However, such legal niceties look like being overwhelmed by political realities. David Cameron is under intense pressure to agree a number to show that he cares, whatever the practical consequences may be. He is being unfairly traduced for resisting these blandishments and there is something deeply unpleasant about the picture of a dead child being used as a stick with which to beat a political opponent. The Prime Minister is as moved as anyone by the sight of a dead child; but he is right to say that it is better to help the refugees remain in situ, in camps in countries bordering Syria, in the expectation of one day returning home.
"The argument is about that not about who feels the most. And I resent the way that it is being framed as this in order to avoid the hard thinking which needs to be done. This will only result in bad policy, resentment, more tragedy and unintended outcomes."
I've just shared that on facebook. Partly as an experiment. It will be interesting to see what opprobrium I receive in return (or it might just remain unliked, uncommented and ignored)
No. As always, someone else i.e us, is expected to pay.
If you read the comments on the threads below the articles on this topic, even in the Guardian, it seems the public is completely fed up of politicians writing social cheques on their behalf with zero consultation or mandate.
From the UK point of view the scenes in Calais are a good pointer to what would happen.
Sorry, I'm confused now - I thought the majority view on this thread was that images that the media choose to show us should not determine immigration policy.
A massive guiltfest in the media..I wonder when the father of the two children will realise that they died because of his gross stupidity....If a British father had set sail to cross over to France in a leaky rubber dinghy and the children had drowned then daddy would have been arrested and charged with willful negligence. They were escaping from a Turkish holiday resort where thousands of Brits are on holiday..Not a effin war zone.
But none of that matters. The photo was perfectly framed and shot, and the subject content and scenic context near perfect for a dramatic image. It is extremely powerful for that. It led to a visceral gut reaction in millions of people. That will change government policy in several countries - including ours. It will probably go down in history as being as famous at that saigon execution photo taken during the Vietnam war.
Individually tragic though it was (and is) it just goes to show, to me at least, how tremendously illogical human beings are, and therefore our politics too.
The parents may have been stupid. But they were probably desperate or just longing for a better life. These are not bad things to be. And desperate people do silly things.
They were children. The father has suffered a terrible loss, no doubt made worse by the realisation of his own role in it. There is no need for anyone to kick a man when he is down. We can all mourn unknown children, grieving parents and feel and say that the world should not be like this, that common humanity requires us to do what we can to help. One does not walk on the other side when one sees someone suffering.
And when we've done that we think hard about what practical steps can be done and by whom which will reduce the risk of such tragedies.
The argument is about that not about who feels the most. And I resent the way that it is being framed as this in order to avoid the hard thinking which needs to be done. This will only result in bad policy, resentment, more tragedy and unintended outcomes.
You're preaching to the converted - I need no convincing of that.
Sorry: I wasn't getting at you. Shroud waving is a peculiarly unpleasant way of making policy and almost invariably results in bad outcomes.
If that father had a flat in Istanbul it is beyond belief that he did what he did. And if had already been refused asylum I'd be interested to know the full story. But - as always - the chidren suffer. It is tremendously sad.
Whatever Nick P may think, I don't mind the UK being in the same camp as Victor Orban.
By all means, take in several thousand from refugee camps, but not 200,000. We aren't in a bidding war with Germany and Sweden.
I'll take more notice of politicians like Cooper when they practice what they preach. She has at least 2 homes, one of them funded by the taxpayer. Why hasn't she take the lead and made one of them available to someone less fortunate than herself?
Dave agrees with Yvette
He can put a few up in that lovely house in Chipping Norton. His Father in Law has space for thousands. Perhaps they'll exchange words over lunch at the weekend?
30 to Watford?
Perhaps after those already here by virtue of birth, receive the help and support to which they're entitled.
No. As always, someone else i.e us, is expected to pay.
If you read the comments on the threads below the articles on this topic, even in the Guardian, it seems the public is completely fed up of politicians writing social cheques on their behalf with zero consultation or mandate.
A massive guiltfest in the media..I wonder when the father of the two children will realise that they died because of his gross stupidity....If a British father had set sail to cross over to France in a leaky rubber dinghy and the children had drowned then daddy would have been arrested and charged with willful negligence. They were escaping from a Turkish holiday resort where thousands of Brits are on holiday..Not a effin war zone.
But none of that matters. The photo was perfectly framed and shot, and the subject content and scenic context near perfect for a dramatic image. It is extremely powerful for that. It led to a visceral gut reaction in millions of people. That will change government policy in several countries - including ours. It will probably go down in history as being as famous at that saigon execution photo taken during the Vietnam war.
Individually tragic though it was (and is) it just goes to show, to me at least, how tremendously illogical human beings are, and therefore our politics too.
The parents may have been stupid. But they were probably desperate or just longing for a better life. These are not bad things to be. And desperate people do silly things.
You're preaching to the converted - I need no convincing of that.
Sorry: I wasn't getting at you. Shroud waving is a peculiarly unpleasant way of making policy and almost invariably results in bad outcomes.
If that father had a flat in Istanbul it is beyond belief that he did what he did. And if had already been refused asylum I'd be interested to know the full story. But - as always - the chidren suffer. It is tremendously sad.
I wouldn't want to jeer at anyone who's child had just been killed.
But, if both Canada and the UN had both concluded the family didn't qualify for asylum, the likelihood is that they didn't.
The ones in the Times are 80%+ against - and a lot pointing out the father's responsibility. I've been quite surprised.
I suspect the tide turned a while ago, and it's just starting to gather more will to actually say what they think. When the DT says something nice and supportive about David Cameron - well, I take notice!
No. As always, someone else i.e us, is expected to pay.
If you read the comments on the threads below the articles on this topic, even in the Guardian, it seems the public is completely fed up of politicians writing social cheques on their behalf with zero consultation or mandate.
A massive guiltfest in the media..I wonder when the father of the two children will realise that they died because of his gross stupidity....If a British father had set sail to cross over to France in a leaky rubber dinghy and the children had drowned then daddy would have been arrested and charged with willful negligence. They were escaping from a Turkish holiday resort where thousands of Brits are on holiday..Not a effin war zone.
But none of that matters. The photo was perfectly framed and shot, and the subject content and scenic context near perfect for a dramatic image. It is extremely powerful for that. It led to a visceral gut reaction in millions of people. That will change government policy in several countries - including ours. It will probably go down in history as being as famous at that saigon execution photo taken during the Vietnam war.
Individually tragic though it was (and is) it just goes to show, to me at least, how tremendously illogical human beings are, and therefore our politics too.
The parents may have been stupid. But they were probably desperate or just longing for a better life. These are not bad things to be. And desperate people do silly things.
They were children. The father has suffered a terrible loss, no doubt made worse by the realisation of his own role in it. There is no need for anyone to kick a man when he is down. We can all mourn unknown children, grieving parents and feel and say that the world should not be like this, that common humanity requires us to do what we can to help. One does not walk on the other side when one sees someone suffering.
And when we've done that we think hard about what practical steps can be done and by whom which will reduce the risk of such tragedies.
The argument is about that not about who feels the most. And I resent the way that it is being framed as this in order to avoid the hard thinking which needs to be done. This will only result in bad policy, resentment, more tragedy and unintended outcomes.
You're preaching to the converted - I need no convincing of that.
Sorry: I wasn't getting at you. Shroud waving is a peculiarly unpleasant way of making policy and almost invariably results in bad outcomes.
If that father had a flat in Istanbul it is beyond belief that he did what he did. And if had already been refused asylum I'd be interested to know the full story. But - as always - the chidren suffer. It is tremendously sad.
No probs. I think we could have many more cases of this as a *direct* result of EU policy.
Saying that we would want the boy to have lived is of course right. Saying that it's a test of our humanity to wish that he could have had the same opportunities as any four year old in the UK is silly.
PT I am not suggesting he government should waste stacls of dosh on surveys all the time but in Warringtons case there must be so few people on the waiting list that someone from the housing department could do a one day whisk around to gather opinions.. and we all know the out come of that .. and if I ran the housing department there then I would know exactly how many people had applied for social housing and in what capacity...that would be a major part of my job.. not to do so is not doing the job.. it is all at a finger click on a computer.
Saying that we would want the boy to have lived is of course right. Saying that it's a test of our humanity to wish that he could have had the same opportunities as any four year old in the UK is silly.
Iain Dale is soaking wet. He is also hyper-emotional in general, with poor betting and political judgement, and best ignored.
@Cyclefree - If that father had a flat in Istanbul it is beyond belief that he did what he did. And if had already been refused asylum I'd be interested to know the full story. But - as always - the chidren suffer. It is tremendously sad.
According to the Guardian: - The sister living in Canada who had been sponsoring the family claimed their application for repatriation had been rejected in June, however the Canadian authorities contradicted this and claim the application “was returned as it was incomplete as it did not meet regulatory requirements for proof of refugee status recognition”.
It appears as though the Kurdi family grow impatient/gave up with the due legal process and resorted to illegal means to enter the EU in their attempt the reach Canada.
Finally voted in the Labour leadership election. YC seemed to break out the pack in the last few days and got the nod. SC for deputy.
I am delighted. Not only have I backed her (did I mention that?) but if she does become LotO there will be a perception that it's more of the same plus is Mr Cooper running the show and he's hardly Claire Underwood = same old (New) Lab = no clean break = 2020 loss.
No no, remember it this way The lass from Cas is no saviour for Labour; but Burnham will earn 'em for the crew that is blue.
The ones in the Times are 80%+ against - and a lot pointing out the father's responsibility. I've been quite surprised.
I suspect the tide turned a while ago, and it's just starting to gather more will to actually say what they think. When the DT says something nice and supportive about David Cameron - well, I take notice!
No. As always, someone else i.e us, is expected to pay.
If you read the comments on the threads below the articles on this topic, even in the Guardian, it seems the public is completely fed up of politicians writing social cheques on their behalf with zero consultation or mandate.
I sense Cameron understands this.
Yesterday the BBC News reporter was very unpleasant to D. Carswell because he wasn't virtue signalling enough - even referring to the twitter storm as an 'argument'. No pretense whatsoever at neutral journalism - the reporter and his views were paramount.They don't report news any more - it's all emotion and angst. Very sad state of affairs.
The ones in the Times are 80%+ against - and a lot pointing out the father's responsibility. I've been quite surprised.
I suspect the tide turned a while ago, and it's just starting to gather more will to actually say what they think. When the DT says something nice and supportive about David Cameron - well, I take notice!
No. As always, someone else i.e us, is expected to pay.
If you read the comments on the threads below the articles on this topic, even in the Guardian, it seems the public is completely fed up of politicians writing social cheques on their behalf with zero consultation or mandate.
I sense Cameron understands this.
Yesterday the BBC News reporter was very unpleasant to D. Carswell because he wasn't virtue signalling enough - even referring to the twitter storm as an 'argument'. No pretense whatsoever at neutral journalism - the reporter and his views were paramount.They don't report news any more - it's all emotion and angst. Very sad state of affairs.
The ones in the Times are 80%+ against - and a lot pointing out the father's responsibility. I've been quite surprised.
I suspect the tide turned a while ago, and it's just starting to gather more will to actually say what they think. When the DT says something nice and supportive about David Cameron - well, I take notice!
No. As always, someone else i.e us, is expected to pay.
If you read the comments on the threads below the articles on this topic, even in the Guardian, it seems the public is completely fed up of politicians writing social cheques on their behalf with zero consultation or mandate.
I sense Cameron understands this.
Yesterday the BBC News reporter was very unpleasant to D. Carswell because he wasn't virtue signalling enough - even referring to the twitter storm as an 'argument'. No pretense whatsoever at neutral journalism - the reporter and his views were paramount.They don't report news any more - it's all emotion and angst. Very sad state of affairs.
I hope John Whittingdale shows no mercy.
Ironically I felt sorry for Carswell who I can't stand!
@Cyclefree - If that father had a flat in Istanbul it is beyond belief that he did what he did. And if had already been refused asylum I'd be interested to know the full story. But - as always - the chidren suffer. It is tremendously sad.
According to the Guardian: - The sister living in Canada who had been sponsoring the family claimed their application for repatriation had been rejected in June, however the Canadian authorities contradicted this and claim the application “was returned as it was incomplete as it did not meet regulatory requirements for proof of refugee status recognition”.
It appears as though the Kurdi family grow impatient/gave up with the due legal process and resorted to illegal means to enter the EU in their attempt the reach Canada.
The sad truth is, they were safe in Turkey.
It is yet another tragedy, upon a tragedy, upon a tragedy.
It also shows how a picture fails to tell a thousand words. I find it quite a shocking tale if true that this father had a flat in Istanbul !!
On topic: It really is a most splendid shambles. To add to the entertainment, when the result is announced we'll have the amusing spectacle of all sorts of people popping up to gloat that they shouldn't have got a vote but did, and another group bitching that they should have got a vote but were incorrectly purged.
The main problem with this whole migrant argument, even more so than most arguments, is that the nuances are lost. I for one was and am happy to take more refugees, though how many is 'fair' is a difficult question, whereas others might not be, but I still thought there was ridiculous posturing going on with regards presenting the Merkel plan as some kind of solution to the actual problem - people fleeing these areas and dying in the med and elsewhere - when it absolutely is not, it is a solution to the most visible symptom of that problem. Meaning one can support backing her, or not, and that doesn't actually say aything about whether we as a nation are 'ignoring' the problem, because there are other aspects to the problem which might be better handled in another fashion, but that gets lost in the accusations of us not doing our 'fair share', which gets the backs up of those who point out we are not doing nothing even if we had taken no more refugees (which might do more harm than good, and if one believes that, it would be a bad thing to give in to the emotional tugging going on).
It's so much talking past one another, even more than usual.
@Plato I think anyone with a more nuanced point than 'let them all in' are commenting on news articles, as it's a touch more anonymous than Twitter or Facebook where anything short of "Oh my God do something, anything, anything at all. Let 'em all come" looks likely to be blown out the water with alot of sound and fury.
From the UK point of view the scenes in Calais are a good pointer to what would happen.
Sorry, I'm confused now - I thought the majority view on this thread was that images that the media choose to show us should not determine immigration policy.
? Economic migrants are not trying to break into Britain through the Channel Tunnel then? We are to pretend that this is not happening? What have media images got to do with examining the facts. We know hundreds of people are drowning in the mediterranean. No one is trying to hide that fact.
PT I am not suggesting he government should waste stacls of dosh on surveys all the time but in Warringtons case there must be so few people on the waiting list that someone from the housing department could do a one day whisk around to gather opinions.. and we all know the out come of that .. and if I ran the housing department there then I would know exactly how many people had applied for social housing and in what capacity...that would be a major part of my job.. not to do so is not doing the job.. it is all at a finger click on a computer.
So government by survey is not a principle you believe in but is for some reason something that should have been done this time, though no specific reason why? That's just absurd. Either you believe in government by opinion polls or you don't, there's no reason why it should apply in this instance but not others.
I see Bob Geldof has offered to house 4 families in his many homes.
I don't recollect that he's ever publicly offered to do the same for any homeless British in similar circumstances.
I mentioned Sir Bob earlier this morning, only a matter of time before others enter the bidding. As much as I loathe Geldof this is what the very start point should be: those that can have a responsibility to look after those that can't.
Saying that we would want the boy to have lived is of course right. Saying that it's a test of our humanity to wish that he could have had the same opportunities as any four year old in the UK is silly.
Iain Dale is soaking wet. He is also hyper-emotional in general, with poor betting and political judgement, and best ignored.
His take on the mass of LibDem MPs Westminster would still have is particularly embarrassing to revisit.
Mr. Felix, hearing him squeal about 'opening the bidding' was a bit surreal.
'People on Twitter' as an argument would also suppose a lot of other interesting new policies.
Carswell was spot on about stopping the boats.
I think the reporter 'lost it' at that point. I was so embarassed for him. Oh for those halcyon days of the old stuffy Beeb - when "fog in the channel, Europe cut off" was as tabloid as it got.
Labour's position on this is a bit like the Boy who cried Wolf but in reverse.
In the past they were so insistent on an open door immigration policy, so critical of anyone who questioned that and so willing to jeer at anyone who wondered whether all immigrants were equally welcome or able/willing to integrate that, now, when there is an arguable case for opening our doors to those who need refuge, no-one is listening to Labour when they say just that.
People resent having their charity and hospitality abused. And that is what I think an increasing number of people in this country feel about immigration, whether it is legal migrants, illegal ones or asylum seekers. They understand the value etc, they like the immigrants they know, they want to be compassionate to those who deserve our compassion but feel that too many governments simply have not been willing to tackle those who have taken and are continuing to take the p*ss out of us on this.
I found it ironic that NickPalmer quoted Blair talking about control of immigration. If there's one thing that can be said about Labour's stance on this is that in 1997 - 2010, Labour utterly lost control of it - if indeed they ever intended having any control over it in the first place.
PT I am not suggesting he government should waste stacls of dosh on surveys all the time but in Warringtons case there must be so few people on the waiting list that someone from the housing department could do a one day whisk around to gather opinions.. and we all know the out come of that .. and if I ran the housing department there then I would know exactly how many people had applied for social housing and in what capacity...that would be a major part of my job.. not to do so is not doing the job.. it is all at a finger click on a computer.
So government by survey is not a principle you believe in but is for some reason something that should have been done this time, though no specific reason why? That's just absurd. Either you believe in government by opinion polls or you don't, there's no reason why it should apply in this instance but not others.
if a council does not know the statistics of its housing applicants then they all deserve to be dismissed for incompetence
Labour's position on this is a bit like the Boy who cried Wolf but in reverse.
In the past they were so insistent on an open door immigration policy, so critical of anyone who questioned that and so willing to jeer at anyone who wondered whether all immigrants were equally welcome or able/willing to integrate that, now, when there is an arguable case for opening our doors to those who need refuge, no-one is listening to Labour when they say just that.
People resent having their charity and hospitality abused. And that is what I think an increasing number of people in this country feel about immigration, whether it is legal migrants, illegal ones or asylum seekers. They understand the value etc, they like the immigrants they know, they want to be compassionate to those who deserve our compassion but feel that too many governments simply have not been willing to tackle those who have taken and are continuing to take the p*ss out of us on this.
I found it ironic that NickPalmer quoted Blair talking about control of immigration. If there's one thing that can be said about Labour's stance on this is that in 1997 - 2010, Labour utterly lost control of it - if indeed they ever intended having any control over it in the first place.
Excellent.
Immigration fatigue has set in: Eastern Europeans, Calais, Syria, asylum seekers, economic migrants, illegal immigrants - where does it start and where does it finish.
Labour's position on this is a bit like the Boy who cried Wolf but in reverse.
In the past they were so insistent on an open door immigration policy, so critical of anyone who questioned that and so willing to jeer at anyone who wondered whether all immigrants were equally welcome or able/willing to integrate that, now, when there is an arguable case for opening our doors to those who need refuge, no-one is listening to Labour when they say just that.
PT I am not suggesting he government should waste stacls of dosh on surveys all the time but in Warringtons case there must be so few people on the waiting list that someone from the housing department could do a one day whisk around to gather opinions.. and we all know the out come of that .. and if I ran the housing department there then I would know exactly how many people had applied for social housing and in what capacity...that would be a major part of my job.. not to do so is not doing the job.. it is all at a finger click on a computer.
So government by survey is not a principle you believe in but is for some reason something that should have been done this time, though no specific reason why? That's just absurd. Either you believe in government by opinion polls or you don't, there's no reason why it should apply in this instance but not others.
Isn't the general point that is being made here is that governments here - including local councils - should think of their own citizens first? And should find some way of consulting their citizens, those who elect and pay for them?
If there are houses available for families in need, it is not at all unreasonable for local councils to make those houses available to those families already in need and on the waiting list first before offering them to families somewhere else in the world.
Finally voted in the Labour leadership election. YC seemed to break out the pack in the last few days and got the nod. SC for deputy.
I am delighted. Not only have I backed her (did I mention that?) but if she does become LotO there will be a perception that it's more of the same plus is Mr Cooper running the show and he's hardly Claire Underwood = same old (New) Lab = no clean break = 2020 loss.
No no, remember it this way The lass from Cas is no saviour for Labour; but Burnham will earn 'em for the crew that is blue.
If only the vessels vith the vater all held the pellets with the poison.
German factories have suffered a shock collapse in export business, as demand from outside Europe for German goods evaporated in July.
Non-eurozone orders slid by more than 9pc, sending overall export demand down by 5.2pc, according to figures from the country's federal statistical office.
"The Great Migration is a 21st century problem, far bigger than Syria and bigger than the authorities in Brussels seem able to comprehend."
A must read article.This is about denizens of the Third World now having the wherewithal and technology to up sticks and illegally head for the First World.
Greed, pure a simple.
Greed is the wrong word. Hope or despair or ... in fact there are many words, but for the vast majority of migrants, let alone displaced persons and refugees, greed is the wrong one.
A vote of Labour list readers put Attlee top with 36%. Somewhat surprisingly, Blair was second with 15%. 2% of respondents took the mickey voted for Gordon Brown.
I get confused sometimes about whether I have actually posted something or just thought about it so apologies to everyone if I already said this over the last few days.
It strikes me there is only one way to deal with this crisis that has any chance of long term success.
1. We recognise that there is a genuine humanitarian crisis on the borders of Syria and that we need to do far more to help those people in camps around the borders of the country - Turkey, Lebanon and Jordan. The UK and US are already leading the way on this and need to shame/pressurise the rest of the first world into doing more. The people in those camps need to feel safe with access to health care, food and warm clothing, proper shelter and education for the children. 2. We recognise at the same time that there are many people - families with young children, old and infirm, injured etc - for whom the camps are almost as dangerous as staying in Syria. We should, as a collection of first world nations, organise boats and airlifts to take those people out of the camps and distribute them amongst our countries. We can make whatever provision we like based on our own laws and requirements for how long they will be allowed to stay but I imagine it will be many years in any case and we need to accept that. 3. In doing so we need to make clear, again as a group of nations, that this is the only way we will accept refugees from these camps. Anyone making their own way into Europe by boat or on foot will be returned to their point of departure. 4. We need to put far more diplomatic and political pressure on the other Arab countries who are not doing their bit.
Will this work? I don't know for sure. I do know that doing nothing is not - in my eyes - an acceptable response but neither is encouraging more and more dangerous migrant journeys by letting them stay if they are lucky enough to make it to European shores.
PT I am not suggesting he government should waste stacls of dosh on surveys all the time but in Warringtons case there must be so few people on the waiting list that someone from the housing department could do a one day whisk around to gather opinions.. and we all know the out come of that .. and if I ran the housing department there then I would know exactly how many people had applied for social housing and in what capacity...that would be a major part of my job.. not to do so is not doing the job.. it is all at a finger click on a computer.
So government by survey is not a principle you believe in but is for some reason something that should have been done this time, though no specific reason why? That's just absurd. Either you believe in government by opinion polls or you don't, there's no reason why it should apply in this instance but not others.
Isn't the general point that is being made here is that governments here - including local councils - should think of their own citizens first? And should find some way of consulting their citizens, those who elect and pay for them?
If there are houses available for families in need, it is not at all unreasonable for local councils to make those houses available to those families already in need and on the waiting list first before offering them to families somewhere else in the world.
It's extraordinary. Local authorities are constantly complaining about the need to cut services due to budgetary restraints, and yet can somehow find the funding to look after those from thousands of miles away, in the blink of an eye. If I was on a waiting list, I'd be seething with anger.
"Good morning. In only eight days, Left-wing Activists from here will join others from around the world. And you will be launching the largest political battle in the history of mankind. "Mankind." That word should have new meaning for all of us today. We can't be consumed by our petty differences anymore. We will be united in our common interests. Perhaps it's fate that day is the 12th of September, and you will once again be fighting for our freedom... Not from tyranny, oppression, or persecution... but from annihilation. We are fighting for our right to live. To exist. And should we win the day, the 12th of September will no longer be known as a Labour Party holiday, but as the day the world declared in one voice: We will not go quietly into the night! We will not vanish without a fight! We're going to live on! We're going to survive! The day we celebrate our Independence Day!"
I get confused sometimes about whether I have actually posted something or just thought about it so apologies to everyone if I already said this over the last few days.
It strikes me there is only one way to deal with this crisis that has any chance of long term success.
1. We recognise that there is a genuine humanitarian crisis on the borders of Syria and that we need to do far more to help those people in camps around the borders of the country - Turkey, Lebanon and Jordan. The UK and US are already leading the way on this and need to shame/pressurise the rest of the first world into doing more. The people in those camps need to feel safe with access to health care, food and warm clothing, proper shelter and education for the children. 2. We recognise at the same time that there are many people - families with young children, old and infirm, injured etc - for whom the camps are almost as dangerous as staying in Syria. We should, as a collection of first world nations, organise boats and airlifts to take those people out of the camps and distribute them amongst our countries. We can make whatever provision we like based on our own laws and requirements for how long they will be allowed to stay but I imagine it will be many years in any case and we need to accept that. 3. In doing so we need to make clear, again as a group of nations, that this is the only way we will accept refugees from these camps. Anyone making their own way into Europe by boat or on foot will be returned to their point of departure. 4. We need to put far more diplomatic and political pressure on the other Arab countries who are not doing their bit.
Will this work? I don't know for sure. I do know that doing nothing is not - in my eyes - an acceptable response but neither is encouraging more and more dangerous migrant journeys by letting them stay if they are lucky enough to make it to European shores.
Add in 5. Because they are exploiting the humanitarian crisis in Syria, all human trafficking lowest-of-the-low human scum will have a US$100k bounty on their heads. Delivred to the nearest EU embassy. Dead or alive. Those who are alive can spend an unpleasant few years in Diego Garcia.
6. Those from outside Syria who are exploiting the confusion to access the EU will be treated as criminals - and incarcerated upon arrival. They will have all their data taken, including DNA, then be expelled - and be barred from claiming any form of access into the EU for life.
I get confused sometimes about whether I have actually posted something or just thought about it so apologies to everyone if I already said this over the last few days.
It strikes me there is only one way to deal with this crisis that has any chance of long term success.
1. We recognise that there is a genuine humanitarian crisis on the borders of Syria and that we need to do far more to help those people in camps around the borders of the country - Turkey, Lebanon and Jordan. The UK and US are already leading the way on this and need to shame/pressurise the rest of the first world into doing more. The people in those camps need to feel safe with access to health care, food and warm clothing, proper shelter and education for the children. 2. We recognise at the same time that there are many people - families with young children, old and infirm, injured etc - for whom the camps are almost as dangerous as staying in Syria. We should, as a collection of first world nations, organise boats and airlifts to take those people out of the camps and distribute them amongst our countries. We can make whatever provision we like based on our own laws and requirements for how long they will be allowed to stay but I imagine it will be many years in any case and we need to accept that. 3. In doing so we need to make clear, again as a group of nations, that this is the only way we will accept refugees from these camps. Anyone making their own way into Europe by boat or on foot will be returned to their point of departure. 4. We need to put far more diplomatic and political pressure on the other Arab countries who are not doing their bit.
Will this work? I don't know for sure. I do know that doing nothing is not - in my eyes - an acceptable response but neither is encouraging more and more dangerous migrant journeys by letting them stay if they are lucky enough to make it to European shores.
I get confused sometimes about whether I have actually posted something or just thought about it so apologies to everyone if I already said this over the last few days.
Your comments are always worth reading Mr Tyndall, - even for a second time
Excellent thoughts btw. – International agreement/long term planning is the only way forward.
I get confused sometimes about whether I have actually posted something or just thought about it so apologies to everyone if I already said this over the last few days.
It strikes me there is only one way to deal with this crisis that has any chance of long term success.
1. We recognise that there is a genuine humanitarian crisis on the borders of Syria and that we need to do far more to help those people in camps around the borders of the country - Turkey, Lebanon and Jordan. The UK and US are already leading the way on this and need to shame/pressurise the rest of the first world into doing more. The people in those camps need to feel safe with access to health care, food and warm clothing, proper shelter and education for the children. 2. We recognise at the same time that there are many people - families with young children, old and infirm, injured etc - for whom the camps are almost as dangerous as staying in Syria. We should, as a collection of first world nations, organise boats and airlifts to take those people out of the camps and distribute them amongst our countries. We can make whatever provision we like based on our own laws and requirements for how long they will be allowed to stay but I imagine it will be many years in any case and we need to accept that. 3. In doing so we need to make clear, again as a group of nations, that this is the only way we will accept refugees from these camps. Anyone making their own way into Europe by boat or on foot will be returned to their point of departure. 4. We need to put far more diplomatic and political pressure on the other Arab countries who are not doing their bit.
Will this work? I don't know for sure. I do know that doing nothing is not - in my eyes - an acceptable response but neither is encouraging more and more dangerous migrant journeys by letting them stay if they are lucky enough to make it to European shores.
those that can have a responsibility to look after those that can't.
Isn;t that why we pay taxes?
So in distributing tax collected where on the list of priorities do people from overseas figure?
Serious question bearing in mind we're £1.5trillion in debt, platitudes are easy.
They figure at 0.7% of our GDP. But I would argue that as well as being humanitarian it should also figure in being used to develop stability in those places we see as being potentially dangerous for us. I suggest its better to spend money than blood. But in economic terms it surely makes sense to see a world that is secure and growing wealthier.
those that can have a responsibility to look after those that can't.
Isn;t that why we pay taxes?
So in distributing tax collected where on the list of priorities do people from overseas figure?
Serious question bearing in mind we're £1.5trillion in debt, platitudes are easy.
They figure at 0.7% of our GDP. But I would argue that as well as being humanitarian it should also figure in being used to develop stability in those places we see as being potentially dangerous for us. I suggest its better to spend money than blood. But in economic terms it surely makes sense to see a world that is secure and growing wealthier.
Maybe. Evidence is migration increases as countries get more prosperous because people have more ways to become aware of lifestyles they envy, and more ways to pay to travel to other countries either legally or unlawfully. It takes a massive increase in prosperity before people are sufficiently satisfied at home that migration isn't worth it. See Senegal.
those that can have a responsibility to look after those that can't.
Isn;t that why we pay taxes?
So in distributing tax collected where on the list of priorities do people from overseas figure?
Serious question bearing in mind we're £1.5trillion in debt, platitudes are easy.
They figure at 0.7% of our GDP. But I would argue that as well as being humanitarian it should also figure in being used to develop stability in those places we see as being potentially dangerous for us. I suggest its better to spend money than blood. But in economic terms it surely makes sense to see a world that is secure and growing wealthier.
Maybe. Evidence is migration increases as countries get more prosperous because people have more ways to become aware of lifestyles they envy, and more ways to pay to travel to other countries either legally or unlawfully. It takes a massive increase in prosperity before people are sufficiently satisfied at home that migration isn't worth it. See Senegal.
There is a lengthy debate to be had about the 0.7% and an equally lengthy one about what to do with the £12bn. As I mention earlier today helping this crisis (whatever that means) should be the priority. Vanity projects will have wait, if you're interested I'll provide some examples.
CR..The pic should have the caption "This child died because his father was stupid"
Don't you think he's suffered enough?
No, not even close.
These days people are keen to shift the blame onto others for the consequences of their own actions. Life has turned into a sloping-shoulders blame-fest where nobody actually takes responsibility for things they do.
In this case the child died as a direct consequence of him wanting to upgrade from a holiday resort to somewhere better. There should be no escaping the responsibility for his (and only his) actions.
Only his relevant god-botherer can grant absolution. Or twitter, it seems.
Apparently, the father of the dead Syrian boy wanted to go to Europe to get his teeth fixed? Source: Child's aunt, via Sky news. (I read this somewhere yesterday, but couldn't believe it was true).
those that can have a responsibility to look after those that can't.
Isn;t that why we pay taxes?
So in distributing tax collected where on the list of priorities do people from overseas figure?
Serious question bearing in mind we're £1.5trillion in debt, platitudes are easy.
They figure at 0.7% of our GDP. But I would argue that as well as being humanitarian it should also figure in being used to develop stability in those places we see as being potentially dangerous for us. I suggest its better to spend money than blood. But in economic terms it surely makes sense to see a world that is secure and growing wealthier.
Maybe. Evidence is migration increases as countries get more prosperous because people have more ways to become aware of lifestyles they envy, and more ways to pay to travel to other countries either legally or unlawfully. It takes a massive increase in prosperity before people are sufficiently satisfied at home that migration isn't worth it. See Senegal.
There is a lengthy debate to be had about the 0.7% and an equally lengthy one about what to do with the £12bn. As I mention earlier today helping this crisis (whatever that means) should be the priority. Vanity projects will have wait, if you're interested I'll provide some examples.
I was not commenting on aid spending, I was saying there is strong evidence that the number of people leaving their country as economic migrants INCREASES as their country gets more prosperous, it does not decrease as previously supposed until the country get quite wealthy. Helping countries develop might of it self be a good thing, but it will increase migration dramatically.
CR..The pic should have the caption "This child died because his father was stupid"
Don't you think he's suffered enough?
No, not even close.
These days people are keen to shift the blame onto others for the consequences of their own actions. Life has turned into a sloping-shoulders blame-fest where nobody actually takes responsibility for things they do.
In this case the child died as a direct consequence of him wanting to upgrade from a holiday resort to somewhere better. There should be no escaping the responsibility for his (and only his) actions.
Only his relevant god-botherer can grant absolution. Or twitter, it seems.
Had he been a Brit trying the same thing heading for France or Germany he would have been arrested for manslaughter at the very least. Causing the death of your children due to negligence for whatever motive is a crime
Apparently, the father of the dead Syrian boy wanted to go to Europe to get his teeth fixed? Source: Child's aunt, via Sky news. (I read this somewhere yesterday, but couldn't believe it was true).
Apparently, the father of the dead Syrian boy wanted to go to Europe to get his teeth fixed? Source: Child's aunt, via Sky news. (I read this somewhere yesterday, but couldn't believe it was true).
those that can have a responsibility to look after those that can't.
Isn;t that why we pay taxes?
So in distributing tax collected where on the list of priorities do people from overseas figure?
Serious question bearing in mind we're £1.5trillion in debt, platitudes are easy.
They figure at 0.7% of our GDP. But I would argue that as well as being humanitarian it should also figure in being used to develop stability in those places we see as being potentially dangerous for us. I suggest its better to spend money than blood. But in economic terms it surely makes sense to see a world that is secure and growing wealthier.
Maybe. Evidence is migration increases as countries get more prosperous because people have more ways to become aware of lifestyles they envy, and more ways to pay to travel to other countries either legally or unlawfully. It takes a massive increase in prosperity before people are sufficiently satisfied at home that migration isn't worth it. See Senegal.
There is a lengthy debate to be had about the 0.7% and an equally lengthy one about what to do with the £12bn. As I mention earlier today helping this crisis (whatever that means) should be the priority. Vanity projects will have wait, if you're interested I'll provide some examples.
I was not commenting on aid spending, I was saying there is strong evidence that the number of people leaving their country as economic migrants INCREASES as their country gets more prosperous, it does not decrease as previously supposed until the country get quite wealthy. Helping countries develop might of it self be a good thing, but it will increase migration dramatically.
My point supports yours, our priority should not be to develop other countries but to help those in need, that in itself will come down to prioritising. And so it goes on, some people will always call for more help.
OT slightly and not wanting to add to the sum of their suffering.. but why were the MCanns not charged with child neglect. I always felt if they had been WWC from some Northern town and not Surgeons the law would have been down on them like a ton of bricks
Apparently, the father of the dead Syrian boy wanted to go to Europe to get his teeth fixed? Source: Child's aunt, via Sky news. (I read this somewhere yesterday, but couldn't believe it was true).
It would appear that the UK's asylum policy is decided by sensationalist journalism. The family were held up as the perfect example of the type of migrants the UK should be helping. Turns out the father was just after taxpayer funded dental treatment.
OT slightly and not wanting to add to the sum of their suffering.. but why were the MCanns not charged with child neglect. I always felt if they had been WWC from some Northern town and not Surgeons the law would have been down on them like a ton of bricks
Great PR and a useless local police force.
Personally I'm with Gonçalo Amaral on the whole sorry affair.
As of 31st August 2015: Amnesty International reported that Qatar, United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Bahrain have offered "zero resettlement places to Syrian refugees"
Sky reporting on website Sir Bob Geldof willing to house 4 refugee families in his home. Fair do's to him.
Good for him. Wonder how many of the others who are clamouring to copy Merkel's policy are willing to put their money where their mouths are and open up their homes and wallets to support refugees and migrants?
I hadn't realised that "check your privilege" had been adopted by the paleo-right until this week.
Could someone tell me what's the maximum standard of property and educational background that one can live in before one is disbarred from having a view on the migrant crisis? Are five bedrooms too many? Minor public schools I appreciate are out, but what about grammar schools?
Apparently, the father of the dead Syrian boy wanted to go to Europe to get his teeth fixed? Source: Child's aunt, via Sky news. (I read this somewhere yesterday, but couldn't believe it was true).
It would appear that the UK's asylum policy is decided by sensationalist journalism. The family were held up as the perfect example of the type of migrants the UK should be helping.
Cameron said yesterday the focus would be on Syrian refugees presently in camps directly bordering Syria. – Don’t think he mentioned long term residents of Istanbul.
Sky reporting on website Sir Bob Geldof willing to house 4 refugee families in his home. Fair do's to him.
Good for him. Wonder how many of the others who are clamouring to copy Merkel's policy are willing to put their money where their mouths are and open up their homes and wallets to support refugees and migrants?
Well you can count out Emma Thompson, she’d rather just blame everyone as being racist.
I hadn't realised that "check your privilege" had been adopted by the paleo-right until this week.
Could someone tell me what's the maximum standard of property and educational background that one can live in before one is disbarred from having a view on the migrant crisis? Are five bedrooms too many? Minor public schools I appreciate are out, but what about grammar schools?
What is your view on free dental care for impatient Istanbul residents ?
(snip) It strikes me there is only one way to deal with this crisis that has any chance of long term success.
1. We recognise that there is a genuine humanitarian crisis on the borders of Syria and that we need to do far more to help those people in camps around the borders of the country - Turkey, Lebanon and Jordan. The UK and US are already leading the way on this and need to shame/pressurise the rest of the first world into doing more. The people in those camps need to feel safe with access to health care, food and warm clothing, proper shelter and education for the children. 2. We recognise at the same time that there are many people - families with young children, old and infirm, injured etc - for whom the camps are almost as dangerous as staying in Syria. We should, as a collection of first world nations, organise boats and airlifts to take those people out of the camps and distribute them amongst our countries. We can make whatever provision we like based on our own laws and requirements for how long they will be allowed to stay but I imagine it will be many years in any case and we need to accept that. 3. In doing so we need to make clear, again as a group of nations, that this is the only way we will accept refugees from these camps. Anyone making their own way into Europe by boat or on foot will be returned to their point of departure. 4. We need to put far more diplomatic and political pressure on the other Arab countries who are not doing their bit.
Will this work? I don't know for sure. I do know that doing nothing is not - in my eyes - an acceptable response but neither is encouraging more and more dangerous migrant journeys by letting them stay if they are lucky enough to make it to European shores.
I think this is an excellent starting point. One of my concerns about our Aid Industry is that it has become self-serving and frankly a rip off. I also really, really, don't like money being spent to provide basic services to those who live in non failed states, democracies in some cases, who think that space or hi-tech weaponry is more important than their own citizens.
But spending UK tax payers money making refugee camps in the vicinity tolerable and helping to create circumstances when they can go home seems to me to be an excellent use of our money. Given there are currently something approaching 60m displaced people world wide I think the time has come to stop spending our money on almost anything else.
I apologise for not replying to the many responses to my comments this morning. I was at work. Briefly, I agree that Merkel's response was less than wise; that the UK should be proud of what it has done already but I think that we need to do more. Richard's proposals, like Cameron's seem a very good place to start.
Sky reporting on website Sir Bob Geldof willing to house 4 refugee families in his home. Fair do's to him.
Good for him. Wonder how many of the others who are clamouring to copy Merkel's policy are willing to put their money where their mouths are and open up their homes and wallets to support refugees and migrants?
*** Paging Yvette Cooper *** Paging Yvette Cooper ***
Comments
I've just shared that on facebook. Partly as an experiment. It will be interesting to see what opprobrium I receive in return (or it might just remain unliked, uncommented and ignored)
If you read the comments on the threads below the articles on this topic, even in the Guardian, it seems the public is completely fed up of politicians writing social cheques on their behalf with zero consultation or mandate.
I sense Cameron understands this.
If that father had a flat in Istanbul it is beyond belief that he did what he did. And if had already been refused asylum I'd be interested to know the full story. But - as always - the chidren suffer. It is tremendously sad.
But, if both Canada and the UN had both concluded the family didn't qualify for asylum, the likelihood is that they didn't.
I suspect the tide turned a while ago, and it's just starting to gather more will to actually say what they think. When the DT says something nice and supportive about David Cameron - well, I take notice!
The Book Of Souls: the new album by Iron Maiden is just fantastic.
http://www.conservativehome.com/thecolumnists/2015/09/iain-dale-syrian-refugees-heres-what-a-true-compassionate-conservative-would-do.html#comments
Saying that we would want the boy to have lived is of course right. Saying that it's a test of our humanity to wish that he could have had the same opportunities as any four year old in the UK is silly.
According to the Guardian: - The sister living in Canada who had been sponsoring the family claimed their application for repatriation had been rejected in June, however the Canadian authorities contradicted this and claim the application “was returned as it was incomplete as it did not meet regulatory requirements for proof of refugee status recognition”.
It appears as though the Kurdi family grow impatient/gave up with the due legal process and resorted to illegal means to enter the EU in their attempt the reach Canada.
The sad truth is, they were safe in Turkey.
The lass from Cas is no saviour for Labour; but Burnham will earn 'em for the crew that is blue.
It also shows how a picture fails to tell a thousand words. I find it quite a shocking tale if true that this father had a flat in Istanbul !!
I don't recollect that he's ever publicly offered to do the same for any homeless British in similar circumstances.
It's so much talking past one another, even more than usual.
The interviewer's got an empty head and a bleeding heart.
Economic migrants are not trying to break into Britain through the Channel Tunnel then? We are to pretend that this is not happening? What have media images got to do with examining the facts. We know hundreds of people are drowning in the mediterranean. No one is trying to hide that fact.
'People on Twitter' as an argument would also suppose a lot of other interesting new policies.
Carswell was spot on about stopping the boats.
Isn;t that why we pay taxes?
In the past they were so insistent on an open door immigration policy, so critical of anyone who questioned that and so willing to jeer at anyone who wondered whether all immigrants were equally welcome or able/willing to integrate that, now, when there is an arguable case for opening our doors to those who need refuge, no-one is listening to Labour when they say just that.
People resent having their charity and hospitality abused. And that is what I think an increasing number of people in this country feel about immigration, whether it is legal migrants, illegal ones or asylum seekers. They understand the value etc, they like the immigrants they know, they want to be compassionate to those who deserve our compassion but feel that too many governments simply have not been willing to tackle those who have taken and are continuing to take the p*ss out of us on this.
I found it ironic that NickPalmer quoted Blair talking about control of immigration. If there's one thing that can be said about Labour's stance on this is that in 1997 - 2010, Labour utterly lost control of it - if indeed they ever intended having any control over it in the first place.
Serious question bearing in mind we're £1.5trillion in debt, platitudes are easy.
Immigration fatigue has set in: Eastern Europeans, Calais, Syria, asylum seekers, economic migrants, illegal immigrants - where does it start and where does it finish.
https://twitter.com/liam_o_hare/status/587566960835178497
If there are houses available for families in need, it is not at all unreasonable for local councils to make those houses available to those families already in need and on the waiting list first before offering them to families somewhere else in the world.
"Clement Attlee chosen as Labour’s greatest ever leader"
http://labourlist.org/2015/09/clement-attlee-chosen-as-labours-greatest-ever-leader/
A vote of Labour list readers put Attlee top with 36%.
Somewhat surprisingly, Blair was second with 15%.
2% of respondents
took the mickeyvoted for Gordon Brown.http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/generalelection/ed-miliband-unveils-stone-carved-with-labour-pledges-to-be-placed-at-downing-st-if-he-wins-10221946.html
It strikes me there is only one way to deal with this crisis that has any chance of long term success.
1. We recognise that there is a genuine humanitarian crisis on the borders of Syria and that we need to do far more to help those people in camps around the borders of the country - Turkey, Lebanon and Jordan. The UK and US are already leading the way on this and need to shame/pressurise the rest of the first world into doing more. The people in those camps need to feel safe with access to health care, food and warm clothing, proper shelter and education for the children.
2. We recognise at the same time that there are many people - families with young children, old and infirm, injured etc - for whom the camps are almost as dangerous as staying in Syria. We should, as a collection of first world nations, organise boats and airlifts to take those people out of the camps and distribute them amongst our countries. We can make whatever provision we like based on our own laws and requirements for how long they will be allowed to stay but I imagine it will be many years in any case and we need to accept that.
3. In doing so we need to make clear, again as a group of nations, that this is the only way we will accept refugees from these camps. Anyone making their own way into Europe by boat or on foot will be returned to their point of departure.
4. We need to put far more diplomatic and political pressure on the other Arab countries who are not doing their bit.
Will this work? I don't know for sure. I do know that doing nothing is not - in my eyes - an acceptable response but neither is encouraging more and more dangerous migrant journeys by letting them stay if they are lucky enough to make it to European shores.
"Good morning. In only eight days, Left-wing Activists from here will join others from around the world. And you will be launching the largest political battle in the history of mankind. "Mankind." That word should have new meaning for all of us today. We can't be consumed by our petty differences anymore. We will be united in our common interests. Perhaps it's fate that day is the 12th of September, and you will once again be fighting for our freedom... Not from tyranny, oppression, or persecution... but from annihilation. We are fighting for our right to live. To exist. And should we win the day, the 12th of September will no longer be known as a Labour Party holiday, but as the day the world declared in one voice: We will not go quietly into the night! We will not vanish without a fight! We're going to live on! We're going to survive! The day we celebrate our Independence Day!"
6. Those from outside Syria who are exploiting the confusion to access the EU will be treated as criminals - and incarcerated upon arrival. They will have all their data taken, including DNA, then be expelled - and be barred from claiming any form of access into the EU for life.
Excellent thoughts btw. – International agreement/long term planning is the only way forward.
Surely a good pal of Corbyn like Michael Meacher could help out assuming he's still got his property empire ?
The many homes of Michael Meacher - The Guardian
www.theguardian.com › World › UK News › Labour
19 Jan 2001 - But Michael Meacher has come a long way from the days of that chilly ... does not want to come clean on exactly how many homes he owns.
These days people are keen to shift the blame onto others for the consequences of their own actions. Life has turned into a sloping-shoulders blame-fest where nobody actually takes responsibility for things they do.
In this case the child died as a direct consequence of him wanting to upgrade from a holiday resort to somewhere better. There should be no escaping the responsibility for his (and only his) actions.
Only his relevant god-botherer can grant absolution. Or twitter, it seems.
Table on the right
https://youtube.com/watch?v=QZUuoaq1MLM
2,138,999 estimated (April 2015)
1,938,999 registered (April 2015)
Personally I'm with Gonçalo Amaral on the whole sorry affair.
How many homes does Bono own ?
http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9623722/how-can-labours-centrists-survive/
Could someone tell me what's the maximum standard of property and educational background that one can live in before one is disbarred from having a view on the migrant crisis? Are five bedrooms too many? Minor public schools I appreciate are out, but what about grammar schools?
After a bit of publicity again is he?
New Thread New Thread
But spending UK tax payers money making refugee camps in the vicinity tolerable and helping to create circumstances when they can go home seems to me to be an excellent use of our money. Given there are currently something approaching 60m displaced people world wide I think the time has come to stop spending our money on almost anything else.
I apologise for not replying to the many responses to my comments this morning. I was at work. Briefly, I agree that Merkel's response was less than wise; that the UK should be proud of what it has done already but I think that we need to do more. Richard's proposals, like Cameron's seem a very good place to start.