Yes ,we’ve always had immigrants from all over come and work in our local hospitals and healthcare, the international nurse coordinator in our local hospital is actually Filipino she’s been there for years , came for a short stay to send money back to her family and never went back .There are legal routes to apply.
Plus the fact the country can overrule their decision or simply change the law.
But most don't because there's a lot of shame in being called out for not following basic human rights. If it was that easy, the ECHR would not exist and would not be as effective as it is
I’m not saying there presence isn’t a good thing I’m saying countries basically make their own rules and that can impact any decision they make, take the UK’s new bill against the right to protest for instance.
The whole point is that they should respect human rights and the ECHR/Human Rights Act and threat of human rights not being upheld allows for public pressure to hold more weight. When the government reacts to that pressure it normally suggests that they think that they lack public support to bulldoze through the rule of law
Exactly ! it can take years and even then they don’t have to take the case on.
It does feel like the UK has gone so soft it’s dissolving. I mean would they have been agonising and court battles to see if Shamina Begum was able to come back into this country? Would there have been a toleration of allowing channel crossing after channel crossing of men who don’t contribute to the country to happen? Would there have been a focus on murderer’s ‘human rights’ after they’ve brutally killed someone but don’t like the idea of being deported.
'Many' is quite imprecise especially when there are figures available. In 2022 there was a dramatic increase in the number of Albanian people arriving across the Channel but even in the 3 months to September 2022 they represented less than 20% of the total number of people claiming asylum. Even assuming that none of the arrivals from Albania will be granted asylum (and very few of their claims have been considered yet) it seems a bit of a stretch to claim that everybody crossing the channel is 'taking thee piss out of our system or for suggesting that none of them want to work.
But don’t you see the cost involved until that claim is processed? That’s the pisstake people are thinking of when the majority of claims are not accepted and that money could be used in other ways.
I always think it's useful to understand a bit of the background about an issue before drawing conclusions. The power to deprive certain people of their British citizenship came into law in 1914. It included the right for the individual to challenge the decision in court. Over the years the law has been changed to allow more people to be deprived of citizenship in more circumstances. Originally the individual kept their citizenship until the appeal was heard. In 2005 the law was changed so that the individual lost their citizenship before the appeal. Around 2014 the law was changed again so that an individual could be deprived of their citizenship while out of the country. However the government promised this would only happen on rare occasions and that there would still be a right of appeal. In fact this power has been used many times. In addition the law was changed so that for the first time an individual could be deprived of citizenship even ion it made them 'stateless'. in the first 100 years since the law was passed very few people lost their citzenship. Between 2010 and 2021, 767 people lost their citizenship. There has been many appeals, some successful some not.
Do you have a link to this, I’d like to read why the lost them.
Yes of course I do. It seems pretty clear that something is happening with Albania that has little if anything to do with people seeking protection from persecution (although before the recent increase in numbers there was a smaller but steady stream of people from Albania given refugee status (mostly women I believe). I have no problem with the government trying to deal with that.
Somehow they have got the money together to pay smugglers 1000s of pounds a visa is cheaper, they have passed through multiple safe countries and many have destroyed documentation. You don't know who they are if they have committed crimes in their home countries. There are people who want to come here and go through the proper process and will make a contribution they should have priority.
The details of each individual case are not published. You can read about the history of 'deprivation of citizenship'and some overall numbers in a research briefing posted in the House of Commons Library. The link below is to the latest 2023 version which I think has been a bit sanitised compared to the previous one. That had more explanation of the concerns expressed in parliament (by MPs from all sides) to the changes in 2014:
Fair enough everyone thinks differently and you’re entitled to your opinion ,it’s only when those that don’t share your opinion are branded a certain way gets my goat, not everyone is far right or reads the Daily Mail, nor do they believe government propaganda, maybe they’re seeing this abuse first hand and want something done about before it gets completely out of hand.
Your posts raise quite a few questions:
Refugees who have passed through numerous safe countries to reach the UK? Are they fleeing for their lives from France ? If they have relatives here already they can ask their relative to apply for the correct dependent visa. If you aren't educated can't speak English and can't really make a contribution it should only be the most most needy as the British taxpayer will have to fund their healthcare, housing and living costs. 6.1 billion people live in developing countries we cannot invite everyone who wants to make a life here it's not sustainable. I hate it but that's the truth, life is not fair.. I would be happy to give more aid money.
So the humanitarian visa is a family visa or??
Okay I realise that was a lot of questions all at once so I'll just repeat two and ask one new one to see if we can make progress with actual facts
