Send the buggers back

[Mrr T]

craigjm said:

Mrr T said:

I believe the treaty obligation would take precedent. You should also look at the Dublin Convention.

Which, as you should know, if you are going to start throwing legislation around on something you know about, was superseded in 2003.

You are right I should have said the Dublin Regulation II and now III. These are treaties; so I was throwing treaties around not legislation.

[Sheets Tabuer]

Don't see the problem, she decided to keep her Singapore citizenship over British citizenship. She may have been married to a British man for 27 years but she spent many of them in her homeland.

They married in 1990, she went back to Singapore in 92 tried to come here in 1999 where her visa application was rejected. Finally in 2013 she came over.

Normally I'd be sympathetic but I'd suggest she hasn't a clue who her husband is and I see no problem with her being sent back.

Edited by Sheets Tabuer on Monday 27th February 16:24

[Murph7355]

pim said:

Sent the buggers back,this is all getting a bit silly.A woman with grandchildren who lived here many years.Jobsworth acting stupid.

Is this going to be tit for tat British retired workers carted back from Spain.

Or from any other E.U country.? Nobody has been send back to the U.K yet by force are we setting a precedent?

No because she's Singaporean, not Spanish

I have no doubt every story has heart string angles to it. Individuals need to take a bit more responsibility for themselves...on the face of it you'd think she could have handled things very differently and not be in this mess.

And while you bring up the EU, note that Theresa May wanted residency rights of those currently here covered in advance of Article 50 so it didn't become a negotiating chip and some surety could be given to EU nationals living here already. The EU refused.

[FredClogs]

Stinks of a rising bureaucracy that's acting as a nodding dog to the daft populist nonsense we've seen in the west over the last 18 months.

We're opening the door to some pretty unpleasant political and legal precedent with stuff like this, if you tolerate this - then your children will be next. We have statute limitations act to protect many people from many past crimes they've committed - we should simply have amnesty for people in her position.

[Murph7355]

FredClogs said:

Stinks of a rising bureaucracy that's acting as a nodding dog to the daft populist nonsense we've seen in the west over the last 18 months.

We're opening the door to some pretty unpleasant political and legal precedent with stuff like this, if you tolerate this - then your children will be next. We have statute limitations act to protect many people from many past crimes they've committed - we should simply have amnesty for people in her position.

We have no idea what the full story is, so I'm not sure why.

On the face of it, someone who has been here so long ought to have known the rules and sorted themselves out. Reading between the lines it also sounds like a decent dose of "benefit of the doubt" had already been applied, otherwise how come she was here for so long?

The country does not have infinite resources or infinite capacity for people. It's unfair on those with a legitimate claim to be here, and for those who are already citizens, to allow illegals to remain. No matter what the backstory. Cross the line from illegal to legal, or leave.

[Mrr T]

Murph7355 said:

pim said:

And while you bring up the EU, note that Theresa May wanted residency rights of those currently here covered in advance of Article 50 so it didn't become a negotiating chip and some surety could be given to EU nationals living here already. The EU refused.

That’s a good head line and proves how little the Government understands how the EU works.

If the UK leaves the EU and the EEA then UK residency rights cease to be an EU competency. The rights will depend of the attitude of the individual countries.

[Murph7355]

Mrr T said:

Murph7355 said:

And while you bring up the EU, note that Theresa May wanted residency rights of those currently here covered in advance of Article 50 so it didn't become a negotiating chip and some surety could be given to EU nationals living here already. The EU refused.

That’s a good head line and proves how little the Government understands how the EU works.

If the UK leaves the EU and the EEA then UK residency rights cease to be an EU competency. The rights will depend of the attitude of the individual countries.

Your quoting was broken (pim didn't say that).

AIUI it's precisely that which TM was trying to address. Remove the uncertainty for those based here (and vv) upfront and in the clear.

Anything can be done by agreement. There are no physical barriers to such a move. The EU didn't want to entertain it - one assumes because they were still sulking. Or maybe they feel it actually is a decent bargaining chip?

[Mrr T]

Murph7355 said:

Anything can be done by agreement. There are no physical barriers to such a move. The EU didn't want to entertain it - one assumes because they were still sulking. Or maybe they feel it actually is a decent bargaining chip?

For a thing to be done, it must be done lawfully. The treatment of immigrants other than those from EU/EEA is the responsibility of the relevant countries.

To change that would involve an EU treaty change.

So the EU cannot agree the status of UK citizens in the EU/EEA if we leave the EU and EEA.

[sugerbear]

FredClogs said:

Stinks of a rising bureaucracy that's acting as a nodding dog to the daft populist nonsense we've seen in the west over the last 18 months.

We're opening the door to some pretty unpleasant political and legal precedent with stuff like this, if you tolerate this - then your children will be next. We have statute limitations act to protect many people from many past crimes they've committed - we should simply have amnesty for people in her position.

If you really want to live in a country then best to get yourself registered and fully signed up. Dont leave it to chance, dont leave it until you are nearing retirement age etc. etc. Maybe you can't have your proverbial cake and eat it after all.

[Murph7355]

Mrr T said:

For a thing to be done, it must be done lawfully. The treatment of immigrants other than those from EU/EEA is the responsibility of the relevant countries.

To change that would involve an EU treaty change.

So the EU cannot agree the status of UK citizens in the EU/EEA if we leave the EU and EEA.

In dealing with the "EU" we are really dealing with the 27 other member states. If they each agreed to guarantee the rights of UK citizens in their country for some quid pro quo, then surely that is job done, and what TM was looking to secure. No?

[Rude-boy]

To be honest it is as clear as day why this lady has been deported, and why they have chosen to do it on a Sunday.

Politics.

She has broken the rules, fair enough she has a very compelling back story but the bottom line is that there are harsh rules in place and the word has come from on high that these have to be enforced. Now does the nice liberal minded person who is in charge of all this immediately set to to getting their team to hunt down and deport Amjin the 27 year old rapist/drug dealer who they last heard was at x address a few years ago or do they pick the easiest person on the books who also have a really good back story that (in more sensible times) many might even say that she is why there are exceptions to rules?

It's a win/win for them - on the one hand they get the notch on the list that they need for little or no hard work and even better if it all gets "Woe is me, How could we be so cruel" there is a chance that the rules might be relaxed or changed so that they don't actually have to do anything that might be considered hard work.

[bloomen]

I feel sorry for her. I also assume the rules she could've followed to stay are clearly laid out and had she stuck to them she'd be fine.

If I moved to the US and screwed up my residency status by not paying attention I'd fully expect to be booted out.

[Wobbegong]

pim said:

Sent the buggers back,this is all getting a bit silly.A woman with grandchildren who lived here many years.Jobsworth acting stupid.

Is this going to be tit for tat British retired workers carted back from Spain.

Or from any other E.U country.? Nobody has been send back to the U.K yet by force are we setting a precedent?

British in wrong part of Oz

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2281642/Br...

Druggie Brit

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-36318954

Poorly British

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3430033/Br...

More poorly British

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3708012/Br...

Rapist Brit

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/australasi...

Brit failed character test and hadn't applied for citizenship

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-04-18/australia-ca...


Didn't complete required number of days at work

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3952182/Au...


Happens to the British too (stories picked at random)

[craigjm]

FredClogs said:

we should simply have amnesty for people in her position.

We have done that kind of thing in the past. Most notably in the early 2000s where anyone who had had an asylum application in for more than 10 years was given leave to remain to clear a massive backlog of cases.

The problem is that lots of these people aren't even in the system and we have no idea they are here or who they are.

My stance is, and always has been, if you come here then know the rules and stick to them or expect to be deported and if you are an asylum seeker than if you have really experienced the issues covered by the conventions then you are welcome too as long as you haven't sat in another safe country for ages trying to get into a lorry to get here.

[Murph7355]

Rude-boy said:

...Now does the nice liberal minded person who is in charge of all this immediately set to to getting their team to hunt down and deport Amjin the 27 year old rapist/drug dealer who they last heard was at x address a few years ago ...

Or....

Maybe Amjin's offski too. But that doesn't make quite the same headline for the Guardian or whichever rag wanted a sob story...?

[craigjm]

Murph7355 said:

Or....

Maybe Amjin's offski too. But that doesn't make quite the same headline for the Guardian or whichever rag wanted a sob story...?

Exactly. One of the real serious issues with immigration is that the average person has no idea about it in reality just hears in the media that it is high and they see a lot of "foreigners" around them. With people voting for UKIP etc because of the "immigration issue" the government needs to start publishing quarterly figures on the subject so that people are voting knowing the true extent of the issue not just based on a feeing

[Ahbefive]

Illegal immigrant is sent home.....and?

[Mrr T]

Murph7355 said:

Mrr T said:

For a thing to be done, it must be done lawfully. The treatment of immigrants other than those from EU/EEA is the responsibility of the relevant countries.

To change that would involve an EU treaty change.

So the EU cannot agree the status of UK citizens in the EU/EEA if we leave the EU and EEA.

In dealing with the "EU" we are really dealing with the 27 other member states. If they each agreed to guarantee the rights of UK citizens in their country for some quid pro quo, then surely that is job done, and what TM was looking to secure. No?

You are wrong. When you deal with the “EU” you are dealing with three very separate heads, the Commission and the member countries as the Council of Europe, both of these deal with EU matters but in different ways, and the member countries as sovereign countries. If the UK leaves the EU and the EEA then the position of UK citizens living in the rEU is no longer covered by EU law but by 27 domestic laws.

A call by TM in a speech in the UK to preserve the rights of all EU migrants is hardly the best way of approaching 27 different nations and asking them to consider the rights of UK residents in their countries.

TM commitment on the rights of rEU citizens in the UK was also very vague. DD (leader of the brexit buffoons) spoke about rEU having the right to UK citizenship after 5 years. Is he suggesting rEU citizens in the UK will have to take UK citizenship. If he is besides being expensive, does he realise even now it takes about 9 moths for the applications to be completely processes.

Does he realise this is not an option, for example, retirees in Spain would want to take.

[craigjm]

MrrT you are right it is a whole big mess. Would be quite amusing mind to see the Spanish put 1000s of orange British pensioners in removal centres through 😂

[mac96]

Rude-boy said:

To be honest it is as clear as day why this lady has been deported, and why they have chosen to do it on a Sunday.

Politics.

She has broken the rules, fair enough she has a very compelling back story but the bottom line is that there are harsh rules in place and the word has come from on high that these have to be enforced. Now does the nice liberal minded person who is in charge of all this immediately set to to getting their team to hunt down and deport Amjin the 27 year old rapist/drug dealer who they last heard was at x address a few years ago or do they pick the easiest person on the books who also have a really good back story that (in more sensible times) many might even say that she is why there are exceptions to rules?

It's a win/win for them - on the one hand they get the notch on the list that they need for little or no hard work and even better if it all gets "Woe is me, How could we be so cruel" there is a chance that the rules might be relaxed or changed so that they don't actually have to do anything that might be considered hard work.

It's not just Amjin and co.

Over the years government departments have been hopelessly inefficient at finalising appeals; there has been a raft of dubious lawyers encouraging immigrants to engage in appeals (or pretending there are further avenues of appeal in order to extract more fees) and all of this has created a community of illegals who have been here so long that that this is de facto their home whether we like it or not.

They are of course not living at a addresses known to the authorities!
And as they live outside the law they are extremely vulnerable to exploitation of various sorts. And they can't pay income tax.

This is the problem, not the high profile individuals. and the solution is mainly in the hands of government, speeding up process, and the legal profession, dealing with its bent members.

In the meantime- amnesty so that these people can contribute properly to society..