The US has seen rallies protesting for and against the new proposed immigration reform

UK immigration is a hot area of interest at the moment, commentators across all mediums are debating the subject and it is proving to be a very divisive topic. The debate is set to carry-on up until the next general election, as you can be sure that both the opposition parties will have something to say about Gordon Brown’s UK immigration proposals.

This week it was half-confirmed, by the US Homeland secretary, that US immigration reform will take place in 2010; by half-confirmed I mean it wasn’t a statement issued by the White House and it certainly wasn’t an assertion from the president. The comments made during a speech in Washington DC appeared to serve the purpose of reassuring sceptics that the new administration’s priorities hadn’t changed and US immigration reform would be imminent.

So with the US planning to legalise 12million illegal immigrants, what are the implications for this country?

The Director of this company last week called for a UK immigration amnesty, at the time I could not see how such a scheme would work or how the government would possibly implement it. Now as we enter an era where in the US they are planning on doing just that and giving the illegal citizens of their country the chance to become legal, is it time this country considered doing the same?

It is with no under-estimation that this would be a radical policy, the US last weekend seeing impromptu ‘tea party’ rallies in response to the reform proposed. Is this country really ready for such a revolutionary policy? The debate about ‘legal’ immigration seems to have stirred deep feelings within some parts of society already.

Would proposing a mass legalisation of people already here, illegally, not just equate to a metaphorical letter of resignation from the Prime Minister?

What are your views on the subject? Since calling for a UK immigration amnesty we have been inundated with positive comments. Do you think that in the Prime Minister’s current uncertain situation he could possibly introduce such an idea in the foreseeable future?

The new ID cards introduced by this Government will be hitting the shops in just over two weeks and will be on sale for the price of £30.

The total cost of ID cards will be £5billion, however the London school of Economics estimate the cost to be much higher at between £10bn and £20bn. So far the Government says it has spent £216million on the scheme, one that both the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats say they would swiftly drop if they were to win the next General election.

UK Shadow Immigration Minister,  Damian Green, said yesterday that he thought the scheme ‘ridiculous’ and continued that his party see it as a total waste of money.

“I would advise anyone in Manchester not to bother wasting £30 on an identity card as a Conservative government would scrap this expensive, intrusive and unworkable scheme. The Government shouldn’t hoodwink anyone in Manchester that there are benefits to this card.”

Defenders of ID cards cite the fact that many people still go to clubs and pubs with their passports to prove they are of a legal age to consume alcohol, they say that the cost of this card, at £30, pales in significance when compared to replacing a passport at £77.70. Perhaps indicative of this country’s blasé approach to binge drinking, Meg Hillier, Home Office Minister, states that “People often take their passports to prove their identity, going to nightclubs and bars and the Passport Service sweeps these up every week.”

No mention is however made to the driving licence, this useful form of ID can be used for exactly the same purpose and is the same size as the new ID cards, it is however at the more luxurious end of forms of ID, costing £50, although it does have the benefit that you can use it to drive legally, a very helpful added feature, especially in Manchester.

The only apparent benefit to the new cards is that they can be used for travel within Europe, this allows passengers to travel without their passports, again a very dubious advantage considering carrying a passport is not akin to lugging an extra suitcase with you on your journey, and in the scale of travelling to another country is not to dissimilar in size to the new ID card.

UK immigration say the cards are of course biometric, meaning they hold fingerprints and an encrypted photo, this means that they will increase national security, however, when introduced nationwide in 2011 or 2012, they will not be compulsory. So the increases in ‘national security’ statements are presuming a mass mania of people viewing ID cards as the next must-have, similar to iPods except not as cool or no way as useful.

The new ID cards features explained

Following on from last week and Gordon Brown’s proposal for ‘managed UK immigration,’ we have seen a plethora of commentators on the issue take what Gordon Brown has said and throw disregard to Labours past policies.

It has been claimed by some that Tony Blair and Gordon Brown got together and conspired to create a United Kingdom that was an open door to immigrants, this they philosophise would create a country so full of immigrants and thankful to the Labour party that the Tories would never again win a general election.

This theory is being touted by many as a genuine incidence, and although interesting I feel it to be another fabricated bit of spin by those seeking to displace the current Government.

In this blog entry I would like to address the issue that I see as the main instigator for many people’s negative views on UK immigration.

The UK’s policy on asylum has to date been that of a tolerate nation to problems and plights that have been encountered by immigrants in their home country. The UK has not nor has it ever had an ‘open door policy to immigration.’ The bill for human refugee status is quite clear on the subject of asylum seekers, and I am confident that if a person has been granted such status in the UK it has been warranted.

It is clear to me that feelings about this small part of UK immigration, although important, are clouding the average persons’ idea of what ‘immigration’ is in this country. UK immigration is much larger than asylum seekers.

Certain areas of society feel they are being shifted along in order to make room for new arrivals to the UK, although not felt by other areas, this can no-longer remain unaddressed by the Government. Specific areas that have housed new arrivals have been ill-equipped to do so; they need injections into their public services such as schools and doctor surgeries, that have under the current system, had to bear the weight of more people without any increases in funding. The feelings around this issue have reached such a point that we have had two BNP MEP’s elected, this should have been dealt with a long time ago, however the Government now seems to understand that it can no-longer simply dump immigrants in areas and needs to ‘manage’ these arrivals.

For to long this country’s immigration policy has been susceptible to the over-burdening that this has resulted in. It is not just the area of asylum that it is being felt, since 2004 when nations such as Poland and The Czech Republic were granted into the EU state of nations we have seen an influx of immigrants but no measures taken to increase spending on the necessary infrastructure.

I understand the reasons behind the policy for workers, and am happy that the approach we have towards asylum seekers is fair and right. The gaps however have been widening for some time and they are the real reasons people are unhappy. Gordon Brown must now address the needs of the areas that are feeling the burden of new arrivals most heavily and regain peoples belief that they, as others, have access and rights equally to all aspects of their communities.

Chris Huhne MP, Liberal Democrats, criticises Gordon Browns proposals for changes to UK immigration policy

It didn’t take long for the Liberal Democrats to issue their thoughts on Gordon Browns speech yesterday, speaking of the new proposals for UK immigration, Chris Huhne says “It is far to easy to make a case for managed UK immigration, after it has been mis-managed for so long.”

The Prime Minister attempted to answer his critics on UK immigration today

Gordon Brown has today attempted to right the wrongs of previous mistakes, in a sweeping speech given in front of a packed conference room in West London, he forthrightly outlined what now must take place in order for the Governments’ policy on immigration to regain some respect.

Speaking at times mechanically and without the natural enthusiasm of his predecessor, at fleeting moments Brown seemed to be learning of the new proposals himself. For the reforms certainly came thick and fast. Every aspect of the system that has come under scrutiny in the past couple of months seemingly addressed.

As the bullish talk continued, in front of the worlds media, it seemed Brown’s line on UK immigration hadn’t so much as changed as mutated into a new approach to the issue, Brown again reiterated that ‘The economy had to grow’ and that ‘managed migration’ was the way to do that. At one point Brown pointed to the ‘immeasurable benefits’ that immigrants to this country offered, a phrase all too familiar with the party faithful. This was however aimed at an altogether different audience, the undertaking being to keep afloat his credibility as a leader and someone in control of the country’s policy on UK immigration.

The Prime Minister went on to tackle all the concerns we at this company have been voicing for weeks. He stated that UK student visas were being suspended, and went on to praise the University system and those foreign students that currently are enrolled in it, Brown cited institutions lower down the pecking order as those culpable for the abuses of the current student visa and vowed to tackle those that had exploited it.

The new UK points system was at the centre of his speech today, of which he said was changing to reflect the needs of the economy.

“This is a system not ready to deal with the changes in global trends,” And continued with the words that “Government must change to meet the new challenges put before it.”

He went on to say certain jobs will no longer be included within the system. He also outlined new guidelines for employers hiring foreign workers, stating that jobs advertised will now have to be made available for UK workers for a period of four weeks as opposed to the previous two, before employers look further a field to fill the vacancy.

The answers to questions raised about rules governing immigration were wheeled out one after another. In what seemed to be a retort for Tuesday’s news, of the arrests in Manchester of illegal workers, he put forward a plan to raise fines for employers hiring such workers, saying that the government was ‘passionate’ about such an issue and had long fought for a fair wage for everyone.

Also in the raft of new proposals was the measure of imposing a probationary period for migrants of between 1-5 years, after which time they will be judged on what they have achieved and whether they warrant staying in the country. This was a very clear resolution to critics that cite immigrants as doing nothing but draining the state of hand-outs and benefits. With the new system put in place all immigrants would be entitled to benefits, they would however be used when they are needed most and not as a long-term living mechanism.

Brown said that there would be “More expectations put on people that want to stay here permanently.”

He mixed this new policy with a Labour line borrowed from the Tony Blair years, saying he wanted “…to strengthen what it means to be British.” Perhaps a little optimistically proposing that migrants to the UK will be expected to contribute to the communities in which they live, in the form of community service and volunteering.

This certainly was a speech packed with plans and changes, Gordon Brown answering every criticism of the immigration system in almost categorical style. Certain changes were needed and the abuses of the system that were taking place have today been addressed, what is now clear is that the Prime Minister does not want the British public to feel that he is not listening, or at least his advisors have been. Policy is being adjusted to change with a changing world Mr Brown said today, this is of course true, and one feels that he has provided an adequate appraisal of what’s wrong and what to fix.

However, ‘Words’ as one satirist once put it ‘are cheap’ and Gordon Brown’s speech encompassed so much of the UK immigration problem, that how he plans to implement the changes were not touched on. Today he has set-out his stand-point on the issue of immigration, this being the first major speech on the topic since arriving in office, this it seems is his working manifesto on the subject.

The feeling that this is just a build-up to the general election is tangible; the issues covered today serving as a necessary pre-emptive attack against the Tories, on what remains a core issue to many voters.

Recently on this blog a UK immigration amnesty was called for from the director of Global Visas, Liam Clifford, today we learn of a raid on a warehouse where 21 arrests were made in Manchester. It is clear that people in this country are working illegally and the point made concerning lost revenue for the country is a valid one.

If you are in a country illegally you cannot claim any sort of government handouts, fact, and the notion that there are people working in the country that could be supporting the economy, like the rest of us, is frustrating to say the least. The figure quoted by Mr Clifford of 400,000 adds up to a lot of revenue slipping through the hands of the chancellor, in fact I would put the amount of people in this country working illegally as much higher.

The argument for a UK immigration amnesty seems a little futile, however, the principle remains when you consider there are unscrupulous people benefiting from this unregulated labour market. Added to that is the endless list of services being used but not paid for in taxes. Who is winning out of all of this?

The life of an illegal immigrant is not a very pleasant existence; the people arrested today are probably scared out of their wits with anticipation of what will happen to them. The same month a human trafficking awareness campaign is kicked off in the US, we see the end result of the process in the UK. The people arrested yesterday are not the real criminals, if the government want to blame anyone they should look at the people traffickers and the people that use this cheap form of labour to their advantage.

You could blame the macro-economics of the society we live in today, for pushing down the prices of everything we buy, from chickens and milk, to sweatshirts from Primark. The western world is pushing this ideology of throw-away goods, think of all the food wastage we as a nation are guilty of-2 for the price of 1 anyone? Why not make the labour force from the same mould, it costs peanuts and is easy to replace.

Until the country and government sit up and actually take notice of what is important in our society, instead of jumping from policy to policy, with no real interest or intent of fully solving the problem, the country will remain in the over-stimulated and over-burdened state it is at the moment.

This month it is a furore over comments made about horse-riding and the dangers of drugs, the next something entirely new, a common thread however persists. The systems in place for some of the most crucial elements of society are not working, look at the amount of benefit fraud this country currently has a yeat, 4billion at the last count, why is the system not catching these people? The prison system, constantly in the news but not adequately managed. The list could go on and turn into a very depressing appraisal, however, the facts remain that systems are not working and solutions are not forthcoming.

How long does it take to make sure one aspect of society is functioning at an optimum level and depressing mistakes are not constant? The subject of immigration is of course massively vast, but to think that 21 arrests are only the tip of the iceberg and the problem goes a long way further, a solution or plan needs to happen. I think considering the current chaos and lack of initiative in solving such an issue an immigration amnesty in the UK seems an extremely plausible remedy.

Alan Johnson wants a debate on UK immigration

News today that Alan Johnson, the UK Home Secretary, is ready to open up a dialogue about UK immigration has come better late than never. For to long we have seen the concern over the Governments policies on immigration grow. Although this is limited to certain parts of society, the culmination has been the BNP gaining 2 seats in the European parliament and voices becoming more confident in numbers that ‘the party has a point.’ For an issue that has become completely misconstrued it has taken the Government far to long to dispel and blow away the myths about UK immigration.

Nick Griffin’s recent interview on BBC’s Newsnight appeared to do little but make a showcase of humiliating the party’s policies and views on UK immigration. The leader of the BNP was subjected to a TV appearance that could be likened to a public thrashing. At the time it seemed a non-sensical exercise in condemnation, for many commentators this was giving oxygen to a political party that deserved as little recognition as just that.

What was surprising about the interview, apart from the fact the whole format of the show was ripped in half and replaced with a verbal attack on Griffin, was that notwithstanding this and the obvious impression it gave the audience, the BNP party remained in some people’s eyes as a party with a valid standpoint.

The usual line of ‘I’m not racist, but…’ is the epitome of a person who is presented with no explanation of why immigration is important. Of course people with this viewpoint are usually referring to people seeking asylum, and in my mind where the problem lies. With no explanation they are left with what they see to be people from another country occupying flats in their area and as they do not speak much English also claiming benefits. This is the dog and bone that the BNP are peddling, and so far have been the single voice in an argument that most working class people understand.

This has seen serious effects outside of London, such as the race riots in parts of Lancashire, as animosity grew on both sides to such a level it spilt over. Yet it is only now that the Government seem to be twigging that the policy on UK immigration needs to be explained.

Of course no-one is saying that this will solve the problem of real racism, a problem that most people have with the BNP party, but it should mean that people will understand why people claim asylum, and why these people once in the UK can contribute to society as much as the next person.

We have the privilege in this country to be free from persecution and able to live our lives with no infringement to our human rights. We also have the advantage of any number of opportunities in the life that we lead. For this opportunity to be handed to another person to then credit this country with, to me, remains a great thing. I look forward to Alan Johnson’s proposal and no doubt will be commenting on the UK immigration debate in this blog.

Sheila Fraser is paid to criticise and not solve problems

The auditor general in Canada, Sheila Fraser, has said she has exposed major problems with Canada’s immigration system. Her report has been classed as a damning appraisal on the Canadian immigration structure at present.

The main emphasis of her report is the temporary foreign worker program, which she claims is effectively bringing in mass unskilled workers with no thought of the long-term consequences. This is increasingly meaning that workers with poor English skills are being taken advantage of, and with little chance of knowing or doing anything about it.

This is a slight embarrassment for the Canadian Immigration minister, Jason Kenney, who has been seen to be an advocate of the foreign worker program, just last month announcing plans to improve the working conditions of this low-skilled sector.

The report also said that Canada was failing in their efforts of lowering the backlog of applications for Canadian visas. A change in the occupations that Canada accept for skilled worker visas was claimed would ease this problem, however since it was introduced last year there has been little evidence of the desired effect.

The problem with reports such as this is they have little to say in relation to what should be done and a lot to do with minor problems. Canada for my money has one of the most forthcoming and positive approaches to immigration apparent at this time. To highlight problems with a program that has been claimed by other sources to help ‘tens of thousands’ of businesses that would otherwise go out of business is baffling.

The story last month of the town of Brooks, in Canada, and the company XL foods Inc, which up until recently stood derelict, yet now employs a 2,400 strong workforce, 60% of which are low-skilled immigrant workers is testament to this.

It is staggering how reports into immigration such as this can have any claims on being factual. The long-term benefits to that town are that the community has adapted to their presence and the economy has been boosted. Now if Sheila Fraser wants to point out why this is a bad thing for Canadian society she should, but to have a wishy wash approach to it and point to the obvious potential flaws is pointless.

To have a policy that allows un-skilled labour into the country is going to be open to abuse. The fact that some workers are not being paid what they should has to be amended, however, these cases are not the common denominator of the program.

While I feel it is right to open up a debate about what is wrong with a system, to claim that the whole program has major problems is doing it a dis-service. There is a long held belief that government policies are there to be challenged and then changed, often resulting in a new policy that is surprisingly similar to the last, and the small flaw that was there has simply moved somewhere else. This is a cycle that can theoretically continue forever, with people like Sheila Fraser being paid to find faults with what is a very good a well-working system. Wouldn’t the people that we pay our taxes for be better off doing some work like the rest of us, rather than telling us what we already know, that there are no answers and the world is sometimes a bad place?

Nigel Farage MEP backs Global Visas

The UK Independence party has added its weight behind a story we ran about loop-holes in the current UK student visa system. Colleges and visitors posing as students are exploiting the current rules in place for their own purposes.

The story was first brought to light by the BBC’s Donal Macintyre. The fact that rules governing the issue of these UK visas were only changed last year seems to be making no difference.

We have a real problem in this country of people saying they are here to study in order to gain a student visa; this is a known scam among certain visitors in order to gain entry into the country and then be given the right to remain for the duration of the course. We are not advocating that the whole system is corrupt, it is just a simple rule that colleges, and indeed students, should be penalised if they are found to have not been attending the course.

This problem is not a difficult one to police, and we thought on the face of it that the government had come up with a solution to the problem with the checks they have put into place.

However, this is not the case and we broke the story about colleges still taking advantage of the UK visa system on Wednesday.

An email we received from the offices’ of Nigel Farage of the UK Independence party agreed there was a problem;

“Thank you for your hard-hitting, and highly justified, criticism of the government’s procedures for verifying the status of students.

As though immigration-policy, as a whole, were not a noisome shambles, the government cannot even administer one of the few controls, which remain at its disposal.  This is surely too incompetent to be credible as a mere mistake, and the Conservatives have no solution either!”

So the problem with the current system has been highlighted, the question now is what does the government propose to do about it?

An issue that is being addressed in a new ad campaign at the moment by the ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) in the US is that of human trafficking

Posters at bus stops were rolled out recently with the slogan “Hidden in Plain Sight.” They are being displayed across the US in Dallas, Detroit, Los Angeles, Miami, Philadelphia, New York, St Paul,  San Francisco and Tampa to name but a few.

The campaign is a drive by the government to raise awareness about human trafficking and the serious consequences for those involved. It is encouraging Americans to become more aware of their surroundings and notice if anyone around them is being forced to act or work against their will, which can only be a good thing.