Large slums developing in France

BobQ

Mistermeaner wrote: »

Torture has shown to be a reliable means of getting accurate information.

I think you will find the contrary is the case.

CLAPTON

BobQ wrote: »

Fair point, but an unwillingness to deport them is what they are relying on. I would put them into camps and provide basic essentials. I would not call that prison, they would be free to leave if they indicated where they came from and then returned to that country. I doubt they would be prepared to stay there indefinitely.

But what would you do?

Given we are an island our first line must be to stop unwanted immigrants arriving here: the number of genuine asylum seekers is close to zero as we are rarely the first 'safe' country

If Europe wishes to limit the number of immigrants then they must also police their borders more effectively even if this seems harsh.

I think we do need to look at how we assist people staying in their own country : better trade to make their home lives better would be a good start even if it means remove of the EU tariff walls.

I don't think camps are the answer: I wouldn't want to see people imprisoned indefinitely.

Sadly Pax Britannia isn't an option.

kabayiri

How to work out economic migrant vs asylum seeker?

Easy.

Put the person into a camp, and make them work in a workhouse. Once board and lodgings have been deducted, they will have only a couple of pounds left for spends.

The asylum seeker will put up with this, reassured by the fact they are not in danger.

The economic migrant will get fed up and try to escape the camp. At this point we let them escape back to France.

kinger101

Most of the illegals don't show up at immigration claiming asylum (which they'd be unlikely to get). They've either been smuggled into the country, or have overstayed a visa. They find work illegally (as do many British people to supplement their benefits).

It's difficult to stop people being drawn to Britain (or anywhere for that matter) if there are these jobs available.

cells

kinger101 wrote: »

The life expectancy rate is increasing in case you hadn't noticed. I was simply pointing out the mathematics.

And I was pointing out, in case you hadnt noticed, that that just masks population decline of working age folk.

I'm not sure that we want to determine our net immigration based on birth rates in Spain.

I was talking about the EU nations, UK and France seem to be ok with about 2 kids per woman (but maybe that is because of immigrant mothers having more kids?) whereas most the rest of the EU27 without migration would have a big problem in the years to come

If we want people to contribute to the economy, then they need skills to match the vacancies we have.

maybe that would work or maybe not.
Over the next 20-40 years it will be a lot more clear, countries like Japan with very low migration can be compared to countries like the UK with higher migration.

dktreesea

Sapphire wrote: »

Didn't people used to be deported back from whence they came if they entered a country illegally?

The trick is to have proper border controls, and not allow in anyone unless they a job to go to and will not receive any support from taxpayers.

European countries would never have allowed illegal entry in the past – they need to go back to border controls, otherwise Europe will be swamped.

Some of the European countries are trying at the moment to deport some of the refugees. And in some cases, in spite of Pakistani passports re-issued by the Pakistani embassy in Greece, Pakistan is refusing to accept them.


http://news.sky.com/story/1600042/pakistan-refuses-migrants-sent-back-by-greece


Why would they? Where is the proof the refugees are from wherever Europe is claiming they are from? The rejected refugees have no Pakistani ID cards.

Sapphire

dktreesea wrote: »

Some of the European countries are trying at the moment to deport some of the refugees. And in some cases, in spite of Pakistani passports re-issued by the Pakistani embassy in Greece, Pakistan is refusing to accept them.


http://news.sky.com/story/1600042/pakistan-refuses-migrants-sent-back-by-greece


Why would they? Where is the proof the refugees are from wherever Europe is claiming they are from? The rejected refugees have no Pakistani ID cards.

Create camps set aside for them in Africa, then deport them there, and let them get on with it – or return to their countries voluntarily. I'm sure such countries would have birth records so the returnees could prove their origins if necessary. They cannot be allowed to come to Europe in the way they have been doing – they would be a severe drain on the economies of Europe, and besides, Europe should not be allowing in people about whom nothing is known. This never used to happen when there were passport controls, and it shouldn't happen now. If necessary reinstate passport/border controls – these were never particularly onerous, as far as I can remember.

jacko74

What nobody seems to realize or accept is that our government WANTS immigration despite anything they may say to the contrary... the whole basis of a successful capitalist economy is that it relies on constant growth, and as we clearly aren't getting any real economic growth through manufacturing or exports the only thing left to do is create pretend growth by inflating the population.

Generali

Sapphire wrote: »

Create camps set aside for them in Africa, then deport them there, and let them get on with it – or return to their countries voluntarily.

A bit bloody arrogant.

Are you going to invade to create the camps or buy up a bit of land and hope that the locals don't notice that you don't have planning permission.

Interesting that nobody has noticed the actual problem: the poorest people in Europe are so mind-bogglingly rich compared to most people in Africa and central Asia that they are quite keen to get to enjoy a better life for their families.

These days travel is simple and so getting to a place where you can get you Europe is relatively simple.

The idea that Europe or the UK is going to be able to hold back the masses is risible. If you don't want them and you aren't prepared to shoot them (which would be a horrible idea I hope we can all agree) then you had better be prepared to find a solution that enables people to want to stay where they were. That means economic development: stop preventing poor people selling goods and services to Europe and start investing in the Sustainable Development Goals.

wotsthat

Generali wrote: »

Interesting that nobody has noticed the actual problem: the poorest people in Europe are so mind-bogglingly rich compared to most people in Africa and central Asia that they are quite keen to get to enjoy a better life for their families.

A walk past the newspapers at the petrol station will explain to most people all they need to know - the country has gone to the dogs and we're in a handcart on the road to hell. People want to move to Europe you say - are they mad? There must be another reason other than wanting a better life for their families - like being scouts for an army of terrorists or to spread Islam.

Generali wrote: »

The idea that Europe or the UK is going to be able to hold back the masses is risible. If you don't want them and you aren't prepared to shoot them (which would be a horrible idea I hope we can all agree) then you had better be prepared to find a solution that enables people to want to stay where they were. That means economic development: stop preventing poor people selling goods and services to Europe and start investing in the Sustainable Development Goals.

Good luck with that. I've lost count of the number of proposals for the foreign aid budget to be spent on local entitlement projects.

Just recently I heard the UK spends more on sustainable energy in the third world than at home as the solar industry lobbied for more subsidies for the UK middle classes.