Can immigration actually been controlled?
Scroll to see replies
Original post by londonmyst
Yes.
But doing so will require a government with some spine and common sense.
Led by a PM with guts like Suella Braverman.
Along with some changes to existing laws to emphasize uk national sovereignty and ensure that no overseas citizens are ever able to access any welfare or obtain ilr status.
Nor obtain access to any uk taxpayer funded: places at educational establishments, accomodation outside of the incarceration & detention systems, healthcare beyond a&e in exceptional circumstances.
This would require the uk ending all involvement with the ECHR and UN 1951 Convention.
But doing so will require a government with some spine and common sense.
Led by a PM with guts like Suella Braverman.
Along with some changes to existing laws to emphasize uk national sovereignty and ensure that no overseas citizens are ever able to access any welfare or obtain ilr status.
Nor obtain access to any uk taxpayer funded: places at educational establishments, accomodation outside of the incarceration & detention systems, healthcare beyond a&e in exceptional circumstances.
This would require the uk ending all involvement with the ECHR and UN 1951 Convention.
Why do you believe the issues with the asylum system lies with the ECHR and 1951 Refugee Convention rather than being the fault of the government and inept Home Secretaries like Braverman?
Original post by Gazpacho.
Advocating restricting the freedom of British people does not align with British values. I have no idea what country you are a nationalist of but it certainly is not Britain.
You support a political party that abandoned all focus on economic growth in favour of the cult of austerity and supported Brexit. Your poor voting choices are responsible the current patterns of immigration that is putting pressure on our economic infrastructure and our boarder economic stagnation. So I'd question the extent to which you actually care about the economy.
You support a political party that abandoned all focus on economic growth in favour of the cult of austerity and supported Brexit. Your poor voting choices are responsible the current patterns of immigration that is putting pressure on our economic infrastructure and our boarder economic stagnation. So I'd question the extent to which you actually care about the economy.
The free benefits and the free tax payers money given away to anyone who sets foot on our shore is the biggest draw for 99% of the immigration to our country. Remove the magnet effect and some of the problem will be resolved. We should copy Australia. It has a similar island land mass.
Without economic growth we have no money for public services or any other benefits in a society that is increasingly sick and lazy, expecting others to its dirty work and its lower paid jobs. As much as money is made for an economy it is far easier to keep spending it on non productive ostentatious displays of virtue signalling and every other non productive project and then wonder why we have no money left. Austerity is about taking control of runaway public spending and being realistic about what you have got to spend. Every penny has to count. We are like a family with no income, in massive debt with multiple credit cards who cannot stop spending on them. Those with billions to play with, and those paid huge sums in salary and expenses lose sight of that.
Those politicians from all parties are often out of touch and are bank rolled to oblivion. So often it is the hard pressed operational front line staff who get penalised by austerity, stressed out by the severe shortages of supplies and staff. Duplicitous managers in every organisation who implement the austerity cuts ensure their own survival. Nothing affects their world and they remain the gilded elite. These are the very managers are untouchable thanks to our complex and over engineered employment and HR laws. We have lost the ability in the UK to think through the effects of implemented policy ideas
We have to make sure own workforce is disciplined and has a work ethic for the good of the country rather than a selfish individualistic outlook. Brexit had nothing to do with that. Brexit was and is about sovereignty and making independent legislation and governmental decisions without EU say so. Rishi Sunak has now lost his nerve and has now called for his stand in (weak slippery Dave) to take control
We need some tough decisions to be made in the UK made by leaders with back bone. Stop making it economically good to step foot on the UK shores. No benefits. Let charities manage austerity. But the Government has to step up to control the borders. Check every arrival, put equipment and personnel in place. Know who is setting foot on our shores. Remove ECHR legislation as it is so badly abused. Turn back small boats, back to France. Return non visa flight arrivals. Refuse entry to any migrant arriving illegally. Put a ban on any migrant claiming benefits for 10 years. Cut many of the benefits of young people and make them work related. The benefit system and all the free welfare is the very reason the whole world flocks to use the Worldwide NHS. This is killing our wildlife, our land and causing our indigenous population to emmigrate for good.
Think of just how much sh*t our current population produces? Our ancient sewage system cannot cope with that load with our current population. We certainly don't need a million new people a year (increasing five fold every decade) to add to that. Our UK wilderness land areas do not need more people and more sewage.
What is lacking is the political will and the charismatic political leaders who can make those changes. Politicians who are open, honest and steadfast in their vision, and have the backbone to make the necessary changes both in legislation and in policy. Sadly those in power in Whitehall and the Lords will stymy any Government of the day that tries to make those changes. That is not a functioning Government and it is not democracy.
Original post by Muttly
The free benefits and the free tax payers money given away to anyone who sets foot on our shore is the biggest draw for 99% of the immigration to our country. Remove the magnet effect and some of the problem will be resolved. We should copy Australia. It has a similar island land mass.
Without economic growth we have no money for public services or any other benefits in a society that is increasingly sick and lazy, expecting others to its dirty work and its lower paid jobs. As much as money is made for an economy it is far easier to keep spending it on non productive ostentatious displays of virtue signalling and every other non productive project and then wonder why we have no money left. Austerity is about taking control of runaway public spending and being realistic about what you have got to spend. Every penny has to count. We are like a family with no income, in massive debt with multiple credit cards who cannot stop spending on them. Those with billions to play with, and those paid huge sums in salary and expenses lose sight of that.
Those politicians from all parties are often out of touch and are bank rolled to oblivion. So often it is the hard pressed operational front line staff who get penalised by austerity, stressed out by the severe shortages of supplies and staff. Duplicitous managers in every organisation who implement the austerity cuts ensure their own survival. Nothing affects their world and they remain the gilded elite. These are the very managers are untouchable thanks to our complex and over engineered employment and HR laws. We have lost the ability in the UK to think through the effects of implemented policy ideas
We have to make sure own workforce is disciplined and has a work ethic for the good of the country rather than a selfish individualistic outlook. Brexit had nothing to do with that. Brexit was and is about sovereignty and making independent legislation and governmental decisions without EU say so. Rishi Sunak has now lost his nerve and has now called for his stand in (weak slippery Dave) to take control
We need some tough decisions to be made in the UK made by leaders with back bone. Stop making it economically good to step foot on the UK shores. No benefits. Let charities manage austerity. But the Government has to step up to control the borders. Check every arrival, put equipment and personnel in place. Know who is setting foot on our shores. Remove ECHR legislation as it is so badly abused. Turn back small boats, back to France. Return non visa flight arrivals. Refuse entry to any migrant arriving illegally. Put a ban on any migrant claiming benefits for 10 years. Cut many of the benefits of young people and make them work related. The benefit system and all the free welfare is the very reason the whole world flocks to use the Worldwide NHS. This is killing our wildlife, our land and causing our indigenous population to emmigrate for good.
Think of just how much sh*t our current population produces? Our ancient sewage system cannot cope with that load with our current population. We certainly don't need a million new people a year (increasing five fold every decade) to add to that. Our UK wilderness land areas do not need more people and more sewage.
What is lacking is the political will and the charismatic political leaders who can make those changes. Politicians who are open, honest and steadfast in their vision, and have the backbone to make the necessary changes both in legislation and in policy. Sadly those in power in Whitehall and the Lords will stymy any Government of the day that tries to make those changes. That is not a functioning Government and it is not democracy.
Without economic growth we have no money for public services or any other benefits in a society that is increasingly sick and lazy, expecting others to its dirty work and its lower paid jobs. As much as money is made for an economy it is far easier to keep spending it on non productive ostentatious displays of virtue signalling and every other non productive project and then wonder why we have no money left. Austerity is about taking control of runaway public spending and being realistic about what you have got to spend. Every penny has to count. We are like a family with no income, in massive debt with multiple credit cards who cannot stop spending on them. Those with billions to play with, and those paid huge sums in salary and expenses lose sight of that.
Those politicians from all parties are often out of touch and are bank rolled to oblivion. So often it is the hard pressed operational front line staff who get penalised by austerity, stressed out by the severe shortages of supplies and staff. Duplicitous managers in every organisation who implement the austerity cuts ensure their own survival. Nothing affects their world and they remain the gilded elite. These are the very managers are untouchable thanks to our complex and over engineered employment and HR laws. We have lost the ability in the UK to think through the effects of implemented policy ideas
We have to make sure own workforce is disciplined and has a work ethic for the good of the country rather than a selfish individualistic outlook. Brexit had nothing to do with that. Brexit was and is about sovereignty and making independent legislation and governmental decisions without EU say so. Rishi Sunak has now lost his nerve and has now called for his stand in (weak slippery Dave) to take control
We need some tough decisions to be made in the UK made by leaders with back bone. Stop making it economically good to step foot on the UK shores. No benefits. Let charities manage austerity. But the Government has to step up to control the borders. Check every arrival, put equipment and personnel in place. Know who is setting foot on our shores. Remove ECHR legislation as it is so badly abused. Turn back small boats, back to France. Return non visa flight arrivals. Refuse entry to any migrant arriving illegally. Put a ban on any migrant claiming benefits for 10 years. Cut many of the benefits of young people and make them work related. The benefit system and all the free welfare is the very reason the whole world flocks to use the Worldwide NHS. This is killing our wildlife, our land and causing our indigenous population to emmigrate for good.
Think of just how much sh*t our current population produces? Our ancient sewage system cannot cope with that load with our current population. We certainly don't need a million new people a year (increasing five fold every decade) to add to that. Our UK wilderness land areas do not need more people and more sewage.
What is lacking is the political will and the charismatic political leaders who can make those changes. Politicians who are open, honest and steadfast in their vision, and have the backbone to make the necessary changes both in legislation and in policy. Sadly those in power in Whitehall and the Lords will stymy any Government of the day that tries to make those changes. That is not a functioning Government and it is not democracy.
It is interesting that you talk of bankrolled politicians yet miss that you are uncritically repeating the very same talking points dominate the low brow establishment media that is bankrolled by certain individuals (Paul Marshall, etc.) to cover up the failings of the conservative establishment.
It is curious that you defend austerity while recognising the need for economic growth but lack the economic background to understand how the cuts in investment that defined austerity are fundamental to the economic stagnation we’ve seen over the last 14 years. You are arguing against yourself.
And most perplexing of all is that you deny the link Brexit and the current pattern of immigration. It is understandable that badly informed people caught up in those simplistic Brexit slogans designed by brand consultants missed that a rise in non-EU immigration was an obvious consequence of Brexit. However, to deny it after non-EU immigration has skyrocketed as a consequence of Brexit is to deny reality.
As always, Muttly, your posts are an entertaining read.
Original post by Gazpacho.
Why do you believe the issues with the asylum system lies with the ECHR and 1951 Refugee Convention rather than being the fault of the government and inept Home Secretaries like Braverman?
Most of the very same problems have existed during the eras of multiple governments before the 1990s and multiple Home Secretaries since- including Jack Straw & Jackie Smith.
My own positions are slightly different from Suella Braverman's on a few issues.
I am deeply hostile towards the ECHR in almost every context.
Not just in relation to immigration or incarcerated convicts connected issues.
In relation to immigration policy, I disagree with both the eu settlement scheme and ukrainian settlement schemes.
I am fiercely opposed to the uk tolerating the physical presence of any asylum claimants and all of those overseas citizens that are ineligible for honestly obtained uk visas or unable to provide proof of sufficient cash savings to financially support themselves/their entire household throughout the duration of their stay within uk territories.
I support preventing the entry of any overseas citizens who have either:
committed a crime within the uk, have a history of harassing any uk citizen (within uk territories or anywhere else), have insufficient readily accessible cash funds available to pay for all their own accomodation/healthcare/insurance/ legal bills/student tuition/visa fees, have a history of deportation/holocaust denial/supporting theocracy or terror groups, have previously attempted to obtain access to uk council accomodation, have attempted to avoid deportation by any means except arranging their own transport to leave the uk within 24hrs of visa expiry/being caught by the authorities/losing their job or student place.
I believe that there should be no way of ever preventing the removal of any overseas citizens from uk territories who have ever: committed a crime in the uk, been banned from entering the uk, obtained a visa dishonestly, flouted the conditions of their visa, been a member of a proscribed group, had a restraining order or asbo granted against them.
Original post by londonmyst
I don't hold that belief.
Most of the very same problems have existed during the eras of multiple governments before the 1990s and multiple Home Secretaries since- including Jack Straw & Jackie Smith.
My own positions are slightly different from Suella Braverman's on a few issues.
I am deeply hostile towards the ECHR in almost every context.
Not just in relation to immigration or incarcerated convicts connected issues.
In relation to immigration policy, I disagree with both the eu settlement scheme and ukrainian settlement schemes.
I am fiercely opposed to the uk tolerating the physical presence of any asylum claimants and all of those overseas citizens that are ineligible for honestly obtained uk visas or unable to provide proof of sufficient cash savings to financially support themselves/their entire household throughout the duration of their stay within uk territories.
I support preventing the entry of any overseas citizens who have either:
committed a crime within the uk, have a history of harassing any uk citizen (within uk territories or anywhere else), have insufficient readily accessible cash funds available to pay for all their own accomodation/healthcare/insurance/ legal bills/student tuition/visa fees, have a history of deportation/holocaust denial/supporting theocracy or terror groups, have previously attempted to obtain access to uk council accomodation, have attempted to avoid deportation by any means except arranging their own transport to leave the uk within 24hrs of visa expiry/being caught by the authorities/losing their job or student place.
I believe that there should be no way of ever preventing the removal of any overseas citizens from uk territories who have ever: committed a crime in the uk, been banned from entering the uk, obtained a visa dishonestly, flouted the conditions of their visa, been a member of a proscribed group, had a restraining order or asbo granted against them.
Most of the very same problems have existed during the eras of multiple governments before the 1990s and multiple Home Secretaries since- including Jack Straw & Jackie Smith.
My own positions are slightly different from Suella Braverman's on a few issues.
I am deeply hostile towards the ECHR in almost every context.
Not just in relation to immigration or incarcerated convicts connected issues.
In relation to immigration policy, I disagree with both the eu settlement scheme and ukrainian settlement schemes.
I am fiercely opposed to the uk tolerating the physical presence of any asylum claimants and all of those overseas citizens that are ineligible for honestly obtained uk visas or unable to provide proof of sufficient cash savings to financially support themselves/their entire household throughout the duration of their stay within uk territories.
I support preventing the entry of any overseas citizens who have either:
committed a crime within the uk, have a history of harassing any uk citizen (within uk territories or anywhere else), have insufficient readily accessible cash funds available to pay for all their own accomodation/healthcare/insurance/ legal bills/student tuition/visa fees, have a history of deportation/holocaust denial/supporting theocracy or terror groups, have previously attempted to obtain access to uk council accomodation, have attempted to avoid deportation by any means except arranging their own transport to leave the uk within 24hrs of visa expiry/being caught by the authorities/losing their job or student place.
I believe that there should be no way of ever preventing the removal of any overseas citizens from uk territories who have ever: committed a crime in the uk, been banned from entering the uk, obtained a visa dishonestly, flouted the conditions of their visa, been a member of a proscribed group, had a restraining order or asbo granted against them.
So if you are against the ECHR, then presumably you feel it is fair for the state to spy on you, for the state to decide if you can marry or not or the state to decide to remove you from the country for no reason whatsoever.
Human rights are just that. Rights for humans. If you remove them, you end up having no rights at all, as many Russians are currently experiencing right now. And remember that just a few years ago, Russia was the darling of the west. You think we are in a stable democracy where the rule-of-law rules, but Russia has shown just how quickly and easy it is to undermine and undo that.
We can sort immigration out pretty easily but our politicians don't seem to appreciate that because we live in a democracy, you can't just pass laws as if we were a dictatorship. We operate on the rule of law. So what is your compromise? Do away with the law and give power to an autocratic dictator in the hope they play a game you approve of or end up on the receiving end unwhittingly?
Original post by londonmyst
I don't hold that belief.
Most of the very same problems have existed during the eras of multiple governments before the 1990s and multiple Home Secretaries since- including Jack Straw & Jackie Smith.
My own positions are slightly different from Suella Braverman's on a few issues.
I am deeply hostile towards the ECHR in almost every context.
Not just in relation to immigration or incarcerated convicts connected issues.
In relation to immigration policy, I disagree with both the eu settlement scheme and ukrainian settlement schemes.
I am fiercely opposed to the uk tolerating the physical presence of any asylum claimants and all of those overseas citizens that are ineligible for honestly obtained uk visas or unable to provide proof of sufficient cash savings to financially support themselves/their entire household throughout the duration of their stay within uk territories.
I support preventing the entry of any overseas citizens who have either:
committed a crime within the uk, have a history of harassing any uk citizen (within uk territories or anywhere else), have insufficient readily accessible cash funds available to pay for all their own accomodation/healthcare/insurance/ legal bills/student tuition/visa fees, have a history of deportation/holocaust denial/supporting theocracy or terror groups, have previously attempted to obtain access to uk council accomodation, have attempted to avoid deportation by any means except arranging their own transport to leave the uk within 24hrs of visa expiry/being caught by the authorities/losing their job or student place.
I believe that there should be no way of ever preventing the removal of any overseas citizens from uk territories who have ever: committed a crime in the uk, been banned from entering the uk, obtained a visa dishonestly, flouted the conditions of their visa, been a member of a proscribed group, had a restraining order or asbo granted against them.
Most of the very same problems have existed during the eras of multiple governments before the 1990s and multiple Home Secretaries since- including Jack Straw & Jackie Smith.
My own positions are slightly different from Suella Braverman's on a few issues.
I am deeply hostile towards the ECHR in almost every context.
Not just in relation to immigration or incarcerated convicts connected issues.
In relation to immigration policy, I disagree with both the eu settlement scheme and ukrainian settlement schemes.
I am fiercely opposed to the uk tolerating the physical presence of any asylum claimants and all of those overseas citizens that are ineligible for honestly obtained uk visas or unable to provide proof of sufficient cash savings to financially support themselves/their entire household throughout the duration of their stay within uk territories.
I support preventing the entry of any overseas citizens who have either:
committed a crime within the uk, have a history of harassing any uk citizen (within uk territories or anywhere else), have insufficient readily accessible cash funds available to pay for all their own accomodation/healthcare/insurance/ legal bills/student tuition/visa fees, have a history of deportation/holocaust denial/supporting theocracy or terror groups, have previously attempted to obtain access to uk council accomodation, have attempted to avoid deportation by any means except arranging their own transport to leave the uk within 24hrs of visa expiry/being caught by the authorities/losing their job or student place.
I believe that there should be no way of ever preventing the removal of any overseas citizens from uk territories who have ever: committed a crime in the uk, been banned from entering the uk, obtained a visa dishonestly, flouted the conditions of their visa, been a member of a proscribed group, had a restraining order or asbo granted against them.
The problems have got far worse. Back in 2004, 88% of asylum seekers were refused at the initial decision. That figure has has now fallen to 24%. Labour were bound by the ECHR and the Refugee Convention just as the current Conservative government are yet were able to run a much more robust asylum system. Blaming international conventions is just an attempt to deflect attention away from those who have created this chaos: the Conservative government and those who have voted for them.
And I haven't even touched on the insane hotel bill that runs to billions that taxpayers are having to pick up because the Conservative government processes claims so slowly.
Your hostility to the ECHR is irrelevant. It is not going away any soon. Various Conservative MPs have spend the last 14 years floating a Bill of Rights designed to weaken our individual protections from overbearing government but it has never got off the drawing board because whenever they consult legal experts, they are told how idiotic it is.
Original post by hotpud
So if you are against the ECHR, then presumably you feel it is fair for the state to spy on you, for the state to decide if you can marry or not or the state to decide to remove you from the country for no reason whatsoever.
Human rights are just that. Rights for humans. If you remove them, you end up having no rights at all, as many Russians are currently experiencing right now. And remember that just a few years ago, Russia was the darling of the west. You think we are in a stable democracy where the rule-of-law rules, but Russia has shown just how quickly and easy it is to undermine and undo that.
We can sort immigration out pretty easily but our politicians don't seem to appreciate that because we live in a democracy, you can't just pass laws as if we were a dictatorship. We operate on the rule of law. So what is your compromise? Do away with the law and give power to an autocratic dictator in the hope they play a game you approve of or end up on the receiving end unwhittingly?
Human rights are just that. Rights for humans. If you remove them, you end up having no rights at all, as many Russians are currently experiencing right now. And remember that just a few years ago, Russia was the darling of the west. You think we are in a stable democracy where the rule-of-law rules, but Russia has shown just how quickly and easy it is to undermine and undo that.
We can sort immigration out pretty easily but our politicians don't seem to appreciate that because we live in a democracy, you can't just pass laws as if we were a dictatorship. We operate on the rule of law. So what is your compromise? Do away with the law and give power to an autocratic dictator in the hope they play a game you approve of or end up on the receiving end unwhittingly?
Nor are they the fairygodmother for all western nations or omniscient saviours of their civilian populace.
Same applies to the USAs constitution and Supreme Court justices.
I spent almost 2 decades surrounded by crank revolutionary tuas fatally obsessed with the idea of the big bad bourgeoisie state plotting against them and setting their masonic spies upon them virtually 24/7 all year round.
That's the reason why my father has never had a bank account and spent almost 15 years living on a boat with his poisonous snakes.
I was bombarded since babyhood with all their paranoid load of bull & conspiracy theorist rants about the hoards of sinister secret government agents lurking behind every garden gnome, breaking into homes to plant audio bugging devices in all the electricity sockets & lightbulbs and secret cameras in bathrooms.
I'm not denying the fact that undercover police and intelligence officers do exist.
Nor that more than 100 spycops tasked with infiltrating some activist groups between the early 80s- late Blair gov era did behave appallingly while funded by the hardpressed UK taxpayer.
I know that most countries do use their national security provisions, public health responsibilities, child safety laws, detection and prevention of crime legal powers to monitor many elements of their law abiding citizens day to day lives.
Internet use, credit & welfare application, overseas travel history, business dealings, regular interactions with the most noxious and inflammatory of individuals.
Arguably the situation regarding intelligence gathering did help protect public safetyand kept Elizabeth I & King James on the throne.
Plus prevented the Catesby gang from succeeding in their holy war terrorist plot in the early 17th century, saving protestant England from being transformed into a catholic theocracy far more brutal than the days of Bloody Mary and her husband Philip II.
Personally I've ruled out marriage.
I am very glad that forced marriage and arranged marriage ceremonies based on proxies or male wardship have long been unlawful within the UK.
That said the UK authorities have long had the power to prevent marriages of opposite sex couples, for many different reasons.
Arguably this is the correct course of action when it comes to infamous imprisoned child murderers, criminal polygamists, teenagers under 18, vulnerable adults with a history of severe mental instability or serious learning difficulties.
I do disagree with preventing healthy 16 and 17 year olds from getting married in England.
But the majority of adults in England seem to hold the opposite point of view to me on this issue.
Original post by StriderHort
Pretty sure we already control it, we just don't fully enforce it which I agree with.
The fact we don't have enough homes, doctors etc really isn't immigrations problem it's the government and the people with the money. Immigration is often just shining a glaring light on the deficiencies imo, we talk a big game as a country so we should be able to take free passengers frankly.
Also past a point if you choose to live in London that's just what it is, you've no excuse for not knowing that everyone wants to be there prob for the same reason as you do and there's plenty of affordable and attainable homes, doctors, schools etc elsewhere. Choices.
The fact we don't have enough homes, doctors etc really isn't immigrations problem it's the government and the people with the money. Immigration is often just shining a glaring light on the deficiencies imo, we talk a big game as a country so we should be able to take free passengers frankly.
Also past a point if you choose to live in London that's just what it is, you've no excuse for not knowing that everyone wants to be there prob for the same reason as you do and there's plenty of affordable and attainable homes, doctors, schools etc elsewhere. Choices.
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Border force officer training?
- Is there a reason why the government has failed to control its borders?
- Border force oct 2022 mobile and core teams
- Advice needed
- Who regrets the outcome of Brexit??
- Why are you concerned about migration?
- Germany: Marches against the far right draw over 200,000
- Recommended city in canada to meet local girls
- Rishi Sunak threatens to remove UK from ECHR if Rwanda plan blocked
- essay question sociology
- Have the Tories stopped being Conservative?
- i missed 3 college interviews
- questions about physics degree
- Home office
- Finally, a study to show what we all knew anyway.
- Help with Dual Nationality and Residential Category in UCAS application!!!!!
- Mum not letting me move out for uni
- Woman using shady tactics?
- Executive Officer IMIU Remote Operations Hub
- emigrating to australia after uni
Latest
Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Even Europe’s far-right firebrands seem to sense Brexit is a disaster- The GuardianLast reply 3 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 5 days ago
Sunak rejects offer of youth mobility scheme between EU and UKLast reply 2 weeks ago
Rayner denies wrongdoing over council house sale amid police reviewLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 3 weeks ago
TSR Big Discussion #1: What should be top priority to protect the environment?Last reply 3 weeks ago
Where do you stand on the political spectrum (8values)? – Take a quiz here!Last reply 3 weeks ago
2024 UK general election speculation and build-up threadLast reply 3 weeks ago
No progress made on half of UK government’s levelling-up targetsLast reply 3 weeks ago
Trump needs a $464m bond in six days. What if he can't get it?Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Even Europe’s far-right firebrands seem to sense Brexit is a disaster- The GuardianLast reply 3 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 5 days ago
Sunak rejects offer of youth mobility scheme between EU and UKLast reply 2 weeks ago
Rayner denies wrongdoing over council house sale amid police reviewLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 3 weeks ago
TSR Big Discussion #1: What should be top priority to protect the environment?Last reply 3 weeks ago
Where do you stand on the political spectrum (8values)? – Take a quiz here!Last reply 3 weeks ago
2024 UK general election speculation and build-up threadLast reply 3 weeks ago
No progress made on half of UK government’s levelling-up targetsLast reply 3 weeks ago
Trump needs a $464m bond in six days. What if he can't get it?
