What would you do about immigration?

[stateofthem]

I’ve seen an awful lot of political posts here recently, generally displeased with labour (other policies are for a separate thread) and taking hard stances on immigration.

I often feel as though people have a very blinkered view on immigration which does sway the argument. It seems to be either “let everyone in” or “let no one in” as such.

One point I wish to make is that currently you must be in the UK to be able to make an asylum claim. This (in my opinion) is the biggest factor in small boats/mass migration.

If I were in charge I would propose the following:

Re-implement the ability to seek asylum from abroad via one safe legal channel. Enforce that applications must be made via this route (obviously with concessions for no internet, poor English etc).

Applications are reviewed on a case by case basis, and if rejected, a person is placed onto a register explaining the reason for rejection (and possibly a timescale of when they could reapply).

Anyone who does not follow this channel is returned to their country of origin.

Anyone who arrives having not followed this policy is returned to their country of origin.

I appreciate that the above would need a lot of work and investment, and it’s not quite as straightforward as how I set it out, but I feel as if it’s a reasonable response which allows some migrants but not uncontrolled.

at the moment it feels as though both sides of the coin are offering very extreme solutions either way, and I feel as though someone needs to offer a more reasonable and middle way approach.

I am interested to hear others opinions on this, and if you disagree, what would you do instead?

First thing that has to happen is a cut in welfare. Followed by a refusal to allow second rate university sector to sell student visas they can keep running the racket they are running.

We do not need low skilled immigration when we have millions on welfare refusing to work. Without a servings slashing of welfare, this problem cannot be solved.

There are lots of other things too. Leave to remain should be granted much later than 5 years and to net contributing tax paying immigrants only. No country needs immigrants who are supported by the taxpayer. Especially when we don’t have a labour shortage. We just have a shortage of willingness of people here to work.

And no asylum claims should ever be heard on shore. As well as leaving ECHR. No rapist should be allowed to appeal removal decision because their kid doesn’t like the chicken nuggets in their home country.

I agree on the welfare aspect if you mean cutting funds for those out of work by choice etc. I don’t think that we should penalise those who are genuinely disabled etc, and I find those groups are usually left with the brunt to bear from a lot of cuts etc.

So, assuming disabled people are removed from this equation I would personally propose:

Those on jobseeker benefits to be required to fulfil 30 hours per week of community service or charity work - to be signed off by a member of this organisation personally each week. (I appreciate there would need to be things done to ensure no corruption here).

Total reform on the issues around working a certain number of hours reducing benefits, meaning people don’t work (or work little hours) as they can earn more on benefits. This should not happen.

The above said, I often see that the vast majority of work posts needed are in care. I would never want someone to work in care who didn’t want to, not least as they would likely provide some substandard care. I’d much rather know my mum was being cared for by an immigrant who wants to care and will offer kindness and compassion, than an English person who will be full of resentment. I know there’s no easy fix to that aspect, but I really do feel that those out of work (or anyone really) shouldn’t be forced into care roles as ultimately those receiving the care would suffer.

We also need serious improvement for legitimate immigration of the sort of highly skilled tax payer who benefits this country. I am working with a colleague who earns £80k+ a year, takes nothing in terms of benefits/NHS/schooling etc from this country and is being treated appallingly as she tried to extend her visa. According to the lawyer we are receiving advice from this is becoming the norm.

Ironically, it is quicker and easier (24 hours) for a new immigrant to apply to enter the country from abroad, but takes 18 weeks+ to extend a visa in this country.

The system really is entirely broken.

Must say I disagree wholeheartedly on the ECHR point though. It provides many protections which some politicians would exploit the vulnerability of if it were not in place

Absolutely! Definite improvement needed for high skilled immigrants etc. I feel in these cases it should be such a different system and the process of renewing or extending visas is shocking!

Yes never mind the vulnerability of the woman who was raped and other victims of crime while their perpetrators get to stick two fingers up at the them thanks to the ECHR.

And who says that without ECHR, our human rights would disappear overnight. ECHR did not invent human rights rights. We have a parliament. A legislature that can put laws on the statute books voted by our representatives. You know those Poole that we vote for. Pesky democracy.

If you come over here illegal, you are going to a detention center pending deportation.

No ifs no buts.

Parliament cannot bind its successors, so just because something is passed now doesn’t mean it will always be there. It would become a lot easier to overrule things that new governments didn’t like!

If the aim is to reduce immigration, I don't see how having ways to seek asylum from abroad will do that. There are millions of people around the world in poverty, danger and being persecuted. Unless there was also a quota of people to take in via asylum every year then I can't imagine that would do anything but increase applications. I guess those asylum seekers wouldn't be here while the application is being looked at but let's be real, people who want immigration vastly reduced want fewer foreigners here full stop, regardless of whether they have been granted asylum or are waiting for their applications to be processed.

It would solve the problem of it being dangerous for the people on the boats and perhaps 'smash the gangs' to an extent but it wouldn't stop what seems like an irreversible public change of opinion against immigration.

But how do you determine who has come over here “illegal”? You must be in the country to start a claim, so technically they are not illegal until said claim is denied

If you come over on a boat or back of a lorry.

First of all have a honest national debate about it- particularly that we might need more younger people to balance our ageing population!

One thing the government could realistically do to improve the asylum system is pay caseworkers properly. It's a very stressful job and there are many other CS jobs at the same grade/pay with barely any stress at all, which means that people take caseworker jobs and then leave, either on level transfer or promotion, as soon as possible. It causes sky high attrition rates and huge amounts of time wasted on recruiting, onboarding, and training - often with little to no ROI. If the pay package was fair for the work you might actually get some skilled, experienced people staying and speed the process up a bit.

True, I do see your point. Perhaps we would also need to put strict caps on asylum too, but this also poses its own problems.

I suppose I’m thinking from this perspective of “stop the boats” which I’m sure all sides of the argument can agree is not good, but I do see your point about general ill feel towards all immigrants

a very good point. There’s about a million things I could say in this country need proper investment, but no government is ever able to have the balls to do so.

Not to derail the thread, but I had a convo with a friend recently about finances. I said I’d rather have a 30% basic rate tax but have good public services (eg functioning nhs, public transport, schooling etc). Obviously it would take time and need a total overhaul for a lot of bureaucracy involved (particularly in the nhs) but overall life would then be better. Similar to Nordic models really. She was so shocked I had said this and couldn’t believe I was happy to pay more tax! I think we have a real greed issue in this country with no one wanting to pay for the things we want and need

First, clear the backlog.

Anyone who arrives undocumented and/or on a small boat or in the back of a lorry goes straight to a detention centre.

Anyone who breaks the law while waiting for a decision is deported (to their country of origin or maybe even France) and may not enter the country again.
They all know when they break the law.

I’m not sure how well your plan would work though. Fewer than half of the people who come here illegally are granted asylum at the first stage. Those who know they will be refused may well still come here illegally. So how would your plan reduce number?

There are no routes for immigrants to claim asylum until they have a foot on British soil. So the ‘send them back if they arrive by boat or in the back of a lorry’ doesn’t work. They have no other choice of getting in the country. Or do you mean we should not accept any asylum seekers at all? If so, let’s hope we are never in need of help and asylum from our neighbours.

Well, this is my point. A route without being here should be put in place. Those saying “deport people coming here illegally” don’t seem to realise that at the moment it is necessary to travel here to claim asylum

But we don't want them here.

This ⬆

I have name changed as this is outing, but a few years ago our son was working in the USA and met and married a US citizen. His company posted him back to London and the hoops he (and we) had to jump through to allow his wife to come with him were ridiculous, including a personal visit to us by a representative of the Home Office (I think) to make sure we had enough room for them to live with us and that we had enough income to support them both and were willing to do so.

He and his wife are both well-qualified professionals, he was employed and his wife works in a field where we had shortages at the time. It was utterly ridiculous. They have never taken a penny from the state and pay a lot of tax.

I have heard many similar stories from friends (my DH worked in an international industry so colleagues meeting and marrying spouses from other countries was not at all unusual).

We absolutely do not need to be importing people who are from countries where women have no rights, and people who will be a permanent cost to the taxpayer.

As to our citizens being allowed to not work, then I do agree everyone should contribute in some way if they are being supported by the state. Having parents who needed care, I do not want anyone looking after them who resents it, but heaven knows there is enough work that can be done without that; litter picking and cleaning up graffiti for a start!

If you get here via people smuggling, whether a boat or a lorry, then yes, into a detention centre and sent back to where you came from pdq; no wandering the streets getting up to no good or working in the black market. Fingerprinted and DNA tested if necessary so you can’t just keep coming back again and again for another go.

Too many politicians are willing to virtue signal on immigration, but they don’t tend to have to live with the consequences in their own back yard.

I think anyone who arrives by unorthodox routes needs to be contained during processing as we have no idea who they are.

Then we need to speed up the system and not allow multiple appeals.

Definitely agree!

I appreciate that this (hopefully) isnt your point but I would say that I’d be very happy to welcome the women from the countries that you refer to. They are incredibly oppressed in the likes of Afghanistan and I for one would welcome women feeling that!

agree re the other points though! I’d get getting people going all kinds of manual efforts or charity work if they weren’t working

Have a look at what other more successful countries like Australia do. Turn back boats, off shore processing, not allowing them to stay on the mainland etc.