British govt: papers please

[Aimless]

The British government's treatment of the Windrush migrants offers an enlightening illustration of why no-one can take their assurances on immigrants' rights seriously:

https://amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/...ration-amnesty

After decades in the UK, immigrants from the Caribbean are suddenly being detained and required to prove, to an unreasonable standard, their right to legally reside in the country, under threat of deportation. Downing street largely silent on the matter.

This is a PR problem for the UK's relations with the Commonwealth nations as well, but I suspect the Caribbean nations among them don't have much clout. India already knows of the UK's role in obstructing its trade negotiations with the EU due to its reluctance to loosen immigration restrictions, so this won't really change much but will, in a decade, likely be pointed to as justification for tougher clauses on immigration rights.

[Aimless]

Twitter Link

Still no confirmation on whether or not any of them were actually deported "in error", as some official comments appeared to suggest.

[Loki]

It's a feature, not a bug.

[Hazir]

So typical; shoddy government but God are they proud of it.

[Aimless]

https://amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/...ays-ex-staffer

Oh my fucking God.

[gogobongopop]

Shameful stuff

[Timbuk2]

What a farce this is.

[RandBlade]

Completely unacceptable and disgusting cock up.

What makes things worse is that it seems in 2009 the bureaucrats the Home Office shredded the documents relating to the Windrush generation then they've started going after these people for lack of documentation. Ridiculous and it needs to stop immediately.

[Aimless]

See Guardian link for background on that. No way in hell that was just done by just "bureaucrats".

[RandBlade]

See Guardian link for background on that. No way in hell that was just done by just "bureaucrats".

I hadn't ready that but the news today is that the decision was made in 2009 not 2010 like the Guardian said in their first article.

However if not done by bureaucrats who do you think made that decision and why?

[Khendraja'aro]

I hadn't ready that but the news today is that the decision was made in 2009 not 2010 like the Guardian said in their first article.

However if not done by bureaucrats who do you think made that decision and why?

The government? Such things are not decided by bueraucrats - they merely follow the orders passed down to them.

[Hazir]

The government? Such things are not decided by bueraucrats - they merely follow the orders passed down to them.

Actually in most countries such archives would have been destroyed long ago. It's not the shredding of these cards that is the scandal; it's the shredding of them at a time when the Government started to force people to provide proof of residence for every year that they claimed to have lived in the UK. In The Netherlands it would have been considered borderline legal to have those cards still in the archives. Unless they were considered of historical value. In which case they'd have been moved to an archive under the supervision of the National Library.

It would be highly uncommon for political appointees to be even aware of removing old files from the archives.

[RandBlade]

Actually in most countries such archives would have been destroyed long ago. It's not the shredding of these cards that is the scandal; it's the shredding of them at a time when the Government started to force people to provide proof of residence for every year that they claimed to have lived in the UK. In The Netherlands it would have been considered borderline legal to have those cards still in the archives. Unless they were considered of historical value. In which case they'd have been moved to an archive under the supervision of the National Library.

It would be highly uncommon for political appointees to be even aware of removing old files from the archives.

Indeed this seems to be incompetence more than malice.

Not that it makes it any better for those who've suffered due to the Home Office's incompetence.

I do find it very odd that migrants into the nation aren't recorded anywhere. There are records of births, deaths and marriages for anyone in this country dating back for over a thousand years. These are historical records that are never destroyed. If you have an English ancestor you can trace your ancestry (so long as they remain in this nation of course) back to the first millennium. It would make sense to record migrants and emigrants somewhere too.

[Aimless]

I hadn't ready that but the news today is that the decision was made in 2009 not 2010 like the Guardian said in their first article.

However if not done by bureaucrats who do you think made that decision and why?

High-level officials with the support of a minister. May claimed that the decision was made in 2009, contrary to the HO's own announcement. The destruction of these records seems to have occurred in 2010. Of course, slips or no slips, the "hostile environment" policies would still be in effect and these people would still find themselves in precisely the same bind, more or less. Alas, the Tories will still be unable to keep their promise to reduce immigration to the tens of thousands.

[Aimless]

https://amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/...-for-his-death

They're just people.

[Hazir]

https://amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/...-for-his-death

They're just people.

I have no doubt it was an ordeal, but I also refuse this kind of 'it killed him' dramatism. People don't drop dead on the street for bureaucratic setbacks. Otherwise the streets of every major city would be covered in corpses.

What I don't quite understand is how judges agree to complicity in this policy.

[Aimless]

I have no doubt it was an ordeal, but I also refuse this kind of 'it killed him' dramatism. People don't drop dead on the street for bureaucratic setbacks. Otherwise the streets of every major city would be covered in corpses.

What I don't quite understand is how judges agree to complicity in this policy.

The question will never be resolved, but your characterization & reasoning are flawed. This man went through prolonged and intense financial, social, psychological and physical stress. Most people are not subjected to these pressures and even those who are, are not all equally sensitive or equally unfortunate. Your work environment or your position in your workplace hierarchy can have detrimental effects on your health; there's no reason to think sustained extreme stress of other varieties can't also have similarly detrimental effects.

[RandBlade]

Ignorance and incompetence again I suspect.

After this media furore I don't think they will.

[Hazir]

Most people are not no, but millions are. In a city where I spend 1/3 of my time there are 600.000 people (at least) in a situation AT LEAST as bad as described for this man. However, they somehow manage to stay alive. Despite being subjected to insurmountable obstacles in every aspect of their daily lives. Such as there are; obtaining a mobile phone line, obtaining a 'travel permit' so they can go on a vacation to the beach in the same country, obtaining a registration so that they can compete in tournaments in their favorite sport, obtaining a passport of their home state as that home state charges as much as 4-5 months of your wages to give you one, obtaining a travel card for public transport so that you don't have to spend 20% of your income on travel costs to the crappy (illegal) job you managed to get. And this is the beginning only of a long list of can t does for the average Syrian in Istanbul. Still, no 600.000 dead bodies in the streets.

And now that I think of it; since when are we going by the diagnosis of lay people to explain someone's death?

[Aimless]

Again, your reasoning is flawed. This is evidenced by your bizarre assumption that, if you were wrong, we'd see 600k dead bodies on the streets just from bureaucratic hassling. Just because the reasoning in the article is questionable doesn't mean that your reasoning is correct. I think we should be careful with attribution absent compelling evidence, but I also think we should acknowledge reality.

[Hazir]

Which reasoning are you talking about? The one where you blindly follow the diagnosis of a lay person who didn't even have a relationship close enough to know that he lost his benefits that this person died because of a severe depression? I have to reason nothing as all I do is say there is no proof for the correlation. My mention of millions of people NOT dying from bureaucratic obstacles is merely illustration.

[Loki]

Twitter Link

[RandBlade]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-43846047

[Loki]

What's the compensation for being forced into homelessness immediately after btain surgery?

[RandBlade]

No idea. It ought to be a lot.

[gogobongopop]

And the government is Rudderless.

Can May survive this? I sense the outrage and/or plot isn't over; but she's now lost her human shield. All eyes on Mrs May.

[RandBlade]

This was May's mess that Rudd has carried the can for. Although Rudd made a mistake in Parliament this is pathetic behaviour from the PM - though I already want her out anyway. She's a nasty authoritarian that we would be well rid of.

I'd rather Rudd be in the cabinet and May gone than the other way around.

[gogobongopop]

Agreed.

[Loki]

I still remember a certain person here claiming that the Brexit vote would be followed by liberalization in trade and immigration policy. And a certain other person arguing it would empower the xenophobes and the nationalists.

[RandBlade]

I still remember a certain person here claiming that the Brexit vote would be followed by liberalization in trade and immigration policy. And a certain other person arguing it would empower the xenophobes and the nationalists.

So far the evidence is that the first certain person was right and the certain other person was wrong. It is worth remembering that the Windrush scandal actions pre-date the referendum and far both parties of government (many of the scandals to come to light date between 97-2010) but now everyone is trying to improve things.

The momentum now is with people arguing in favour of migration. Everyone wants to prove how not a racist they are and the xenophobes far from surging forward are in retreat. Their parties are deceased, they have no political cleft or threat left.