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?

Legally you cannot return someone who has arrived by small boat and claimed asylum. This is a breach of human rights law. Same as 'push backs' where small boats are denied entry or given fuel for a return journey is illegal.

This sounds terrible. Who among us would want to travel on those terms? It is swapping one oppression for another.

You know there are some loving and supportive Afghan men, right?

I witness so much bullying of brown women and physical attacks on their businesses in my city. Why isolate them from loved ones?

Racist, really?
I suppose you are in favour of subjugation of women, FGM, cousin marriage, ‘honour’ killings, and other backwards practices then?

If being against those makes me a racist then that is why that insult no longer has any power over many of us.

Pathetic.

On students, it is only since 2024 that rules were tightened up on bringing dependents, and the fact is nobody knows how many stay on illegally because nobody is bloody counting!

@FeistyFrankie you need to provide evidence for your assertion.

Dig around in here and see what conclusion you come to:

https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/briefings/student-migration-to-the-uk/

You speak for yourself. You may know others who agree with you but in discussion like this it's not appropriate to be presenting opinion as fact when lots of people feel differently on it. I expect people to feel differently to me but I would never pretend to speak for everyone or present myself as such.

There is already a limited 'one in one out' trial scheme with France so I assume that means it's possible for it to be done legally.

The migrants aren't coming for the fun of it. They come for work and opportunity (and potentially benefits). ID cards and HMRC funded to clamp down on off the books employers would go a long way to help. There are reasons economic migrants go to the UK and dont stay in Germany or France.
Application for refugee status should be via the nearest safe Embassy. No country wants to be Britain's off shore processing hub.

I worked in the asylum system for 6 eye-opening years.

The biggest area of reform are the asylum courts and lawyers.

Lawyers want cases to appeal as they will get twice the pay. Small aspects of evidence is regularly withheld in order for it to be then provided and an appeal based on.

Appeals courts overturn the majority of negative decisions. Appeals clog up the courts so everyone waits too long. That doesn't seem like a system that is working.

Interpreters that work for the lawyers are not professional. I have heard recordered calls with interpreters where the interpreter is adding their own information.

And then when someone gets a negative decision they have all support removed but were rarely detained or deported. Just left to sofa surf or put in a new claim or enter the grey/black economy.

Lastly, most people I worked with worked illegally in some capacity (nail bar/car wash/ deliveroo/ even sex work). If asylum seekers were allowed to work legally many of them would - and pay tax. They do in germany and other countries.

Also brexit needs to be undone. When we could no longer access european data on asylum we lost the ability to see that Mr X had applied and been refused in Germany and should be deported. That was a quick way to deport people who were serial applicants.

But the immigrants providing the care are not necessarily caring and compassionate. They are usually coming from countries where there are no out of work benefits so their choice is either to work or starve.

I think it would be better if we invested in care work, improved wages and conditions and supported Brits to do the work. If you factored in the saving on welfare, it might even be cost effective.

I heard a similar story of a Kiwi who is going home because they can't get sponsors etc despite earning way into the higher rate tax bracket. Very much part of the anglosphere, loves this country, loves our customs and loves our people, yet they're being slung out on their arse. Yet we seem ok to indefinitely support entire families who will never be contributors, and want to silo themselves, or even take an active dislike to our society and have a very different values system.

Completely arse about face.

It wouldn’t reduce trafficking unless you can meet the requirement of everyone who would want to be here and who meets the criteria.

Because doing that rather than going through proper channel s should lead to automatic dentition and femoval

I don’t know what the answer is but I wish I could talk openly about how hard some types of immigration can be to live with.
I live in a poor diverse area, it’s always been this way and mostly hasn’t been a problem. Some communities settled in the area a long time ago and integrated well.
We have more recent high immigration in the area that I assume is economic migration? They seem to hate the country but are perhaps just here to make money and send it home? Obviously this wouldn’t be a problem if they didn’t engage in such anti social behaviour. Issues include drinking in the streets, setting off fireworks in the streets, blocking resident drives and generally not following parking regulations. Having loud parties, littering and fly tipping. Combined with the fact that they rent and don’t care about the property it can make for a miserable neighbourhood. Although I am fully aware that bad landlords don’t help either.

I know that people will say that anyone can display this behaviour and that is true. However when you try and talk to them about it and they don’t speak English it is so hard to resolve any problems. I just feel like I am living in a hostile environment next to people who don’t care about the area and aren’t invested in it. My long term neighbours who are all from different ethnic backgrounds feel the same.

If I ever voice these opinions I am just viewed as racist.

I would focus enforcement on employers who hire people without authorization to work. The employers don’t have any incentive to take risk beyond profit. People will be less likely to enter or stay illegally if they can’t find work.

for people trying to do things properly, streamline the process. I’ve known people who did everything right and had highly paid corporately sponsored immigration attorneys working on their behalf lose their legal status because of delays that were in no way their fault. They did every renewal as soon as possible and every form was filled out perfectly, but their packet just sat in the bottom of a pile past their expiration date.

There are also significant challenges for women who travel with men to integrate. They are also more vulnerable to domestic abuse, find access to services less accessible and are more at risk of being siphoned into exploitation and trafficking.

Of course that's not going to apply to all asylum seeking women and of course there will be many men who are fabulous, caring husbands. But there are specific vulnerabilities that apply to asylum seeking women that are more complex.

I didn't say that other pathways shouldn't be available, just that some women centric pathways should be available. It's much harder for women to safely travel, there are flaws with the family reunification process and its lengthy. Plus we know for some women they're at significant risk in their native country while waiting for reunification which is a time limited process. I work with women seeking asylum and all of them at some point have experienced very significant abuse and trauma along the way because they needed to leave but had no safe way to do so. This also happens to many men, but it's noticibly worse/ more common for women. So I do think there's a need there. The current system means separating them anyway as young men often travel first due to these very risks. The young women who I work with who have travelled alone have benefitted from making support networks quickly because as you say, it's difficult for them. Many are also highly motivated for education and training because they weren't previously able to access that in their home countries so I think it's right to take as many barriers away from them making those connections as possible. It also opens safer passage for women and children who maybe don't have a male relative fit to accompany them or go ahead without them.

The point of promoting integration at point of arrival is more about supporting women to get on their feet and have support which gives security than just being here in a hostile system on benefits. We know that doesn't work for people and is usually very detrimental for mental health. All of the asylum seekers I work with are incredibly frustrated that they can't work and we know there are issues with siloed social networks.

YOU don't want them. I think that any country that wants to think of itself as civilised should welcome and support refugees.

Look at the result, protect our women.

Really helpful insight. Thank you.

I'd make it safer and easier, that's what I'd do.

All welcome, it's a free world. Borders are imaginary lines 🤗

I think this is an interesting thread and one thing it shows is that there are no easy answers.

Neither the Tories nor Labour have been able to easily solve this issue, and Reform won't be able to either.

Not that we shouldn't try to think of innovative solutions. But Reform and their supporters seem to think just shouting "Stop the boats" will solve the issue, when it won't.

As caused by Brexit.

There is no credible evidence the refugees are more of a threat to women than British men, and a HUGE amount to evidence to show that refugees are victims of crime far more than perpetrators.

Lorries were pre Brexit. 2002 was particularly high.

I'm not being funny but care work is hard work. I know i personally couldn't do it.

I agree we need to look at overall wage rises in the UK in line with COL but most people on benefits who don't work at all are on benefits due to long term illness/disability which isn't going to change or be suitable for the likes of care work, or they have much more complex needs going on in the background. There are plenty of services out there to get local people into employment and off benefits or reduced benefits but it's highly complex in most cases. If it was an easy solve it would have been done already.

I do not approve of replacing Bad sex segregation by the Taliban with Good sex segregation by the Brits.

Brown men are demonised and brown women are patronised.

Maybe more British men will get Afghan wives, sex workers, or cleaners if the men do not come?

Please, have some respect.

Boys may be gay, autistic, proto feminist allies, or all sorts. They deserve to travel with their mums.

The whole thing has become a racket. I think the East European countries like Poland have got the measure of this. They don't accept asylum seekers or very very few, apart from temporary refuge to Ukrainians.

We could support people through our foreign aid budget to work to improve their own countries. The current system doesn't help anyone, apart from lawyers, criminals and employers who want a bottomless pit of cheap labour.