New immigration bill - how on earth will it work?

Siope

Is he swearing a lot yet? I love him.

Not yet. But being rude, of course.

Said that Cooper's and May's speeches were excellent.

I love him, too

He's posted a couple of photos of the demo outside Parliament. It looks well attended.

All the Albanians could go back for a start. Albania is safe and they will take them. No one should be running round UK without paperwork, Identity cards should be compulsory, I don’t mind. If you are in threat of your life and come in illegally, your duty is to tell the authority who bought you in. If conservative handle this I might vote for them next time. It’s naive to think we don’t have to get tough and employ conditions if settlement.

Is he swearing a lot yet? I love him.

I'm following Ian Dunt (columnist for The i) who is live tweeting it.

Anyone watching the debate?

Braverman managing to fit a lie into every sentence, and consistently equating asylum seekers and economic migration; Yvette Cooper’s response picks up the points about cost - she says £25bn every 5 years, presumably based on 45k asylum seekers pa - in perpetuity since nobody will be processed or therefore returned. She also made the point I did several pages ago about slavery, and Theresa May, who introduced the Modern Slavery Act, is absolutely on fire.

Bloody Bill will still pass, but it’s good to see a few Tories have a conscience.

I shall await your lead growstuff. I could offer an anecdotal story but better not.

Germanshepherdsmum

Indeed it would.

So why don't you make a start?

I've met asylum seekers. Some of them were highly qualified. Some of them spoke excellent English. Some of them volunteered with different organisations because they are not allowed to work. Most of them wanted to work. They would take any job until their application was processed and their qualifications are recognised. Many of the local restaurants and hotels have said they would employ asylum seekers. They say the majority of their employees are temporary anyway so it would fit in with their needs.. It would enable asylum seekers to have their own money and cease to be an expense. They would pay taxes. They would also learn and improve their English. It would be easy to do with temporary working permits.
The idea that we don't have jobs for these people is false. Hospitality needs them, farmers and market gardens need them many other low paid jobs need them. Only an intransigent government is stoping it happening.

I stayed in a huge hotel recently and could hear all the doctors and architects fighting at four in the morning

As far as I understand it, the government does not collect official statistics on how many migrants have family already in the UK, or speak English, so the only option to find the information is via agencies like the Red Cross. You can split hairs if you want, but you can’t prove that what I said is any less accurate than what you said I don’t think - if you can, I’d love to see it.

In the meantime this makes a fascinating read, I’d recommend it Germanshepherdsmum.
publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm5803/cmselect/cmhaff/706/report.html

So, to pick up your point earlier, are you in agreement that the circa 50% who have family here should be considered as legitimate asylum seekers -or not, or only if they speak English as well?

Germanshepherdsmum

Casdon

Yes
www.redcross.org.uk/stories/migration-and-displacement/refugees-and-asylum-seekers/5-reasons-people-cross-the-channel

I read the word ‘many’ Casdon, not ‘most’.

The Red Cross is pretty close I think that around 50% trying to cross the channel have got family in the UK
They do not distinguish between Asylum Seekers and Economic Migrants, probably most of the economic migrants do have family contacts in the UK

Indeed it would.

It really would be helpful if people used verifiable facts when discussing immigration.

Oh for god’s sake

Casdon

Yes
www.redcross.org.uk/stories/migration-and-displacement/refugees-and-asylum-seekers/5-reasons-people-cross-the-channel

I read the word ‘many’ Casdon, not ‘most’.

The majority do stop in countries close to their own, Lebanon is full of refugees for example Those who travel on mostly remain in European countries on the way.
We have far fewer refugees than most countries and those that come here want to come because they think we are a safe country, where people are polite welcoming and friendly )and most of us are) but the main reason is they often speak English and have family here.
Given a choice wouldn’t we all choose a country where we speak the language rather than having to learn a new one fluently. To be properly fluent takes years, and they want to be able to work.
A few might be lazy but most want to work. We have our own lazy people here don’t forget. Under pension age not sick just not working.
We are all people and never ‘illegals’ which is a horrible way to describe someone.

Yes
www.redcross.org.uk/stories/migration-and-displacement/refugees-and-asylum-seekers/5-reasons-people-cross-the-channel

Most? Can you provide evidence of that Casdon?

That’s a very odd post GSM, as most do have family in the UK, and do speak English, that’s why they want to come to the UK?

Precisely Maudi. Unless you have family in the UK or speak English rather than the languages of other safe countries you have passed through, why pay a smuggler to take you to the UK by boat? Why?

Biscuitmuncher

choughdancer a lot of them could fly here with passports but they know they wouldn't be allowed in. That's why they come on boats illegally. Whitewavemark2 could I just rock up in Australia and expect to be housed and fed? We apparently need doctors from abroad to treat the foreigners here illegally who we all need to pay for

I’m not sure it’s good form to quote my own posts but see below from my earlier post on why asylum seekers don’t come by plane or other carriers.

PS: coming by small boats is not illegal.

The short answer is they don’t get given the choice.

Mainstream international travel requires a passport , which lots of refugees don’t have, and often can’t get from their first country of arrival. Even when they do, for most nationalities travel to another country requires a visa, obtained in your home country before you leave it. Embassies in refugee first arrival places like Turkey don’t have the resources to offer visas as the scale that would be needed. No visa, no boarding.

The longer answer, for the EU (other countries have an equivalent) is that there is an EU Directive (the Carrier Sanctions Directive 2001/51/EC) that imposes sanctions on carriers – such as airline companies – if they transport passengers that are not in possession of valid travel documents. Fines can be up to €500k.

A clause in the Directive does say that signatory countries airlines/other carriers should take account of obligations under the 1951 Geneva Convention, which means airlines etc shouldn’t prevent asylum seekers from travelling. But - and it’s a massive but - that means check-in staff are left to decide, in just a few minutes, whether someone is a genuine asylum seeker (never illegal) or an illegal immigrant, and not surprisingly, they err on the side of caution.

To help staff decide, most EU countries have asylum/immigration experts at the airports and ports, but they can only advise, and there are no benefits to airlines etc in taking that advice, and high financial. risk if it’s wrong, so again, erring on the side of caution wins.

choughdancer Today 11.34
"What would make YOU leave home and spend months, years in danger, seeing so many people dying and suffering along the way, worrying about the people you had to leave behind in that dangerous place, as they were too old, too young, pregnant or vulnerable to be able to make such a harsh journey?
What would make YOU set off on such an incredibly difficult road to try to find SOMEWHERE you could bring them to, at huge risk to your life?
In your own beloved country, there may be war; torture and death for your religious views, or sexual orientation.

You don't just set off for the hell of it."

Plenty of counties on the way to the UK they could settle without having to pay thousands to people smugglers, what's wrong with the EU Germany, France. Most on the small boats are from Albania, I could book a holiday there tomorrow beautiful place but they choose to pay thousands to the smuggler gangs why? You don't need to be a rocket scientist to answer that one.

choughdancer a lot of them could fly here with passports but they know they wouldn't be allowed in. That's why they come on boats illegally. Whitewavemark2 could I just rock up in Australia and expect to be housed and fed? We apparently need doctors from abroad to treat the foreigners here illegally who we all need to pay for

11:01Biscuitmuncher

"Doctors, nurses and architects are not coming in on boats. Also don't their own counties need doctors etc. Did our men after our last war not bother coming home? Did they leave for somewhere better?"

Precisely Biscuitmuncher obviously these illegals aren't bothered about their country of birth their women and children they just want to game the system and pay the people smugglers thousands of pounds to get here. Seems to me some posters support the smuggler gangs and are quite happy for this practise to carry on.

silverlining48

Were the conflicts in Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria not wars too, two of which we were involved in. The way we left Afghanistan was disgraceful, and those left there are in fear for their lives with no hope of ever getting out.

Have you ever actually spoken to any refugees? Heard their stories?
Or is your information all gleaned from the DM and it’s ilk which can never be relied on for anything other than scaring the bejesus out of its readers.

Well said, SL48.

Further up Biscuitmuncher says people aren't coming here because they want to give us something. They're here to take. They're not willing to make their own countries somewhere worth living

I just wonder how you picture the process of leaving your home for ever, your former life and people you love, scratching together whatever you can carry.
Do you wake up one morning and think 'Oh the house needs painting/the town looks untidy/there are queues at the hospital/I don't like the school my children go to. I know what, I'll leave here and go to a country where milk and honey flows and will expect the people there to provide me with everything I want!'?

What would make YOU leave home and spend months, years in danger, seeing so many people dying and suffering along the way, worrying about the people you had to leave behind in that dangerous place, as they were too old, too young, pregnant or vulnerable to be able to make such a harsh journey?
What would make YOU set off on such an incredibly difficult road to try to find SOMEWHERE you could bring them to, at huge risk to your life?
In your own beloved country, there may be war; torture and death for your religious views, or sexual orientation.

You don't just set off for the hell of it.