Labour isn't Working - Thread 38

[Nuthatch26]

A chat thread for those who don't like this Labour government. 💙

The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.

Previous thread
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/_chat/5554358-labour-isnt-working-thread-37?utm_campaign=thread&utm_medium=share

The massive increase in economic migration in the last generation - entrenched by the bad-faith human rights industry - has made the concept of asylum untenable.

Asylum criteria are wide enough that a high percentage of the global population are potentially included. They just have to be primed on what unproveable story on sexual orientation, faith or political view to fabricate.

The only barrier to claiming asylum is physically getting here - which has created a huge global trafficking industry.

Once they're here, they get living costs from the government, but can also start working in the informal economy (which will employ workers without permits) and the human rights machine gets involved - who are frankly the other side of the same coin as traffickers.

It's completely different from what the creators of the asylum agreements expected when they designed them in post-war Europe: with the memory of their citizens fleeing bombing, Nazi persecution fresh in their memories, all of Europe still devastated by war and all struggling economically (so no reason for economic migration), and limited global migration.

It can only be a short time before those obligations are massively changed or abandoned. Europe has been in a boiling-frog situation for decades, but yesterday's invasion will be repeated - and is too extreme to be ignored.

Does this really mean that Spain is moving anyone who claims to be under 18 into mainland Spain to start the process of giving them leave to remain?!? Which effectively means anyone under the age of about 35.

This risks exploding very rapidly.

Good morning 😁

John Healey has refused to commit to 3% on defence by 2030. He resigned and brought down Starmer's government for failing to commit to 3% just weeks ago. Hmmm. Perhaps his decision to resign wasn't quite as noble as was painted at the time. He's done very well out of it.

Healey has also refused to rule out tax rises, and confirmed that there will be cuts across departments to pay for Burnham's promises. Date for the Burnham budget is 28th October.

https://www.thetimes.com/article/6da0013d-ca37-499f-b224-53c3604bd98a?shareToken=f8788f863260901266f076f1bf243cc6

It's also nuts because a lot of the people involved were out on a silly, dangerous jolly - any that are truly under 18 need to be back at home with their parents, and any that aren't shouldn't be there at all. These aren't war orphans ffs, they're from a country that's a tourist destination.

Thanks for your reply. Do you believe that there should be no right to claim asylum at all from anyone anywhere in the world? What should happen with people who are under threat of death due to practising their religion or who have helped British armed forces? And what legal routes are there to asylum in the UK now? Thank you.

The local administration of Ceuta say that half of the 60,000 have now returned to Morocco. That still leaves around 30,000.

I watched a Sky report lastnight which stated that immigration via Ceuta has increased by 149% in the past year.

https://www.thetimes.com/article/ad68ee09-5081-450e-97fd-d4a937c6871f?shareToken=3884dced3517f728276c68a019d0a67f

That interview is suspicious. Cuts to be found in departmental budgets but no ruling out tax rises? That looks like Healey talking out of both sides of his mouth at the same time.

If he is going to spend appreciably more, tax rises will either be so painful that he’ll piss off huge numbers of voters, or politically bearable and he’d need to borrow.

I’m not buying anything that Burnham and his outriders are saying until I see the colour of his money.

My hope is that he turns out to be a giant political fraud, telling his party what they want to hear, and buying time that way, but actually pursuing a fiscally cautious plan.

But it’s possible that he’s as foolish as his grand announcements suggest.

Unbelievable, Healy’s position!

I thought he acted because of his principles.

I’ll never trust a Labour politician again.

Being facetious for a moment, I always thought the default position was never to trust a politician (especially this current shower).

Strawberry the laws and parameters are behind everything it's been said for a while then laws and parameters need to change. The whole debacle in Spain all because of an judges ruling.
57 people dead ,many injured. Damages to property ,and all the other costs involved that judge should be accountable.

Good article by gove today in the mail

Basic premise is that oxbridge educated labour MPs are lowering WC aspirations again

I'm not a huge fan of gove after making young kids lean pre prepositions and enforcing only the phonics test as a way to test reading...and I do agree more technical routes are needed
However the over all idea was interesting

I can't understand why we are sending 153 million to pakistan a nuclear strong country and yet we can't afford to defend ourselves.

Clearly.

I feel embarrassed I fell for it!

I fell for it too with Healey.

His reported educational achievements indicate he's not a fool, but nothing about his first few days in office convinces me he sees his premiership as anything more than a personal goal - another tick on the sheet. He's not a statesman.

Indeed /look at all the hypocrisy starting with
Diane Abbott sending her son to private school, Corbyn’s kids going to grammars -to the present numerous Labour MPs who objected to Rishi taking over without a GE and then endorsing Eyelashes…

I don't trust numbers on how many have returned. Or reassurances about containmemt of the rest. There is way too much gaslighting by governments and complicit media for us to have any confidence in what we hear on such a politicised subject.

Only a few years ago, I used to wonder how Russians could believe their state media, and feel sad that it was so hard for them to get unbiased facts.

I took the reliability of our own media for granted - how things have changed😥

The absolute classic - "if you don't like my beliefs, I can have different ones"

I do try to stick to the most reliable sources, but fair point, well made. There's a lot of gaslighting and manipulation around.
The local authority did revise Spain's figure of 50K up to 60K. I trust their analysis more than anything Sanchez says.

I think it's untenable for asylum to be granted for reasons such as persecution due to religion or sexual orientation - there are simply too many people living in shitty countries for that to be sufficient reason.

Possibly for political dissidents - but restricted to known, high-profile dissidents.

Specifically having helped British armed forces: it needs to be part of their contract and on a case-by-case basis.

With war refugees, I'm expecting a move towards Denmark's model: with short-term residence permits (1 to 2 years) that are regularly re-evaluated. Individuals to be repatriated when their home country becomes safe (relative to their region - not UK levels of safety).

The most important changes which I see as inevitable will be stronger border controls, treaties for returns to home countries, removal to 3rd countries for processing (to avoid the huge leakage into the grey economy), restrictions on family reunification and restrictions on appeals (single appeal in a short time frame, rather than stringing out multiple appeals for years).

I think you know the current legal routes to asylum, and you're not asking in good faith. For the avoidance of doubt, I am very strongly against introducing asylum 'safe routes' into the UK or reception centres to allow people to claim UK asylum from other countries.

The way Europe's generosity has been taken advantage of - and human rights agreements corrupted - has set the path we're on. There's no going back.

Talking of Abbott, her reinstatement has gone too unremarked IMO. She wasn’t chucked out for being too left-wing or a troublemaker, but for making antisemitic comments.

Anyone welcoming her back is sending a terrible signal about themselves and about the direction of Labour. It’s a bit of a litmus test (among others) for identifying left-wing antisemites.

I have a funny feeling about Burnham, Israel and the Labour votes lost to the Greens…

Good grief. I didn't know that Abbott had been reinstated.
Your last sentence is very worrying indeed. I was pleased to see such a low vote share for the Greens in GM yesterday, but your posts puts a very different slant on it.

@DenizenOfAisleOfShame

Excellent posts, really clear and logical, thank you.

I saw the other day but forgot to mention it as I've been stupidly busy this week.

Why Abbott ahead of Duffield (assuming Rosie has had any conversations about it)? Abbott is such a troublesome character, why would they want her back?

She gave what looked like a written-for-her apology on reinstatement.

I think it’s perfectly possible to be very well educated and intelligent and still be a fool. Tony Benn was known, accurately, as the most intelligent fool in Britain.

As it happens, I don’t think Burnham is a fool generally. But that doesn’t stop a person falling into foolishness over specific things at specific times.

Thank you for the thoughtful reply. If I understand you correctly I think you are saying you don’t want safe and legal routes to asylum but you would be willing to consider this in the case of refugees from conflict but only on the strictest possible terms. On the Danish model I feel uncomfortable about the idea we would imprison victims of torture and force them to work for 80 cents an hour under threat of punishment. On the religious persecution point I ask because I often hear people talk about this being a Christian country but there are persecuted Christians who could be welcomed here but are not. I also wonder about our past history with Jewish refugees and whether we will look back with pride on our record of protecting persecuted groups or not.

On third country processing I’m really interested that people still see that as an answer when a lot of research indicates it would be ineffective as a deterrent and that many people sent to third countries are back in the people trafficking system in a relatively short time. I ask about safe and legal routes to asylum because I find many people are under a misapprehension about these and think that there are routes available that actually don’t exist. I have also found that there are misunderstandings around these third country solution as people assume ‘genuine’ asylum seekers would be able to come to the UK after their claims were processed when in fact they would be required to stay in Rwanda or wherever forever.

I’m not saying you’ve misunderstood- just that this is something I have come across.

On family reunification, would you include children in this?

On appeals I think it would benefit everyone if people didn’t spend years waiting to be able to appeal without being able to work and contribute legally.

On the grey economy, would you be in favour of allowing people to work and pay tax?

Thank you. I am trying to continue a good faith conversation and learn more about different perspectives.

“Mother of the House” according to some on certain threads