[News] Nigel Farage and Reform

[El Presidente]

If you're saying that a safe way must be found for Channel small boaters to get here, then it is a safe way for everyone to get here. You can't in practice have a policy that provides a safe route for those who would otherwise get into a small boat but excluding those who would otherwise stop at home.

Why do you think migrants want to come to the UK?

If you have a suggestion to address the problems caused by war, famine, disease, corruption and prejudice that are the main drivers of migration then I’m with you 100%

The suggestion from Badfish was that a system should be put in place whereby people who wish to come to the UK should be allowed to do so safely. Specifically in respect of the small boaters, but obviously it would be extended to all. Essentially illegal immigrants would be legitimised.

 

[BadFish]

The suggestion from Badfish was that a system should be put in place whereby people who wish to come to the UK should be allowed to do so safely. Specifically in respect of the small boaters, but obviously it would be extended to all. Essentially illegal immigrants would be legitimised.

All passengers on those boats or planes would be processed, the asylum seekers become refugees and those making bogus claims would be returned to their country of origin.

All I am suggesting is the asylum claims process be started in neighbouring countries to take out the dangerous channel crossing that Tom and Jerry and I would like stopped.

I am not sure what illegal immigrants you are referring to as all on my suggested boats would be asylum seekers. Which under international law is not illegal.

 

[dsr-burnley]

Why do you think migrants want to come to the UK?

If you have a suggestion to address the problems caused by war, famine, disease, corruption and prejudice that are the main drivers of migration then I’m with you 100%

Most of us are not willing to do all that we can to support sufferers from war etc. For example, I could quite easily provide room for a dozen refugees to live in my house in more comfort than they have in their home country - but I don't. I prefer to live in first world comfort and the poorer people of the world suffer. I suspect that many of us have that attitude to a greater or lesser degree, but to those that do fill their house with refugees, my congratulations and thanks.

It's the same nationally. How much do we want our lifestyle to suffer for the sake of other people who want a share of it? The easy answer is to allow anyone in who wants, until in the fullness of time the standard of living drops so low as to be no better than where they come from. But that isn't going to wash, so immigration (even if only for selfish reasons) will be restricted.

 

[The Clamp]

We don’t have a housing shortage. There are plenty of properties.


We have an affordable housing shortage.

As for the immigration issue. I’m not very keen on a lot of the migrants we let in. Their cultures are at odds with ours and we don’t invest enough in our infrastructure to support our own, let alone the sheer volume of migrants we let in.

 

[dsr-burnley]

All passengers on those boats or planes would be processed, the asylum seekers become refugees and those making bogus claims would be returned to their country of origin.

All I am suggesting is the asylum claims process be started in neighbouring countries to take out the dangerous channel crossing that Tom and Jerry and I would like stopped.

I am not sure what illegal immigrants you are referring to as all on my suggested boats would be asylum seekers. Which under international law is not illegal.

One practical difficulty is that we would need somewhere for all these making bogus claim to live while their case wends though the courts. It's surely easier to find places in the UK than it is abroad.

But primarily I believe your system wouldn't work because it misreads the motivation of these people. Joe Bloggs does not get into his little boat at Calais because he thinks the asylum system should be set up differently; he gets in because he thinks he wouldn't be allowed into the UK by legal channels. If Joe Bloggs is going to fail by legal channels, then he will still get in his little boat.

 

[BadFish]

Most of us are not willing to do all that we can to support sufferers from war etc. For example, I could quite easily provide room for a dozen refugees to live in my house in more comfort than they have in their home country - but I don't. I prefer to live in first world comfort and the poorer people of the world suffer. I suspect that many of us have that attitude to a greater or lesser degree, but to those that do fill their house with refugees, my congratulations and thanks.

It's the same nationally. How much do we want our lifestyle to suffer for the sake of other people who want a share of it? The easy answer is to allow anyone in who wants, until in the fullness of time the standard of living drops so low as to be no better than where they come from. But that isn't going to wash, so immigration (even if only for selfish reasons) will be restricted.

You are continuing to conflate immigration with asylum seeking. I suspect that this rudimentary error is indicative of the absolut hogwash in the rest of your post.

You are discussing a subject your are struggling to grasp the basics of.

fWiw

- immigration is restricted.

- Asylum seeking is restricted

You are arguing a straw man point, not one single person is or has on this thread (or probably anywhere else) suggested 'unfettered immigration' or unrestricted asylum seeking (the process is, in itself a process of proving that one meets the criteria to be given refugee status).

 

[BadFish]

One practical difficulty is that we would need somewhere for all these making bogus claim to live while their case wends though the courts. It's surely easier to find places in the UK than it is abroad.

But primarily I believe your system wouldn't work because it misreads the motivation of these people. Joe Bloggs does not get into his little boat at Calais because he thinks the asylum system should be set up differently; he gets in because he thinks he wouldn't be allowed into the UK by legal channels. If Joe Bloggs is going to fail by legal channels, then he will still get in his little boat.

So you are saying that with my brilliant system we could be sure that all the people crossing the channel in dinghies are bogus asylum seekers or illegal immigrants trying to break into the country.

A brilliant way to cut down those processing times. Pick em up and return them to whence they came.

I think it's about 20-30 % at present

Job done.

Edit: the down side of this is that you and the other reform types have already been persuaded that they already are.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Most of us are not willing to do all that we can to support sufferers from war etc. For example, I could quite easily provide room for a dozen refugees to live in my house in more comfort than they have in their home country - but I don't. I prefer to live in first world comfort and the poorer people of the world suffer. I suspect that many of us have that attitude to a greater or lesser degree, but to those that do fill their house with refugees, my congratulations and thanks.

It's the same nationally. How much do we want our lifestyle to suffer for the sake of other people who want a share of it? The easy answer is to allow anyone in who wants, until in the fullness of time the standard of living drops so low as to be no better than where they come from. But that isn't going to wash, so immigration (even if only for selfish reasons) will be restricted.

Why do you think our lifestyle and standard of living will drop when 'foreigners' come to this country?

We've had all sorts of different nationlities living with us. Some have been students, some guests, and an immigrant who worked here for while after she finished university. I love learning about life in their country, eating the food from their country and generally living with them.
Some stayed for a fortnight, some a month and one for three years.
When we were in the EU, the language schools in Brighton had loads of students here, to be housed by families. It was great.

 

[Deportivo Seagull]

Stop all non essential immigration, allow skilled workers in

But how? Exactly how do they stop the small boats? They haven’t a clue.

 

[Guinness Boy]

Reform want us to leave the ECHR to restrict our rights. Why would you want that?

It's exactly this sort of nonsense that shifts the whole conversation and policy rightwards unfortunately. The idea that there are a couple of Labour MPs considering this (though I'd take a Telegraph report that doesn't attribute names as dodgy in the extreme) is everything that is wrong with social media algo era politics.

Labour should be moving to the left. They should be asking basic questions like 'so do YOU want YOUR human rights to be unprotected?' or 'do you want LESS rights in the workplace?'. I suspect the answer would be 'no' from almost everyone.

But, hey, maybe it's better to have no rights at all just so long as it means we can sling a few Kurds back home?

 

[dsr-burnley]

Why do you think our lifestyle and standard of living will drop when 'foreigners' come to this country?

We've had all sorts of different nationlities living with us. Some have been students, some guests, and an immigrant who worked here for while after she finished university. I love learning about life in their country, eating the food from their country and generally living with them.
Some stayed for a fortnight, some a month and one for three years.
When we were in the EU, the language schools in Brighton had loads of students here, to be housed by families. It was great.

Of course it will. Are you saying that if we allow say 100 million people in, our standard of living won't drop? If we allow unfettered immigration, then immigration will continue unless and until people don't want to come here any more. Even with restrictions and licences that we have at present, there are about a million people a year coming in. Remove the restrictions and there will be more. Which may or may not be a good thing, but sooner or later the infrastructure is going to creak.

 

[The Clamp]

There are far too many immigrants in the U.K.
There are far too many continually arriving.
We spend far too much money housing them.

I still don’t think Reform is the answer.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Of course it will. Are you saying that if we allow say 100 million people in, our standard of living won't drop? If we allow unfettered immigration, then immigration will continue unless and until people don't want to come here any more. Even with restrictions and licences that we have at present, there are about a million people a year coming in. Remove the restrictions and there will be more. Which may or may not be a good thing, but sooner or later the infrastructure is going to creak.

40.6% of our GPs are foreign born. Why do you think foreigners will bring our standard of living down?

Not everyone who comes here stays here. Do you remember the little boy who drowned off the Greek coast? His family were fleeing Syria, and trying to get to Britain.
Their actual destination was Canada, because the eldest daughter was already there, but it was easier to get to Canada from Britain than it was from Greece.

Try looking at the stories rather than lumping all asylum seekers together.

 

[dsr-burnley]

So you are saying that with my brilliant system we could be sure that all the people crossing the channel in dinghies are bogus asylum seekers or illegal immigrants trying to break into the country.

A brilliant way to cut down those processing times. Pick em up and return them to whence they came.

I think it's about 20-30 % at present

Job done.

Edit: the down side of this is that you and the other reform types have already been persuaded that they already are.

No I'm not. Whether it's my fault or yours, what I'm saying has totally gone over your head.

My point is that some of these people in the little boats are coming by little boat because they can't get in any other way. Unless you give them a way in, they will still come by little boat.

 

[dsr-burnley]

40.6% of our GPs are foreign born. Why do you think foreigners will bring our standard of living down?

Not everyone who comes here stays here. Do you remember the little boy who drowned off the Greek coast? His family were fleeing Syria, and trying to get to Britain.
Their actual destination was Canada, because the eldest daughter was already there, but it was easier to get to Canada from Britain than it was from Greece.

Try looking at the stories rather than lumping all asylum seekers together.

I don't think "foreigners will bring our standard of living down". I know it's easier to be critical of what someone says if you make it up rather than answer the post as written, but it's unworthy of you.

What I said was that if we allow unrestricted immigration, then immigration will continue apace until the country is no more attractive to live in than where they come from now. Isn't that obvious? If we put posters out in Syria, or Sudan, or Somalia, advertising the UK as a place to come and live with guaranteed entry, then they will come in their millions, and there will be too many for the infrastructure to cope with and the standard of living will go down. It would have to go down an awful long way to be at the standard of living they are coming from, and maybe it never would get so low. But as long as there are no restrictions on immigration, the immigrants will keep coming.

Hence my opinion that we shouldn't have unlimited immigration. And if we provide safe passage for the little boaters across the Channel, then we are in effect providing safe passage for everyone.

 

[nicko31]

There are far too many immigrants in the U.K.
There are far too many continually arriving.
We spend far too much money housing them.

I still don’t think Reform is the answer.

Important to remember before Brexit a lot of EU immigration was transient, as countries in Eastern Europe get richer than us they eventually return home. Things were different and numbers a lot smaller.

This won't happen with immigration from the likes of Pakistan, Nigeria etc. Anyway, its what the Brexiteers wanted, it was the Tories that created it this shift enabled by Farage.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

I don't think "foreigners will bring our standard of living down". I know it's easier to be critical of what someone says if you make it up rather than answer the post as written, but it's unworthy of you.

What I said was that if we allow unrestricted immigration, then immigration will continue apace until the country is no more attractive to live in than where they come from now. Isn't that obvious? If we put posters out in Syria, or Sudan, or Somalia, advertising the UK as a place to come and live with guaranteed entry, then they will come in their millions, and there will be too many for the infrastructure to cope with and the standard of living will go down. It would have to go down an awful long way to be at the standard of living they are coming from, and maybe it never would get so low. But as long as there are no restrictions on immigration, the immigrants will keep coming.

Hence my opinion that we shouldn't have unlimited immigration. And if we provide safe passage for the little boaters across the Channel, then we are in effect providing safe passage for everyone.

That's being silly. We aren't going to advertise our country in war torn places. Syria is still a mess, and the Sudan and Somalia are still dangerous for people.

 

[Pavilionaire]

Farage is a genius. He causes Brexit which creates a problem for the UK that didn't exist before Brexit - i.e. small boat crossings - which kills the 2 main parties because they can't stem the tide, causing him to surge ahead in the polls and give him his best chance of becoming PM.

And all the while our economy tanks, chiefly because of the Brexit he caused, but which significant numbers of voters seem to have overlooked.

 

[Chicken Run]

40.6% of our GPs are foreign born. Why do you think foreigners will bring our standard of living down?

I’d love to know since 2018 how many boat people are now GP’ s

Delivering food which lead to others needing GP’s probably

 

[Thunder Bolt]

The whole point of the criminal justice system is that it restricts people's rights. The ECHR on the one hand wants to give people as many rights as possible, the court systems in all countries want to restrict the rights of criminals. It's a matter of getting the right balance, and at present the ECHR is (in some people's opinions) too successful at stopping the criminal courts from restricting their rights.

Seriously?
Which of these human rights do you object to?

European Convention on Human Rights (simplified version) - Manual for Human Rights Education with Young people - www.coe.int

coe.int