Genius!!’ replies make me want to pull my hair out.People don't like it morally, but the detention centre option is the only viable option. There has to be some kind of deterrent - the gov already has 6500 illegal migrants entering the UK this year - that is with the French supposedly doing their bit with us paying them £600m+ to stop boats.
Their ability to find so many oiks with incredibly punchable faces is quite something.The UK taxes housing, not wealth. Other countries directly tax large fortunes.
Why not?
Sure, in an ideal world we could house all the asylum seekers who need help but it is a fantasy. We should (and do) help many thousands. Even if we magically stopped any and all immigration we have a huge issue with housing already, particularly for those at the lower end of the income bracket who need social housing/support.
You're seemingly not getting what an illegal immigrant is. It's not just a blanket term for everyone who arrives on small boats. It's a specific legal term and it only applies to migrants who've been processed and denied.
I agree with that, with one exception - we have fractionally more houses per person now than we had 20 years ago. The problem isn't numbers, it's prices and not replacing council houses. Too many homes that councils require to house people are rented from private landlords at obscene prices, because they have no other choice. Instead of people seeing that as a root cause of most of our problems, it's easier to believe it's all because of immigration.
Not sure I follow. The point of the detention centre would be for anyone awaiting deportation - Reform have previously said anyone coming on a small boat would be detained + deported so I assume anyone awaiting deportation includes anyone arriving on a small boat. I am sure there will be people amongst those who arrive who successfully claim asylum (many do so I doubt it will change that much even if Reform get into power as the law will be hard to get around). What any gov can do, and seems the only real fair option, is to at least stop using as much housing for migrants in general whilst simultaneously completely removing the risk of the small minority of bad migrants escaping/being able to move freely around local communities. It doesn't need to be a prison which is what the 'concentration camp' point alluded to, it would just like an army barracks in that there'd be accommodation, canteens, toilets etc. but it would be enclosed.
Yep. To make things worse, councils also buy up the cheaper homes (thus stopping people getting on the lower end of the property ladder) because of the shortage of social housing. It's not really about immigration specifically, there's a host of issues combining, but there are some easier fixes i.e. stopping housing migrants in hotels, social housing etc. and also making it harder for landlords to rinse people of money (which to be fair has recently got a bit better).
It’s all projection.
If it is just a conspiracy, it is not an effective one; neither is it just incompetence, if anything it is both.... an incompetent conspiracy!
The Times is pretty rabidly pro-Israel, so maybe people are overegging the cartoon.
I think you need to move your start date back from the 1950s. Immigration and emigration were always about race. The Aliens Act 1905 for example was passed to limit the number of Russian Jews who could reach the UK.
Quite true.... but the subject became 'openly toxic' via Enoch Powell and if you go back far enough enforced emigration (Australia etc.) was a favourite way of disposing of the unwanted, whatever their race. Therefore the question is... Will the Rwanda scheme make a comeback under Reform?
Really?
It seems kind of apparent that being pro Israel doesn't require you to be pro jewish people
That’s selective. Some wealth taxes were scrapped, others still work it depends on design, not ideology. Switzerland raises circa 1% of GDP from wealth taxes. Norway and Spain also still operate them.
