clint van damme
Well-Known Member
I've since seen it on Sky. Probably a better alternative for a lot of people given it location though the same article said China was going to refuse to let people leave.
I've since seen it on Sky. Probably a better alternative for a lot of people given it location though the same article said China was going to refuse to let people leave.
Alan Dugdales Moustache
Well-Known Member
It's going to get messy. You'd have thought that perhaps China might want to get shot of those who object to the new legislation and allow them to leave . Perhaps its a deliberate move to show that they are in control and any subsequent relaxation will be seen as a "goodwill" gesture on their part.
Otis
Well-Known Member
Anyone who protests about any foreigners coming in.
We surely owe it to the people of Hong Kong to give them safe residence.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
I'd hope that the scale we're talking here makes such people stop and think the next time there's a mindless rant about immigration. Those numbers are trivial, for the everyday oppressed, compared to this. This highlights just how small they are in reality.
Last edited by a moderator:
Alan Dugdales Moustache
Well-Known Member
So you "hope" there will be big numbers coming over so it justifies something else . You hope that, for example, 3 million arrive from Hong Kong so that the usual figures of between 200 - 400,000 arriving most years from all over the world will look like peanuts and will no longer attract the kind of objections that it currently does.
It's very sad that you wish for huge numbers of people to feel so threatened for their liberty just to somehow satisfy your personal opinions on immigration policy.
I hope the Chinese renage on their policy and the people of Hong Kong feel that they can stay.
If not, we need to help as best we can. It's not about any personal political opinion. It's about doing the right thing.
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
This is right. We also heard many, many times that 500 million people could be allowed into the UK because of freedom of movement. We all knew it was bollocks but it didn't stop the argument being used countless times. The real question is why has no government managed to get net immigration below 100,000 despite promising every year to do it.
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
Not like say Syria, which lets be honest was what drove Brexit.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
Way to misread.
Ring Of Steel
Well-Known Member
He is saying nothing of the sort. What he is saying is that this should put things in perspective, ie you get huge outcry & horror when massively smaller numbers of people come in, yet here we are talking about the same number of people as the entire West Midlands potentially coming in. The inference being that you should maybe think twice before launching into another anti-immigration monologue, because its not actually very many people at all you're talking about, no matter what Nigel Farage tells you.
Alan Dugdales Moustache
Well-Known Member
Nope . You want a big influx just so that you can make a political pont . Shame on you. You couldn't give a shit about the Hong Kong people at all.
Ring Of Steel
Well-Known Member
I don't believe you are a teacher, but I do agree you belong in a school.
Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
So are places like Syria and Yemen. Far more serious and awful situations we've directly or indirectly helped to cause. Should we help them and let those that want to come here do so?
I think it's the correct move, even though it will anger China. But those that voted Tory for Brexit and stronger immigration laws are not going to be pleased that we've just offered to take in over a decades worth of immigrants (not just asylum seekers) in one go. Although I'm sure they'll somehow find a way to separate this from their usual opinions on asylum.
But to the HK residents - beware Brits bearing gifts. Don't forget Windrush - they were invited too.
Evo1883
Well-Known Member
I voted leave, I have no problem with taking in people from Hong Kong
Wyken Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Genuine question:
What benefit would this have to the UK, considering the unemployment rate will rise once furlough is ceased? Or is there an ulterior motive?
Sent from my I3113 using Tapatalk
What benefit would this have to the UK, considering the unemployment rate will rise once furlough is ceased? Or is there an ulterior motive?
Sent from my I3113 using Tapatalk
Ring Of Steel
Well-Known Member
Ulterior motive apart from what? You surely don't think this is being done out of kindness or friendship
Alan Dugdales Moustache
Well-Known Member
Good. I'm glad you've got that off your chest.
Last edited:
Alan Dugdales Moustache
Well-Known Member
Oh no, here we go.......
Did see something about giving them a region and making it a Freeport.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
Exccellent. Hopefully not from Syria either. If so, we'll get on famously
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
tbf, traditionally Johnson is very liberal in his attitude to immigration. This is far more the Johnson prior to his stance on Brexit, and his rhetoric there. It's interesting in its own way... although given he didn't realise that people with leave to remain in the UK didn't necessarily have access to benefits...
Alan Dugdales Moustache
Well-Known Member
..and if he doesn't agree with you, then that's his problem not yours. After all, you're always right.Exccellent. Hopefully not from Syria either. If so, we'll get on famously
Evo1883
Well-Known Member
Exccellent. Hopefully not from Syria either. If so, we'll get on famously
Britain since 2016 has taken in more refugees from outside the EU than any other EU state... I think we do our bit
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
Just over 20k people offered protection by the UK in the last year. Nothing compared to this. No reason to complain about 20k
Evo1883
Well-Known Member
I'm not complaining about anything, merely pointing out we do help refugees... Our offering help to Hong Kong is an entirely different situation
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
Not really. It's only different in the same v way b somebody from Sudan is persecuted in a different way to somebody from Syria.
If you support us helping people in need from any country I have no issue whatsoever
Evo1883
Well-Known Member
Not really. It's only different in the same v way b somebody from Sudan is persecuted in a different way to somebody from Syria.
If you support us helping people in need from any country I have no issue whatsoever
I generally don't mind us helping people... Anybody.. Within reason.
Think that's as reasonable a reply as I could offer
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
You for a source for that? Also 2016 is a very weird cut off considering the migrant crisis started a couple years prior to that.
Evo1883
Well-Known Member
No specific reason for a 2016 cut off, it was just the dates that full fact. Com threw at me.
I may or may not be 100% correct or incorrect according to this, who knows, we do our bit anyway is the point.
Down the article we have claims made from 2016 to July 2019 .
E UK’S INDEPENDENT FACT CHECKING CHARITY
How many refugees does the UK take in?
16th Aug 2019
Claim
In 2017 the UK resettled more refugees from outside Europe than any other EU member state.
Conclusion
Technically correct, but resettled refugees are only a subset of all refugees a country might take in. Overall, Germany, France, Austria and Sweden all granted asylum to more refugees than the UK did in 2017.
“In 2017 the UK resettled more refugees from outside Europe than any other EU member state (Eurostat figures).”
Migration Watch, 13 August 2019
In response to a journalist tweeting that “the only refugee the British government wants to support is a cartoon bear”, the think tank Migration Watch claimed that the UK resettled more refugees from outside Europe than any other EU member state in 2017. The government has previously made a similar claim: "Since 2016, Britain has resettled more refugees from outside Europe than any other EU state”.
Both statements are correct, but there’s some important context which many people might not have picked up from the wording.
The term “resettled” is very important here. “Resettled refugees” are not all refugees which a country might take in. It refers to refugees who were resettled in a new country as part of a specific scheme run by that country. Most refugees arrive in the EU as asylum seekers, not as people being resettled as part of a scheme.
clint van damme
Well-Known Member
It also puts a bit of a hole in the why don't they stay in the first safe country argument
skyblueusername
Well-Known Member
Theres talk of building a new Hong Kong right here in the UK.
Let's build Hong Kong 2.0 here in the UK - CapX
Let's build Hong Kong 2.0 here in the UK - CapX
Evo1883
Well-Known Member
I was thinking about this and wondered where there was enough land... I thought Wales
skyblueusername
Well-Known Member
On BBC radio yesterday they said somewhere on the coast in Scotland or Humberside were being considered.
Otis
Well-Known Member
As long as it is not in my backyard, I am not really bothered.
Alan Dugdales Moustache
Well-Known Member
East Anglia. The fens, Lincolnshire.