That Starmer fella...

I've no idea what your views are because you keep dodging the question.

Honestly I've written this three times now.

My view is that Rachel Reeves of the shadow cabinet should not be publicly calling for the home office to deport everyone who has a failed claimed because my view is that the system is deeply flawed, and many of those claims shouldn't be refused, and that some people who will be deported face persecution.

What should happen under the perfect system is not for me to magic up, but it would be nice if the Labour Party could put that forward x

I've no idea what your views are because you keep dodging the question.

+1

It's not a hard question.

Do you think:

A. No one should have an asylum application refused, and all asylum seekers should have the right to remain regardless of circumstances, or
B. If an asylum application is rejected and the right of appeal exhausted that person should be returned to their county of origin/another country?

C’mon people what’s the point

I know that I've said this lots before, but Labour (especially Jacqui Smith) don't have an unblemished record on asylum.

So I don't think it's a given that a Labour government is going to be good on asylum. Although you'd hope they wouldn't be worse.

That the OG tweet wasn't Rachel Reeves getting all Priti Patel. It was a perfectly reasonable position for a shadow minister to express.

Wonder how Labour would do in the polls if they stood up and said that they would not deport anybody who did not have the legal right to remain.

Yeah true, I guess I have just seen how bad it has been lately and probably adopt a “could it be worse” position - but that’s not a given

Also pretty sure the Home Office don't publish stats on overstays.

You are correct. The most recent estimate of number of overstayers I could find is about 600,000 people but the home office don't issue stats. I assume because it would be an admission of how much control theyve lost of the system.

Without the context of the questioning your cherry picked responses are worthless. For example my statement "you're a cunt" would be completely different applied to you in this thread vs a previous face to face with Fred west.

If RR is responding validly to a question about Tory proposals to make more immigration rules on top of those they already enacted her statement is perfectly reasonable. She's not stating an opinion on the extant policy but the failure to enforce and attempts to shore up with further legislation.

1 Attachment

A good tip for headlines like this is to challenge yourself to go away and make sure that is what he actually said.

Internet failing at nuance again I see. Is this really the same as saying that too many migrants are recruited in the NHS? Or that not enough Brits are being trained to work in the NHS.

1 Attachment

I mean, what he literally said is pretty close to that, yep:

What I would like to see is the numbers go down in some areas. I think we're recruiting too many people from overseas into, for example, the health service.

That's only a quarter of what he said. You've taken once sentence and ignored the context.

Did he say:

A) We're employing too many migrants in the NHS
B) We aren't training enough doctors and nurses in the UK and importing talent from overseas does not solve that problem.

Anyway, it's a brilliant bit of messaging from Starmer.

Expresses support for migration. Pays respect to migrant workers in the NHS. Talks about manifesto pledges to create 7,500 student medical places. Talks about investing in domestic talent and reducing dependency on migration. Dog whistles to the racists he needs to vote for him in in the GE. He's walking a tightrope.

What I would like to see is the numbers go down in some areas. I think we're recruiting too many people from overseas into, for example, the health service.

He's absolutely right. When you're bringing in more than a third of your doctors from overseas instead of training up people who were born and raised here, that points to a problem where the NHS is not an attractive place to work. It's not an anti-immigration point. It's not even a pro-native point. It's literally saying that we need to make the NHS a place where people WANT to work.

Hasn't stopped left wing twitter going into meltdown and flooding Twitter with tweets along the line of "So when is Starmer going to tell us which foreign doctors aren't welcome here?"

It also goes directly against international guidelines that wealthier/developed countries should NOT take(/recruit/attract) vital medical skills from poorer/developing countries.

left wing twitter going into meltdown and flooding Twitter

I'm so jaded about twitter that I my gut says these stories are actually initiated by Tory false flag ops.

then why didnt he say exactly that using those exact words?

then why didnt he say exactly that using those exact words?

Have you listened to the interview and exactly what Starmer said? The point about there being vacancies and nobody wanting to apply for them is addressed...thats when he talks about the need to encourage people to apply for careers with the NHS with funding.

This is what we need more of right?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/sep/25/plan-to-recruit-nepal-nurses-for-nhs-puts-them-at-risk-of-exploitation

Or a long term plan to train more domestically and a plan for the transition so we aren't removing professionals from countries that leave them exposed to staff shortages and undermining their health care systems

so we aren't removing professionals from countries that leave them exposed to staff shortages and undermining their health care systems

What about the rights of those individuals that trained abroad? Whilst I accept that the argument can be made from a non-nativist perspective, there will still be those that would otherwise like to come to the UK that lose out.

Why should we be complicit in another country’s protectionist migration policies?

it's not just over countries policies, countries like Nepal and Ghana are on the WHO Red list for a reason, they face significant health care workforce shortages which is why you aren't supposed to actively recruit from (but we do and exploitive agencies as shown in the article linked do, upto 20% of our overseas recruitment for nurses and midwives comes from red list countries) them as you are exacerbating a problem that will lead to worse outcomes in those countries for the population. you might be able to argue it's OK if we were balancing the issue with our foreign aid but instead we are spending that in the UK on hotels to pay for a failed immigration policy.

There are always going to be winners and losers in any policy but I think net suffering is larger in the current system

Are the qualifications also funded for by the government?