[Politics] Tory meltdown finally arrived [was: incoming]...

[Thunder Bolt]

The law on asylum seekers as explained by a KC. It includes the UN 1948 and 1951 legislations.

 

[Pevenseagull]

The law on asylum seekers as explained by a KC. It includes the UN 1948 and 1951 legislations.

Or, as the tories with their 'lefty lawyer' stuff might call him, a 'KFC'.


Reason for editing: punctuation.

 

[rogersix]

Not at all, I wasn’t speaking for myself or giving my views one way or the other on that specific policy or any other.

Simply my view on what the Labour Party need to do in order to take power:

Produce a credible effective fully costed manifesto providing solutions for today’s political problems.

1. call election

2. produce manifesto

i'm afraid you'll have to a while for all the excitement

 

[jcdenton08]

1. call election

2. produce manifesto

i'm afraid you'll have to a while for all the excitement

At the moment Labour have all the power by virtue of staying quiet and not giving failing Tories any ammunition. The hustings and debates after manifesto is released don’t give Conservative strategists time to play the long PR game of slagging off Labour ideas for years before an election.

This is sensible to me.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

That Labour will not replace the borders bill, they will only amend it. Whilst I welcome the desire to speed up the processing of applications, the focus on creating another border force and renewing return agreements with EU countries (which does need to happen) still smacks of pandering to those who demonise asylum seekers and refugees as criminals and a problem. Labour has to my knowledge said nothing about securing new safe and legal routes that will reduce the market for people smugglers to exploit.

Not a word about the immorality of this government's action, just a reassurance to the public that they will be more effective in dealing with this 'problem'. I understand that they're maybe some realpolitik behind this stance, but to me it just stinks.

The UK does far less than any other comparable country for refugees and asylum seekers yet these people are seen as convenient scapegoats for our ills by the leaders of both major parties

Oh, I see.

Well, as repeated ad nauseam, labour don't need to declare anything much at the moment. I don't have a problem with Cooper's comment. She has to say something, or hide in a wardrobe like Johnson, or pretend the phone signal is lost, like Corbyn did.

As for leaders of both parties (which includes Starmer) seeing refugees as 'convenient scapegoats'.....I think someone has put some LSD in your tea. Starmer has done no such thing. Neither that, nor on the other hand made him and his party a hostage to fortune by publishing an 'alternative' policy that can be misrepresented by the tory lickspittles in/and the media.

Starmer (and Cooper) can largely sit back and let the tories eat themselves for the time being. Huffing and puffing about 'immorality' will have no impact on anything (other than to make the huffer feel self-righteous).

Every sane person (who isn't a blighted by their tiny white penis) knows all this immigrant stuff is a red herring. Anyone serious going toe to toe with it, in full rebuttal mode, hasn't read the room. The tories are desperately whistling to their dogs. There is no need for either labour or you to get distraught about it. Hold your nose till after the general election. Hold labout to account once they have had a chance to exercise some power.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Not at all, I wasn’t speaking for myself or giving my views one way or the other on that specific policy or any other.

Simply my view on what the Labour Party need to do in order to take power:

Produce a credible effective fully costed manifesto providing solutions for today’s political problems.

They will.

I hope they don't publish it till days before the election, though.

The election won't be won by votes from the likes of you or me. It will be won by the whim of a swathe of floating voters, hopefully forgetting that recently they mostly believed that Corbyn-Labour want unrestricted immigration and a seat in the house of lords for Gerry Adams.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Your first point explains why I disagree with your second. They were elected by winning seats in working class areas. They did this by focusing on the EU and immigration as the major problems for those communities. The real reasons they are not thriving are far more to do with the underinvestment and demise of manufacturing industry. They cannot / will not do anything to respond to those challenges because the potential solutions are either too expensive, or too Keynesian to fit their free market ideology. In those circumstances, they can't admit their impotency, so they need a convincing alternative explanation. Putting the blame on 'others' is a long established tactic of right wing populist politicians. Proposing seemingly simple solutions to very complex problems is another.

I see Starmer's position differently. Labour in opposition in the UK is in opposition to the current government, but is also effectively opposed by the majority of owners of media outlets. Starmer's reticence on this and a lot of other issues reflects that his present job is not to promote debate, but to get himself elected. To do this, he believes that he is better advised to focus attention on the faults of the government, than to propose alternatives that he is currently powerless to implement. Doing the latter would just encourage his opponents to focus on attacking his proposals, leaving him on the defence instead of attacking the government. This unspoken truth is why I have more patience with his seeming ineffectiveness than most on the left do. Corbyn openly went to war with the media and though his supporters loved him saying the things that they wanted to hear, he gave the media what it needed to destroy his credibility with a particular segment of working class voters. At present, the best that they can do with Starmer is say that he's boring. Given the endless supply of 'exciting' politicians that his opponents have inflicted upon us, a bit of tedious stability might be welcomed by a lot of us. I don't seem him as a good political campaigner, but as a proven sound admistrator. As you suggest, the real test of him will come if and when he is elected.

Precisely.

Anyone who continues to scream for detailed labour strategy and tactics, immediately and in triplicate are, in my view, not thinking this properly through.

Or are tories.

I imagine that several jackasses I have on ignore have already posted 'come on then Starmer, you slag, you think you're so clever but you don't have any plans and are trying to con the electorate (etc etc)'. If I decided to be a right wing twit it would be such a doddle.

 

[Rdodge30]

They will.

I hope they don't publish it till days before the election, though.

The election won't be won by votes from the likes of you or me. It will be won by the whim of a swathe of floating voters, hopefully forgetting that recently they mostly believed that Corbyn-Labour want unrestricted immigration and a seat in the house of lords for Gerry Adams.

Only days before?

Im sure there will be many others with the same view as you on both sides of politics- voting for their party regardless of what is in the manifesto

 

[worthingseagull123]

Apart from what we already know, what is it about France / the French that asylum seekers find so unacceptable and unpalatable they they won't claim asylum there?

It's a genuine question. I really don't understand what the attraction of the UK is compared to France.

We are a lot more lenient.

Asylum applications - annual statistics - Statistics Explained

The latest statistics on asylum applicants in the EU are presented.

ec.europa.eu

We grant to a higher percentage of people than anywhere else in the EU.

We don’t have ID cards and can’t tackle illegal working as other nations do.

We have a huge backlog and people know it could take years to assess their claims. The longer they remain, the greater the chance of an amnesty.

 

[drew]

This bill will fail just as all the other bill/ideas that this government have proposed. The big problem is that they don't process applications quick enough. People bang on about illegal asylum seekers however, they are not illegal until their application has been rejected which means it must be processed. It's all cloak and mirrors to try an appeal to the voters more xenophobic tendancies and distract from the disaster that this government is on almost every front.

 

[BadFish]

We are a lot more lenient.

Asylum applications - annual statistics - Statistics Explained

The latest statistics on asylum applicants in the EU are presented.

ec.europa.eu

We grant to a higher percentage of people than anywhere else in the EU.

We don’t have ID cards and can’t tackle illegal working as other nations do.

We have a huge backlog and people know it could take years to assess their claims. The longer they remain, the greater the chance of an amnesty.

The best thing about having the press on one's side is that you can continually chip away at asylum seeker laws and introduce some of the most draconian systems in the world, cut off any and all legal routes to seeking asylum in your country, out source your responsibilities to a third country and slow down the processing of applications to snails pace all the while convincing your electorate that you are more lenient than other countries and a 'soft touch's.

Keep drinking the Kool aid people.

 

[worthingseagull123]

The best thing about having the press on one's side is that you can continually chip away at asylum seeker laws and introduce some of the most draconian systems in the world, cut off any and all legal routes to seeking asylum in your country, out source your responsibilities to a third country and slow down the processing of applications to snails pace all the while convincing your electorate that you are more lenient than other countries and a 'soft touch's.

Keep drinking the Kool aid people.

So why do we have a higher grant rate than the rest of Europe?

Which other countries have safe routes to allow people to lodge asylum claims from outside their territories or issue visas to allow them to travel to their territory to lodge an asylum claim?

Can you advise?

 

[Hugo Rune]

Your first point explains why I disagree with your second. They were elected by winning seats in working class areas. They did this by focusing on the EU and immigration as the major problems for those communities. The real reasons they are not thriving are far more to do with the underinvestment and demise of manufacturing industry. They cannot / will not do anything to respond to those challenges because the potential solutions are either too expensive, or too Keynesian to fit their free market ideology. In those circumstances, they can't admit their impotency, so they need a convincing alternative explanation. Putting the blame on 'others' is a long established tactic of right wing populist politicians. Proposing seemingly simple solutions to very complex problems is another.

I see Starmer's position differently. Labour in opposition in the UK is in opposition to the current government, but is also effectively opposed by the majority of owners of media outlets. Starmer's reticence on this and a lot of other issues reflects that his present job is not to promote debate, but to get himself elected. To do this, he believes that he is better advised to focus attention on the faults of the government, than to propose alternatives that he is currently powerless to implement. Doing the latter would just encourage his opponents to focus on attacking his proposals, leaving him on the defence instead of attacking the government. This unspoken truth is why I have more patience with his seeming ineffectiveness than most on the left do. Corbyn openly went to war with the media and though his supporters loved him saying the things that they wanted to hear, he gave the media what it needed to destroy his credibility with a particular segment of working class voters. At present, the best that they can do with Starmer is say that he's boring. Given the endless supply of 'exciting' politicians that his opponents have inflicted upon us, a bit of tedious stability might be welcomed by a lot of us. I don't seem him as a good political campaigner, but as a proven sound admistrator. As you suggest, the real test of him will come if and when he is elected.

This is a good post.

But Starmer has not been quiet. There have been comments from Sir Keir about tackling Non-Doms and their tax avoidance (the opposite of the Tory ‘lefty lawyer’ gaslighting).

Because of this, be in no doubt at all that the personal attacks against Starmer from the Mail, Express and Sun will be at least on the level of the anti-Corbyn campaign. In fact, those rags will be trying to convince people he IS Corbyn.

As you say, any semblance of a policy or idea is going to be jumped on by the right wing press and spun into the sort of shite that was thrown at Corbyn. The longer Starmer keeps his mouth shut, the less they have to throw at him. Good tactics.

Johnson got elected with a back-of-the-fag packet manifesto and a three word slogan. Starmer and Labour can change the country and prevent this happening again but they need the keys to Downing Street first. They can then break the system and rebuild.

 

[Eric the meek]

The greatest and most insidious danger to the multicultural harmony in this country, doesn't come from Farage, the Daily Mail or Piers Morgan.

It comes from the most unlikely sources within the current government.

 

[BadFish]

So why do we have a higher grant rate than the rest of Europe?

Which other countries have safe routes to allow people to lodge asylum claims from outside their territories or issue visas to allow them to travel to their territory to lodge an asylum claim?

Can you advise?

No sorry, I've been on threads about asylum seekers for longer than I care to remember sharing information, links and everything else. I can't compete with the papers and I need to work today.

Your questions are good though and worth exploring.

 

[drew]

So why do we have a higher grant rate than the rest of Europe?

Which other countries have safe routes to allow people to lodge asylum claims from outside their territories or issue visas to allow them to travel to their territory to lodge an asylum claim?

Can you advise?

Just to remind you, we're an island!!!

 

[worthingseagull123]

No sorry, I've been on threads about asylum seekers for longer than I care to remember sharing information, links and everything else. I can't compete with the papers and I need to work today.

Your questions are good though and worth exploring.

No worries.

Personally the problem and blame lies solely with the government. They’ve underfunded government departments for far too long as you wont fix any issue with reactionary nonsense like this.

The UK, needs to work with the EU to devise a united strategy and undertake a consistent framework.

 

[worthingseagull123]

Just to remind you, we're an island!!!

Yes we are an island. As are many other nations.

Do you know which island nations and non-island nations offer legal routes for people to claim outside their territory or issue visas to people to allow them to travel to their own territory to claim asylum?

 

[Jim in the West]

So why do we have a higher grant rate than the rest of Europe?

Which other countries have safe routes to allow people to lodge asylum claims from outside their territories or issue visas to allow them to travel to their territory to lodge an asylum claim?

Can you advise?

Good questions!

- According to the info on the Govt website, the reason for the relatively high grant rate in the UK is that we have a greater proportion of asylum-seekers from the most dangerous countries (Afghanistan, Syria, Eritrea). So we're not necessarily being more generous (or humane), it's just we get fewer "undeserving" cases.

- One of the key differences between the UK and almost all other countries in Europe is that you need to cross the sea to get here. So other countries automatically have safer routes (even for Greece, where many arrivals come by boat, there is a land border with Turkey that can be crossed - albeit with difficulty).

 

[BadFish]

No worries.

Personally the problem and blame lies solely with the government. They’ve underfunded government departments for far too long as you wont fix any issue with reactionary nonsense like this.

The UK, needs to work with the EU to devise a united strategy and undertake a consistent framework.

There is a unified strategy. The UN have created it.

The UK government just do not follow it.



Interesting video here that talks about the whole 'illegal' narrative.