Thread 31 Starmer - September Rain

[DuncinToffee]

Pull up a chair for some friendly chit chat about politics and beyond

Taxes optional but greatly appreciated.

Previous thread
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/_chat/5399546-thread-30-starmer-magic-roundabouts?page=40&reply=146834602

It rather begs the question why the previous government missed such a straightforward tack. How much port was there in the Rwanda deal for fucks sake ?

It's rather cunning to introduce a disincentive to lose documents too.

It's not unacceptable to say even if we wanted to, we couldn't host everyone fleeing everywhere. What we can do is our level best to make the process as humane and caring as possible for those we can accept with our restrictions in place.

I am old enough to remember the Cambodian boat people. A few years ago I started seeing posts from the children we took in in 1979 who were now grown up. Educated. Drs, nurses and other vital professionals. That's my country. That's my people. And I want it back.

Is that automatically a bad thing ?

One thing we really need to be honest about in the UK is when it comes to the areas where it hurts us, we are exceptional. And moreover we rather gloated over that exceptionalism rather too loudly and over the voices of others to be able to walk it back.

Even if you reset the clock back so there were no refugees in the UK - and no benefits, it would still be the preferred destination for many due to it's familiar language and customs.

These threads is speedy, innit?
Cat Tax as per.

A Danish type solution then.

It never ceases to amaze me the contortions the UK will perform to avoid doing anything they do "in Europe".

Yes. I was discussing with ds the other day and said something radical like - no documents - no processing - might be necessary.

I wasn’t entirely comfortable with the idea because it may leave some extremely vulnerable but it also would stop people getting on the boats with no documents and risking their lives.

I then thought about how you could actually deport someone when you don’t know where you’re deporting them to?!

It’s all such a mess.

As harsh as it is though I agree with asylum seekers having to meet the same criteria as British nationals to bring family over. I would prefer it to be done alongside the introduction of safe routes though so we take people in. We can’t just not accept anyone - this is an international crisis.

Sir Keir Starmer is on the BBC shortly.
I cannot bear the question of "When, give us a date , will you say here and now when ..... "
Yak, yak, yak.
Exact timings are not the main thing, improvements in standard of living, helping people etc are the main desired results. Judge them after a decent amount of time.
Still team Starmer here.
Seems Chris Philps "forgot" about his part in the use of hotels for asylum seekers.
Pillock.
Btw, I haven't seen Chris Mason or LK for a while either.

I am still very uncomfortable with the language used by Labour

Moving where though?

It's ugly and it happens in England on a daily basis. We, as a collective, cannot allow such attacks within our communities. I praise her resilience. Those wee shites doing this cannot get away with it.

Agree. Denmark initially toyed with a Rwanda deal, Kigali, but dropped it.

I then thought about how you could actually deport someone when you don’t know where you’re deporting them to?!

That's why (some) arrivals destroy their documents.

I'm not as naive as to believe that there is a thriving black market in getting people not only across the channel, but then to disappear into the crowd.

It happens in England and I moved to another bit! This poor woman. What real help does she have??? Media coverage is not it,

It's ironic that if the empire had survived, then the UK would have had a plethora of places to put asylum seekers. Sort of transportation for non criminals.

It's also enmeshed with previous dodgy contacts and a 'discount' for families. The reality is often very much different and that poor person who risked their life ends up in perpetual penury and slavery - slavery still exists in the UK.

Yes, this is where I’m struggling.

It’s awful because I feel to agree with some of the points of the policy ( I do) I’m agreeing the language is ok - IMO it’s not.

No, not in my view. The issue is actually it may be a real challenge to whole idea of asylum necessity. Let’s say you can only apply for family reunification after three years, but how on earth would be able to show the ability to support and maintain a family or relationship over this distance to the standards required by the Home Office.

The answer is you are very unlikely to ever manage it. Very. The other issue is that presumably this will come with a sting in the tail. That will be a limited period of status as a refugee. The Home Office will tell you that x country is safe to go home and reunify as an alternative.

This is how it is in other countries, but it is big change for the UK.

Yes slavery very exists still.

And I actually think all the time
the focus is on asylum seekers - human trafficking is increasing as no one is watching.

The world is such a mess right now and innocent humans are suffering.

ChatGPT will tell you - correctly - that slavery can be considered a normal state of human existence.

It's just a matter of numbers.

Me too.

This should also be considered with the one in one out policy. To enter the UK and claim asylum you will have to show a connection to a family member to stay. Then you will be accepted. If you arrive and you cannot show such connection, then you will be returned to France.

Combine these two policies together and the number of applications for asylum will shrink radically.

There is just one big problem with it all. That is open employment market which uses asylum seekers as labour. Unless you address that there will always be a pull because the UK does not have ID cards.

I see we are all on track for a digital ID. Otherwise really there would be every point in just hitting a dingy and trying to get into the UK without being registered in some way. You have to deal with illegal labour and drugs and prostitution too

Wasn't it Vietnamese Boat People Jane? I remember from Newsround!

That is open employment market which uses asylum seekers as labour.

Having been through more and more RTW checks since I started work, I struggle to see how people can get away with employing illegal workers in the numbers they do in 2025.

Clearly the punishments aren't anywhere near enough to serious deter.

How can an illegal worker have a bank account ? Presumably they are paid case ?

in which case, what the are HMRC up to ? Especially given how much they (and their dodgy IT deals) cost us.

It must be incredibly easy to pay cash in hand, particularly in the context of a money laundering business.

What you do is this. You either work in a cash driven business - nail bar, labouring, vape shop, barbering or car wash. Anything with small amounts of cash as the normal payment method. Or you rent a Deliveroo account from someone, earn on their account, and you ask for them to extract cash from their account… so too with Uber and other gig employment

Jesus, Putin’s getting bold.

EU chief von der Leyen's plane hit by suspected Russian GPS jamming https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c9d07z1439zo