Immigrant / Freedom of movement What do we actually mean?

[bkgirl]

I voted leave and am against free movement. It seems apparent that most people think some sort of controls are necessary.
I guess it's like having a party - you can invite a certain amount but if it is open house, well it's gonna end up a disaster for everyone.
By the same token, who am I inviting? Yep, I would like lots of different people at my party but I also don't want them fighting. People should get along for the party to be a success.
So surely controls and balances are appropriate? It's not about limiting immigration (which can be very positive) to silly numbers but setting it at levels we can cope with and it will maintain tolerance between the groups.Every group should feel safe here that requires one group doesn't dominate another.It also requires that everyone conforms to our laws. I don't know what that figure is? No doubt ukip's numbers are too small but what is the right figure?
By maintaining a tolerant society, the extreme right wing will lose their energy/power.
Maybe some remainers would see the sense in this? Or do you still feel the freedom of movement makes sense? (Forget about what the EU wants, just think about what YOU want for here).

There was a documentary recently about how Australia enforces their immigration policy (should be required viewing for any Brit keen to bail out of the racist UK and use their skills to get into their preferred location - goody for them!)
the 'boat people' who have attempted to get into Australia are incarcerated on an island in what amounts to prisons and live in limbo.

But of course Australia is not 'racist' and will be a wonderful home for those who find the UK racist because we want to control 'free movement' of EU nationals (not genuine refugees). The hypocrisy is amazing.

One issue amongst the immigrant population near me is one that I'd like to see better addressed. I live near a very "deprived" town with a high immigrant population, and an overwhelming majority of the English residents voted Leave. It is an area associated with high crime rates and has a reputation as being full of non-working immigrants.

In reality, several articles have been published in the last year, highlighting the amount of human trafficking and slavery in the local area. Gang masters have lured people over with the promise of work (far less than is available for the number they bring in) and confiscate passports on arrival. They rent from unscrupulous landlords, and pile them in, 10 to a room, charging them for lodging. They provide transport (for a fee) out to work sites, where "Sorry, We can only take half of you guys today. BTW, you still owe for the transport and accommodation- so now you're in debt to us."

Since they have no wish to go back to the cramped house, you can see some of them hanging around the local parks during the day.

They can try to work off their debts, but it often involves illegal activities. Sham marriages to people outside the EU. Prostitution. Drug sales.

And since the local English population resents them, where can they go for help?

I don't want them out, but I would like more resources for people who fall victim to trafficking and harsher penalties for the people exploit them.

The punishment of traficking is a national issue not an EU one. If you think it will stop outside of the EU you have another thing coming.

Sorry I didn't mean trafficking would stop by leaving!

I think the result has just made it that much harder to support victims because they feel like everyone is against them.

The punishment of traficking is a national issue not an EU one. If you think it will stop outside of the EU you have another thing coming.

It's not about 'having another thing coming'. We should be able to have a sensible discussion about the pros and cons of immigration for different motivations without aggression and judgement.

And if the victims are EU nationals then perhaps it will have an impact.

I'm quite happy to have a discussions about the pros and cons of immigratio, I'm not happy to conflate human trafficking with EU immigration.

Far from being goady (and I apologise if that's how I come across), I appreciate it when people contradict me after I've posted something.
Being contradicted means one of two things: either I'm learning something new because the poster has told me something I'd not thought of before and I need to check it out (which is good) or I have more arguments that I need to put forward so that I'm understood. It's a mixture of both for everyone I think, and that's how we 'go forward'.

When I think of immigration I always bear in mind what I would like if I was on the other side of the fence, ie a woman from a country that's not bad enough to give me a refugee status, but not good enough to offer me a decent enough future.
As others have said, I don't think it's fair to turn our back on migrants. Some people do advocate Open Borders. need to read up to see how realistic it is of not, I'm ready to accept it isn't if it isn't.
But I truly believe that nation states don't necessarily help themselves in the long term if they are apparently indifferent to the suffering of others. As we have seen, people can get quite desperate when they don't feel anyone listens to them.

I feel people are unrealistic about immigration. There are 3 billion people in China. At the moment most do not have passports. There are 1.3 billion in India. If I was living on the pavement in an Indian city, living hand to mouth and I thought there might be a better life for my DCs with my distant relatives in the UK I would definitely go.

Why not?

It is a global issue. I dont' know the answer but the EU seems to have a policy of 'not my problem let them drown' which is pretty appalling imo.
There are quotas of Syrian refugees which EU countries have agreed to accept but so far haven't implemented. Shameful really.

Funnily birth control has never been mentioned in all of this. It seems a no brainer for countries which can't afford to provide a decent standard of living for its citizens.

Donald Trump says build a wall - well at least he has a policy idea. No one else has.

I liked Deborah Orr's suggestion in the Guardian that instead of full-scale Leave, we could have negotiated a deal where the

1. EU would have contributed to public service costs where immigration put too much strain on the system, and
2. they would also intervene in places where people are emigrating from to give them an opportunity to stay and make a better life there.

I am with MaidofStars on this one, it is not really my party.

I'm not happy to conflate human trafficking with EU immigration

So are you saying it never happens from the poorer parts of Europe, girls come over believing they have a job and it happens to be in a brothel that they then cant get out of?

I'm not saying that.

But I'm saying that would happen anyway.

Quite possibly but open borders would surely make it easier..?

We dont have open borders, not in Schengen.

The US doesn't have either and they have people trafficking,

We do have open borders across the vast majority of Europe. Then a quick flash of a Romanian passport gets you into the UK. Similarly there is not passport control within the US. I said this makes it easier and it does.

Romania doesn't have Schengen.

there may be some human trafficking in the EU from EU countries, but its very small.