Dear All
Think tanks are bodies that come up with ideas, in the past,
some ideas have been useful and other ideas border on plain stupidity. If you
take the ‘Windrush’ scandal, the reason for the problem is that the Labour
Government of the time; ordered their documents destroyed. Down the line, this
meant the incumbent government of Theresa May couldn’t do their job properly,
leading to confusion and problems. Brexit is still moving forward, the Policy
Exchange thinks that there is a case for a ID registration system for EU
citizens in the UK and also for British citizens.
In many walks of life, the ID card system is already here,
in education, in construction, police and in health, even private companies
have id systems to allow their staff access to their premises. Previously in
the UK, we had an ID card system during WW2, the scheme continued well after
the end of the war and then was phased out. There is a case for an ID card
system, and a case not for a card system, in several posts, I wrote about the
need for an EU wide identity card to cope with the migrant crisis.
Illegal migrants need to be documented, and we need to know
where they are and who they are since the political elite opened the flood
gates and let these people roam free in our country and others in the EU. I
have no problem with EU citizens being issued with an ID card; similar schemes
operate in other countries of the EU. But if there is to be an extended ID card
programme to document British citizens, it cannot similar be about the issuing
of a card. It is said that there are one million illegal immigrants in this
country, these people are criminals, and should be removed, no matter how long
they have been here.
The idea of a national ID system for British citizens has
been controversial, with many people opposing it on civil liberties grounds.
The state of politics in this country means that one group plays off against
the other group which we all know as party politics, civil liberties are just
the ‘peg’ that they use to hang their grievance on.
A £5 billion national identity card scheme was introduced by
the last Labour government in 2006 under Tony Blair, probably to bring us
more into line with European practice. The idea wasn’t acceptable and a Bill to
scrap it was the first legislation introduced by Theresa May when she
became home secretary in 2010. After Brexit, EU citizens already in the UK will
have to pay £65 and join a registration scheme if they wish to stay in Britain
after the end of the transition period on December 31 2020.
£65 isn’t a high fee, and I think the government has got the
balance right.
David Goodhart, Policy Exchange's head of demography,
immigration and integration, suggests that the scheme should be widened to
Britons, initially on a voluntary basis. In other words, voluntary first then
turned into compulsory.
He said:
"We strongly recommend reopening the debate about ID
management to reassure people that we know who is in the country, for how long,
and what their entitlements are. A proper national ID system would have
prevented the harassment of the Windrush victims."
I never favour knee jerk politics as a basis for making
policy, usually, a single incident is used to justify an idea which the authors
aren’t able to articulate on its own merits, hence they find a victim.
The report by the Policy Exchange has other ideas:
A more decisive removals process, the current system has
been abused using the Human Rights Act as an opened ended book to concoct the
most ridiculous decisions.
An amnesty for illegal immigrants who have been in the UK
for 10 years or more, this is unacceptable, we don’t reward people for crime
because they have been doing it a long time.
More cash to pay illegal immigrants to leave and a joint
scheme involving the Department for International Development to help them set
up businesses in their countries of origin, I see no problem with this idea.
A British version of the US Electronic System for Travel
Authorisation (ESTA) that allows non-UK citizens to use e-gates at borders and
made it quicker for "low-risk groups" to enter, this is idea has
merit provide the scheme is secure.
Make rail and ferry operators provide more information about
passengers and introduce more collaboration with Irish authorities to close
down the Common Travel Area "backdoor", private companies shouldn’t
have to act as border agents, this would create a security problem.
Higher overall investment, including better detection
systems for lorries at Calais and Dover, more staff and more border patrol
boats, this isn’t setting the heather on fire but if anyone is found, we should
send them back to France without judicial review, instant deportation.
The farce of letting them in has gone on too long.
Mr Goodhart added:
"Illegal immigration is not only unfair on legal
immigrants who wait their turn in the queue and the employers and businesses
who play (and pay) by the rules, it also fosters a twilight world of
criminality, dependence and exploitation in which modern slavery flourishes. Combating illegal immigration should be overtly linked
to minimum wage enforcement, private landlord licensing and action against
modern slavery. While a general amnesty for the estimated 500,000 illegal
residents here would send the wrong signal, some form of regularisation should
also be considered for those who have been here for more than 10 years, who are
now parts of their communities with ties to the UK and often become the focus
of grassroots campaigns."
Everyone should play by the rules and no one should be
getting special treatment, this has been the cause of division in this and
other EU States.
A Home Office spokesman said:
"We are pursuing an ambitious programme of reform at
the border as well as investing in new capability to improve passenger
experience. Examples of this include e-Passport gates and motion
detection technology which benefit passengers and improve security. Border
Force invested £63.5 million in new technology and capability in 2017-18 and
£90.4 million in the two previous years combined. Decisions on the future immigration system will be based on
evidence. This is why we have asked the independent Migration Advisory
Committee (MAC) to advise on the economic and social impacts of the UK's exit
from the EU and also on how the UK's immigration system should be aligned with
a modern industrial strategy."
If you are the type of person who gets angry when
someone breaks into your house to steal, then you should be equally angry when
someone breaks into your country to steal, the fact they aren’t lifting your
possessions is irrelevant. The madness of Germany’s migrant crisis, the crisis
in Sweden, Italy and France, show what happens when rules are abandoned for
political virtual signalling, chaos, rape, murder, theft and acts of terror.
I favour a fair, strong immigration system based on evidence,
need and cohesion, sadly the open borders people are the facilitators of much
of the current problems, if you don’t have strong borders, you don’t have
security, just ask the Germans. Immigration is a good thing, what has happened
in Europe and in the UK has been exceptionally bad, it is time that someone
cleaned up the mess.
Finally, Angela Merkel ruined Germany by her open borders policy, in the UK, much of the damage was done by Tony Blair when Labour Prime Minister, his social engineering experiment done under the 'lie of economic reasons' caused many of the problems of a similar nature to Germany's troubles.
Yours sincerely
George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University
No comments:
Post a Comment