Reform UK

[valiant]

Olivera said:

It's not costing £1.3bn per year: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-68613186

The National Audit Office states: "the Home Office still expects to spend £3.1bn on private accommodation in the year up to March 2024.".

That's just accommodation, so you need to add on welfare, legal, translation, health spending on top.

Well as the majority qualify for asylum status when they are eventually processed shouldn't the onus be on how they are processed rather than the amount?

Remind me again who slowed down the whole process, who has weaponized the entire st show in order to gaslight the dense of thinking?

[valiant]

Dave200 said:

What are Reform specifically offering by way of solution that makes you so much more confident in voting for them?

ThEY'Ll SeNd Them BaCK!!!

No details on how of course and what the french will do when ferries start disembarking at Calais but it'll be someone else's fault regardless and deffo not Nige's

[Vasco]

Dave200 said:

Vasco said:

Dave200 said:

I find it curious that there's so much (misplaced) emphasis on "small boats" from Reform supporters, but none of them seem willing to back Labour who pledge to stop them.
https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/uk-opposition-lea...

Of course Labour are also planning to deal with the actual immigration problems, rather than just standing on a cliff and pointing at the boats as evidence of a broken immigration system.

So, the big pledge from Starmer to the small boats issue is to work with our foreign colleagues. How is that different to the current arrangement ?

What are Reform specifically offering by way of solution that makes you so much more confident in voting for them?

....erm....

I wasn't querying what Reform would do - and have no intention of voting for them, so have no idea where you get all that from.

My query related to Starmer's expectation of working with our foreign colleagues.

[Tom8]

DeejRC said:

Labour/anti-Tory supporters delirious with glee at being able to point to another party about their “magic money tree” policies…
Oh how the world chortles merrily
Farage et al don’t need to have joined up economic policies for the same reason nobody cared much about the LD economic manifesto - everybody knows they will never be able to implement. It’s the free shot that the 3rd opposition party gets.
I’m not hugely convinced SKS will put taxes up too soon either. I suspect there will be 12months before he does. The IFS, their £35bn black hole and all those others who think their “needs” to be tax rises, “they” simply don’t understand that the country can’t really afford it atm. The SMEs etc have only just finished accommodating the 7% rise BoJo and Rishi hit us with. The employed sector has only just completed the salary rises/cost of living rises/fiscal drag cycle to rebalance their domestic economics. SKS is dull, but he is a competent manager, he has a decent grasp on what he can/can’t do at any one time and the slowly slowly approach. He and Reeves know full well they haven’t the headroom to change much, because the country hasn’t.

The economic (growth) plan from both Labour and the Conservatives is the same. Do nothing. There is slow growth and there is fiscal drag in the tax system so just carry on as we are and the tax take will grow and so will growth albeit slowly.

I agree that in a year or two, that will then be accelerated by the usual tax rises until, as is tradition, we run out of everyone else's money again, true Labour stylee.

[s1962a]

valiant said:

Remind me again who slowed down the whole process, who has weaponized the entire st show in order to gaslight the dense of thinking?

Yeah but if you made the process efficient, this would be a smaller issue than the 600k legal net migration, mostly from India and China. Why would you want people to ask questions about that??

[smn159]

President Merkin said:

Olivera said:

GDP is not government spending. Very odd that you would quote GDP.

£5-10bn is the equivalent to about half of the entire policing budget in 2024 for England, or the entire budget of The Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. It's a significant amount given our squeezed public spending and deficit. Hence why even Starmer agrees that this number needs reduced.

No one is saying it's a small number. Lots that it's not as big as you think it is, but you are choosing to ignore them. That's your business but if you have a bit of self awareness, you might want to consider how you got there. Otherwise, crack on.

To put it into context - About the same as the money wasted by the government on a single PPE contract

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cll476qzm85o

[PurplePenguin]

Dave200 said:

Olivera said:

Dave200 said:

Current costing is estimated at £1.3bn a year.

It's not costing £1.3bn per year: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-68613186

The National Audit Office states: "the Home Office still expects to spend £3.1bn on private accommodation in the year up to March 2024.".

That's just accommodation, so you need to add on welfare, legal, translation, health spending on top.

Looks like the numbers I found were wrong.

So should I assume you'll be voting Labour, who have a plan to tackle immigration numbers AND the (completely unrelated) problem of "small boats"?

Because government “plans” always work. It will be very interesting to revisit in a year to see how Labour will have sorted illegal immigration.

[Vanden Saab]

Vasco said:

Dave200 said:

I find it curious that there's so much (misplaced) emphasis on "small boats" from Reform supporters, but none of them seem willing to back Labour who pledge to stop them.
https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/uk-opposition-lea...

Of course Labour are also planning to deal with the actual immigration problems, rather than just standing on a cliff and pointing at the boats as evidence of a broken immigration system.

So, the big pledge from Starmer to the small boats issue is to work with our foreign colleagues. How is that different to the current arrangement ?

It is not. It is just a sop to the white knights who think anything bar taking them back or sending them somewhere else when they arrive will actually work.
You only have to look at the resources the EU has and their abject failure to do anything about the smugglers to understand that.

[Murph7355]

Dave200 said:

Looks like the numbers I found were wrong.

So should I assume you'll be voting Labour, who have a plan to tackle immigration numbers AND the (completely unrelated) problem of "small boats"?

Ha ha haaaaaaaaaaaaa.

Sounds like you seem to be suggesting voting Labour for similar reason to those you tabled earlier.

[Mr Penguin]

https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/refor...

Twenty-two Reform candidates have been found to have expressed sympathies for Putin, according to The Mail on Sunday.

These include Jonathan Mappin, a Farage ally, who said: “Being friends with Putin is very smart. We love him.” He added that President Zelensky was “murderous” and forced “every Nato citizen … to fund his Nazi operations”.

I can see why they don't suspend their candidates after saying this stuff because they'd have none left.

[Dave200]

Murph7355 said:

Dave200 said:

Looks like the numbers I found were wrong.

So should I assume you'll be voting Labour, who have a plan to tackle immigration numbers AND the (completely unrelated) problem of "small boats"?

Ha ha haaaaaaaaaaaaa.

Sounds like you seem to be suggesting voting Labour for similar reason to those you tabled earlier.

"I'm voting Reform, lol".

This is grown-up political discourse at its finest.

[Dave200]

PurplePenguin said:

Dave200 said:

Olivera said:

Dave200 said:

Current costing is estimated at £1.3bn a year.

It's not costing £1.3bn per year: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-68613186

The National Audit Office states: "the Home Office still expects to spend £3.1bn on private accommodation in the year up to March 2024.".

That's just accommodation, so you need to add on welfare, legal, translation, health spending on top.

Looks like the numbers I found were wrong.

So should I assume you'll be voting Labour, who have a plan to tackle immigration numbers AND the (completely unrelated) problem of "small boats"?

Because government “plans” always work. It will be very interesting to revisit in a year to see how Labour will have sorted illegal immigration.

And if Labour don't succeed, I'd expect them to be judged against that failure at the next election. That's how politics works.

Unless you're a Reform voter, it seems. I'm still waiting for someone here to explain the specifics of Reform's plan for immigration and boat people that has won them over. I feel like I might be waiting a while here.

[Olivera]

Dave200 said:

So should I assume you'll be voting Labour, who have a plan to tackle immigration numbers AND the (completely unrelated) problem of "small boats"?

Yes I intend to, as the current government is an incompetent busted flush.

Having said that I don't see current very high immigration numbers as being in any way compatible with a leftist political stance, so I'd like to see it significantly reduced.

[don'tbesilly]

Vanden Saab said:

Vasco said:

Dave200 said:

I find it curious that there's so much (misplaced) emphasis on "small boats" from Reform supporters, but none of them seem willing to back Labour who pledge to stop them.
https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/uk-opposition-lea...

Of course Labour are also planning to deal with the actual immigration problems, rather than just standing on a cliff and pointing at the boats as evidence of a broken immigration system.

So, the big pledge from Starmer to the small boats issue is to work with our foreign colleagues. How is that different to the current arrangement ?

It is not. It is just a sop to the white knights who think anything bar taking them back or sending them somewhere else when they arrive will actually work.
You only have to look at the resources the EU has and their abject failure to do anything about the smugglers to understand that.

Labour will just sign up to the EU immigration pact, so instead of anything between 30-40k arrivals across the Channel, it will be 100,000+ legally + 100’s/1000’s still arriving across the channel after dodging the half ar*ed attempts to be caught by the gendarmes who are waving them off on the beaches.

[Mortarboard]

don'tbesilly said:

Labour will just sign up to the EU immigration pact, so instead of anything between 30-40k arrivals across the Channel, it will be 100,000+ legally + 100’s/1000’s still arriving across the channel after dodging the half ar*ed attempts to be caught by the gendarmes who are waving them off on the beaches.

Current inward uk immigration is what, 1 million or more p.a.?

So that'd be about 15% of what it currently is then.

Voting labour now, dbs?

M.

[thetapeworm]

An old associate...

[Dave200]

don'tbesilly said:

Vanden Saab said:

Vasco said:

Dave200 said:

I find it curious that there's so much (misplaced) emphasis on "small boats" from Reform supporters, but none of them seem willing to back Labour who pledge to stop them.
https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/uk-opposition-lea...

Of course Labour are also planning to deal with the actual immigration problems, rather than just standing on a cliff and pointing at the boats as evidence of a broken immigration system.

So, the big pledge from Starmer to the small boats issue is to work with our foreign colleagues. How is that different to the current arrangement ?

It is not. It is just a sop to the white knights who think anything bar taking them back or sending them somewhere else when they arrive will actually work.
You only have to look at the resources the EU has and their abject failure to do anything about the smugglers to understand that.

Labour will just sign up to the EU immigration pact, so instead of anything between 30-40k arrivals across the Channel, it will be 100,000+ legally + 100’s/1000’s still arriving across the channel after dodging the half ar*ed attempts to be caught by the gendarmes who are waving them off on the beaches.

Where did you read that in their three-point plan? Or is this yet more "Labour bogeyman" wibbling?

1) Boost Britain’s skills by joining-up Whitehall systems to spot and tackle skills shortages – so we can fire up skills training rather than look overseas to fill skills gaps, and end the days of sectors languishing on the shortage of skills list without a plan to deal with the problem.

2) Reform the points-based immigration system, bringing down migration. We will instruct the Migration Advisory Committee (MAC) to partner with other government agencies to ensure joined-up action to deliver the skills needed for growth, including priority sectors for our industrial strategy. We will work to reduce the need for international recruitment, boost per-capita growth, and ensure quick responses to changes in the labour market.

3) New powers to ban hiring from overseas for employers and recruitment agencies who break employment law. An end to workplace exploitation, where migration is used as a way to undercut the terms and conditions of workers here.

In essence, the above is a more intelligent and well thought-out version of what Reform are proposing with their vague "Freeze Non-Essential Immigration" and "Employer Immigration Tax" policies. Farage was challenged on the detail of this a couple of weeks back on BBC R4, and couldn't actually tell anyone what "Essential Immigration" was in practice.

Reform also make "small boats" the second bullet point in their 7-point plan, and their only detail as to how they plan to achieve this is the frankly ludicrous idea of leaving the ECHR.

Labour, on the other hand, have actually given this some thought and separated the issue out from immigration.
"Labour will launch a new Border Security Command with hundreds of new specialist investigators and counter-terror powers to smash criminal gangs and strengthen our borders."

So then, tell me what it is SPECIFICALLY about Reform's policy that you think people should vote for?

[andymadmak]

Dave200 said:

Where did you read that in their three-point plan? Or is this yet more "Labour bogeyman" wibbling?

1) Boost Britain’s skills by joining-up Whitehall systems to spot and tackle skills shortages – so we can fire up skills training rather than look overseas to fill skills gaps, and end the days of sectors languishing on the shortage of skills list without a plan to deal with the problem.

2) Reform the points-based immigration system, bringing down migration. We will instruct the Migration Advisory Committee (MAC) to partner with other government agencies to ensure joined-up action to deliver the skills needed for growth, including priority sectors for our industrial strategy. We will work to reduce the need for international recruitment, boost per-capita growth, and ensure quick responses to changes in the labour market.

3) New powers to ban hiring from overseas for employers and recruitment agencies who break employment law. An end to workplace exploitation, where migration is used as a way to undercut the terms and conditions of workers here.

I think the above is a good start towards ensuring UK is focussed on securing the skills it needs, through a combination of improved training of British young people and selective immigration that brings in those we still need.
We still need some unskilled immigration though, so how do we ensure that we get the quantity and quality we want? I see the changes the Tories made post Brexit that allowed the explosion our student visas and then extended to families has lead to the 600k+ we have now, but even if SKS changes those rules, how does the Govt secure the right people?

I'm also entirely unclear how this deals with the issue of the boat people? Granted the numbers in boats is comparatively small but its a problem that needs to be addressed because:

1. Too many people are dying making the trip
2. People are being exploited
3. It's a totem that Reform et al point to
4. The media likes to give us the daily numbers - further fuelling unease

Edited to add: "Labour will launch a new Border Security Command with hundreds of new specialist investigators and counter-terror powers to smash criminal gangs and strengthen our borders." Are the French going to let British investigators operate in France?

[Dave200]

andymadmak said:

Dave200 said:

Where did you read that in their three-point plan? Or is this yet more "Labour bogeyman" wibbling?

1) Boost Britain’s skills by joining-up Whitehall systems to spot and tackle skills shortages – so we can fire up skills training rather than look overseas to fill skills gaps, and end the days of sectors languishing on the shortage of skills list without a plan to deal with the problem.

2) Reform the points-based immigration system, bringing down migration. We will instruct the Migration Advisory Committee (MAC) to partner with other government agencies to ensure joined-up action to deliver the skills needed for growth, including priority sectors for our industrial strategy. We will work to reduce the need for international recruitment, boost per-capita growth, and ensure quick responses to changes in the labour market.

3) New powers to ban hiring from overseas for employers and recruitment agencies who break employment law. An end to workplace exploitation, where migration is used as a way to undercut the terms and conditions of workers here.

I think the above is a good start towards ensuring UK is focussed on securing the skills it needs, through a combination of improved training of British young people and selective immigration that brings in those we still need.
We still need some unskilled immigration though, so how do we ensure that we get the quantity and quality we want? I see the changes the Tories made post Brexit that allowed the explosion our student visas and then extended to families has lead to the 600k+ we have now, but even if SKS changes those rules, how does the Govt secure the right people?

I'm also entirely unclear how this deals with the issue of the boat people? Granted the numbers in boats is comparatively small but its a problem that needs to be addressed because:

1. Too many people are dying making the trip
2. People are being exploited
3. It's a totem that Reform et al point to
4. The media likes to give us the daily numbers - further fuelling unease

You've literally deleted the part of my post that explains their plan to deal with "the boat people". Did you not read it before you deleted it???

Labour's points-based immigration system will deal with the requirement for unskilled labour, I suspect. If they get it right, there will be a quota of unskilled labour allowable via immigration. In stark contrast to Reform's vague "non-essential" strapline.

[Murph7355]

Dave200 said:

Murph7355 said:

Dave200 said:

Looks like the numbers I found were wrong.

So should I assume you'll be voting Labour, who have a plan to tackle immigration numbers AND the (completely unrelated) problem of "small boats"?

Ha ha haaaaaaaaaaaaa.

Sounds like you seem to be suggesting voting Labour for similar reason to those you tabled earlier.

"I'm voting Reform, lol".

This is grown-up political discourse at its finest.

Reap what you sow.