UK Politics General Discussion

Matt N said:

You really need legislation to have contribution from experts in the field if you want it to be successful.

Click to expand...

But we've been sick of experts since 2016 apparently.

Just get Tim from down the local to draw up the plans to stop the boats. And Derrick to redesign HS2 for a far cheaper rate.

HS2 could have been made much cheaper if they didn't insist on it going quite so fast. If it was a little bit slower it could have been more curvy to skirt around spans of water, bat populations, hills etc instead of having to build tunnels and bridges and whatnot. But they insisted on the extra bit of speed as it was always a vanity project and a white elephant. The extra bit of speed gives you hardly any benefit as the distance travelled in this country is so small relative to the likes of China and France. Even Derrick could have looked at both of those options and decided on the slower trains.

As for the boat people. Kier's not exactly smashing the gangs is he? 25,000 people have entered by boat so far this year making it a record (approx the population of somewhere like Harrogate). The truth is, they want the immigration. He's done nothing of any substance to stop it. All his initiatives are total rubbish that won't make a dent in the numbers. Whether you like it or not, it's a big issue for voters and if he doesn't sort it you'll end up with a Reform like party eventually.

BarryZola said:

HS2 could have been made much cheaper if they didn't insist on it going quite so fast. If it was a little bit slower it could have been more curvy to skirt around spans of water, bat populations, hills etc instead of having to build tunnels and bridges and whatnot. But they insisted on the extra bit of speed as it was always a vanity project and a white elephant. The extra bit of speed gives you hardly any benefit as the distance travelled in this country is so small relative to the likes of China and France.

Click to expand...

HS2 could have been cheaper if they had left it out in the open instead of the NIMBYs wanting it covered and in tunnels to protect the views. They could have cut the number of tunnels anyway and just run at ground level in some sections.

BarryZola said:

As for the boat people. Kier's not exactly smashing the gangs is he? 25,000 people have entered by boat so far this year making it a record (approx the population of somewhere like Harrogate). The truth is, they want the immigration. He's done nothing of any substance to stop it. All his initiatives are total rubbish that won't make a dent in the numbers. Whether you like it or not, it's a big issue for voters and if he doesn't sort it you'll end up with a Reform like party eventually.

Click to expand...

The rise in the number of crossings is due to the better weather. Simplest way to stop them would be to have an asylum processing centre in France.

jon81uk said:

The rise in the number of crossings is due to the better weather. Simplest way to stop them would be to have an asylum processing centre in France.

Click to expand...

That probably wouldn't work either, as they know if they come here they will have their accommodation paid for and will be able to go out to work for Just Eat etc with false identification or in some back-street operation, whilst having a weekly allowance from the government on top. The way to stop them is to make coming here not any more advantageous than other countries (less pull factors, as they say).

In the short term, personally I would sack the hotel accommodation off and we would build army barrack style accommodation with dorm rooms whilst they wait for a decision on their asylum claims. Perfectly adequate but basic and cheaper for the tax-payer long-term. When we get to the point where the numbers are lower these places can be re-purposed into Cat D (open) prisons so they're still value for money for the tax-payer. If you're fleeing a country where your life is in imminent danger you'll be glad of a safe place to stay with a roof over your head and food provided. Obviously have provision for exercise and other pass-times. These people wouldn't be free to just go out and get lost in society and work illegally.

Also, in general, build more prisons so we can start handing out proper sentences again. People know that they can come here and if they get into criminality the sentences are pathetic. Let's have a bit of deterrent.

Have some way of limiting (not denying completely) benefits etc until successful asylum applicants have paid into the system for a certain number of years.

People/families who have been granted asylum will generally not jump the queue for housing in front of anyone who has already been on the waiting list before them, regardless if they've got 4 children or not.

Introduce I.D cards for everyone in Britain. I've got nothing to hide, so bring it on. If you're a genuine citizen the government will already know everything about you anyway.

Literally have teams of people paid and stationed along French beaches to destroy the boats before or as they get into the water. We know the general areas where they travel from and to across the channel. All the hundreds of millions of pounds we've given to the French over the years has seemingly done nothing to stop it.

Longer term I would like to explore being able to ban anyone from ever being granted asylum here if they enter illegally/irregularly. I know this is problematic due to our relationship with the ECHR. This would be alongside setting up processing centres abroad so people can open a claim in a fair and legal way from other countries, but there would be a cap. When people do get granted asylum, if they require social housing they should be distributed throughout the UK instead of all being gathered in the major towns and cities. This is better for social cohesion.

Another option is to bring something like the Rwanda plan into action if you can get it through the courts. Yes, it seems expensive but once the deterrent is known about and understood by those who would choose to come here illegally, the numbers will reduce and so will the cost. Starmer never wanted to give it a chance to work. Nothing else seems to work so why wouldn't he give it a try?

Just some ideas. Enough for you to get stuck into me about there?

BarryZola said:

That probably wouldn't work either, as they know if they come here they will have their accommodation paid for and will be able to go out to work for Just Eat etc with false identification or in some back-street operation, whilst having a weekly allowance from the government on top. The way to stop them is to make coming here not any more advantageous than other countries (less pull factors, as they say).

Click to expand...

I don't think we give more than any other country, looks very similar to what France offers in terms of a living allowance.

BarryZola said:

In the short term, personally I would sack the hotel accommodation off and we would build army barrack style accommodation with dorm rooms whilst they wait for a decision on their asylum claims. Perfectly adequate but basic and cheaper for the tax-payer long-term

Click to expand...

Thats still a long-term thing as need to build them first. All the short-term ideas (remeber the housing them on a boat one) have gone wrong. Better long-term plan is to actually process the applications so we don't need to house them in temporary accommodation. If we can process the application within weeks not months/years then won't need the hotels as exisiting asylum centres would be OK. Moving the processing overseas would help with this too.

BarryZola said:

Also, in general, build more prisons so we can start handing out proper sentences again. People know that they can come here and if they get into criminality the sentences are pathetic. Let's have a bit of deterrent.

Click to expand...

Prison isn't a deterrent, plenty of studies show this. We need rehabilitation instead, also better mental health and homeless support would go a lot further than just locking people up.

BarryZola said:

Literally have teams of people paid and stationed along French beaches to destroy the boats before or as they get into the water. We know the general areas where they travel from and to across the channel. All the hundreds of millions of pounds we've given to the French over the years has seemingly done nothing to stop it.

Click to expand...

France have agreed to start doing this a little more at least. Also what millions of pounds given to the French? But again a processing centre in France is the better solution rather than trying to force French police to do something.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-64916446 £500 million for a start.

As for the 'speeding up the asylum application decisions' thing. Interestingly enough, during a similar debate on here several months ago someone made an off the cuff remark that someone should look at applying to join the team doing that if they're so bothered (or something like that). So, I actually looked into it a bit further and applied for a job as a decision maker! I'm 100% serious. So, I applied and did the initial online test and they were supposed to get back to me with the next part of the application. Since then, all they've done every couple of weeks is send me an email saying that they're currently reviewing my application and they'll be in touch soon. I applied on the 13th of May. They're obviously not in that much of a rush if they can't make a simple decision on whether to progress an initial application to the next level after two and a half months. It's literally exactly the same message every single time every fortnight. It's easy to just send a rejection message if they deem me not good enough, but they just don't seem to be dealing with it at all, and I'm not bothered enough to chase it up.

BarryZola said:

HS2 could have been made much cheaper if they didn't insist on it going quite so fast. If it was a little bit slower it could have been more curvy to skirt around spans of water, bat populations, hills etc instead of having to build tunnels and bridges and whatnot. But they insisted on the extra bit of speed as it was always a vanity project and a white elephant. The extra bit of speed gives you hardly any benefit as the distance travelled in this country is so small relative to the likes of China and France. Even Derrick could have looked at both of those options and decided on the slower trains.

Click to expand...

HS2 is wasted on the south of the country.

The money would have been far better actually improving the east and west coast lines. It was laughable that the new line would shave a whopping 20mins from Leeds to London. Well worth the tax payers billions.

It would also have been better spent actually building a decent rail connection between the cities in the north. Getting from Leeds to Manchester and Liverpool is absolute graft. Slow times following Victorian routes. Rolling stock is old and outdated. That's if they are bothering to run at all.

As for the boats.

No one knows what to do. Keir Starmer hasn't dealt with issue. When you ask those who shout "stop the boats" they have even less of plan. Farage only solution is putting on a little sailor suit and pointing at them.

Slugjc said:

The money would have been far better actually improving the east and west coast lines. It was laughable that the new line would shave a whopping 20mins from Leeds to London. Well worth the tax payers billions.

It would also have been better spent actually building a decent rail connection between the cities in the north. Getting from Leeds to Manchester and Liverpool is absolute graft. Slow times following Victorian routes. Rolling stock is old and outdated. That's if they are bothering to run at all.

Click to expand...

We need both, the west coast mainline needs the capacity so the additional tracks from London to Birmingham and up to Manchester is needed. But also east-west rail is much needed too.

I say stop spending on motorways and invest more in trains. Maintain local roads better but for city to city transport we need more capacity on some train routes and as you say, new train routes as well.

Selling HS2 as a "quicker" option rather than a "reducing the amount of trains on local lines freeing them up for more local services" is just typical government.

Why all the surprise at the lack of competence behind the Online Safety bill? Insert some heated politics into it and it's going to be badly designed. I thought we'd be used to how it works by now?

"Save the children from porn" sounds noble, to hell with the details. "Tax Amazon warehouses to save the high street" (futile) does as well, until you consider the fact that it actually hits the retailers with less deeper pockets than Amazon the hardest.

HS2 doesn't benefit "The South". Rail is as crap in the west as it is in the North. Wales is even worse. HS2 goes nowhere near either of them.

Matt.GC said:

Why all the surprise at the lack of competence behind the Online Safety bill? Insert some heated politics into it and it's going to be badly designed. I thought we'd be used to how it works by now? "Save the children from porn" sounds noble, to hell with the details

Click to expand...

Not sure about the heated politics - just a bill designed by people that have no idea of the real world. It's a missed opportunity that I'm sure will have legal ramifications (what about playing an 18+ title on your PS/Xbox).

I firmly believe that it will create more harm than it does good. The easiest/free VPN is the TOR browser. Good luck keeping kids safe on that!

Smiley said:

Not sure about the heated politics - just a bill designed by people that have no idea of the real world. It's a missed opportunity that I'm sure will have legal ramifications (what about playing an 18+ title on your PS/Xbox).

Click to expand...

Think Microsoft have already mentioned adding in age verification for the account(s) on the console to be compliant.