[Politics] Sir Keir Starmer’s route to Number 10

[Rdodge30]

And I though potty training kids was hard work

1. You desperately bounce a thread (twice) from a month ago with an article that says that if/when Labour get into power they would inherit refugees in barges which they would deal with 'as quickly as possible'
2. @abc asks why they don't have an 'alternative policy'
3. I say what 'alternative policy' would stop them inheriting refugees in barges while they are in Opposition.
4. You make a fool of yourself again

The end

Not the end though is it?

Source Sky News:

On Sunday, Shadow Immigration Minister Stephen Kinnock

Labour will have no choice but to continue using the sites owing to the "mess" it would inherit from the Conservatives - but said the party would try to move asylum seekers out of hotels, barges and military camps as "quickly as possible".

So what is the alternative policy? Where is it they will move the thousands of people to? They will ‘as quickly as possible’ move them from the barges, Military camps and hotels…. to where?

What is the miracle cure that Sir Keir has and why is he keeping it secret? He has gone on the record recently to say that Sunak has lost control of immigration. He is criticised from within his own party for not outlining an alternative policy. Yet it seems the shadow minister for immigration does indeed have a (secret?) plan.

Not unreasonable to question this latest development (or to bump the thread)

 

[Bob!]

Not the end though is it?

Source Sky News:

On Sunday, Shadow Immigration Minister Stephen Kinnock

Labour will have no choice but to continue using the sites owing to the "mess" it would inherit from the Conservatives - but said the party would try to move asylum seekers out of hotels, barges and military camps as "quickly as possible".

So what is the alternative policy? Where is it they will move the thousands of people to? They will ‘as quickly as possible’ move them from the barges, Military camps and hotels…. to where?

What is the miracle cure that Sir Keir has and why is he keeping it secret? He has gone on the record recently to say that Sunak has lost control of immigration. He is criticised from within his own party for not outlining an alternative policy. Yet it seems the shadow minister for immigration does indeed have a (secret?) plan.

Not unreasonable to question this latest development (or to bump the thread)

I imagine they would put the necessary resources into assessing the asylum seekers claims.

 

[Rdodge30]

I imagine they would put the necessary resources into assessing the asylum seekers claims.

…and then where? Council house waiting lists already of 7500 waiting anything up to 5 years!!!!

There is no easy solution, yes the Conservative government are shambolic but for Labour to say we will solve this …and quickly.. but with no mention as to how

 

[The Clamp]

The how is easy;

You reinstate safe routes for refugees and make it legal for asylum seekers to find work so they can pay for their own accommodation.

Selling that to people who want to see all foreigners locked away on barges and sailed home is a different matter.

 

[Crawley Dingo]

Why not set a cap on refugees accepted at 50% of the number of failed claimants who were deported the previous year?

For 20 years?

 

[The Clamp]

Why not set a cap on refugees accepted at 50% of the number of failed claimants who were deported the previous year?

For 20 years?

Because setting arbitrary numbers in a bid to halt the movement of desperate people has never worked. And will never work.

 

[Rdodge30]

The how is easy;

You reinstate safe routes for refugees and make it legal for asylum seekers to find work so they can pay for their own accommodation.

Selling that to people who want to see all foreigners locked away on barges and sailed home is a different matter.

Hardly easy- more like simplistic and idealistic.

If that was the case I imagine there would be far fewer families living in temporary accommodation already

 

[Gwylan]

If that was the case I imagine there would be far fewer families living in temporary accommodation already

Not at all; it's been a deliberate policy by the Tory government to close down safe routes and be slow in processing asylum applications. Why? Because it suits their policy of claiming that refugees (particularly those arriving on small boats are a major issue).

The next government will have a mess to inherit, but sorting out asylum claims is one of the easiest ( not that it will be instant, but a lot easier than the NHS or Brexit, for example).

 

[Jim in the West]

Hardly easy- more like simplistic and idealistic.

If that was the case I imagine there would be far fewer families living in temporary accommodation already

As Gwylan says, the current shambles is the result of a deliberate policy by the government. The processing resources in the Home Office are ridiculously inadequate. Plus, it is almost impossible for asylum seekers to get hold of any sort of legal assistance to help them navigate their way through a complex process (legal aid lawyers in the asylum field are like hens teeth).

If you allow asylum seekers to lodge a claim without first coming to the UK (as we did with Ukrainians, for example), you would significantly reduce the number of refugees arriving in small boats…the government rails against people smugglers, but is actively encouraging them by making it virtually impossible to claim asylum in the UK without arriving in a small boat.

The government is desperate to use immigration as a weapon in the next General Election - hence the almost constant generation of headlines on the issue. In reality the levels of so-called illegal immigration are relatively low. The scandal is that there are so many more issues they should be tackling!

 

[WATFORD zero]

As Gwylan says, the current shambles is the result of a deliberate policy by the government. The processing resources in the Home Office are ridiculously inadequate. Plus, it is almost impossible for asylum seekers to get hold of any sort of legal assistance to help them navigate their way through a complex process (legal aid lawyers in the asylum field are like hens teeth).

If you allow asylum seekers to lodge a claim without first coming to the UK (as we did with Ukrainians, for example), you would significantly reduce the number of refugees arriving in small boats…the government rails against people smugglers, but is actively encouraging them by making it virtually impossible to claim asylum in the UK without arriving in a small boat.

The government is desperate to use immigration as a weapon in the next General Election - hence the almost constant generation of headlines on the issue. In reality the levels of so-called illegal immigration are relatively low. The scandal is that there are so many more issues they should be tackling!

All of this.

Plus why would Starmer try to put together a manifesto over a year out from a GE when he still has no idea of the size of crisis he is going to inherit. As the current cabal have proven time and time again in far shorter timespans, there's plenty of time for it to get significantly worse

Who would have predicted this current economic clusterf*** when Johnson first got into power ..... oh

 

[Is it PotG?]

All of this.

Plus why would Starmer try to put together a manifesto over a year out from a GE when he still has no idea of the size of crisis he is going to inherit. As the current cabal have proven time and time again in far shorter timespans, there's plenty of time for it to get significantly worse

Who would have predicted this current economic clusterf*** when Johnson first got into power ..... oh

I think we'll translate that as 'he hasn't got a clue'.

 

[WATFORD zero]

Hardly easy- more like simplistic and idealistic.

If that was the case I imagine there would be far fewer families living in temporary accommodation already

This Government closed the option for claiming asylum while abroad in September 2011. For decades we always had asylum schemes where people could claim asylum, whilst abroad, get their claims processed and get allowed in if their claim was valid. Nearly 12 years ago we stopped accepting Asylum requests from abroad and insisted the person had to be in the UK, then closed various safe and legal routes forcing people onto boats.

As a signatory to the 1951 Refugee Convention, the UK fully considers all asylum applications lodged in the UK. However, the UK’s international obligations under the Convention do not extend to the consideration of asylum applications lodged abroad and there is no provision in our Immigration Rules for someone abroad to be given permission to travel to the UK to seek asylum. The policy guidance on the discretionary referral to the UK Border Agency of applications for asylum by individuals in a third country who have not been recognised as refugees by another country or by the UNHCR under its mandate, has been withdrawn. No applications will be considered by a UK visa-issuing post or by the UK Border Agency pending a review of the policy and guidance.

20 September 2011

https://freemovement.org.uk/does-the-uk-consider-asylum-applications-made-from-abroad/

How clearly does the point have to be made that this Government wants Asylum seekers stuck in the UK for years unprocessed in order to create a 'crisis' and appeal to the naïve and stupid

*edit* Seeing the post above, case rests m'lud

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

I imagine they would put the necessary resources into assessing the asylum seekers claims.

Bloke in charge of immigration till 2014 or something said on the radio that the government sacked huge numbers of expert immigration case workers to save money and were then caught out by the massive number of channel crossings, about which they did next to nothing.

All very odd, given that stopping illegal immigration was a key element of the Brexit narrative. A cynic would suggest the Tories allowed it to build up so they could then crack down on it and use this as proof that Brexit 'worked'.

Except they seem to have forgotten to do the second bit.

Bloke on radio was asked 'do you think that having a barge in Poole harbour will be seen by those planning to come here as a deterrent?' and he laughed. 'Will they even know about it? I doubt it'. Still, everyone loves a gimmick, right?

 

[WATFORD zero]

Bloke in charge of immigration till 2014 or something said on the radio that the government sacked huge numbers of expert immigration case workers to save money and were then caught out by the massive number of channel crossings, about which they did next to nothing.

All very odd, given that stopping illegal immigration was a key element of the Brexit narrative. A cynic would suggest the Tories allowed it to build up so they could then crack down on it and use this as proof that Brexit 'worked'.

Except they seem to have forgotten to do the second bit.

Bloke on radio was asked 'do you think that having a barge in Poole harbour will be seen by those planning to come here as a deterrent?' and he laughed. 'Will they even know about it? I doubt it'. Still, everyone loves a gimmick, right?

The level of stupidity about this, in the face of mountains of facts and evidence to the contrary is

'quite remarkable'

But we've been here before, haven't we

 

[beorhthelm]

Bloke in charge of immigration till 2014 or something said on the radio that the government sacked huge numbers of expert immigration case workers to save money and were then caught out by the massive number of channel crossings, about which they did next to nothing.

All very odd, given that stopping illegal immigration was a key element of the Brexit narrative. A cynic would suggest the Tories allowed it to build up so they could then crack down on it and use this as proof that Brexit 'worked'.

Except they seem to have forgotten to do the second bit.

Bloke on radio was asked 'do you think that having a barge in Poole harbour will be seen by those planning to come here as a deterrent?' and he laughed. 'Will they even know about it? I doubt it'. Still, everyone loves a gimmick, right?

it might seem that way, this would imply some sort of plan. the floundering and inability to actually do anything runs counter to that. instead we've seen boat crossing replace hiding in and under lorries, due to increased surveillance and checks at the ports post Brexit. have to point to cock-up. as the last point makes, the asylum seeker is unlikely to know about policy details, so the whole hostile environment cant work.

anywho this is the Stamer thread and i dont really see what they are going to do, other than employ a workforce to go through the backlog. i dont see Labour materially changing policy on immigration, seeing as the nuts and bolts legislation go back to late 90's/early 00's. everyone seems to forget there were asylum seeker problems then, fines for lorry drivers, Sangatte etc. certainly i dont expect Starmer to go into an election with any policy that might be used to say Labour is soft on immigration.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

it might seem that way, this would imply some sort of plan. the floundering and inability to actually do anything runs counter to that. instead we've seen boat crossing replace hiding in and under lorries, due to increased survailance and checks at the ports. have to point to cock-up. as the last point makes, the asylum seeker is unlikely to know about policy details, so the whole hostile environment cant work.

anywho this is the Stamer thread and i dont really see what they are going to do, other than employ a workforce to go through the backlog. i dont see Labour materially changing policy on immigration, seeing as the nuts and bolts legislation go back to late 90's/early 00's. everyone seems to forget there were asylum seeker problems then, fines for lorry drivers, Sangatte etc. certainly i dont expect Starmer to go into an election with any policy that might be used to say Labour is soft on immigration.

Spot on.

In a sensible world it would be regarded as a nuisance to be dealt with in collaboration with the states from whence the people arrive (mostly France, presently).

Unfortunately the Tories weaponized it.

Starmer is doing the right thing, which is parking it till once they are in charge whence, one hope, he will attempt to deal with it. Unfortunately the tories will continue to weaponize it, and even if numbers are halved in a year they will claim Labour is 'soft on immigration'. This has been a successful trope for 20 years so why stop using it?

 

[Fungus]

The level of stupidity about this, in the face of mountains of facts and evidence to the contrary is

'quite remarkable'

But we've been here before, haven't we

sorry to go off topic, but I don’t remember David Coleman having a goatee.

 

[The Clamp]

Hardly easy- more like simplistic and idealistic.

If that was the case I imagine there would be far fewer families living in temporary accommodation already

It is fairly simple;

Open up safe routes again. Employ more admin. Let them work.

Immediately you’ve reduced the amount arriving on boats as they can now safely apply from abroad.

The ones that do arrive here are processed quickly and allowed to work and pay for themselves in the meantime.

The entire reason we don’t know which ones arriving are legit or not is because Tory’s scraped the only reliable way of screening.

Reintroduce safe passage and you’re then pretty sure the people arriving by boat are either being trafficked against their will or are here on nefarious grounds.

Isn’t this what people want? Or do they want to be outraged at foreign people and Labour?

 

[Is it PotG?]

It is fairly simple;

Open up safe routes again. Employ more admin. Let them work.

Immediately you’ve reduced the amount arriving on boats as they can now safely apply from abroad.

The ones that do arrive here are processed quickly and allowed to work and pay for themselves in the meantime.

The entire reason we don’t know which ones arriving are legit or not is because Tory’s scraped the only reliable way of screening.

Reintroduce safe passage and you’re then pretty sure the people arriving by boat are either being trafficked against their will or are here on nefarious grounds.

Isn’t this what people want? Or do they want to be outraged at foreign people and Labour?

Be interesting if Starmer does this.

Additionally, there is a large assumption in there that folks are willing and able to work. What sort of jobs did you have in mind, obviously not for the women and children?

 

[Rdodge30]

Plus why would Starmer try to put together a manifesto over a year out from a GE when he still has no idea of the size of crisis he is going to inherit.

Funnily enough that’s exactly what Tony Blair did when he was the only successful leader of the opposition to win a majority since Thatcher in ‘79 ….. He put a manifesto together a year before a General Election.

However this is yet another case of this opposition saying;

the Government have got it wrong- we are going to fix it - we know how but we just aren’t saying.

Weak politics no matter who the party is. For decades I have watched opposition leaders either at the dispatch box or on tv interviews explain how their policies would work and why they should be in government.