Simply enforcing all our laws from Landlord & Tenant to Animal Welfare to Sex Discrimination to Modern Slavery would achieve a great deal. There should be no exceptions or exemptions.
It's an interesting thought that, even if a housing inspector discovers 12 people in an severely overcrowded house, it's better to let them wander off into vagrancy than for immigration enforcement to take them into custody and deport them.
Is there a tension between claiming that deportation of illegals will cause other illegals do disappear into the weeds (i.e. be very difficult to find) whilst claiming that those illegals kicked out of overcrowded houses will be easy to find - in migrant tent cities which are easily demolished by JCBs?
Presumably there's a third option of inviting the 12 illegals discovered in the house to take up the state's offer of leaving voluntarily, incentivized with a lump sum paid to them by the state?
Mate, you're losing me. A great repeal bill is not 'fantasy politics'. It's not only very do'able, it's absolutely essential to enable anything else to be done. There are people already looking into the detail of what should be in such a bill.
You seem to have reverted to a position of accepting the legislative and legal status quo - absolute insanity IMO. Both laws and peoples views change. The entire legislative and legal structure can be removed. We had one that worked perfectly well pre 1997. I am perplexed that you can't see that.
It is fantasy politics for the moment. There is no party close to power that would adopt such a thing. The Tory deportation bill talks about disapplying ECHR on immigration law, but stops short of leaving the ECHR, while Reform only makes vague noises. If Jenrick deposes Badenough and adopts the work of Starkey as a manifesto pledge, then maybe it has legs, but for now, we need to look at pragmatic measures we can take which are already in scope that do not require extensive constitutional engineering.
Look I don't entirely disagree with you - these are all sensible ideas. But your argument re this repeal bill seems to be 'nobodies doing it right now so it will never be done'. You are a smart guy, you know that's not how things work.
It's like saying we can never have a plan that consists of more than a single step. Just because nobody has it in their manifesto right now doesn't mean that will be true in 1 or 2 years. Indeed the level of knowledge and support of a repeal bill will determine wether such a bill makes it into a manifesto. To dismiss it and take no further action makes it less like such a bill will be one reality. Instead why not say - how could it be done?
I can realistically see a Jenrick Tory party having such a bill in their manifesto by the next election.
Maybe. Maybe not. The point is there agnostic policies that can work in the here and now, and there is everything to be gained by promoting them without resorting to wishful thinking.
I think you will find that the wishful thinking here is believing that these policies will not simply get bogged down in the usual black hole of bureaucracy + lawfare. Without a repeal bill they will come to nothing.
Being realistic means facing the fact that the current system will block any change - pulling broken levers with the most amazingly detailed policy ideas without having repealed first is a massive waste of time and effort. Time that we don't have.
Yes and no. I agree with everything you said, but I don’t think they will re migrate. Compare with the countries they came from, the UK is still better. You will not die from hunger in the UK, but in their countries, they might. They have free healthcare in here, it’s a very important factor for them.
I would also argue that we need to house illegals in tents just like the French, not in hotels or houses and with withhold all benefits. The fact that we are a 'soft touch' is a big magnet to these people. You are right in that we need to get rid of millions but so far no gov either has the ba**s to do this or take on the civil service.
Most people have very workable ideas for making illegal and gimme migrants unwelcome. That’s a logistical problem.
But what do we do with the
hangers on who demand to remain in this country.
Many will be criminals who will be making good money here.
There are ideas of moving them to an island where they can’t make money - seems eminently suitable. My dad served at Scapa Flow, hated the place, grim.
Some of the deported will return to the UK. They will provide false ID (a big industry in Africa, Eastern Europe and Asia) they need a quick turnaround.
That requires DNA, eye and finger print data to be held at each port of entry with holding pens, security with powers to return them on the same conveyance they arrived in.
On the politics we see there’s MSM bias daily.
But ensuring balanced reporting may not need much change in the laws.
First, remove the staffing of OFCOM and re staff with neutrals, politically.
Second, make it illegal for ad agencies to block revenues because they don’t like a companies political stance.
That should prove sufficient to stop much of MSMs bias.
Finally, the College of Policing needs dismantling as does the current process for promoting police and judges.
By taking politics out of policing and the law, we will see so called ‘left’ inspired rioting dissipate naturally.
But I do think Peters belief that voluntary deportations will not lead to rioting by foreign led organisations and ‘left’ wing factions is wrong.
Armed reaction including bombings and stabbings should be anticipated from fanatics looking to promote civil war.
There needs to be contingencies to thwart outrages before they occur.
Part of me would like to just herd them all through the channel tunnel, but I know that an emotional response like that won't succeed. Whatever approach, it must be morally defensible in the cold light of day.
I think your approach is sensible and realistic. We get our foot in the door with sensible policies that remove all the low-hanging fruit first, then build on that. The collective consciousness of this country is much abused, and we must rediscover our dignity after years of psychological warfare from the collective elites. Once we have some self-respect, stronger policies will naturally have popular support.
We are talking about a cultural counter-revolution to overthrow the last 50 years or so. That is best kindled from the ground up, using our innate talents as a nation. We are not extreme by nature. We are clever and moderate, with occasional judicial use of force. We must play to our strengths.
You are doing very thoughtful and intelligent work Pete, thank you.
Simply enforcing all our laws from Landlord & Tenant to Animal Welfare to Sex Discrimination to Modern Slavery would achieve a great deal. There should be no exceptions or exemptions.
It's an interesting thought that, even if a housing inspector discovers 12 people in an severely overcrowded house, it's better to let them wander off into vagrancy than for immigration enforcement to take them into custody and deport them.
Is there a tension between claiming that deportation of illegals will cause other illegals do disappear into the weeds (i.e. be very difficult to find) whilst claiming that those illegals kicked out of overcrowded houses will be easy to find - in migrant tent cities which are easily demolished by JCBs?
Presumably there's a third option of inviting the 12 illegals discovered in the house to take up the state's offer of leaving voluntarily, incentivized with a lump sum paid to them by the state?
Mate, you're losing me. A great repeal bill is not 'fantasy politics'. It's not only very do'able, it's absolutely essential to enable anything else to be done. There are people already looking into the detail of what should be in such a bill.
You seem to have reverted to a position of accepting the legislative and legal status quo - absolute insanity IMO. Both laws and peoples views change. The entire legislative and legal structure can be removed. We had one that worked perfectly well pre 1997. I am perplexed that you can't see that.
It is fantasy politics for the moment. There is no party close to power that would adopt such a thing. The Tory deportation bill talks about disapplying ECHR on immigration law, but stops short of leaving the ECHR, while Reform only makes vague noises. If Jenrick deposes Badenough and adopts the work of Starkey as a manifesto pledge, then maybe it has legs, but for now, we need to look at pragmatic measures we can take which are already in scope that do not require extensive constitutional engineering.
Look I don't entirely disagree with you - these are all sensible ideas. But your argument re this repeal bill seems to be 'nobodies doing it right now so it will never be done'. You are a smart guy, you know that's not how things work.
It's like saying we can never have a plan that consists of more than a single step. Just because nobody has it in their manifesto right now doesn't mean that will be true in 1 or 2 years. Indeed the level of knowledge and support of a repeal bill will determine wether such a bill makes it into a manifesto. To dismiss it and take no further action makes it less like such a bill will be one reality. Instead why not say - how could it be done?
I can realistically see a Jenrick Tory party having such a bill in their manifesto by the next election.
Maybe. Maybe not. The point is there agnostic policies that can work in the here and now, and there is everything to be gained by promoting them without resorting to wishful thinking.
I think you will find that the wishful thinking here is believing that these policies will not simply get bogged down in the usual black hole of bureaucracy + lawfare. Without a repeal bill they will come to nothing.
Being realistic means facing the fact that the current system will block any change - pulling broken levers with the most amazingly detailed policy ideas without having repealed first is a massive waste of time and effort. Time that we don't have.
I'm not really talking about big changes to law. I'm mostly talking about properly enforcing the ones we have.
Yes and no. I agree with everything you said, but I don’t think they will re migrate. Compare with the countries they came from, the UK is still better. You will not die from hunger in the UK, but in their countries, they might. They have free healthcare in here, it’s a very important factor for them.
They will not go back 😞
Definitely. Trading standards may also hold another key. Check this out:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy9097lwxg9o
Note where the hot-spots are...
I would also argue that we need to house illegals in tents just like the French, not in hotels or houses and with withhold all benefits. The fact that we are a 'soft touch' is a big magnet to these people. You are right in that we need to get rid of millions but so far no gov either has the ba**s to do this or take on the civil service.
Most people have very workable ideas for making illegal and gimme migrants unwelcome. That’s a logistical problem.
But what do we do with the
hangers on who demand to remain in this country.
Many will be criminals who will be making good money here.
There are ideas of moving them to an island where they can’t make money - seems eminently suitable. My dad served at Scapa Flow, hated the place, grim.
Some of the deported will return to the UK. They will provide false ID (a big industry in Africa, Eastern Europe and Asia) they need a quick turnaround.
That requires DNA, eye and finger print data to be held at each port of entry with holding pens, security with powers to return them on the same conveyance they arrived in.
On the politics we see there’s MSM bias daily.
But ensuring balanced reporting may not need much change in the laws.
First, remove the staffing of OFCOM and re staff with neutrals, politically.
Second, make it illegal for ad agencies to block revenues because they don’t like a companies political stance.
That should prove sufficient to stop much of MSMs bias.
Finally, the College of Policing needs dismantling as does the current process for promoting police and judges.
By taking politics out of policing and the law, we will see so called ‘left’ inspired rioting dissipate naturally.
But I do think Peters belief that voluntary deportations will not lead to rioting by foreign led organisations and ‘left’ wing factions is wrong.
Armed reaction including bombings and stabbings should be anticipated from fanatics looking to promote civil war.
There needs to be contingencies to thwart outrages before they occur.
Part of me would like to just herd them all through the channel tunnel, but I know that an emotional response like that won't succeed. Whatever approach, it must be morally defensible in the cold light of day.
I think your approach is sensible and realistic. We get our foot in the door with sensible policies that remove all the low-hanging fruit first, then build on that. The collective consciousness of this country is much abused, and we must rediscover our dignity after years of psychological warfare from the collective elites. Once we have some self-respect, stronger policies will naturally have popular support.
We are talking about a cultural counter-revolution to overthrow the last 50 years or so. That is best kindled from the ground up, using our innate talents as a nation. We are not extreme by nature. We are clever and moderate, with occasional judicial use of force. We must play to our strengths.
You are doing very thoughtful and intelligent work Pete, thank you.
Thanks Pete,
Another rational and well thought out approach.