Lords lay into the governments illegal migration bill

The King, the Archbishop of Canterbury and former head of the Army condemn Braverman’s bill.

Voices condemning it from every side of the HoL.

I am guessing that Starmer will abstain rather than oppose?

Do you think so Ilovecheese when there's so much criticism and opposition? If he does, he'll appear extremely weak IMO.

Smileless2012

Do you think so Ilovecheese when there's so much criticism and opposition? If he does, he'll appear extremely weak IMO.

He IS extremely weak! 😉

Well yes that's true Primrose I just can't understand why does nothing to improve his image.

Smileless2012

Do you think so Ilovecheese when there's so much criticism and opposition? If he does, he'll appear extremely weak IMO.

This is the Lords not the Commons!

Casdon

Smileless2012

Do you think so Ilovecheese when there's so much criticism and opposition? If he does, he'll appear extremely weak IMO.

This is the Lords not the Commons!

😄😄

For those who seem a tad unclear as to Labours migration policy, I think Starmers speech to the CBI outlined Labours policy in some detail.

Basically it is a much more pragmatic approach than the Tory policy.

Labour acknowledges the need for immigrant skilled worker by pointing to different industries where skilled labour is badly lacking, although overall Labour is keen to reduce the U.K. reliance on migrant Labour where possible, by training and investment in new technology.

Starmer recognises the stupidity of putting a figure for migrants to the U.K. as the need will change year on year.

Whilst the Tories have said that they want to put British workers first, there is no policy behind the rhetoric.

With regard to the small boats and Rwanda. Labour will scrap this draconian policy and instead use the millions of pounds being spent - on funding the national crime agency to tackle the smuggling gangs. Labour would also set up a clear safe route for those seeking asylum, and ensure that those entering the U.K. are dealt with swiftly.

Labour would end the rhetoric of hate and othering.

I saw the DMs front page this morning and thought how skewed their rhetoric is - O’Brien is so right.

*James O'Brien
There’s a grim inevitability about the forces behind Brexit turning their guns on the Archbishop of Canterbury. It follows attacks on the rule of law, academic freedom, judicial independence & parliamentary democracy. One wonders what ‘British values’ they actually hold dear*

As said on another thread 'British culture (values) are not important'

apparently.

The fact that Welby is being attacked by some media proves his criticism of the awful Bill is spot on. But I suspect Archbishops are a diminished power in the UK given the fall in church attendance. I just hope the Lords can wreck the Bill.

I think you’re twisting what was said on another thread fp.

For "British" read English FleurpepperScottish values are very different .WE need immigration, people are welcome here and its rare to hear the bigotted hate rhetoric that we hear on the right wing ENGLISH media .

paddyann54

For "British" read English FleurpepperScottish values are very different .WE need immigration, people are welcome here and its rare to hear the bigotted hate rhetoric that we hear on the right wing ENGLISH media .

Do you really need emigrants and does it apply to English people?
I can give quite a few examples of people doing their further education in Scotland but on leaving Uni could not break through the glass ceiling and get jobs in Scotland.
I'm not talking off the top of my head DH was a member of one of the Scots Royal colleges and I have Scots friends who wanted to go back to live there no job was available even though their training had taken part in Scots Uni's..

This 100%

“We are being asked to ban claims of asylum because of the method of arrival, rather than the merits of the claim." ~

Lord Purvis

Lib-dem.

And this

Conservative Lord Farmer said:

"Two-fifths of people think stopping the small boats is more important than tackling NHS waiting lists."

We know this isn't true, don't let them divide us!

Cracks in the Tory wall

“Churchill would be turning in his grave if he saw that we were taking the UK out of the processes of international law”

Conservative MP @CSkidmoreUK slams the Illegal Migration Bill, telling @Peston it has “overpromise and underdeliver written all over it”.

The experience in my family relocating from England to Scotland is very different. My niece who was born, bred and educated in England was successful in getting a job in a hospital in Scotland. She has recently been promoted to hospital manager. My DS moved to be near her and has been accepted into the local community and has made good friends there. They're very happy and I'm happy for them, it's just a long drive to visit them!

Whitewavemark2

This 100%

“We are being asked to ban claims of asylum because of the method of arrival, rather than the merits of the claim." ~

Lord Purvis

Lib-dem.

Could those arriving in boats from France not claim asylum there?

Honestly! As a lawyer you know you shouldn’t be asking such questions, and encourage international law breaking.

The U.K. is part of a community of nations signed up to and agreeing humanitarian assistance to those seeking sanctuary.

Everyone has the right to seek and enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution. The 1951 UN Convention relating to the Status of Refugees elaborates upon this right. It provides an international meaning of 'refugee', which is a person in another country at risk of persecution in her, his or their own country.

There are a number of laws both international and domestic that covers asylum refugees rights, which includes someone seeking sanctuary from harm, starvation etc has a right to choose the country in which they would like to seek sanctuary.

There is only a small minority choosing the U.K. - the vast majority choose to stay in the country “next” to their own.
These countries are generally much poorer than any in the western world.
Because if this I think we have a duty to assist these countries in sheltering the refugees.

I think you well know that I am not in favour of so many seeking asylum in the UK when there is no demonstrable reason, such as family ties or language, for them to choose the UK.
I am not in need of a lecture on the applicable law.

😄😄

Your question did not appear to take the law into consideration.

This country has a fine tradition of welcoming people who come here legally from all over the world and right down the centuries.

I don’t think it’s unreasonable, racist, cruel or anything else to stop people coming here illegally though. My best friend says exactly the same and she is from Tanzania. She had to go through a very lengthy process to come here as she married a British man. She also had to take the British Citizens test after being here some time. She is shocked that she had to go through all that yet people can just pay people smugglers, get on a dinghy and come here illegally and get looked after.

She got no help, support or handouts and says the system is completely wrong. She cannot even get her niece here for a holiday even though she would provide a return air ticket and dates so she would not stay here indefinitely.

Here we go again, conflating asylum seekers and immigrants for other reasons (marriage, work, study). There is no such thing, despite this government’s lies, as an illegal route for genuine asylum seekers, which, as evidence from the government itself proves, the vast majority of those on the boats are.