK where they are under the yoke of the EU. Oh no, I'd rather stay here in France, in the, er, EU"
I can see why you struggle with a lot of this if that's your thought process.
I say if they're illegal they should be deported.
If they're legal they should be allowed to work.
Telling people they can stay in the country, but can't work, so need to live off taxpayers is the worst of all worlds.
But *if* it is true; that's a sign that the government made it harder for people to cross by their preferred method, so they moved to another method.
Ahem.
The insanity is telling people that they can stay in the country, for years, but can't work legally so end up living off the taxpayer. And since they're here, they inevitably are free not just to be taking taxes but working in the black economy so are making money from being here.
Saying either be deported or get a job is not insane.
If they're here legally, they should be allowed to work.
If they're here illegally, they should be able to be deported.
What's wrong with that?
https://x.com/politlcsuk/status/1823073108439228805?s=61
It's all very well to have the political power to say that something should happen, but if you can't actually make it happen, it's all a bit hollow.
It's blindingly obvious and entirely predictable.
#New General Election Poll
Wisconsin - 🔵 Harris +9
Michigan - 🔵 Harris +5
Pennsylvania - 🔵 Harris +4
Bullfinch (No Rank) - 1500 LV - 8/11
https://x.com/PpollingNumbers/status/1823062435810378154
‘I do indeed, sir, and am much obliged to you for your candor in telling me this: it confirms what was in my mind and I shall do all I can to make him conscious of the delicacy of his position. Though upon my word,’ he added with a sigh, ‘there are times when it seems to me that nothing short of a radical ablation of the membrum virile would answer, in this case.’
‘That is very generally the peccant part,’ said Mr Florey.
I met the love of my life and I still couldn't keep the snake inside the pet store.
Will avenge 958 years of humiliation as well.
A repoll when everyone has calmed down would surely show very different results.
Like, asking a victims family straight after sentencing for an awful crime, whether we should introduce the death penalty vs a few months later.
They both cost a lot of money to maintain for the amount of time you spend inside them.
https://x.com/manniefabian/status/1823031128208412884?s=61
The Supreme leader has been visiting today
https://x.com/aliostad/status/1823036467590897683?s=61
1) Conditions for refugees are intolerable in the camps around Calais
2) This makes France a failed state
3) Various treaties give us a legal claim to France.
4) France has oil