Lords lay into the governments illegal migration bill

It would be aiding and abetting entry into the UK in breach of immigration controls, such entry being a criminal act under the Bill. Same as aiding and abetting any other criminal offence. Money doesn’t have to change hands.

Rwanda was invented - Braverman said - to deter people from using the gangs. So she could cut Rwanda out as well. Use the millions to dealing with the asylum seekers in an efficient and humane manner

Win, win

I read that the government will improve safe routes for genuine asylum seekers. I haven’t seen how.

Whitewavemark2

What would happen if someone with a boat toddled across to give the asylum seekers a lift. That would cut out these evil gangs that the Tories say is the real problem.

Good point! So many profess to only be concerned about the exploitation by the people traffickers, in fact our own Home Secretary has said that 'stopping the boats' and the traffickers is her only motive, so, if a flotilla of volunteers went across to Calais and loaded the desperate people onto safe vessels, at no charge..........hmmm.

Before the predictable comments, please be advised that this is a hypothetical question. I do not own a boat

What would happen if someone with a boat toddled across to give the asylum seekers a lift. That would cut out these evil gangs that the Tories say is the real problem.

Germanshepherdsmum

Unworkable? Why? Have you read it?

😄

Unworkable? Why? Have you read it?

In my opinion this Illegal Migration Bill is a sign of the Government's desperation. It's populist and brings shame on this country. I also believe it's unworkable. I could easily be read as Illegal Bill of Migration.

Glad to see immigrants are welcome in Scotland but there’s still a housing crisis to fix. Not much of a welcome without housing.

Oreo

paddyann54

For "British" read English FleurpepperScottish values are very different .WE need immigration, people are welcome here and its rare to hear the bigotted hate rhetoric that we hear on the right wing ENGLISH media .

Plenty of bigoted hate rhetoric at a Celtic/Rangers match!

And that's on old Religious lines like the DUP versus Sein Fein.
It shows how many still live in the past when it comes to certain areas of their life.

Casdon

This debate could go on for ever growstuff, and it’s a pointless debate as there is no one answer. This was what the original meaning of the word democracy came from, there have been thousands of different interpretations since then.
www.worldhistory.org/Athenian_Democracy/

But people still bandy the word "democracy" around as though it's a simple concept with an agreed definition.

Nobody is going to criticise people for "defending democracy" because it's seen positively, even though people don't actually agree on what they're talking about.

The Athenian version of democracy is as unsuited to the modern world as Magna Carta is as a model for universal rights.

The list is a bit longer than that, Greta

For legislatures, it’s over 40 countries, including India, Canada (one house) , the USA (both houses); Kenya; many of the West Indies; and Poland.

A number of countries elect their Heads of State and sub-national assemblies with FPTP too.

It’s still a poor system though.

This debate could go on for ever growstuff, and it’s a pointless debate as there is no one answer. This was what the original meaning of the word democracy came from, there have been thousands of different interpretations since then.
www.worldhistory.org/Athenian_Democracy/

So what do you understand by democracy? As you say, there's more than one model. What's your definition?

growstuff

Casdon

growstuff

I don't accept that the HoC with its first past the post system is democratic. If it were, we'd have more Greens and LibDems (and right-wingers) and the government wouldn't have such a big majority, so wouldn't be able to guarantee that it can pass almost all the bills it introduces.

To be fair, it is democratic, just not your preferred model of democracy.

Well, no, it's not democratic. It's not representative of the whole spectrum of public opinion.

"Democracy" is IMO one of those words which are bandied about, but people don't really think through what it does mean.

I do understand what democracy means, and I do understand what a democracy based on proportional representation means compared to our current system. However, there is more than one model of democracy, and like it or not the UK is a democracy. There is no perfect model of course.
assets-learning.parliament.uk/uploads/2019/12/How-it-Works-booklet.pdf

First past the post must surely be a good system since so many other countries have adopted it. The list is long:
Belarus

Casdon

growstuff

I don't accept that the HoC with its first past the post system is democratic. If it were, we'd have more Greens and LibDems (and right-wingers) and the government wouldn't have such a big majority, so wouldn't be able to guarantee that it can pass almost all the bills it introduces.

To be fair, it is democratic, just not your preferred model of democracy.

Well, no, it's not democratic. It's not representative of the whole spectrum of public opinion.

"Democracy" is IMO one of those words which are bandied about, but people don't really think through what it does mean.

growstuff

I don't accept that the HoC with its first past the post system is democratic. If it were, we'd have more Greens and LibDems (and right-wingers) and the government wouldn't have such a big majority, so wouldn't be able to guarantee that it can pass almost all the bills it introduces.

To be fair, it is democratic, just not your preferred model of democracy.

I don't accept that the HoC with its first past the post system is democratic. If it were, we'd have more Greens and LibDems (and right-wingers) and the government wouldn't have such a big majority, so wouldn't be able to guarantee that it can pass almost all the bills it introduces.

It is totally undemocratic to have an unelected chamber. All very well some say, when they’re saying what you (or I or anyone else) agree with, but what when they say what you don’t agree with?
I cannot agree that to have an unelected chamber is acceptable in a supposedly democratic country. Whatever any of them say or indeed don’t say. There is simply no justification. I think Labour have said that they will do away with it. I certainly hope so if they win the next election.

maddyone

I believe that there should be no second chamber that has unelected representatives. Who exactly do these unelected people represent? Not me! So I’m not interested in their opinions on anything. When we have a properly elected second chamber, I’ll sit up and listen. Until then, I don’t care what any of them say.

Even though for the past few years they have spoken far more sense than the government?

I'd be more confident if it were worth sitting up and listening to all the members of the elected chamber. Some lords do good work.

Casdon

Primrose53

growstuff

Primrose53

Dinahmo

I have just looked up figures for countries accepting refugees. The top 10 ranges from Iran with 840k through Poland with 1.21 million, Russian Federation with1.45 million, Germany 2.2 million and the highest is Turkey with 3.67 million. Amongst the list are Ethiopia, Bangladesh, India, Uganda and Pakistan.

And the UK is complaining about 364,501 refugees, asylum seekers and stateless people as at November 2022.
The French figures (for 2021) were 499,914.

But look at the size of those countries compared to us!! I wish people would stop making out this country has not welcomed people because we have and for centuries.

It’s not a bad thing at all to pull up the drawbridge every now and then and look after the population we already have before allowing others in. It’s basic housekeeping! I am sure we all feed our families first before feeding everybody else in the street.

When did you last look at the population density in Germany? Germany takes far more asylum seekers per head of existing population and hectare than the UK does.

I last looked today actually at the ONS figures. We are just under twice as crowded as Germany (232/km2) while England is (429/km2). We are the most densely populated nation in Europe. The UK is also the most crowded large country in Europe. (271/km2).

www.worldatlas.com/articles/european-countries-by-population-density.html
We aren’t.

🤣🤣🤣🤣

I believe that there should be no second chamber that has unelected representatives. Who exactly do these unelected people represent? Not me! So I’m not interested in their opinions on anything. When we have a properly elected second chamber, I’ll sit up and listen. Until then, I don’t care what any of them say.

I do understand that.