Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Politics
Original poster

LibDem's amnesty on illegal immigrants

56 replies

CurlyhairedAssassin · 29/04/2010 22:45

I might be being a bit dim here so perhaps someone can enlighten me, but how on earth would the LibDems identify those illegal immigrants who have been here 10 years? If they're here illegally what proof would they have to show they've been here that long?

OP posts:
SpeedyGonzalez · 29/04/2010 23:43

Curly - I was wondering the same thing. In principle I think it's a better idea than burying one's head in the sand about the whole issue - all politicians know that these people are here. There is an organisation whose name I've forgotten, who have been campaigning for this amnesty for some years now...I'm sure someone, somewhere has an idea of how to prove their status.

WebDude · 30/04/2010 13:14

Proof from rent books, or visiting a doctor, or having children in school, perhaps?

After all, the eligible ones are also expected to have learned English so odds are that they would have probably tried getting work early on, too.

Alternatively, it could be a cynical "We'll have an amnesty but raise the bar very high" so as to offer it but also cut numbers...

crystal123 · 30/04/2010 14:25

CULYHAIREDASSASSIN LOL This policy is bonkers, where do I start? How can you find out if they have criminial records are they going to tell you? Spains' had 25 amnesties and it never worked for them, illegal immigration grew after every amnesty, each time. Even if each illegal person brought only 3 dependants with them it makes another 4 million people added to the population! This country is skint,broke, not taking into acccount other factors, we just can't afford it, and the policy is very unpopular and will never gain growth , particularly with mass immigraton on every politicians lips.

vesela · 30/04/2010 14:30

crystal, this would be a ONE-OFF amnesty to bring them out of the black economy. It wouldn't be repeated - no question of having 25 of them!

crystal123 · 30/04/2010 14:36

VESELA" how do you know that? Can we really take another 3 or 4 million into a country that is as broke as ours. I would not believe any politician when he states it's a one off, amnesties don't work, and that is why CLegg is the only politician pushing for one, as stated, it would be highly unpopular.

vesela · 30/04/2010 14:43

Because it doesn't make sense to have more than one - that's the whole point. You have an amnesty to get those who've been here for 10 years out of the black economy, and then you make sure the controls are more effective and that your policies are geared to making sure you're not going to need one again. There's no point in having amnesty after amnesty without making your immigration controls more effective - that would be silly.

and Boris Johnson has also suggested one.

crystal123 · 30/04/2010 15:19

Anyone can suggesst an amnesty, but shouldn't the British people decide if we have one? Roll on.....referendums for the people!

onagar · 30/04/2010 15:43

An amnesty only makes sense if you really do put a stop to new illegal immigrants. If you just do the first part it makes matters worse.

People seem to just stroll in now after several claims that things have been tightened up. How about they tighten them up first and then discuss the amnesty.

I'm not even sure how I'd make immigration controls more effective if it were up to me. Maybe a policy that illegal means you go back no matter how good your case is? That your excuses won't even be listened to if you come in illegally. If you have the amnesty it could just give hope that there will be another and so encourage more illegals.

WebDude · 30/04/2010 18:31

oagar - One problem is that the counting of people leaving was scrapped (definitely not caused by the Lib Dems) some years ago, which means we have lost track of those (mainly Australian) people who have stayed on after they should.

Probably much less "bother" from authorities if (a) you are white and (b) speak English and (c) have a job. Getting into a job easier in some areas if you speak English, I'd expect, so some people can blend in more easily or be "lost in the crowd" in big cities.

As for "can we take them" crystal - it's not as if the idea would be to accept even more people but to take account of a portion of the people here already.

'Regularising' their status would bring money into the tax system, and break some of the gangmaster problems, as well as reducing blackmail or poor wages simply under threat of "you'll be reported to immigration".

(PS Nick Griffin was corrected on radio as their manifesto has a claim of UK being the most crowded in Europe was incorrect.)

onagar · 30/04/2010 19:34

I would definitely like to put a stop to gangmaster/intimidation/blackmail problems. I don't like that kind of thing going on at all.

Having said that. It's a bit like making sure that the burglar who broke in and is still hiding in your cellar is getting enough to eat. They shouldn't be here and wouldn't be in that situation if they hadn't broken our laws to get here. Not a good start if they wanted to be members of our society.

vesela · 30/04/2010 19:35

so what would you do about them?

vesela · 30/04/2010 19:39

As I see it, there are three options:

  1. Have them stay on in the black economy

  2. Give them an amnesty (I would actually make it sooner than 10 years if it were me)

  3. Deport them.

StrictlyKatty · 30/04/2010 19:41

I can't believe anyone would seriously consider rewarding people for managing to evade the law for a decade! It's not a good thing, you shouldn't get a prize.

What message does it send? Anyone who thinks it would be a one off is really a fool. Once the numbers built up again it would be repeated... and then repeated.

It is without doubt, the single WORST policy I have ever heard.

vesela · 30/04/2010 19:42

So you'd deport them?

vesela · 30/04/2010 19:43

It wouldn't be repeated. It's a ONE-OFF (wonders if Sophable has flat head from banging her head against wall over this yesterday).

StrictlyKatty · 30/04/2010 19:44

Onegar you are right. It's not a good start. Imo if you have a good case you have no need to be illegal which means the people are illegal would most likely be those we wouldn't want anyway!

StrictlyKatty · 30/04/2010 19:46

HOW DO WE KNOW IT'S A ONE OFF?! How can we ever believe that it 20 years it won't be a 2 off????

And yes I would deport them. Anyone here illegally. No chance.

Ewe · 30/04/2010 19:46

You can't deport them as you don't know where they are! That isn't one of the options we have here.

The options are to have an amnesty and bring them into tax/employment system.

Other option is keep them hiding, working illegally and contributing nothing to country.

I prefer first option followed by immigration reform.

StrictlyKatty · 30/04/2010 19:49

I prefer the option where the government makes a bit more effort to find them, and then deports them!

StrictlyKatty · 30/04/2010 19:50

This is why I want ID cards... if you haven't got a card you shouldn't be here. Easy way to find and deport them.

vesela · 30/04/2010 19:52

Because there's no point having several amnesties. You have one and then change the system at the same time, as Ewe says.

StrictlyKatty · 30/04/2010 19:57

Or.... we change the system now without rewarding a million plus criminals. Heaven forbid right.

WebDude · 30/04/2010 20:18

I can see we are diametrically opposed if ID cards get your OK, StrictlyKatty. Out of interest, were you aware that the Labour party claimed there would be no "compulsory ID card" which makes the "no card, get out" plan fail.

Out of interest, who would pay for homeless people to have ID cards? If they would be issued free, why not for people with low incomes, too? Just something which had been bugging me, as someone who is required to buy a damn Passport to be able to get my Credit Reference Agency report, because I have no driving licence (don't drive) and was initially told by a pensions firm that they would not accept a change of address without photo ID. Too Big Brother for me already!

Of course, the problem started in the late 90s when the exit count was abandoned, as it meant there was no monitoring of who had exceeded their stay in the UK. Wonder which party did it?

StrictlyKatty · 30/04/2010 20:58

Well yes I would prefer the ID cards be made compulsary as they are in Germany and Malta to name a couple.

BertieBotts · 30/04/2010 21:06

These are people you are talking about