To be really worried about Reform?

[FiveHorse]

Just that really. They’re predicted to gain the most from the upcoming elections, if this carries on could we see a reform government at the next general elections? Or is it press scaremongering as usual?

Why wouldn’t the numbers crossing go up? The amount of people crossing is directly related to how attractive the country is.

The same for anywhere. Whether it’s Italy, Australia or UK. If we are comparatively easier we will be marketed as such by traffickers. It’s an easier sell for profit.

It will need international co-operation to stop the dangerous crossing, shame the UK made that more difficult by leaving the EU

Thank you!

OK well I don’t want to leave the EHCR (and this wouldn’t automatically stop asylum seeking as we would still be tied to the refugee convention) & I understand that France won’t take the boats back. So nothing to convince me it’s a better option there. But I appreciate someone actually letting me know what they’re saying.

Because being granted asylum wouldn’t be easier or harder depending on how fast the claims were processed, if the criteria remained the same?

Yes, remember Brexit, remember when those UK towns who received the highest subsidies from the EU voted to leave the EU and shot themselves in the foot e.g Ebbw Vale, despite Wales seeing a net benefit from the EU of $107 per resident in 2014.

Your indignation over issues that Reform bang on about is the big give away!

Traffickers are selling a service (a dangerous one but still), faster processing in one country over another means an easier sell and maybe higher profits.

The criteria doesn’t have to change for crossings to be higher in number. Traffickers use SM to show which country is the most lax with best results.

Ok, agreed. Crossings may increase if they think processing time is faster. But the chances of approval don’t increase, so would mean the 30% or so whose applications aren’t approved, could be returned faster. Swings and roundabouts maybe?

If you arrive by small boat you are extremely unlikely to be removed so what would you call it?

If we want to have capacity to help people being persecuted then we need to stop the thousands of young, healthy, economic migrants coming across the channel.

We also need to accept that the world is full of people living with oppression and persecution. Particularly women. Hundreds of millions if not billions of people and Britain is in no position to save them all no matter how genuine they are.

Oh, on the migration issue, every UK political party is to blame, but the Left is the one that made this debate truly toxic.

Any notion of even curtailing immigration, any attempt to even start a neutral discussion on the topic has been for years systematically met by massive outcry, emotional blackmail, jumping straight at the jugular with accusations of racism, fascism, yadda, yadda, yadda.

The Tories have yapped a lot about it but in the end, in front of such hysterical opposition, they have never had the courage to do anything. They kicked the ball down the road, letting the sh*t hit the fan.

If the Left had been more open to a honest, neutral discussion about migration 20-15y ago or even after Brexit, Reform would have had no space to exist.

Between a white, male, pale and stale gammon from the Home Counties who doesn't like any foreigners because ..., and a Uni Leftie with blue hair from Goldsmiths who likes all foreigners because ..., there is no difference (and they often all come from the same socio-economical class in the end). Both have based their views on dogmas rather than critical thinking.

A lot of people were against uncontrolled immigration from Europe hence Brexit.

I think it would feel too much like a roundabout to the electorate to last. Enough feel numbers are too high already so increasing them again would be difficult.

Labour won’t run on higher numbers, even if the policy they did introduce is failing.

If you think about what you pay more for or are more likely to do the same applies to trafficking, whether it’s faster service, safer or easier. All those things can be bought at a higher rate rn, there’s a ‘VIP lane’ if people want to pay more.

The fact that most asylum claims are granted means that there aren't many economic migrants making the crossing.

Young healthy economic migrants are here to work, will pay taxes and contribute to the local economy. They don't get benefits or skip queues for council houses. They also pay a NHS surcharge.

what do you mean by economic migrant? Someone who comes here illegally and doesn't claim asylum, but rather slips into the black market?

You almost make it sound as if they are arriving by luxury yacht rather than risking their lives on a cramped dinghy.

I don't think people care about the differences between asylum seekers, economic migrants an illegal migrants.

It’s not my language but traffickers’. It’s the term they use to get a higher price.

You get fewer people with you and therefore safer crossing. It’s still pretty awful and dangerous I expect.

As a sales tactic it probably works for higher profit.

To add of course those selling try to gloss over risk and make it sound easy. They also use SM videos from people involved. They have marketing and are pretty good at it, given the multi billions involved it’s not a surprise.

It's very telling that when the question of education is brought up you automatically turn it round to classism. Why is it that you equate uneducated to working class?

I mean, I grew up in one of the most deprived areas of Scotland and the vast majority of "working class" people I know aren't stupid enough to be taken in by Reform.

As far as I can tell there are only 3 types of people who would consider voting for Reform.

Elitists, who stand to make more money from reduced regulation/workers rights.
Bigots and racists, who just hate immigrants, Muslims, LGBTQ and the left and don't care about anything other than "sticking it to the looney left".
The gullible, who are far too easily swayed by a sound bite and a headline.

ETA - and that's based on actual experience of trying to engage with reform voters. Like try to have a discussion with them about how Reforms energy, immigration and tax policies would be disastrous for the country and you'll either be insulted or ignored.

There are also people who are sick of being lied to and let down by the two main parties.

They can still make the choice not to vote for Reform. It's the local elections, usually plenty of other parties to choose from.

Can I add please
People that have enjoyed growing up in diverse communities and love that "British" includes people from many races, religions and histories but see that a million immigrants each year is upsetting this balance of living side by side.

Well if those disillusioned voters think the answer to that is to vote for a party run by a lying grifter who pretends he is a man of the people, they are going to be very disappointed.

So they prefer to be lied to by a lesser know party?

Can you expand on this, please? What do you mean by "upsetting this balance of living side by side"?

Misread the post

Net migration isn't a million and is coming down already