Ding Dong .... round 2

There was an article in the Guardian two weeks ago about asylum seekers from Somalia, coming over by boat to Italy. It told how many of them drowned, just over a year ago.
Some of those who survived were raped. One girl burnt her finger tips so that she did not have to be finger printed and listed as an asylum seeker in Italy as she wanted to get to Sweden where she had friends. The men who raped her were in court in Italy, so she did not want to stay there.
She now is on a course there, and will send back her wages to her parents who sold absolutely everything they owned to pay for what they thought was a safe passage for their daughter.
I felt quite humbled at reading this. It is not their fault that the only way they can escape from their persecutors is by going to the nearest part of Europe.
We're such a soft touch that a girl taking her 'A' levels was sent back weeks before the exam!

Many people make their way from North Africa to Spain and then some travel via France to gain entry to the UK. These people are supposedly fleeing form their own country and seeking asylum, but why do they not seek asylum in the first place to which they escape? Why do they then do their utmost to get to the UK? We are simply a soft touch, a great way of life - houses, benefits etc. It is worth almost any risk to make our shores.

I recently came back from Gijon (Spain) to Poole on LDLines ferry and in Gijon they had a sniffer dog and police checking the cars, lorries, caravans and motorhomes, for what or whom I don't know. When we arrived in Poole we where stopped as were many others, we were checked for green diesel, others had their cars etc searched.

Previously when I came back on myferry.com Calais to Dover no one was stopped or searched. There were romanians, polish and various other nationalities on this ferry. One young romanian girl was begging outside the duty free shop!

I agree that the country needs to look at the issue of immigration very seriously. If UKIP and the NF have at least made politicians wake up to the problem then that is the one, and only, thing on their favour. But as for voting anyone from a far right party into a position of power....I hope that never happens.

Given the shortage of available jobs, they could employ more border control personnel and charge those wanting to enter the country for the checks to an amount that equals the pay of the border officials.

I must agree with you there, but it is not such a big problem as the open borders. More checks are being put in place to monitor who does/doesn't leave. I can't believe that these checks had been stopped. All part of cost cutting, no doubt.

Immigration from non European countries doesn't seem to be well managed Experigran. Many people come to the UK as students, or to visit, and over stay. There don't appear to be any reliable figures, or reliable system to monitor who is in or out of the uk

Unfortunately immigration from Europe cannot be controlled. From other countries it can and is, when the immigrant is legal. The size of the UK alone prohibits unlimited migration. People from poorer EU countries come for a better way of life. Most work and claim benefits, such as free health service, child benefit and tax credits. There will be a problem with numbers until our standard of living is the same as theirs.

As the ultimate aim is to become the United States of Europe, I don't hold out much hope of a change in the freedom of movement law. There is no other reason why we would have taken this on board. I just wish that politicians would be honest and tell everyone what the ultimate aim is. Only then will you now whether you want to be in it or not. It's slowly, slowly, catchy monkey. You will suddenly realise that it is a fait accomplis.

I wasn't referring to the tv debate, Penstemmon, nor was I referring solely to politicians. You were asking how immigration would be 'controlled' and I was just wondering how those who argue against strict controls can justify their position, given that Britain is hardly the rich and prosperous country it once was.

Good questions Penstommon. I'm not holding my breath for answers from politicians, but will be interested to hear what other posters' views are.

I would favour this country's long standing approach of attempting to offer safety to those fleeing persecution.

Given we're in the EU (something I'm not against), there has to be a debate about free movement between EU countries, between all member states. The evidence seems to be that the majority of people coming from EU countries, come here to work. I'm not disputing the fact that some either don't want to work, or can't find the plentiful work they'd expected.

I wish as a country we could find (and fund) a creative, determined approach to supporting unemployed British people to find work. I am not anti immigration, but put simply, being in some form of work leads to better physical and mental health.

A gransnet manifesto could be a joy to argue, whoops, I mean debate, about

I meant all politicians Ana not just the goons on the TV debate

Your answer seems to suggest that there are politicians who think that unlimited immigration is OK. I think all politicians, in main parties, have said there needs to be some limit.

My question is who will choose and who will they choose?

Maybe it should just be the first xx to apply each month.. or a lottery? Or do we chose by wealth, education etc?

I think the question of immigration is very, very complex..not just a case of saying only a set number of people can come & live here.

But then we also need answers from those who think anyone at all should be allowed to come here. When (if ever) would they agree that enough is enough? When (if ever) would they realise that schools, hospitals etc. have been pushed to their absolute limits and that there is nowhere for immigrants to live, never mind work...

If we agree that the number of people re-locating to UK needs to be controlled..simply because space is limited... then we need to be able to agree how we decide on 'who' can be an immigrant.

Do we give priority to those in distress, i.e. asylum /refugees fleeing from violence and war. As in European Jewish immigration prior to WW2, Ugandan Asians fleeing from Amin etc etc Now would it be from Syria /Palestine / Central Africa ?

Or is immigration prioritised for those who can 'afford' to come here such as wealthier Eastern Europeans/ Sth Africans/Australians who come because they prefer a life in UK to life 'at home' ?

Or give priority to those who can provide cheap labour to maintain certain industries / aspects of work to keep costs down/profits up?

Those are the questions I would like politicians to answer.

I've noticed that those who do not have a valid reason, or little knowledge of what staying in, or coming out will mean resort to name calling. Control of immigration has nothing to do with race. Just numbers. When asked were our schools, hospitals, housing etc. able to cope with a large influx from Europe. Nick Clegg said "That's the problem where there are people!" It's always pointed out that the hospital wouldn't cope without the immigrants that work there - I would agree, but would also like to know how many extra patients they are dealing with since our borders were opened. Schools are struggling to cope and I'm not talking about teaching, more about providing places. Housing? Well enough said!

It was turned into a slanging match about political parties instead. Nick Clegg never did give one good reason why we should stay in. It was all 'Let's run each other down' when I really wanted a discussion about the EU

I felt that as far as politicians go, it was a huge stride forward to actually discussing the matter at hand. Farage did show Clegg up for being a little frugal with the truth at the previous meeting (not that it would have surprised anyone) and Clegg floundered as to how to respond so just rubbished what Farage had said but without offering any form of proof. I know which of the two I would believe.

Excellent post BAnanas

Farage may not be a potential Hitler but he is a demagogue

I see most politicians in that light and given Clegg's constant referrals to terrorism, criminals, loss of jobs/income it would seem he also falls into that bracket.

banging the drum for one particular little Englander policy,

I hear that term (BIB) quite a lot and although it is blatantly obvious it is meant as a slur, what is wrong with the people of England wanting to put England first?

I think that's what annoyed me most about the 'so called' debate and following conversations here. The fact that before any of us can actually make a logical decision such as In or Out, we need the true facts. It was turned into a slanging match about political parties instead. Nick Clegg never did give one good reason why we should stay in. It was all 'Let's run each other down' when I really wanted a discussion about the EU.

I do feel that we should all be either right in, or right out. We either believe in it, or we don't. All we have done so far is sit on the fence. I do not believe that we can negotiate to get more control of our own country and I do not believe that we will ever have a referendum unless UKIP get in. Nigel Farage is someone whose main job is at the centre and is aware of what is going on.

Yes probably should have stated Britain, but was following on from "Little Englander"

Good post, BAnanas - although it might have been more diplomatic to substitute 'Britain' for 'England'!

I am another who wholeheartedly voted for a common market, but not fiscal and political union. I do not in any way consider myself a "Little Englander" both my parents being only part English, a lot of my extended family live overseas, my first husband was foreign. I do not live on a diet of Brown Windsor Soup, boiled cabbage or have dreams of England being a superior nation that still rules the world. I wish Nick Clegg would stop droning on in that "the whole world has moved on" mode as if anyone who doesn't embrace the idea of the United States of Europe is living in some bygone time warp and is suspicious of all things foreign. We don't like the European Union as it is because it is undemocratic even the late great Tony Benn subscribed to that point of view. We have been told that we are unlikely to get the changes that would make it more palatable to much of the electorate.

When I go over to Europe I want it to be bloody foreign that's why I'm going there, God forbid we all end up some homogenised mass, there are distinct differences between England and the rest of Europe, it's something to celebrate, it's called diversity.

I find the idea that Nigel Farage may at some stage in the future turn into some dictator figure laughable. He has in fact pointed out that the far right is alarmingly on the march in some member states. The majority party in Hungary is overtly anti semitic and also waged hate campaigns against the Roma gypsy population. Yet these are the people that we are expected to climb into bed with and Nick Clegg seems to believe that Europe will be a safer place affiliating ourselves with political parties that hold views akin to Adolf Hitler. The reason why Nigel Farage resonates with some is that they feel patronised by the career politicians who daily demonstrate the contempt they feel for the ordinary people of this country.

England has been great in assimilating many different people for centuries, I wouldn't be here today if my grandfather and various great grandparents hadn't decided to settle in England, but previous immigration was gradual not the tidal wave that we have had over the last few years. Undoubtedly there have been positives, but there have been downsides too, lack of affordable housing, lack of school places, hot housing, people trafficking, towns where locals feel displaced, unscrupulous gangmasters, exploitation wages. Deborah Orr recently wrote in the Guardian that the real scandal Labour should be focusing on is not the cost of living but the appalling way some employers treat their staff now. I gather our Business Secretary has done very little to get rid of the disgusting zero hour contracts.

These are very real concerns that many people wish to discuss. We are also frequently told that many British people are dependent on jobs in Europe, I can't help feeling that a lot of those would be high fliers and would possibly have the credentials to work in any part of the world. I would like to know how many ordinary people from this country, such as tradespeople and those who would wish to go to work in cafes and shops manage to secure employment in mainland Europe.

The nuts and bolts are not discussed enough and our politicians exude an attitude that the little person is too stupid to be given a referendum. Nigel Farage may not be ideal but he has stepped into a void that has been waiting to be filled.

What exactly do you think we would lose if we came out? At the moment we are not allowed to trade with the rest of the world without going through Brussels. The rest of the world is still there to trade with, but we have lost some of the loyalty which we had before. We were a great manufacturing country pre-EU, why could we not be one again? Why do our politicians want to fill you with fear about what may or may not happen? Our farmers could start to produce food again while we still have some land to do it with.

The whole EU set up is geared to become a United States of Europe. Is that what you want? the only way that will work is for all states to be equal. Equal pay, equal benefits, equal standard of living. To achieve that the poorer ones must improve and better off must drop. They will meet somewhere in the middle. Only then will it work. Open borders is the start of this. It will be the biggest leveler, we already have a lower standard of living and wages are dropping. When all states are equal people will have no need to go to another country to work, unless they have a special skill that is needed. It will be a long and hard road until all are equal, but we will never be a wealthy country again.

I voted to join the Common Market. European Union wasn't mentioned in those days was it?

I voted to join the EU and I don't believe it's in our interests to leave either.

I was against it at the referendum because I could see there being a lot of bureaucracy.....but I am very unsure about getting out now we are in.
WE could lose out badly.