UK net migration hits record high

[DavidinSouthampton]

I think this image sums up nicely the 2 sides of the argument. Which one are you?



View attachment 68329

Oh well, two out of three isn't bad.

I was at a family party over the weekend and talking to a nephew who will be starting next week at the Guildhall School of Music to study (Jazz) bass. I was talking to him about Jack Bruce, and have just sent him courtesy of Amazon the Cream double album "Wheels of Fire". I have obviously condemned him to a life of depravity, and will have to look forward to spending my declining years in eternal damnation.

 

[Bakero]

It's interesting how right wingers across the country have become so compassionate towards the homeless, the poorly paid and benefit claimants since the escalation of the refugee crisis.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Those risks that are 'beyond what they are presumably preparing for' are the threats that the MI5 admit they cannot counter, thats the point.

Well finally, you realise I've asked you a question and you've tried to answer it. Regarding the refugee intake, have they stated the threats they cannot counter? I've honestly not seen anything to that effect, or is this your own conclusion? (again this is a question, not a point disguised as one).

 

[Nibble]

It's interesting how right wingers across the country have become so compassionate towards the homeless, the poorly paid and benefit claimants since the escalation of the refugee crisis.

Quite.

 

[Ernest]

It's interesting how right wingers across the country have become so compassionate towards the homeless, the poorly paid and benefit claimants since the escalation of the refugee crisis.

Have they ?

 

[Hastings gull]

And that is you at your best? I will rephrase the question for you:

As the UK will be taking refugees from existing refugee camps and will be concentrating on taking orphaned and vulnerable children, the disabled and the elderly, no doubt security vetting them as they go instead of taking anyone who turns up, by how much, if at all, will this increase the risk of "importing unknown Syrians from an ISIS war zone" who will make "our own home grown jihadists" look like "amateurs in comparison"? And yes, I do know that they are not your words, but as you decided to criticise my debating skills in asking my original question, perhaps you would like to give me a reasoned, sensible answer?

My own view, as you may well have guessed, is that by taking refugees this way the risks are minimised and that the onus is on the UK's vetting procedures to wheedle out any threats.

OK, if you say that your post was not overly sarcastic, then fair enough, but that is how I read it. This reads in a far more reasonable manner, rather than the clever one-liner. If you give it, then you have to take it. As I understand it, the UK is taking in folk from Syria under some vulnerable persons scheme, including orphaned children, which is where the figure of 216 comes from. Might this be what you are thinking of? This is in addition to the thousands from the refugee camps, which might not necessarily concentrate on the most vulnerable, but this is of course very difficult to assess. And yes, you are right, this does seem a better way of going about things, in that if they have presumably been registered and identified, then the risk of potential terrorists getting into the UK is theoretically reduced. But it is of course by no means a guarantee, and similarly so when they get here and possibly fall under the spell of some rogue mullah.
As an aside, my friend, you are not very keen on other's views, are you? You seem very quick to rile, and yet you told us of your altruistic kind nature.

 

[BigGully]

Well finally, you realise I've asked you a question and you've tried to answer it. Regarding the refugee intake, have they stated the threats they cannot counter? I've honestly not seen anything to that effect, or is this your own conclusion? (again this is a question, not a point disguised as one).

I have answered your flawed argument in each replied post, if you accept that bringing in over 1 million refugees (Europe) from an ISIS dominated war zone of Syria might pose some security issues on top of the threat we already have, on the back of a statement prior to the migrant crisis from the boss of MI5 saying 'we cannot stop every UK threat', it would be logical to accept there might be an even greater likelihood of an attack here in Europe.

I am not sure if you think there would be NO increased risk from any rogue cell within the million refugees or you acknowledge an increase risk but feel the security service will counter any risk, 100%.

 

[Hastings gull]

The waiting lists are people that are housed, just not in a permanent property they can call their own. Councils provide housing through a variety of RSL's and the private sector, the private sector of course being expensive and not a long term solution.

Housing refugees will not impact on the social housing waiting lists as they will need to be housed in whatever emergency housing councils can find, whether private, short tenancy stock, or various other agencies that can provide accommodation.

Mixing a shortage of purpose built social housing for permanent tenants with emergency housing for refugees is just a misleading headline. Government data suggests we do have 600,000 empty homes in the uk, with 200,000 of those long term vacant (unoccupied for 6 months or more). The issue is cost to provide accommodation to refugees, not the actual availability.

I am in now way an expert on this and so I am rather baffled. Those currently in temporary accommodation will presumably be waiting for social housing to become available. Refugees will be similarly found temporary accommodation, probably of a basic standard, but will not they also want social housing? They won't want to be housed at a mediocre standard for too long, once the sniff of better social housing is on the horizon. This brings them into competition with the indigenous population surely.

 

[Hastings gull]

It's interesting how right wingers across the country have become so compassionate towards the homeless, the poorly paid and benefit claimants since the escalation of the refugee crisis.

Don't you just love a clever-dick; everyone community has one.

 

[heathgate]

It's interesting how right wingers across the country have become so compassionate towards the homeless, the poorly paid and benefit claimants since the escalation of the refugee crisis.

Perhaps it's just your inbuilt default prejudices that lead you to fantasise that right wingers didn't have any compassion for those causes in the first place....

Most people, right or left, have the right motivations,....there are almost certainly equal numbers of bigoted fools on either side of the political spectrum.

 

[alfredmizen]

Well, then move to a more affordable area, like everyone else has to. Is it right? No. Is it unfair? Probably. But guess what? The world is on the move my friend, it always has been. Waving your pearly jacket and yelling I'm a cockney geezer all me bloomin days! Won't get one far these days. So what they were born and bred in London Town? The people that were there before they arrived can claim the same and those before them, it's all on flux. Just because you'd like it to remain stable and static for the duration of your three score and ten, doesn't make it so.
You're the perfect example. You migrated of sorts. White flight. . If that's not white flight I dunno what is.

Social housing is affordable in London , it just goes to the wrong people.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Social housing is affordable in London , it just goes to the wrong people.

I agree, huge swathes of Islington were sold off under Right To Buy and are now in the hands of private landlords and North London luvvies.

 

[BadFish]

It's interesting how right wingers across the country have become so compassionate towards the homeless, the poorly paid and benefit claimants since the escalation of the refugee crisis.

It would appear they have also lost their sense of humour

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

I'm meeting a friend for lunch today in the local Syrian restaurant. I'll let you know if I see any refugees or terrorists.

 

[BadFish]

I'm meeting a friend for lunch today in the local Syrian restaurant. I'll let you know if I see any refugees or terrorists.

Just make sure you check under the tables.

red under the bed is now terrorist under the table.

 

[alfredmizen]

I agree, huge swathes of Islington were sold off under Right To Buy and are now in the hands of private landlords and North London luvvies.

I absolutely disagree with right to buy, terrible policy.

 

[Bold Seagull]

I am in now way an expert on this and so I am rather baffled. Those currently in temporary accommodation will presumably be waiting for social housing to become available. Refugees will be similarly found temporary accommodation, probably of a basic standard, but will not they also want social housing? They won't want to be housed at a mediocre standard for too long, once the sniff of better social housing is on the horizon. This brings them into competition with the indigenous population surely.

We're currently taking the most vulnerable I think I'm right in saying, orphans, sick, injured, elderly etc. I suspect to start with at least, they'll just want to be safe.

 

[Hastings gull]

Perhaps it's just your inbuilt default prejudices that lead you to fantasise that right wingers didn't have any compassion for those causes in the first place....

Most people, right or left, have the right motivations,....there are almost certainly equal numbers of bigoted fools on either side of the political spectrum.

Will you PLEASE stop posting such ridiculous views on here! If you go on like this, then common sense is going to rear its ugly head.

 

[Hastings gull]

We're currently taking the most vulnerable I think I'm right in saying, orphans, sick, injured, elderly etc. I suspect to start with at least, they'll just want to be safe.

I think you are replying to the wrong post here

 

[Bold Seagull]

I think you are replying to the wrong post here

No, you're worried that the 20,000 most vulnerable refugees we've agreed to take over 5 years are going to come into direct competition for social housing. I merely said that to start with, I suspect they'll be happy to be safe. I have no idea how to predict how long they'll stay, will they go into education, become trained professionals, already trained to get work, not need social housing...who knows. Lets hope they make a success of it either way. After all, we're all coming at this from the same motivations.