AIBU to be deeply concerned about the recent influx of 30k+ undocumented arrivals in Spain?

Climate change is an issue, not because migrants necessarily care about it per se but rather because of the impact of climate change on their living conditions.

I did not say Denmark have a right wing government. I said they have a left wing government in terms of social and fiscal policies but that their policies wrt immigration are right wing. The left wing parties pivoted in terms of immigration to prevent the rise of right wing parties.

Personally, I believe labelling people/parties as left/right wing because of a single belief is ridiculously simplistic. Many of my leanings are mildly left wing, particularly in terms of fiscal and social policy. I have been labelled right wing due to my position on the trans issue. I believe women’s spaces should be protected but that trans people are perfectly entitled to live their lives as they wish so long as women’s rights are not trampled on.

I could also be labelled right wing in terms of immigration as I do believe in controls on immigration and a managed process. I also believe genuine refugees should be protected but economic migration should be managed in a sustainable way. I also believe there are concerns that need to be addressed in terms of the impact of migration on housing, education, health etc.

I used the term right wing in the way it is generally used these days wrt migration. The terminology was much easier in the past when left/right referred to economics rather than its current usage which emphasises cultural issues.

I also think that hysteria over any issue involving migrants helps nobody.

She just ignores it.... I feel horrific that anyone has to experience SA. It makes me sick. I feel horrific when a white person or a non-white person does it.

But do we not think men from the third world where VAWG is through the roof (more so than here) maybe pose a bit more of a threat to women?

Climate change is an issue, not because migrants necessarily care about it per se but rather because of the impact of climate change on their living conditions.

Haha the climate change seems to be a new one added to the script! As if these migrants give a shit about climate change 🤣 In fact, I don’t think a lot of the countries they come from give a shit about it for that matter, yet the lefties blame the uk for “ignoring climate change”! Bloody brilliant! 🤣🤣

You're unlikely to hear any justification, because clearly there isn't one

And on the howls of "Who said it??" you're unlikely to hear anyone say "I support uncontrolled/undocumented migration" either, because it's couched in other terms such as:

"If you don't make other countries equal folk will come somewhere richer"
"You ignored climate change so now they'll have no choice but to leave"
"We colonised their countries and this is payback"
"I'm involved in supporting refugees" - which too often translates as advising irregular migrants which lies to tell and even providing scripts

Naturally they insist this is completely different from supporting a lack of control, but the instant that control's actually attempted they're all off again with cries about "inhumanity", "racism", "concentration camps" and all the rest

You're unlikely to hear any justification, because clearly there isn't one

And on the howls of "Who said it??" you're unlikely to hear anyone say "I support uncontrolled/undocumented migration" either, because it's couched in other terms such as:

"If you don't make other countries equal folk will come somewhere richer"
"You ignored climate change so now they'll have no choice but to leave"
"We colonised their countries and this is payback"
"I'm involved in supporting refugees" - which too often translates as advising irregular migrants which lies to tell and even providing scripts

Naturally they insist this is completely different from supporting a lack of control, but the instant that control's actually attempted they're all off again with cries about "inhumanity", "racism", "concentration camps" and all the rest

Laws we want can be kept via domestic legislation

Yes I think I posted similar stats on another thread. Per head of population for the particular demographic, ME men from war torn areas are much more likely to be convicted or charged with SA. I dont think its wrong to extrapolate from that, that the rate of crime is much higher.

According to the Ministry of Justice data via LBC, there are not 80,000 white men convicted or charged with sexual assault per year in the UK. The total number of all sexual assault convictions against women in the entire country for a given year is roughly 1,453, of which British nationals account for 523. The figure of 80,000 is completely made up.

Official data released by the Ministry of Justice shows 77 sexual offence convictions attributed to Afghan nationals over a multi-year period, with roughly 19 convictions specifically for sexual assault against women in a single recent calendar year.

When independent bodies like Sky News, the BBC, and Oxford University's Migration Observatory calculated the actual per capita rates using official Ministry of Justice data, they found the following:

• The British / UK-born rate sits at roughly 2.7 to 2.9 sexual offences per 10,000 people.
• The Afghan rate (using realistic, updated population figures) sits at roughly 9.0 sexual offences per 10,000 people.

If we're taking Big Minds and legal heavyweights, here's an analysis of the ECHR from Oxford. It's a large document but here is the brief version

*The analysed benefits of staying in the ECHR are:

• Safeguarding basic rights in workplaces, courtrooms, hospitals, care homes and newsrooms.
• Protecting people at risk, including children, people in care, and victims of domestic violence and modern slavery.
• Defending privacy in an age of mass surveillance and data harvesting (e.g. DNA retention limits and bulk interception safeguards).
• Enabling accountability after major failures such as the Hillsborough disaster.
• Protecting free speech and democracy, and respecting parliamentary sovereignty.
• Providing increased protection compared with common law protections, including by providing an external source of accountability through the European Court of Human Rights
• Providing rights protections that stand the test of time, adapting to new circumstances and new threats.
• Supporting peace and stability in Northern Ireland.
• Enabling cooperation on border control, security, data sharing and tackling cross-border crime.
• Strengthening the UK’s voice and credibility in the Council of Europe and on the global stage.*

How many of those are people prepared to go without, in the hope that leaving it would stop the boats? Another Big Mind has also analysed how much difference leaving the treaty would have on the small boat influx, and it turns out that it could be very little. That it might well not be the magic bullet that people think.

Meanwhile we'll have lost all those rights above. And note that the last but one actually supports cooperation between border forces etc.

Yeah tell that to Rhiannon whites family and the loved ones of others who have been attacked/raped/killed by illegal immigrants. What part of "illegally entered the country, undocumented and free to roam" dont you understand?

😆

That quote says ‘managed immigration’ though. Which is the opposite of ‘uncontrolled immigration’.

My reading of that quote is that an ideal world may be one where we can all be nomads who can travel the world without borders, but that’s not the reality, so we need ‘managed immigration’.

So they are going to tell us their solution to the GFA ECHR issue? I've not heard a single word from them about it

If we're taking Big Minds and legal heavyweights, here's an analysis of the ECHR from Oxford. It's a large document but here is the brief version

*The analysed benefits of staying in the ECHR are:

• Safeguarding basic rights in workplaces, courtrooms, hospitals, care homes and newsrooms.
• Protecting people at risk, including children, people in care, and victims of domestic violence and modern slavery.
• Defending privacy in an age of mass surveillance and data harvesting (e.g. DNA retention limits and bulk interception safeguards).
• Enabling accountability after major failures such as the Hillsborough disaster.
• Protecting free speech and democracy, and respecting parliamentary sovereignty.
• Providing increased protection compared with common law protections, including by providing an external source of accountability through the European Court of Human Rights
• Providing rights protections that stand the test of time, adapting to new circumstances and new threats.
• Supporting peace and stability in Northern Ireland.
• Enabling cooperation on border control, security, data sharing and tackling cross-border crime.
• Strengthening the UK’s voice and credibility in the Council of Europe and on the global stage.*

How many of those are people prepared to go without, in the hope that leaving it would stop the boats? Another Big Mind has also analysed how much difference leaving the treaty would have on the small boat influx, and it turns out that it could be very little. That it might well not be the magic bullet that people think.

Meanwhile we'll have lost all those rights above. And note that the last but one actually supports cooperation between border forces etc.

What are you on about? This makes no difference. He's done his research and completed the review.

A review after announcing the policy? That's not very smart at all

Shouldn't she do the review first to see if it's possible before announcing the policy?

Seems amateurish

Yeah the usual comment, when people don't actually have anything to contribute to a discussion.🙄.
So what exactly are we doing about the 92% of home grown ones who carry out SA's on women? You do know that SA's on women and children wouldn't stop if we deported every single man of colour from the country? Women and girls are statistically less safe in their OWN HOMES than from any migrant.
Also we used to have access to Eurodac before we left the EU. Access to the biggest database where information on fingerprints, identity etc was all shared with us. Now we have no access since we left EU. We rely on French to stop the boars at a cost of over £600 million.
Of course we need a sensible conversation on asylum claims. But lets stop the hysteria that migrants are the source of evil and the only threat to women and children here . It's at worst racism and at best Xenophobia , purported by the Daily Heil, Reform and Restore

The Tories commissioned a review.

Why are you promoting a policy without understanding the drawbacks of it? Why aren't the Tories and Reform explaining how they will deal with the GFA with no EHCR? It's a very important question. It makes them look like they have no clue. And are just pushing populist bollocks