Brexit discussion thread III

J Mysterio

Sajid Javid new Home Secretary.

The home secretary, whose parents emigrated from Pakistan in the 1960s, spoke at the weekend about his initial reaction to news of the treatment of Windrush-generation migrants.

“I thought that could be my mum? My dad? My uncle? It could be me,” he said.

Javid (48) said he recognised the scandal could cause concern among ethnic minority voters but issued a plea to those who were wavering to look at the government’s attempts to “put things right”.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/uk/sajid-javid-replaces-amber-rudd-as-uk-home-secretary-1.3478924?mode=amp

J Mysterio

Tories are falling over themselves to cover May now. Re: Rudd, it's not connected to May as 'her resignation was due to misleading Parliament and committee, not May introduced reforms leading ro Windrush scandal. But now this...

Theresa May has revealed she did know there were targets for deporting illegal immigrants – hours after a Cabinet minister suggested she had no knowledge.

The comment will pile pressure on the prime minister to explain to MPs why she did not intervene, to point out that Amber Rudd – when denying the targets existed – had misled parliament.

Earlier, Chris Grayling, the transport secretary, suggested Ms May had been ignorant of the targets, because she had “not been home secretary for an extensive period”.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/theresa-may-deportation-targets-home-office-amber-rudd-chris-grayling-a8329366.html

May should have resigned many times over now. She is undoubtedly the worst PM the UK has ever seen. Gutless, dishonest and nasty. A very poor leader who can't control her own party and a PM who cant relate to ordinary people at all - she looks totally bewildered anytime she has to stand in a factory or buy some chips.

Professor Moriarty

The shift in balance between Remain and Leave in cabinet is quite significant. While Javid reluctantly voted Remain, he has a history of eurosceptism and has moved into the Brexiteer camp. Here is a Javid tweet from two weeks ago:

British people gave politicians clear instructions through EU referendum. Includes leaving the Customs Union, an intrinsic part of the EU. Britain must leave CU and be able to negotiate & sign own trade deals

J Mysterio

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

British people gave politicians clear instructions through EU referendum. Includes leaving the Customs Union, an intrinsic part of the EU. Britain must leave CU and be able to negotiate & sign own trade deals

There is another shameless lie.

Professor Moriarty

J Mysterio wrote: »

There is another shameless lie.

Yes. A naked lie. But that doesn't seem to matter anymore.

flatty

Rudd floated a kite for staying in the cu, and was gone in 48 hours. Just saying.

mayo.mick

Seems the DUP are a little annoyed, again.

https://twitter.com/oconnellhugh/status/990932105935904768

ancapailldorcha

Mod: Leave the name calling elsewhere please.

Hurrache

I must have miss their whinging when we had a representative of the UK government visit recently under the exact same circumstances.

EdgeCase

I don't think many older European (and French) politicians forget the time that Paisley had to be basically thrown out of the European parliament screaming something about "I denounce you antichrist" at the Pope on an official courtesy visit way back 1988. He had called in as part of a trip to Alsace-Lorraine. (It's immortalised on YouTube.)

I wouldn't think they waste too much time assuming the DUP are a normal political party.

ambro25

EdgeCase wrote: »

I don't think many older European (and French) politicians forget the time that Paisley had to be basically thrown out of the European parliament screaming something about "I denounce you antichrist" at the Pope on an official courtesy visit way back 1988. He had called in as part of a trip to Alsace-Lorraine. (It's immortalised on YouTube.)

I wouldn't think they waste too much time assuming the DUP are a normal political party.

You might be delighted at the irony that the President of the EEC Parliament at the time, and who eventually had to order him out, was Lord Charles Henry Plumb of Britain.

Zubeneschamali

ambro25 wrote: »

You might be delighted at the irony that the President of the EEC Parliament at the time, and who eventually had to order him out, was Lord Charles Henry Plumb of Britain.

...or the bizarre fact that one of the people who ejected him was heir to the throne of the Austro-Hungarian Empire!

Danzy

What it does show is the need to have a national ID card and to make that card largely mandatory for employment, renting, etc etc,

If that was the case this problem would not have arisen.

Danzy

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

The Windrush folks are completely legal, that is why this is, y'know, a scandal.

I am aware of that, there has been such a laissez faire to migration and especially illegal migrants, left and right both bought in to that Neoliberal approach, that even a slight reversal was going to cause problems for some.

Better targetting, stricter regulation,national ID cards, all should have been in years ago and this problem could have been avoided.

The policy is correct but given the mess made of migration in to Britain over the years, there was going to be problems.

They should of course receive restitution in the few cases it has caused problems for those with legitimate cause.

Water John

You cannot change a policy, without first, securing fully the rights, of those presently in the system.
They went off half cock, and that happened under TM's watch. Did not fully transition those with some residency rights, into full citizens. This was a longish and awkward process, taking months. They now can do it in 2 hours. But all historical ones should have been completed before a, change of policy.
Interesting to inquire, how are the Irish immune? Because we are in the EU?

Rudd is taking one here, that should be striking at May.

Sam Russell

Danzy wrote: »

I am aware of that, there has been such a laissez faire to migration and especially illegal migrants, left and right both bought in to that Neoliberal approach, that even a slight reversal was going to cause problems for some.

Better targetting, stricter regulation,national ID cards, all should have been in years ago and this problem could have been avoided.

The policy is correct but given the mess made of migration in to Britain over the years, there was going to be problems.

They should of course receive restitution in the few cases it has caused problems for those with legitimate cause.

They have no database of any description that is accurate enough to issue ID cards to people. The National Insurance database is only of those that pay tax. The Passport database is only of those that have a passport. There are many GB citizens who have no entry on either one.

Time for an amnesty of those affected - be they legal or illegal.

Danzy

Sam Russell wrote: »

They have no database of any description that is accurate enough to issue ID cards to people. The National Insurance database is only of those that pay tax. The Passport database is only of those that have a passport. There are many GB citizens who have no entry on either one.

Time for an amnesty of those affected - be they legal or illegal.

An amnesty might be a wet dream for the Boris Johnson wing and free market ideologues in the Tories but they tend not to work sustainably which is often the whole point.

They have to organize this properly, no doubt, but given the mess made over many years, the solution will be messy at first.

Kicking the can is no longer an option.

Sam Russell

Danzy wrote: »

An amnesty might be a wet dream for the Boris Johnson wing and free market ideologues in the Tories but they tend not to work sustainably which is often the whole point.

They have to organize this properly, no doubt, but given the mess made over many years, the solution will be messy at first.

Kicking the can is no longer an option.

It would be an opportunity to show some good faith (in very short supply by all accounts) towards the EU and EU citizens by including them in the ID scheme, and giving them official 'Leave to Remain' or whatever status that is appropriate.

They have blown a hole in the bottom of the Good Ship Trust that would enable the EU to place any credence in their word.

Leroy42

Danzy wrote: »

An amnesty might be a wet dream for the Boris Johnson wing and free market ideologues in the Tories but they tend not to work sustainably which is often the whole point.

They have to organize this properly, no doubt, but given the mess made over many years, the solution will be messy at first.

Kicking the can is no longer an option.

Do you think a messy start, such as that visited on the Windrush generation, is an acceptable price to pay?

EdgeCase

It’s actually fairly typical of the UK approach - nothing is done in a very clear, codified or systematised way. It’s always layers and layers of legacy arrangements and belt and braces approaches to things.

Everything’s very reliant on self regulation and so on.

Very much coming from the common law tradition and the notion of things just being law because they’re done that way.

Even their constitution is a bit of a confusing mess of ancient history and case law that has to be consulted like reading tea leaves from time to time.

Ireland is actually less like that as we’ve a written constitution and I genuinely think we have become more technocratic, codified and organised due to interaction with other systems.

The advantages of increasing codification is that everyone can access all the information without spending decades researching - it’s transparent.

I think that’s also where there coming to a major showdown with the EU. One side is based on make-it-up-as-you-go-along politics and the other side is an international body that’s built around codified treaty law and effectively operating within a set of treaties that are akin to a written constitution. It also very much comes from the civil code, not common law traditions.

Leroy42

EdgeCase wrote: »

It’s actually fairly typical of the UK approach - nothing is done in a very clear, codified or systematised way. It’s always layers and layers of legacy arrangements and belt and braces approaches to things.

Everything’s very reliant on self regulation and so on.

Very much coming from the common law tradition and the notion of things just being law because they’re done that way.

Even their constitution is a bit of a confusing mess of ancient history and case law that has to be consulted like reading tea leaves from time to time.

Ireland is actually less like that as we’ve a written constitution and I genuinely think we have become more technocratic, codified and organised due to interaction with other systems.

The advantages of increasing codification is that everyone can access all the information without spending decades researching - it’s transparent.

You have a point in the overall, but this mess has nothing to do with any of that. It stems from a decision by the Tory party but be more like UKIP, to be seen to be tough on immigration.

This is simply looking to take the easiest approach to that. Pick off the most venerable. They promised to reduce immigration, and since they were getting nowhere with the EU, decided to pick on the other countries.

Hence why only 2 weeks ago the UK refused a meeting about this with the Commonwealth countries that had been affected.

This has nothing to do with lack of leadership, lack of constitution, lack of political will. This has all to do with a party scrambling to be as populist as possible and willing to make their own people suffer once it could be hidden from the main stream.

EdgeCase

Well yeah the politics of populist xenophobia are a big part of it. I just mean on the day to day issues around all of how these things seem to be possible in the first place.

You’ve populists, xenophobes and racists abusing a system a system that is based on trust, not rule of law really. It granted people nebulous rights without actually writing anything down.

A weak system open to horrific abuse basically that has ended up allowing, what amounts to blatantly racist politics, to target people.

On the Brexit negotiations it’s the same. They seem to agree things then claim they didn’t agree anything.

It’s a totally duplicitous way of operating where nothing is committed to and I think that’s wheee Brexit will hit the rocks.

trellheim

I have a huge issue with ID cards; they are not necessary in any system and are just a crutch for bureaucratic minds at best and at worst its the Gestapo and papers please. That this is even being contemplated in the UK - the land of "your word is your bond" is insanity

EdgeCase

The problem is your word isn’t your bond in this case

You are told one thing and the next thing you’re being handed a guidebook telling you how to put on a Jamaican accent and blend in preparation for your imminent deportation, when you’ve spent your entire life contributing to the country and assumed you were there entirely legally, based on someone’s “word being their bond.”

If it’s not written down - it’s waffle.

You saw them pull the exact same kind of stunt where they agreed all sorts of stuff with Ireland and the rest of the EU to move forward to stage 2 of the negotiations and then we discover, oh no.. they didn’t ... they had their fingers crossed behind their back the whole time.

You’re dealing with the political equivalents of used car sales tactics.

“Tell them what they want to hear” ...

Danzy

The problem is not in the legislation but the free market bolloxology that created the mess.

If there had been a strictly regulated migration program.

If a strict approach was taken to illegal migration this problem would not have arisen.

It is crap that a few thousand out of millions have been affected but that was going to happen, unfortunately,given the mess made over decades.

Letting it build further is not an option though.

Capt'n Midnight

Hurrache wrote: »

I must have miss their whinging when we had a representative of the UK government visit recently under the exact same circumstances.

https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/brexit/secret-border-visit-by-david-davis-showed-contempt-for-politicians-says-sf-36841754.html

SDLP MLA Claire Hanna described the visit as "nothing more than a box-ticking exercise".
...
Former Ulster Unionist leader Mike Nesbitt also voiced his criticism.

"How on earth can the Brexit Secretary make his first visit to the border without informing the media, or talking to anyone beyond the head of the Autism Centre in Middletown? Open, transparent, confident in his stance? Not!"

DUP deputy leader Nigel Dodds told the BBC that it was "very important" local MPs were notified ahead of a ministerial visit to their constituencies.

Meanwhile SF have used the word "Londonderry" and supported the election of a Unionist to the Seanad. Strange days indeed.

Meanwhile the DUP are biting the hand. This comment sums it up nicely.
https://sluggerotoole.com/2018/04/26/dup-threatening-to-bring-the-government-down-over-a-customs-union-or-are-they/

So let me get this straight. The DUP who embarrassed Theresa May in December in front of the world, the PM of the United Kingdom being strongarmed during a meeting with Jean-Claude Juncker by an MLA from Fermanagh. The DUP who then embarrass her again when she shows up at Stormont to unveil a deal that falls apart 24 hours later. This DUP are now openly threatening the Prime Minister over the backstop. Threatening to bring down the government. Threatening to open the door for Corbyn. Not only that but suggesting that they would be prepared to accept a customs union for the whole of the UK which will incense the right wing in the Tory party. They are overplaying their hand big time and making a very dangerous enemy in the Conservative party. Their revenge will be served very very cold.

flatty

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Hurrache wrote: »

I must have miss their whinging when we had a representative of the UK government visit recently under the exact same circumstances.

https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/brexit/secret-border-visit-by-david-davis-showed-contempt-for-politicians-says-sf-36841754.html

SDLP MLA Claire Hanna described the visit as "nothing more than a box-ticking exercise".
...
Former Ulster Unionist leader Mike Nesbitt also voiced his criticism.

"How on earth can the Brexit Secretary make his first visit to the border without informing the media, or talking to anyone beyond the head of the Autism Centre in Middletown? Open, transparent, confident in his stance? Not!"

DUP deputy leader Nigel Dodds told the BBC that it was "very important" local MPs were notified ahead of a ministerial visit to their constituencies.

Meanwhile SF have used the word "Londonderry" and supported the election of a Unionist to the Seanad. Strange days indeed.

Meanwhile the DUP are biting the hand. This comment sums it up nicely.
https://sluggerotoole.com/2018/04/26/dup-threatening-to-bring-the-government-down-over-a-customs-union-or-are-they/

So let me get this straight. The DUP who embarrassed Theresa May in December in front of the world, the PM of the United Kingdom being strongarmed during a meeting with Jean-Claude Juncker by an MLA from Fermanagh. The DUP who then embarrass her again when she shows up at Stormont to unveil a deal that falls apart 24 hours later. This DUP are now openly threatening the Prime Minister over the backstop. Threatening to bring down the government. Threatening to open the door for Corbyn. Not only that but suggesting that they would be prepared to accept a customs union for the whole of the UK which will incense the right wing in the Tory party. They are overplaying their hand big time and making a very dangerous enemy in the Conservative party. Their revenge will be served very very cold.

Possibly. It depends who is in power. A United Ireland is inevitable in the medium term in any case, revenge or no.

An Ciarraioch

Fresh defeat for the Government in the House of Lords (336-245) : essentially giving Parliament a mandate to send May back to the table if the talks are in danger of collapse:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/apr/30/fresh-lords-defeat-for-government-makes-no-deal-less-likely

Larbre34

Brexit continues to die by a thousand cuts.

From the morning of the ref result Ive been saying they would never leave, but even i never thought they would wind themselves into such a long term damaging mess as they have in the process

sink

I'm worried that they're incompetent enough to leave with no deal almost by accident. It's going to take concerted action by the UK government to turn the ship around, if they continue on rudderless (no pun intended) they will crash out by default. Like a deer caught in the headlights or more aptly, diving of a cliff with ignorant confidence and breaking both legs.

steddyeddy

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Fresh defeat for the Government in the House of Lords (336-245) : essentially giving Parliament a mandate to send May back to the table if the talks are in danger of collapse:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/apr/30/fresh-lords-defeat-for-government-makes-no-deal-less-likely

The thing is that it doesn't matter if the UK aren't happy with the deal if they don't satisfy the Irish border problem. The default position that the UK will revert to is no deal. That will happen even if Parliament are unhappy with it.

Enzokk

Danzy wrote: »

I am aware of that, there has been such a laissez faire to migration and especially illegal migrants, left and right both bought in to that Neoliberal approach, that even a slight reversal was going to cause problems for some.

Better targetting, stricter regulation,national ID cards, all should have been in years ago and this problem could have been avoided.

The policy is correct but given the mess made of migration in to Britain over the years, there was going to be problems.

They should of course receive restitution in the few cases it has caused problems for those with legitimate cause.

But you are talking about Utopia here, where only the guilty go to jail and there are no injustices. The problem isn't that the policy is correct but the implementation is wrong. It's because the policy is wrong and you now have innocent people being hounded for no reason but to try and reach an number that was decided years ago.

If the Conservatives didn't target immigration at an unrealistic less than 100 000 per year then there would not have been the need to aggressively try and get people to leave the country, whether they were entitled to stay or not. That is why this story will most likely not be limited to the Windrush generation only. You will find that all non-EU immigrants will be targeted by this because these are the people the government thought they could require to leave without being told by a court that they are not allowed to do this. They could just ignore the countries, as Theresa May did at the Commonwealth meeting, and not be tied by the ECJ rulings.

As we know now though, had the government just applied the rules related to EU immigration they could probably have made a big dent to the immigration numbers. As you say they could have done this with proper checks but as you can see by the reply on here there is a reluctance for people to accept ID cards in the UK. I guess the people will have to decide, either you can get a degree of control by requiring everyone to get ID cards to help authorities to check that only those that have work can stay after 3 months. But people seem to want their cake and want to eat it as well (seems familiar), they don't want ID cards but they want the UK authorities to enforce the rules and those that can be asked to leave be asked to leave. Can't have it both ways.

Larbre34

steddyeddy wrote: »

The thing is that it doesn't matter if the UK aren't happy with the deal if they don't satisfy the Irish border problem. The default position that the UK will revert to is no deal. That will happen even if Parliament are unhappy with it.

The middle grounders in Parliament would immediately move to protect UK society in the event no deal looked likely. All but the Rees-Moggs and the Duncan Smiths, who do not live in the real world, comprehend what a critical and chaotic stop in UK commerce would mean.

Lemming

Enzokk wrote: »

That is why this story will most likely not be limited to the Windrush generation only. You will find that all non-EU immigrants will be targeted by this because these are the people the government thought they could require to leave without being told by a court that they are not allowed to do this.

It has already stretched beyond the windrush generation; a Canadian widow (of a UK citizen) having lived most of her adult life in the UK (and now well into pensionable years) has been threatened with deportation. That particular case made the papers last week (or late the week before) and was linked in this very thread iirc.

EU citizens have already had deportation letters sent to them "in error" as we already know. This apocryphal scandal will only continue to grow until it claims another few Tory ministerial scalps.

Capt'n Midnight

Lemming wrote: »

EU citizens have already had deportation letters sent to them "in error" as we already know. This apocryphal scandal will only continue to grow until it claims another few Tory ministerial scalps.

Just a reminder that like the Windrush Generation they were people who were registered. (Though in the Windrush case the landing papers were destroyed)

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/aug/23/home-office-apologises-for-letters-threatening-to-deport-eu-nationals

Although Eva Johanna Holmberg has lived in the UK with her British husband for most of the last decade, the correspondence from the Home Office said that if she did not leave the country of her own accord the department would give “directions for [her] removal”. It added that she was “a person liable to be detained under the Immigration Act”.

...
Holmberg had lived in the UK without complications for some time, but on the day May triggered article 50 she applied for a “qualified person certificate” to confirm her right to remain in the UK for her own “peace of mind”.

...
After the mistake came to light, the Home Office called Holmberg to “apologise profusely”, she said. But the person who telephoned her would not confirm that the government would cover her legal costs of about £3,800.

J Mysterio

sink wrote: »

I'm worried that they're incompetent enough to leave with no deal almost by accident. It's going to take concerted action by the UK government to turn the ship around, if they continue on rudderless (no pun intended)

Oh, good pun nonetheless. How did the tabloids miss that one?

Sam Russell

Enzokk wrote: »

But people seem to want their cake and want to eat it as well (seems familiar), they don't want ID cards but they want the UK authorities to enforce the rules and those that can be asked to leave be asked to leave. Can't have it both ways.

They want all the 'immigrants' to have ID cards but not themselves.

We have a similar problem where some people have to have Garda Immigration cards, but not genuine Irish citizens. However, not all Irish citizens look like Kathleen Ni Houlihaun, or Paddy Joe from down the road.

In fact, some are immigrants but actual citizens as well. It is for that reason that I have become convinced that on balance we should have a National ID card system here. Previously I would have been opposed to the idea.

Econ_

EdgeCase wrote: »

It’s actually fairly typical of the UK approach - nothing is done in a very clear, codified or systematised way. It’s always layers and layers of legacy arrangements and belt and braces approaches to things.

Everything’s very reliant on self regulation and so on.

Very much coming from the common law tradition and the notion of things just being law because they’re done that way.

Even their constitution is a bit of a confusing mess of ancient history and case law that has to be consulted like reading tea leaves from time to time.

Ireland is actually less like that as we’ve a written constitution and I genuinely think we have become more technocratic, codified and organised due to interaction with other systems.

The advantages of increasing codification is that everyone can access all the information without spending decades researching - it’s transparent.

I think that’s also where there coming to a major showdown with the EU. One side is based on make-it-up-as-you-go-along politics and the other side is an international body that’s built around codified treaty law and effectively operating within a set of treaties that are akin to a written constitution. It also very much comes from the civil code, not common law traditions.

You've reminded me of the Irish Times reader's Brexit description.


Brexit: The undefined being negotiated by the unprepared in order to get the unspecified for the uninformed.

EdgeCase

Sam Russell wrote: »

They want all the 'immigrants' to have ID cards but not themselves.

We have a similar problem where some people have to have Garda Immigration cards, but not genuine Irish citizens. However, not all Irish citizens look like Kathleen Ni Houlihaun, or Paddy Joe from down the road.

In fact, some are immigrants but actual citizens as well. It is for that reason that I have become convinced that on balance we should have a National ID card system here. Previously I would have been opposed to the idea.

The biggest one is on the border. I know a few people who are 100% Irish who were stopped and questioned or illegally entering the UK (Northern Ireland) effectively because they weren’t quite pasty white and freckly enough. In one case the person in question has a serious Cork accent and refused to speak anything other than Irish to the person questioning them.

It shows though how the CTA is a bit of a joke without some kind of ID as you can’t just psychically probe people to prove their Irishness or Britishness.

CrabRevolution

Found an old newspaper (The Irish Independent) from late 1992 while looking for some documents at home tonight. The 2 headlines were:

1. Pope issues warning against access to abortion information.

2. London fears for UK after ERM withdrawal.

With a subheading along the lines of "Economists fear the UK will be left out of key EC decision making when they withdraw from the ERM"

Plus ca change....

Kermit.de.frog

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/04/30/naive-leo-varadkar-manipulated-wily-michel-barnier/?utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter#link_time=1525112919

Ruth Dudley Edwards with her take in tomorrows telegraph.

Capt'n Midnight

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/04/30/naive-leo-varadkar-manipulated-wily-michel-barnier/?utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter#link_time=1525112919

Ruth Dudley Edwards with her take in tomorrows telegraph.

that's tame.

Former Ulster Unionist politician Lord John Kilclooney has referred to Irish Taoiseach Leo Varadkar as a "typical Indian" on social media.

https://mobile.twitter.com/KilclooneyJohn/status/990954166741856256

They're upset that Leo followed protocol
https://sluggerotoole.com/2018/04/30/dup-takes-aim-at-leo-varadkar/

Leo was to contact the government to inform them of his visit. As there is no government he informed the NIO. The DUP are trying to get one over nationalism for their criticism of David Davis and him not following protocol.

EdgeCase

I don’t think Varadkar is being naïve nor do I think the EU is being manipulative. It’s simply that the Irish interest is ideally for no Brexit at all or a very soft and non-disruptive Brexit.

The Irish and EU positions are simply very aligned on this.

We’ve no real shared interests with the brexiteers, the right wing of the Tories or the DUP.

What would be extreme naïveté, would be throwing our lot in with totally unpredictable jingoistic politicians who come from a political tradition (English right wing) that’s not very friendly to this country.

EdgeCase

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

that's tame.

Former Ulster Unionist politician Lord John Kilclooney has referred to Irish Taoiseach Leo Varadkar as a "typical Indian" on social media.

https://mobile.twitter.com/KilclooneyJohn/status/990954166741856256

They're upset that Leo followed protocol
https://sluggerotoole.com/2018/04/30/dup-takes-aim-at-leo-varadkar/

It gets worse :

https://twitter.com/kilclooneyjohn/status/991080900170526720?s=21

Unbelievable! This is the kind of “debate” we are dealing with in 2018.

Peregrinus

Danzy wrote: »

I am aware of that, there has been such a laissez faire to migration and especially illegal migrants, left and right both bought in to that Neoliberal approach, that even a slight reversal was going to cause problems for some.

Better targetting, stricter regulation,national ID cards, all should have been in years ago and this problem could have been avoided.

The policy is correct but given the mess made of migration in to Britain over the years, there was going to be problems.

The policy is not correct. Good policy has to be framed to operate in the real world. The real world is that for a century at least the UK has operated by controlling migration at its borders and not by controlling the population internally. The result of this is that many people, citizens and non-citizens alike, do not have ready access to documents which will prove their status. So a policy which disadvantages people for not being able to prove their status is a bad policy, not a correct policy.

Danzy wrote: »

They should of course receive restitution in the few cases it has caused problems for those with legitimate cause.

What makes you think it's a few cases? The thrust of the policy is to disadvantage everybody, although in most cases the disadvantage is little more than an inconvenience - having to demonstrate citizenship or resident status in order to keep your job, or enroll your children at school is a pain, but not more than a pain, for those who can produce the required demonstration. Others - those who haven't the documents - suffer much greater disadvantage, but thisis not "a few cases"; because of the approach followed by the UK already mentioned, there are a very large number of people who haven't got documents.

A better policy would have been to start by issuing documents to those entitled, at no cost to them and at no inconvenience to them. Then, and only then, can a policy of victimising those who don't have documents begin to look rational or defensible.

Peregrinus

Bloomberg is reporting that the UK is going to propose a new solution to the Irish border problem.

Since Options A and B are both widely regarded as unfeasible, and have both already been rejected from the EU side, the new proposal will apparently be . . . . [drumroll] a mash-up of Options A and B.

This doesn't inspire confidence. My suspicion is that this is not really a serious attempt to secure agreement with the EU; it's an attempt to shore up Cabinet unity; a response to the fact that some of the more Brexity ministers are said to have told May that her proposed "customs partnership" model for Option B is not viable.

EdgeCase

Realistically, there's no perfect solution to this other than the status quo or something very close to it.

Hurrache

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/04/30/naive-leo-varadkar-manipulated-wily-michel-barnier/?utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter#link_time=1525112919

The comments section, and I thought those that accompany articles in TheJournal.ie where bad. So many blinkers.


Kilclooney I think deleted that original tweet, (or my tweeting skills are just poor) and tried to row back with the "some of my best friends are Indians" type post, and then second tweet in his 'apology' he tweets

https://twitter.com/KilclooneyJohn/status/991097644889137157
https://twitter.com/KilclooneyJohn/status/991184202476412928

The natives, what what.

Gotta hand it to him though, he's united those across the divide in condemnation of him.

Zubeneschamali

I was wondering who this idiot was so I looked him up: he's the racist formerly known as John Taylor.

flatty

I despair.
I'm lost for words.