www.bbc.co.uk
www.bbc.co.uk
inews.co.uk
...Yet..look where ReformUK is in the polls. There's not much to be hopeful about,really.
I'm sure that Farage would like the power, but power comes with responsibility and hard work, and everyone would also be looking at his financial interests, so I don't see that happening - or maybe I'm just hoping that it doesn't.
I surmise that Reform will gain more traction but as for him ever(?) being PM.......very doubtful!
www.bbc.co.uk
When I expressed my views on the referendum result I was regarded as an ignorant idiot by many on here, I'm as ignorant and stupid as ever, but a lot of people have woken up and smelled the coffee and it's becoming ever more difficult to find anyone who admits to voting for Brexit
We need to come up with some way of getting truthfullness into political debate. Trump is showing us what happens when we allow untrammelled claims that are predictably proven false.
The last figures I can find are rather depressing and appear to suggest that less than 5% of "small boat arrivees" are returned each year "due to the need to process asylum claims".
Unless there's new figures since, I believe only a small proportion of them were actually enforced removals. I believe it could also include those who have not entered illegally and their visa simply expired.
Has the government really 'returned' 24,000 people?
Sir Keir Starmer has claimed more than 24,000 people have been returned since Labour came to power.
Many ideas have been floated on here as possible solutions, but often I find the Government of the day can take years to cotton on to what the public seem to figure out long in advance. Personally, I don't believe that any of the current parties are genuinely interested in solving it due to how good a distraction it is for certain demographics who believe it is the only thing that detrimentally affects the UK.
We need to come up with some way of getting truthfullness into political debate. Trump is showing us what happens when we allow untrammelled claims that are predictably proven false.
The last figures I can find are rather depressing and appear to suggest that less than 5% of "small boat arrivees" are returned each year "due to the need to process asylum claims".
Because that is unhealthy & will make you ill which is good because the pharmaceutical industry is huge and needs as many people as possible needing medication..... 
The extreme reading of the Digital ID Brit Card is that it's linking you with your banking, healthcare, etc etc and all that data is recorded for what you are doing, where you are going, what you are buying etc This is then said to lead on to a Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) which is a new form of money that exists only in digital form - so you don't actually HAVE the money. And you need 'permission' as such to access it. There is also talk of people then being restricted on what they can purchase and where from. I also read somewhere about the good old 'carbon footprint' coming into it - so you could, for example, be blocked from buying fuel because you've already used too much this week. And blocked from buying a piece of beef at Asda because you bought beef burgers last week and so you are contributing to too much co2...... Instead you would have to buy chemical enhanced, processed food of which you can buy as much as you want
Again, this is what I've read. Not what I've fully researched into, so..... Maybe a pinch of salt & all that
It occurs to me to ask a question: why can the UN not deploy some of its staff in every country of passage, to provide a "refugee immigration clearing service"?
This would interview and classify each refugee, using the UN's resources to verify the claims and provide all the information required to the host country, which the refugee wishes to enter. Such a world wide service could be paid for by a levy on the immigration service of each member of the UN. The final decision on whether to grant entry would remain with the host country but the assessment would be based on the information provided by the UN.
Any person entering a country without permission would then have no grounds for appeal in the host country. It would be the right of the host to return the entrant to their original country without delay. At the same time, the host country would be able to speed up the entry of those applicants whose circumstances fitted the host's requirements. The resources currently being spent on illegal immigrants could then be put to more useful purposes.
Just a thought.
I tried to make clear that I proposed the UN or similar would do the checking, having direct access to the country of origin,
That's sad to hear.
Interesting and radical, and maybe a great idea. But, could it actually work in practice?It occurs to me to ask a question: why can the UN not deploy some of its staff in every country of passage, to provide a "refugee immigration clearing service"?
This would interview and classify each refugee, using the UN's resources to verify the claims and provide all the information required to the host country, which the refugee wishes to enter. Such a world wide service could be paid for by a levy on the immigration service of each member of the UN. The final decision on whether to grant entry would remain with the host country but the assessment would be based on the information provided by the UN.
Any person entering a country without permission would then have no grounds for appeal in the host country. It would be the right of the host to return the entrant to their original country without delay. At the same time, the host country would be able to speed up the entry of those applicants whose circumstances fitted the host's requirements. The resources currently being spent on illegal immigrants could then be put to more useful purposes.
Just a thought.
You're right, but the law deals in facts, not motives, and the law trumps suspected motives.
Hmmm! then why not return them to France.....or does it then depend on whose territorial waters they were picked up in?
