Immigration and Asylum (4 Viewers)

Brighton Sky Blue

Well-Known Member
Short of kicking everyone out you cant. Its the price we pay for open borders. So innocent until proven guilty is the closest you can get. But its not enough, and anyone with a modicum of sense can see that
We don’t have open borders but crack on.
 

Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Well-Known Member
I gave you a solution. You need to read better.
No you didn't. You said deport everyone who doesn't integrate then in the very next post admitted it was near impossible to show people who aren't integrating. So you can't deport anyone.

It's one of those generic terms that the likes of Farage like to use that can mean different things to different people. It's not a policy, it's a soundbite.

As for the thing about not knowing English after a set time, I've suggested that myself before. I think we should explore a legally binding contract migrants have to sign when coming in saying that they will respect other peoples values, faiths, beliefs, biological sex, gender, sexuality etc. and the penalty if they fail to do so is the risk of losing the right to stay here. I really think we need to change the terminology from 'rights' to 'rights and responsibilities'
 

Briles

Well-Known Member
Mask has slipped, i’m not the only one who noticed…
Just out of curiosity, have you ever been diagnosed with anything personality wise? Your half trolling reminds me of someone....
 

chiefdave

Well-Known Member
What worries me is there is so much focus on asylum seekers arriving by boat or those awaiting processing who have been placed in hotels that we are taking our focus off by far the largest group of offenders.

I completely understand the idea of certain groups being over-represented in stats but you can't just ignore the overall figures if they don't fit your narrative.

We also need far better data. This has been raised in previous reviews but it was decided the priority was to spend years on another review rather than action things we already know are an issue.
 

Briles

Well-Known Member
What worries me is there is so much focus on asylum seekers arriving by boat or those awaiting processing who have been placed in hotels that we are taking our focus off by far the largest group of offenders.

I completely understand the idea of certain groups being over-represented in stats but you can't just ignore the overall figures if they don't fit your narrative.

We also need far better data. This has been raised in previous reviews but it was decided the priority was to spend years on another review rather than action things we already know are an issue.
Tbf the data is usually deliberately Hazy to allow scope for whatever the government want to do to deal with it. If it was clear and concise they would have to do what the data shows. If its open to interpretation then they can do what they like
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Tbf the data is usually deliberately Hazy to allow scope for whatever the government want to do to deal with it. If it was clear and concise they would have to do what the data shows. If its open to interpretation then they can do what they like

Yeah the Casey report suggested that to be the case
 

Captain Dart

Well-Known Member
"The council argued the government had agreed not to procure accommodation for asylum seekers in excess of a ratio of one asylum seeker per 200 residents, and it would not procure new accommodation while those figures were exceeded.

Mr Justice Eyre rejected this and said figures were planning tools and not limits."

 

Brighton Sky Blue

Well-Known Member
3 guesses as to why theyve done this....


So if they do nothing…people complain. If they do something the right wants…people complain.

Fair has to be fair, what do the immigration obsessives actually want them to do?
 

chiefdave

Well-Known Member
So if they do nothing…people complain. If they do something the right wants…people complain.

Fair has to be fair, what do the immigration obsessives actually want them to do?
Ridiculous isn't it. Was the same with the hotels. Months of 'why don't they use army barracks', now they're doing that its 'why are they using army barracks'.

Same with this, exactly what people have been asking for but because it's being done those same people now aren't happy with it.
 

Brighton Sky Blue

Well-Known Member
Ridiculous isn't it. Was the same with the hotels. Months of 'why don't they use army barracks', now they're doing that its 'why are they using army barracks'.

Same with this, exactly what people have been asking for but because it's being done those same people now aren't happy with it.
‘They’re only doing it because loads of people are complaining about it’.

Would people rather they get ignored?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top