Labours one in one out migrant policy

I've read that the whole business of encouraging migration was started by the Blair Govt. with the aim of creating a new population of Labour voters. Well, possibly. Whatever the intention, it's turned out more like The Sorcerer's Apprentice - out of control and terrifying.

valdavi

Cath9

Excuse I didn’t notice you had also added a topic on this matter.
As I mentioned I do hope the law that all who will be allowed to remain in the uk must speak an A level in English

None of my traditionally British family have an A level in english... I suppose it could be useful, they could write a best-seller about their life as a small-boat migrant?

Well, I'm not sure that 'A' level English should be pre-requisite as many British people do not have 'A' level English and it is beyond the scope of everyday conversation.

Of course, a basic level of English is required for many jobs and, as immigrants are, presumably, hoping to work, that could be a requirement.
Would there be free classes or would they require an immigrant to pass an English examination before entering the UK?

With AI, it is often difficult to assess a candidate's true ability now unless it is a written examination under personal examination conditions or an oral examination.

It impressed upon me how ‘Smash the Gangs’ can never work.
The head of the Hydra came to mind.
And how intricate ‘payments for passages’ are organised - down at the local Asian corner shop if so designated.

This will never end without a viable deterrent. People trafficking is an extremely lucrative business.

I read that memoir last year.

Try The Lightless Sky

Gulwali Passarlay.

Cath9

Excuse I didn’t notice you had also added a topic on this matter.
As I mentioned I do hope the law that all who will be allowed to remain in the uk must speak an A level in English

None of my traditionally British family have an A level in english... I suppose it could be useful, they could write a best-seller about their life as a small-boat migrant?

Sago

Oh dear Lord.

One in: One Out: One Back In Again ....

In out: in out : shake it all about ......🎶🎶🎼🎼

Am I the eightieth person to have said this ????
🤣🤣🤣

Good for Labour.

Maremia

So, what you are saying PaynesGrey is that the Labour Government is taking actual real steps to tackle the situation?
They are doing it now.
Would some Posters prefer they wait 14 years and do nothing useful?

Yes. Considering Labour was elected in a snap election, just three weeks before summer recess (30 July 2024 to 2 September 2024).

After summer recess, business is further disrupted by party conference season. Things don’t really get under way until October but soon followed by Christmas recess (19 December 2024, to 6 January 2025).

Bills are actually drafted by the Office of the Parliamentary Counsel, government lawyers who specialise in drafting legislation. They work closely with departments to translate policy into clear, effective and readable law.

All things considered, the government did well to get what is a very complex bill drafted and presented to Parliament by the end of January 2025. Now it’s with the Lords.

There’s still a long way to go. Commentators suggest it could become law in summer 2026.

I'm not sure how au fait the public is with the process, perhaps blinded by Reform promises. We will do this in the first 100 days. We will do that in the first 100 days. No they won't because the Parliamentary process doesn't allow it for complex matters where proper debate and scrutiny is essential. Secondary legislation is a way to short cut process but can still be annulled if there's no support in the Lords.

I read French newspapers daily.
Today a couple of them are saying that Keir Starmer is trying en vain to make this work!
And they're actually part of the scheme.

So, what you are saying PaynesGrey is that the Labour Government is taking actual real steps to tackle the situation?
They are doing it now.
Would some Posters prefer they wait 14 years and do nothing useful?

You are misundertanding what it means

I know a facile soundbite when I hear one.

All Governments use them.

MayBee70

Can’t help but feel that some people don’t actually want any of these measures to work and seem positively gleeful when things go wrong .

But none of them are working, that’s the point!

Rwanda, military bases, barges, hotels, HMO, ….

No one seems to have the answer to the problem, and it is a problem.

You are misundertanding what it means,

The UK-France treaty, which came into force on 6 August 2025 allows the UK to detain and rapidly remove people who enter illegally via small boats, blocking their access to the UK asylum system and drastically reducing dependence on costly hotel accommodation. In return, the UK will accept an equal number of migrants through a newly established safe and legal route – subject to rigorous documentation, eligibility, and security checks.

www.gov.uk/government/news/first-small-boat-migrant-returned-under-new-uk-france-agreement

Labours one in one out migrant policy

It is such a facile soundbite it's quite ridiculous.

'One in one out' would rely on the premise that for every asylum seeker who deserves refugee status, there is another who does not and should be deported.

Read the Labour Manifesto, It says:

Launch a new Border Security Command with hundreds of new specialist investigators and use counter-terror powers to smash criminal boat gangs.

labour.org.uk/change/first-steps-for-change/

The Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill was introduced into Parliament on 30 January 2025.

bills.parliament.uk/publications/62877/documents/7140

The bill (now standing at 98 pages) has been through various stages of legislative review in both the Commons and Lords, with discussions and committee stages throughout February, March, June, and July of 2025. It is now in the House of Lords at the Report Stage.

bills.parliament.uk/bills/3929

As I said before, these things take time.

The Rwanda plan had stalled. Just days before Sunak called the election, spokesperson, Yolanda Makolo for the Rwandan government was interviewed by Laura Kuennsberg. She said her government had only agreed to accommodate 200 deportees not the tens of thousands Sunak claimed.

That charade cost £700 million, £290 million going to Rwanda.

That same accommodation is now being used for deportees from the USA. Rwanda has agreed to take only 250 people.

In other words, they were never going to take the numbers Sunak claimed. Why do you think he called the election when he did? The Tory term of office had another six months to run. He knew the scheme was doomed to fail. Labour was right to scrap it.

Sounds like the Hokey Cokey.

You put your right leg in, you pull your right leg out, in, out, in, out and shake it all about

Any ne with half a brain cell could foresee that this is what would happen. Pity the Labour party combined cannot rustle up even half a brain cell.

MayBee70

Can’t help but feel that some people don’t actually want any of these measures to work and seem positively gleeful when things go wrong .

Not me. Sheer frustration and exasperation at the incompetence thus far.

MayBee70

Can’t help but feel that some people don’t actually want any of these measures to work and seem positively gleeful when things go wrong .

Not me.
I want something - anything - to work now, by anyone, as it’s beyond ridiculous.

I think it’s not so much ‘glee’ as Schadenfreude because Labour (14 years in opposition plenty of time to think up their own plan as they shouted down Rwanda on the first day in office) told us the grown ups were now back in charge. Puffed up with their own hubris they seriously thought they’d Get This Sorted.

Well they haven’t. And they are embarrassing to boot over it. Joe Public doesn’t trust a word they say on it now and I’m not surprised.

Have you not heard of zig zag brokers?

For a fee of €100 to €400, these brokers take a migrant to a point on the coast where a boat is being prepared for launch, so that the migrant can attempt to board it, by force if necessary, without paying the fare.

globalinitiative.net/analysis/how-to-make-and-lose-a-fortune-smuggling-migrants-on-the-french-coast/

Can anyone explain where all the migrants get the thousands of pounds for their boat trip in the first place? They all seem to be genuinely poor people but they seem to be able to get their hands on lots of money to fund their trips?

Can’t help but feel that some people don’t actually want any of these measures to work and seem positively gleeful when things go wrong .

Visgir1

Where did he get the money from to pay for another trip!
Unbelievable!

I said that 😳

*irritates not iterates

This isn’t an issue than can be resolved quickly.
I totally agree. Infact we'll be lucky if it can be resolved before the next general election.
What iterates me is all the groundbreaking agreement rubbish, and strutting around praising themselves before anything was off the ground. Just wasting their breath really, because the figures are a mockery.