kent_white Posted March 5 Posted March 5 45 minutes ago, royal white said: We live in strange times 🤦🏻 It's a weird system that's for sure. But probably a pragmatic one based on how much it costs to go through the courts. What could you do in this situation. If your you could bin someone off for £10,000 or go through the courts for £50,000 (and not be guaranteed to win)? My AI reckons it costs £50,000 to £100,000 in costs to take someone through the full appeals process. Quote
royal white Posted March 5 Posted March 5 36 minutes ago, kent_white said: It's a weird system that's for sure. But probably a pragmatic one based on how much it costs to go through the courts. What could you do in this situation. If your you could bin someone off for £10,000 or go through the courts for £50,000 (and not be guaranteed to win)? My AI reckons it costs £50,000 to £100,000 in costs to take someone through the full appeals process. Yes something about guidelines or some other bollocks, it’s all a fkin farce. Average salary in Pakistan is £2500 a year! It’s an incentive to come over. Quote
kent_white Posted March 5 Posted March 5 24 minutes ago, royal white said: Yes something about guidelines or some other bollocks, it’s all a fkin farce. Average salary in Pakistan is £2500 a year! It’s an incentive to come over. Yeah I suppose that's the counter argument. Although Denmark have tried it and it halved the number of people awaiting deportation. So it sounds like in their experience it didn't lead to a huge increase in people coming the other way. It's a hell of a long way and a lot of fannying about with a hell of a lot of risk - even if you might potentially get to go home with four times your annual salary. And I doubt it's going to be a long term measure. More likely something to bring down the backlog that been allowed to accrue over time. I don't think immediately dismissing it is a good idea. Although it clearly needs a great deal of thought. I don't think it's any more bonkers than the Rwanda deal for example. Quote
royal white Posted March 5 Posted March 5 19 minutes ago, kent_white said: Yeah I suppose that's the counter argument. Although Denmark have tried it and it halved the number of people awaiting deportation. So it sounds like in their experience it didn't lead to a huge increase in people coming the other way. It's a hell of a long way and a lot of fannying about with a hell of a lot of risk - even if you might potentially get to go home with four times your annual salary. And I doubt it's going to be a long term measure. More likely something to bring down the backlog that been allowed to accrue over time. I don't think immediately dismissing it is a good idea. Although it clearly needs a great deal of thought. I don't think it's any more bonkers than the Rwanda deal for example. Personally I think any kind of financial incentive being given to folk who shouldn’t be here in the first place is outrageous. Suppose that’s far right Nazi bigot in me 😄 Quote
Lt. Aldo Raine Posted March 5 Posted March 5 What's stopping a failed asylum seeker accepting the payment and then submitting an appeal anyway? Quote
jmjhb Posted March 5 Posted March 5 (edited) If you leave voluntarily then come back do you get another 10K? Sounds like a nice gravy train, er, boat Edited March 5 by jmjhb Quote
Spider Posted March 5 Posted March 5 Or here’s a thought Since they’ve failed to be granted asylum, they get a plane ticket back and absolutely fuck all else? Quote
royal white Posted March 5 Posted March 5 Just now, Spider said: Or here’s a thought Since they’ve failed to be granted asylum, they get a plane ticket back and absolutely fuck all else? That’s common sense. I’ve just read that if thy refuse the money then they can be forcibly removed. How’s about skipping the money part? Quote
athywhite1958 Posted March 5 Posted March 5 Will any government grow a pair of balls big enough to change the system of the payment farce and why it costs so much to remove a failed asylum seeker, they had their chance and failed Quote
tomski Posted March 5 Posted March 5 30 minutes ago, Spider said: Or here’s a thought Since they’ve failed to be granted asylum, they get a plane ticket back and absolutely fuck all else? Been reading adverts on buses again. You are an advertisers dream 😂 Quote
kent_white Posted March 5 Posted March 5 42 minutes ago, Spider said: Or here’s a thought Since they’ve failed to be granted asylum, they get a plane ticket back and absolutely fuck all else? I think the idea is that it prevents a costly appeals process. I've not looked into it that deeply mind. So ie - people have a legal right to appeal if we don't accept their right to stay here. In which case - they would be offered a £10,000 sweetener to not hang around for another 18 months while it goes through the courts? I suppose you could also remove the right to appeal? Quote
Lt. Aldo Raine Posted March 5 Posted March 5 4 minutes ago, kent_white said: I suppose you could also remove the right to appeal? Not without leaving or ignoring the ECHR Quote
Spider Posted March 5 Posted March 5 47 minutes ago, tomski said: Been reading adverts on buses again. You are an advertisers dream 😂 Which bus is that written on? Ill vote for that pig Quote
Mounts Kipper Posted March 5 Posted March 5 (edited) 40k is 3.5 years state pension for someone working and paying taxes for 50 years… housing family of asylum seekers for 1 year is 158k… that’s 13 years of state pension for someone working 50 years…. This country is fucked. Edited March 5 by Mounts Kipper Quote
Cheese Posted March 5 Posted March 5 34 minutes ago, Mounts Kipper said: 40k is 3.5 years state pension for someone working and paying taxes for 50 years… housing family of asylum seekers for 1 year is 158k… that’s 13 years of state pension for someone working 50 years…. This country is fucked. State Pension is nothing to do with how much tax you've paid. Pensioners are ripping this country off at a far greater scale than anyone else. Quote
kent_white Posted March 5 Posted March 5 25 minutes ago, Mounts Kipper said: 40k is 3.5 years state pension for someone working and paying taxes for 50 years… housing family of asylum seekers for 1 year is 158k… that’s 13 years of state pension for someone working 50 years…. This country is fucked. I wouldn't disagree mate. The challenge is, how do you unfuck it? Like the bloke says in the interview, this is a pilot, aimed at people who are already in the country, and it's been shown to work elsewhere (Denmark). It sounds galling (because it is) but not doing anything is even more galling (in my opinion). We're going to have to take some unpalatable decisions eventually. Otherwise we're just sticking with the status quo of housing the backlog of people in hotels and/or council accommodation. I know it's been mentioned that we could leave the ECHR and bypass the appeals process. But that would have huge implications - most notably for the Good Friday Agreement. So given that - I'd rather be giving an unsuccessful family £40,000 than paying triple or quadruple that to house that same family in the UK while each year. Especially while we've got housing problems of our own. BTW - this isn't necessarily aimed at you mate - but it costs about £2000 to £6000 to cross the channel on a small boat. Plus whatever is cost to get you from home to Calais. Plus the risk you take too. I think we pilot it - see if it works - and if it does then expand on it - along with a range of other methods. Quote
Tonge moor green jacket Posted March 5 Posted March 5 5 hours ago, kent_white said: It's a weird system that's for sure. But probably a pragmatic one based on how much it costs to go through the courts. What could you do in this situation. If your you could bin someone off for £10,000 or go through the courts for £50,000 (and not be guaranteed to win)? My AI reckons it costs £50,000 to £100,000 in costs to take someone through the full appeals process. We've been here before re individual cases. A moderate offer to fuck off, rather than a slow deportation process makes sense. A huge offer is an enticement to come in the first place. Even more so if they're one of the few to be swapped out, and then get the next boat back again. This has already happened. Simply have to change laws etc and get shut quickly. SM has come up with some reasonable ideas, but they're surface scratches. Probably testing the water to see what she can get past backbenchers, but all to late. Quote
Tonge moor green jacket Posted March 5 Posted March 5 https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15614327/Big-firms-forced-draw-action-plans-close-gender-pay-gap-says-equalities-minister-women-paid-unfairly.html?ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490&ito=social-twitter_mailonline Quote
Mounts Kipper Posted March 5 Posted March 5 16 minutes ago, Cheese said: State Pension is nothing to do with how much tax you've paid. Pensioners are ripping this country off at a far greater scale than anyone else. Utter bullshit. Quote
royal white Posted March 5 Posted March 5 32 minutes ago, kent_white said: I wouldn't disagree mate. The challenge is, how do you unfuck it? Like the bloke says in the interview, this is a pilot, aimed at people who are already in the country, and it's been shown to work elsewhere (Denmark). It sounds galling (because it is) but not doing anything is even more galling (in my opinion). We're going to have to take some unpalatable decisions eventually. Otherwise we're just sticking with the status quo of housing the backlog of people in hotels and/or council accommodation. I know it's been mentioned that we could leave the ECHR and bypass the appeals process. But that would have huge implications - most notably for the Good Friday Agreement. So given that - I'd rather be giving an unsuccessful family £40,000 than paying triple or quadruple that to house that same family in the UK while each year. Especially while we've got housing problems of our own. BTW - this isn't necessarily aimed at you mate - but it costs about £2000 to £6000 to cross the channel on a small boat. Plus whatever is cost to get you from home to Calais. Plus the risk you take too. I think we pilot it - see if it works - and if it does then expand on it - along with a range of other methods. Are people missing this part “those who refuse the payment will be forcibly removed” Quote
Winchester White Posted March 5 Posted March 5 3 minutes ago, royal white said: Are people missing this part “those who refuse the payment will be forcibly removed” It's no different to what's been in place for two decades, just the amount involved has been reviewed. For what it's worth, I do wonder if this is a little too high but if it works then so be it as it would therefore save money in the long run. Quote
Tonge moor green jacket Posted March 5 Posted March 5 23 minutes ago, Mounts Kipper said: Utter bullshit. They're ripping people off! Worked hard, paid in but can't take out. Now they have to pay even more tax after retirement. Oldies having to keep Wayne and Waynetta in chocolate, illegals in HMOs, and all manner of non-jobs in the public sector. Chip on the shoulder attitudes again. The road to ruin. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.