Any civilised country will have a human rights act. The Human Rights Act 1998 (the Act) 2000 sets out the fundamental rights and freedoms that everyone in the UK is entitled to. It incorporates the rights set out in the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) into domestic British law. The Human Rights Act came into force in the UK in October 2000.
The proposed Conservative ‘Borders Plan’, which Neil O'Brien MP sets out, changes. They propose leaving the ECHR and ECAT, repealing the Human Rights Act, and introducing a total ban on asylum claims for illegal entrants.
This will not provide the UK with a fair plan for genuine asylum seekers and subsequently, remove the UK from the list of civilised countries.
An asylum-seeker is someone who is seeking international protection. Their request for refugee status, or complementary protection status, has yet to be processed, or they may not yet have requested asylum but they intend to do so.
War, persecution and human rights violations force people to flee their homes. To escape violence or threats to their lives or freedoms, many must leave with just a few moments' notice, carrying little more than the clothes on their backs.
When someone crosses an international border seeking safety, they often need to apply to be legally recognised as a refugee. While they seek asylum and await the outcome of their application, they are referred to as asylum-seekers and should be protected. Not all asylum-seekers will be found to be refugees, but all refugees were once asylum-seekers.
The problem is that we don’t have an efficient method of categorising refugees. Assuming that if they don’t have a UK-sounding name, they are assumed, by many, to be illegals. If, as well as your name, you have to produce a documented proof of your current status – for example, an ID card – and it is logged centrally, and it is part of the ID, we will always have this problem.
I always carry a passport. I would sooner carry a passport or ID card ( even if it is provided by Palantir ! ) than go through this fiasco. As an ex-exec, this would be cheaper to implement than any alternative. Just don’t give the contract to Fujitsu!
You're right, bad or missing statistics can lead to bad policy choices or recommendations. The question is not, do immigrants commit offences. It's are they much more likely to do so than other people? I was surprised to find that in 24-5 there were 200,000+ sexual offences recorded, of which 70,000+ were rapes, so more than 500 sex offences PER DAY. So, are asylum seekers/immigrants worse or better than the rest of us? There's no data.
We all know what needs to be done and there is a party that endorses this - Restore Britain
Unfortunately liberals (and I include the 2010-2024 Conservative Party in this) can, to butcher a famous Winston Churchill quote, always be trusted to do the right thing - after they've tried everything else.
Hopefully we're reaching the point where everything is seen to have been tried.
You do a great service to the British people. Depressing to read and probably more so to research. Even so, essential work that no other politician, as far as I can see, is doing.
As with many of your articles, it all sounds sensible up until we consider the record of the last government that you supported and were part of.
If that government had been even halfway decent we wouldn't have this problem.
What is the Steelman excuse for having bad data?
Any civilised country will have a human rights act. The Human Rights Act 1998 (the Act) 2000 sets out the fundamental rights and freedoms that everyone in the UK is entitled to. It incorporates the rights set out in the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) into domestic British law. The Human Rights Act came into force in the UK in October 2000.
The proposed Conservative ‘Borders Plan’, which Neil O'Brien MP sets out, changes. They propose leaving the ECHR and ECAT, repealing the Human Rights Act, and introducing a total ban on asylum claims for illegal entrants.
This will not provide the UK with a fair plan for genuine asylum seekers and subsequently, remove the UK from the list of civilised countries.
An asylum-seeker is someone who is seeking international protection. Their request for refugee status, or complementary protection status, has yet to be processed, or they may not yet have requested asylum but they intend to do so.
War, persecution and human rights violations force people to flee their homes. To escape violence or threats to their lives or freedoms, many must leave with just a few moments' notice, carrying little more than the clothes on their backs.
When someone crosses an international border seeking safety, they often need to apply to be legally recognised as a refugee. While they seek asylum and await the outcome of their application, they are referred to as asylum-seekers and should be protected. Not all asylum-seekers will be found to be refugees, but all refugees were once asylum-seekers.
The problem is that we don’t have an efficient method of categorising refugees. Assuming that if they don’t have a UK-sounding name, they are assumed, by many, to be illegals. If, as well as your name, you have to produce a documented proof of your current status – for example, an ID card – and it is logged centrally, and it is part of the ID, we will always have this problem.
I always carry a passport. I would sooner carry a passport or ID card ( even if it is provided by Palantir ! ) than go through this fiasco. As an ex-exec, this would be cheaper to implement than any alternative. Just don’t give the contract to Fujitsu!
You're right, bad or missing statistics can lead to bad policy choices or recommendations. The question is not, do immigrants commit offences. It's are they much more likely to do so than other people? I was surprised to find that in 24-5 there were 200,000+ sexual offences recorded, of which 70,000+ were rapes, so more than 500 sex offences PER DAY. So, are asylum seekers/immigrants worse or better than the rest of us? There's no data.
There are data though.
https://www.migrationcentral.co.uk/p/over-100000-foreign-national-convictions
Very interesting ; but unvalidated. Reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/GreenAndPleasant/comments/1j8agii/who_is_the_centre_for_migration_control/?solution=8d4af24af9176a168d4af24af9176a16&js_challenge=1&token=bbbe4bf1c9a2b5160829c4be34da58614aed32e1a25940266ca85a87217d24a8&jsc_orig_r=
We all know what needs to be done and there is a party that endorses this - Restore Britain
Unfortunately liberals (and I include the 2010-2024 Conservative Party in this) can, to butcher a famous Winston Churchill quote, always be trusted to do the right thing - after they've tried everything else.
Hopefully we're reaching the point where everything is seen to have been tried.
You do a great service to the British people. Depressing to read and probably more so to research. Even so, essential work that no other politician, as far as I can see, is doing.