Categories
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The LD leadership race where NOT being anti-immigration cou
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The LD leadership race where NOT being anti-immigration could be a vote winner
With the Lib Dem leadership race drawing to a close the favourite, ex-party president Tim Farron, according to the Observer, has said that the UK should take 60,000 immigrants to help deal with the current crisis. According to Toby Helm’s report:
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Well done Tim.
Or, as any decent sub-editor would put it,
"The LD leadership race where being PRO-immigration could be a vote winner"
Hashtag Double Negative
Hashtag Convoluted Wording
This tim nice but dim guy should be standing on a platform of hunting down and hanging the immigrantz. The country would love it.
Every single seat would turn yellow.
or not.
Like when Christianity trumped Liberalism?
I guess he needs to do something to prove his credentials after not voting in favor of same sex marriage.
Whilst this may be popular with some Lib Dem members it would be deeply unpopular with the majority of voters as every poll shows immigration is the number 1 concern among voters.
Still it gets him a soundbite for a day.
It's very easy to be liberal on this issue - when you know full well it's not your street or town they will be moved into.
Indeed why doesn't he take say half a dozen into his own home - I am sure he has the room!
Is the proposal to take in 60,000 as a one-off, or to do it every year? Is this in place of some of the existing half million immigrants that presently arrive through other channels, or in addition?
Just more soundbite nonsense from a party that was obliterated because of messages like this.
I've read on here Cameron is a lucky PM, I bet he can't believe his luck looking at the candidates for leadership of the libs and labour. He is potentially making a pigs ear of things at the moment and nobody is holding him to account, they're too busy waving their willies at a tiny % of the population who will be voting.
He didn't need to make it in order to get the LD leadership, he was miles ahead anyway.
Before his stupid statement no one had anything bad to say about him, now they have and big time too.
The chances of a LD revival have just slimmed down, you won't get votes with stupid policies like Farron's or Lamb's.
As an aside, Turkey has taken in 1.7 million refugees from Syria, many of whom have been settled in the interior.
http://www.unhcr.org/pages/49e48e0fa7f.html
There won't be an exit poll of the greek referendum, so unfortunately I won't be able to find it before the polls close.
Only a single normal opinion poll will be published, but hopefully I will have some sense of where are things going by the afternoon.
Probably the way to pick out the least needy is to pick those who are:
Single
Male
Have the ability to travel
Have the ability to negotiate with people traffickers
Have cash resources in liquid form that exceed the percapita GDP of many African nations.
Can travel across borders without material support.
Can get to Calais and live in the forest for weeks
Can break through the port security
Can sucessfuly break into or bribe a truck driver to stow them away.
If we were to invent a Darwinian system to pick out the least vulnerable refugees we could hardly come up with a worse selection system! Meanwhile the highest risk refugees are being raped and slave traded.
Let's look at the people in Calais: where are they from, what are their skills, what languages do they speak, have they been vetted for criminality etc etc.
Farron needs to decide if he wants to take in women and children on purely humanitarian grounds, or if he means economic migrants who have no means of answering the questions I raise above.
The libs might agree with his stance, it is after all an internal poll, but statements like his will alienate the majority of the electorate.
The refugee crisis was not a great deal different last year. What did Farron say then, when we had a sizeable LD presence in government?
Poor old Frank Dobson... and a fair number of others will finally have to suck it up. http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/Politics/article1577215.ece
If I'm going to vote liberal I want him to clearly define who the 60,000 are.
And with the move re Free TVLF - the responsibility for giving them out will be up to the BBC to decide from 2020, not HMG. Neat footwork there.
Either Farron does believe in a truly open door policy - in which case I would suggest he has lost a chunk of even the 8% who voted LibDem in 2015. Or else it is just empty gesture politics, that does nothing to understand and solve the underlying problem.
Politically, a minefield.
Genuine asylum seekers should be welcome. Those in real fear in their native country - we have a long and noble history of taking them in.
Of the economic migrants, some will benefit the country and some will not. I think most people would welcome the former.
The political problem for the LDs is that this will be spun as a welcome for the world's ne'er do wells, for ISIS terrorists, and for those from parts of the globe with narrow, old-fashioned views - those who will never integrate.
A 'brave' decision.
The Lebanon is struggling to cope with the huge immigration crisis on it's borders. We can find frankly more 'worthy' refugees there than the shysters at Calais.
Still - and if Nigerians seeking exit visa may be taken as a proxy for Africans as a whole - four-fifths of them want to live in the USA, not here or anywhere else in Europe.
Damned fool Farron is. It's that kind of nonsense that makes it almost impossible to see myself ever voting Lib Dem. Farron might love the euro-sausage, but the electorate (Largely) do not.
Mr. 16, welcome to pb.com, and I agree with your debut post. It's like Robertson of the SNP being pro-immigration when relatively few will go to Scotland and practically none to his own constituency.
But there is a broader point that Mr Farron needs to answer. By accepting those young, purposeful men (they are invariably men) looking for a better life beyond their brutal regimes, then who is left to agitate against and overturn those regimes? The old, the young, the sick, the unable. Those are the people whose hope of a better life is greatly diminished by your proposal, Mr Farron. The warlords and dictators must take great comfort that their position is a little more secure with every pissed off citizen who leaves their country.
Where would South Africa be today if we had accepted political asylum en masse from the members of the ANC?
It's like inheriting non-dom status - WTF? That's going too apparently.
http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.co.uk/2015/07/united-kingdom-pre-race.html
He's been working in the NHS his entire working life - mostly in mental health and has seen it all. And not impressed by the lead swingers.
It is interesting to see how the Ugandan Resettlement board worked, with active attempts at education, English language lessons, education in British social mores and keeping family life intact:
http://www.asiansfromuganda.org.uk/uganda_resettlement_board.php
Ugandan Asians were actively helped, not given leave to remain and left to fend for themselves.
He was truly agape for large chunks of the programme. Funny ole world when the tables turn.
Imagine the Daily Heil headlines.
Whether that is moral is another question. But if I were a cynical government I would be accepting these as asylum seekers then exhorting our EU fellow members to show solidarity by taking their fair share of the rest.
"....then exhort our EU fellow members to show solidarity by taking their fair share of the rest."
Reminds me of Blair giving up half the rebate for a promise on CAP reform.
Somewhat crass to compare 60,000 illegal and economic migrants to the Ugandan Asians, many of which were UK citizens and British colonial workers. – Still, a brave decision by Tim.
EDIT the book is a great read http://www.amazon.co.uk/Last-King-Scotland-Giles-Foden/dp/0571232884
"It is the way to make resettlement work. Otherwise we just store up problems for the future."
That sounds good but it would be very labour-intensive. Hence, there would have to be a limit on the numbers.
We're not in their situation, either regarding the EU or immigration. If they want to take migrants, good for them. It shouldn't affect British policy.
http://www.polishresettlementcampsintheuk.co.uk/
The investment in integration and resettlement bore fruit in the long term. Letting feral and desperate young men in, who often owe money to criminal trafficking gangs, then denying them legitimate means of support, is hardly comparable.
But I suspect they will gradually pick up again as some NOTAs return.
May be he's right, may be he's not. But it doesn't give you call to insult him.
Scottish Independence
Yes to Indy 47%
No to Indy 53%
Poll also finds
It also finds that close to half of all voters in Scotland believe people who live here but come from England or other parts of the UK should not be entitled to vote again if another referendum on independence were to be held.
Push-polling forever!
We now have a situation where there are low hundreds of thousands of refugees ending up in Italy. This is a result of geography and is arguably a European problem rather than an Italian one. British navy ships rescue these people from the sea and then dump them on the Italians. Thanks guys.
What to do with these people is a real dilemma. Personally, I think they have to be returned to their point of origin so the message is given out that spending your family's savings dealing with these thugs and terrorists and risking your life in the med is not a good idea. If you don't do that then the flow will simply increase.
The EU has not taken this view. It has asked its member states to share the burden of caring for these people. We have refused. As we are, through our Navy, contributing to it in a modest way that is pretty shameful and Farron is right to say so. I think the policy is wrong but given the policy of non return we should indeed help.
I also think Foxinsox is right to point to what we did for the Ugandan Asians. The way we treat asylum seekers in this country is shameful but it is again a deliberate policy designed to discourage them and reduce their numbers to something deemed politically acceptable. To claim we have a "proud record" in this area is simply untrue. We don't and it is deliberate because we don't want them to come here. It is as simple as that. Look how we are responding to the Syrian crisis.
For me, there should always be a place for a genuinely Liberal party willing to point out our hypocrisy and make us uncomfortable. They are a force for good and will occasionally make us rethink our selfishness.
As you say, there is a very good reason for returning to point of origin or, at least, to a safe non-EU location.
But the EU has decided not to take that view. However, we have an explicit derogation from accepting EU policy on matters such as this, so we have chosen to stick to our guns.
I think the activities of the Royal Navy people from the water is admirable. I wish they would put them elsewhere, but to blame us for "contributing to the problem" when we have recommended an alternative course of action is risible.
Or are you saying we should let the migrants drown rather than drop them off in Italy?
It is worth arguing that housing association and council tenants on the incomes above should actually pay a service charge over and above the market rate to compensate the taxpayer for the unnecessary occupation of social housing. The truth is that a secure tenancy in itself adds a massive value to the tenant above the market rate for similar private rental properties.
(Yes, I know polling is currently a dirty word, but it's all we have to go on aside from anecdata).
Africa has improved in some respects but is still spinning off hundreds of thousands of people who believe that there has to be a better life somewhere else. They are right. They will have a better life if they make the promised land. It is a difficult issue.
But why do you think the role of the Navy is shameful?
The abuse of "asylum seeker" status is endemic. It has got to the point where even making a claim of asylum is as good as it being granted, given the monumental backlog and then the difficulty in repatriation even after any eventual finding against the claimant. And that is a story that gets back to those who make the journey.
Indeed. The problem with this approach by Farron is this very abuse. I would like to think that where persecution exists we can be a safe haven for anyone under threat. It's not always going to be possible though even withe best will in the world. The original " political Asylum" system has been so abused that it is today virtually meaningless. Those most in danger are now hidden in the "white noise" of economic migrants and chancers.
The general public also no longer differentiate between the two and to them they are all like the ones they see jumping on lorries screened on their TV's into their lounges every evening. There is huge concern about this and the amounts we are forced to pay if they get lucky and make it across the channel. Meanwhile innocent truck drivers and companies are having their business held up, additional costs imposed and fines if they should be unlucky to be the target of a free ride.
On top of all of that previously we as a country determined who could enter based on merits of the case.now we re dictated to by some faceless, unelected bureaucrat in Brussels what we have to do even if we don't like it. I would also not put it pass them to select all the difficult ones and send them here in the 60k.
Sorry this was a very poor decision by Farron. If he wins then hopefully this will be hung around his neck consistently. It's irrelevant anyway TBH because I suspect they are effectively finished as a mainstream party anyway. That's a shame because in amongst them there were good people but as always drowned out by the left liberLs that should have moved into Labour years ago.
Which does lead into the notion of what if the LibDems get to be king-makers again, holding the balance of power: would Farron insist that his position on the asylum seekers/economic migrants prevails? You can see a situation where a sizeable majority of the voters would be dead against allowing it, yet their wishes are over-ruled by the junior party. Not hard to see why coalition governments (and hence any LibDem route to relevance) is out of favour...
Perhaps I've got rather liberal associates, but a few people (mainly mothers in various toddler groups) have been saying we should let some/all in.
Although there is always the chance that people who think the opposite dare not face the wrath of mothers.
If we accept those people who have stormed the channel tunnel what sort of message do we send out? There are proper procedures to follow, paying people smugglers, crossing several safe countries and then illegally entering a tunnel, endangering life, is not proper procedure.
Ultimately I've gone for Lewis Hamilton to achieve the "Hat Trick", i,e Pole + Win + Fastest Lap, available from Laddies, Hills & Paddy Power at odds of 2.75 (7/4).
The first element is of course already in the bag, the second appears to be an odds-on likelihood, which probably means the prospect of this bet delivering is down to whether Lewis can be sufficiently enthused to secure the fastest lap in the final stages of the race were he to be, say, 10 - 20 seconds clear of the field by that stage. I am hoping that the fanatical cheering of a massive home crowd will spur him on to achieve this third leg of the bet.
And in the meantime we drown under the deluge of economic migrants who have had the resources and abilities to get here. Many of these have hard luck stories to tell. Some of them may even be true. But the self selection of numbers that already seem higher than we want to cope with is leaving little to no compassion for anyone else.
Repeat until feeling of smugness and moral virtue reaches 100%
I think people need to understand that returning people to point of origin is very difficult if not impossible. They destroy any documents they have and refuse to disclose where they originated. To be able to return a displaced person you have to prove their nationality, legal residency which without documents and cooperation you cannot do. The country you are attempting to return them too also will demand evidence which you don't have. Most coming out of for example Syria are not Syrian. They are from middles East or East Africa and some West Africans. That's as much as you really know so Syria can legitimately refuse entry to them once crossing the Med in a boat.
I am aware of this as I was involved more than once in trying to repatriate African migrants from ships that had picked up stowaways on board. It's a thankless task you know is going to fail and with the exception of one person never succeeded.
Quite simply you have to stop them at the waters edge because after that it really is game over.
The Mercedes is fastest by a mile but they may well build an enormous lead then cruise around managing things. Plus, Hamilton's been having some slightly dodgy starts of late (I did consider laying him to lead lap 1).
Edited extra bit: speaking of starts, rule changes are coming in this season to cut electronic aids, which will primarily affect the start. I suspect engine/traction will determine who does better/worse as a result (as well as driver skill, of course).