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?

The Judge, defence, prosecution barristers & court officials would not allow this.

Fellow juries would also highlight, as should the pp DH.

There are actually plenty of native English speakers unable to understand or follow the legal case they're assessing as jurors. The problem isn't just a language issue

Well that didn’t happen in this case! The women said they couldn’t speak English and the staff shrugged/didn’t believe them

Well that didn’t happen in this case! The women said they couldn’t speak English and the staff shrugged/didn’t believe them

I can totally believe that. They may have been worried they would have been accused of racism.

How can you say that?

So because you think some jurors don't have enough comprehension in their language then it's ok for some not to understand, or speak, the language at all.

These a people who decide what someone's life.

Where did I say it was OK for people not to understand or speak the language at all? I was merely pointing out that jury service suffers from wider comprehension issues.

Well its been going for nearly 1000 years so presumably it worked OK up until people who couldn't speak the language were asked to become jurors.

The problem is non-assimilation - caused by sheer weight of numbers and technology. In the past there was the tv… or the tv. Now people can live in a bubble of their own culture quite easily.

I think there should be an English language proficiency test before coming to UK - for legal immigration. As it is we are continuously importing a first generation with marriages. One of the independent MPs is leading a campaign for the UK to fund a large new airport in Pakistan for to-ing and fro-ing.

In some complex financial fraud cases, maybe.

Otherwise it's perfectly possible for both counsel to present their evidence clearly and understandably and it's up to the judge to direct the jury and to sum up.

Lack of language comprehension hinders that.

I think nowadays people often have shorter attention spans and reduced capacity to follow verbal output.

Regarding juries there is also the problem of herd bias. One example being the case of the councillor doing slitting throat motion about far-right people who was found not guilty straightaway. There is no chance of fair trials if we get in an OJ situation.

That is in addition to in some areas swathes of people being unfit for jury duty due to language problems. Are women in some communities even allowed to participate? One fears not.

That is just guaranteed to wind everyone up.

Of course it does. However I think the problem is wider than that.

Yeah this was my thought. 3/12 being led by one juror is pretty scary though!

Well you either have to sit an exam or prove your comprehension skills in some way or you just have what we have had for 1000 years.

I thought the whole point of jurors was that they were supposed to be normal average people and defendants were judged by their peers. Until recently if you were legally qualified (so would understand what was going on) you couldn't sit as a juror anyway. Im a solicitor and I would have huge trouble concentrating through a long fraud trial.

Thats simply not going to happen.

There are very specific rules on juries and being able to understand English is paramount.
There is even an act of parliament on it, its a valid reason to be excused.

There is also form to fill out, so how did they do that? and produce some of the form at court.

A judge does not direct the jury on the verdict normally, just on points of law.

Great question. We seem to have a very high proportion of younger people not economically active or in training. This isn’t good for the economy and I suspect relying on benefits unnecessarily isn’t good for individuals.

Protecting the vulnerable is important and the horror stories about failing to do that are highly concerning. When jobs don’t exist, society must step up. But I’ve also seen the explosion in a lesser ability on the part of many YP to cope and statistics reflect that their MH is a big part of the benefits problem.
How do we solve this?

There is probably need for some to suck it up and take a job, but it can certainly be more complex. Many mums post here about DC with mild disabilities who would be thrilled to work min wage jobs (that they are well qualified for) but cannot get past prejudice.

I don’t think it helps for politicians to concentrate on punitive approaches without giving people realistic pathways to success

Do you know of any economic studies concerning the yields to the economy with various projected DT rates?

Not off the top of my head no 😬

But whatever is said about DT make sure it’s added to CT for a person starting a business. Don’t just view in isolation.

It needs to be competitive to PAYE so you get people taking a risk, starting something new and potentially employing people including young people.

What does it matter if most of the country is concreted over if it means we can offer sanctuary and a better life to 100 million+ of the worlds' most vulnerable people? They are fleeing hellholes like France ffs - have some sympathy!

We need less trees anyway, since they are the boomers of the natural world and drive demand for carbon dioxide which is fueling the climate crisis!

And next time you need your gallbladder removed,remember that it is quite likely that your surgeon will have come across the channel on a dinghy - be grateful! And how the hell will our pensions be paid if there are no Deliveroo drivers and Uber drivers paying in!

Be kind!

Exactly.
And that dinghy-doctor may have thrown his papers away so we dont know where his medical qualification came from. But who cares. Better him than some A* white public school boy rejected from medical school on the basis of "diversity".