How the PM’s leader ratings are moving – politicalbetting.com
Options
Comments
-
Perhaps we should get the refugees to do it.nico679 said:Even if you could sort out social care in terms of more money who exactly is going to be doing the caring . Unless you increase foreign workers which this cesspit government won’t do where are these carers going to come from .
0 -
Hey mate how are you?IshmaelZ said:
Sleazy broken Tories on the slideCorrectHorseBattery said:https://twitter.com/Survation/status/1417559489700630541
The dam has broken! 40% breached!
Hartlepool = peak Johnson0 -
That Labour lead bet is looking tasty0
-
Blimey it's testy on here tonight again.
As for refugees, there isn't a simple answer, otherwise it would have been done .
Not funding warlords, and selling weapons to all and sundry might be a start?5 -
Just rewatched S1E1 of The West Wing.
Fantastic.
Such sharp dialogue might well watch the whole thing again.
Oh and a sub plot of some Cubans making their way to America some of whom died on the way and Pres. Bartlett says let the survivors in. That's how to do it.0 -
He may need to be careful, if she loses enough might not Macron face someone who would actually beat him in the second round?HYUFD said:
Macron's focus is obviously getting as many out of France as possible to keep his 2017 vote from going to Le PenSandyRentool said:
I assume that Macron is the one supplying them with boats.HYUFD said:
Voters who are most appalled by that will obviously stick with Boris over Labour or the LDs, so unless Farage returns it will not be a major issue.Leon said:The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories
TAKE BACK CONTROL?!
If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked
There is only so much they can do anyway without Macron's help in keeping them in France otherwise all they can do is pick them up where they can0 -
My philosophy is we should help those in need and I’ve said the amount we could, and should, take as part of an international and co ordinated effort.Leon said:
There is actually a Darwinian argument that agrees with Taz. Tho I suspect he won't like itMaxPB said:
Not our problem. Let them rot in Calais or go back and apply for asylum from there. As soon as they left the unsafe country the need went away. Everything after that was want which makes them an economic migrant and we have legal routes of migration for anyone who wants to come and work and settle in the UK.Taz said:
We should have a co ordinated approach with the EU and the rest of the western world and agree quotas and take the full quota amount.Leon said:
100,000Taz said:
We should take our fair share. Obviously we cannot take 10 million but 80 - 100K is feasible.Leon said:
Interesting. Is there a limit to the numbers we should take? 10,000? 100,000? 10 million?Taz said:
Labour needs to make the most of this and push to welcome these people to the UK and help them. Their moral cowardice in not doing so shames left wing politicsLeon said:The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories
TAKE BACK CONTROL?!
If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked
We should take 100,000
You are literally saying 100,000 illegal migrants making insanely dangerous crossings should be prioritised over the other hundreds of thousands of migrants who want to come here, but who do so legally and safely (which takes years). You want to reward human trafficking, you want to reward evil
And besides, once we reach the 100,000, what you gonna do then? Shoot the next boats? Or let them next boats in as well, because your enormous heart is bleeding?
By adopting my suggestion, of setting up processing centres in France to review and approve/reject applications it should remove the illegal,element.
If you want to take immigrants, take the youngest, toughest, smartest, richest - take the best, but make them go through some kind of awful Hunger Games-esque trial, to see who the fittest are - like, say, illegally crossing half of Africa, sorting out a trafficker, then surviving a horrible Channel crossing in a dinghy
If they make it, let them in, because you have then successfully selected for the fittest, most enterprising migrants, who will prosper in the UK
Perhaps we should close down all legal routes of migration, and only allow crossings of the Channel. They could be televised, in front of live audiences, as people cheer on their favourites
FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBT, THIS IS SATIRE, I DO NOT THINK THIS IS A GOOD, KIND OR WISE THING. But it is the weird Ayn Randy upshot of Taz's Let Them Come philosophy
These are human beings at the end of the day. There but for,the grace of god.1 -
I've sympathy with this view. The French (and the Belgians) don't want organised crime operating on their shores supplying desperate people with dinghies in exchange for a lot of cash, and they don't want the shanty towns either.Casino_Royale said:
Actually, it's in Macron's interests to help the British.HYUFD said:
Macron's focus is obviously getting as many out of France as possible to keep his 2017 vote from going to Le PenSandyRentool said:
I assume that Macron is the one supplying them with boats.HYUFD said:
Voters who are most appalled by that will obviously stick with Boris over Labour or the LDs, so unless Farage returns it will not be a major issue.Leon said:The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories
TAKE BACK CONTROL?!
If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked
There is only so much they can do anyway without Macron's help in keeping them in France otherwise all they can do is pick them up where they can
If crossing the channel was utterly futile then far fewer migrants, if any, would congregate in the Pas De Calais area.
There'd be no point.
Active attempts to stop people smuggling are made; most asylum seekers in the UK do not, in fact, come across on the leaky dinghies; and, if the UK Government were to agree to throw more money at the continental authorities to pay for more rigorous policing, I suspect that this would be met with a positive response.
Beyond that, in the long run Europe will continue to find itself dealing with a constant flow of irregular migrants (some actual refugees, some economic, all jumbled up together) which rights groups waving copies of the relevant conventions will want to let in and electorates will want to keep out. The democratic will of voters not to have an open door, and the international rules on asylum and refugee status - which were largely drafted in the aftermath of WW2, when movements of the scale we now see from developing to developed countries were unheard of and unimagined - and that practically demand an open door, are fundamentally irreconcilable. Something has to give.0 -
You're certainly selecting the migrants most likely to disappear into the black economy.Leon said:
There is actually a Darwinian argument that agrees with Taz. Tho I suspect he won't like itMaxPB said:
Not our problem. Let them rot in Calais or go back and apply for asylum from there. As soon as they left the unsafe country the need went away. Everything after that was want which makes them an economic migrant and we have legal routes of migration for anyone who wants to come and work and settle in the UK.Taz said:
We should have a co ordinated approach with the EU and the rest of the western world and agree quotas and take the full quota amount.Leon said:
100,000Taz said:
We should take our fair share. Obviously we cannot take 10 million but 80 - 100K is feasible.Leon said:
Interesting. Is there a limit to the numbers we should take? 10,000? 100,000? 10 million?Taz said:
Labour needs to make the most of this and push to welcome these people to the UK and help them. Their moral cowardice in not doing so shames left wing politicsLeon said:The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories
TAKE BACK CONTROL?!
If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked
We should take 100,000
You are literally saying 100,000 illegal migrants making insanely dangerous crossings should be prioritised over the other hundreds of thousands of migrants who want to come here, but who do so legally and safely (which takes years). You want to reward human trafficking, you want to reward evil
And besides, once we reach the 100,000, what you gonna do then? Shoot the next boats? Or let them next boats in as well, because your enormous heart is bleeding?
By adopting my suggestion, of setting up processing centres in France to review and approve/reject applications it should remove the illegal,element.
If you want to take immigrants, take the youngest, toughest, smartest, richest - take the best, but make them go through some kind of awful Hunger Games-esque trial, to see who the fittest are - like, say, illegally crossing half of Africa, sorting out a trafficker, then surviving a horrible Channel crossing in a dinghy
If they make it, let them in, because you have then successfully selected for the fittest, most enterprising migrants, who will prosper in the UK
Perhaps we should close down all legal routes of migration, and only allow crossings of the Channel. They could be televised, in front of live audiences, as people cheer on their favourites
FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBT, THIS IS SATIRE, I DO NOT THINK THIS IS A GOOD, KIND OR WISE THING. But it is the weird Ayn Randy upshot of Taz's Let Them Come philosophy0 -
Not the worst idea, actually. If I was a refugee uncertain of my chances of staying and knew that looking after some elderly folk was a passport to stay, I'd do it like a shot. But it's not the unskilled profession that some people think, so training would be needed.another_richard said:
Perhaps we should get the refugees to do it.nico679 said:Even if you could sort out social care in terms of more money who exactly is going to be doing the caring . Unless you increase foreign workers which this cesspit government won’t do where are these carers going to come from .
0 -
"we started or helped fuel many of the conflicts"Taz said:
We take,a fraction compared to other nations, it’s time we did our bit after all we started or helped fuel many of the conflicts that saw these people forces to leave their home nations where they all would rather be.MaxPB said:
Change the law, legislate, do whatever it takes. If it means burning the HRA then so be it. Enough is enough.Taz said:
Fortunately our courts wouldn’t allow it and someone like the good law project would soon stop it.MaxPB said:
The UK is far to weak. We need to do what the European countries are doing. Fuck middle class sensibilities, push them back out to sea like French and Greeks and house the ones that do make it in Algeria until they are processed. No right to enter the UK until asylum is granted. The UK needs to become a fortress island.Leon said:The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories
TAKE BACK CONTROL?!
If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked
That sounds like a very patronising approach to problems in other places. I dare say we don't help much and used to do even worse, but it seems to infantilise them to take on all responsibilty like that.
0 -
Actually, a TV series or a high concept thriller based on a Hunger Games style sieving of migration could be a cracking drama, weaving together leftwing "care" with right wing pragmatics, plus lots of climate change drama1
-
I recommend it. Am near the end of Series 3 now.TOPPING said:Just rewatched S1E1 of The West Wing.
Fantastic.
Such sharp dialogue might well watch the whole thing again.
Oh and a sub plot of some Cubans making their way to America some of whom died on the way and Pres. Bartlett says let the survivors in. That's how to do it.
Amazing to see how politics has changed for the worse over there in 20 years.
Yes, I know it's fictionalised.0 -
I suspect the number of issues caused by activist judges is a lot less than problems caused by a confused legal situation which happens to be inconvenient to swift administration.Pagan2 said:
Thats because we have shit courts with lefty judges. That can be changed and will be if they keep doing it.Taz said:
Yet many are accepted as genuine and of those rejected a large proportion have the rejections overturned.Pagan2 said:
They are absolutely economic migrants. They fled war. They are in a safe country. Further movement is economic based not safety basedTaz said:
These are not economic migrants. Surely we should, as a nation, be proud they want to come here as they see us as safe, warm and welcoming to,vulnerable people.MaxPB said:
Asylum is about need, not want. Economic migration is about want, not need. If they want to migrate here for economic reasons then they can do so legally. Push the boats back out and send them to Algeria or Morocco etc...Taz said:
They are not obliged to apply to stay in France. They want to come here. We should give them safe passage as long as they are genuine and most are.Andy_JS said:
Why won't you address the point that France is a safe country and that therefore there's no reason for migrants to risk their lives crossing the channel?Taz said:
Labour needs to make the most of this and push to welcome these people to the UK and help them. Their moral cowardice in not doing so shames left wing politicsLeon said:The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories
TAKE BACK CONTROL?!
If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked0 -
Can we put the most bleeding heart guardianista's in with them?Leon said:Actually, a TV series or a high concept thriller based on a Hunger Games style sieving of migration could be a cracking drama, weaving together leftwing care with right wing pragmatics, plus lots of climate change drama
0 -
Not too ropey, good to see youCorrectHorseBattery said:
Hey mate how are you?IshmaelZ said:
Sleazy broken Tories on the slideCorrectHorseBattery said:https://twitter.com/Survation/status/1417559489700630541
The dam has broken! 40% breached!
Hartlepool = peak Johnson0 -
On the other hand, I don't think people will vote for asylum-seekers being left to drown off the English coast.Casino_Royale said:
I don't like to be the bringer of bad news but that's ultimately where we'll end up if a solution is not found.MaxPB said:
Change the law, legislate, do whatever it takes. If it means burning the HRA then so be it. Enough is enough.Taz said:
Fortunately our courts wouldn’t allow it and someone like the good law project would soon stop it.MaxPB said:
The UK is far to weak. We need to do what the European countries are doing. Fuck middle class sensibilities, push them back out to sea like French and Greeks and house the ones that do make it in Algeria until they are processed. No right to enter the UK until asylum is granted. The UK needs to become a fortress island.Leon said:The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories
TAKE BACK CONTROL?!
If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked
People won't accept legal niceities as an excuse for doing nothing - they'll vote for those who'll drive a cart and horses through them.
It's a very difficult issue, there are no easy solutions.0 -
Yes its true not just the fault of judges but the whole system. We should be able to process refugees within a week including appeal and either let them become productive citizens or get rid of them. The biggest loophole we need to close is the no papers where do we deport them too onekle4 said:
I suspect the number of issues caused by activist judges is a lot less than problems caused by a confused legal situation which happens to be inconvenient to swift administration.Pagan2 said:
Thats because we have shit courts with lefty judges. That can be changed and will be if they keep doing it.Taz said:
Yet many are accepted as genuine and of those rejected a large proportion have the rejections overturned.Pagan2 said:
They are absolutely economic migrants. They fled war. They are in a safe country. Further movement is economic based not safety basedTaz said:
These are not economic migrants. Surely we should, as a nation, be proud they want to come here as they see us as safe, warm and welcoming to,vulnerable people.MaxPB said:
Asylum is about need, not want. Economic migration is about want, not need. If they want to migrate here for economic reasons then they can do so legally. Push the boats back out and send them to Algeria or Morocco etc...Taz said:
They are not obliged to apply to stay in France. They want to come here. We should give them safe passage as long as they are genuine and most are.Andy_JS said:
Why won't you address the point that France is a safe country and that therefore there's no reason for migrants to risk their lives crossing the channel?Taz said:
Labour needs to make the most of this and push to welcome these people to the UK and help them. Their moral cowardice in not doing so shames left wing politicsLeon said:The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories
TAKE BACK CONTROL?!
If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked0 -
Perhaps people might assimilate better in countries culturally similar ?Taz said:
Why is that an issue worthy of comment ?another_richard said:
They're more likely to need Allah's blessing from that set of countries.Taz said:
They are men, women and children. Many are unaccompanied children. It is right because they are desperate people,fleeing torture, wars, bigotry, prejudice and persecution. Look where they come from. Places like Somalia, Iran, Eritrea, Syria, S Sudan. They don’t tend to come from stable nations. God bless them all.SandyRentool said:
Why is it right to allow a bunch of young, fit blokes who have blagged their way across Europe to come and live here?Taz said:
Sorry but SKS and his team need to do what is right and if that means losing the red wall to gain other seats so be it.SandyRentool said:
Sorry, but are you fecking radge?Taz said:
Labour needs to make the most of this and push to welcome these people to the UK and help them. Their moral cowardice in not doing so shames left wing politicsLeon said:The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories
TAKE BACK CONTROL?!
If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked
Wave goodbye to the Red Wall forever.
Those in genuine need are languishing in camps near to the conflict zones.
Or if they still have the values of countries which are failed states they might not be as deserving to settle here as you think ?
I suppose there could be a test - pork chops and alcohol while their asylum claims were being processed.0 -
Yes it's time to reform those rules or withdraw from them as well as setting fire to the HRA and fucking off the asylum industry that has sprouted from it. All those wanky lawyers no longer able to suckle on the public teat. It's a wonderful thought.pigeon said:
I've sympathy with this view. The French (and the Belgians) don't want organised crime operating on their shores supplying desperate people with dinghies in exchange for a lot of cash, and they don't want the shanty towns either.Casino_Royale said:
Actually, it's in Macron's interests to help the British.HYUFD said:
Macron's focus is obviously getting as many out of France as possible to keep his 2017 vote from going to Le PenSandyRentool said:
I assume that Macron is the one supplying them with boats.HYUFD said:
Voters who are most appalled by that will obviously stick with Boris over Labour or the LDs, so unless Farage returns it will not be a major issue.Leon said:The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories
TAKE BACK CONTROL?!
If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked
There is only so much they can do anyway without Macron's help in keeping them in France otherwise all they can do is pick them up where they can
If crossing the channel was utterly futile then far fewer migrants, if any, would congregate in the Pas De Calais area.
There'd be no point.
Active attempts to stop people smuggling are made; most asylum seekers in the UK do not, in fact, come across on the leaky dinghies; and, if the UK Government were to agree to throw more money at the continental authorities to pay for more rigorous policing, I suspect that this would be met with a positive response.
Beyond that, in the long run Europe will continue to find itself dealing with a constant flow of irregular migrants (some actual refugees, some economic, all jumbled up together) which rights groups waving copies of the relevant conventions will want to let in and electorates will want to keep out. The democratic will of voters not to have an open door, and the international rules on asylum and refugee status - which were largely drafted in the aftermath of WW2, when movements of the scale we now see from developing to developed countries were unheard of and unimagined - and that practically demand an open door, are fundamentally irreconcilable. Something has to give.0 -
Baroness Kennedy completely ridiculous on Newsnight
"Cummings is a fantastic evil liar but suddenly absolutely truthful!"
Strasbourg Syndrome. Again. God help them
0 -
The easiest solution is to have their claims processed somewhere outside the UK. So they cross the Sahara, the Med, continental Europe, the Channel and then get put on a plane to Cape Verde.Benpointer said:
On the other hand, I don't think people will vote for asylum-seekers being left to drown off the English coast.Casino_Royale said:
I don't like to be the bringer of bad news but that's ultimately where we'll end up if a solution is not found.MaxPB said:
Change the law, legislate, do whatever it takes. If it means burning the HRA then so be it. Enough is enough.Taz said:
Fortunately our courts wouldn’t allow it and someone like the good law project would soon stop it.MaxPB said:
The UK is far to weak. We need to do what the European countries are doing. Fuck middle class sensibilities, push them back out to sea like French and Greeks and house the ones that do make it in Algeria until they are processed. No right to enter the UK until asylum is granted. The UK needs to become a fortress island.Leon said:The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories
TAKE BACK CONTROL?!
If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked
People won't accept legal niceities as an excuse for doing nothing - they'll vote for those who'll drive a cart and horses through them.
It's a very difficult issue, there are no easy solutions.1 -
You too, Keir is doing fantastic work this week, Labour is slowly getting back into the gameIshmaelZ said:
Not too ropey, good to see youCorrectHorseBattery said:
Hey mate how are you?IshmaelZ said:
Sleazy broken Tories on the slideCorrectHorseBattery said:https://twitter.com/Survation/status/1417559489700630541
The dam has broken! 40% breached!
Hartlepool = peak Johnson0 -
What's in it for France? Politically it seems to be a useful stick to beat us with to get money and a political distraction.Taz said:
We should have a co ordinated approach with the EU and the rest of the western world and agree quotas and take the full quota amount.Leon said:
100,000Taz said:
We should take our fair share. Obviously we cannot take 10 million but 80 - 100K is feasible.Leon said:
Interesting. Is there a limit to the numbers we should take? 10,000? 100,000? 10 million?Taz said:
Labour needs to make the most of this and push to welcome these people to the UK and help them. Their moral cowardice in not doing so shames left wing politicsLeon said:The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories
TAKE BACK CONTROL?!
If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked
We should take 100,000
You are literally saying 100,000 illegal migrants making insanely dangerous crossings should be prioritised over the other hundreds of thousands of migrants who want to come here, but who do so legally and safely (which takes years). You want to reward human trafficking, you want to reward evil
And besides, once we reach the 100,000, what you gonna do then? Shoot the next boats? Or let them next boats in as well, because your enormous heart is bleeding?
By adopting my suggestion, of setting up processing centres in France to review and approve/reject applications it should remove the illegal,element.
And I do think 'we should have a coordinated approach' is along the same lines as politicians talking about how great it is that everyone agrees there is a problem, but that does nothing for coming up with a solution. Lots of people will agree a coordinated approach is a good idea, but actually doing it is a rare thing indeed. Indeed, on this issue some of those who tended to look down on unilateral actions by others deciced to act so themselves.0 -
I’m sure @Taz lives in or around Co. Durham?HYUFD said:
He does but only in Islington and Hampstead and Cambridge etc where the decent Labour voters live, he would rather lose but with dignity than have to appeal to anti migration sensibilities.Casino_Royale said:
So, you don't want Labour re-elected then?Taz said:
Labour needs to make the most of this and push to welcome these people to the UK and help them. Their moral cowardice in not doing so shames left wing politicsLeon said:The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories
TAKE BACK CONTROL?!
If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked
It is a view if not a very practical one0 -
That sounds spookily like the spiel I was non satirically (i think) given by the guide showing me the slave dungeons in Zanzibar about how the slaves who made it alive as far as this were the best of the best, natural survivors, etc.Leon said:
There is actually a Darwinian argument that agrees with Taz. Tho I suspect he won't like itMaxPB said:
Not our problem. Let them rot in Calais or go back and apply for asylum from there. As soon as they left the unsafe country the need went away. Everything after that was want which makes them an economic migrant and we have legal routes of migration for anyone who wants to come and work and settle in the UK.Taz said:
We should have a co ordinated approach with the EU and the rest of the western world and agree quotas and take the full quota amount.Leon said:
100,000Taz said:
We should take our fair share. Obviously we cannot take 10 million but 80 - 100K is feasible.Leon said:
Interesting. Is there a limit to the numbers we should take? 10,000? 100,000? 10 million?Taz said:
Labour needs to make the most of this and push to welcome these people to the UK and help them. Their moral cowardice in not doing so shames left wing politicsLeon said:The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories
TAKE BACK CONTROL?!
If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked
We should take 100,000
You are literally saying 100,000 illegal migrants making insanely dangerous crossings should be prioritised over the other hundreds of thousands of migrants who want to come here, but who do so legally and safely (which takes years). You want to reward human trafficking, you want to reward evil
And besides, once we reach the 100,000, what you gonna do then? Shoot the next boats? Or let them next boats in as well, because your enormous heart is bleeding?
By adopting my suggestion, of setting up processing centres in France to review and approve/reject applications it should remove the illegal,element.
If you want to take immigrants, take the youngest, toughest, smartest, richest - take the best, but make them go through some kind of awful Hunger Games-esque trial, to see who the fittest are - like, say, illegally crossing half of Africa, sorting out a trafficker, then surviving a horrible Channel crossing in a dinghy
If they make it, let them in, because you have then successfully selected for the fittest, most enterprising migrants, who will prosper in the UK
Perhaps we should close down all legal routes of migration, and only allow crossings of the Channel. They could be televised, in front of live audiences, as people cheer on their favourites
FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBT, THIS IS SATIRE, I DO NOT THINK THIS IS A GOOD, KIND OR WISE THING. But it is the weird Ayn Randy upshot of Taz's Let Them Come philosophy0 -
We should be doing it then. More of this.NickPalmer said:
Not the worst idea, actually. If I was a refugee uncertain of my chances of staying and knew that looking after some elderly folk was a passport to stay, I'd do it like a shot. But it's not the unskilled profession that some people think, so training would be needed.another_richard said:
Perhaps we should get the refugees to do it.nico679 said:Even if you could sort out social care in terms of more money who exactly is going to be doing the caring . Unless you increase foreign workers which this cesspit government won’t do where are these carers going to come from .
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-569364000 -
Well I don't actually agree that it should be quite that swift, nor indeed on specific things that should not be permitted, I haven't looked into it enough but am inclined to be overly soft on the matter, but I agree that problems, such as people think they are, are a systemic issue.Pagan2 said:
Yes its true not just the fault of judges but the whole system. We should be able to process refugees within a week including appeal and either let them become productive citizens or get rid of them. The biggest loophole we need to close is the no papers where do we deport them too onekle4 said:
I suspect the number of issues caused by activist judges is a lot less than problems caused by a confused legal situation which happens to be inconvenient to swift administration.Pagan2 said:
Thats because we have shit courts with lefty judges. That can be changed and will be if they keep doing it.Taz said:
Yet many are accepted as genuine and of those rejected a large proportion have the rejections overturned.Pagan2 said:
They are absolutely economic migrants. They fled war. They are in a safe country. Further movement is economic based not safety basedTaz said:
These are not economic migrants. Surely we should, as a nation, be proud they want to come here as they see us as safe, warm and welcoming to,vulnerable people.MaxPB said:
Asylum is about need, not want. Economic migration is about want, not need. If they want to migrate here for economic reasons then they can do so legally. Push the boats back out and send them to Algeria or Morocco etc...Taz said:
They are not obliged to apply to stay in France. They want to come here. We should give them safe passage as long as they are genuine and most are.Andy_JS said:
Why won't you address the point that France is a safe country and that therefore there's no reason for migrants to risk their lives crossing the channel?Taz said:
Labour needs to make the most of this and push to welcome these people to the UK and help them. Their moral cowardice in not doing so shames left wing politicsLeon said:The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories
TAKE BACK CONTROL?!
If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked0 -
If we do that then we should do those most in need and least likely to cause trouble for the UK. That means people actually facing genocide, not people just escaping poverty or leaving a war zone.Taz said:
My philosophy is we should help those in need and I’ve said the amount we could, and should, take as part of an international and co ordinated effort.Leon said:
There is actually a Darwinian argument that agrees with Taz. Tho I suspect he won't like itMaxPB said:
Not our problem. Let them rot in Calais or go back and apply for asylum from there. As soon as they left the unsafe country the need went away. Everything after that was want which makes them an economic migrant and we have legal routes of migration for anyone who wants to come and work and settle in the UK.Taz said:
We should have a co ordinated approach with the EU and the rest of the western world and agree quotas and take the full quota amount.Leon said:
100,000Taz said:
We should take our fair share. Obviously we cannot take 10 million but 80 - 100K is feasible.Leon said:
Interesting. Is there a limit to the numbers we should take? 10,000? 100,000? 10 million?Taz said:
Labour needs to make the most of this and push to welcome these people to the UK and help them. Their moral cowardice in not doing so shames left wing politicsLeon said:The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories
TAKE BACK CONTROL?!
If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked
We should take 100,000
You are literally saying 100,000 illegal migrants making insanely dangerous crossings should be prioritised over the other hundreds of thousands of migrants who want to come here, but who do so legally and safely (which takes years). You want to reward human trafficking, you want to reward evil
And besides, once we reach the 100,000, what you gonna do then? Shoot the next boats? Or let them next boats in as well, because your enormous heart is bleeding?
By adopting my suggestion, of setting up processing centres in France to review and approve/reject applications it should remove the illegal,element.
If you want to take immigrants, take the youngest, toughest, smartest, richest - take the best, but make them go through some kind of awful Hunger Games-esque trial, to see who the fittest are - like, say, illegally crossing half of Africa, sorting out a trafficker, then surviving a horrible Channel crossing in a dinghy
If they make it, let them in, because you have then successfully selected for the fittest, most enterprising migrants, who will prosper in the UK
Perhaps we should close down all legal routes of migration, and only allow crossings of the Channel. They could be televised, in front of live audiences, as people cheer on their favourites
FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBT, THIS IS SATIRE, I DO NOT THINK THIS IS A GOOD, KIND OR WISE THING. But it is the weird Ayn Randy upshot of Taz's Let Them Come philosophy
These are human beings at the end of the day. There but for,the grace of god.
We should also have a pretty hard line on taking anyone from the Middle East until their Arab brothers in the Gulf take their fair share.0 -
Lol the legal system has been starved of money since 2010 there is no quick administration of justicePagan2 said:
Yes its true not just the fault of judges but the whole system. We should be able to process refugees within a week including appeal and either let them become productive citizens or get rid of them. The biggest loophole we need to close is the no papers where do we deport them too onekle4 said:
I suspect the number of issues caused by activist judges is a lot less than problems caused by a confused legal situation which happens to be inconvenient to swift administration.Pagan2 said:
Thats because we have shit courts with lefty judges. That can be changed and will be if they keep doing it.Taz said:
Yet many are accepted as genuine and of those rejected a large proportion have the rejections overturned.Pagan2 said:
They are absolutely economic migrants. They fled war. They are in a safe country. Further movement is economic based not safety basedTaz said:
These are not economic migrants. Surely we should, as a nation, be proud they want to come here as they see us as safe, warm and welcoming to,vulnerable people.MaxPB said:
Asylum is about need, not want. Economic migration is about want, not need. If they want to migrate here for economic reasons then they can do so legally. Push the boats back out and send them to Algeria or Morocco etc...Taz said:
They are not obliged to apply to stay in France. They want to come here. We should give them safe passage as long as they are genuine and most are.Andy_JS said:
Why won't you address the point that France is a safe country and that therefore there's no reason for migrants to risk their lives crossing the channel?Taz said:
Labour needs to make the most of this and push to welcome these people to the UK and help them. Their moral cowardice in not doing so shames left wing politicsLeon said:The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories
TAKE BACK CONTROL?!
If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked1 -
Why would Cape Verde agree to take them?Aslan said:
The easiest solution is to have their claims processed somewhere outside the UK. So they cross the Sahara, the Med, continental Europe, the Channel and then get put on a plane to Cape Verde.Benpointer said:
On the other hand, I don't think people will vote for asylum-seekers being left to drown off the English coast.Casino_Royale said:
I don't like to be the bringer of bad news but that's ultimately where we'll end up if a solution is not found.MaxPB said:
Change the law, legislate, do whatever it takes. If it means burning the HRA then so be it. Enough is enough.Taz said:
Fortunately our courts wouldn’t allow it and someone like the good law project would soon stop it.MaxPB said:
The UK is far to weak. We need to do what the European countries are doing. Fuck middle class sensibilities, push them back out to sea like French and Greeks and house the ones that do make it in Algeria until they are processed. No right to enter the UK until asylum is granted. The UK needs to become a fortress island.Leon said:The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories
TAKE BACK CONTROL?!
If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked
People won't accept legal niceities as an excuse for doing nothing - they'll vote for those who'll drive a cart and horses through them.
It's a very difficult issue, there are no easy solutions.0 -
Might be useful if you wanted to create an Unsullied style military force.Leon said:
There is actually a Darwinian argument that agrees with Taz. Tho I suspect he won't like itMaxPB said:
Not our problem. Let them rot in Calais or go back and apply for asylum from there. As soon as they left the unsafe country the need went away. Everything after that was want which makes them an economic migrant and we have legal routes of migration for anyone who wants to come and work and settle in the UK.Taz said:
We should have a co ordinated approach with the EU and the rest of the western world and agree quotas and take the full quota amount.Leon said:
100,000Taz said:
We should take our fair share. Obviously we cannot take 10 million but 80 - 100K is feasible.Leon said:
Interesting. Is there a limit to the numbers we should take? 10,000? 100,000? 10 million?Taz said:
Labour needs to make the most of this and push to welcome these people to the UK and help them. Their moral cowardice in not doing so shames left wing politicsLeon said:The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories
TAKE BACK CONTROL?!
If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked
We should take 100,000
You are literally saying 100,000 illegal migrants making insanely dangerous crossings should be prioritised over the other hundreds of thousands of migrants who want to come here, but who do so legally and safely (which takes years). You want to reward human trafficking, you want to reward evil
And besides, once we reach the 100,000, what you gonna do then? Shoot the next boats? Or let them next boats in as well, because your enormous heart is bleeding?
By adopting my suggestion, of setting up processing centres in France to review and approve/reject applications it should remove the illegal,element.
If you want to take immigrants, take the youngest, toughest, smartest, richest - take the best, but make them go through some kind of awful Hunger Games-esque trial, to see who the fittest are - like, say, illegally crossing half of Africa, sorting out a trafficker, then surviving a horrible Channel crossing in a dinghy
If they make it, let them in, because you have then successfully selected for the fittest, most enterprising migrants, who will prosper in the UK
Perhaps we should close down all legal routes of migration, and only allow crossings of the Channel. They could be televised, in front of live audiences, as people cheer on their favourites
FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBT, THIS IS SATIRE, I DO NOT THINK THIS IS A GOOD, KIND OR WISE THING. But it is the weird Ayn Randy upshot of Taz's Let Them Come philosophy
I suppose you could adapt it to allow any refugee a right to stay but first they had to do ten years work as specified by the government.0 -
The main problem is time and that hurts refugees too, it can't be right some have to wait a year or more to find out if they have been accepted. It is in their best interests, those at least accepted that it is done quickly it also avoids one of the favourites of refugee lawyers "the right to family life" as they dont have time to meet and marry etc.kle4 said:
Well I don't actually agree that it should be quite that swift, nor indeed on specific things that should not be permitted, I haven't looked into it enough but am inclined to be overly soft on the matter, but I agree that problems, such as people think they are, are a systemic issue.Pagan2 said:
Yes its true not just the fault of judges but the whole system. We should be able to process refugees within a week including appeal and either let them become productive citizens or get rid of them. The biggest loophole we need to close is the no papers where do we deport them too onekle4 said:
I suspect the number of issues caused by activist judges is a lot less than problems caused by a confused legal situation which happens to be inconvenient to swift administration.Pagan2 said:
Thats because we have shit courts with lefty judges. That can be changed and will be if they keep doing it.Taz said:
Yet many are accepted as genuine and of those rejected a large proportion have the rejections overturned.Pagan2 said:
They are absolutely economic migrants. They fled war. They are in a safe country. Further movement is economic based not safety basedTaz said:
These are not economic migrants. Surely we should, as a nation, be proud they want to come here as they see us as safe, warm and welcoming to,vulnerable people.MaxPB said:
Asylum is about need, not want. Economic migration is about want, not need. If they want to migrate here for economic reasons then they can do so legally. Push the boats back out and send them to Algeria or Morocco etc...Taz said:
They are not obliged to apply to stay in France. They want to come here. We should give them safe passage as long as they are genuine and most are.Andy_JS said:
Why won't you address the point that France is a safe country and that therefore there's no reason for migrants to risk their lives crossing the channel?Taz said:
Labour needs to make the most of this and push to welcome these people to the UK and help them. Their moral cowardice in not doing so shames left wing politicsLeon said:The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories
TAKE BACK CONTROL?!
If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked0 -
Nope. Now you’re answering a question I did not ask. I know it’s terribly old-fashioned, but could you give a straight answer to a straight question? Please inform us where you got the figures you pumped in to Martin Baxter’s ElectoralCalculus calculator:HYUFD said:
Scottish figures are largely irrelevant to the UK total unless the SCons take the lead as the SNP will prop up Labour anyway, so your Scottish subsample demand is also largely irrelevant.StuartDickson said:
Err… yes. Thanks. Hate to be a pain, but I repeat my question:HYUFD said:
Which would still see a hung parliament on the UK Survation numbers and PM Starmer propped up by the SNP and LDs, the SDLP, PC, Alliance and Greens despite another Tory majority in England.StuartDickson said:
Where are you getting these figures from?HYUFD said:
Electoral Calculus gives a hung parliament on those numbers from Survation with Tories 310, Labour 247, SNP 55, LDs 15.FrancisUrquhart said:
Interesting labour and lib dems managing better numbers. Normally it is one or the other.HYUFD said:Closer with Survation tonight
Tories 39%
Labour 35%
LDs 11%
https://twitter.com/Survation/status/1417559489700630541?s=20
So Starmer could be PM with SNP, LD and Green and PC support, the Tories would certainly need the DUP to have a chance of staying in office.
IDS, Raab, Villiers and Steve Baker would lose their seats
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/usercode.py?scotcontrol=Y&CON=39&LAB=35&LIB=11&Reform=3&Green=5&UKIP=&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVReform=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=23&SCOTLAB=19.6&SCOTLIB=6&SCOTReform=0.4&SCOTGreen=2.1&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=47.7&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2019base
Scotnat 47.7%
Scotcon 23%
Scotlab 19.6%
Scotlib 6%
Scotgreen 2.1%
Scotreform 0.4%
The DUP would not support the Tories again unless they removed the Irish Sea border
Where are you getting these figures from?
Scotnat 47.7%
Scotcon 23%
Scotlab 19.6%
Scotlib 6%
Scotgreen 2.1%
Scotreform 0.4%
However the Scottish figures are SNP 39%, Tories 22%, Labour 19%, Greens 5%, LDs 4%
https://www.survation.com/survation-19-july-2021-uk-politics-survey/
Scotnat 47.7%
Scotcon 23%
Scotlab 19.6%
Scotlib 6%
Scotgreen 2.1%
Scotreform 0.4%0 -
Quite a long way from Kent, thenGallowgate said:
I’m sure @Taz lives in or around Co. Durham?HYUFD said:
He does but only in Islington and Hampstead and Cambridge etc where the decent Labour voters live, he would rather lose but with dignity than have to appeal to anti migration sensibilities.Casino_Royale said:
So, you don't want Labour re-elected then?Taz said:
Labour needs to make the most of this and push to welcome these people to the UK and help them. Their moral cowardice in not doing so shames left wing politicsLeon said:The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories
TAKE BACK CONTROL?!
If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked
It is a view if not a very practical one
It would be fascinating - genuinely - to hear the views of the Labour voters of Dungeness and Dover. I somehow feel they would disagree with Taz, but who knows?0 -
Herein lies the issue.Benpointer said:
Why would Cape Verde agree to take them?Aslan said:
The easiest solution is to have their claims processed somewhere outside the UK. So they cross the Sahara, the Med, continental Europe, the Channel and then get put on a plane to Cape Verde.Benpointer said:
On the other hand, I don't think people will vote for asylum-seekers being left to drown off the English coast.Casino_Royale said:
I don't like to be the bringer of bad news but that's ultimately where we'll end up if a solution is not found.MaxPB said:
Change the law, legislate, do whatever it takes. If it means burning the HRA then so be it. Enough is enough.Taz said:
Fortunately our courts wouldn’t allow it and someone like the good law project would soon stop it.MaxPB said:
The UK is far to weak. We need to do what the European countries are doing. Fuck middle class sensibilities, push them back out to sea like French and Greeks and house the ones that do make it in Algeria until they are processed. No right to enter the UK until asylum is granted. The UK needs to become a fortress island.Leon said:The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories
TAKE BACK CONTROL?!
If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked
People won't accept legal niceities as an excuse for doing nothing - they'll vote for those who'll drive a cart and horses through them.
It's a very difficult issue, there are no easy solutions.0 -
How can it be safe if we have to quarantine for days after even driving through it just briefly in our own car?Andy_JS said:
Why won't you address the point that France is a safe country and that therefore there's no reason for migrants to risk their lives crossing the channel?Taz said:
Labour needs to make the most of this and push to welcome these people to the UK and help them. Their moral cowardice in not doing so shames left wing politicsLeon said:The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories
TAKE BACK CONTROL?!
If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked0 -
Take them to an Algerian processing centre to await the decision. It could take up to 5 years of waiting and people who fail will have to go back to their own country by their own means from Algeria. Pay the Algerians whatever we currently spend on it via the aid budget. If the lawyers don't like it then change the law, if the HRA is incompatible then amend or repeal it. It's time to take a scorched earth approach or we'll see thousands of arrivals per day the same as Greece and Italy, except we don't have Lesbos or Lampedusa to keep them bottled up.Benpointer said:
On the other hand, I don't think people will vote for asylum-seekers being left to drown off the English coast.Casino_Royale said:
I don't like to be the bringer of bad news but that's ultimately where we'll end up if a solution is not found.MaxPB said:
Change the law, legislate, do whatever it takes. If it means burning the HRA then so be it. Enough is enough.Taz said:
Fortunately our courts wouldn’t allow it and someone like the good law project would soon stop it.MaxPB said:
The UK is far to weak. We need to do what the European countries are doing. Fuck middle class sensibilities, push them back out to sea like French and Greeks and house the ones that do make it in Algeria until they are processed. No right to enter the UK until asylum is granted. The UK needs to become a fortress island.Leon said:The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories
TAKE BACK CONTROL?!
If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked
People won't accept legal niceities as an excuse for doing nothing - they'll vote for those who'll drive a cart and horses through them.
It's a very difficult issue, there are no easy solutions.0 -
There are a million Syrian refugees in Jordan and over three million in Turkey.Aslan said:
If we do that then we should do those most in need and least likely to cause trouble for the UK. That means people actually facing genocide, not people just escaping poverty or leaving a war zone.Taz said:
My philosophy is we should help those in need and I’ve said the amount we could, and should, take as part of an international and co ordinated effort.Leon said:
There is actually a Darwinian argument that agrees with Taz. Tho I suspect he won't like itMaxPB said:
Not our problem. Let them rot in Calais or go back and apply for asylum from there. As soon as they left the unsafe country the need went away. Everything after that was want which makes them an economic migrant and we have legal routes of migration for anyone who wants to come and work and settle in the UK.Taz said:
We should have a co ordinated approach with the EU and the rest of the western world and agree quotas and take the full quota amount.Leon said:
100,000Taz said:
We should take our fair share. Obviously we cannot take 10 million but 80 - 100K is feasible.Leon said:
Interesting. Is there a limit to the numbers we should take? 10,000? 100,000? 10 million?Taz said:
Labour needs to make the most of this and push to welcome these people to the UK and help them. Their moral cowardice in not doing so shames left wing politicsLeon said:The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories
TAKE BACK CONTROL?!
If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked
We should take 100,000
You are literally saying 100,000 illegal migrants making insanely dangerous crossings should be prioritised over the other hundreds of thousands of migrants who want to come here, but who do so legally and safely (which takes years). You want to reward human trafficking, you want to reward evil
And besides, once we reach the 100,000, what you gonna do then? Shoot the next boats? Or let them next boats in as well, because your enormous heart is bleeding?
By adopting my suggestion, of setting up processing centres in France to review and approve/reject applications it should remove the illegal,element.
If you want to take immigrants, take the youngest, toughest, smartest, richest - take the best, but make them go through some kind of awful Hunger Games-esque trial, to see who the fittest are - like, say, illegally crossing half of Africa, sorting out a trafficker, then surviving a horrible Channel crossing in a dinghy
If they make it, let them in, because you have then successfully selected for the fittest, most enterprising migrants, who will prosper in the UK
Perhaps we should close down all legal routes of migration, and only allow crossings of the Channel. They could be televised, in front of live audiences, as people cheer on their favourites
FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBT, THIS IS SATIRE, I DO NOT THINK THIS IS A GOOD, KIND OR WISE THING. But it is the weird Ayn Randy upshot of Taz's Let Them Come philosophy
These are human beings at the end of the day. There but for,the grace of god.
We should also have a pretty hard line on taking anyone from the Middle East until their Arab brothers in the Gulf take their fair share.2 -
I wouldn't disagree and possibly a false economyGallowgate said:
Lol the legal system has been starved of money since 2010 there is no quick administration of justicePagan2 said:
Yes its true not just the fault of judges but the whole system. We should be able to process refugees within a week including appeal and either let them become productive citizens or get rid of them. The biggest loophole we need to close is the no papers where do we deport them too onekle4 said:
I suspect the number of issues caused by activist judges is a lot less than problems caused by a confused legal situation which happens to be inconvenient to swift administration.Pagan2 said:
Thats because we have shit courts with lefty judges. That can be changed and will be if they keep doing it.Taz said:
Yet many are accepted as genuine and of those rejected a large proportion have the rejections overturned.Pagan2 said:
They are absolutely economic migrants. They fled war. They are in a safe country. Further movement is economic based not safety basedTaz said:
These are not economic migrants. Surely we should, as a nation, be proud they want to come here as they see us as safe, warm and welcoming to,vulnerable people.MaxPB said:
Asylum is about need, not want. Economic migration is about want, not need. If they want to migrate here for economic reasons then they can do so legally. Push the boats back out and send them to Algeria or Morocco etc...Taz said:
They are not obliged to apply to stay in France. They want to come here. We should give them safe passage as long as they are genuine and most are.Andy_JS said:
Why won't you address the point that France is a safe country and that therefore there's no reason for migrants to risk their lives crossing the channel?Taz said:
Labour needs to make the most of this and push to welcome these people to the UK and help them. Their moral cowardice in not doing so shames left wing politicsLeon said:The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories
TAKE BACK CONTROL?!
If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked0 -
Here https://twitter.com/Survation/status/1417559489700630541?s=20 and it is UK figures and UK figures alone that matter for UK elections.StuartDickson said:
Nope. Now you’re answering a question I did not ask. I know it’s terribly old-fashioned, but could you give a straight answer to a straight question? Please inform us where you got the figures you pumped in to Martin Baxter’s ElectoralCalculus calculator:HYUFD said:
Scottish figures are largely irrelevant to the UK total unless the SCons take the lead as the SNP will prop up Labour anyway, so your Scottish subsample demand is also largely irrelevant.StuartDickson said:
Err… yes. Thanks. Hate to be a pain, but I repeat my question:HYUFD said:
Which would still see a hung parliament on the UK Survation numbers and PM Starmer propped up by the SNP and LDs, the SDLP, PC, Alliance and Greens despite another Tory majority in England.StuartDickson said:
Where are you getting these figures from?HYUFD said:
Electoral Calculus gives a hung parliament on those numbers from Survation with Tories 310, Labour 247, SNP 55, LDs 15.FrancisUrquhart said:
Interesting labour and lib dems managing better numbers. Normally it is one or the other.HYUFD said:Closer with Survation tonight
Tories 39%
Labour 35%
LDs 11%
https://twitter.com/Survation/status/1417559489700630541?s=20
So Starmer could be PM with SNP, LD and Green and PC support, the Tories would certainly need the DUP to have a chance of staying in office.
IDS, Raab, Villiers and Steve Baker would lose their seats
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/usercode.py?scotcontrol=Y&CON=39&LAB=35&LIB=11&Reform=3&Green=5&UKIP=&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVReform=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=23&SCOTLAB=19.6&SCOTLIB=6&SCOTReform=0.4&SCOTGreen=2.1&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=47.7&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2019base
Scotnat 47.7%
Scotcon 23%
Scotlab 19.6%
Scotlib 6%
Scotgreen 2.1%
Scotreform 0.4%
The DUP would not support the Tories again unless they removed the Irish Sea border
Where are you getting these figures from?
Scotnat 47.7%
Scotcon 23%
Scotlab 19.6%
Scotlib 6%
Scotgreen 2.1%
Scotreform 0.4%
However the Scottish figures are SNP 39%, Tories 22%, Labour 19%, Greens 5%, LDs 4%
https://www.survation.com/survation-19-july-2021-uk-politics-survey/
Scotnat 47.7%
Scotcon 23%
Scotlab 19.6%
Scotlib 6%
Scotgreen 2.1%
Scotreform 0.4%
For unless the Scottish Conservatives take the lead in Scotland whether the SNP lead or SLab lead it makes no difference, their MPs will both make Starmer PM0 -
Cape Verde, a poor country, would take them because we'd pay them, handsomelydixiedean said:
Herein lies the issue.Benpointer said:
Why would Cape Verde agree to take them?Aslan said:
The easiest solution is to have their claims processed somewhere outside the UK. So they cross the Sahara, the Med, continental Europe, the Channel and then get put on a plane to Cape Verde.Benpointer said:
On the other hand, I don't think people will vote for asylum-seekers being left to drown off the English coast.Casino_Royale said:
I don't like to be the bringer of bad news but that's ultimately where we'll end up if a solution is not found.MaxPB said:
Change the law, legislate, do whatever it takes. If it means burning the HRA then so be it. Enough is enough.Taz said:
Fortunately our courts wouldn’t allow it and someone like the good law project would soon stop it.MaxPB said:
The UK is far to weak. We need to do what the European countries are doing. Fuck middle class sensibilities, push them back out to sea like French and Greeks and house the ones that do make it in Algeria until they are processed. No right to enter the UK until asylum is granted. The UK needs to become a fortress island.Leon said:The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories
TAKE BACK CONTROL?!
If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked
People won't accept legal niceities as an excuse for doing nothing - they'll vote for those who'll drive a cart and horses through them.
It's a very difficult issue, there are no easy solutions.
That is the concept underlying the Rwanda idea, I believe0 -
What about if the Algerians don't like it?MaxPB said:
Take them to an Algerian processing centre to await the decision. It could take up to 5 years of waiting and people who fail will have to go back to their own country by their own means from Algeria. Pay the Algerians whatever we currently spend on it via the aid budget. If the lawyers don't like it then change the law, if the HRA is incompatible then amend or repeal it. It's time to take a scorched earth approach or we'll see thousands of arrivals per day the same as Greece and Italy, except we don't have Lesbos or Lampedusa to keep them bottled up.Benpointer said:
On the other hand, I don't think people will vote for asylum-seekers being left to drown off the English coast.Casino_Royale said:
I don't like to be the bringer of bad news but that's ultimately where we'll end up if a solution is not found.MaxPB said:
Change the law, legislate, do whatever it takes. If it means burning the HRA then so be it. Enough is enough.Taz said:
Fortunately our courts wouldn’t allow it and someone like the good law project would soon stop it.MaxPB said:
The UK is far to weak. We need to do what the European countries are doing. Fuck middle class sensibilities, push them back out to sea like French and Greeks and house the ones that do make it in Algeria until they are processed. No right to enter the UK until asylum is granted. The UK needs to become a fortress island.Leon said:The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories
TAKE BACK CONTROL?!
If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked
People won't accept legal niceities as an excuse for doing nothing - they'll vote for those who'll drive a cart and horses through them.
It's a very difficult issue, there are no easy solutions.0 -
Hope so! The poll shows remarkable disillusion with everyone - around 8-10% each think very highly of Johnson, Starmer, Conservatives or Labour. But it might be a turn for the better...CorrectHorseBattery said:https://twitter.com/Survation/status/1417559489700630541
The dam has broken! 40% breached!0 -
Funding it properly, even for 'unpopular' things like legal aid could presumably be more effective than any number of grandiose announcements of new laws and procedural hurdles.Gallowgate said:
Lol the legal system has been starved of money since 2010 there is no quick administration of justicePagan2 said:
Yes its true not just the fault of judges but the whole system. We should be able to process refugees within a week including appeal and either let them become productive citizens or get rid of them. The biggest loophole we need to close is the no papers where do we deport them too onekle4 said:
I suspect the number of issues caused by activist judges is a lot less than problems caused by a confused legal situation which happens to be inconvenient to swift administration.Pagan2 said:
Thats because we have shit courts with lefty judges. That can be changed and will be if they keep doing it.Taz said:
Yet many are accepted as genuine and of those rejected a large proportion have the rejections overturned.Pagan2 said:
They are absolutely economic migrants. They fled war. They are in a safe country. Further movement is economic based not safety basedTaz said:
These are not economic migrants. Surely we should, as a nation, be proud they want to come here as they see us as safe, warm and welcoming to,vulnerable people.MaxPB said:
Asylum is about need, not want. Economic migration is about want, not need. If they want to migrate here for economic reasons then they can do so legally. Push the boats back out and send them to Algeria or Morocco etc...Taz said:
They are not obliged to apply to stay in France. They want to come here. We should give them safe passage as long as they are genuine and most are.Andy_JS said:
Why won't you address the point that France is a safe country and that therefore there's no reason for migrants to risk their lives crossing the channel?Taz said:
Labour needs to make the most of this and push to welcome these people to the UK and help them. Their moral cowardice in not doing so shames left wing politicsLeon said:The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories
TAKE BACK CONTROL?!
If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked0 -
They wouldn't, but Algeria or Morocco probably would.Benpointer said:
Why would Cape Verde agree to take them?Aslan said:
The easiest solution is to have their claims processed somewhere outside the UK. So they cross the Sahara, the Med, continental Europe, the Channel and then get put on a plane to Cape Verde.Benpointer said:
On the other hand, I don't think people will vote for asylum-seekers being left to drown off the English coast.Casino_Royale said:
I don't like to be the bringer of bad news but that's ultimately where we'll end up if a solution is not found.MaxPB said:
Change the law, legislate, do whatever it takes. If it means burning the HRA then so be it. Enough is enough.Taz said:
Fortunately our courts wouldn’t allow it and someone like the good law project would soon stop it.MaxPB said:
The UK is far to weak. We need to do what the European countries are doing. Fuck middle class sensibilities, push them back out to sea like French and Greeks and house the ones that do make it in Algeria until they are processed. No right to enter the UK until asylum is granted. The UK needs to become a fortress island.Leon said:The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories
TAKE BACK CONTROL?!
If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked
People won't accept legal niceities as an excuse for doing nothing - they'll vote for those who'll drive a cart and horses through them.
It's a very difficult issue, there are no easy solutions.0 -
A year or more?Pagan2 said:
The main problem is time and that hurts refugees too, it can't be right some have to wait a year or more to find out if they have been accepted. It is in their best interests, those at least accepted that it is done quickly it also avoids one of the favourites of refugee lawyers "the right to family life" as they dont have time to meet and marry etc.kle4 said:
Well I don't actually agree that it should be quite that swift, nor indeed on specific things that should not be permitted, I haven't looked into it enough but am inclined to be overly soft on the matter, but I agree that problems, such as people think they are, are a systemic issue.Pagan2 said:
Yes its true not just the fault of judges but the whole system. We should be able to process refugees within a week including appeal and either let them become productive citizens or get rid of them. The biggest loophole we need to close is the no papers where do we deport them too onekle4 said:
I suspect the number of issues caused by activist judges is a lot less than problems caused by a confused legal situation which happens to be inconvenient to swift administration.Pagan2 said:
Thats because we have shit courts with lefty judges. That can be changed and will be if they keep doing it.Taz said:
Yet many are accepted as genuine and of those rejected a large proportion have the rejections overturned.Pagan2 said:
They are absolutely economic migrants. They fled war. They are in a safe country. Further movement is economic based not safety basedTaz said:
These are not economic migrants. Surely we should, as a nation, be proud they want to come here as they see us as safe, warm and welcoming to,vulnerable people.MaxPB said:
Asylum is about need, not want. Economic migration is about want, not need. If they want to migrate here for economic reasons then they can do so legally. Push the boats back out and send them to Algeria or Morocco etc...Taz said:
They are not obliged to apply to stay in France. They want to come here. We should give them safe passage as long as they are genuine and most are.Andy_JS said:
Why won't you address the point that France is a safe country and that therefore there's no reason for migrants to risk their lives crossing the channel?Taz said:
Labour needs to make the most of this and push to welcome these people to the UK and help them. Their moral cowardice in not doing so shames left wing politicsLeon said:The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories
TAKE BACK CONTROL?!
If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked
Light speed compared to when I worked in the area.0 -
The solution is for the French to stop them risking their lives by attempting to cross the channel.Benpointer said:
On the other hand, I don't think people will vote for asylum-seekers being left to drown off the English coast.Casino_Royale said:
I don't like to be the bringer of bad news but that's ultimately where we'll end up if a solution is not found.MaxPB said:
Change the law, legislate, do whatever it takes. If it means burning the HRA then so be it. Enough is enough.Taz said:
Fortunately our courts wouldn’t allow it and someone like the good law project would soon stop it.MaxPB said:
The UK is far to weak. We need to do what the European countries are doing. Fuck middle class sensibilities, push them back out to sea like French and Greeks and house the ones that do make it in Algeria until they are processed. No right to enter the UK until asylum is granted. The UK needs to become a fortress island.Leon said:The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories
TAKE BACK CONTROL?!
If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked
People won't accept legal niceities as an excuse for doing nothing - they'll vote for those who'll drive a cart and horses through them.
It's a very difficult issue, there are no easy solutions.0 -
Indeed.NickPalmer said:
Not the worst idea, actually. If I was a refugee uncertain of my chances of staying and knew that looking after some elderly folk was a passport to stay, I'd do it like a shot. But it's not the unskilled profession that some people think, so training would be needed.another_richard said:
Perhaps we should get the refugees to do it.nico679 said:Even if you could sort out social care in terms of more money who exactly is going to be doing the caring . Unless you increase foreign workers which this cesspit government won’t do where are these carers going to come from .
It would have to be done properly.
Alternatively there must be plenty of other 'unpleasant' jobs which need doing and which struggle for workers.
Relatedly is my idea of housing UK criminals in African jails - officially done with money paid to African governments, proper terms and conditions for the warders and opportunities after a length of time for them to apply for British citizenship.0 -
I think £1-2bn changes their mind. Probably a lot less. Funnel it through the aid budget.Benpointer said:
What about if the Algerians don't like it?MaxPB said:
Take them to an Algerian processing centre to await the decision. It could take up to 5 years of waiting and people who fail will have to go back to their own country by their own means from Algeria. Pay the Algerians whatever we currently spend on it via the aid budget. If the lawyers don't like it then change the law, if the HRA is incompatible then amend or repeal it. It's time to take a scorched earth approach or we'll see thousands of arrivals per day the same as Greece and Italy, except we don't have Lesbos or Lampedusa to keep them bottled up.Benpointer said:
On the other hand, I don't think people will vote for asylum-seekers being left to drown off the English coast.Casino_Royale said:
I don't like to be the bringer of bad news but that's ultimately where we'll end up if a solution is not found.MaxPB said:
Change the law, legislate, do whatever it takes. If it means burning the HRA then so be it. Enough is enough.Taz said:
Fortunately our courts wouldn’t allow it and someone like the good law project would soon stop it.MaxPB said:
The UK is far to weak. We need to do what the European countries are doing. Fuck middle class sensibilities, push them back out to sea like French and Greeks and house the ones that do make it in Algeria until they are processed. No right to enter the UK until asylum is granted. The UK needs to become a fortress island.Leon said:The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories
TAKE BACK CONTROL?!
If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked
People won't accept legal niceities as an excuse for doing nothing - they'll vote for those who'll drive a cart and horses through them.
It's a very difficult issue, there are no easy solutions.0 -
Yes, that's brilliant!Taz said:
We should be doing it then. More of this.NickPalmer said:
Not the worst idea, actually. If I was a refugee uncertain of my chances of staying and knew that looking after some elderly folk was a passport to stay, I'd do it like a shot. But it's not the unskilled profession that some people think, so training would be needed.another_richard said:
Perhaps we should get the refugees to do it.nico679 said:Even if you could sort out social care in terms of more money who exactly is going to be doing the caring . Unless you increase foreign workers which this cesspit government won’t do where are these carers going to come from .
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-569364001 -
We have millions of unemployed and under-employed people already in the country who could be learning to do jobs like this.nico679 said:Even if you could sort out social care in terms of more money who exactly is going to be doing the caring . Unless you increase foreign workers which this cesspit government won’t do where are these carers going to come from .
0 -
It's not a new concept. Some of the slavers who ran the Middle Passage positively gloated in its cruelties, because they felt it selected for the fittest slaves to sell at the endIshmaelZ said:
That sounds spookily like the spiel I was non satirically (i think) given by the guide showing me the slave dungeons in Zanzibar about how the slaves who made it alive as far as this were the best of the best, natural survivors, etc.Leon said:
There is actually a Darwinian argument that agrees with Taz. Tho I suspect he won't like itMaxPB said:
Not our problem. Let them rot in Calais or go back and apply for asylum from there. As soon as they left the unsafe country the need went away. Everything after that was want which makes them an economic migrant and we have legal routes of migration for anyone who wants to come and work and settle in the UK.Taz said:
We should have a co ordinated approach with the EU and the rest of the western world and agree quotas and take the full quota amount.Leon said:
100,000Taz said:
We should take our fair share. Obviously we cannot take 10 million but 80 - 100K is feasible.Leon said:
Interesting. Is there a limit to the numbers we should take? 10,000? 100,000? 10 million?Taz said:
Labour needs to make the most of this and push to welcome these people to the UK and help them. Their moral cowardice in not doing so shames left wing politicsLeon said:The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories
TAKE BACK CONTROL?!
If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked
We should take 100,000
You are literally saying 100,000 illegal migrants making insanely dangerous crossings should be prioritised over the other hundreds of thousands of migrants who want to come here, but who do so legally and safely (which takes years). You want to reward human trafficking, you want to reward evil
And besides, once we reach the 100,000, what you gonna do then? Shoot the next boats? Or let them next boats in as well, because your enormous heart is bleeding?
By adopting my suggestion, of setting up processing centres in France to review and approve/reject applications it should remove the illegal,element.
If you want to take immigrants, take the youngest, toughest, smartest, richest - take the best, but make them go through some kind of awful Hunger Games-esque trial, to see who the fittest are - like, say, illegally crossing half of Africa, sorting out a trafficker, then surviving a horrible Channel crossing in a dinghy
If they make it, let them in, because you have then successfully selected for the fittest, most enterprising migrants, who will prosper in the UK
Perhaps we should close down all legal routes of migration, and only allow crossings of the Channel. They could be televised, in front of live audiences, as people cheer on their favourites
FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBT, THIS IS SATIRE, I DO NOT THINK THIS IS A GOOD, KIND OR WISE THING. But it is the weird Ayn Randy upshot of Taz's Let Them Come philosophy
Same for the walk down the Natchez Trace from Nashville to New Orleans. If you made it that far, having walked 1000 miles or more, you would fetch a premium in the slave marts of Louisiana0 -
I see the nasty party is out in force tonight. Asylum seekers and the French are the targets.
For the record, France takes in a lot more asylum seekers than we do. Those passing through France and heading for the UK are presumably doing so because they have family connections or historical links over here.
Having said that, I suspect the UK appeals to a minority of economic migrants because it is much easier to make money under the radar and 'hide away' than it is in France, which has much more stringent identity checks for work etc. than we do.0 -
Or st Helena after all it was good enough for Napolean so they cant complainMaxPB said:
They wouldn't, but Algeria or Morocco probably would.Benpointer said:
Why would Cape Verde agree to take them?Aslan said:
The easiest solution is to have their claims processed somewhere outside the UK. So they cross the Sahara, the Med, continental Europe, the Channel and then get put on a plane to Cape Verde.Benpointer said:
On the other hand, I don't think people will vote for asylum-seekers being left to drown off the English coast.Casino_Royale said:
I don't like to be the bringer of bad news but that's ultimately where we'll end up if a solution is not found.MaxPB said:
Change the law, legislate, do whatever it takes. If it means burning the HRA then so be it. Enough is enough.Taz said:
Fortunately our courts wouldn’t allow it and someone like the good law project would soon stop it.MaxPB said:
The UK is far to weak. We need to do what the European countries are doing. Fuck middle class sensibilities, push them back out to sea like French and Greeks and house the ones that do make it in Algeria until they are processed. No right to enter the UK until asylum is granted. The UK needs to become a fortress island.Leon said:The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories
TAKE BACK CONTROL?!
If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked
People won't accept legal niceities as an excuse for doing nothing - they'll vote for those who'll drive a cart and horses through them.
It's a very difficult issue, there are no easy solutions.0 -
How many in Saudi Arabia or the UAE?Gallowgate said:
There are a million Syrian refugees in Jordan and over three million in Turkey.Aslan said:
If we do that then we should do those most in need and least likely to cause trouble for the UK. That means people actually facing genocide, not people just escaping poverty or leaving a war zone.Taz said:
My philosophy is we should help those in need and I’ve said the amount we could, and should, take as part of an international and co ordinated effort.Leon said:
There is actually a Darwinian argument that agrees with Taz. Tho I suspect he won't like itMaxPB said:
Not our problem. Let them rot in Calais or go back and apply for asylum from there. As soon as they left the unsafe country the need went away. Everything after that was want which makes them an economic migrant and we have legal routes of migration for anyone who wants to come and work and settle in the UK.Taz said:
We should have a co ordinated approach with the EU and the rest of the western world and agree quotas and take the full quota amount.Leon said:
100,000Taz said:
We should take our fair share. Obviously we cannot take 10 million but 80 - 100K is feasible.Leon said:
Interesting. Is there a limit to the numbers we should take? 10,000? 100,000? 10 million?Taz said:
Labour needs to make the most of this and push to welcome these people to the UK and help them. Their moral cowardice in not doing so shames left wing politicsLeon said:The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories
TAKE BACK CONTROL?!
If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked
We should take 100,000
You are literally saying 100,000 illegal migrants making insanely dangerous crossings should be prioritised over the other hundreds of thousands of migrants who want to come here, but who do so legally and safely (which takes years). You want to reward human trafficking, you want to reward evil
And besides, once we reach the 100,000, what you gonna do then? Shoot the next boats? Or let them next boats in as well, because your enormous heart is bleeding?
By adopting my suggestion, of setting up processing centres in France to review and approve/reject applications it should remove the illegal,element.
If you want to take immigrants, take the youngest, toughest, smartest, richest - take the best, but make them go through some kind of awful Hunger Games-esque trial, to see who the fittest are - like, say, illegally crossing half of Africa, sorting out a trafficker, then surviving a horrible Channel crossing in a dinghy
If they make it, let them in, because you have then successfully selected for the fittest, most enterprising migrants, who will prosper in the UK
Perhaps we should close down all legal routes of migration, and only allow crossings of the Channel. They could be televised, in front of live audiences, as people cheer on their favourites
FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBT, THIS IS SATIRE, I DO NOT THINK THIS IS A GOOD, KIND OR WISE THING. But it is the weird Ayn Randy upshot of Taz's Let Them Come philosophy
These are human beings at the end of the day. There but for,the grace of god.
We should also have a pretty hard line on taking anyone from the Middle East until their Arab brothers in the Gulf take their fair share.0 -
There are a lot of solutions being offered on here tonight... none of which have the slightest chance of working.Andy_JS said:
The solution is for the French to stop them risking their lives by attempting to cross the channel.Benpointer said:
On the other hand, I don't think people will vote for asylum-seekers being left to drown off the English coast.Casino_Royale said:
I don't like to be the bringer of bad news but that's ultimately where we'll end up if a solution is not found.MaxPB said:
Change the law, legislate, do whatever it takes. If it means burning the HRA then so be it. Enough is enough.Taz said:
Fortunately our courts wouldn’t allow it and someone like the good law project would soon stop it.MaxPB said:
The UK is far to weak. We need to do what the European countries are doing. Fuck middle class sensibilities, push them back out to sea like French and Greeks and house the ones that do make it in Algeria until they are processed. No right to enter the UK until asylum is granted. The UK needs to become a fortress island.Leon said:The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories
TAKE BACK CONTROL?!
If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked
People won't accept legal niceities as an excuse for doing nothing - they'll vote for those who'll drive a cart and horses through them.
It's a very difficult issue, there are no easy solutions.
Since the French have no incentive to do what you suggest and have shown next to no willing ness to do so to date, how do you propose to make them start?1 -
Hardly. Indeed they may well be fleeing Islamists in many of those countries.another_richard said:
They're more likely to need Allah's blessing from that set of countries.Taz said:
They are men, women and children. Many are unaccompanied children. It is right because they are desperate people,fleeing torture, wars, bigotry, prejudice and persecution. Look where they come from. Places like Somalia, Iran, Eritrea, Syria, S Sudan. They don’t tend to come from stable nations. God bless them all.SandyRentool said:
Why is it right to allow a bunch of young, fit blokes who have blagged their way across Europe to come and live here?Taz said:
Sorry but SKS and his team need to do what is right and if that means losing the red wall to gain other seats so be it.SandyRentool said:
Sorry, but are you fecking radge?Taz said:
Labour needs to make the most of this and push to welcome these people to the UK and help them. Their moral cowardice in not doing so shames left wing politicsLeon said:The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories
TAKE BACK CONTROL?!
If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked
Wave goodbye to the Red Wall forever.
Those in genuine need are languishing in camps near to the conflict zones.
Has any country agreed to be our offshore asylum camp? I understood that there are no takers so far.
I expect there will be a fresh wave of refugees from Afghanistan on the way soon. Anyone who worked for us is surely at risk from the Taliban, as indeed are all women. Do we not have some responsibility for the wars that we have sowed across the world?1 -
Even if they did.Leon said:
Cape Verde, a poor country, would take them because we'd pay them, handsomelydixiedean said:
Herein lies the issue.Benpointer said:
Why would Cape Verde agree to take them?Aslan said:
The easiest solution is to have their claims processed somewhere outside the UK. So they cross the Sahara, the Med, continental Europe, the Channel and then get put on a plane to Cape Verde.Benpointer said:
On the other hand, I don't think people will vote for asylum-seekers being left to drown off the English coast.Casino_Royale said:
I don't like to be the bringer of bad news but that's ultimately where we'll end up if a solution is not found.MaxPB said:
Change the law, legislate, do whatever it takes. If it means burning the HRA then so be it. Enough is enough.Taz said:
Fortunately our courts wouldn’t allow it and someone like the good law project would soon stop it.MaxPB said:
The UK is far to weak. We need to do what the European countries are doing. Fuck middle class sensibilities, push them back out to sea like French and Greeks and house the ones that do make it in Algeria until they are processed. No right to enter the UK until asylum is granted. The UK needs to become a fortress island.Leon said:The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories
TAKE BACK CONTROL?!
If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked
People won't accept legal niceities as an excuse for doing nothing - they'll vote for those who'll drive a cart and horses through them.
It's a very difficult issue, there are no easy solutions.
That is the concept underlying the Rwanda idea, I believe
What happens if the good folk of Cape Verde decide they no longer have patience with thousands upon thousands being dumped on them, and decide they want to return them whence they came? Here.0 -
If Taz lives in the North East then that's the place where most asylum seekers are relocated - 17 times more than in the South East apparently.Leon said:
Quite a long way from Kent, thenGallowgate said:
I’m sure @Taz lives in or around Co. Durham?HYUFD said:
He does but only in Islington and Hampstead and Cambridge etc where the decent Labour voters live, he would rather lose but with dignity than have to appeal to anti migration sensibilities.Casino_Royale said:
So, you don't want Labour re-elected then?Taz said:
Labour needs to make the most of this and push to welcome these people to the UK and help them. Their moral cowardice in not doing so shames left wing politicsLeon said:The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories
TAKE BACK CONTROL?!
If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked
It is a view if not a very practical one
It would be fascinating - genuinely - to hear the views of the Labour voters of Dungeness and Dover. I somehow feel they would disagree with Taz, but who knows?0 -
How can you defend the French when the asylum seekers seem to believe France is such an awful country that they're willing to risk their lives trying to leave it in order to get to the UK?Northern_Al said:I see the nasty party is out in force tonight. Asylum seekers and the French are the targets.
For the record, France takes in a lot more asylum seekers than we do. Those passing through France and heading for the UK are presumably doing so because they have family connections or historical links over here.
Having said that, I suspect the UK appeals to a minority of economic migrants because it is much easier to make money under the radar and 'hide away' than it is in France, which has much more stringent identity checks for work etc. than we do.0 -
Though the residents of St Helena might do.Pagan2 said:
Or st Helena after all it was good enough for Napolean so they cant complainMaxPB said:
They wouldn't, but Algeria or Morocco probably would.Benpointer said:
Why would Cape Verde agree to take them?Aslan said:
The easiest solution is to have their claims processed somewhere outside the UK. So they cross the Sahara, the Med, continental Europe, the Channel and then get put on a plane to Cape Verde.Benpointer said:
On the other hand, I don't think people will vote for asylum-seekers being left to drown off the English coast.Casino_Royale said:
I don't like to be the bringer of bad news but that's ultimately where we'll end up if a solution is not found.MaxPB said:
Change the law, legislate, do whatever it takes. If it means burning the HRA then so be it. Enough is enough.Taz said:
Fortunately our courts wouldn’t allow it and someone like the good law project would soon stop it.MaxPB said:
The UK is far to weak. We need to do what the European countries are doing. Fuck middle class sensibilities, push them back out to sea like French and Greeks and house the ones that do make it in Algeria until they are processed. No right to enter the UK until asylum is granted. The UK needs to become a fortress island.Leon said:The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories
TAKE BACK CONTROL?!
If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked
People won't accept legal niceities as an excuse for doing nothing - they'll vote for those who'll drive a cart and horses through them.
It's a very difficult issue, there are no easy solutions.0 -
Personally I would take the greek approachBenpointer said:
There are a lot of solutions being offered on here tonight... none of which have the slightest chance of working.Andy_JS said:
The solution is for the French to stop them risking their lives by attempting to cross the channel.Benpointer said:
On the other hand, I don't think people will vote for asylum-seekers being left to drown off the English coast.Casino_Royale said:
I don't like to be the bringer of bad news but that's ultimately where we'll end up if a solution is not found.MaxPB said:
Change the law, legislate, do whatever it takes. If it means burning the HRA then so be it. Enough is enough.Taz said:
Fortunately our courts wouldn’t allow it and someone like the good law project would soon stop it.MaxPB said:
The UK is far to weak. We need to do what the European countries are doing. Fuck middle class sensibilities, push them back out to sea like French and Greeks and house the ones that do make it in Algeria until they are processed. No right to enter the UK until asylum is granted. The UK needs to become a fortress island.Leon said:The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories
TAKE BACK CONTROL?!
If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked
People won't accept legal niceities as an excuse for doing nothing - they'll vote for those who'll drive a cart and horses through them.
It's a very difficult issue, there are no easy solutions.
Since the French have no incentive to do what you suggest and have shown next to no willing ness to do so to date, how do you propose to make them start?0 -
Nope, you are still obfuscating. The link you provided does not contain the numbers you yourself pumped into Baxter’s calculator.HYUFD said:
Here https://twitter.com/Survation/status/1417559489700630541?s=20 and it is UK figures and UK figures alone that matter for UK elections.StuartDickson said:
Nope. Now you’re answering a question I did not ask. I know it’s terribly old-fashioned, but could you give a straight answer to a straight question? Please inform us where you got the figures you pumped in to Martin Baxter’s ElectoralCalculus calculator:HYUFD said:
Scottish figures are largely irrelevant to the UK total unless the SCons take the lead as the SNP will prop up Labour anyway, so your Scottish subsample demand is also largely irrelevant.StuartDickson said:
Err… yes. Thanks. Hate to be a pain, but I repeat my question:HYUFD said:
Which would still see a hung parliament on the UK Survation numbers and PM Starmer propped up by the SNP and LDs, the SDLP, PC, Alliance and Greens despite another Tory majority in England.StuartDickson said:
Where are you getting these figures from?HYUFD said:
Electoral Calculus gives a hung parliament on those numbers from Survation with Tories 310, Labour 247, SNP 55, LDs 15.FrancisUrquhart said:
Interesting labour and lib dems managing better numbers. Normally it is one or the other.HYUFD said:Closer with Survation tonight
Tories 39%
Labour 35%
LDs 11%
https://twitter.com/Survation/status/1417559489700630541?s=20
So Starmer could be PM with SNP, LD and Green and PC support, the Tories would certainly need the DUP to have a chance of staying in office.
IDS, Raab, Villiers and Steve Baker would lose their seats
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/usercode.py?scotcontrol=Y&CON=39&LAB=35&LIB=11&Reform=3&Green=5&UKIP=&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVReform=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=23&SCOTLAB=19.6&SCOTLIB=6&SCOTReform=0.4&SCOTGreen=2.1&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=47.7&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2019base
Scotnat 47.7%
Scotcon 23%
Scotlab 19.6%
Scotlib 6%
Scotgreen 2.1%
Scotreform 0.4%
The DUP would not support the Tories again unless they removed the Irish Sea border
Where are you getting these figures from?
Scotnat 47.7%
Scotcon 23%
Scotlab 19.6%
Scotlib 6%
Scotgreen 2.1%
Scotreform 0.4%
However the Scottish figures are SNP 39%, Tories 22%, Labour 19%, Greens 5%, LDs 4%
https://www.survation.com/survation-19-july-2021-uk-politics-survey/
Scotnat 47.7%
Scotcon 23%
Scotlab 19.6%
Scotlib 6%
Scotgreen 2.1%
Scotreform 0.4%
For unless the Scottish Conservatives take the lead in Scotland whether the SNP lead or SLab lead it makes no difference, their MPs will both make Starmer PM
Please inform us where you got the figures you entered in to the ElectoralCalculus calculator:
Scotnat 47.7%
Scotcon 23%
Scotlab 19.6%
Scotlib 6%
Scotgreen 2.1%
Scotreform 0.4%0 -
Yep. True colours and all that.Northern_Al said:I see the nasty party is out in force tonight. Asylum seekers and the French are the targets.
0 -
Which is?Pagan2 said:
Personally I would take the greek approachBenpointer said:
There are a lot of solutions being offered on here tonight... none of which have the slightest chance of working.Andy_JS said:
The solution is for the French to stop them risking their lives by attempting to cross the channel.Benpointer said:
On the other hand, I don't think people will vote for asylum-seekers being left to drown off the English coast.Casino_Royale said:
I don't like to be the bringer of bad news but that's ultimately where we'll end up if a solution is not found.MaxPB said:
Change the law, legislate, do whatever it takes. If it means burning the HRA then so be it. Enough is enough.Taz said:
Fortunately our courts wouldn’t allow it and someone like the good law project would soon stop it.MaxPB said:
The UK is far to weak. We need to do what the European countries are doing. Fuck middle class sensibilities, push them back out to sea like French and Greeks and house the ones that do make it in Algeria until they are processed. No right to enter the UK until asylum is granted. The UK needs to become a fortress island.Leon said:The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories
TAKE BACK CONTROL?!
If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked
People won't accept legal niceities as an excuse for doing nothing - they'll vote for those who'll drive a cart and horses through them.
It's a very difficult issue, there are no easy solutions.
Since the French have no incentive to do what you suggest and have shown next to no willing ness to do so to date, how do you propose to make them start?0 -
There is only 4000 of them employ them all as prison guards if you pay them a reasonable wage they will all be better off in per capita pay and may even get some olympic class atheletes into the bargainBenpointer said:
Though the residents of St Helena might do.Pagan2 said:
Or st Helena after all it was good enough for Napolean so they cant complainMaxPB said:
They wouldn't, but Algeria or Morocco probably would.Benpointer said:
Why would Cape Verde agree to take them?Aslan said:
The easiest solution is to have their claims processed somewhere outside the UK. So they cross the Sahara, the Med, continental Europe, the Channel and then get put on a plane to Cape Verde.Benpointer said:
On the other hand, I don't think people will vote for asylum-seekers being left to drown off the English coast.Casino_Royale said:
I don't like to be the bringer of bad news but that's ultimately where we'll end up if a solution is not found.MaxPB said:
Change the law, legislate, do whatever it takes. If it means burning the HRA then so be it. Enough is enough.Taz said:
Fortunately our courts wouldn’t allow it and someone like the good law project would soon stop it.MaxPB said:
The UK is far to weak. We need to do what the European countries are doing. Fuck middle class sensibilities, push them back out to sea like French and Greeks and house the ones that do make it in Algeria until they are processed. No right to enter the UK until asylum is granted. The UK needs to become a fortress island.Leon said:The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories
TAKE BACK CONTROL?!
If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked
People won't accept legal niceities as an excuse for doing nothing - they'll vote for those who'll drive a cart and horses through them.
It's a very difficult issue, there are no easy solutions.0 -
I think most of the Afghans who worked with the UK have already qualified to come under an existing resettlement programme.Foxy said:
Hardly. Indeed they may well be fleeing Islamists in many of those countries.another_richard said:
They're more likely to need Allah's blessing from that set of countries.Taz said:
They are men, women and children. Many are unaccompanied children. It is right because they are desperate people,fleeing torture, wars, bigotry, prejudice and persecution. Look where they come from. Places like Somalia, Iran, Eritrea, Syria, S Sudan. They don’t tend to come from stable nations. God bless them all.SandyRentool said:
Why is it right to allow a bunch of young, fit blokes who have blagged their way across Europe to come and live here?Taz said:
Sorry but SKS and his team need to do what is right and if that means losing the red wall to gain other seats so be it.SandyRentool said:
Sorry, but are you fecking radge?Taz said:
Labour needs to make the most of this and push to welcome these people to the UK and help them. Their moral cowardice in not doing so shames left wing politicsLeon said:The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories
TAKE BACK CONTROL?!
If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked
Wave goodbye to the Red Wall forever.
Those in genuine need are languishing in camps near to the conflict zones.
Has any country agreed to be our offshore asylum camp? I understood that there are no takers so far.
I expect there will be a fresh wave of refugees from Afghanistan on the way soon. Anyone who worked for us is surely at risk from the Taliban, as indeed are all women. Do we not have some responsibility for the wars that we have sowed across the world?
Other than that, no, we haven't. Afghanistan was a shithole before and it's still a shithole now.0 -
Right wing pragmatics? Why can’t it be right wing loonballs barely able to sublimate their racism?Leon said:Actually, a TV series or a high concept thriller based on a Hunger Games style sieving of migration could be a cracking drama, weaving together leftwing "care" with right wing pragmatics, plus lots of climate change drama
1 -
They confine them to a single island officiallyBenpointer said:
Which is?Pagan2 said:
Personally I would take the greek approachBenpointer said:
There are a lot of solutions being offered on here tonight... none of which have the slightest chance of working.Andy_JS said:
The solution is for the French to stop them risking their lives by attempting to cross the channel.Benpointer said:
On the other hand, I don't think people will vote for asylum-seekers being left to drown off the English coast.Casino_Royale said:
I don't like to be the bringer of bad news but that's ultimately where we'll end up if a solution is not found.MaxPB said:
Change the law, legislate, do whatever it takes. If it means burning the HRA then so be it. Enough is enough.Taz said:
Fortunately our courts wouldn’t allow it and someone like the good law project would soon stop it.MaxPB said:
The UK is far to weak. We need to do what the European countries are doing. Fuck middle class sensibilities, push them back out to sea like French and Greeks and house the ones that do make it in Algeria until they are processed. No right to enter the UK until asylum is granted. The UK needs to become a fortress island.Leon said:The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories
TAKE BACK CONTROL?!
If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked
People won't accept legal niceities as an excuse for doing nothing - they'll vote for those who'll drive a cart and horses through them.
It's a very difficult issue, there are no easy solutions.
Since the French have no incentive to do what you suggest and have shown next to no willing ness to do so to date, how do you propose to make them start?0 -
Try reading what I've written. The French take more asylum seekers than we do, so obviously some are happy to stay in France. Those who want to come here are highly likely to have to travel through France to get here. There'll be lots of reasons why they prefer the UK to France, if you could be bothered to ask them.Andy_JS said:
How can you defend the French when the asylum seekers seem to believe France is such an awful country that they're willing to risk their lives trying to leave it in order to get to the UK?Northern_Al said:I see the nasty party is out in force tonight. Asylum seekers and the French are the targets.
For the record, France takes in a lot more asylum seekers than we do. Those passing through France and heading for the UK are presumably doing so because they have family connections or historical links over here.
Having said that, I suspect the UK appeals to a minority of economic migrants because it is much easier to make money under the radar and 'hide away' than it is in France, which has much more stringent identity checks for work etc. than we do.1 -
We don't. We have full employment pretty much.Andy_JS said:
We have millions of unemployed and under-employed people already in the country who could be learning to do jobs like this.nico679 said:Even if you could sort out social care in terms of more money who exactly is going to be doing the caring . Unless you increase foreign workers which this cesspit government won’t do where are these carers going to come from .
0 -
France is four times our size just sayingNorthern_Al said:
Try reading what I've written. The French take more asylum seekers than we do, so obviously some are happy to stay in France. Those who want to come here are highly likely to have to travel through France to get here. There'll be lots of reasons why they prefer the UK to France, if you could be bothered to ask them.Andy_JS said:
How can you defend the French when the asylum seekers seem to believe France is such an awful country that they're willing to risk their lives trying to leave it in order to get to the UK?Northern_Al said:I see the nasty party is out in force tonight. Asylum seekers and the French are the targets.
For the record, France takes in a lot more asylum seekers than we do. Those passing through France and heading for the UK are presumably doing so because they have family connections or historical links over here.
Having said that, I suspect the UK appeals to a minority of economic migrants because it is much easier to make money under the radar and 'hide away' than it is in France, which has much more stringent identity checks for work etc. than we do.0 -
How about a swap - we'll take care of the Afghan translators in return we give Blair to the Taliban.Foxy said:
Hardly. Indeed they may well be fleeing Islamists in many of those countries.another_richard said:
They're more likely to need Allah's blessing from that set of countries.Taz said:
They are men, women and children. Many are unaccompanied children. It is right because they are desperate people,fleeing torture, wars, bigotry, prejudice and persecution. Look where they come from. Places like Somalia, Iran, Eritrea, Syria, S Sudan. They don’t tend to come from stable nations. God bless them all.SandyRentool said:
Why is it right to allow a bunch of young, fit blokes who have blagged their way across Europe to come and live here?Taz said:
Sorry but SKS and his team need to do what is right and if that means losing the red wall to gain other seats so be it.SandyRentool said:
Sorry, but are you fecking radge?Taz said:
Labour needs to make the most of this and push to welcome these people to the UK and help them. Their moral cowardice in not doing so shames left wing politicsLeon said:The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories
TAKE BACK CONTROL?!
If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked
Wave goodbye to the Red Wall forever.
Those in genuine need are languishing in camps near to the conflict zones.
Has any country agreed to be our offshore asylum camp? I understood that there are no takers so far.
I expect there will be a fresh wave of refugees from Afghanistan on the way soon. Anyone who worked for us is surely at risk from the Taliban, as indeed are all women. Do we not have some responsibility for the wars that we have sowed across the world?
Blair's property empire can then be used for housing the translators.0 -
Another 'solution' that stands zero chance of working. Fortunately.Pagan2 said:
There is only 4000 of them employ them all as prison guards if you pay them a reasonable wage they will all be better off in per capita pay and may even get some olympic class atheletes into the bargainBenpointer said:
Though the residents of St Helena might do.Pagan2 said:
Or st Helena after all it was good enough for Napolean so they cant complainMaxPB said:
They wouldn't, but Algeria or Morocco probably would.Benpointer said:
Why would Cape Verde agree to take them?Aslan said:
The easiest solution is to have their claims processed somewhere outside the UK. So they cross the Sahara, the Med, continental Europe, the Channel and then get put on a plane to Cape Verde.Benpointer said:
On the other hand, I don't think people will vote for asylum-seekers being left to drown off the English coast.Casino_Royale said:
I don't like to be the bringer of bad news but that's ultimately where we'll end up if a solution is not found.MaxPB said:
Change the law, legislate, do whatever it takes. If it means burning the HRA then so be it. Enough is enough.Taz said:
Fortunately our courts wouldn’t allow it and someone like the good law project would soon stop it.MaxPB said:
The UK is far to weak. We need to do what the European countries are doing. Fuck middle class sensibilities, push them back out to sea like French and Greeks and house the ones that do make it in Algeria until they are processed. No right to enter the UK until asylum is granted. The UK needs to become a fortress island.Leon said:The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories
TAKE BACK CONTROL?!
If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked
People won't accept legal niceities as an excuse for doing nothing - they'll vote for those who'll drive a cart and horses through them.
It's a very difficult issue, there are no easy solutions.0 -
There's also the premise that this government will (a) put real money towards this issue; and (b) have the attention span to see their strategy through.Benpointer said:
There are a lot of solutions being offered on here tonight... none of which have the slightest chance of working.Andy_JS said:
The solution is for the French to stop them risking their lives by attempting to cross the channel.Benpointer said:
On the other hand, I don't think people will vote for asylum-seekers being left to drown off the English coast.Casino_Royale said:
I don't like to be the bringer of bad news but that's ultimately where we'll end up if a solution is not found.MaxPB said:
Change the law, legislate, do whatever it takes. If it means burning the HRA then so be it. Enough is enough.Taz said:
Fortunately our courts wouldn’t allow it and someone like the good law project would soon stop it.MaxPB said:
The UK is far to weak. We need to do what the European countries are doing. Fuck middle class sensibilities, push them back out to sea like French and Greeks and house the ones that do make it in Algeria until they are processed. No right to enter the UK until asylum is granted. The UK needs to become a fortress island.Leon said:The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories
TAKE BACK CONTROL?!
If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked
People won't accept legal niceities as an excuse for doing nothing - they'll vote for those who'll drive a cart and horses through them.
It's a very difficult issue, there are no easy solutions.
Since the French have no incentive to do what you suggest and have shown next to no willing ness to do so to date, how do you propose to make them start?1 -
I would be quite happy just giving blair to the taliban and call it a winanother_richard said:
How about a swap - we'll take care of the Afghan translators in return we give Blair to the Taliban.Foxy said:
Hardly. Indeed they may well be fleeing Islamists in many of those countries.another_richard said:
They're more likely to need Allah's blessing from that set of countries.Taz said:
They are men, women and children. Many are unaccompanied children. It is right because they are desperate people,fleeing torture, wars, bigotry, prejudice and persecution. Look where they come from. Places like Somalia, Iran, Eritrea, Syria, S Sudan. They don’t tend to come from stable nations. God bless them all.SandyRentool said:
Why is it right to allow a bunch of young, fit blokes who have blagged their way across Europe to come and live here?Taz said:
Sorry but SKS and his team need to do what is right and if that means losing the red wall to gain other seats so be it.SandyRentool said:
Sorry, but are you fecking radge?Taz said:
Labour needs to make the most of this and push to welcome these people to the UK and help them. Their moral cowardice in not doing so shames left wing politicsLeon said:The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories
TAKE BACK CONTROL?!
If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked
Wave goodbye to the Red Wall forever.
Those in genuine need are languishing in camps near to the conflict zones.
Has any country agreed to be our offshore asylum camp? I understood that there are no takers so far.
I expect there will be a fresh wave of refugees from Afghanistan on the way soon. Anyone who worked for us is surely at risk from the Taliban, as indeed are all women. Do we not have some responsibility for the wars that we have sowed across the world?
Blair's property empire can then be used for housing the translators.0 -
Blair and Bush to be fair to them paved the way for the removal of Al Qaeda from the country and Bin Laden to be killed.another_richard said:
How about a swap - we'll take care of the Afghan translators in return we give Blair to the Taliban.Foxy said:
Hardly. Indeed they may well be fleeing Islamists in many of those countries.another_richard said:
They're more likely to need Allah's blessing from that set of countries.Taz said:
They are men, women and children. Many are unaccompanied children. It is right because they are desperate people,fleeing torture, wars, bigotry, prejudice and persecution. Look where they come from. Places like Somalia, Iran, Eritrea, Syria, S Sudan. They don’t tend to come from stable nations. God bless them all.SandyRentool said:
Why is it right to allow a bunch of young, fit blokes who have blagged their way across Europe to come and live here?Taz said:
Sorry but SKS and his team need to do what is right and if that means losing the red wall to gain other seats so be it.SandyRentool said:
Sorry, but are you fecking radge?Taz said:
Labour needs to make the most of this and push to welcome these people to the UK and help them. Their moral cowardice in not doing so shames left wing politicsLeon said:The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories
TAKE BACK CONTROL?!
If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked
Wave goodbye to the Red Wall forever.
Those in genuine need are languishing in camps near to the conflict zones.
Has any country agreed to be our offshore asylum camp? I understood that there are no takers so far.
I expect there will be a fresh wave of refugees from Afghanistan on the way soon. Anyone who worked for us is surely at risk from the Taliban, as indeed are all women. Do we not have some responsibility for the wars that we have sowed across the world?
Blair's property empire can then be used for housing the translators.
It is Biden and Boris who are cutting and running and leaving it open to the Taliban again0 -
Hello everyone again. Report from the real world: everything is lovely. Pakistanis are lovely, despite their cricket team losing and potentially dubious practices being employed to get in to the ground. Cricket is once again lovely. England is lovely, though winning at cricket has little to do with. South Manchester is lovely, beneath a gibbous moon and marinated in the darker beers from the Thornbridge brewery and also a quite improbable amount of lowest common denominator cider. No one i s wearing a mask who doesn't have to. I am quite unaccustomably drunk.
3 -
Not on a GB basis though.CorrectHorseBattery said:https://twitter.com/Survation/status/1417559489700630541
The dam has broken! 40% breached!0 -
Would they?MaxPB said:
They wouldn't, but Algeria or Morocco probably would.Benpointer said:
Why would Cape Verde agree to take them?Aslan said:
The easiest solution is to have their claims processed somewhere outside the UK. So they cross the Sahara, the Med, continental Europe, the Channel and then get put on a plane to Cape Verde.Benpointer said:
On the other hand, I don't think people will vote for asylum-seekers being left to drown off the English coast.Casino_Royale said:
I don't like to be the bringer of bad news but that's ultimately where we'll end up if a solution is not found.MaxPB said:
Change the law, legislate, do whatever it takes. If it means burning the HRA then so be it. Enough is enough.Taz said:
Fortunately our courts wouldn’t allow it and someone like the good law project would soon stop it.MaxPB said:
The UK is far to weak. We need to do what the European countries are doing. Fuck middle class sensibilities, push them back out to sea like French and Greeks and house the ones that do make it in Algeria until they are processed. No right to enter the UK until asylum is granted. The UK needs to become a fortress island.Leon said:The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories
TAKE BACK CONTROL?!
If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked
People won't accept legal niceities as an excuse for doing nothing - they'll vote for those who'll drive a cart and horses through them.
It's a very difficult issue, there are no easy solutions.
Morocco often refuses to take back its own citizens, let alone other countries?
https://nltimes.nl/2019/11/22/morocco-refusing-speak-nl-taking-back-failed-asylum-seekers0 -
Eh?? Population is about the same. If it's land mass you're talking about, that's hardly relevant.Pagan2 said:
France is four times our size just sayingNorthern_Al said:
Try reading what I've written. The French take more asylum seekers than we do, so obviously some are happy to stay in France. Those who want to come here are highly likely to have to travel through France to get here. There'll be lots of reasons why they prefer the UK to France, if you could be bothered to ask them.Andy_JS said:
How can you defend the French when the asylum seekers seem to believe France is such an awful country that they're willing to risk their lives trying to leave it in order to get to the UK?Northern_Al said:I see the nasty party is out in force tonight. Asylum seekers and the French are the targets.
For the record, France takes in a lot more asylum seekers than we do. Those passing through France and heading for the UK are presumably doing so because they have family connections or historical links over here.
Having said that, I suspect the UK appeals to a minority of economic migrants because it is much easier to make money under the radar and 'hide away' than it is in France, which has much more stringent identity checks for work etc. than we do.0 -
Can't see the point. It is only immigarnt obcessives like you who care.Leon said:The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories
TAKE BACK CONTROL?!
If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked3 -
Cookie said:
Hello everyone again. Report from the real world: everything is lovely. Pakistanis are lovely, despite their cricket team losing and potentially dubious practices being employed to get in to the ground. Cricket is once again lovely. England is lovely, though winning at cricket has little to do with. South Manchester is lovely, beneath a gibbous moon and marinated in the darker beers from the Thornbridge brewery and also a quite improbable amount of lowest common denominator cider. No one i s wearing a mask who doesn't have to. I am quite unaccustomably drunk.
Am I lovely?Cookie said:Hello everyone again. Report from the real world: everything is lovely. Pakistanis are lovely, despite their cricket team losing and potentially dubious practices being employed to get in to the ground. Cricket is once again lovely. England is lovely, though winning at cricket has little to do with. South Manchester is lovely, beneath a gibbous moon and marinated in the darker beers from the Thornbridge brewery and also a quite improbable amount of lowest common denominator cider. No one i s wearing a mask who doesn't have to. I am quite unaccustomably drunk.
0 -
Dear oh dear, by 'our' size you must mean Little England?Pagan2 said:
France is four times our size just sayingNorthern_Al said:
Try reading what I've written. The French take more asylum seekers than we do, so obviously some are happy to stay in France. Those who want to come here are highly likely to have to travel through France to get here. There'll be lots of reasons why they prefer the UK to France, if you could be bothered to ask them.Andy_JS said:
How can you defend the French when the asylum seekers seem to believe France is such an awful country that they're willing to risk their lives trying to leave it in order to get to the UK?Northern_Al said:I see the nasty party is out in force tonight. Asylum seekers and the French are the targets.
For the record, France takes in a lot more asylum seekers than we do. Those passing through France and heading for the UK are presumably doing so because they have family connections or historical links over here.
Having said that, I suspect the UK appeals to a minority of economic migrants because it is much easier to make money under the radar and 'hide away' than it is in France, which has much more stringent identity checks for work etc. than we do.0 -
Israel COVID update: Nearly 1,500 new cases, biggest one-day increase since March
- New cases: 1,491
- Average: 987 (+42)
- In hospital: 129 (+2)
- In ICU: 16 (-1)
- New deaths: 2
Population vaccinated:
- 1st dose: 61.83% (+0.03)
- 2nd dose: 56.53% (+0.13)0 -
Nope Nats like you have got to realise not all polls revolve around you, I have now given you both the UK and Scottish Survation figures both of which would make Starmer PM with minor parties support, exactly as the 2019 Scottish numbers would.StuartDickson said:
Nope, you are still obfuscating. The link you provided does not contain the numbers you yourself pumped into Baxter’s calculator.HYUFD said:
Here https://twitter.com/Survation/status/1417559489700630541?s=20 and it is UK figures and UK figures alone that matter for UK elections.StuartDickson said:
Nope. Now you’re answering a question I did not ask. I know it’s terribly old-fashioned, but could you give a straight answer to a straight question? Please inform us where you got the figures you pumped in to Martin Baxter’s ElectoralCalculus calculator:HYUFD said:
Scottish figures are largely irrelevant to the UK total unless the SCons take the lead as the SNP will prop up Labour anyway, so your Scottish subsample demand is also largely irrelevant.StuartDickson said:
Err… yes. Thanks. Hate to be a pain, but I repeat my question:HYUFD said:
Which would still see a hung parliament on the UK Survation numbers and PM Starmer propped up by the SNP and LDs, the SDLP, PC, Alliance and Greens despite another Tory majority in England.StuartDickson said:
Where are you getting these figures from?HYUFD said:
Electoral Calculus gives a hung parliament on those numbers from Survation with Tories 310, Labour 247, SNP 55, LDs 15.FrancisUrquhart said:
Interesting labour and lib dems managing better numbers. Normally it is one or the other.HYUFD said:Closer with Survation tonight
Tories 39%
Labour 35%
LDs 11%
https://twitter.com/Survation/status/1417559489700630541?s=20
So Starmer could be PM with SNP, LD and Green and PC support, the Tories would certainly need the DUP to have a chance of staying in office.
IDS, Raab, Villiers and Steve Baker would lose their seats
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/usercode.py?scotcontrol=Y&CON=39&LAB=35&LIB=11&Reform=3&Green=5&UKIP=&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVReform=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=23&SCOTLAB=19.6&SCOTLIB=6&SCOTReform=0.4&SCOTGreen=2.1&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=47.7&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2019base
Scotnat 47.7%
Scotcon 23%
Scotlab 19.6%
Scotlib 6%
Scotgreen 2.1%
Scotreform 0.4%
The DUP would not support the Tories again unless they removed the Irish Sea border
Where are you getting these figures from?
Scotnat 47.7%
Scotcon 23%
Scotlab 19.6%
Scotlib 6%
Scotgreen 2.1%
Scotreform 0.4%
However the Scottish figures are SNP 39%, Tories 22%, Labour 19%, Greens 5%, LDs 4%
https://www.survation.com/survation-19-july-2021-uk-politics-survey/
Scotnat 47.7%
Scotcon 23%
Scotlab 19.6%
Scotlib 6%
Scotgreen 2.1%
Scotreform 0.4%
For unless the Scottish Conservatives take the lead in Scotland whether the SNP lead or SLab lead it makes no difference, their MPs will both make Starmer PM
Please inform us where you got the figures you entered in to the ElectoralCalculus calculator:
Scotnat 47.7%
Scotcon 23%
Scotlab 19.6%
Scotlib 6%
Scotgreen 2.1%
Scotreform 0.4%
You are Labour's little helpers at Westminster so obviously we don't give a toss precisely how many little Nationalists there are at Westminster as you will all be making Starmer PM anyway. Unless the SCons make significant gains in Scotland, Scottish figures are therefore irrelevant for UK elections0 -
... and completely false, to boot!Northern_Al said:
Eh?? Population is about the same. If it's land mass you're talking about, that's hardly relevant.Pagan2 said:
France is four times our size just sayingNorthern_Al said:
Try reading what I've written. The French take more asylum seekers than we do, so obviously some are happy to stay in France. Those who want to come here are highly likely to have to travel through France to get here. There'll be lots of reasons why they prefer the UK to France, if you could be bothered to ask them.Andy_JS said:
How can you defend the French when the asylum seekers seem to believe France is such an awful country that they're willing to risk their lives trying to leave it in order to get to the UK?Northern_Al said:I see the nasty party is out in force tonight. Asylum seekers and the French are the targets.
For the record, France takes in a lot more asylum seekers than we do. Those passing through France and heading for the UK are presumably doing so because they have family connections or historical links over here.
Having said that, I suspect the UK appeals to a minority of economic migrants because it is much easier to make money under the radar and 'hide away' than it is in France, which has much more stringent identity checks for work etc. than we do.0 -
What do you mean not relevant land mass is totally relevant if you have 4 times the land mass you can fit 4 times the people without any more crowdingNorthern_Al said:
Eh?? Population is about the same. If it's land mass you're talking about, that's hardly relevant.Pagan2 said:
France is four times our size just sayingNorthern_Al said:
Try reading what I've written. The French take more asylum seekers than we do, so obviously some are happy to stay in France. Those who want to come here are highly likely to have to travel through France to get here. There'll be lots of reasons why they prefer the UK to France, if you could be bothered to ask them.Andy_JS said:
How can you defend the French when the asylum seekers seem to believe France is such an awful country that they're willing to risk their lives trying to leave it in order to get to the UK?Northern_Al said:I see the nasty party is out in force tonight. Asylum seekers and the French are the targets.
For the record, France takes in a lot more asylum seekers than we do. Those passing through France and heading for the UK are presumably doing so because they have family connections or historical links over here.
Having said that, I suspect the UK appeals to a minority of economic migrants because it is much easier to make money under the radar and 'hide away' than it is in France, which has much more stringent identity checks for work etc. than we do.0 -
No I meant the greater cornish empireBenpointer said:
Dear oh dear, by 'our' size you must mean Little England?Pagan2 said:
France is four times our size just sayingNorthern_Al said:
Try reading what I've written. The French take more asylum seekers than we do, so obviously some are happy to stay in France. Those who want to come here are highly likely to have to travel through France to get here. There'll be lots of reasons why they prefer the UK to France, if you could be bothered to ask them.Andy_JS said:
How can you defend the French when the asylum seekers seem to believe France is such an awful country that they're willing to risk their lives trying to leave it in order to get to the UK?Northern_Al said:I see the nasty party is out in force tonight. Asylum seekers and the French are the targets.
For the record, France takes in a lot more asylum seekers than we do. Those passing through France and heading for the UK are presumably doing so because they have family connections or historical links over here.
Having said that, I suspect the UK appeals to a minority of economic migrants because it is much easier to make money under the radar and 'hide away' than it is in France, which has much more stringent identity checks for work etc. than we do.0 -
I don't think so. The way the numbers of arrivals increase each year is a real vulnerability of this government. Farage has touched a nerve over the issue and it could get very hot for the government.MikeSmithson said:
Can't see the point. It is only immigarnt obcessives like you who care.Leon said:The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories
TAKE BACK CONTROL?!
If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked0 -
Surely occupied Wales?Pagan2 said:
No I meant the greater cornish empireBenpointer said:
Dear oh dear, by 'our' size you must mean Little England?Pagan2 said:
France is four times our size just sayingNorthern_Al said:
Try reading what I've written. The French take more asylum seekers than we do, so obviously some are happy to stay in France. Those who want to come here are highly likely to have to travel through France to get here. There'll be lots of reasons why they prefer the UK to France, if you could be bothered to ask them.Andy_JS said:
How can you defend the French when the asylum seekers seem to believe France is such an awful country that they're willing to risk their lives trying to leave it in order to get to the UK?Northern_Al said:I see the nasty party is out in force tonight. Asylum seekers and the French are the targets.
For the record, France takes in a lot more asylum seekers than we do. Those passing through France and heading for the UK are presumably doing so because they have family connections or historical links over here.
Having said that, I suspect the UK appeals to a minority of economic migrants because it is much easier to make money under the radar and 'hide away' than it is in France, which has much more stringent identity checks for work etc. than we do.0 -
ok 3 and a bit aryea of gb = 209,331, area of france 643,801 it wasnt wildly out and suggests pedantryBenpointer said:
... and completely false, to boot!Northern_Al said:
Eh?? Population is about the same. If it's land mass you're talking about, that's hardly relevant.Pagan2 said:
France is four times our size just sayingNorthern_Al said:
Try reading what I've written. The French take more asylum seekers than we do, so obviously some are happy to stay in France. Those who want to come here are highly likely to have to travel through France to get here. There'll be lots of reasons why they prefer the UK to France, if you could be bothered to ask them.Andy_JS said:
How can you defend the French when the asylum seekers seem to believe France is such an awful country that they're willing to risk their lives trying to leave it in order to get to the UK?Northern_Al said:I see the nasty party is out in force tonight. Asylum seekers and the French are the targets.
For the record, France takes in a lot more asylum seekers than we do. Those passing through France and heading for the UK are presumably doing so because they have family connections or historical links over here.
Having said that, I suspect the UK appeals to a minority of economic migrants because it is much easier to make money under the radar and 'hide away' than it is in France, which has much more stringent identity checks for work etc. than we do.0 -
Right, off to bed now. Hopefully tonight's little outbreak of zealous xenophobia will have calmed down a little by tomorrow.
Night all!0 -
Do we? A quick Google suggests only 350k odd claiming jsa/universal creditAndy_JS said:
We have millions of unemployed and under-employed people already in the country who could be learning to do jobs like this.nico679 said:Even if you could sort out social care in terms of more money who exactly is going to be doing the caring . Unless you increase foreign workers which this cesspit government won’t do where are these carers going to come from .
0 -
Zealous xenophobia? This is why it's impossible to have a debate on this issue, you immediately get accused of racism.Benpointer said:Right, off to bed now. Hopefully tonight's little outbreak of zealous xenophobia will have calmed down a little by tomorrow.
Night all!0 -
It peaked around 100K about 20 years ago. It’s declined since thenFoxy said:
I don't think so. The way the numbers of arrivals increase each year is a real vulnerability of this government. Farage has touched a nerve over the issue and it could get very hot for the government.MikeSmithson said:
Can't see the point. It is only immigarnt obcessives like you who care.Leon said:The images of 450 migrants simply beaching in Kent, in one single day, and then scattering are absolutely appalling for the Tories
TAKE BACK CONTROL?!
If they don't get a grip on this the government is fucked0 -
As wages rise in the care industry people wanting to come will pass the points systemGallowgate said:
Do we? A quick Google suggests only 350k odd claiming jsa/universal creditAndy_JS said:
We have millions of unemployed and under-employed people already in the country who could be learning to do jobs like this.nico679 said:Even if you could sort out social care in terms of more money who exactly is going to be doing the caring . Unless you increase foreign workers which this cesspit government won’t do where are these carers going to come from .
0 -
2.3mGallowgate said:
Do we? A quick Google suggests only 350k odd claiming jsa/universal creditAndy_JS said:
We have millions of unemployed and under-employed people already in the country who could be learning to do jobs like this.nico679 said:Even if you could sort out social care in terms of more money who exactly is going to be doing the caring . Unless you increase foreign workers which this cesspit government won’t do where are these carers going to come from .
https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peoplenotinwork/outofworkbenefits/timeseries/bcjd/unem0 -
I've been down the pub engaging in some mask/no mask etiquette. So may have missed some detail.
But seems I may have missed Cummings blowing himself up by claiming him and three mates were about to undertake a coup days after Dec 2019 GE?
1
This discussion has been closed.