Labour's new policies for asylum seekers

[frommyheadtomyfeet]

Are rumoured to follow Denmark's, which include the seizure of valuables from people arriving here to pay their accommodation costs.

Is anyone else disgusted by this?! How will it work, they can take people's jewellery, phones etc., and leave them with nothing? What sort of message does that send?

https://ukandeu.ac.uk/lower-migration-is-bad-news-for-the-uk-economy/

Well you should be well educated on the effect of NATO then. For good or bad.

And yet....

I don’t have a single positive thing to say about NATO so I think I will just sidestep your comment and leave it at that.

I think this sounds very reasonable. Flip it around - you are fleeing a country under desperate circumstances, you grab your stash of gold coins or whatever, in the knowledge that you might have to bribe somebody to escape, pay for transport etc. its like expected.
If there are people arriving in the UK who are claiming asylum but ALSO carrying significant assets with them, then of course they should be asked to help to fund the specifics, over the UK taxpayer being asked to fund it... they've already received the biggest gift for free, that being allowed into a safe country like the UK

Yes, we gathered that, but some actual reasons would be nice, not just ‘omg peace mannnnn why bomb when you can love 😎✌🏻’

In which case, I would recommend that you brush up on your Russian, and Mandarin.

I’ve just noticed with interest the breaking notice on Sky about the number of people who have left the UK. They have seen the writing on the wall.

So this is for arrivals 2019 to 2023 the majority of whom would be non-EU.

So it doesn't prove that non-EU migrants are net contributors but neither does it provide evidence that they are not.

I can't see any particular reason why Nigerians or Indians (who I believe are the two largest countries of origin for more recent work visas) would earn less and progress financially more slowly than Polish or Dutch migrants.

Cards on the table, I am absolutely in favour of Chinese hegemony over the current American capitalist Patriarchy complex, so you might think you were insulting me just now but rest assured, you have not.

Not Russian though? So maybe keep NATO for that.

Not even the most committed can look at the millions dying right now for Putin and make light of it.

Why are you "all for guns"?

Well, at least you’ve unveiled. No doubt you’re a cool, cutting edge communist who is convinced the monster that is the West is endlessly demonising other countries.

It’s very predictable at this stage.

Ah, you like watchtowers and boiler suits, then.

A Sino-Russian autocratic system instead.

You do you. Enjoy.

Yes, and the fail to recognise the liberties they have been provided with, so they can write such drivel.

I don’t expect them to say thank you to those who laid down their lives, so they can enjoy their freedom. I would be happy if they simply kept a respectful silence, however.

Of course, they are always welcome to emigrate to Moscow, or Beijing or Tehran…

I thought i did say the court in Strasburg, perhaps on another post.

But here is your answer:

The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) has rarely overturned UK deportation decisions. Since 1980, the Court has found that a UK deportation or extradition would violate the Convention in only 13 cases in total.
The vast majority of applications made to the ECtHR against the UK are deemed inadmissible and do not proceed to a full judgment.
Within the UK's domestic legal system, challenges to deportation orders on human rights grounds are more common but still rarely successful in the overall context of deportations:

• Home Office data up to June 2021 showed that just 0.73% of foreign national offenders successfully appealed a deportation solely on human rights grounds in the First-tier Tribunal.
• Overall, in the period from April 2016 to June 2021, around 3% of completed deportations for criminal offending were successfully challenged on ECHR grounds alone in the First-tier Tribunal (922 successful appeals out of 31,400 removals).
• The Home Office can appeal these First-tier Tribunal decisions to the Upper Tribunal, and many have been subsequently overturned.

More recently, UK courts have dismissed claims against deportation, so @Leavesfalling no selective cherry picking of data.

But your word doesn’t count as evidence.

Hi, OP -

Surely you know it is impossible to prove a negative and posing such a question isn’t part of adult intellectual discourse.

However a quick search on Google Scholar will find many articles in top peer reviewed journals on NATO’s role in nuclear deterrence. The topic has been a key to the making of a number of eminent careers on both sides of the Atlantic.

You made some good points earlier but have jumped the shark, whether you really prefer Chinese hegemony or are simply saying so for effect

Edit: @Swiftasthewind is not the OP! She did make some interesting points earlier before IMO changing tacks

Yusuf says they won't.
They won't, of course, be in favour of measures like this, because the government is introducing them and it threatens their USP that nobody apart from Reform is prepared to address immigration issues.

Which proves they are petty and ‘party before country’.

Is that true? Wasn't there a comment published in the guardian yesterday that mahmood would be 'welcomed with open arms' into reform, should she desire? On that basis, I should expect reform to vote in favour alongside the Tories who have also pledged support. I think it's a worrying time for Labour who are already expecting a backlash from the back benchers, that they will have to rely on the opposition to get the motion passed.

Why the surprise about Reform’s reaction? Nigel has always been about Nigel and he is still the de facto head of the party.