Thread: Britain Tackles Immigration Problem

Originally Posted by Ray

Britain is at its tethers end or so it appears.

It's politically expedient. I read polls now show ^ 40% regard immigration as the primary election issue. No matter how liberal the politicians are, those numbers mean only one thing, how best to be seen to be against immigration. The British public should get used to hearing, "we're listening to the people"

Marriage visa age to rise to 21

The minimum age for a marriage visa is to be raised from 18 to 21, in a bid to combat forced marriages.

Spouses or fiances who want to come to the UK from outside the EU may also have to pass an English test first.

People who act as guarantors for people on family visit visas could also face fines of £1,000 if they overstay.

The proposals are part of efforts to strengthen UK border controls, which will see more people being screened before they enter the UK.

Home Office Minister Liam Byrne also announced the creation of a new government committee which will look at the social impact of immigration.

Social impact

The decision to set up the Migration Impact Forum (MIF) goes even further than plans announced earlier this year.

This reflects concern about the strain placed on public services such as the NHS and schools by immigrants, as well as on housing and transport.

But Mr Byrne said the forum would also look at the impact of migration on community cohesion and would report to the proposed Migration Advisory Committee which will set quotas for migrant workers through the new Australian-style points-based system.

Measuring community cohesion was not "an exact science," added Mr Byrne, but he said "we will be establishing the means to take into account the wider impact of immigration".

The government has already announced plans to strengthen border controls, including ID cards for all immigrants and greater use of technology such as iris scans to check identity.

But it is also planning a shake-up of the visa system, which could have a major impact on UK citizens who want to bring family members into the country.

'Family pressure'

British people being guarantors in a Sponsored Family Visitor visa may have to give undertakings to house the applicant and pay for any non-emergency medical care they require during their stay.

Mr Byrne said: "I think a fine of £1,000 or more will encourage sponsors to take their responsibilities seriously.

"We need to consult with a number of organisations about how best this can be put into effect."

The plan also proposed raising the minimum age for a marriage visa from 18 to 21.

In a report published earlier, the Home Office says "there are sometimes situations in which a young person is forced by family pressure into an unwanted union," with one party needing a visa to enter the UK.

Interviews

Raising the minimum age to 21, would "allow the young people involved to have completed their education as well as allowing them to gain in maturity and possess adequate life skills," it adds.

The government is also expected to introduce confidential interviews for people entering the country to make sure they have not been forced into marriage.

About 15,000 British people marry foreign nationals from outside the European Union each year. The age at which people in the UK can get married is 16.

The government said it expected the number of people entering and leaving the UK to increase by 50% in the next seven years.

It wants to "export" Britain's borders to screen more people wanting to enter the UK before they get there.

"The days when border control started at the White Cliffs of Dover are over," said Mr Byrne.

He also pledged to count in and count out 95% of travellers by 2009.

The home office also proposes charging immigrants more in fees for leave to remain and naturalisation - sparking criticism from the Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants which accused ministers of being "completely unfair that these vulnerable groups".

Both the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats have accused the home secretary of putting rhetoric above action.


BBC NEWS | UK | UK Politics | Marriage visa age to rise to 21

An interesting way to tackle immigration.

What is most important is to control and eliminate the illegal immigration, which is the real danger!

Reid targets illegal immigrants

A clampdown has been launched targeting "foreigners [who] come to this country illegitimately and steal our benefits", home secretary John Reid has said.

The plan is to stop illegal immigrants getting housing, healthcare or work.

He said the UK was now "throwing out" record numbers of asylum seekers and he hoped to make life "constrained and uncomfortable" for illegal immigrants.

But the Lib Dems said "impersonating Alf Garnett" could not absolve him of responsibility for migration failings.

Lib Dem home affairs spokesman Nick Clegg added: "The more John Reid yells at 'foreigners' the greater the suspicion will grow that he is simply trying to divert attention from this Government's own incompetence.

"What the public want is quiet competence, not loud incompetence."

The Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants warned against "hyping up public emotions".

For the Conservatives, the shadow home office minister Damian Green said there was "nothing much new in here... it is a package of announcements rather than anything changing."

He said the idea that most illegal immigrants were in the UK "to scrounge off the benefits system" was factually wrong, saying instead that most were in the UK to work.

The Home Office plans include a proposal to run a pilot scheme to send text messages reminding people not to overstay their visas.

This has been criticised by opposition parties, but Mr Reid dismissed it as a minor measure, stressing instead the core of the package was to beef up the powers of immigration officers to police the borders, as well as compulsory ID cards for foreign nationals seeking to settle in the UK.

Mr Reid told BBC Breakfast: "It is unfair that foreigners come to this country illegitimately and steal our benefits, steal our services like the NHS and undermine the minimum wage by working.

"Year on year, we are going to make it even more difficult for them to do that."

And he told BBC Radio Five Live: "We are now throwing out more asylum seekers - failed asylum seekers - than ever before."

Estimates vary widely as to how many illegal immigrants are living in the UK. The Home Office ran into trouble last year when it said it had no idea, but later produced an estimate of up to 570,000.

Pressure group Migration Watch puts the figure at between 515,000 and 870,000.

Measures being introduced to make life more difficult for illegal immigrants includes a "watch list" to alert government agencies if someone applies for services to which they are not entitled.

Workplace enforcement teams will also attempt to track down companies employing people who should not be in the country.

'Exploitation'

There will also be pilot schemes in three NHS trusts using data from the Immigration and Nationality Directorate to ensure migrants pay for care where required to do so.

Mr Reid said most people who came to the UK wanted to comply fully with immigration laws but those who did not should not enjoy the same benefits and privileges.

"That's why the time is now right to tackle the root cause of the problem - exploitation. We have to tackle not only the illegal trafficking but also the illegal jobs at the end of the journey.

"This new approach will make life in this country ever more uncomfortable and constrained for those who come here illegally," the home secretary said.

The policy has been welcomed by the Association of Chief Police Officers. Spokesman Grahame Maxwell said it was "a really positive step forward for the Home Office, police and other agencies".

Meanwhile, further education minister Bill Rammell said the Department for Education was "on the case" of colleges which act as a front for foreign nationals to enter the country and stay as students.

However, Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants chief executive Habib Rahman said: "Barring up to half a million irregular migrants in the UK from access to rights and services is not a realistic or humane response."

He added: "We want a more balanced approach, not just hyping up public emotions on some very emotive subjects."

He called for action on people trafficking rather than a crackdown on the "victims" of it and an amnesty on illegal workers.

Shadow home secretary David Davis accused John Reid of giving up on trying to deport hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants, preferring to "spam them with text messages".

Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesman Nick Clegg said: "If tough rhetoric and gimmicks were enough to sort out our immigration system, we would have the best in the world."
BBC NEWS | UK | UK Politics | Reid targets illegal immigrants

Nothing will work unless the Britons stop employing these illegals for self serving interests!

Once the source of existence dries up, the illegals will have to give up their struggle and go back from wherever they have come.

Illegal migrants 'allowed to go'

The police are often "not interested, too busy or don't know what to do" when illegal immigrants are reported, says the largest UK traffic warden provider.

National Car Parks said it reported the illegal migrants who attempted to get jobs with it, but most "walked away".

"Limited resources" for immigration officers also seemed to contribute to a lack of action, the firm told MPs.

The Home Office said it was working with employers to make sure they were aware of the law.

MPs heard that ID checks were not robust enough nor enforced well and there are lots of "forged documents".

Many employers recognised the need for checks but become disenchanted due to "a general lack of joined-up thinking from enforcement agencies", the company said in a submission to MPs reviewing the proposed Borders Bill.

'Mistake'

The firm, the biggest provider of parking attendants for local councils, employs around 3,000 foreign nationals.

It said the bill - which makes identity cards mandatory for foreign nationals - ought to require all employees to have their biometric identity documents checked.

Guidelines requiring employers to carry out a "reasonable" check were insufficient, it said, as potential employees would have to consent to it.

"Therefore the checking system does little to address the very real issue of the underclass of workers in the population, those with forged documents who present to less than scrupulous employers."

NCP executive Gordon McLardy told the MPs: "If you put biometric [checks] in, it should be mandatory, or we would be failing in our duties."

He added that in 2005 the company had identified 100 non-EU national applying for jobs at NCP who would have been illegal workers.

"Clearly we've a system which lends itself to illegal workers, the checks aren't robust enough, we don't enforce it well and clearly there's a market for false documentation."

False documents

He added that the number of forged ID documents meant it was sometimes easier not to employ a non-EU national, just in case they turned out to be an illegal worker.

He also called for better information sharing between employers and different enforcement agencies, as well greater awareness among police of immigration issues.

"There isn't a central database which collects this information - what you find is that illegal immigrants will go to a certain area of a city where they'll congregate because they can get forged documentation," he said.

Gareth Crossman, policy director of human rights group Liberty, told the committee that biometric ID cards would not have a "significant effect" on the numbers of illegal workers in the UK.

'Scrupulous employers'

"If the problem is in illegal working, and there are employers that do not care about the status of their employees, biometric ID will make no difference," he said.

"It might make a difference for scrupulous employers who are being hoodwinked. But I don't think that's a significant problem," he added.

The government says the Borders Bill's introduction of ID cards for non-EU nationals will help to tackle illegal immigration and illegal working, and cut down on forgeries.

The Home Office said in a statement that the Immigration and Nationality Directorate carried out 3,000 enforcement operations in 2005.

Shadow home secretary David Davis said Mr McLardy's comments had reinforced the Conservatives' argument for a "dedicated UK border police force" to secure borders and find and remove illegal immigrants and workers.

BBC NEWS | UK | UK Politics | Illegal migrants 'allowed to go'

Quite a difficult situation.

Cameron wants to cut immigration

David Cameron has outlined plans for "significantly less" immigration to the UK from outside the European Union.

In his first major statement on the issue, Mr Cameron stressed the possible economic benefits of migration.

But there must be limits to immigration levels because of the impact on public services, the environment and on "community cohesion", he said.

Home Secretary John Reid said Tory opposition to ID cards meant their plans were unworkable.

The launch of the Conservative policy on economic migration comes with Labour ministers expected to unveil fresh measures in the Queen Speech next week.

Key issue

The Conservatives have been reluctant to talk about the issue since last year's general election, as party strategists believe former leader Michael Howard's focus on the issue helped the party lose the poll.

But opinion polls suggest the issue continues to be a key one for voters.

The party's proposals are set out in a pamphlet, Controlling Economic Migration, written by Mr Green and shadow home secretary David Davis.

They propose annual limits on economic migration, worked out in yearly consultation with local authorities, businesses and others.

Limits would reflect economic need, pressure on public services, environmental impact and "community cohesion".

Mr Cameron told the BBC: "We are saying yes, look at the economic benefits of migration, make sure we make the most of them, but then actually have a limit which is set according to the pressures on health and education and housing. That's sensible politics."

The Tories concede they can not stop EU immigration, but annual limits could mean "significantly less" than current levels.

But asked what reduction he envisaged, he said: "We can't put numbers on that today, because we are some way away from the election and the circumstances that we would be in at the time."

Conservative proposals include separating asylum policy from economic migration policy and a border force to enforce policy and deal with over-stayers and illegal workers.

Mr Reid, who this summer revamped government policy on immigration, called the Tory plans "meaningless" while they did not back ID cards.

He also said the number of people allowed into the UK under the points-based system for skilled workers, would also take into account impacts on schools, housing and hospitals.

For the Liberal Democrats, home affairs spokesman Nick Clegg said: "It simply doesn't add up to advocate the economic benefits of immigration on the one hand, and then claim that a Conservative government would significantly cut inward immigration without specifying how this would happen."

Nigel Farage, leader of the UK Independence Party, which wants zero net immigration, said the Tory proposals were "a step in the right direction, but too little too late".

"They don't address the fact that we still have an open door policy to 450m people from the EU," said Mr Farage.

Labour MP and former minister Frank Field, who called at the start of the summer for effective immigration control, welcomed the Tory proposals but also called for limits on migration from new EU states.

BBC NEWS | UK | UK Politics | Cameron wants to cut immigration

Wonder if it will be workable!

UK immigration hits all-time high

he Office for National Statistics (ONS) has published its most comprehensive assessment of the numbers of migrant workers in Britain.

It confirms the general picture of a recent surge in immigration.

The ONS concludes that opening the UK to workers from the EU accession countries "initiated what is almost certainly the largest single wave of in-migration that the British Isles have ever experienced".

In 2005, it says, one in 19 workers in Britain was a foreign national.

Up to now, debate on migration has been confused by a plethora of different statistical sources covering different groups, often with out-of-date figures.

But the official study by two authors from University College London, Professor John Salt and Jane Millar, draws together as much of the available evidence as possible for recent years.

The conclusions are not surprising. Last year, 400,000 foreign workers came to the UK, the largest ever number, taking the total foreign workforce to 1.5 million.

But is this the biggest influx in the history of the British Isles, as the authors claim?

"Probably", is the answer.

French protestants

Look back to the Huguenots, protestants who fled France in the 16th and 17th centuries. They made up about 1% of Britain's population, and 5% of London's.

But there were only tens of thousands of Huguenots, spread across two waves a 100 years apart.

More recently, net immigration from the new commonwealth peaked at an annual 50,000 in the late 60s.

The Asians arriving after expulsion from Uganda by Idi Amin in 1972, numbered fewer than 30,000.

Of course, we don't know how long the current inflow of central Europeans to Britain will last, or for how long they'll choose to stay.

But clearly - perhaps thanks to advances in transport - migration moves quickly these days.
BBC NEWS | Business | UK immigration hits all-time high

Sort of sums up the whole subcheez!

Parihaka,

In the olden days, anyone person from a Commonwealth country did not require an passport or visa. That is where the immigration issue commenced.

Now, what is the most problematic are the illegals and asylum seekers.

Illegals are a problem the world over including in India. It is all because of economics and man's natural desire to seek a better life for himself and his families. One must understand the compulsion of a person to leave his home, hearth and his family, perhaps forever! I am not justifying the illegals, but I am just highlighting the psychological and social deprivation a person has to go through. In between, in transit, he may die by leaky tubs capsizing or choking to death with asphyxiation in trailer trucks! Illegal immigrants into India from the neighbouring countries have a easier access as the borders are porous!

Unless the economy improves in the countries from where these illegals come, whatever be the rules etc, they will find a way to beat it. Such is the burning desire to better one's life and more so, their families back home!

Illegals are a MASSIVE problem everywhere! More so, because there are always unscrupulous employers who exploit the illegals to make the profits soar! And the govt turns a blind eye for reasons of its own.

As far as asylum seekers, here I will state it is the British govt's fault to allow one and all on the flimsiest of grounds. There is no cause for bellyaching now! In fact, most of today's terrorists have found a safe haven in the UK under this asylum business since the British govt was always very liberal in its outlook. It is only now that because the situation is getting out of control that serious thought is being given on this issue,on illegals and on immigration.

I am interested as to how they solve the issue since India should follow suit!

Enough of all this liberal attitude which is being exploited by the unscrupulous.

Originally Posted by Ray

Nothing will work unless the Britons stop employing these illegals for self serving interests!

Once the source of existence dries up, the illegals will have to give up their struggle and go back from wherever they have come.

Many of these employers are immigrants themselves. Once they get their naturalisation papers they can call themselves 'Britons' - however incorrect that word might be.

Originally Posted by glyn

Many of these employers are immigrants themselves. Once they get their naturalisation papers they can call themselves 'Britons' - however incorrect that word might be.

I wouldn't be surprised if quite a few are naturalised Citizens of UK, who employ these illegals.

However, I would be indeed surprised if non immigrants (white British) are pure as driven snow in this regards.

Once a person gets his naturalisation paper, what is he to call himself? "Half a Briton"? Haven't understood the logic of that statement. Maybe to suit your dowdy wheezing cold in the head attitude, they should call themselves, "Bastard British"! That should make you feel terrific upbeat, right?

Is Sonia Gandhi, who is a naturalised Indian (there is a controversy in that too!) not an Indian? Or is she a "pizza"?

Be rational or is your laws for naturalisation idiotic?

And why should there be a difference with the white immigrants and the darkies, if you wish.

Our colour does not wash off with "Tide"?

Address the issue and not be racial, Gyln.

I have showed the HUGE problem that UK faces and you go racial! No wonder the Conservative lose hands down, even when Blair screws the whole issue! You Conservatives are blind racists. You really know how to push wellwishers into the opposition camp!

You sure know how to lose friends.

Originally Posted by Ray

I wouldn't be surprised if quite a few are naturalised Citizens of UK, who employ these illegals.

However, I would be indeed surprised if non immigrants (white British) are pure as driven snow in this regards.

Once a person gets his naturalisation paper, what is he to call himself? "Half a Briton"? Haven't understood the logic of that statement. Maybe to suit your dowdy wheezing cold in the head attitude, they should call themselves, "Bastard British"! That should make you feel terrific upbeat, right?

Is Sonia Gandhi, who is a naturalised Indian (there is a controversy in that too!) not an Indian? Or is she a "pizza"?

Be rational or is your laws for naturalisation idiotic?

And why should there be a difference with the white immigrants and the darkies, if you wish.

Our colour does not wash off with "Tide"?

Address the issue and not be racial, Gyln.

I have showed the HUGE problem that UK faces and you go racial! No wonder the Conservative lose hands down, even when Blair screws the whole issue! You Conservatives are blind racists. You really know how to push wellwishers into the opposition camp!

You sure know how to lose friends.

Calm down! There is no need for anyone to get on their high horse and start accusing others of anything. I am using the word 'Britons' perfectly correctly. I suggest you try using a dictionary instead of imagining that slights are being cast at you and your particular race. Britons were the original inhabitants of the British Isles, no more, no less. Those who consider themselves thus are the Highland Scots, the Welsh, the Cornish and those from the Isle of Man.
We have millions from your sub-continent in the UK, Indians, Pakistanis and Bangladeshis. The latest immigration furore is about the estimated 600,000 who arrived between 2004 and 2005. No one mentioned colour, so your indignation is misplaced.

Britons,[7] are inhabitants of Great Britain[8][9] or citizens of the United Kingdom, of the Isle of Man, one of the Channel Islands, or of one of the British Overseas Territories. In an historical context, the word is used refers to the ancient Brythons, the indigenous inhabitants of most of Great Britain.

Webster:

A native or inhabitant of Great Britain especially England.

So those who are naturalised Britons are what? Half A Briton.

Your statement that only those particular races that you wrote can claim to be Briton reeks of prejudice!

so, get off you favourite hobby horse instead!

So, be man enough to face up. At least that is one of the qualities that the British are supposed to possess.

Enough of the wishy washy ducking!

Get back to the subject.

.

Originally Posted by Ray

Britons,[7] are inhabitants of Great Britain[8][9] or citizens of the United Kingdom, of the Isle of Man, one of the Channel Islands, or of one of the British Overseas Territories. In an historical context, the word is used refers to the ancient Brythons, the indigenous inhabitants of most of Great Britain.

Webster:

A native or inhabitant of Great Britain especially England.

I don't care for Websters definition. In fact the English are quite recent immigrants themselves! The Angles and Saxons became the English, in fact the word derives from Angles. When Julius Caeser conquered Britain the inhabitants were Britons. The individual tribes could not cope with the Roman tactics.

So those who are naturalised Britons are what? Half A Briton.

Only to suspicious minds. They are British.

Your statement that only those particular races that you wrote can claim to be Briton reeks of prejudice!

An inconvenient truth is rarely welcomed. Predjudice doesn't come into it.

so, get off you favourite hobby horse instead!

My hobby horse is History, and from that I shall never dismount!

So, be man enough to face up. At least that is one of the qualities that the British are supposed to possess.

Face up to what? It was you that started implying racism


Be rational or is your laws for naturalisation idiotic?

And why should there be a difference with the white immigrants and the darkies, if you wish.

Our colour does not wash off with "Tide"?

Address the issue and not be racial, Gyln.

I have showed the HUGE problem that UK faces and you go racial!

Enough of the wishy washy ducking!

I have to make due allowances for the fact you are not writing in your mother tongue, but what that means I simply have no idea.

Get back to the subject.

The subject being the immigration problem the UK is currently suffering. 600,000 immigrants in one year to this small country is outrageous. On the news today it was revealed that a Sri Lankan ring had been cloning credit cards in filling stations and sending the money to maintain the war. Or shouldn't I have said that? Judging by the reaction I have been getting some will undoubtedly consider that racist.

Your explanation is as weak and insipid as weak tea.

Of course, you don't care for the written word accepted by the world. You, yourself, asked me to check the dictionary. After all, as per your idea of yourself, you are Lord of Tartary! (Tartary by Walter de la Mare at Old Poetry)

English is not my mother tongue, but I am a one pointer in English Language and English Literature (Senior Cambridge). My exam papers were set AND corrected in England!! But then, if you are more qualified than qualified professors of England who set and corrected my answer papers, then you should be the Head at Cambridge!!!

But then, I am sure Cambridge is not even a University worth your attention! A trash bin I am sure, of one goes by your ideas! Pray, where did you study, old boy?

BacK to the subject:

Yes, I also saw the petrol scandal by the LTTE.

Shocking!

LTTE is a terrorist organisation.

You can't have your cake and eat it too!

You allow all sorts of shady characters in who claim to be Freedom Movements and then encourage them to use your soil to cause chaos, and when they bite you back, you Howl! Same with the Underground bombers! You allow shady chaps in who indoctrinate the Britishers and then when these Joes blow up the tube, you howl!

Are you suggesting that the immigrants and second generation are not Britishers? If that is not prejudice and racism, then what is?

Prince Philip is a member of the Danish Royal House of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg. Is he not a Britisher?

I am glad that on second glance I saw that it was your hobby which was history! I thought you were history!

Come, come, sire (though I though HRH would be appropriate), you are batting on a very sticky wicket!

Originally Posted by Ray

Your explanation is as weak and insipid as weak tea.

Of course, you don't care for the written word accepted by the world.

What a great pity that you have never heard of the Oxford English Dictionary. It is not entirely unknown in various parts of the world. I am using the current 2nd edition.

You, yourself, asked me to check the dictionary. After all, as per your idea of yourself, you are Lord of Tartary! (Tartary by Walter de la Mare at Old Poetry)

There is a point to this?

English is not my mother tongue, but I am a one pointer in English Language and English Literature (Senior Cambridge). My exam papers were set AND corrected in England!! But then, if you are more qualified than qualified professors of England who set and corrected my answer papers, then you should be the Head at Cambridge!!!

How lucky you are to be so well qualified - and modest with it. If you were a one pointer (whatever that is) why should 'qualified professors' find it necessary to correct your answer papers?

But then, I am sure Cambridge is not even a University worth your attention! A trash bin I am sure, of one goes by your ideas! Pray, where did you study, old boy?

Cambridge is undoubtedly a word class university, particularly in the sciences. Isaac Newton studied there.
I never attended a formal university, just the blue-grey uniformed university of hard knocks. They very kindly taught me to fly at the same time - and even paid me for it.

BacK to the subject:

Yes, I also saw the petrol scandal by the LTTE.

Shocking!

LTTE is a terrorist organisation.

You can't have your cake and eat it too!

You allow all sorts of shady characters in who claim to be Freedom Movements and then encourage them to use your soil to cause chaos, and when they bite you back, you Howl!

We encourage them on to our soil to cause chaos? Oh, sure. I don't think I've ever seen a more foolish statement made on WAB.

Same with the Underground bombers! You allow shady chaps in who indoctrinate the Britishers and then when these Joes blow up the tube, you howl!

Ah yes. Got us there too. We are getting quite good at howling now.

Are you suggesting that the immigrants and second generation are not Britishers? If that is not prejudice and racism, then what is?

IF you understood the English language more fully you would not be making comments like this. Of course they are British. I said so earlier.

Prince Philip is a member of the Danish Royal House of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg. Is he not a Britisher?

Old Phil the Greek, consort of the Queen? He is British (not Britisher, a word used only in B movies when spoken by somebody in German uniform).

I am glad that on second glance I saw that it was your hobby which was history! I thought you were history!

I am. So are you. We are all prisoners of history.

Come, come, sire (though I though HRH would be appropriate),

I much preferred the term 'Your Most Majestical Majesty' as used in the much loved Larry the Lamb books of my distant youth. They have also been read to my grand-children.

you are batting on a very sticky wicket!

But you fondly believe that you are not?