Why do Labour not get it?

[Dacatspjs]

It's being reported today that Labour want to stop using hotels and move migrants into barracks. Fine. But when quizzed on it Luke Pollard has suggested this will be more expensive, but the public want the hotels to close at all costs so it will be worth it.

This to me just seems like another step forward for Reform. The public who care about this, care about how much the government is spending on migrant housing. A new policy that costs more isn't going to go anyway towards solving this problem.

I don't know what the solution is, but spending more money getting mothballed barracks up to spec seems ludicrous.

"Asked about whether it would cost more to house migrants at military bases than in hotels, Mr Pollard insisted that 'the public want to see those hotels close'.

But he added: 'We're looking at what's possible and, in some cases, those bases may be a different cost to hotels, but I think we need to reflect the public mood on this asylum hotels need to close.'"

If you think that the migrants enjoy the same level of comfort that paying customers would have enjoyed in the past, you have a bad case of Farage-itis.

Also, what do you think will happen to the hotels now? Most of them would have taken up contracts to house migrants for a reason.

Finally, an ex-migrant hotel near me is now being used to use homeless people. The locals are whining about that too.

What's your proposal for Labour?

Do we lump them on a ship and drop them off mid-Ocean?

Ask citizens to house them?

Lock them in sheds?

Keep them in the hotels?

Fence off some open land and just herd them in and lock the gate?

Oh but they are, and they have room service, plus an a la carte menu to choose from too🙄.

Can anyone explain under what law they must be housed? Don't get me wrong - I have no problem with migrants being given accommodation. I do have a problem with that imperative not applying to people who are already here. That is what is working in Reform's favour - ex-servicemen sleeping rough, but get off a boat and straight into accommodation.

It's mainly to get them away from people isn't it? So that the locals don't have to worry about the rapey tendencies. Or those that do will be wealthier country folk who are less likely to kick off.

I got married in the one in my area currently being used. Many are beautiful buildings externally. The one I got married in got brought by Britannia and it doesn't take very long of nothing being done to them to make it an absolute dump. The really nice hotel you talk of will have been stripped to the bare bones, extra beds crammed in for families, the facilities removed and only the very basic of upkeep. I guarantee you.

Oh well OP, once Reform get in they've promised to spend even more money on detention centres.

People want to see the migrants suffer. Maybe Reform can recoup some of the money by live streaming a kind of Big Brother of human misery?

Ex servicemen sleeping rough is a very complicated issue and mental health has a lot to do with it. Many will not engage with homeless services or adhere to the rules. They cannot be "imprisoned" unless sectioned and forced to reside in a particular place, unlike the asylum seekers.

Various charities who work with this group have spoken out about the support offered and the reasons why many are still sleeping rough despite what is available.

But once refurbished, the barracks remain a state owned asset. Under the present arrangements public money is going into the pockets of private companies, and there is nothing tangible to show for the spending. Its like the difference between paying for an extension to a home you own rather than paying a landlord rent for a bigger property. The first may be more costly, but is obviously the most beneficial way to use money.

If the government just let them wander off what do you think would happen? Would they even bother claiming asylum and risking deportation or would they disappear into the grey economy of cash in hand jobs and HMOs?

They are mostly resourceful young men, they've crossed continents to come here, they would probably thrive for the most part.

Hotels that were popular enough to be thriving aren’t generally used.

Also, they don’t get to use any of the facilities which make them nice, such as spas etc.

I do wish people would use their brains and realise they’re being manipulated.

What extra comforts are you thinking of?
You do realise that we are talking about traumatized people fleeing for their lives, not criminals?

Well, then they are obviously doing it wrong.

What do you think should happen?

Where do you think they should be housed?

Would it still be open now in this climate if it wasn't being used for this?

It might be sticking plasters for failing hotels but there's a reason they took on the contracts.

Like I said in my OP I don't really know.

Personally I'd like to see a primary education stage with language and culture lessons to accelerate individuals to a midway stage in processing, when we know who they are are and where they are, and get them and NI number so they can work should they be able to find employment. The New Zealand model seems quite good, but the scale of their issue is much lower.

I just don't this a policy designed to pander to public mood feels right, particularly when the public mood is governed by cost and this doesn't solve that.

If we're going to spend more, we spend more to make it better. If we're going to make it worse, then it should cost less.

I genuinely think some people would love that.

France must have changed since I was last there!

They do get it but it’s a runaway train now. They can’t stop it so the tip toe around the edges pretending they’re doing this and that. It’s like when you’re trying to tidy up but there’s too much stuff so you just end up moving it to different parts of the house or dumping it on the stairs or in a cupboard.

Do you travel? Have you ever been to Africa?
If not, I strongly recommend watching some travel documentaries or YouTube channels featuring people backpacking through Africa. These videos often show people live for real, not the touristy, developed parts.
The man who was recently sentenced is from Ethiopia. Go online and take a look at how people live there not in the capital, but in the small, remote villages.

The accommodation in the UK might not seem to us as luxurious by European standards, but for many people crossing, such hotels represent incredible comfort. For them basics such as having clean, warm water to wash with whenever you want and for how long you want, regular meals, and even the allowance they get, all provided for free. From their perspective, that’s not hardship at all it’s a remarkably comfortable situation.

It is criminal to pay a smuggler and get on a boat. They might apply for asylum after they get here, but their journey is not a legal one.
Then we don’t know much of their history or where they might have committed crimes…although we do know that some carry out heinous crimes whilst here, which I blame on the government. Detained until we know who you are should be the default.

These men should be housed in multi bed rooms/dorms in barracks. They should be made to clean and cook for themselves (under management if course). They all evidently speak English and are keen to work (both I don’t believe, the first I know not to be true) so let them contribute to their own upkeep. The issue with the hotels is that private companies are making a load of money, these hotels are in built up areas and the men all hang around, they are ‘looked’ after having their laundry done and meals cooked.

It needs to be made as unattractive as possible for arrivals. These people should not get more, they should get the basics and should have to wait for any medical and dental treatment, just like we all
do.

Yup, same in our town. One was a Travelodge that was only built less than a decade ago, so is bound to be relatively modern/comfortable. The other was a historic 3* hotel in prime seafront position, again in use for coach tours until it was re-purposed for asylum seekers, so again will be in a decent condition. Maybe not "luxury" as such, but they'll be both of a good standard and comfortable. It's not as if neither were in use and were derelict/poor state of repair. Another one was being used for homeless women/families who have been given eviction notices as it, too, is being repurposed for asylum seekers, so again, in a pretty good condition and habitable.

But apparently they're not going to be confined to barracks. Some human rights shit being trotted out. So instead of maybe 150 migrants wandering near one hotel you're going to have at least 4 or 5 hundred men wandering the areas around these barracks. Unless they are actively contained it's not going to make any difference. Be careful what you wish for springs to mind.
People want them immediately turned away, so do I, but there is no quick answer. The politicians would rather spend time arguing over who's fault it is than actually sort it out.

Yes, the public could decide who is awarded asylum and then there could be a big deportation night for the rest. It would go down a storm.

Fully agree. It's that they're getting "better" services than workers which is the main problem, plus them hanging around which makes locals feel unsafe.