|
|
Post by steppenwolf on Aug 24, 2023 12:23:57 GMT
It's actually long past time. The new figures on immigration are astonishing. Over 3.2 million people were granted visas to come to the UK in the last year. That's up on ALL categories by over 30% - some much higher. You can look up the breakdown but the point is that the amount of LEGAL immigration to this country has exploded over the last year or so.
It's true that a lot of this migration is people who come on holiday visas - but we never check that they go home. We have no means of doing this. And those that come here on student visas are also never checked as to whether they leave. And, more worryingly, those who get student visas are entitled to bring their relatives over (why?) and this is a very good way of getting into the country for a lot of people very cheaply - because students can put down small deposits on useless degrees, which entitles them to many visas, and then never turn up to study. The visas re still valid. It's a joke.
Basically this government has abandoned border control completely. Why? Is it the Remoaners' revenge? I'm sure that's a factor - but it's basically total incompetence on the part of govt and the determination of so many parts of our public sector to destroy this country.
|
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Aug 24, 2023 13:28:22 GMT
We have gradually watched this gestate from a request for kindness and understanding to a shrill insistence that the resident population's views, preferences and rights be pushed aside to make room..at all costs. It's essentially an invasion and quite consciously that (Iimho)
People trafficking is a gigantic business.
|
|
|
|
Post by dappy on Aug 24, 2023 13:40:14 GMT
The confusion in people like yourself's minds Orac could not be clearer. Steppenwolf was talking about 3.2m visas being issued last year. None of those needed the services of people smugglers. People claiming asylum represent less than 2% of the total number arriving.
|
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Aug 24, 2023 13:56:06 GMT
The confusion in people like yourself's minds Orac could not be clearer. Steppenwolf was talking about 3.2m visas being issued last year. None of those needed the services of people smugglers. People claiming asylum represent less than 2% of the total number arriving. All part of the same process, though the motivations arrive through a different (though probably adjacent) vector. Despite notionally having an elected government, the UK people have (so far) remained separated from entry control. The reason the UK public can't gain control of entry into the UK is because such entry is being privately sold over their heads |
|
|
|
Post by steppenwolf on Aug 25, 2023 7:36:47 GMT
It's all symptomatic of the same attitude in government - that they're not bothered about immigration. And I'm sure that part of the motivation for this "open borders" policy is - as Blair did - to "rub the noses of the Right in diversity". Only in this case it's more like "rub the noses of the Brexiteers in open borders". We're letting in vast numbers of people who will be largely dependent on the state, which is crazy.
There seems to be complete absence of any form of sensible government now - an interregnum where those who would destroy the country are given free rein. The damage being done will make Blair's open borders policy seem inconsequential. This is an invasion the like of which we have never seen and the consequences will be irreversible.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Aug 25, 2023 7:43:32 GMT
This is really getting out of hand now - 3.2 million and rising every year in a country that does not have enough housing, healthcare, transport, education etc etc.
It does seem a deliberate ploy to destroy our way of life.
|
|
|
|
Post by oracle75 on Aug 27, 2023 10:23:12 GMT
The confusion in people like yourself's minds Orac could not be clearer. Steppenwolf was talking about 3.2m visas being issued last year. None of those needed the services of people smugglers. People claiming asylum represent less than 2% of the total number arriving. All part of the same process, though the motivations arrive through a different (though probably adjacent) vector. Despite notionally having an elected government, the UK people have (so far) remained separated from entry control. The reason the UK public can't gain control of entry into the UK is because such entry is being privately sold over their heads Funny you should say that. Some of it is being sold in the UK itself. www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-66341824If you search "people smuggling in UK" . One of many incidents is this: www.gov.uk/government/news/people-smuggling-gang-jailed-for-26-yearsIt is a clear indication that NO COUNTRY CAN STOP THIS BY ITSELF or by trying to seal its own borders. The people smuggling for whatever end is worldwide. Smugglers will use every available loophole to gain entry. |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Aug 27, 2023 10:36:06 GMT
All part of the same process, though the motivations arrive through a different (though probably adjacent) vector. Despite notionally having an elected government, the UK people have (so far) remained separated from entry control. The reason the UK public can't gain control of entry into the UK is because such entry is being privately sold over their heads It is a clear indication that NO COUNTRY CAN STOP THIS BY ITSELF or by trying to seal its own borders. No. The answer is in the opposite direction - subsidiarity. The model that will work (and has shown itself to work) is elected national governments that have unchallenged control of their borders. If the elected government has control, it can be held democratically accountable for the misuse of that control. If that government is actually elected, than the public can sack the government - ie if the government is hijacked by criminal interests that negatively affect them, the public can clear the whole command structure out with one or two elections. By moving the vector of control upwards, you make the control less accountable to any public and it will be far more likely that various criminal interests will hold sway. |
|
|
|
Post by oracle75 on Aug 27, 2023 10:47:07 GMT
Orac that is logic.
Not reality.
People smuggling goes on in every conceivable kind of governmentally controlled country.
Much of the smuggling goes on through libya and Northern Africa.
All democratic countries.
Democracy does not always produce governments that the west approves of. And Libya etc control their borders tightly.
You will never be able to build a wall around a country. Nor with international internet connections used by smugglers to circumvent borders.
It takes international surveillance and cooperation to trace the source and routes the smugglers use.
|
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Aug 27, 2023 10:58:08 GMT
Orac that is logic. Not reality. People smuggling goes on in every conceivable kind of governmentally controlled country. Much of the smuggling goes on through libya and Northern Africa. All democratic countries. It is both logic and reality. However, you are overlooking my premise. The government must be both elected and have legal control of borders. Presently, in many western countries the elected portions of government don't have proper legal control and the parts of government that appear to have control aren't democratically accountable. You can see this clearly in the uk. We are well into implementing your plan move the powers away from people and upwards into democratically unaccountable international bodies and the results are predictable |
|
|
|
Post by oracle75 on Aug 27, 2023 11:20:30 GMT
Orac that is logic. Not reality. People smuggling goes on in every conceivable kind of governmentally controlled country. Much of the smuggling goes on through libya and Northern Africa. All democratic countries. It is both logic and reality. However, you are overlooking my premise. The government must be both elected and have legal control of borders. Presently, in many western countries the elected portions of government don't have proper legal control and the parts of government that appear to have control aren't democratically accountable. You can see this clearly in the uk. We are well into implementing your plan move the powers away from people and upwards into democratically unaccountable international bodies and the results are predictable In many cases you might be right. But i am afraid however a government is elected, it cannot seal its own borders. On the ground, you are up against telling lies on paperwork and to the victim, travel through tiny roads, lanes and paths, including corn fields and mountain tracks, prearranged transfers, alises, and corrupt movement of money via the internet. It is not true that everyone passes through patrolled borders. And if they do, that their paperwork is honest. Many if not most migrants are wanting to travel. They will do what it takes to pass through borders. The foem of government is not any guarzntee to border security. OTOH it is easier to flush out migrant gangs if countries exchange information and break into their communications. No one country can do it alone. |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Aug 27, 2023 12:13:06 GMT
It is both logic and reality. However, you are overlooking my premise. The government must be both elected and have legal control of borders. Presently, in many western countries the elected portions of government don't have proper legal control and the parts of government that appear to have control aren't democratically accountable. You can see this clearly in the uk. We are well into implementing your plan move the powers away from people and upwards into democratically unaccountable international bodies and the results are predictable In many cases you might be right. But i am afraid however a government is elected, it cannot seal its own borders. On the ground, you are up against telling lies on paperwork and to the victim, travel through tiny roads, lanes and paths, including corn fields and mountain tracks, prearranged transfers, alises, and corrupt movement of money via the internet. I didn't suggest it would be airtight in reality. However, a suitably empowered government in the modern age is quite capable of reducing this to a trickle. To give an extreme example as an illustration rather than advocacy - If illegal migrants or visa over-stayers faced a death penalty, how much interest would there be in the activity? I suggest interest would quickly reduce to a trickle. If visa holders had to pay a bond repayable only on their exit, how many visa over-stayers would the government have to deal with? - a very reduced number. Nothing I suggest stops governments co-operating with each other - if they wish. |
|
|
|
Post by oracle75 on Aug 27, 2023 17:43:51 GMT
In many cases you might be right. But i am afraid however a government is elected, it cannot seal its own borders. On the ground, you are up against telling lies on paperwork and to the victim, travel through tiny roads, lanes and paths, including corn fields and mountain tracks, prearranged transfers, alises, and corrupt movement of money via the internet. I didn't suggest it would be airtight in reality. However, a suitably empowered government in the modern age is quite capable of reducing this to a trickle. To give an extreme example as an illustration rather than advocacy - If illegal migrants or visa over-stayers faced a death penalty, how much interest would there be in the activity? I suggest interest would quickly reduce to a trickle. If visa holders had to pay a bond repayable only on their exit, how many visa over-stayers would the government have to deal with? - a very reduced number. Nothing I suggest stops governments co-operating with each other - if they wish. Now in reality, a deaath penalty does not exist in the UK. If it doesnt exist for multiple baby killers, it doesnt exist for anyone. Further, the UK has never counted people out. As far as i know it still doesnt. Imagine what that would do to drivers of transport vehicles. Gridlock. |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Aug 28, 2023 12:42:17 GMT
I didn't suggest it would be airtight in reality. However, a suitably empowered government in the modern age is quite capable of reducing this to a trickle. To give an extreme example as an illustration rather than advocacy - If illegal migrants or visa over-stayers faced a death penalty, how much interest would there be in the activity? I suggest interest would quickly reduce to a trickle. If visa holders had to pay a bond repayable only on their exit, how many visa over-stayers would the government have to deal with? - a very reduced number. Nothing I suggest stops governments co-operating with each other - if they wish. Now in reality, a deaath penalty does not exist in the UK. If it doesnt exist for multiple baby killers, it doesnt exist for anyone. Further, the UK has never counted people out. As far as i know it still doesnt. Imagine what that would do to drivers of transport vehicles. Gridlock. Like i said , it was an illustration using extremis. My only point was that substantially solving the problem is very far from being impossible or even that difficult. It could be all but solved with far less. There is no need to count people leaving - you make a visa holder pay a bond on entry and they receive repayment when they leave - ie it's up to them to make their exit known |
|
|
|
Post by oracle75 on Aug 28, 2023 15:14:55 GMT
Now in reality, a deaath penalty does not exist in the UK. If it doesnt exist for multiple baby killers, it doesnt exist for anyone. Further, the UK has never counted people out. As far as i know it still doesnt. Imagine what that would do to drivers of transport vehicles. Gridlock. Like i said , it was an illustration using extremis. My only point was that substantially solving the problem is very far from being impossible or even that difficult. It could be all but solved with far less. There is no need to count people leaving - you make a visa holder pay a bond on entry and they receive repayment when they leave - ie it's up to them to make their exit known That's one way of keeping track but in reality I doubt the Home Office in its cuorrent form could handle more bureaucracy. |
|
