Add thelocalreport.in As A Trusted Source
AHome Secretary Shabana Mahmood will fail in her duties if she does not try to do something Restoring confidence in the immigration system,
This may prove an impossible task but, in principle, it makes sense to get a head start on the rules for claiming refugee status. Overhaul of visa system for regular immigration coming later,
However, there is uneasiness about some of his proposals, and rightly so.
Ms. Mahmood certainly has some bold plans because, as she says, she sees it as a “moral mission.” She understands that “illegal immigration is tearing our country apart” and “dividing communities”, she says.
This is undisputed, and streamlining the process and dealing with appeals more quickly should help reduce the numbers already in the UK, but These things, by themselves, won’t “stop boats.”,
New tighter restrictions on eligibility for social security benefits and citizenship may serve as a deterrent, but perhaps not as effective for a determined migrant, refugee or economic as intended.
The new rules also have the perverse consequence of making it more difficult for immigrants to do the work that is increasingly demanded of them – To be “integrated” and to become “British”They cannot truly “settle” if they wonder whether their country of origin will be deemed “safe” by the UK authorities every 30 months, and find it unfair to deny them child benefit if they have spent decades earning wages in the UK,
If conditions “home” improve, Ms Mahmood may also face the ethical question of separating families, given that her children born in Britain may not have even visited the country of origin.
As with the Windrush scandal, the scope for appalling injustice and human rights abuses is clear. We already know that the Home Office Plan to seize jewellery, valuables discussed and e-bikes belonging to refugees to pay for housing and other costs as part of broader reforms to the asylum system, as part of a broader effort to mimic Denmark’s most successful elements of their immigration policy while emulating Denmark’s punitive “jewelry law.”
There must also be doubts about whether the Home Office has the resources to run such a cumbersome system. One way to bring more order to the system would be to create more safe routes for genuine refugees, as was done under the special Syria, Hong Kong, Ukraine and Afghanistan plans.
A more humane approach at the point of origin would offset a tougher attitude towards those attempting to cross the English Channel. But the country must still determine how many refugees and irregular economic migrants it is prepared to accommodate.
In any case, the national conversation about migration has never been conducted in a sober and fact-based manner. Instead, it has been embroiled in emotionally charged and debated debates about grooming gangsBrexit, welfare reform, the jobs market and the wild hinterlands of outright racism. Rational debate about immigration is perhaps impossible, such is the mood of modern Britain.
Nevertheless, to the extent that the arguments have been aired, it has become abundantly clear that a significant portion of the British population either believes that, for practical purposes, there is no such thing as a genuine refugee arriving on a boat; Or that even if those seeking protection in the UK are entirely genuine asylum seekers, the country is “absolute” and unable and unwilling to respect any such international or moral obligations.
Against this backdrop, it makes no sense for politicians, including Ms Mahmood, to declare that Britain has always been and will always be welcoming refugees fleeing persecution and torture. Much of the country no longer subscribes to what has become a shibboleth, if it ever did.
Yet, despite the efforts of extremists, Britain is a successful multi-ethnic, multi-religious, multicultural societyThere may be tensions, and the sudden arrival of any group will inevitably put pressure on public services, but Britain’s social and economic problems do not arise from immigration, and it is a dangerous fantasy to assume that they do, The UK has historically suffered from inadequate investment, productivity growth, skills shortages and widespread labor shortages at times,
The global financial crash of 2008, Brexit, and Trump tariffs have exacerbated these long-term trends. They neither began with immigration, nor were they its result; In fact, without migration Britain would be worse off, and the health, social care, leisure and agricultural sectors would be in an even worse state than they are now. When Britain had too few black and brown faces, it faced Relative economic decline, recession and depression, housing shortage and crime, as it happens todayBlaming “outsiders” for any nation’s difficulties quickly turns into racism, as we have unfortunately seen,
Arguments in favor of migration are being lost in a whirlpool of bias, disinformation, distorted facts and the rapidly growing venom of open racism, especially Islamophobia, on social media. If Ms Mahmoud’s radical overhaul of asylum policy restores some confidence, it will at least help ease tensions and create the conditions for a more sensible, more measured and less racist debate.