Comment on Home secretary to make some migrants wait 10 years or more for right to settle in UK

Zombie@feddit.uk ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

• Flax_vert@feddit.uk ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

  How? We are allowed to dictate the terms on which people stay in the UK

  source

  • Zombie@feddit.uk ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

    15 years of precarity is evil. I wouldn’t expect a monarchist and Prince Andrew fan to understand the difference between right and wrong though.

    source

    • Flax_vert@feddit.uk ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

      You could just not come here if you don’t agree to those terms, then? A nation controlling it’s borders in a way that respects human rights isn’t evil or immoral.

      Also, I am not a fan of Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor*

      source

      • guycls@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

        What can I tell you man, karma is a bitch and works on long timescales.

        British government and European governments in general didn’t respect the wishes of other countries on planet when they were looting & colonizing them.

        This is just an instance of “what goes around comes around”.

        If your claims about sovereignty didn’t apply to other countries in the past, they also wouldn’t apply to UK now.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
      • Zombie@feddit.uk ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

        Ministers – including the housing secretary, Angela Rayner – had raised concerns about the effect the rules would have on care workers already in the UK who would be likely to face a 15-year wait for settlement, also known as indefinite leave to remain (ILR).

        The government’s response to the consultation on the reforms, which will be put before MPs on Monday, is expected give some exemption to care workers already in the UK, though most other professions will face the lengthy waits for settlement.

        In June, Rayner described making care workers already in Britain wait up to 15 years for permanent residence as “un-British”. In September, the energy secretary, Miatta Fahnbulleh, said the plans would have been “tough” for her family, who came to Britain as refugees.

        Signatories argue that changing the rules for people who have planned their lives around existing settlement requirements would be unfair and could encourage essential workers to leave the country.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
  • scratchee@feddit.uk ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

    We are desperately dependent on immigrants to keep our nation functioning. Then leaving them living in uncertainty for almost half their lives potentially seems like scumbag behaviour.

    If we actually wanted to reduce immigration all we need to do is give migrants more rights, require generous pay and suddenly there wouldn’t be so much demand for them because they wouldn’t be worth the price, but we won’t do that because we need them too badly to fill the hole in our economy, all the bad jobs that there aren’t enough uk nationals to fill. Treating them as equals who can earn their right to live here simply by doing the work we cannot do ourselves anymore feels like the least we can do, a minimum of the respect they are due. Dragging it out as long as possible is the action of a dodgy boss, not a nation worthy of respect.

    source

    • Paddzr@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

      If someone doesn’t work for 20 years? No, we don’t rely on them.

      Unpopular opinion here… but that’s a leech. I’m not from here either but I got to work for it. People native here? Also got to work to get unemployment money.

      We don’t live in dystopia. Lemmy has some insane takes and this is top of the list. People expect to get stuff for free with literally zero contribution on claim.

      source

      • scratchee@feddit.uk ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

        If someone doesn’t work for 20 years? Other than any Brits who go to university, I don’t think it’s particularly relevant here.

        This is discussing people who do work, and how long they need to work before we trust them enough to treat them like citizens.

        If someone comes here at 18 and works for 5 years… this may shock you, but they’ve been a net benefit to the country to the tune of 5 man-years of work (minus their salary, which presumably is less than the labour, or nobody would be throwing money at them). They are already better for the economy than an equivalent Brit since they didn’t spent 18 years being a drag on the economy (instead they were a drag of whatever poor country wasted the resources prepping them for us!).

        Hypothetically the absolutely most untrusting and stingy position we could take would be to require someone to work long enough to pay off the cost of caring for them for the rest of their life. That would mean assuming they immediately stop working the moment they earn leave to remain. But that would be like a life insurance company saying “we’ll insure you for £100000 but you need to pay us £100000 to cover the risk”.

        Thankfully we can very easily predict how people behave in aggregate. We could pick a number where we’re near guaranteed to come out ahead, I bet it’d be embarrassingly short (most people work to just before pension age). But that’s not what’s driving this policy. This policy exists to look “tough on immigration”, but not too tough because we are actually dependent on immigration. Enough to ruin lives without you know… accidentally having any real effect on immigration numbers, since they would be a disaster.

        source
    • Flax_vert@feddit.uk ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

      It may be a bad policy, but is it actually morally evil? And if so, how?

      It could be beneficial to keep people here for less than 15 years, then replace their positions when there is a UK national to fill the job. There are people who would be happy to work abroad to send money back home, I knew a professional who followed the money and had been to several countries before.

      source

      • scratchee@feddit.uk ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

        I never said evil, but I do think immoral, as I outlined in my previous comment, we’re talking about benefitting from people dedicating a significant amount of their working lives to this country doing jobs we are failing to do ourselves. Leaving those people in limbo for so long isn’t fair to them. This is just statistics to us, but it’s their lives getting uprooted.

        If people are bouncing between different countries and jobs, good for them, and this policy won’t change things for them one bit, because they already wouldn’t be eligible, and if they’re bouncing around they really wouldn’t be interested either.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
    • mlcgdrhu@sopuli.xyz ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

      No we’re not. This level of immigration is for wage supreasion. It’s big business using these people, and it’s sad.We don’t need more people when there aren’t enough jobs to go around, especially for going people.

      source

      • scratchee@feddit.uk ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

        You’re not wrong that it suppresses wages. And if we “just” wanted to fix that we could (by increasing the minimum wage for immigrants perhaps). Interesting that all our anti-immigration policies are less about doing that and more about bullying people.

        But on the flip side, we do need immigration. Wage suppression is only a part of it, at some point wages can’t go up because the money doesn’t exist (especially for the kind of roles we need, the kind of person who needs a carer doesn’t have unlimited funds), and we’ll need it more and more as time goes on too. We genuinely need a growing pool of workers whilst we have an aging population. We’re not making enough young workers ourselves to care for our aging population.

        source

        • -> View More Comments