So what can in practical terms fully halt illegal immigration?

Let's be honest. Nigel Farage duped the public into thinking that Brexit would solve our immigration problems. What it did was make it 100 times worse ... no longer can we just return said asylum seekers to France.

ha ha ha then explain why Poland has mosques in all the major cities some dating back to the 14th century?

@AnneElliott I can well imagine it must be hugely frustrating for them.

Paying them millions is money for old rope then?

Yes, this is what my French relatives tell me.

This. We are a soft touch joke.

I can tell you what the French think (i previously worked in immigration and met my French counterparts often). Their view is our benefits are too generous and we don’t have ID cards meaning we have a thriving black economy. The French regularly used to tell us the solution was in our own hands and so they saw no need to try and stop anyone leaving France to come here.

Ha ha ha we have that too.

https://ukvisacenter.com/en/other/uk-visa-centres/france/

I think we should have a one in, one out policy. We put together a national database of all the British nationals that are happy to allow asylum seekers to have full access to citizenship and the NHS, welfare etc and we ship those Nationals out to the country if the individual entering the country. This would obviously be dependant on the asylum seeker having the correct paperwork on entry and would also need to involve the British National having accommodation that the asylum seeker could occupy.

This is a workable solution as we don’t then have a problem with finding accommodation for rhe asylum seeker although obviously paying bills on the residence could be problematic. Perhaps access to welfare for a set amount of time to get them on their feet? It would also allow the British National to contribute to building uo the developing country the asylum seeker has left.

My son is at a university with a lot of international students. Some are his friends. They all are very thorough about attending the lectures because otherwise the university will report them. So if a Russell Group University were not doing that, they should have been reported. They were at fault there, not the students. The law is clear on this. Same with a student working (presumably illegally) during lectures. It should have been reported.
My school works closely with a local uni and has had many international students coming to volunteer over they years. Most of them are from wealthy families and go back to their privileged lives after graduation.
Surely if you are getting to the country to earn money you are not going to use the university route. What illegal jobs pay enough to be able to afford over £40000 a year in fees?

Hmmm, thinking cap on again. Back to the simplest solution then, slash the boats! Stop them getting on them. Of course the French don’t want to do that! That’s what they should always have been doing. Raise the criteria for eligibility to live in the U.K. There’s not a one size fits all. Useless to keep saying it’s a small amount of people and money. It’s big enough to make a difference, as people who were interviewed in the street before the local elections, made clear.

Ha ha ha ha all immigrants already have biometric ID cards. They were introduced in 2015.

Ha ha ha ha everything you listed has been done for over 30 years. Do you think it worked?

No matter, I plan to use the rubbish in my bin to fill in the potholes.

Absolutely. All
thats going to happen is that their bin collections are going to be even worse.

If you want that, we'll take a lot more. We dont take the same proportion based on size as other countries.

So you want more asylum seekers to come here.

Migrants think they will be able to stay in the UK and it will be good for them. You have to dispel that belief. Migrants think that trying to go to some other countries will result in extreme unpleasantness for them. Therefore they don't even try. Those other countries then don't have to actually do or spend much protecting their borders. Thats why Rwanda isn't such a dumb idea if you can get potential migrants to think thats where they will end up, you don't then actually have to.do it.

Because in the uk they can disappear underground and earn a living. No ID, free no-questions asked healthcare, a thriving black / cash-in-hand economy, weak enforcement of existing laws and underfunded, under-resourced public service like the police out the immigration dept.

i live in France, it’s not easy to disappear here and still access work or healthcare. Access to healthcare is restricted to those who can show the correct papers to prove their entitlement. Working ’on the black’ is much harder as there is far stronger enforcement of tax and labour laws. And the police are, frankly, more scary and armed.

Someone isnt barred from getting leave to remain due to criminal records although it is harder yes. It depends on the offence

Its also not that easy to have a full history and record, it relies on the countries that the person has been in before having full records, having taken biometric data etc etc. It relies on those countries having communication with the UK

I mean what is the liklihood of the UK government having sufficient confidence in the records held in Sudan, or Syria or Ethiopia for some of the people here?

This wasn't a general election , it was a council election to vote in councillors for local areas. Not all counties had a LOCAL election --- mine didn't.
Councillors are not MP's, so have no say in parliament. They have a say in what happens in your local area, not the whole country.

A general election is at least two years away. This is when you vote for who you want to run the country, not a local election.

Perhaps each country should have a specified quota in relation to its size etc. When that’s been reached the immigrant has to move on to the next one, hopefully not ending up in the U.K.!

How? It's not as simple as it sounds. If the first safe country is, say, Turkey we still need an agreement with the Turkish govt to send people there. And given that Turkey hosts far more asylum seekers and refugees than we do they will quite reasonably say no.

Doubtful. Once someone was sent there the U.K. continued to pay for them. Win win for Rwanda.

Fix the root causes, or at least help solve the root causes. Everyone else takes their share. The way people carry on you'd think the UK were the only ones taking immigrants.

If they’ve been given leave to remain, presumably their background has already been checked?