Govt announces Ukrainian style scheme to bring thousands more migrants to UK

Our Government has ACCELERATED the vetting process, in the short time it has been in power.
Just because it's not been headlining in The Mail or the Telegraph or GB News does not mean it has not been happening.
That is 'doing something'.

If we bring more immigrants in, how on earth are we going to be able to pay for the Defences we so badly need, and apparently cannot afford. We are letting our NATO allies down as well as ourselves.
I despair of the financial state of our country now.

What do you think is going on in Sudan?

We hosted a lovely Ukrainian girl for a year. While she was with us, she continued with her degree on line, worked 2 jobs and went to English classes. Would we host a fighting age man from a totally different culture? Not a chance. I see these thousands of undocumented young men arriving on boats as an invading army. We have no idea if they have criminal backgrounds or not. And I'm absolutely furious that our government hasn't dealt with it properly. Shocking.

In your link, the illegal immigrant refried to is a failed asylum seeker that is after their asylum application has failed they thus have been fully screened and assessed and have no legal right to remain in the UK, thus now, in the government's assessment term, an illegal immigrant.

I object however to the term illegal immigrant being incorrectly applied to those who arrive at a UK border seeking asylum offensive because everyone has the right to seek asylum legally under the 1951 Human Convention AND they are following UK government instructions.

Therefore it is less offensive to refer to asylum seekers by the term asylum seeker or refugee rather than an illegal immigrant which can be deemed offensive.

LemonJam

I can only suggest you read Gov.uk "Mamood: My reforms will save the asylum system for a generation" to understand what is actually being proposed

It's a community sponsorship scheme to allow communities and organisations (that will become accredited organisations) to sponsor refugees to resettle in their area, taking responsibility to house, integrate and support them into work for a designated small number at first- and *all vetted and application processed before arrival*

Good luck with getting them all vetted and approved then. There was new footage yesterday of a packed large rubber dinghy full of young men throwing their passports into the Channel.

What I can never understand is this. IF you are genuinely fleeing war or danger in your home country surely the first thing you would want to hang on to is your passport and other credentials to prove who you are and where you are from. Without that you are a nobody. So why destroy it?

Most of us travel abroad and we know we won’t get into another country without our passports.

LemonJam

Primrose53

You said it Catswhiskas! Or is that twaddle? 😉

www.gov.uk/government/news/illegal-immigrants-and-foreign-criminals-to-be-removed

Your link opens to 29 June news story: "Illegal immigrants and foreign criminals to be removed. More than 45,000 foreign criminals and failed asylum seekers will be removed over the coming decade thanks to a significant expansion of detention capacity.

Different to the asylum scheme you OP refers to on 26th June.

I know that thanks. I was just pointing out that the Home Office use the term “illegal immigrants” which a few on here find offensive.

Will it just be British citizens who can offer sponsorship, or will it be a method of by-passing the regulations covering requests to allow family members to join people who have been given a right to remain?

Maremia

The clue is in tbe name
ASYLUM seekers
They are fleeing wars and persecution.
What on earth has that to do with contraception!!!!

Isn't that obvious. While their population it more than doubling every generation they don't have the infrastructure the space the food and end up in Civil War and have to flee.

I can only suggest you read Gov.uk "Mamood: My reforms will save the asylum system for a generation" to understand what is actually being proposed

It's a community sponsorship scheme to allow communities and organisations (that will become accredited organisations) to sponsor refugees to resettle in their area, taking responsibility to house, integrate and support them into work for a designated small number at first- and all vetted and application processed before arrival

Lemonjam, if it is families !!, but as it is open to all, I am assuming? Not just women and children? I have not checked, then the men seem to be the ones coming over and leaving the women and children behind. If we did not have so many illegals entering, draining our economy there would be more people welcoming this idea, however the system has broken and it’s costing too much and the infrastructure is not there, it is a big problem.

Primrose53

You said it Catswhiskas! Or is that twaddle? 😉

www.gov.uk/government/news/illegal-immigrants-and-foreign-criminals-to-be-removed

Your link opens to 29 June news story: "Illegal immigrants and foreign criminals to be removed. More than 45,000 foreign criminals and failed asylum seekers will be removed over the coming decade thanks to a significant expansion of detention capacity.

Different to the asylum scheme you OP refers to on 26th June.

You said it Catswhiskas! Or is that twaddle? 😉

www.gov.uk/government/news/illegal-immigrants-and-foreign-criminals-to-be-removed

See Gov.uk "Mahmood: My reforms will save the asylum system for the generation"

Theclue is in the name! The Government is clear this scheme is about asylum

I doubt very much if it is for goodness sake that anyone is calling them anything other than asylum seekers.

What's the difference between taking in a Ukrainian family, ie women and children to taking in a Somali family?

Members of parliament have larger than average homes and often second homes, they should lead and be the first to accommodate these people .
Also there is no way a comparison of taking in a family from Ukrainian, women and children while the men are fighting can be the same as a young man coming to live in your home from one of these countries mentioned. If so then the people on this thread that are comparing , that now have empty bedrooms can go ahead and welcome a young man that you do not know into
Your home, and yes I do know it’s not only open to men but I am confident it will be mainly young men! And will not be the desperately needed doctors , engineers, scientists ect

Primrose53

Maremia

The clue is in tbe name
ASYLUM seekers
They are fleeing wars and persecution.
What on earth has that to do with contraception!!!!

For goodness sake, even the Govt are calling them illegal immigrants now.

Even the government isn't immune from ignorance.

Ho many are you housing?

Maremia

The clue is in tbe name
ASYLUM seekers
They are fleeing wars and persecution.
What on earth has that to do with contraception!!!!

For goodness sake, even the Govt are calling them illegal immigrants now.

The clue is in tbe name
ASYLUM seekers
They are fleeing wars and persecution.
What on earth has that to do with contraception!!!!

Message deleted by Gransnet. Here's a link to our Talk guidelines.

Don't worry, Moii. Nature has its way of keeping the size of sub-Saharan African families down.

Around 2.8 million children under the age of five die in Africa each year, accounting for more than half of all global child deaths. Sub-Saharan Africa alone experiences an average of roughly 71.2 deaths per 1,000 live births, meaning approximately 1 in 14 children there do not survive to see their fifth birthday.

I'm still unsure how exactly we're going to "shut our borders".

Well said Moii

I stand back and look at these endless wars and displation, majority of it is religion and overpopulation and until they stop having an average of 6 children things will never improve. The population of Africa is set to double by 2050 we can't keep taking these people in. For me it's time to shut the borders and leave them to sort themselves out. Majority of aid should be in the form of contraception.