Creating a hostile environment for immigrants. Is this acceptable? - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

All general discussion about politics that doesn't belong in any of the other forums.

Moderator: PoFo Political Circus Mods

#14907543
Image

Creating a hostile environment for immigrants. Is this acceptable?

The stories have not lost their capacity to shock, even as their numbers have grown:

The man who came here as a child, yet was told to leave immediately, after sixty years in Britain.

The elderly woman, a former chef from the House of Commons restaurant, sent to a detention centre and threatened with deportation to Jamaica, a country she hasn’t seen since she was ten.

The elderly man thrown out of his council home, and refused cancer treatment.

This is the grim harvest of wrecked lives produced as the government’s “hostile environment” policies – which require doctors, employers, landlords and schools to check the immigration status of all who use their services – are applied to the “Windrush generation”: immigrants who came to Britain from the Commonwealth, often actively recruited by the government at a time when little or no paperwork was required to do so.

People who have been in Britain legally for decades – but have no formal papers confirming this – are being treated as potential criminals by the government, because its predecessors didn’t document their arrival or record their status.

The current Conservative government has made it an article of faith that the British public would back any policy designed to make life difficult for immigrants, however cruel, inept or inflexible.

The growing public backlash to the “Windrush crisis” – intense enough for the Daily Mail to join in with attacking the government – belies this assumption.

The reason is quite simple: the policy falls well foul of what British voters, even those with serious reservations about immigration, think is fair.

This is underlined by polling from the British Social Attitudes survey which, a few years ago, asked people how long immigrants who play by the rules and pay their taxes should have to wait before receiving full political and social rights. Eight out of ten said such people should have full rights after five years, and nine out of ten would grant them after ten years.

The “Windrush” immigrants caught up in the current crisis have typically been here 50 years – and arrived as citizens with full rights in the first place. There is simply no meaningful public support for the way they are being treated.

It gets worse for the Conservatives, for not only is this policy universally opposed, it also reinforces negative views of the party that have hurt their support with crucial sections of the electorate.

The Conservatives’ struggle with voters under 40 in the last general election have been widely debated – but while much of this discussion has focused on issues such as housing and student debt, researchers like John Curtice have found that the bigger dividing line is on values: the more socially liberal, younger generations reject a Conservative party they see as illiberal and intolerant.

Daily stories of law-abiding pensioners denied housing and healthcare, and ordered out of the country, can only cement this reputation, further alienating a critical and fast-growing section of the electorate.

Then there are Britain’s rapidly growing ethnic minority communities, who have rejected the Conservatives en masse. Researchers investigating this – including the Conservative strategist and donor Lord Ashcroft – have found the root cause is a deep-seated distrust of the Conservatives from ethnic minority voters, who feel the party does not understand the problems they face, and does not take the prejudice they face seriously enough as a political issue.

The widely-reported struggles of the predominantly black Caribbean “Windrush” immigrants, and the insensitive and inflexible way the government treated them, will be long remembered by communities already primed to distrust the Conservatives.

The next Conservative leader who sets out to build bridges with ethnic minority communities will face a very tough task indeed.

The heavy-handed, error-strewn treatment of immigrants here for decades will also be making EU migrants and their allies profoundly anxious. Many Europeans have also been here for decades and they also did not anticipate needing comprehensive records of their time in the country.

They, too, have faced a government whose reassuring words have not been met with clear or comprehensive action to define and secure their rights. These immigrants, and their families, friends and allies, could emerge as another group permanently alienated by Conservative incompetence and intransigence.

The crisis is also harming our national reputation abroad. Commonwealth governments have been appalled at the treatment of their citizens, some of whom have been detained and deported in the midst of the Commonwealth games.

These are the nations our post-Brexit government is supposed to be building new trade and political relationships with.

Meanwhile, the EU nations which have been repeatedly reassured by our government that their citizens will be treated fairly are getting a very clear idea what happens to immigrants when past guarantees of rights clash with current enforcement imperatives. “Trust us, we will treat EU citizens fairly” is likely to evoke some pretty bitter laughs around the negotiating table.

This attack on a group whose rights everyone, across the political spectrum, wants respected cannot last. It is a question of when, not if, the government backs down and changes course.

But by stubbornly pursuing the “hostile environment” policy that produced this crisis, despite repeated warnings about the problems it would create, Theresa May has done lasting damage to her party and to Britain’s reputation abroad.

An ambitious new Conservative chair once criticised colleagues for trying to “make political capital out of demonising minorities” and warned them about the risks of such a course: “Our base is too narrow and so, occasionally, are our sympathies…You know what some people call us: the nasty party.”

Fifteen years later, as Prime Minister, Theresa May has renewed the lease on that title, and all the problems it brings, for a generation to come.

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2018/04/what-theresa-may-s-treatment-generation-windrush-means-other-immigrants
#14907554
Nation states are inherently racist. The nation state is a form of apartheid. This is an extremely inconvenient truth. However the overwhelming majority of people will support immigration control if they are citizens of a state that people want to emigrate to. This is quite rational as mass immigration makes the current citizens poorer than they would otherwise be. Particularly if the immigrants are Muslims because of their higher birth rate.
#14907583
We should assume someone comes to our culture because it offers benefits they are not receiving in their own. To allow them to bring that culture with them is to destroy the very benefits that enticed them.
#14907601
One Degree wrote:We should assume someone comes to our culture because it offers benefits they are not receiving in their own. To allow them to bring that culture with them is to destroy the very benefits that enticed them.


Cultural freedom is one of those benefits. If we start unduly restricting cultural freedom we'll destroy our own culture. Our culture of freedom is corrosive to repressive cultures anyway, it only takes few generations for most of the ignorance to corrode away.
Last edited by Sivad on 19 Apr 2018 14:32, edited 1 time in total.
#14907602
Sivad wrote:Cultural freedom is one of those benefits. If we start unduly restricting cultural freedom we'll destroy our own culture. Our culture of freedom is corrosive to repressive cultures anyway.


When was it decided we were based upon ‘cultural freedom’? 10 years ago? Assimilation was always the expectation.
#14907608
One Degree wrote:Show me where it says ‘freedom of culture’.


Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press

That pretty much covers any cultural practices within reason and many that arguably are not.
#14907611
Sivad wrote:Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press

That pretty much covers any cultural practices within reason and many that arguably are not.


It does no such thing. It says our culture allows some freedom in these specific areas.
It does not deny our culture is based upon a limited religious outlook. It only says we will tolerate the practice of others. Nothing here says we will make any concessions to it.
#14907760
Seeker8 wrote:Yet only a few Labour MP's voted against the Tories hostile immigration bill which led to this happening.
I don't think David Lammy was on that list, was he?

No.
In a bid to catch up to the Tories and in an ever-symptomatic move of Miliband’s dregs of New Labour, the vast majority of Labour MPs abstained on the Immigration Bill, allowing it to pass into law and become the Immigration Act 2014.

That is, except for 6 Labour MPs. One of whom was none other than Jeremy Corbyn.

Alongside him were David Lammy, Diane Abbott and John McDonnell. The most prominent of Labour’s new conception.
Once more, Corbyn and the ideology of his reinvention of the Labour party has been proved to be on the right side of history.

https://evolvepolitics.com/jeremy-corbyn-was-one-of-only-6-labour-mps-to-vote-against-the-bill-that-caused-the-windrush-scandal/
#14907763
Ah he was on it then. There's a list going around twitter that he isn't on, kinda baffled me.

Anyway, all the blairites and Zonists who are accusing Corbyn of anti semitism voted against this. Bunch of arseholes. :lol:
Last edited by Seeker8 on 19 Apr 2018 21:31, edited 1 time in total.
Russia-Ukraine War 2022

Are people on this thread actually trying to argu[…]

Isn't oil and electricity bought and sold like ev[…]

@Potemkin I heard this song in the Plaza Grande […]

I (still) have a dream

Even with those millions though. I will not be ab[…]