What would you do about immigration?

I thought the Denmark model Labour were talking about could be worth trying. It takes time to plan and implement though.

It’s just not true about 24 hours don’t be ridiculous

Typical time to have an asylum application processed is 6 months. What do you think will happen during the wait?

How did we do it before the disability benefits ballooned to unseen levels?

Every care home should have a subsidised crèche you would have young mums queuing up for a job plus better training on the job - hospitals would also benefit from a crèche and would massively reduce sick leave which would reduce importing care workers also!

Thanks. Appreciate you answering. How do you separate the needy from the non needy? At what point does someone with a disability become worthy of receiving benefits? Or is there a blanket cut to all benefits which will disadvantage all people with caring responsibilities and disabilities - in which case a person with terminal cancer or a parent caring for a critically ill child will also lose out.

Sure, the genuinely unable to work need help. But the out of control surge in disability related welfare is not indicative that these are all genuinely needy people.

Thanks for answering. Separating from the immigration issue, can I ask about people that need it and can't enter the workforce for varying reasons? For example if they're disabled or in a caring role?

Very true. Human rights law seems to have been weaponised in favour of the most heinous criminals and each Albanian criminal (like Klevis Disha) who wins the right to stay because he managed to get a girl pregnant and his child won’t eat Albanian chicken nuggets creates stronger case law to be used for further cases.

It is no small significance that our current Prime Minister was a human rights lawyer and is now presiding over a totally failing immigration system with only token acknowledgement.

@Lavender14

i really don’t agree. The current interpretation of those rights is more likely to erode democracy in some cases - I think that law abiding citizens actually have rights too, to live in a country in which they are protected and in which the social contract functions. Unfortunately, the way that the rights are interpreted in the U.K. mean that certain rights are actually interpreted as being greater in scope than in France/germany (because the government’s discretion to do what is needed in the public interest is given less weight and the individual’s rights are given more weight), but in addition to that there are lots of cases of ECHR overreach. This is recognised by many countries- in fact, it’s enlightened scandi countries that are trying to lead on reform. It cannot be in the interests of democracy to prevent the deportation of criminals to countries with less comfortable prisons, or failed asylum seekers who have less access to good healthcare in their home country. It unfortunately strips the legitimacy out of the concept of rights and undermines public trust in them. Unfortunately, these conventions are being abused. I don’t want to see them repealed, so something needs to be done. I think the real slippery slope is the slope to resentment and irrelevance.

Yes, showing that it can be done where there is the will to do it. There's nothing written in stone saying the UK cannot be resolute and strong when it's required.

Australia took a pretty hard line against illegal boat arrivals. Towing back boats, offshore processing and detention, and no chance of permanent settlement for people who arrived illegally. Cross party agreement.

I also don’t think that large organisations should be allowed to prioritise recruitment based on ethnic minority status.

If people want to come and work here, fine but I don’t know of any other country that treats its born and bred citizens worse than first or second generation immigrants. Fair treatment for all, yes, treating us worse to fulfil some arbitrary quota, no.

We need far better pipeline planning so that we educate and train our own NHS staff including specialists instead of poaching skilled staff from abroad and leaving our prospective staff jobless.

Simple answer is to make the world a better place where people don't need to move away from loved ones and support networks to have a perceived better life. Where people can stay and be integral to the success of their own communities, and continue the rich cultural practices and identity that make us all different and the world a more interesting place. Instead of the championing of multicultural beige driven by the global elites.

To stimulate the labour market. Leading to less unskilled immigration, leading to higher wages. Supply and demand. Welfare artificially manipulates the labour market and wages, and encourages low skilled immigration.

Make the home office fit for purpose

Yes, agreed, that's what I thought. The idea that it isn't possible to control who enters our country is just more gaslighting. A lot of people have had enough of it.

No they haven’t, they and NZ still are in top of the human rights tables.

How do the Aussies manage to control their borders, then? Last time I looked, Australia hasn't become an authoritarian hellhole just because they are successfully managing who enters their country.

The only person who would buy my house would be another dodgy landlord at a reduced price as the area has now got such a bad reputation. It breaks my heart, I worked so hard as a single parent to buy and renovate my little house. As you say we need to address the "all immigration is good", the culture which has now become very prevelant in my area have as my other (immigrant) neighbour put it " no respect and no standards" . Thank goodness my other neighbours are good kind friendly people.

Australia has managed to control who enters their country without sacrificing the human rights of Australians. It can be done, if there is a will to do it. In the UK their are too many vested interests and the lawyer class on a never-ending immigration gravy train have a lot to answer for.

But if the results of yesterday's election are anything to go by, things may change in the future. A lot of people are fed up of the notion that we can't control our borders and we just have to suck it up whether we like it or not.

I understand that but when you start to peel things back then you find yourself on a slippery slope.

@Lavender14
have you heard of habeus corpus, for example?

@Lavender14

i don’t want to repeal the human rights act or the convention, but it is absolutely ridiculous to claim that it’s the only reason why we have a protected right to vote in the U.K. The UK has been a democracy with a right to vote for a long time. I think this hysterical nonsense that no one will have any rights if they don’t like part of the package really does the cause no good at all.

Glad we agree