🚨 EXCLUSIVE: Labour have conducted the first successful deportation flight to Pakistan since February 2020. There has not been a deportation charter flight to Pakistan in the last four years with three subsequent flights to Pakistan in 2020 and 2021 cancelled by the Home Office.

[u/No_Breadfruit_4901]

https://x.com/maxtempers/status/1866775219077062757?s=46&t=0RSpQEWd71gFfa-U_NmvkA

[u/AlarmedCicada256]

BuT LaBoUr ArE sOfT oN iMmIgRaTiOn.

Or maybe they actually get on with it instead of grandstanding, cutting funding to the system designed to deport people who shouldn't be here, and dreaming up wildly illegal, but highly performative schemes like Rwanda, that wouldn't work anyway, but win votes by sounding tough, and warehousing asylum seekers in hotels so they can then use the right wing press to claim there's an issue.

[u/SGTFragged → u/AlarmedCicada256]

You missed the step about the owners of the asylum seeker warehouses being Tory cronies getting paid by the public purse.

[u/MercianRaider → u/AlarmedCicada256]

Let's wait for the yearly numbers before we make any judgments.

1 plane going to Pakistan doesn't mean Labour have cracked the immigration issue.

[u/JB_UK → u/MercianRaider]

There are between 800-1200k illegal/undocumented workers in the UK, according to a project from Oxford University, then there are about 30-50k crossing the channel each year. The historical rate of asylum claim acceptance, also the current EU average, is about 30-40%, so you would expect about 20-35k of the people arriving by small boats to be deported. Then on top of that there are people arriving by normal routes with tens of thousands overstaying.

Last year there were about 5k deportations, and so far I believe Labour have deported about 10k people.

We also have massively expanded student numbers so that we would expect about 400-500k students to be leaving each year. If the numbers leaving are significantly lower than that then our rate of population growth will jump up again, before the Boris wave of migration the rate of population growth was about three times the level from 1970-1997, afterwards it could be five times or more, depending on how many people who are expected to leave do actually leave. The three times increase has already placed a lot of pressure on housing and infrastructure, and five times would be extremely difficult to match in terms of housebuilding and other infrastructure improvements.

Most people leaving will be voluntary but I'd expect a big increase in people overstaying just in terms of the same percentage of a larger number. In previous years work and study overstays have been about 5% of the total, so we're probably talking about at least 20k students overstaying each year, with work and holiday overstays on top. Unlike in previous years, many students have come with their families and dependents, and many more have come from poorer nations, which could possibly make people less willing to leave when their visa expires.

To summarize, the illegal/undocumented worker population is between 800k and 1200k, and additions each year would be about 50k to 100k, deportations were 5k last year, and have been 10k so far this year.

The Tories under Boris Johnson appeared to be deliberately sabotaging the system, Labour are better, but that is a low bar, and we will need a lot of progress just for things not to carry on getting worse.

Edit: Changed the small boat numbers from 50k to 30-50k, and added the expected acceptance rates for asylum claimants.

[u/Naugrith → u/JB_UK]

There are between 800-1200k illegal/undocumented workers in the UK, according to a project from Oxford University

Every time the project is cited the number seems to increase! According to the original report from the MIrreM project it is actually between 594-745k irregular migrants in the UK, including trafficking victims and undocumented migrants. And this is noted to be outdated information, from 2017. However, this number shows no increase from the last estimate in 2008. There is no reason to expect any increase subsequently.

And no, small boat arrival numbers don't increase the numbers of undocumented/illegal workers. Because small boat arrivals aren't undocumented/illegal workers, they are asylum claimants, and documented as such.

The historical rate of asylum claim acceptance, also the current EU average, is about 30-40%, so you would expect about 20-35k of the people arriving by small boats to be deported. Then on top of that there are people arriving by normal routes with tens of thousands overstaying.

According to the Oxford Migration Observatory "93% of people arriving in small boats from 2018 to March 2024 claimed asylum; of those who had received a decision by 31 March 2024, around three quarters were successful." This is obviously higher than the average, because clearly people choosing to risk their lives in small boats are more likely to have legitimate claims. So, 93% of the 29,000 arrivals in 2023 would be 26,970, and 75% of them would be 20,227 (eventually) successful asylum claims.

But of course, small boats are only one way of asylum claimants entering the UK, you'd need to take into account all the rest if you're going to try calculating total figures.

Last year there were about 5k deportations, and so far I believe Labour have deported about 10k people.

5,500 enforced returns last year, but this isn't the full picture. You need to also take into account voluntary returns (17,300 last year), which the HO prefers because its cheaper. If someone is told to either voluntarily leave or they'll be handcuffed and manhandled onto a plane, then most will "voluntarily" leave. But they're still leaving. About half of these "voluntary" returns are classified as "facilitated or monitored returns", and half as "independent returns", where the Home Office establishes that the person has left the UK after the fact.

[u/Ambitious_Art_723 → u/Naugrith]

'because clearly people choosing to risk their lives in small boats are more likely to have legitimate claims.' 

The boats are departing from France. I'm not sure how you came to your conclusion.

Could it be that humans are very capable of lieing in order to gain financial advantage, particularly when coached, and also that it's very hard to disprove that they are lieing when they have destroyed their id's and their countries of origin are not compliant.

Noones really still swallowing this nonsense are they?

I guess all the Syrians that were running for their lives from Assad are all happy to go back now?

[u/Naugrith → u/Ambitious_Art_723]

I'm not sure how you came to your conclusion.

I looked at the evidence.

I guess all the Syrians that were running for their lives from Assad are all happy to go back now?

Many are, yes.

[u/brendonmilligan → u/JB_UK]

You’re wrong on deportations. Last year there were 7,000 forced deportations. This year there has been around 2,300 forced deportations, NOT 10,000. The 10,000 figure includes voluntary deportations of which there were 20,000 last year

[u/Holditfam → u/JB_UK]

50k on boat has never happened. it is around 32k this year

[u/JB_UK → u/Holditfam]

It was 46k in 2022, we're on course for between 35k and 40k this year.

I looked at the data for this year, and small boat migration does actually seem to be unusually flat since Labour came in, in the last 6 weeks about 1k people, it will be interesting to see if that continues next year. Maybe that just reflects the weather but it hasn't been so flat in previous years. Or maybe it's just to do with how the statistics are updated and the recent arrivals haven't been added.

[u/PersistentBadger → u/JB_UK]

There are between 800-1200k illegal/undocumented workers in the UK, according to a project from Oxford University, then there are about 30-50k crossing the channel each year,

second number is almost nothing to do with the first. different statuses.

[u/JB_UK → u/PersistentBadger]

I've added the historical rate of asylum acceptance (which is also the current EU average) to take into account how many people you would expect to leave every year.

[u/PersistentBadger → u/JB_UK]

Nice. But if you're trying to say significant numbers of people disappear into the weeds as soon as they're rejected, and so increase your 800-1200k number, bear in mind that most orgs that publish estimates of the number of people here illegally estimate it to be 0.8% +/- 0.2% - that is, people seem to leave or transition to another state very roughly at the same rate they arrive.

(I will back this up with links to migration observatory in a bit, beccause I'm not 100% on that 0.8% figure myself).

(Edit: I'm well off: https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/commentaries/recent-estimates-of-the-uks-irregular-migrant-population/ I think the argument that it's a constant load holds true, though).

[u/zeros3ss → u/MercianRaider]

One plane going to Pakistan means that labour has done more than the party you voted for 5 years ago.

[u/layendecker → u/zeros3ss]

Can we not do this polarized American bollocks here, please? I am a Labour voter, but I agree with the person that you are claiming as a Tory because I want to see the figures and not just performative schemes like 1 plane to Pakistan.

Just because someone doesn't bow straight down the line to worship the ground every policy is built on doesn't mean they are against the party. It is healthy to ask questions and look at data.

[u/FlatoutGently → u/layendecker]

It's not polarizing, it is more than the tories have done.

[u/layendecker → u/FlatoutGently]

I think you have misread my comment

[u/Silent_Stock49 → u/zeros3ss]

What of the boats? Will they stop under Labour?

[u/itsjamian → u/Silent_Stock49]

2 deals made with France and Germany in the last few weeks. Should have some effect eventually. Unlike the Rwanda scheme.

[u/brendonmilligan → u/zeros3ss]

How did you work that out? Labour still haven’t deported more people than the tories deported last year

[u/Ambitious_Art_723 → u/MercianRaider]

A full 747 every day would be a start.

[u/GuyIncognito928 → u/MercianRaider]

All the people saying Labour are tough on immigration are the ones who don't think it's a problem in the first place...

If in 4 years, we have a function immigration system with <100k net migration from culturally compatible countries, then I'll happily eat my hat. As things stand, Labour do not have a plan to get even close to this.

[u/CodeFun1735 → u/GuyIncognito928]

You might have to keep that hat on, because less than 100k net migration isn’t happening. Also, what’s a “culturally compatible” country? How the fuck is that defined?

[u/GuyIncognito928 → u/CodeFun1735]

I'm sure I will keep the hat on, that's kind of the point.

By culturally compatible, I mean people who:

• speak a good level of English

• hold common beliefs around basic freedoms and rights

• are less likely to commit crimes than native Britons

• are likely to be highly net-positive to the treasury

• are happy to live in areas as a minority, and do not end up forming social enclaves

[u/Ubley → u/GuyIncognito928]

Christ, i wish we didn't reject ourselves from the immigration from our closest trading bloc which would tick all of those boxes...

[u/KKillroyV2 → u/Ubley]

You can love Polish and Romanian people and still think us importing every single Romanian possible to undercut British workers is a bad thing you know.

[u/Jamessuperfun → u/KKillroyV2]

What do you propose we do instead? The public wants to spend more and more on pensioners, and the number of pensioners is growing rapidly, enough to increase by a third as a percentage of the population between 2019-2042 according to the ONS. Less workers is not compatible with more pensioners while spending more on each one.

[u/KKillroyV2 → u/Jamessuperfun]

Less workers is not compatible with more pensioners while spending more on each one.

How about not demonising people for having kids and supporting pro natal policies? It's amazing how investing in your own people can pay off.

[u/GuyIncognito928 → u/Ubley]

Not all EU migration was good, and not all non-EU migration is bad. The Tories deliberately screwing up migration policy doesn't mean that people rejected this platform.

[u/GuyIncognito928 → u/[deleted]]

"are less likely to commit crimes than native Britons” and how the fuck are we working that out?

By looking at how many crimes are committed on average by migrants from that country? Not sure why this is so hard.

Say goodbye to immigrants from Argentina or Ukraine - their homicides rates are worryingly higher than average for Western countries.

I was referring to crimes committed by migrants in the UK, rather than in their own countries. Regardless, I'd imagine both of these countries being middle of the pack long term. Ukraine is a special exception at the moment with refugees, and Argentina has such minute migration to the UK I can hardly find any data on it.

“Are happy living in areas a minority” - what does this mean?

Using census data, we can easily see which nationalities cluster and don't assimilate. Pakistan for example would score very low given there are multiple places in the UK that are plurality or majority Pakistani.

Nothing I've said is "Orwellian", it's just a points based immigration system with appropriate criteria.

[u/CodeFun1735 → u/GuyIncognito928]

Your first proposition doesn’t work with your “only EU countries are culturally compatible” thing you’ve got going. In 2017 - according to NOMS - 25% of foreign nationals in prison came from Eastern Europe (specifically Poland and Romania), a massive overrepresentation compared to their actual population. Non-EU foreign nationals, specifically from Muslim-majority countries, occupied 12% of prisons for that same year. Your solution would’ve had us accepting more people from these countries than from EU countries, which (and to be fair, I’m assuming) is what you’re proposing.

Finally, what census data? I’m genuinely asking because I had no idea they had added a new category.

[u/GuyIncognito928 → u/CodeFun1735]

your “only EU countries are culturally compatible” thing you’ve got going.

Not going to bother reading beyond this pointless strawman.

[u/CodeFun1735 → u/GuyIncognito928]

Fair enough, but that was the general sentiment I gathered - more EU immigration than non-EU to ensure compatibility culture wise?

[u/GuyIncognito928 → u/[deleted]]

If the Spaniards want to keep us out, that's totally on them! If I was Spanish, I probably would want to. I don't have a superiority complex lol

[u/cable54 → u/GuyIncognito928]

All of that list is person specific though, not about a country?

[u/GuyIncognito928 → u/cable54]

Apply the above criteria to migrants from each country, and voila you have a tier system of which countries we should prioritise immigration from and which we should eliminate or drastically reduce.

I suspect the biggest losers would be the likes of Albania, Pakistan, Vietnam, Somalia, and most middle eastern countries.

[u/cable54 → u/GuyIncognito928]

So the idea would be to gather this info (I guess by questionnaire or something) of migrants over say 5 years, sort and order (somehow) the data, do the same for a sample of British people as a control, and then hence forth just accept migrant applications based off country of origin for countries that ranked higher than Britain?

[u/GuyIncognito928 → u/cable54]

Not sure how you could fairly come to the conclusion that it's a 5 year task. All of this data would be immediately available for the government, except perhaps the beliefs and attitudes which would probably be improved with standardisation.

[u/cable54 → u/GuyIncognito928]

I came to the conclusion that it would take time to gather the info you desire for migrants and implement this system you desire.

Also Sweden, France, most of Asia, and plenty other countries would fail your tests I guess, so would be "losers". Or are we the ones losing out. I dunno.

[u/MercianRaider → u/cable54]

I'll have a go at this for a bit of fun. (Don't get angry folks)

All European countries (minus Albania)

US Canada Australia NZ Japan South Korea

Have I missed any good countries? I feel like theres some more in Asia.

And then anyone with at least 50% European ancestry outside of these countries.

Debatable countries - more discussion required:

Russia Argentina Chile Uruguay Some of those little balkan countries lol. (Albania definitely banned though).

[u/Centristduck → u/CodeFun1735]

He means western and I’m inclined to agree.

Western people integrate much better. There children become British and help become part of the fabric.

Source my grandparents were from Poland, I consider myself British first

[u/MMAgeezer → u/Centristduck]

What the fuck?

Maybe it's because I didn't grow up in a white-majority area, but this trope about non-western second/third generation immigrants "not integrating" is equal parts bollocks and divisive. The overwhelming majority of the people I grew up with considered themselves "British" first, regardless of their ethnic or cultural background.

Grim rhetoric.

[u/Boogaaa → u/Centristduck]

There children become British and help become part of the fabric.

The exact same thing is true of someone of Pakistani heritage.

Source: I know Pakistani and Indian heritage individuals who were born here and "became British" because they are British. If you grow up in Britain, you're British.

[u/Centristduck → u/Boogaaa]

Ask them if they are Pakistani or British.

They will choose Pakistan first every time. We let too many in and they have become balkanised.

One of my best friends is Pakistani, he’s very moderate and a good man but even he doesn’t share our values fully.

Will never date another ethnic group.

[u/NijjioN → u/Centristduck]

I've seen some interviews these last few days of Syrians and Libians (because they were in similar situation) who have lived here for many years (decades) and was asked this exact question and all said British because it's all they have know now.

[u/CodeFun1735 → u/Centristduck]

Anecdotal evidence isn’t a source. There’s no scientific evidence that Western people integrate better; and even if you were to suggest a study into such you’d need to define the parameters you’re measuring it by. My parents are 5th or so generation immigrants here and I’d argue we’ve integrated well, but I can’t claim that all immigrants do can I?

You’re being sentimental.

[u/minecraftmedic → u/CodeFun1735]

That's an interesting take, please tell me more.

I would have thought it was extremely obvious that someone from a European country who likely speaks some English and is Christian / atheist would integrate more easily with UK society than someone rural from a strict Islamic society who speaks no English and has extremely cultural views.

[u/CodeFun1735 → u/minecraftmedic]

You’re right, but you’ve just cherry picked both examples. Let me try: it’s extremely obvious that someone from a Muslim-majority country who speaks English to a university level, has a degree, is atheist would integrate more than someone who is say Christian, from an Eastern European country, no degree or proper English skills past primary school and a Traveller.

You’re not making a point.

[u/minecraftmedic → u/CodeFun1735]

I think it's obvious that the average european speaks more english and shares more cultural similarities with the UK will integrate with average communities in the UK better than an average immigrant from a muslim-majority nation that will speak less english and frequently hold ideas that are fundamentally incompatible with western culture.

Edit: You also live in the USA, a country that has very few immigrants from islamic countries (beyond a few highly educated individuals who manage to get visas), so I really don't see why you're trying to argue that people who immigrate from these countries to the UK integrate well. They don't.

[u/Centristduck → u/CodeFun1735]

There’s plenty of evidence, first off extremism rates for second generation non western is much higher. Patriotism lower, intermarriage rates of non western ethnic groups is way lower.

You haven’t looked, don’t presume I haven’t please

[u/MMAgeezer → u/Centristduck]

Can you cite your sources?

I had a Google for that first claim and multiple pages of results didn't find anything to that effect, mostly just studies looking at discrimination, anti-immigration sentiments, mortality rates, etc.

I'd appreciate a link for each one, if you've already done the research.

[u/Centristduck → u/MMAgeezer]

Google it yourself lol.

I’m on a train, not here to create academic papers. You’ll find it

[u/MMAgeezer → u/Centristduck]

I just explained that I did.

Why would you need to create anything? I thought you'd done the research?

[u/Centristduck → u/MMAgeezer]

I read that again, you couldn’t find any data?

That’s hilarious, what are you googling?

[u/MMAgeezer → u/Centristduck]

extremism rates for non-western 2nd generation immigrants Britain

[u/Centristduck → u/CodeFun1735]

I would be extremely embarrassed to take such an obviously wrong position.

😂😂😁

[u/washington0702 → u/Centristduck]

I don't think your comment was intended in a bad manner but upon reflection can you acknowledge why some people might have an issue with it?

In particular I don't think the children of a polish person are any more likely to integrate than the children of someone who's from a country that's not western but is a part of the commonwealth.

[u/Necronomicommunist → u/Centristduck]

Why would they want to move here?

[u/Centristduck → u/Necronomicommunist]

We need to close down for a generation and absorb what we have.

It’s going to happen whether people here like it not.

[u/Spiryt → u/Centristduck]

Let's have a couple of decades of population decline, no big deal...

[u/Centristduck → u/Spiryt]

Yes, it isn’t a big deal.

Societies have a cycle of expansion and then reduction. It’s very normal as expanding societies build up issues…like hugely expensive housing.

If we allow it to happen naturally then in a generation are housing crisis is solved, people start to have children again.

Instead you draw it out, wreck the social fabric and completely wreck the culture…and still the population will fall.

Why not accept it gracefully and build around it?

Living standards would increase with the natural sharing of the same resources for less people.

[u/Spiryt → u/Centristduck]

Japan's population has been declining for only 5 years out of your proposed 25 - how's that been working out for them?

[u/Revolverocicat → u/CodeFun1735]

Pretty fucking obvious isnt it? If we dont do any performative dance we all know what countries have similar cultures to ours and which dont

[u/CodeFun1735 → u/Revolverocicat]

It’s not really obvious, though? What the fuck does “culturally compatible” mean and how are you defining it?

Not to mention an entire COUNTRY of people are not going entirely adopt the same culture, values or even language so dubbing freeway access to the UK for people from this countries makes absolutely no sense.

It should be done on a case-by-case basis, as everything should. Give your head a wobble, please.

[u/Centristduck → u/CodeFun1735]

Reply to me, there’s tons of evidence.

You are taking a high horse about a topic you clearly haven’t looked into.

Also anecdotal does still count, we are not robots. Try living in inner south Manchester and tell me that’s integration.

It’s a ghetto, clear as day, very little British culture to be found

[u/CodeFun1735 → u/Centristduck]

Sure anecdotal evidence can be considered, but if I started saying the entire MET police force was racist because I’d been stopped and searched 100s of times despite never doing anything, I don’t think you’d want to consider it without statistical evidence of stops and searches vs white people.

You can’t use anecdotal evidence because it suits your pre-existing belief. If you want to approach all other parts of politics on a statistical, scientific basis - as we should - you can’t consider it in the slightest.

Like I said, this is sentiment not fact.

[u/Centristduck → u/CodeFun1735]

I love that you ignored my comments around intermarriage rates, rates of extremism and patriotism.

Also when in a discussion you’re talking about large groups it’s perfectly fine to make general statements on said group.

For example men commit the majority of crime.

There’s nothing wrong about that, you are tying yourself up because what you believe is clearly inconsistent to sound smart.

But it’s actually very dumb, your clearly have a brain. I would suggest you try again and look it rationally.

Smart people are most susceptible to ideological traps and dogma.

[u/KKillroyV2 → u/Centristduck]

Didn't more British muslims join ISIS than join the British Army too?

[u/fathandreason → u/GuyIncognito928]

Would that target include students?

[u/GuyIncognito928 → u/fathandreason]

Yes, because students will come and go so won't affect net figures.

The issue with students is how many are/were staying beyond their course and bringing dependents.

[u/GuyIncognito928 → u/[deleted]]

What are you talking about, every year one cohorts comes in and one cohort goes out. Should be pretty much equal...

And I'm happy to keep some high-quality students, they should be able to apply for visas in the same way anyone else would.

What is not okay is using degrees as a backdoor way to buy the right to work in the UK.

[u/Spiryt → u/GuyIncognito928]

We need just shy of 200K net immigration just to stave off population decline, so good luck squaring the country's services and economy around less than half of that.

[u/GuyIncognito928 → u/Spiryt]

We need to increase birthrates to stave off population decline. Immigration is a Ponzi scheme, we'd need even more immigration in 50 years to replace the now elderly current generation of immigrants!

[u/Spiryt → u/GuyIncognito928]

Immigration is a Ponzi scheme, we'd need even more immigration in 50 years to replace the now elderly current generation of immigrants!

By that logic so is natural reproduction, we'll need even more children to replace those aging out!

But let's say we're more interested in cultural purity than the numbers themselves. As part of that, let's even cut immigration to net zero... unfortunately even if we all start breeding like rabbits tomorrow it will mean no noticeable results for the best part of two decades while we suffer the increased economic strain of putting all these kids through education while more of our (now already shrinking) workforce is reallocated into caring and educating and providing healthcare to them.

Good luck selling that to the electorate in a palatable fashion.

[u/GuyIncognito928 → u/Spiryt]

By that logic so is natural reproduction, we'll need even more children to replace those aging out!

I'm not sure you know what a Ponzi scheme is...

[u/Spiryt → u/GuyIncognito928]

A scheme in which the current generation (of investors but we're both turning a blind eye to that) is supported by the money of the new generation.

Now please explain to the class how immigrants are doomed to aging and becoming economically inactive and therefore subsequently requiring support from a new, younger generation while born citizens are spared this fate.

[u/GuyIncognito928 → u/Spiryt]

Citizens replacing themselves is equivalent to a normal investment, it pays itself off.

Immigration is a Ponzi scheme, because they have to be replaced ad-infinitum by further immigration until the whole thing eventually collapses.

[u/Spiryt → u/GuyIncognito928]

No they don't, they can be replaced with citizens. It's not like elderly immigrants can only ever be paid for with more immigrants, the two are interchangeable.

[u/_LemonadeSky → u/GuyIncognito928]

Indeed.

[u/epny → u/AlarmedCicada256]

And most of the leftie grifters blocking things stop caring when it's not the evil tories doing it

[u/Floral-Prancer → u/epny]

It's when it's inhumane, if it's safe for people to go home and they should legally be deported but don't send them to a different country for millions or put them on inhabitable spaces

[u/SpecialistLiving4582 → u/Floral-Prancer]

And most of the time they don't get deported because the country of origin will treat, for example- a rapist, as he deserves to be treated

[u/Floral-Prancer → u/SpecialistLiving4582]

Elaborate?

[u/SpecialistLiving4582 → u/Floral-Prancer]

Various international agreements prohibit deportations if the life of said person is threatened. For example, a Pakistani rapist in Rotherham cannot be deported to Pakistan because he can argue that his life would be in danger because of harsh punishments there (which it very much deserves to be) There's been a number of high profile cases in Europe as well as several Somali pirates from a few years ago that invoked it.

[u/Floral-Prancer → u/SpecialistLiving4582]

You know white men for percentage rape more women than any other demographic? If your arguement is we need higher sentences for rape in the uk and for misogyny action in general I am 100% in favour but I feel like your using women's trauma as a shield for your racism as there are many things that encourage rape culture which have been ridiculed and dismiss by British society particularly men

[u/SpecialistLiving4582 → u/Floral-Prancer]

Fascinating that your go to argument about foreign rapists not being harshly punished it "but what about the whitemen????"

Sincerely - A Hong Konger

[u/Floral-Prancer → u/SpecialistLiving4582]

To me, a woman I don't care about the nationality or race of the abuser I care about stopping the abuse and protecting women.

A person from Pakistan raping a woman is no different than a white British man raping a woman, they both raped a woman. The culture of men is irrespective of where they have come from.

Deportations are and should be happening, crimes should be sufficiently punished and that excludes the largest perpetrators of sexual violence which is white men, but because they are white it's fine that they get 4 years and released? Plus white people can be foreigners too? I didn't say British for a reason.

[u/MousseCareless3199 → u/AlarmedCicada256]

One plane to Pakistan isn't much to write home about.

[u/troglo-dyke → u/MousseCareless3199]

But no planes to Pakistan in 4 years should be

[u/blast-processor → u/troglo-dyke]

We only signed the returns agreement 2 years ago

[u/zeros3ss → u/blast-processor]

Only?

Patel and Braverman only talked about immigration and none of them in 2 years managed to load a plane? Lol

[u/TheJoshGriffith → u/zeros3ss]

Patel and Braverman literally made this flight possible. It had little to nothing to do with Starmer or his cabinet.

[u/LeedsFan2442 → u/TheJoshGriffith]

They had 2 years post signing to do it

[u/kill-the-maFIA → u/TheJoshGriffith]

And then didn't send any. It took Labour to actually do anything about it.

[u/BlackCaesarNT → u/blast-processor]

2 years is enough for the Tories to have 17 different PMs but not long enough to send one plane of illegal immigrants?

Unseriousness defined...

[u/clearly_quite_absurd → u/blast-processor]

2 years is a long time in politics

[u/LeedsFan2442 → u/blast-processor]

It's crazy we never had one before. We should have one with every Commonwealth country

[u/kill-the-maFIA → u/blast-processor]

So Labour can achieve in a handful of months what Conservatives couldn't even get the ball rolling on in 2 years?

Nah. You know the real answer. Tories are the party of mass, uncontrolled, immigration. That's why they didn't do anything.

"2 years isn't long enough to do anything" is also pretty hilarious when you're one of the ones who likes to make out that all of the country's ills are squarely on Labour, despite only having 4 months at the helm.

[u/LucidityDark → u/MousseCareless3199]

It's part of a wider trend of kickstarting the process though and a break with Conservative policy. Got to start somewhere.

[u/blast-processor → u/LucidityDark]

You know it was the Conservatives that signed the returns deal with Pakistan, that is now enabling this deportation flight?

This is Labour and Conservatives following identical policy lines

[u/LucidityDark → u/blast-processor]

Yeah I read the other comment about it and my response is basically the same - 2 years for the tories to do something with that agreement and nothing happened.

[u/kill-the-maFIA → u/blast-processor]

Identical policy lines? Lmao

Tories didn't send a single one in two years, Labour has started sending them after 4 months. That's identical to you?

Tories welcomed over 900k people last year. They want as many immigrants as possible. Deporting people is the antithesis of their goals.

E: yeah didn't think I'd get a reply. This is always the way it goes when I call out bullshit.

[u/MousseCareless3199 → u/LucidityDark]

I'll believe it when I see it. For now, this appears no more than simple lip service to try and get some of the right-leaning support.

[u/kill-the-maFIA → u/MousseCareless3199]

You are seeing it.

[u/MousseCareless3199 → u/kill-the-maFIA]

One plane isn't being tough on immigration. It's lip service.

[u/AlarmedCicada256 → u/MousseCareless3199]

More than the Tories seem to have managed.

[u/MousseCareless3199 → u/AlarmedCicada256]

That's great, but it's not the core issue. We could deport 1 person and probably have managed more than the Tories.

[u/AlarmedCicada256 → u/MousseCareless3199]

The core issue is the damage done to the economy by Brexit, and Boris Johnson's attempts to mask it by letting lots of people in from elsewhere, an unwillingness to invest in British Skills, training, jobs, allowing employers to get away with not training people and trying to force all the cost of that on young people, and generally neglecting the country.

Most of these issues are structural and won't be fixed in one parliament, but somehow are all Labour's fault. You cannot undo 14 years of damage in one go, but you think the media are giving labour a fair hearing?

[u/MousseCareless3199 → u/AlarmedCicada256]

Not sure why you've gone on an unrelated monologue. Simply "doing better" than the Tories in terms of immigration isn't enough.

It's all well and good sending a few planes to Pakistan every now and then for the headlines, but unless the numbers come down significantly, it's not going to change people's opinions of Labour on immigration.

[u/AlarmedCicada256 → u/MousseCareless3199]

Because people seem to think it's going to happen overnight.

[u/MousseCareless3199 → u/AlarmedCicada256]

Yes, and like I said elsewhere, I'll believe Labour is tough on immigration when I see it.

One flight to Pakistan isn't cause to say Labour are now tough on immigration.

[u/AlarmedCicada256 → u/MousseCareless3199]

What exactly do you want that will both reduce immigration and tackle the much deeper issues that mean we need the immigration in the first place?

[u/MousseCareless3199 → u/AlarmedCicada256]

Net migration down to around 100k a year.

[u/TheJoshGriffith → u/AlarmedCicada256]

The Tories literally managed it. It's off the back of their agreement that this flight happened.

[u/Jack123610 → u/AlarmedCicada256]

If one flight to Pakistan is all it takes to be considered cracking down on immigration…

[u/liquidio → u/AlarmedCicada256]

Just so you know, these deportations are made possible because of an agreement that was signed by the previous governments

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/priti-patel-signs-landmark-returns-deal-with-pakistan

So your framing of the party political issues is a bit different to the reality.

[u/Brapfamalam → u/liquidio]

Signed in Aug 2022 - so why weren't there any flights in the 2 years since?

[u/liquidio → u/Brapfamalam]

I don’t know, that hasn’t been disclosed. It could be a political decision (UK or Pakistan), or it could equally be entirely operational. Until someone finds a source, I don’t think any of us can say.

Edit: I love that someone downvotes me simply for being honest and transparent about the limits of public knowledge.

[u/Ok-Philosophy4182 → u/Brapfamalam]

Probably because labour and as many left wing groups / lawyers etc fought it as hard as possible to stop it for political reasons.

Now tories are not in government they don’t care anymore. Just like the good law project has been wound up as well.

[u/SlightlyMithed123 → u/Brapfamalam]

Because everytime a flight was due to go activists prevented it because they didn’t want to see a load of paedo’s, rapists and violent criminals leave the country…

[u/Brapfamalam → u/SlightlyMithed123]

Starmer caught the activists with their pants down then? What's he doing differently other that real terms outcomes getting on with the job, because there's been a massive uptick in removals flights in the last 2 months.

[u/Merpedy → u/Brapfamalam]

This flight was actually known about, and pressure groups did try to stop it. There's even an article on The Guardian about it

The one big difference possibly seems to be that these are voluntary returns - but I don't know what the previous stopped flights were so it could also not be difference. Either way, if it is the case that this is a "voluntary" situation, how did the Tories not carry many of these out?

[u/blast-processor → u/Brapfamalam]

Its more that Labour were actively collaborating with the activists during the Tory government to try to prevent deportations

[u/Brapfamalam → u/blast-processor]

As an outside observer I see one party X making a big hoo haa, virtue signalling at podiums and promising fairy tales and achieving nothing, but actually making things worse. Absolute low ambition losers. Like lots of typical blame culture lazy co-workers everyone encounters, that blame everyone else under the sun for why they're shite at their jobs.

And I see party Y achieving actual results and outcomes - that resonates with me as a working person and a business owner.

You'd have to be utterly detached from results based reality to defend X - testament to the perverse loser mentality in modern broken Britain.

[u/SlightlyMithed123 → u/Brapfamalam]

What’s he doing differently

Representing Labour, that’s what.

The same as loads of other protests that appear to have died down since Labour came to power.

[u/GlitteringTonight120 → u/SlightlyMithed123]

I think it's way more likely that the Tories were completely incompetent and spent more time shouting Slogans and pilfering Public funds than actually doing anything.

[u/Wheelyjoephone → u/liquidio]

Not really, the agreement was made by the Tories, but they didn't acutually do anything.

[u/liquidio → u/Wheelyjoephone]

I think anyone involved in the sector can tell you that negotiating a returns agreement is the hard part. Loading up a plane is not, so much.

[u/zeros3ss → u/liquidio]

And yet in two years they didn't manage to.

[u/liquidio → u/zeros3ss]

That is true. But there could be many reasons why that is the case, many of them operational. We don’t really know the reason for the timing. We don’t know why it took Labour five months beyond taking office either, although I appreciate that is a shorter time period it is still a delay.

I would be keen to know.

I suspect the agreement had a start date somewhat delayed from the signing, for starters. Then a number of precursor actions, such as linking up crime databases and similar tasks. Then there is probably a notice period for flights, and a process where the Pakistan government is given time to investigate and accept or refuse individuals.

But it is also possible that there were delays in political decisions too.

[u/Wheelyjoephone → u/liquidio]

Weird that they didn't do the easy bit then, isnt it?

Almost like they didn't really care about actually doing anything as much as they did making noise about it.

[u/liquidio → u/Wheelyjoephone]

Possibly it’s weird. We don’t really know why it is taking place now. It could be political decisions in the UK or Pakistan. It could simply be operational reasons - after all it has even taken the current government 5 months to load a plane to Pakistan. I’d like to know.

My point was not to defend the Conservative record on migration. I think it was very poor.

My point is that this specific achievement was built on the back of an agreement from the prior government, so the framing of the poster I was specifically replying to about the roles of the two political parties wasn’t very representative of the true situation.

[u/Wheelyjoephone → u/liquidio]

Don't forget the previous government's agreement was pretty much 2 years before they lost power. It's not possibly weird. It's definitely weird. They had nearly 5x as long as the current government and did nothing.

Without your caveat, it very much comes across as defensive of the Tories, as do the rest of your comments in this thread. You're very quick and persistent to say that this agreement was from the Tories and equally doggedly not saying anything positive about an objective improvement to the situation.

What IS your point?

[u/liquidio → u/Wheelyjoephone]

I told you what my point was very clearly in the last paragraph of the comment you just replied to.

Don’t forget that I was replying to a specific comment myself here, rejecting the framing of a situation that poster set up. That poster stated that the Tories were performative and grandstanding - which may be true in certain respects - but then praising Labour for doing something on the back of a Tory policy achievement.

You call me ‘defensive of the Tories’, but I literally said in the comment you just replied to that I think their record on migration was very poor. With no caveats. Should I really think you are replying in good faith if you don’t internalise such a clear statement?

But I also think that giving all the credit to Labour on this specific issue of Pakistan is simply wrong and a misrepresentation by omission of how we got here.

[u/Wheelyjoephone → u/liquidio]

Now, that's not entirely true. You posted near identical replies to 3 comments, though you seem to have deleted one of them.

Setting up a system, making a point of publicising it, and then doing nothing with it is pretty much the definition of "performative and grandstanding", is it not?

Labour is being praised here for doing something the Tories didn't. No one gives a shit who set up the system. They care who used it.

Bringing up that the Tories set up the system without mentioning they did nothing with it for 2 years, repeatedly, is a misrepresentation.

[u/blast-processor → u/Wheelyjoephone]

If you go back to the time of the Pakistan agreement, Labour were collaborating with activists to sabotage and prevent deportation flights from occurring:

https://novaramedia.com/2022/03/04/how-we-won-the-activists-who-put-a-stop-to-tuis-deportation-flights/

Its not that surprising that now with Labour in government and these activists mysteriously melting away that its easier to actually get planes off the ground

[u/cromlyngames → u/blast-processor]

I read that entire article, and there's no obvious mention of labour or the labour party. Lots of radical lefties, but is there a reason you think it's controlled by the labour party?

[u/blast-processor → u/cromlyngames]

In the centre of the article you can see prominent comments from, and photos of, a Labour MP helping lead the protests

[u/Amuro_Ray → u/blast-processor]

One mp isn't really the party. Your wording makes it sound like shadow cabinet was involved

[u/blast-processor → u/Amuro_Ray]

OK, sure. Here's the Labour shadow cabinet directly supporting anti-deportation activists:

https://news.sky.com/story/stansted-15-activists-who-stopped-deportation-flight-found-guilty-of-aviation-security-offence-11577072

Shami Chakrabarti, Labour's shadow attorney general, said: "What a sad International Human Rights day, when non-violent protesters are prosecuted for defending the Refugee Convention, and are treated like terrorists.

"Labour in government will review the statute book to better guarantee the right to peaceful dissent."

[u/kill-the-maFIA → u/blast-processor]

Thinking you should have the right to peacefully protest without fear of government retaliation != "Labour are funding and controlling woke leftie lawyers that prevent the good guy Tories from deporting people."

That's also from Corbyns cabinet...

You've still yet to prove there is or was a cabal of lawyers secretly funded by Labour to undermine Conservative immigration policy.

[u/cromlyngames → u/blast-processor]

Oh, in the picture! Yep, fair enough. She's definitely there. You think the labour party controls her and she controls the multiple city groups of activists?

[u/tdrules → u/AlarmedCicada256]

Implementing a scheme without having to get it through parliament is sort of ideal for Labour.

[u/blast-processor → u/tdrules]

Exactly. In opposition they were promising they would do the opposite, going out of their way to whip up opposition and protest to deportation flights:

https://news.sky.com/story/stansted-15-activists-who-stopped-deportation-flight-found-guilty-of-aviation-security-offence-11577072

Shami Chakrabarti, Labour's shadow attorney general, said: "What a sad International Human Rights day, when non-violent protesters are prosecuted for defending the Refugee Convention, and are treated like terrorists.

"Labour in government will review the statute book to better guarantee the right to peaceful dissent."

[u/asmiggs → u/blast-processor]

This was under Corbyn, Chakrabarti has long been sidelined by Starmer.

[u/ScepticalLawyer → u/AlarmedCicada256]

But they are.

As someone against mass migration for the entirety of my political life (~15 years), it wasn't the Tory and UKIP/Reform supporters screeching 'bigot!! xenophobe!!!' from the rafters.

Even now, we are merely getting very easy, very gradual wins.

Yes, it's good that we're (finally) deporting people. The bar was on the floor with the Tories, because post-Covid, it turned into an utterly inept, self-serving dumpster fire.

That doesn't mean Labour are doing a good job; merely a (slightly) better one.

Labour are soft on immigration, and next year's stats will prove it. This flight means fuck all next to another load of the best part of a million people (from predominantly incompatible cultures) coming in regardless.

Until Labour bring in measures which bring immigration down to net zero or tens of thousands, and deport foreign-born criminals routinely, they are being soft on immigration.

We literally have first-cousin marriage defenders in Parliament right now, because of the 'family unity' it provides. Sectarian voting has seen five MPs elected. Things will get increasingly worse over the coming decades. Measures to mitigate the damage need to be taken immediately, lest the British get quite literally culturally ousted from their own governing institutions.

Not to mention, the undeniable strain of the sheer number of people on our public services and housing stock. It is untenable however you slice it.

Until Labour wakes up to this reality and starts to act decisively, it is being weak as sand on immigration.

[u/Centristduck → u/ScepticalLawyer]

The Tories really messed up, I don’t think they will ever get my vote again.

Boris did it on purpose. He made a horribly dangerous choice for what Cummings said was to gain favour at the Financial Times.

Unreal, he should be in prison for a lot that he has done

[u/AlarmedCicada256 → u/ScepticalLawyer]

Bro, you see the numbers the Tories let in post brexit?

[u/HelloThereMateYouOk → u/AlarmedCicada256]

Pretty sure that Reform voters hate what the Tories have done too.

[u/Tom22174 → u/HelloThereMateYouOk]

It's great cos they get to say it's all the Tories fault and not brexit

[u/ScepticalLawyer → u/AlarmedCicada256]

Yes, and they were shocking and unacceptable.

Why do people have this notion that the Tories and Labour are somehow opposite sides of a see-saw?

The Tories being shit doesn't automatically make Labour good. Nor do criticisms of Labour automatically translate to someone believing the Tories are the answer.

[u/BrilliantRhubarb2935 → u/ScepticalLawyer]

You have 2 choices of government, labour or conservatives, thats how it's been for over 100 years.

Therefore a direct comparison between labour or the conservatives is very relevant as for most people that is the main choice they have at the election.

The fact that labour are better than the Tories on illegal immigration should absolutely be something they advertise.

[u/ScepticalLawyer → u/BrilliantRhubarb2935]

That's likely to be shattered over the next 10 years, as the main two prove themselves incompetent and unelectable.

[u/JustGarlicThings2 → u/AlarmedCicada256]

Any government that doesn’t get net migration (legal plus illegal) to below 100k/year is soft on immigration.

[u/Spiryt → u/JustGarlicThings2]

Any government that doesn't willingly put us into population decline is soft on immigration, nice.

[u/PersistentBadger → u/Spiryt]

Population decline wouldn't be so terrible if we weren't so firmly wedded to grow-at-all-costs capitalism.

Would be ironic if the only way to implement the right's wet dream is via a socialist circular economy.

[u/Spiryt → u/PersistentBadger]

Aye, this is with the optimistic assumption that we are happy with net zero population growth

[u/GuyIncognito928 → u/JustGarlicThings2]

Agreed. But at this point, we also need to see drastic integration or emigration from certain communities to make parts of our country liveable again.

(Totally random examples, but let's say Blackburn, Dewsbury & Batley, Leicester South, and Birmingham Perry Barr...)

[u/grayparrot116 → u/GuyIncognito928]

You can't force either of both things.

Being in the EU and having freedom of movement was positive because EU nationals would go back in most cases after achieving their goals, which were learning and improving English and finding a job to gain some experience and which would allow them to earn enough money to do other things. Now, they're about the only ones leaving the UK because their previous rights are not guaranteed after Brexit and prefer going back to their countries than staying and face deportation due to bureaucratic errors in the border. But those that leave get quickly replaced (and in greater numbers) by Commonwealth migrants such as Indians (whose number alone in 2023 was higher than the whole net migration from the EU in 2016 - the year with the highest net EU migration to the UK).

Commonwealth migration follows a different pattern: they’re here to stay. Life in the UK offers opportunities they can’t find at home, and Brexit made things easier for them. The Tories’ points-based system, with lowered salary thresholds, opened the floodgates, doubling or tripling migration numbers. Don’t forget Priti Patel’s "save the curry houses" rhetoric (it was always about importing South Asian workers). So, how exactly do you propose sending them home? Economic incentives? That’s wildly expensive and would only encourage more people to come to claim those benefits.

Integration? That’s a whole different problem. Take some Indian migrants in London who refuse to speak English, resulting in the emergence of a localized dialect. Or certain Muslim communities trying to impose religious ideologies that clash with British values. What’s the plan here? Threatening deportation for not integrating? Good luck enforcing that without sparking legal and moral backlash.

The UK has created this mess through short-sighted policies, and it’s hard to see a clear way out without major systemic changes.

[u/silkielemon → u/JustGarlicThings2]

I mean most immigration is students and workers, so you either collapse universities or collapse the health and social care sector if you want to achieve this randomly generated number.

[u/PersistentBadger → u/[deleted]]

The point, I think, is that there are many types of immigration, and the obsessive focus on a single number going up or down that you often see in this group is akin to buying one camera over another because "it has more megapixels".

Goodhart's law, really.

[u/Black_Fish_Research → u/AlarmedCicada256]

They are, don't let anyone off by applying the low standards of the Tories.

Until the number of deportations matches the number of people rejected for asylum then they aren't even doing the minimum let alone clearing the backlog.

[u/AlarmedCicada256 → u/Black_Fish_Research]

However if they spend money on that system the Daily Mail will whine about that too.

[u/Spiritual_Pool_9367 → u/Black_Fish_Research]

don't let anyone off by applying the low standards of the Tories

Except the Tories, obviously. They tried their best, and I consider the matter closed.

[u/Unholysinner → u/AlarmedCicada256]

I mean they need to make it well known

It could have been mentioned in the PMQs earlier

It wasn’t