+ Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
No, there are slightly less than 3m people in Hong Kong with BNO status, the new visa arrangements only apply to them, other Hong Kong people who didn't get the BNO status can no longer get it AFAIK even if they would have been eligible.
These are British Nationals from a British territory that were abandoned by the government and handed over to China against their wishes - why shouldn't they come here?
The reason I asked was because there was a bbc article that showed the breakdown from the first half of 2022 and it was very different.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/explainers-53734793
I am not willing to dabble in the express but the independent article is very carefully worded.
'Government officials believe around 60% of migrants making the crossing each day now are Albanian.'
And that appears to be based upon:
'More than 700 out of the record total of almost 1,300 migrants who were brought ashore on Monday were Albanian, the Daily Mail reported.'
And
'Lucy Moreton, from the ISU union, said: “ISU members have seen and reported this increase (of Albanian arrivals) over the last few months.
“Reports from the staff involved on Monday suggest the majority of those arriving were Albanian.'
Which is specific to one day and anecdotal. I would be interested to see how the official figures have changed over time.
So is this your justification now? Throw the baby out with the bathwater. If you are from Iraq, Iran, Syria, Afghanistan etc. and cross the channel illegally, you are deported to Rwanda without your claim for asylum being heard because Albanians are also doing it. Why not just assess their the strength of their claim and kick out the Albanians (because presumably they would fail), even send failed asylum seekers to Rwanda if you think that is a deterrent. That has to be better than kicking out genuine claimants because they entered illegally.
Fair play, at least you engage with the issues and don't just resort to throwing insults at politicians.
It seems to me that the asylum system does take a very disproportionate number of people from Albania, and that has perhaps risen dramatically in recent months. I agree with you, it would be very useful to see this stuff properly broken down, and I think the UK taxpayer probably has a right to see that.
I don't agree with throwing baby out with the bathwater, I agree with an asylum system that helps those most in need not those rich enough to receive help (although the articles above suggest that perhaps it is organised gangs paying the fees in some cases) or those already in a safe country. It is not what the system is designed for, it undermines faith in the process, it doesn't help the most needy and it allows organised criminals to exploit a system that is designed to help the most needy.
So what I am hearing is that the Albanians aren't so much of a problem, the issue is that everybody who crosses illegally had the means (either health or money) to cross illegally and therefore are not the most vulnerable? Would that be a fair way to sum up what you are saying?
I would suggest that yes, those people currently in France and with thousands in the bank are probably less likely to be those most in need, but that isn't for me to judge. I'd suggest the issues are as follows:
1 / The system is likely being abused by organised criminal gangs
2 / The system is not designing those most in need
3 / The system may even be used to recruit people to UK based gangs
4 / The UK is having to pay to house, home, process everyone, even if their claims are ultimately unsuccessful
5 / The system reduces public faith in the system (which is important IMO)
Something is up here. Albanians also form by far the largest number of foreign criminals in UK prisons, despite it being a small country. It's a democratic country with a socialist government. Why would so many people want to leave and come here?
https://www.statista.com/statistics/...and-and-wales/
It's madness really. Ask any business and ask them what their biggest challenge preventing growth is, and they'll likely have people near the top of the list.
But a government with growth, growth, growth, as their current headline doesn't want the people to help growth.
The sooner that the UK population and whoever is in government stop thinking of these people as a problem, and thinking about how to solve the 'problem', and actually think of these people as people who can contribute to society, the better. Sadly won't happen while the Daily mail is still circulating and the brexit voting, anti-immigrant, anti-growth coalition of over 60s are still breathing.
This is a great post …. Most people risk their lives to come here for a better life. My brother in law is Turkish (Kurd) and he came to the Uk 22 years ago, He’s raised a lovely family, has his own business and is very hard working and is an asset to his town.
The Home Secretary is deluded.
The overwhelming majority of people who move to the UK do indeed contribute positively to the country, more so in many respects than people who have been here for generations.
That doesn't change the fact that things are better done when managed properly or that systems in place to protect the most vulnerable cannot be exploited by groups for benefit of those perhaps not most deserving.
Yeah, I want lessons in keeping it real from the guy who's contributed the following in one thread in barely 24 hours:
"An absolute pig of a woman"
"twisted, verminous, item of trash"
"ghoulish right wing freaks"
"certain individuals who disgrace the human race."
"contemptuous behaviour of a chancer appealing to the base nature of the lowest of the low."
The absolute state of it!