Brexit - was it worth it? (Vol. 4)

[Murph7355]

turbobloke said:

Following the AV referendum in 2011, which gave a clear 'No' to AV, London boroughs accounted for most of the few areas in the UK that returned a 'Yes' majority. Out of touch for 12 years and counting?

Two completely different votes.

I voted for AV. Was living in London at the time. Voted to leave whilst London centric.

Go figure, but avoid falling into the lazy generalisations trap otherwise your opposite numbers in here will salivate.

(Common theme? UK governance change has been needed for a looooooooong time. AV wasn't the final answer, but the only choice offered ).

[turbobloke]

Murph7355 said:

turbobloke said:

Following the AV referendum in 2011, which gave a clear 'No' to AV, London boroughs accounted for most of the few areas in the UK that returned a 'Yes' majority. Out of touch for 12 years and counting?

Two completely different votes.

Yes and with the same out-of-touchness.

Murph7355 said:

I voted for AV. Was living in London at the time. Voted to leave whilst London centric.

Go figure, but avoid falling into the lazy generalisations trap otherwise your opposite numbers in here will salivate.

(Common theme? UK governance change has been needed for a looooooooong time. AV wasn't the final answer, but the only choice offered ).

Individual views are like this, out-of-touchness is like that ^ and it wasn't a lazy generalisation - it was based on evidence available (Brexit and AV votes) allowing a valid comparison between large numbers of views collectively in London with the country as a whole. Is there similar counter-evidence? Indiviual positions can't provide that.

[Killboy]

crankedup5 said:

Ivan stewart said:

Killboy said:

I'm very confused. I've asked previously what "genuine asylum seekers" are, but the people that use that phrase have not responded as far as I've seen.

I’ll have a go !!
Someone who is in fear and in danger from a rogue regime Maybe been politically active or just the wrong religion or tribe ,fleeing the effects of war
Someone who isn’t safe where they are ..

One would have thought that was common knowledge in here not requiring confirmation, hey ho.

So people arriving in dingys are not any of those? Where are they coming from?

[Bannock]

turbobloke said:

Bottom line - makes no difference.

We're out and not going back in for the foreseeable. It's good to see the occasional real-world remainer on this thread, accepting the democratic decision, moving on, the rest is tedious but with one car crash quality - giving the urge to take a look while knowing what the result will be. 6 years!

Hi TB. Is this you, the same person on the Sadiq Khan thread, the one about closing down debate? You don't want people to debate Brexit, because we have to move on? Hard to see that as anything but wanting debate closed down.

[don'tbesilly]

Bannock said:

The fact that someone makes a post singling out London as "Remainer City", capital letters, note, which you (DBS) were heartily agreeing with, plus lol emojis, indicates that you (and the bigger boy who posted it first) believe London to be a special case, a nest of Remainers in a country of Leave. Never mind all the other major metropolitan centres of the UK (except one) are also "Remain Cities". Would you make the same lols if this had happened in Liverpool, Newcastle or Leeds? No, no you wouldn't. You are simply revealing your biases, and showing us part of the deficiency in your thinking which drove you to your Leave support. London Metropolitan Elite and Brussels bad. Must vote against.

I never suggested London was a special case, I simply pointed out that Johnson was in London as pointed out in the media article that was linked.

No biases and zero deficiencies.

Edited by don'tbesilly on Friday 3rd March 13:19

[Mortarboard]

don'tbesilly said:

I never suggested London was a special case, I simply pointed out that Johnson was in London as pointed out in the media article that was linked.

No biases and zero deficiencies.

Edited by don'tbesilly on Friday 3rd March 13:19

To be fair, I got what DBS meant

"lots of remainers where Boris was, surely at least some would have raised their hand"

Just shows how far on things have moved since the vote

M.

[Mortarboard]

Earthdweller said:

Ivan stewart said:

Killboy said:

I'm very confused. I've asked previously what "genuine asylum seekers" are, but the people that use that phrase have not responded as far as I've seen.

I’ll have a go !!
Someone who is in fear and in danger from a rogue regime Maybe been politically active or just the wrong religion or tribe ,fleeing the effects of war
Someone who isn’t safe where they are ..

Like France you mean?

UK is free to sign on the the Dublin Regulation

M.

[crankedup5]

Killboy said:

crankedup5 said:

Ivan stewart said:

Killboy said:

I'm very confused. I've asked previously what "genuine asylum seekers" are, but the people that use that phrase have not responded as far as I've seen.

I’ll have a go !!
Someone who is in fear and in danger from a rogue regime Maybe been politically active or just the wrong religion or tribe ,fleeing the effects of war
Someone who isn’t safe where they are ..

One would have thought that was common knowledge in here not requiring confirmation, hey ho.

So people arriving in dingys are not any of those? Where are they coming from?

Crux of the issue isn’t it, and why we have to hold these people in hotels at great cost until we can establish their Countries of origin. Stats, if you can believe them, offer some information regarding this.

[crankedup5]

Bannock said:

turbobloke said:

Bottom line - makes no difference.

We're out and not going back in for the foreseeable. It's good to see the occasional real-world remainer on this thread, accepting the democratic decision, moving on, the rest is tedious but with one car crash quality - giving the urge to take a look while knowing what the result will be. 6 years!

Hi TB. Is this you, the same person on the Sadiq Khan thread, the one about closing down debate? You don't want people to debate Brexit, because we have to move on? Hard to see that as anything but wanting debate closed down.

I’m not speaking on behalf of the poster that you are addressing, he doesn’t need me to either. But I will comment that you are cross posting which is against PH rules, care should be taken.

[Mortarboard]

crankedup5 said:

Crux of the issue isn’t it, and why we have to hold these people in hotels at great cost until we can establish their Countries of origin. Stats, if you can believe them, offer some information regarding this.

It really shouldn't be that hard to determine where someone if from via interview.
But processing times in pretty much all countries seems to take forever. I suspect resources applied seems to be the main reason for delays.

M.

[andymadmak]

Mortarboard said:

crankedup5 said:

Crux of the issue isn’t it, and why we have to hold these people in hotels at great cost until we can establish their Countries of origin. Stats, if you can believe them, offer some information regarding this.

It really shouldn't be that hard to determine where someone if from via interview.
But processing times in pretty much all countries seems to take forever. I suspect resources applied seems to be the main reason for delays.

M.

..... but where are you REALLY from?.... I see trouble ahead with that line of questioning

[Mortarboard]

andymadmak said:

..... but where are you REALLY from?.... I see trouble ahead with that line of questioning

It's simple enough. If you're from "x" you'd be aware of people, events, landscapes, points of interest, etc. All of which can be corroborated.

M.

[Killboy]

crankedup5 said:

Crux of the issue isn’t it, and why we have to hold these people in hotels at great cost until we can establish their Countries of origin. Stats, if you can believe them, offer some information regarding this.

Lets take a look.

According to some home secretary data (2020) it seems like its Iran. (https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/commentaries/qa-migrants-crossing-the-english-channel-in-small-boats/)


And "Director General of UKVI stated that of the 5,000 people who had made it to the UK in 2020 to that date, 98% had claimed asylum."

So looks like an overwhelming amount claim asylum. And it seems only 10% are outright refused?

Actually, googling this silly claim it seems it was made by Sajid Javid. Some interesting data points raised here: https://chooselove.org/news/why-are-iranian-people...

If we look at recent asylum statistics for the year ended September 2018, 47% of all asylum claims by people from Iran were accepted. Of those rejected, 46% won on appeal. This means that roughly three-quarters of all people from Iran are granted refugee status.

[don'tbesilly]

andymadmak said:

Mortarboard said:

crankedup5 said:

Crux of the issue isn’t it, and why we have to hold these people in hotels at great cost until we can establish their Countries of origin. Stats, if you can believe them, offer some information regarding this.

It really shouldn't be that hard to determine where someone if from via interview.
But processing times in pretty much all countries seems to take forever. I suspect resources applied seems to be the main reason for delays.

M.

..... but where are you REALLY from?.... I see trouble ahead with that line of questioning

[Mrr T]

crankedup5 said:

Crux of the issue isn’t it, and why we have to hold these people in hotels at great cost until we can establish their Countries of origin. Stats, if you can believe them, offer some information regarding this.

You are missing the point we do not have to hold so many in hotels that's the result of government policy.

Up until recently most would be released on there own parole while their case was assessed. Only those deemed high risk would be detained. They would get small sums for accommodation and food. Most lived in B&B's. Cased would typically be resolved in a few months and those granted asylum could seek work.

Goverment policy has now changed.
1. Far more are being detained and there is a lack of places so they are held in hotels.
2. The goverment will not even accept a claim for asylum for any one arriving by boat for 3 months. They will not be entitled to any support until the BF starts the process. So they have to be accompanied in hotels.
3. Despite an increase in case workers the number of decision keeps falling and takes longer. Combined with 1 and 2 above this has created the current problems.

[chrispmartha]

Killboy said:

crankedup5 said:

Crux of the issue isn’t it, and why we have to hold these people in hotels at great cost until we can establish their Countries of origin. Stats, if you can believe them, offer some information regarding this.

Lets take a look.

According to some home secretary data (2020) it seems like its Iran. (https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/commentaries/qa-migrants-crossing-the-english-channel-in-small-boats/)


And "Director General of UKVI stated that of the 5,000 people who had made it to the UK in 2020 to that date, 98% had claimed asylum."

So looks like an overwhelming amount claim asylum. And it seems only 10% are outright refused?

Actually, googling this silly claim it seems it was made by Sajid Javid. Some interesting data points raised here: https://chooselove.org/news/why-are-iranian-people...

If we look at recent asylum statistics for the year ended September 2018, 47% of all asylum claims by people from Iran were accepted. Of those rejected, 46% won on appeal. This means that roughly three-quarters of all people from Iran are granted refugee status.

To be fair more recent stats show a big increase im Albanians, however and Cranked wont like this, many of them are processes as asylum seekers especially women and children. However most that arrive on small boats aren’t from Albania.

[Killboy]

chrispmartha said:

To be fair more recent stats show a big increase im Albanians, however and Cranked wont like this, many of them are processes as asylum seekers especially women and children. However most that arrive on small boats aren’t from Albania.

Must be a huge increase to overtake the top 3?

[Killboy]

Can you smell the sOveREigNty?

[don'tbesilly]

chrispmartha said:

Killboy said:

crankedup5 said:

Crux of the issue isn’t it, and why we have to hold these people in hotels at great cost until we can establish their Countries of origin. Stats, if you can believe them, offer some information regarding this.

Lets take a look.

According to some home secretary data (2020) it seems like its Iran. (https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/commentaries/qa-migrants-crossing-the-english-channel-in-small-boats/)


And "Director General of UKVI stated that of the 5,000 people who had made it to the UK in 2020 to that date, 98% had claimed asylum."

So looks like an overwhelming amount claim asylum. And it seems only 10% are outright refused?

Actually, googling this silly claim it seems it was made by Sajid Javid. Some interesting data points raised here: https://chooselove.org/news/why-are-iranian-people...

If we look at recent asylum statistics for the year ended September 2018, 47% of all asylum claims by people from Iran were accepted. Of those rejected, 46% won on appeal. This means that roughly three-quarters of all people from Iran are granted refugee status.

To be fair more recent stats show a big increase im Albanians, however and Cranked wont like this, many of them are processes as asylum seekers especially women and children. However most that arrive on small boats aren’t from Albania.

With the exception being between January -September 2022 according to both the Beeb & Home Office.

[Killboy]

don'tbesilly said:

With the exception being between January -September 2022 according to both the Beeb & Home Office.

A little bit of googling suggests 93% of them claim asylum, and the success rate is around 85%?