Labour to Permit 100,000 Migrants to Apply for Asylum

[Nick Carter icp]

6 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The Tories had an unassailable majority in parliament.

 

Labour pointing out flaws in the Tory bills in parliament (which is what the Opposition are supposed to do) did not hinder the Tories recklessly passing laws that would, as Labour pointed out, get tossed by the courts. 
 

Quit gaslighting, Labour did not create the problem, it was the Tories who failed - despite an unassailable majority in parliament.

 

   Concentrate  are on sorting the problem out rather than pointing fingers at others .

Looks like it will be a sunny day today , more boats could sail across 

[Chomper Higgot]

4 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

   Concentrate  are on sorting the problem out rather than pointing fingers at others .

Looks like it will be a sunny day today , more boats could sail across 

You obviously missed this:

 

10 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Correct, its a problem created by the Tories that Labour now need to sort out.

 

And they are on it.

 

[Yellowtail]

2 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

You obviously missed this:

 

 

Yes, that have to keep that border open. Nothing drives an economy more workers/consumers! 

[Nick Carter icp]

5 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

You obviously missed this:

 

 

 

I seem to recall that I replied to that stating the recent huge influx in arrivals of boat people .

   I did reply to that post of yours, so quite obviously I didn't miss it 

[James105]

48 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

How about we wait to see how Labour perform before whining?

 

Labour are not ‘encouraging illegal immigration’, they are (and this has been said before) dealing with the problem they inherited from the Tories.

 

What are they doing to deter illegal migration?  4 people lost their lives yesterday.   What are Labour going to do to prevent this happening again?  

 

The Tories are yesterdays news and it's time for you to move on as there is a new government now.  There is no point to the constant bleating about how it is the Tories fault as they can do nothing to fix it now.   Labour can... if they have the will to do so.      

[Chomper Higgot]

7 minutes ago, James105 said:

 

What are they doing to deter illegal migration?  4 people lost their lives yesterday.   What are Labour going to do to prevent this happening again?  

 

The Tories are yesterdays news and it's time for you to move on as there is a new government now.  There is no point to the constant bleating about how it is the Tories fault as they can do nothing to fix it now.   Labour can... if they have the will to do so.      

 

How about we wait and see.

 

And watch to see if what they do is effective.

And yes I understand why you want to forget who’s fault it is .

 

 

 

Edited July 13 by Chomper Higgot

[Yellowtail]

7 minutes ago, James105 said:

 

What are they doing to deter illegal migration?  4 people lost their lives yesterday.   What are Labour going to do to prevent this happening again?  

 

The Tories are yesterdays news and it's time for you to move on as there is a new government now.  There is no point to the constant bleating about how it is the Tories fault as they can do nothing to fix it now.   Labour can... if they have the will to do so.      

All they have to do to stop illegal migration is to legalize/normalize it. That's what the Biden administration is doing in the US. 

[stoner]

On 7/10/2024 at 6:52 AM, Chomper Higgot said:

On 7/10/2024 at 6:49 AM, Nick Carter icp said:

 

   You link 

 

   I did use Thailand as an example, although the home owners could be living anywhere else .

   I did get my info from the link that you provided in regards to what an empty home i , rather rich that now you suggest that I just dreamt it up 

Expand  

You did, you dreamt up this idea that someone would come on holiday to Thailand and return to find an Albanian living I their house.

 

Utter emotive nonsense.

 

are you sure about that ? another well informed comment. 

 

 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0xQJjm4mmo

[Chomper Higgot]

1 hour ago, stoner said:

 

are you sure about that ? another well informed comment. 

 

 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0xQJjm4mmo

I don’t bother with videos.

 

But judging by the Station Logos  I’m assuming these videos have absolutely nothing to do with the UK.

 

 

Edited July 13 by Chomper Higgot

[stoner]

30 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I don’t bother with videos.

 

But judging by the Station Logos  I’m assuming these videos have absolutely nothing to do with the UK.

 

 

Correct. They do however show multiple times where someone has gone in vacay only to have someone come and squat. Refuting your claim that it doesn't happen bla bla bla bla.

 

Now you will reply with a typical what about when most here will understand the correlation. You however will come up with some gotcha question. Yawn. 

[Chomper Higgot]

22 minutes ago, stoner said:

Correct. They do however show multiple times where someone has gone in vacay only to have someone come and squat. Refuting your claim that it doesn't happen bla bla bla bla.

 

Now you will reply with a typical what about when most here will understand the correlation. You however will come up with some gotcha question. Yawn. 

 No, just point out you’re ripped videos are absolutely nothing to do with the UK.

[stoner]

3 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

 No, just point out you’re ripped videos are absolutely nothing to do with the UK.

 

please re read comment above. any further questions or inquiries you can go ahead and read comment above. 

[Pickwick]

3 hours ago, Nick Carter icp said:

Labour inherited  the problem that they created by them opposing the Government attempts to address the issue 

 

So, Labour are to blame for everything now because they are in government. Labour are also to blame for everything before because they were in opposition. They also had the temerity to oppose things when in opposition.

 

If there were an emoji for Mr Magoo I'd be tempted to use it, though such myopic posts make Mr Magoo seem like the poster boy for 20/20 vision. 

[Nick Carter icp]

3 minutes ago, Pickwick said:

 

So, Labour are to blame for everything now because they are in government. Labour are also to blame for everything before because they were in opposition. They also had the temerity to oppose things when in opposition.

 

If there were an emoji for Mr Magoo I'd be tempted to use it, though such myopic posts make Mr Magoo seem like the poster boy for 20/20 vision. 

 

   Can you stop having personal digs at me , you seem to have a constant personal dig in every reply .

  If you are looking for  fight, look elsewhere  as I am not interested 

[Pickwick]

3 hours ago, James105 said:

What are Labour going to do to prevent this happening again?  

 

Four people died off the coast of France, in French waters - what did you expect the Labour government to do? Starmer resides in number 10, not the Elysee.

 

3 hours ago, James105 said:

The Tories are yesterdays news and it's time for you to move on as there is a new government now.  There is no point to the constant bleating about how it is the Tories fault as they can do nothing to fix it now

 

The constant bleating started - and continued - in this thread with unreasonable, incorrect and unashamedly biased rants against the new Labour government. That you try and twist that the other way is a lazy debating technique and one which is easy to see through.

 

[Nick Carter icp]

6 minutes ago, Pickwick said:

 

So, Labour are to blame for everything now because they are in government.

 

No, I didn't say that they were to blame for everything 

 

6 minutes ago, Pickwick said:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Labour are also to blame for everything before because they were in opposition.

 

 

   Nope, I didn't say that either 

6 minutes ago, Pickwick said:

 

 

 

 

 

They also had the temerity to oppose things when in opposition.

 

 

 

   Labour did indeed oppose measures taken to try to reduce the numbers of illegal immigrants  , now that problem is up to them to solve 

[Pickwick]

Just now, Nick Carter icp said:

 

   Can you stop having personal digs at me , you seem to have a constant personal dig in every reply .

  If you are looking for  fight, look elsewhere  as I am not interested 

 

I do not have personal digs at you. Scroll back and you will see the first 'personal dig' was when you called me a liar. You will notice I ignored that (other posters didn't).

 

I am replying to your posts and disagreeing with you where I see fit, that is the point of the forum. When I see what I believe to be biased misinformation that is presented as fact I will respond. I have been responding to several posters, over 13 pages of this thread. You seem to have a problem with me because I have pointed out the inaccuracies of your links etc.

 

For the avoidance of doubt: I am not looking for a fight but I will continue to debate the points - which I assume you are actually ok with because as I write this you have quoted and responded to my last post.

[Pickwick]

4 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

No, I didn't say that they were to blame for everything 

4 hours ago, Nick Carter icp said:

Labour inherited  the problem that they created by them opposing the Government attempts to address the issue 

 

I read your quote above as blaming Labour for all of the problems, and if I am being sincere it still reads that way. If you are telling me that you do not blame Labour for everything then I'll take your word for it.

9 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

now that problem is up to them to solve 

 

This, I agree with. Unfortunately, many seem to think this complex and difficult problem should have been solved in a week. As I have posted several times I think that is unrealistic and unfair.

 

 

 

 

[Nick Carter icp]

20 minutes ago, Pickwick said:

 

I do not have personal digs at you. Scroll back and you will see the first 'personal dig' was when you called me a liar. 

 

   That isn't true, I didn't call you a liar 

[GammaGlobulin]

In fact:  Increasing migration of humans trying to escape desertification and increasing heat, increasing water stress, and famine due to crop failure, will only continue to increase, and this is utterly unstoppable.

 

Don't think that the US Army has not been gaming contingency measures to fend off the hoard of intruders that is sure to come during the near future.

This is a Known Known, as Rummy told us!

 

What I worry about most, being the true Anglophile that I have always been, is what will happen to the British Culture in light of this unstoppable onslaught from the south?

 

Of course, it is not considered politically correct to call a spade a spade.  However, the US Army has never been accused of being PC.

The US Army's mission is to protect the United States, at all costs.

And, rampant and increasing migration from the south, due to Global Warming, is happening already, and has always been considered inevitable.

 

It's time to get tough.

 

There is NO WAY that the UK can absorb all those that want to be admitted, just to enjoy things like old Hitchcock Movies.

And, all this sudden migration hitting British shores will be far worse than the film, The Birds.

 

Very soon, most countries will arrive at the best FINAL SOLUTION to this challenge.

What this solution might be, one should try to ask the US Army, for one.

Surely, this issue is being discussed at the highest levels of government in the US and the USA.

 

We are brothers, the Brits and the Yanks!

 

We need to raise the drawbridge....

NOW!

 

 

 

[Regyai]

Unless the new government has the collective spine to withdraw from the ECHR then all the posturing and plans are just more of the same empty noise as they remain as powerless as their predecessors.

[Pickwick]

1 hour ago, stoner said:

Correct. They do however show multiple times where someone has gone in vacay only to have someone come and squat. Refuting your claim that it doesn't happen bla bla bla bla.

 

I am not sure if you are being pedantic or just have an axe to grind with the quoted poster, but I am not sure I understand the point about the USA - it is not a challenge, I am being sincere.

 

The odds of finding an Albanian asylum seeker turned squatter in your house is, I think, remote at best - hence my confusion. It wouldn't make sense for an Albanian asylum seeker to lock himself in an immovable property knowing that the police would be called. There is a system to remove squatters, Interim Possession Orders etc. which can lead to forcible removal within 24 hours of notice. The penalty being prison of up to 6 months and a fine of £5000.

 

I do believe it is not the same for non-residential buildings, which might have caused the issue for the Gordon Ramsay pub situation (I have no idea if that was squatters or a protest at a celebrity etc. but shows there is the potential for squatting problems to some extent I suppose.)

[Pickwick]

10 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

That isn't true, I didn't call you a liar 

15 hours ago, Nick Carter icp said:

you are either lying or you didn't read the link .

 

15 hours ago, Nick Carter icp said:

You are Keir do like to give false out of date info

 

I also don't know if you are being pedantic or not. In your middle quote I already said I had read the link so you suggest I am lying. In the bottom link it seems from the context you mean to write 'You and Keir do like to give out false info'.

 

If I am giving out false info or lying, I am naturally a liar. 

 

If you are saying that is not what you meant then I'll accept it, I'd rather not distract from the points anyway.

[Nick Carter icp]

1 minute ago, Pickwick said:

 

I am not sure if you are being pedantic or just have an axe to grind with the quoted poster, but I am not sure I understand the point about the USA - it is not a challenge, I am being sincere.

 

The odds of finding an Albanian asylum seeker turned squatter in your house is, I think, remote at best - hence my confusion. It wouldn't make sense for an Albanian asylum seeker to lock himself in an immovable property knowing that the police would be called. There is a system to remove squatters, Interim Possession Orders etc. which can lead to forcible removal within 24 hours of notice. The penalty being prison of up to 6 months and a fine of £5000.

 

I do believe it is not the same for non-residential buildings, which might have caused the issue for the Gordon Ramsay pub situation (I have no idea if that was squatters or a protest at a celebrity etc. but shows there is the potential for squatting problems to some extent I suppose.)

 

   The suggestion was to put the 100 000 Asylum seekers in the U,Ks empty houses .

   An empty house in the UK is recognised as a house with the owner living elsewhere , so if a home owner went to live in Thailand for six months then his house would be regarded as being an empty house.

   So the suggestion was to house the 100 000 asylum seekers in the UKs empty houses, which would include those houses whose owners live in Thailand (and other Countries)  

[Pickwick]

13 minutes ago, Regyai said:

Unless the new government has the collective spine to withdraw from the ECHR then all the posturing and plans are just more of the same empty noise as they remain as powerless as their predecessors.

 

Leaving the ECHR would probably cause the UK more harm than good and most likely not stop the boats. That's my opinion only, though below is a c+p of one of my previous replies which states why it is fraught with danger. If you disagree with those points fair enough but I'd appreciate to know why - again it is not a challenge but genuine curiosity. My previous post:

 

There has been much noise about leaving the European Convention on Human Rights, but that is a complex issue and not at all straightforward.

 

The Human Rights Act would need to be repealed and UK citizens would lose a whole host of protections for themselves - the right to life, the right to liberty, the right to a fair trial etc (as would potential investors in the country). We would have to join Russia and Belarus as the only European countries barred from the Council of Europe. Our trade agreement with the EU would be gone, and our international standing would be reduced. It would contravene the Good Friday Agreement and our relationship with Ireland and the US would deteriorate.

 

It would also most likely not stop the boats. The UK is bound by other acts and conventions, such as the UN Refugee Convention etc. and refoulement is also not permitted under domestic UK law, so the UK couldn't just send people back to countries willy-nilly. I suppose we would have removed the right to life...

[Pickwick]

4 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

so if a home owner went to live in Thailand for six months then his house would be regarded as being an empty house.

 

I missed this suggestion, sorry - I thought it was about squatters (as in the video links). I won't comment further on this as I have obviously missed some of the thread at some point.

[Nick Carter icp]

2 minutes ago, Pickwick said:

 

 

I also don't know if you are being pedantic or not. In your middle quote I already said I had read the link so you suggest I am lying.

 

   OK, so you read the link where the Government stated that there was no cap on the amount of Asylum seekers that could be sent to Rwanda .

   The UK Government stated they would be able to process an uncapped amount , you read that and then went on to post the untrue claim that the amount of people it would be able to process would be 200 per year .

   As you read the link , you wrote something that was untrue and you also knew that it was untrue when you wrote it . 

[Pickwick]

14 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

The UK Government stated they would be able to process an uncapped amount , you read that and then went on to post the untrue claim that the amount of people it would be able to process would be 200 per year .

 

You are writing as if your link with a vague and unsubstantiated claim is fact. I responded stating there's a myriad of sources on both the left and the right stating that the processing limit Rwanda has is 200 persons per year - sometimes written as 1000 over 5 years. I then quoted the then Conservative Deputy Prime Minister Dominic Raab, who admitted the numbers would be - quote - 'in the hundreds, not thousands'. On top of that I quoted a Home Office paper that admitted the cost per person would be more, with a further payment of £120,000,000 due in two years when 300 claimants had been processed.

 

On top of that, you posted a link which showed the UK government could not be trusted on its claims about numbers of asylum seekers (as evidenced in a letter by the Home Office itself).

 

Your assertion is as risible as it is disingenuous. 

Edited July 13 by Pickwick
typo

[Nick Carter icp]

30 minutes ago, Pickwick said:

 

You are writing as if your link with a vague and unsubstantiated claim is fact. I responded stating there's a myriad of sources on both the left and the right stating that the processing limit Rwanda has is 200 persons per year - sometimes written as 1000 over 5 years. I then quoted the then Conservative Deputy Prime Minister Dominic Raab, who admitted the numbers would be - quote - 'in the hundreds, not thousands'. On top of that I quoted a Home Office paper that admitted the cost per person would be more, with a further payment of £120,000,000 due in two years when 300 claimants had been processed.

 

On top of that, you posted a link which showed the UK government could not be trusted on its claims about numbers of asylum seekers (as evidenced in a letter by the Home Office itself).

 

Your assertion is as risible as it is disingenuous. 

 

   OK, so it wasn't you that was lying when you claimed that Rwanda could only process 200 Asylum seekers per year , it was the UK Government who were lying when  they stated the amount of Asylum seekers per year would be uncapped 

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/rwanda-bill-to-become-law-in-major-illegal-migration-milestone#:~:text=UK government efforts to stop,Parliament overnight%2C Monday 22 April.

 

   Independent  fact checkers also checked the claims and they agreed with the Government that the amount of Asylum seekers per year would be uncapped . 

 

   So, they were both lying and you were telling the truth ?

 

 

https://fullfact.org/news/keir-starmer-rwanda-capacity/

 

[josephbloggs]

5 hours ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

   Tories tried many different things to deal with illegal immigration , all those efforts were met with opposition from Labour , legal action and not voting measure through .

   Labour did their upmost to block everything and when it all failed............................they blamed the Tories for failing 🙂

   Similar things happen frequently .

Labour inherited  the problem that they created by them opposing the Government attempts to address the issue 

Do you understand what a majority is?