Changes to immigration rules announced by Starmer

Have you read the White Paper…

For this with comments such as ‘no mention of gangs’ ‘no mention of stopping the boats’

@Holluschickie @ChardonnaysBeastlyCat @EasternStandard

Have you actually read the White Paper?

Exploitation, gangs, illegal crossings, unscrupulous practice, tackling misuse and abuse of immigration systems, deportation, mentioned again and again.
I've added a screenshot, from the linked White Paper, just one part where your questions are addressed.

Read it! Otherwise this just becomes another thread full of misinformation.

@TimeTaken so how does this government plan to deport/remove those people who

a) have thrown their identification into the English Channel so we don't know who they are
b) belong to a country that we don't have a returns agreement with
c) belong to a country that doesn't want them back

??

Another miss by Labour (and I voted for them...).

People are rightly concerned about illegal immigration. Nothing was said about how the government is planning to address the 'small boats' crisis.

Instead a lot of nonsense about care workers who are incredibly hard working, do the jobs that British people don't want to do and without whom the social care system would collapse.

Not to mention the horrid ''island of strangers'' comment who is an insult to immigrants who made the UK their home following legal routes and who contribute to the economy.

The man is truly useless.

The care worker visa was only started in 2021 by Boris! It’s not like it’s been going for decades.

It needs to be more means tested. If people are here and contributing then they should stay, particularly if they're a net positive in terms of tax burden

If people are on visas and are not contributing then they've no cause to be here beyond their visa expiry

Depends on your point of view.
They aren't loans and can't be claimed back.
So they are a net drain on the system.

Not quite dished out like confetti are they?

OK but they still cost the taxpayer money whatever definition you use.

I think so too. I expect they are panicking because of the general rhetoric.

In the UK, an immigrant is someone who has moved to the country and intends to live there permanently, while an asylum seeker is someone who is seeking protection from persecution in their home country, but hasn't yet been granted refugee status. Once an asylum seeker is recognized as a refugee, they are granted refugee status and have certain rights, which differ from those of a regular immigrant.

I totally agree with you, the job is terribly underpaid & has been for many years. However, the cost of this would be added to the already sky high care costs for residents and/or local councils to pay. When we’re already talking of fees of up to £1500 per week (dementia home with challenging behaviour), how is anyone going to afford this?

I've been watching Keir Starmer's latest "What we need is less of these foreigners coming over" with keen interest.
Obviously it's a poor stance for any human being to adopt, and I don't feel like I need to articulate exactly why, but it is equally obviously bad for additional reasons:

1. Britain is a country with a below replacement fertility rate (1.57), which means, assuming we want to do things like economic growth and have pensions in the future, need to be bringing workers in. In addition there are a lot of sectors in the UK that require labour that for whatever reason can't be supplied domestically (usually due to lack of training or the wages/conditions not being appealing to UK citizens), so immigration is needed to keep them going. At least, at the prices and service levels people have come to expect.
2. Since the mid years of the Blair government, every government has promised to bring down immigration. Because largely of point 1, every attempt has largely failed. David Cameron's pledge in 2011 stands out as a particularly clear example. It's unlikely this time will be different. However, it's possible Starmer will actually try extremely hard anyway, because Labour are for some fucking reason talking about emulating the way Donald Trump is managing the USA. So maybe tanking the economy to appease racists is on the cards for real.
3. The Labour government are being so hardcore and weird about immigration that they are actually being attacked from the left by Reform. Now read that last sentence again. Basically, this policy, while attempting to appeal to anti-immigration voters, has allowed Reform to position themselves the as reasonable ones. As they put it, they just want to bring immigration down to a sensible level, not this weird and hurtful level Starmer is doing. This is just another example of how the current Labour government basically has no organic constituency, and so are completely flailing because they don't actually know who they are trying to appealing to, and failing miserably as a result.

I've included a photo of one of Keir Starmer's pledges here, together with some other relevant media for the short of memory/attention span, but I think it's worth remembering that whilst almost everybody with a working moral compass was jubilant to see the back of the egregious Tories, Starmer has proven himself to be one of - if not the most - dishonest politicians in UK history, and nakedly lied to everyone to get the top job.

"Asylum seekers are not immigrants."

Really? 🤔

Well, they aren't natives of this country so they must be "immigrants".

Oh dear