'Look On My Works, Ye Mighty, And Despair’

The far right across Europe used to dream of seeing their countries leave the European Union. In France, they called for a Frexit; in Germany, it was Dexit. But recently these calls have quietened. The reason is not that far-right parties have become enamoured of the EU, but rather they now understand that instead of quitting, they can reshape the EU into a collection of “strong” nation states that will each enact their own rightwing anti-migration agenda.

As Jordan Bardella, president of the National Rally (RN) in France, recently remarked in explaining why his party no longer called for France to quit the EU: “You don’t leave the table when you are winning the game.”

If you can't beat them, join them (and subvert them), eh? How delicious! 

The German government is on a dangerous path. The country holds a central position in the EU and is its largest economy, meaning that this plan, which goes against one of the central tenets of the EU, threatens to undermine the European project.

Oh noes! Disaster! Who could do such a thing? 

A cornerstone of that project was the ambition to make national borders disappear by creating the passport-free Schengen area, which now includes 25 of the 27 EU member states. It was one of the reasons why the EU received the Nobel peace prize in 2012 – although even then, thousands of migrants were dying at the EU’s external borders every year. At the time, a representative of the union declared: “Over the past 60 years, the European project has shown that it is possible for peoples and nations to come together across borders. That it is possible to overcome the differences between ‘them’ and ‘us’.”

Actually, enough Europeans have realised that it doesn't show that at all, that in fact it shows the opposite. And they've had enough of a union that's no longer working for them, but for itself.  

Besides stoking up racist resentment in society and undermining the rights of vulnerable groups, the German government risks putting the EU itself in jeopardy. The very idea of a political community that enshrines the right to free movement across borders is crumbling before our eyes. And it is not migrants who are to blame.

Ah, well, it had a good run while it lasted. 

No Nominative Determinism Here...

Maya is decidely not...

The political “centre” usually reacts to the far right by denouncing its methods and distancing themselves from its coarse, racist rhetoric – but ultimately conceding to its underlying argument. In the days after the general election, Tony Blair advised Keir Starmer that to ward off the far right, he should celebrate what is good about immigration but be sure to “control” it. No matter how respectable and sensible such advice may seem to some within our political classes, the sentiment that “controlling” immigration is a way to appease socially conservative voters is one cause of the corrosiveness.Why? Because it implies that a fear of immigration is a legitimate concern, and that reducing immigration is the appropriate method to assuage that fear.

So isn't it?  

Are concerns about immigration “legitimate”? Demonstrably, no.

Don't bother looking, Reader, she believes 'demonstrably' is just a word, and doesn't go on to demonstrate anything.  

The “legitimate concerns” in this case are illegitimate. Admitting this doesn’t mean dismissing what people are saying. Equally, engaging people with these views need not lead to legitimisation. The choice is not ignore or accept. Politics is about persuading people of another way; to think this can’t be done is patronising as well as dangerous.

To think it can be done by simply telling everyone that they are wrong is pretty patronising too.  

The government could change the narrative by making the history of empire and migration a statutory party of the curriculum, and by actively countering racism in the press, among opposition parties and within its own ranks. But it could also use this moment to change people’s material circumstances by getting rid of “hostile environment” policies and providing safe routes of travel (one of the only viable solutions to stop people from having to cross the Channel). It could also make visas cheaper, provide better housing, simplify labyrinthine Home Office processes and end temporary, exploitative visas, giving people the ability to come here on decent terms and stay if they want to.

So, to challenge people's assumptions the 'answer' is to flood the country with yet more immigration. Well, that's bound to work! And the craziness doesn't stop there!  

This boldness should be extended beyond immigration. The government should tax the richest, invest in public services and do what’s needed for a just transition from fossil fuels.

Might as well shoot for the moon, eh, Maya? 

The reasons behind the recent violence are many and complex – it cannot be neatly chalked up to the immigration debate alone. But the anti-immigrant sloganeering needs to stop: whether it’s the appeasing of “legitimate concerns”, a commitment to “stop the boats” or the more-acceptable-in-polite-society promises to put “controls on immigration”.

Ignoring and belittling legitimate concerns has never ever worked in the history of mankind, Maya.  

What Happened To Beer & Bratwurst?

The soaring cost of doner kebabs has led to growing calls in Germany for a government subsidy programme to keep the inflation-hit dish, one of the country’s favourites, affordable as politicians report it is frequently cited as a concern in doorstep conversations with voters.

Wow! I guess they must have no potholes in German roads, and no dog crap on their pavements either. 

The chancellor, Olaf Scholz, has become so used to being asked about the price of kebabs during public appearances that his government has even posted on social media to explain that price rises are in part due to rising wage and energy costs. “It’s quite striking that everywhere I go, mainly from young people, I’m asked whether there shouldn’t be a price brake for the doner,” Scholz has said.

Ah, Are those 'young people' Hans & Helga in lederhosen, or perhaps something quite different? Go on, guess! 

The far-left Die Linke party has become the latest to seize on the topic, calling, in a proposal it wants to present to parliament, for the introduction of a Dönerpreisbremse or doner kebab price cap, similar to that introduced in some parts of the country to control high rents. It says kebabs are already €10 (£8.60) in some cities, rising from €4 just two years ago.The party recommends a €4.9o price cap, and €2.90 for young people, especially those from lower income backgrounds, for whom it argues the dish – thinly sliced grilled meat topped with finely chopped vegetables, garlic or chilli sauce, and cradled in a folded flatbread – is a daily staple. It suggests every household could receive daily doner vouchers.

Now, that's chutzpah, and proof German left-wing parties are even more deranged than UK ones! Who thought that was even possible?  

Hanna Steinmüller, an MP for the Greens, a party that more usually appeals to people to give up meat, addressed the issue in parliament earlier this year. “For young people right now it is an issue as important as where they will move when they leave home. I know it’s not an everyday issue for many people here,” she said to fellow MPs, “and that …it’s also something that might be ridiculed, but I think as voter representatives we are obliged to highlight these different perspectives”.

Oh, there's no 'might' about it, it'll be ridiculed all right! But it'll be whistling past the graveyard, as how long will it be until Germany's fate is echoed elsewhere in Europe? 

Are We Charging The Brother? If Not, Why Not?

The BBC is taking out an onion for illegal immigrants again:

Obada and Ayser were among five people who drowned, a few metres from the shore, on the coast of northern France that night - the first to die while trying to cross to the UK in a small boat in 2024, a fortnight into the new year. To try to understand how a child could be put in this situation, the BBC reconstructed Obada's journey from Syria - using videos, messages and interviews with the brothers' relatives and others who accompanied them. Our aim was to explore the wrenching decisions involved at every stage.

Oh, that was your aim, was it? 

In his bedsit in west London, another of Obada's brothers, Nada, 25, kept glancing at his phone. It was 01:00 in London, 02:00 in France. A few hours earlier, Nada had called the whole group as they sat warming themselves around a fire at their makeshift camp under a canal bridge in Calais. They'd seemed confident about the journey ahead. Nada had made the same dangerous crossing two years earlier, ignoring his father, at home in Daraa, who had initially urged him to be patient, suggesting the war in Syria might soon end. Nada had chosen to travel to England because an uncle had already made the journey almost a decade earlier and been granted permission to remain. Both men had come illegally because, Nada said, there was no alternative.

And how did he repay this country? By encouraging more illegal immigration, of course. And now he has a foot in the door our own laws allow him to bring relatives legally. 

In October last year, Nada was granted refugee status and permission to remain in the UK for five years. He recently found a warehouse job near Wembley. He's now taking an English language course and hopes to bring his wife from Syria soon - something he is allowed to apply for as a refugee - and eventually to resume his law degree in England.

Which is the same aim his brother had:  

A neighbour from Daraa, who was with Obada the night he drowned, backed that up. "He would reach Britain and reunite with his brother and soon after would bring his mother and father. That was the whole point of them leaving, so his father could seek medical treatment abroad," said the man, who asked us not to reveal his name. In fact, the plan was flawed from the start. Given that he already had an adult brother in London, Obada would not have been in a position, as a minor, to arrange for his parents to follow him legally.

Well, thank goodness for that! As it happened  he never made it, but why has the brother's asylum not been revisited in light of his collusion? If he's broken no laws in encouraging the child and failing to alert the authorities, it's an utter travesty. 

The following evening, about 100 locals from Calais and a handful of migrants gathered in the town centre to hold a minute's silence for the five dead and to add Obada's and Ayser's names to a long scroll listing those who have died trying to cross the Channel in recent years.

"The biggest fault is the laws of Europe who make the life of the refugees impossible. Who give them not any rights. Who make their life here in Calais and all over the borders impossible. And we have to remember that. It is the fault of the European laws," a local French woman told the sombre crowd.

Sounds like France has its share of idiots too. Just like the UK. 

So, You're Liars?

The 'Guardian' prints another sob-story by illegal immigrants:

There were 39 of us on the barge, from different countries. We are people escaping torture, persecution and imprisonment.

What, in France? Oh, please! 

We were forced to leave our homes, our jobs and our families, and we hoped to find safety in the UK.

You had safety in France. You left it.  

When we were told we would be moved to the Bibby Stockholm, we became worried, not least because we were warned it was dangerous. However, we are law-abiding and wanted to respect the decision of the authorities.

If you were law abiding, you'd have followed our immigration laws. But you didn't, did you? 

On board, although none of us are criminals, we were constrained by the tight security, and we felt far removed from normal life.

You are all criminal. That's the reason for your removal from normal life.  

The government is putting us against the public, by saying this is your taxpayers’ money being wasted on asylum seekers.

I think you'll find that the public is fully in agreement with the government, for once. 

We feel as if we are being hunted by the Home Office, when all we want now is a system that treats us fairly, a swift interview, a stable future and a voice.

And if that 'swift interview' doesn't grant you the future you want? What then? You'll give up trying to enter the UK illegally? 

Yeah, sure.

Remember, Civil Serpents, The Name Of Your Department Is The HOME Office...

...not the Foreign Office. That's another department entirely:

Ellie Robinson was one of more than 150 students at Huddersfield University left in the lurch after a deal was struck between the Home Office and landlords to move asylum seekers into the HD1 building.

...

...the first-year international business student was horrified when, with no prior warning, she was told the bombshell news that her tenancy contract had been cancelled - just weeks before the start of term. Devastated Ellie was left in a state of panic as she and scores of other students scrambled to find last-minute replacement accommodation, in a fiasco branded as 'disgusting' by locals and a 'total mess' by Huddersfield's MP.

My sympathy is tempered a little by the fact that most of these students will be 'Refugees are welcome!' types, as indeed Ellie proves immediately:  

Speaking about migrants taking over the tower block, she added: 'I get why they're doing this – they're doing it to better their lives. But it's a real inconvenience for students. There have to be other places they can do this.'

So, Ellie, if you decide to 'better your life', how will you do it? Get a good job and work hard, or invade another country and demand the people there provide you with everything free of charge? 

The news outraged Labour's shadow immigration minister Stephen Kinnock who told LBC students were 'paying the price for the Government's reliance on emergency accommodation'.

You've got a brass neck a mile wide to claim that. 

The Home Office said Britain was facing a huge demand from asylum seekers crossing the Channel.

Then stop them. Because if they are coming from France, a safe country, they aren't asylum seekers at all. And you know it.  

Nice One, Suella!

Suella Braverman has made her first trip to Rwanda as home secretary amid criticism that the Guardian, other liberal newspapers and the BBC have been shut out from the publicly funded visit.

Ha ha ha ha ha! Consequences, eh? They're a bitch, aren't they?

Charity Freedom from Torture labelled it a “showboat trip” after it emerged that the Guardian, the BBC, the Daily Mirror, the Independent and the i newspaper were not invited.

Sonya Sceats, chief executive at Freedom from Torture, described the policy as a “cash-for-humans” scheme.“Following the outpouring of support for Gary Lineker and his compassionate stand on behalf of refugees, this government knows it is on the back foot and is once again ramping up the cruelty to distract from their own failures.”

I'm sure that's what you'd like to think. I bet you haven't asked anyone outside your own circle what they think though, have you?

Manipulating The News...

The 'Guardian' opines:

Kay Marsh, another Dover resident who works for the migrants rights charity Samphire, said that she has seen attitudes of local people harden against asylum seekers.“I used to find that people were more willing to listen. But now it’s more of ‘this is what I read in the newspapers and this is what the government is saying’. Asylum seekers are normal people who want a safe life. Everybody is entitled to that.”

Normal people who want a safe life that's somehow not in France. Or any of the other countries they've passed through to get here. 

Normal people who know they aren't welcome in a country, so they break its laws to come regardless... 

Chris Johnson, who lives just outside Dover, who is described as “far right” and a “migrant hunter” by the organisation Hope Not Hate, stepped out of his white BMW on the white cliffs of Dover to catch a glimpse of the arrival of Rishi Sunak and his entourage at the Maritime Rescue Coordination Centre.

Gosh. I wonder why the 'Guardian' didn't see fit to tell us what car Kay drives..? 

One asylum seeker living in Home Office accommodation in Napier barracks in Folkestone, said: “The home secretary’s announcement today is a revenge plan and closes any ray of hope for those whose lives are in danger and seek safety and security in Britain.”

What are they seeking it from? France isn't that bad, comparted to Somalia or Afghanistan, is it? And they aren't all 'seeking safety', are they?

 

What Reason Could He Have For Claiming Asylum?

A grieving family are demanding answers after a beloved grandfather died in a motorcycle crash with an asylum seeker who was working illegally as a DPD driver under a false name.

He's Moldovan. Claiming to be Romanian. Why is anyone's claim from either of these two countries tolerated?

Stratan was detained in October 2021 after he entered Scotland from Ireland using the false identity of a Romanian called Sergei Bagrin. He was detained for five months before being freed in March with an admonition by Stranraer Sherriff Court.

Thanks, Scotland! 

He then moved to Devon where he obtained the false driving licence and got a job as a delivery driver.

Stratan had already racked up four unpaid speeding tickets in two months of driving for DPD at their depot near St Austell in Cornwall. The crash with Mr Colwill occurred when he failed to stop at a Give Way sign on a country road at Ashwater, North Devon.

It's beyond bel... No. I have to stop saying that, don't I? Because it isn't.

Stratan admitted perverting the course of justice, causing death by careless driving and driving while uninsured and with a false licence. He was jailed for a year and ten months by Judge David Evans at Exeter Crown Court and banned from driving for five years after his release. The judge said the public would expect him to be deported on or before his release.

We wouldn't expect him to have been allowed into the asylum system in the first place... 

The judge noted that DPD's ability to check on Stratan's credentials had been diluted because he was working through two sub-contractors.

And the country's ability to check on chancers, grifters and wrong 'uns coming in? What's diluted that?

How Does It Do This, Exactly..?

 Whut..?

The new research contradicts claims made by former home secretary Priti Patel, who launched the scheme to deter people crossing the Channel in small boats, saying they were “not genuine asylum seekers” and were “elbowing out the women and children, who are at risk and fleeing persecution”.

It doesn't do anything of the sort. So what if they are married? Does no-one think that might be a ploy to prevent removal? 

Beth Gardiner-Smith, spokesperson for Together With Refugees and chief executive of Safe Passage, said: “This scheme is not just morally wrong; it’s expensive and unworkable. If our government were serious about tackling smuggling and saving lives at sea, they would scrap this plan and urgently expand safe routes for refugees.”

Clare Moseley, founder of Care4Calais, said: “This brutal policy will not end small boat crossings, it won’t stop people smugglers and it won’t keep refugees safe. There is a kinder and more effective option: give safe passage to refugees in Calais.”

There you go, folks! Worried about being burgled? Just leave your front door open! 

Good, Since They Never Should Have Been Made In The First Place...

Sources told the Guardian that the home secretary has dropped a pledge to create the post of a migrants’ commissioner, who was due to be responsible for speaking up for migrants and for identifying systemic problems within the UK immigration system.

Another promise to increase the powers of the independent chief inspector of borders and immigration (ICIBI) has also been abandoned, as work on the post-Windrush reform programme is downgraded.

Officials have also discarded a commitment to run a series of reconciliation events that were due to be attended by senior Home Office staff and ministers during which members of the Windrush generation would have been invited to “articulate the impact of the scandal on their lives”.

None of these should ever have been accepted by a Conservative government. Particularly the last one, which smacks of some show trial demanded by Stalin. 

I guess if ministers want to read about how hard done by some migrants feel, they'll just have to log on to the 'Guardian' like everyone else in future... 

The former home secretary Priti Patel made a firm promise to introduce all 30 recommendations made by Williams in 2020...

Incoming governments aren't bound by decisions taken by the outgoing government.  

We Know What You Really Mean By 'The Most Vulnerable', 'Guardian...

The Home Office has placed immigration officers in child social services and dozens of other local authority departments, in an arrangement that has raised concerns​...

That there's not enough?

...about the ability of the most vulnerable to seek support, the Guardian can reveal.

Why would it? Unless, of course, by 'most vulnerable' you mean illegals and overstayers. Still, any new initiative would be welc...

Oh! 

The on-site immigration officer service was reported by the Observer in early 2019.

So it's been running for three years? 

The revelation that the Home Office was “hiring out” immigration officials to enforce the government’s hostile environment policy was met with outrage from critics, leading many local authorities to eject the officers, and the Home Office to remove information about the service from government websites.

Any local authority that did this should have gone straight to the back of the queue for any government funding... 

However, the service has continued to operate. Records released in response to FoI requests reveal that at the end of 2021, 12 local authorities plus HS2 and TfL still had immigration officers working within them on behalf of the Home Office, including five where officers had been placed specifically in children’s services. 

The OUTRAGE! in the article is led by shadow minister for immigration, Stephen Kinnock, Mary Atkinson, campaigns officer at the Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants and Colin Yeo, an immigration law barrister.

Do they bother to ask Mr or Mrs Average in the street whether they think it's a good idea? Reader, they do not. 

They just expect them to pay eye-watering levels of tax to fund every Tomazs, Dhama and Harsimer who comes ashore at Dover...

Call Their Bluff, Then, Priti...

Priti Patel 'will hire private jets to fly migrants to Rwanda' because airline bosses 'refuse to put on flights in fear of a backlash' from critics.

The Home Secretary was reportedly told that her plan to send migrants to the East African nation for processing could result in protesters targeting the firms involved in the flights.

'Reportedly told' by whom? Those civil serpents in her department desperate to stop it, perhaps? 

That would considerably increase the price of the policy which is already understood to cost British taxpayers an initial £120million.

Not necessarily. We do have all those RAF transports sitting around, don't we? Those pilots need to keep up their flying hours, don't they?

Ipswich MP Tom Hunt, who previously welcomed the Rwanda policy as the 'only truly effective way of tackling the channel crossings issue', said any airline that refuses to take part in the scheme should be 'named and shamed'.

I'd go further. I'd say 'should face sanctions'. At the very least, should no longer be an approved supplier of flights to government employees travelling on business... 

Civil servants who complained about Priti Patel's Rwanda policy have been slapped down by their boss and told to get on with the job.

The Home Office's top civil servant has warned his staff that leaks which had attempted to undermine the policy had been a breach of the civil service code.

So let them face the consequences of it (if indeed there are any). Empty talk, this is all that is.  

Good!

Of course, in the crazy world of the 'Guardian', this is bad!

The government’s New Plan for Immigration aims to restrict family reunion rights for refugees who travelled through a safe third country before reaching the UK. This applies to the thousands who travelled to the UK in small boats.

Many of them have, in fact, travelled through multiple safe countries. Can the 'Guardian' find one that deserves to be here this time?

Reader, they cannot: 

One Syrian asylum seeker, who fled war, imprisonment and torture in his homeland before travelling through several countries and reaching the UK, said he was “horrified” by the government plans.

“We did not leave our country in search of happiness,” he told the Guardian. “I am talking here as the head of a family deserted. Rather, we went out to save our family from a war that does not know the young or the old and does not differentiate between the strong or the weak, in which no one can survive.”

“We walked in the most dangerous country, crossed the desert and crossed the English Channel in a rubber boat, knowing we may die in the sea. Has any official asked themselves what motivated us to risk ourselves … I was ready to die in order to save my family. What Priti Patel is thinking now is to eliminate our families by depriving us of family reunion.”

No, she's seeking to implement the will of the British people who have voted in a party that promised a crackdown on this sort of 'asylum shopping'.  

They Did Their Jobs For Once...

...and naturally, they are being penalised for it by one of those long marchers through our institutions:

The court heard Mr Dawood was working illegally at the car wash after being refused asylum when he arrived in Britain from Sudan.

He had fled Sudan because he belonged to a tribe being persecuted by the authorities, the inquest was told.

And presumably persecuted in all the other countries in Africa too, or why flee here..? 

Mr Dawood fled after immigration officers carried out an enforcement visit at the car wash at around 10.08am. He was pursued by officers to a neighbouring warehouse, where he then climbed on shelving and ran through a metal door before climbing onto its roof.

The inquest into his death was told officers did not pursue when Mr Dawood started to climb, but remained close and did not withdraw.

Well, yes. What else were they supposed to do? 

Ms Saunders' report, published on Wednesday, said immigration officers should have 'practical training in pursuit situations' following his death.

Sounds a lot more like she wants them to be trained to immediately give up, doesn't it? 

Mr Dawood's mother Hameda Hamed Shogar Ahmed, who travelled to the UK for her son's inquest from the Sudanese city of Al Fashir, told the court her son had wanted to earn money to send back to Sudan to support his family.

Strange sort of 'persecution' when the mother - presumably from the same tribe - is allowed to travel... 

'[My son] felt a strong passion for human rights and felt that everyone should be protected and free to live their lives free from persecution and fear.'

Pity he didn't feel that everyone should obey the laws of the country they are (illegally) living in, or he wouldn't be dead... 

Odd Way Of Trying To Say...

...'illegal immigrant dies trying to enter the country illegally'. 

But it is the 'Guardian', I suppose.

The latest suspected tragedy emerged after 500 more migrants crossed the Channel during the day, taking the total so far this year to over 20,000 – more than double 2020’s 8,420 total.

The words 'tragedy' and 'migrants' grate on me. As does the naked appeal to emotion:

In the port of Dover, dozens of recent arrivals were brought to shore by RNLI lifeboats, reports claimed.

A young child holding a cuddly toy and wearing just one wellington boot was among the large numbers of people seen being brought ashore.

Awww, the poor mite! No, don't you dare question the parenting of those responsible for this journey, just give them a council house immediately! 

Amnesty International UK’s chief executive, Sacha Deshmukh, said: “We need to remember that these dangerous crossings are taking place because the government has provided no safe alternative for people to exercise their right to seek asylum here.

“If Priti Patel is truly concerned with tackling criminal gangs and their exploitation of people, she needs to set up safe asylum routes so people no longer need to depend on smugglers.”

That's like burglars getting together to form an organisation to claim that burglary has to take place because householders refuse to open their doors and give the burglars all their money...

If It's Good Enough For British Taxpayers...

The Refugee Council has supported more than 400 asylum seekers in hotels and the report was based on their testimony.

Enver Solomon, chief executive of the council, said: “People who have fled war and persecution often arrive in the UK with just the clothes on their back, in urgent need of healthcare, nutritious food and other essentials such as toiletries.”

The charity says the food provided in many of the hotels is “a major cause of concern”. Food often arrives in small portions, with limited options available, the report says. The quality varies widely across sites, with some hotels providing little or no fruit.

...it's more than good enough for 'refugees', Enver.

A Home Office spokesperson said: “Asylum seekers who would otherwise be destitute are provided with accommodation, a choice of three meals a day in line with NHS nutrition guidelines, as well as access to fresh fruit and drinking water, and we work closely with our providers and local charities to provide other basics.”

Particularly 'refugees' who are fleeing....err, Calais. 

If They Keep Coming, This Is What Has To Happen...

A new network of immigration detention units for women is being quietly planned by the Home Office, contrary to previous pledges to reform the system and reduce the number of vulnerable people held.

When situations change, should previously-stated policies not change to meet the threat, then? 

Alphonsine Kabagabo, director of the charity Women for Refugee Women, called the creation of a detention centre in the north-east a “betrayal of previous commitments made by ministers”.

Who made those committments? 

The developments undermine attempts by the former immigration minister Caroline Nokes to reform the system.

Well, there's your clue, Alphonsine, 'former' minister. She's out, someone else is in, and they ain't impressed with her kow-towing to immigrant pressure groups like yours.  

Philp confirmed plans were being finalised for a new detention centre in County Durham. He said: “The public rightly expects us to maintain a robust immigration system and detention plays a crucial role in this.

“We are committed to making sure people with no entitlement to be in the UK, including people with serious criminal convictions, are removed.”

As you should be.