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.'"

What pp are describing is the Aus system. Stops coastal entry but allows humanitarian claims.

I am referring to the current peak and what's been driving it. It's been quite well documented that the 'second shot' thing has been a clear driver.

But where are we sending them off to? It’s like the hole in the bucket song, you circle back to the same problem again. We don’t know where these people are from!

I believe the Australian system has been criticised by the left so they won’t want to take that route.

Remember when Jess Phillips likened this to a night out in Birmingham.

Disgusting individual.

For anyone who is still in doubt, Keir Starmer is on the record saying that all immigration laws are racist.

And this is the guy who is going to stop illegal immigration.

Go figure.

Rwanda. But it won't be many people because when they know they are going to Rwanda they won't choose to come in the first place.

Starmer won’t, and scrapped a step towards it. But it’s the only method that gets what people are describing.

You don't want them in hotels, you dont want them in barracks. Where are they supposed to go. Having them homeless in the street isn't going to work.

Concentration camps maybe?

they have to stay in the first EU country they reach

How did they reach France and Germany?

In 2015, over 850,000 refugees/asylum seekers entered the EU via Greece - they clearly didn't stay in Greece.

This. @BeachLife2that is not correct.

I just googled that.

She is disgusting.

I was against it because I heard for every one we sent to rawanda we were going to have to have one of theirs. So what was it solving if we'd end up with the same number of people coming in?
I don't trust a lot of places, too many wars and brutal government regimes. I heard there was some kind of iffy government doing unreasonable things in rawanda so I didn't trust that they'd be sending us a refugee granted asylum in exchange for one of ours the same, I suspected they'd send us one they'd like to deport because they failed the asylum checks such as a convicted criminal for example.

...............................................

I agree with the asylum process existing but I disagree with it's current format for two main reasons.
First as a pp mentioned there's no real point processing them if they're going to be allowed to stay whether their claim is accepted or not. Having nowhere to deport failed asylum seekers to because we don't know who they are or where they've come from, makes the process of claiming asylum a pointless waste of money if we're keeping them all anyway. So too the thing where they get rights to bring family over. No, if it's that bad in your home country come with your family so they all can be processed and assessed properly as individuals.
Second when British citizens can't get housing, timely medical care and are often struggling to survive the cost of living on a low income, then I say we don't have anything spare as a country to be generous with.

It's not as if we don't help at all. Our government pays foreign aid and our armed forces always seem to be in other countries trying to sort out their messes and brutal governments, for the better welfare of those country's people.

Once the average British citizen doesn't have to wait years (yes, really, it happened) for an accurate diagnosis and basic antibiotics for an infection that took all of 5mins to diagnose in the end; once we all have affordable housing (for those who want it) in homes actually fit for human habitation and not forced with no options other than sky high private rentals - then and only then will I be happy to share some more of our country's wealth with others. It's ridiculous trying to fix the world's problems while our own country goes down the toilet.

There also should be a law passed that it's not racist to expect someone to publicly integrate into British society. No "can't comply with xyz for religious reasons" etc. Christians or atheist don't get away with that so neither should anyone else. I know of two people one here 5yrs, one here 15yrs, neither can speak English despite being mentally sound and having family members who can and who could teach them. That should be illegal, learn our language or get your right to stay revoked. Comply with our laws, ignorance of law is no excuse for British so no excuse for non-British either. We have freedom of speech and thought (just about!) so people can have their private thoughts and opinions, but live publicly as a British citizen would, if you want to live here. Britain is a tolerant country, there's no banned religion or language to speak to your friends and the acceptable ways to dress are many, plenty of types of hobbies allowed etc. Plenty of freedoms to be yourself, it's not only one rigid way. But that tolerance shouldn't extend to British being expected to lay down in the mud so others can stamp all over us, which is the current state of affairs.

Which charities are encouraging them?

British people don’t listen to facts or data in the main. They are driven by emotions, especially vindictiveness. This is why we have this kind of politics.

Quite.

What on earth drives people to be so vindictive?

I’m going to guess it’s the fact that we don’t have enough resources to support the current inhabitants of this tiny island, without trying to house, clothe, feed and medically support hundreds of of extra people arriving daily.
Plus the fact that people are worried about the safety of their female friends and loved ones around large numbers of men brought up in cultures that don’t respect women.

That’s just a hunch though…

👏 👏

People don’t want them moved around they want them gone .

@SumUpwould you be ok with barracks nearby and do you have DDs who would be nearby?

Care 4 Calais

Every time I see that prat Steven Smith on the telly and hear the crap he comes out with I want to throw something at the tv!

Of course he wants the status quo to continue, it’s his meal ticket.

Bananaandmangosmoothie · Yesterday 22:23
Which charities are encouraging them?

https://www.charlottecgill.co.uk/p/taxpayers-charged-420000-for-quaker
Also have a look at Joseph Rowntree trust.
Tax payers also contribute to these charities.

In a nutshell yes...and deport those here already.

Reform and Tories both talking about mass deportations.

Even those declined don't get deported I've been told on good authority by someone who works in the asylum system...they just disappear basically. It is shocking.

Sssh…don’t you know it’s racist to say stuff like that?

(I agree with everything you say and I’m slowly losing the will to give a shit if the oh so kind left are offended. Somehow their kindness never extends to the people who might be suffering due to this shit show.)