foreveryoung Posted September 7 Share Posted September 7 18 hours ago, LakotaDakota said: According to the governments own figures it is actually around 30% of people claiming asylum that get into the country via small boat. "Small boat arrivals accounted for just under one-third of the total number of people claiming asylum in the UK in the year ending June 2024." Irregular migration to the UK, year ending June 2024 - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk) Also not really sure i would call 1000+ people per week miniscule (1,758 last week, 1,384 this week and similar numbers again prevented) and that is just those that are actually physically confirmed and/or intercepted and escorted over. 38 minutes ago, Follyfoot said: There’s the facts, well researched Love it when facts get in the way of the narrative don't you. Best to just ignore it aye Labour need to stop blaming the Tories and get on with whatever plan they may have, as we are probably looking at 2022 figures for illegal imigrants arriving on small boats this year. Which was around 40k, 20k up from 2023, they might even get the award for most in 1 year. And as nice as its all to think, but they don't all jump in the que for the hotel room, so you can probably add at least 10k to that who disappear into the country. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
limpid Posted September 7 Administrator Share Posted September 7 14 minutes ago, foreveryoung said: Love it when facts get in the way of the narrative don't you. 15 minutes ago, foreveryoung said: And as nice as its all to think, but they don't all jump in the que for the hotel room, so you can probably add at least 10k to that who disappear into the country. What's your source for this figure? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted September 7 Moderator Share Posted September 7 1 hour ago, MakemineVanilla said: What I understand is that most if not all "public" schools, started out as charity schools endowed for the poor but once the nobs got in they took steps to exclude the poor by changing the rules which the poor weren't able to comply with. So it seems likely that that is how the charity status was established. Absolutely untrue. The law changed in 2006 and fee paying schools were only allowed to continue with charitable status if they were non-profit making AND could demonstrate they they served some sort of public good outside of educating the fee paying pupils. This was rather open ended and left to the schools themselves to decide how to do that. By and large that just mean they offered a couple of scholarships and got the pupils to do some sort of engagement with a local charity. It was nonsense then as it is now. The massive tax breaks they get do not outweigh the public good that they do. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
limpid Posted September 7 Administrator Share Posted September 7 1 minute ago, bickster said: It was nonsense then as it is now. The massive tax breaks they get do not outweigh the public good that they do. Like religions then. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted September 7 Moderator Share Posted September 7 1 minute ago, limpid said: Like religions then. Oh yes massively. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted September 7 Moderator Share Posted September 7 7 minutes ago, limpid said: What's your source for this figure? The Home Office. 17,000, not 10,000 Quote Home Office officials have admitted they do not know the whereabouts of more than 17,000 asylum seekers whose claims have been discontinued. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-67567401 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted September 7 Moderator Share Posted September 7 22 minutes ago, foreveryoung said: Labour need to stop blaming the Tories and get on with whatever plan they may have, as we are probably looking at 2022 figures for illegal imigrants arriving on small boats this year. How many days do you think Parliament has actually been sitting since the election at the start of July? Do you know how long it takes for a law to be passed in parliament even if it was in the manifesto? These are just two of the questions you should ask yourself before you start typing that statement. I'll help you out though, the state opening of parliament was on 17th July and it rose for the summer recess on 30th July. It only resumed this week but will rise again at the end of next week for conference season until 7th October. So that’s about 4 weeks in total. That is nowhere near enough time to get bills through parliament with the correct scrutiny. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MakemineVanilla Posted September 7 Share Posted September 7 5 minutes ago, bickster said: It was nonsense then as it is now. The massive tax breaks they get do not outweigh the public good that they do. The advantages of going to a fee-paying school are overwhelmingly clear. Just compare the number of alumni listed for fee-paying schools and compare them with how few state schools have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted September 7 Moderator Share Posted September 7 1 minute ago, MakemineVanilla said: The advantages of going to a fee-paying school are overwhelmingly clear. Just compare the number of alumni listed for fee-paying schools and compare them with how few state schools have. Yes, that’s not exactly the point is it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted September 7 Share Posted September 7 2 hours ago, Xann said: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx28d72948vo There's her objective. I rolled my eyes when I saw this earlier, Tories gonna Tory 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Follyfoot Posted September 7 VT Supporter Share Posted September 7 41 minutes ago, bickster said: How many days do you think Parliament has actually been sitting since the election at the start of July? Do you know how long it takes for a law to be passed in parliament even if it was in the manifesto? These are just two of the questions you should ask yourself before you start typing that statement. I'll help you out though, the state opening of parliament was on 17th July and it rose for the summer recess on 30th July. It only resumed this week but will rise again at the end of next week for conference season until 7th October. So that’s about 4 weeks in total. That is nowhere near enough time to get bills through parliament with the correct scrutiny. Can bills not be fast tracked through in a couple of days? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted September 7 Moderator Share Posted September 7 1 minute ago, Follyfoot said: Can bills not be fast tracked through in a couple of days? What unforeseen circumstance has arisen that would necessitate an emergency legislative timetable? It generally requires approval of the House of Lords where the Government has no natural majority. it requires the commons too but they control that. Democracy generally works slowly and rushing through bills weakens democracy, concentrates power in the hands of the government and puts too much pressure on civil servants to produce information far too quickly. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Follyfoot Posted September 7 VT Supporter Share Posted September 7 1 minute ago, bickster said: What unforeseen circumstance has arisen that would necessitate an emergency legislative timetable? It generally requires approval of the House of Lords where the Government has no natural majority. it requires the commons too but they control that. Democracy generally works slowly and rushing through bills weakens democracy, concentrates power in the hands of the government and puts too much pressure on civil servants to produce information far too quickly. 17,000 officially unaccounted illegals in the country the majority of which will be males aged 18 to 49 seeing as 62% of all people seeking asylum accounted for are in that demographic (highly un likely that there will be many women and children so the percentage will be much higher) To put it in perspective the reserve army of this country is 27,000 people I’m not suggesting that all of these people are involved in nefarious activity, but it’s impossible to say as nobody knows. How are these people going to eat and live without working? If it’s via crime or criminal activity, the prisons are full so what next? To me that would be a reason to get a bill past to try and combat this situation before there are 30/40,000 unaccounted for Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post bickster Posted September 7 Moderator Popular Post Share Posted September 7 41 minutes ago, Follyfoot said: 17,000 officially unaccounted illegals in the country the majority of which will be males aged 18 to 49 seeing as 62% of all people seeking asylum accounted for are in that demographic (highly un likely that there will be many women and children so the percentage will be much higher) To put it in perspective the reserve army of this country is 27,000 people I’m not suggesting that all of these people are involved in nefarious activity, but it’s impossible to say as nobody knows. How are these people going to eat and live without working? If it’s via crime or criminal activity, the prisons are full so what next? To me that would be a reason to get a bill past to try and combat this situation before there are 30/40,000 unaccounted for You want some real perspective not som bullshit emotive crap about army reserves which just isn't relevant? 17,000 people is 0.03% of the population, yes three hundredths of one percent. Next ask yourself why the figure is even that high? The answer to that is because the Tories DELIBERATELY under funded immigration services to create the “crisis” Then ask yourself why the did that? And the answer to that is to create a problem they could use as a campaign tool to get re-elected, an issue that would mask all their other incompetencies. The party of fiscal responsibility managed to spunk over £100 million pounds in forcibly deporting literally zero failed asylum seekers to Rwanda. so if you really want to have a moan about this particular issue, I suggest, quite respectfully you go and moan at a Tory. 5 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted September 7 Moderator Share Posted September 7 47 minutes ago, Follyfoot said: 17,000 officially unaccounted illegals in the country the majority of which will be males aged 18 to 49 seeing as 62% of all people seeking asylum accounted for are in that demographic (highly un likely that there will be many women and children so the percentage will be much higher) To put it in perspective the reserve army of this country is 27,000 people I’m not suggesting that all of these people are involved in nefarious activity, but it’s impossible to say as nobody knows. How are these people going to eat and live without working? If it’s via crime or criminal activity, the prisons are full so what next? To me that would be a reason to get a bill past to try and combat this situation before there are 30/40,000 unaccounted for To me, the opposite. Those 17000 were from 2023. They will have done a runner/been trafficked / fecked off elsewhere because the Home Office was a mess. So to rectify that mess is the urgent most need. It’s taking a year or more to process applications and there’s a massive backlog. It needs to get much, much more efficient, not just to stop people vanishing, but to reduce the costs of all the accomo and stuff. That doesn’t need a new law, it needs a huge overhaul of the processes and attitudes of the home office. Changing the law, whether done quickly or slowly will not fix the problem of people legging it. The pressure of migrants is going to get far greater over the next decades. Billions of people are in war torn, or oppressive regimes or climate change impacted countries, particularly in Africa and the Middle East. Europe is the neighbour to which they will flee 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foreveryoung Posted September 7 Share Posted September 7 23 minutes ago, blandy said: To me, the opposite. Those 17000 were from 2023. They will have done a runner/been trafficked / fecked off elsewhere because the Home Office was a mess. So to rectify that mess is the urgent most need. It’s taking a year or more to process applications and there’s a massive backlog. It needs to get much, much more efficient, not just to stop people vanishing, but to reduce the costs of all the accomo and stuff. That doesn’t need a new law, it needs a huge overhaul of the processes and attitudes of the home office. Changing the law, whether done quickly or slowly will not fix the problem of people legging it. The pressure of migrants is going to get far greater over the next decades. Billions of people are in war torn, or oppressive regimes or climate change impacted countries, particularly in Africa and the Middle East. Europe is the neighbour to which they will flee But we are not talking about migrants, we are talking about illegal immigrants that come over on small boats. Something which is much more difficult to control than genuine migration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Follyfoot Posted September 7 VT Supporter Share Posted September 7 (edited) 59 minutes ago, bickster said: You want some real perspective not som bullshit emotive crap about army reserves which just isn't relevant? 17,000 people is 0.03% of the population, yes three hundredths of one percent. Next ask yourself why the figure is even that high? The answer to that is because the Tories DELIBERATELY under funded immigration services to create the “crisis” Then ask yourself why the did that? And the answer to that is to create a problem they could use as a campaign tool to get re-elected, an issue that would mask all their other incompetencies. The party of fiscal responsibility managed to spunk over £100 million pounds in forcibly deporting literally zero failed asylum seekers to Rwanda. so if you really want to have a moan about this particular issue, I suggest, quite respectfully you go and moan at a Tory. It’s not emotive crap though, is it, if even a small percentage of these people do not share our values and way of life and are planning a spectacular, this is what the security services will be fearing and amazed that it has not been stopped This is the way they will get into the country. It’s not pointing fingers and blame at any political party. The problem needs addressing. Labour are ruling government so it’s in their hands. It’s potentially a modern day Trojan horse Edited September 7 by Follyfoot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foreveryoung Posted September 7 Share Posted September 7 3 minutes ago, Follyfoot said: It’s not emotive crap though, is it, if even a small percentage of these people do not share our values and way of life and are planning a spectacular. This is the way they will get into the country. It’s not pointing fingers and blame at any political party. The problem needs addressing. Labour are ruling government so it’s in their hands. I'm all for 'legal immigration. But I truely cannot believe anyone would think 17000 illegals in our country, probably mostly living off crime, is a small number. The defence of these seafarers is boardline insane! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted September 7 Moderator Share Posted September 7 24 minutes ago, Follyfoot said: It’s not emotive crap though, is it, if even a small percentage of these people do not share our values and way of life and are planning a spectacular, this is what the security services will be fearing and amazed that it has not been stopped This is the way they will get into the country. It’s not pointing fingers and blame at any political party. The problem needs addressing. Labour are ruling government so it’s in their hands. It’s potentially a modern day Trojan horse All that is emotive crap as well 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Follyfoot Posted September 7 VT Supporter Share Posted September 7 (edited) 4 minutes ago, bickster said: All that is emotive crap as well How do you know it is? You don’t know who these people are. You don’t know what they’re planning . You don’t know what they’re doing. The government doesn’t know what they’re doing. The government does not even know who they are but if I was wanting to get into this country to do whatever, I’ll tell you how I would. Join the dots. just because somebody doesn’t have your point of view does not mean it’s crap either. No need to be rude, you could just say “I don’t think you’re right” Not hard to do Edited September 7 by Follyfoot 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts