Are the council going bankrupt like many English ones?Irish gov shitting themselves, only natural people would call time, controlled legal migration shouldn’t be used to gaslight people that have issues with thousands of illegal immigrants being placed in their communities #TitsupforLeo
---
The tourist sector will be bankrupt along with the smaller businesses that rely on it.Are the council going bankrupt like many English ones?
The majority of the public back removal without appeal. Hmmm. Now that's not true is it?
And??? I didn’t write it so wouldn’t know if it’s full proof or not…. I do agree they’ve hatched a plan though, especially with Anderson resigning.The majority of the public back removal without appeal. Hmmm. Now that's not true is it?
The article (which is from The Daily Telegraph for anybody wondering) says that the policy is backed in the majority of constituencies. But even that isn't true. It may have attracted the most support amongst the three options offered in the poll but support for not removing people without appeal was more popular in the vast majority of constituencies. In fact if one actually reads the article it explains that in only 111 constituencies out of 575 (less than 20%) was removal without appeal the preferred option.
Of course this is just part of The Telegraph's campaign to undermine Sunak and force him out before the election in favour of an (even more right wing) alternative.
I have concern about the immigration figures. I have concern about people crossing the channel in small boats. I believe many if not most liberal people do. However there is a huge gap between that and the likes of Suella Braverman’s policies. I’m sorry if you don’t like it, but there is a far right mind set that she and her enablers speak to. Bore off? What is boring are those people who are clearly racist but try and pretend they are not. Nigel Farage is a clear example of one of those people.I wish you would bore off (putting it politely) with your 'far right' guff. If you insist on the stupid name calling of those you don't agree with, there are plenty of derogatory names and phrases that could be thrown back in return...
Having concern for illegal immigration numbers, or the people illegally entering the country is NOT 'far right', as some seem to make out.
It is just the usual lazy and unimaginative name calling (by those on the left) in order to shut down wider discussion and action on the issue.
Whether you like it, or care to acknowledge it, immigration is one of the top election issues this year, along with the cost of living, NHS and rising crime.
Numerous polls out there have indicated majority support for dealing with the 'small boats issue, including from many traditional Labour supporters, particularly in 'red wall' areas - are you also labeling them as 'far right' too? If so, think you need to do some research on what 'far right' really means.
I would suggest a field trip to Eastern Europe to find out, where the 'far right' is a much bigger gathering than in the UK...
Edit: As for lorries. All should be throughly checked entering and leaving the country. Not only for stowaways, but contraband and drugs too.
---
The way to truly stop is is to quit with this stupid Liberal minded mindset that exists towards illegal migration in Government and the Civil Service.
Other EU countries have gotten a better grip of the issue that we have, rejecting large numbers of claims and deporting those with no right.
It is not my financial responsibility to fund everyone who fancies a better life in the UK, just because they feel self entitled to.
The Oxford Migratory Institute has predicted (at the current rate) a UK population of 80 million by the mid/late 2030's, over 100 million by mid/late 2050's - a time when many of us may well still be around.
At the end of the day the illegal migrant crisis is solely an EU made issue. If it were not for open borders across Europe, many of those migrants arriving in Greece and Italy would never make it as far as Calais to begin with. With EU open borders they are freely able to roam from country to country unchecked.
If you want to see 'far right' then (as suggested) you should do a field trip to Eastern Europe, where Nazi-ism is still rife and a bigger issue than in the UK.I have concern about the immigration figures. I have concern about people crossing the channel in small boats. I believe many if not most liberal people do. However there is a huge gap between that and the likes of Suella Braverman’s policies. I’m sorry if you don’t like it, but there is a far right mind set that she and her enablers speak to. Bore off? What is boring are those people who are clearly racist but try and pretend they are not. Nigel Farage is a clear example of one of those people.
So back to this ludicrous Rwandan plan, which could not be more racist if it tried, Chris Bryant made a perfect point. If the high risk of dying whilst crossing the channel isn’t a deterrent, why would any sane person think that the very slim chance of being sent to Rwanda be a deterrent?
There is a large tranche of the current Tory Party who are clearly far right and are clearly racist. The words far right and racist go hand in hand.
Oh it's definitely not fool proof. Plenty of people will read the headline and believe it's true or at least want to believe it's true. Misinterpreting and misrepresenting statistics to people that don't understand or bother to look into them is classic strategy.And??? I didn’t write it so wouldn’t know if it’s full proof or not…. I do agree they’ve hatched a plan though, especially with Anderson resigning.
I guess it depends how far right you need to go to be 'far right' and how much you care about labels. People like Braverman, Jenrick and the other 60 odd Tory 'rebels' now occupy the ground that would once have been the preserve of parties well to the right of the Tory Party and I don't think that trajectory has stopped.If you want to see 'far right' then (as suggested) you should do a field trip to Eastern Europe, where Nazi-ism is still rife and a bigger issue than in the UK.
Remember when the Ukraine-Russia conflict kicked off? Polish border guards were seen saying 'no blacks allowed'. That kind of thing would NEVER happen here!
There are no MPs in Parliament who are 'far right'. This is just (once again) lazy commentary by those who don't agree with Government policy - and still largely believe that Jeremy Corbyn should be PM.
As I also previously stated, there is a small minority whom are more than happy for the arrivals to continue, and at even greater pace. Even for them all to be given automatic right to remain. I recall one on here even wanting open borders for all - utterly bonkers!
The simple fact is the majority of people want firm action. Numerous polls support such measures being taken.
The same suspects can continue to bleat on about how hard done by and the genuineness of the people crossing the channel (and arriving in lorries).
The majority of people do not buy this crap any longer.
From what I have seen anyone who is in favour of a controlled immigration is regarded as "far right" these days. Which is odd because the Far Right have traditionally favoured not only a policy of immigration based primarily on race, but have also called for "repatriation" of minorities. Even British citizen from minority backgrounds. And I have seen literally no one advocating anything even approaching this as a policy.If you want to see 'far right' then (as suggested) you should do a field trip to Eastern Europe, where Nazi-ism is still rife and a bigger issue than in the UK.
Remember when the Ukraine-Russia conflict kicked off? Polish border guards were seen saying 'no blacks allowed'. That kind of thing would NEVER happen here!
There are no MPs in Parliament who are 'far right'. This is just (once again) lazy commentary by those who don't agree with Government policy - and still largely believe that Jeremy Corbyn should be PM.
As I also previously stated, there is a small minority whom are more than happy for the arrivals to continue, and at even greater pace. Even for them all to be given automatic right to remain. I recall one on here even wanting open borders for all - utterly bonkers!
The simple fact is the majority of people want firm action. Numerous polls support such measures being taken.
The same suspects can continue to bleat on about how hard done by and the genuineness of the people crossing the channel (and arriving in lorries).
The majority of people do not buy this crap any longer.
I don't recall anyone posting on this thread being in favour of uncontrolled, 'open borders' immigration. I am not. However I have seen plenty of posts accusing people of advocating that position simply because they don't support demonisation of asylum seekers and other immigrants and the sometimes cruel, inhumane and unlawful policies proposed. I have also seen posts claiming that we already have an uncontrolled, 'open borders' immigration system.From what I have seen anyone who is in favour of a controlled immigration is regarded as "far right" these days. Which is odd because the Far Right have traditionally favoured not only a policy of immigration based primarily on race, but have also called for "repatriation" of minorities. Even British citizen from minority backgrounds. And I have seen literally no one advocating anything even approaching this as a policy.
The reality in my opinion is that the vast majority of people, even the ones arguing on the other side on this thread, favour some level of control, the only real difference being the size of the safety net and the liberalisation of the policy. Because the opposite of control is a complete No borders free for all. All comers welcome. Not even basic Interpol checks for fleeing serial killers, international terrorists, or organised criminals (all those things would be considered immigration control). And I fear for the sanity of anyone who thinks that is anything other than a spectacularly bad idea. And ultimately anyone who supports a no borders solution is the extremist in this scenario.
Well, is there anyone who admits to being a no borders no control advocate?
And in a similar vein I haven't seen anyone arguing for net zero immigration, racial profiling or repatriation of minority groups, yet the "far right" moniker is thrown around like confetti as well. Is this a racist he'll hole or not? You use words like cruel and inhumane on a regular basis. Yet I see no evidence of large scale violence against any asylum seeker. The worst you can say is they can't work and live on a barge. Cruel is a judgement call, but that's an awful low bar.I don't recall anyone posting on this thread being in favour of uncontrolled, 'open borders' immigration. I am not. However I have seen plenty of posts accusing people of advocating that position simply because they don't support demonisation of asylum seekers and other immigrants and the sometimes cruel, inhumane and unlawful policies proposed. I have also seen posts claiming that we already have an uncontrolled, 'open borders' immigration system.
Having been on this thread since it's fairly early days it was noticeable how attitudes changed from concern about some asylum seekers not being genuine (and debates about how that could be dealt with), to being against anyone coming to the UK to seek asylum, to being against accepting any refugees, to being largely or wholly anti any kind of immigrant. In most cases I don't know whether that was simply people taking a more extreme position in order to 'fight their corner' or gradually revealing their true opinions.
How about the one that we're all better off with uncontrolled migrationWhat conspiracies?
I’m pretty sure there have been multiple times people outright or subtly alluded to the great replacement theoryWhat conspiracies?
This is basically my job and it's been going on for months. Today Rishi mentioned the 50 hotels that have been turned back over to the communities after the asylum seekers were dispersed. What he didn't say is that they are immediately rebooked back in under section 122 of that particular council's homeless policy.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?