By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Had the 'pleasure' of listening to Zia Yussuf (remember him? He's the one who originally tried to resign from Reform because they were too racist, but was somehow convinced by Führage to stay...) trying to defend Reform's new immigration policy on R4 this morning.
It's scary how much of their rationale doesn't even stand up to the most basic of scrutiny, but will no doubt be lapped up by their target demographic.
For example, claiming that immediate deportation of illegal immigrants will reduce the burden on the NHS, pensions, and welfare system. My understanding was that, by virtue of their being illegal migrants, they wouldn't even be able to access pensions or the welfare system?
Reform are dangerous - pt. 2,675,823 on 20:32 - Aug 26 by lowhouseblue
i just can't see what your strategy is for avoiding a farage government. truth, honesty, principles and human decency all seem very good reasons for avoiding that outcome. i also think immigration policy needs public consent and an electoral mandate - what we have currently has neither.
Well, that’s a quick switch from insulting to flattery.
I don’t have a strategy to defeat Farage, I have one vote, so I don’t have to have a strategy to beat Farage. But I am allowed to voice an opinion when the chance arises.
However, if I was in charge, I wouldn’t be saying, lads, you know that formation and playing style that has seen us on a losing streak, yeah, against all evidence, let’s keep doing that and hope it works, right let’s get out there….
If I was a strategist, I wouldn’t be forming policy to appease Farage on immigration.
I would promote lots of stories about the contribution asylum seekers have made to the U.K.
If you remember the question time episode when Jack Straw was on with that BNP person, Jack Straw read out some of the names written on his local war memorial.
0
Reform are dangerous - pt. 2,675,823 on 08:03 - Aug 27 with 262 views
Reform are dangerous - pt. 2,675,823 on 21:23 - Aug 26 by eireblue
Well, that’s a quick switch from insulting to flattery.
I don’t have a strategy to defeat Farage, I have one vote, so I don’t have to have a strategy to beat Farage. But I am allowed to voice an opinion when the chance arises.
However, if I was in charge, I wouldn’t be saying, lads, you know that formation and playing style that has seen us on a losing streak, yeah, against all evidence, let’s keep doing that and hope it works, right let’s get out there….
If I was a strategist, I wouldn’t be forming policy to appease Farage on immigration.
I would promote lots of stories about the contribution asylum seekers have made to the U.K.
If you remember the question time episode when Jack Straw was on with that BNP person, Jack Straw read out some of the names written on his local war memorial.
I honestly don't believe that Farage wants to win a general election. He knows that saying "Stop the boats" is his only appeal. If he became PM, he would obviously fail and quickly become irrelevant. No, Nige, like Yaxley Lennon, is happy making money from fear mongering. Listen to him tying himself in knots when confronted properly. It's a shame the MSM see him as an asset.
I mentioned people being misinformed earlier in this thread, and one area where that is the case is the absence of a returns agreement with the EU following Brexit. This has undoubtedly both made the UK a greater draw and hampered our returning people. I imagine few who voted for Brexit are aware of this, and it is clearly not in the interests of people like Farage to highlight this consequence of Brexit.
Here is some analysis of the situation that I came across.
"So this is where the catch-22 becomes apparent. Being outside the Dublin System means that while the UK is no longer required to accept transfers of asylum seekers from EU member states, the EU member states are not required to take asylum seekers from the UK either. But the UK is still bound to consider asylum applications by the UN Refugee Convention. This adds another layer of desirability to the UK as a destination for asylum seekers, on top of the usual ones – its high level of economic development, the English language, colonial ties, family networks, and so on. The UK is a safe and developed state, bound by international law to consider asylum applications, but unable to to transfer applicants back to an EU member state they have entered or transited, as it could do when it was in the Dublin System.
In the absence of the Dublin System and of any replacement readmission agreement with the EU, the UK has very limited ability to send asylum seekers back, which is exactly what makes it a last resort for many of these persons. Some of those attempting the dangerous Channel crossings are desperate to join family members in a context in which the Dublin family reunion is no longer available.
Others have established a connection with the state of first entry, usually by being fingerprinted, but are hoping to apply elsewhere instead. While, for instance, applying in France and hence under the Dublin System, will result in them being sent back to the state of first entry, applying in the UK will now not have the same effect.
Moreover, as L’Auberge Des Migrants, an NGO working on the French coast explains, some of those attempting to cross the Channel have had their applications rejected under the Dublin System and see the UK as a last resort, as it is a country outside this system with no readmission agreement.
This lack of a readmission agreement is one of the legal vacuums that resulted from Brexit. The UK tried to replace some aspects of the Dublin System and tabled some proposals for readmission, but the EU proposals did not include the matter. Instead, the UK announced its intention to go the bilateral route, and to look into individual agreements with the most concerned EU member states.