back to article UK immigration systems delayed by extra Ukraine visa work

A UK Home Office plan to modernize its immigration technology to achieve "operational efficiencies" and "optimize use of data" received a red rating from the government's projects watchdog as it struggles to process Ukrainian refugees. In its latest report, the Infrastructure and Projects Authority, a joint unit under the …

  1. Howard Sway Silver badge

    began in 2013 and was expected to be completed in 2017

    But the reason it's still not operational is a war that began in 2022?

    The memo must have gone out around government that the excuse for all incompetence is to be "Ukraine" from now on.

    1. Korev Silver badge

      Re: began in 2013 and was expected to be completed in 2017

      Ukraine and Corona can cover up all kinds of Brexit related delays. In the case the project was going badly already, but suddenly throwing Brexit with no immigration decisions made until the last minute can only have made things worse.

      1. wolfetone Silver badge

        Re: began in 2013 and was expected to be completed in 2017

        "Ukraine and Corona can cover up all kinds of Brexit related delays. "

        Someone i work with who deals with sending our engineers and products around the world said in June 2020 that COVID was masking a lot of the issues Brexshit has introduced.

        Now we're 2 years on from that, COVID has been replaced with WW2.5, and everyone can now see the issues it's causing everyone.

        But this is what we wanted, this is what we get. We wanted blue passports, which are always nice to look at when you're sat in a queue for 5 hours for it to be checked.

        1. Korev Silver badge

          Re: began in 2013 and was expected to be completed in 2017

          I still find it very funny that Kent was one of the highest regions voting* for "taking back control of our borders" and now they've got it they're finding it completely sucks for them.

          * Apologies to the 41% of Kent voters who saw this coming....

          1. gandalfcn Silver badge

            Re: began in 2013 and was expected to be completed in 2017

            "taking back control of our borders". The only border the UK has is with Eire and that is not much changed, As a consequence the NI economy is thriving whilst it is tanking elsewhere, which the Brexiteers can't allow so they wan't to tear up the agreement.

            But the passport problem has nothing to do with Brexit, apparently.

    2. Pascal Monett Silver badge
      Trollface

      Re: began in 2013 and was expected to be completed in 2017

      Yeah but, Agile !

    3. codejunky Silver badge

      Re: began in 2013 and was expected to be completed in 2017

      @Howard Sway

      "The memo must have gone out around government that the excuse for all incompetence is to be "Ukraine" from now on."

      And before that everything was covid and before that brexit and before that whoever was in government. We had border issues back with labour when they stopped even counting who was turning up. Not much changes but the excuse.

      1. GNU SedGawk Bronze badge

        Re: began in 2013 and was expected to be completed in 2017

        When did the Brexit Cabal in charge start blaming the issues caused by Brexit on Brexit?

        I must have missed that.

        1. codejunky Silver badge

          Re: began in 2013 and was expected to be completed in 2017

          @GNU SedGawk

          "When did the Brexit Cabal in charge start blaming the issues caused by Brexit on Brexit?"

          The ones in charge didnt. Just remainers claiming issues were brexit related, often without looking beyond UK borders.

          1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

            Re: began in 2013 and was expected to be completed in 2017

            "often without looking beyond UK borders"

            Oh, but we did. We knew there'd be borders on the other side. Pointing that out was "Project Doom".

            1. codejunky Silver badge

              Re: began in 2013 and was expected to be completed in 2017

              @Doctor Syntax

              "Oh, but we did. We knew there'd be borders on the other side. Pointing that out was "Project Doom"."

              I dont think thats the zinger you were hoping for. The 'Project Doom' everything is brexits fault fell apart when we pointed out the same problems were happening to countries in and out of the EU as well as the UK.

              Dont think you got the point of my comment but I still dont see how your comment could be taken and factually applied as a problem. Maybe you could enlighten me?

        2. TheMeerkat

          Re: began in 2013 and was expected to be completed in 2017

          I am sure I a meteorite crashed into Earth the remainers would still blame Brexit for that.

    4. Loyal Commenter Silver badge

      Re: began in 2013 and was expected to be completed in 2017

      Given that it has now over-run by 100+%, I wonder how many times over budget it has gone.

      Cui bono, I find myself wondering, yet again.

    5. Fred Dibnah

      Re: began in 2013 and was expected to be completed in 2017

      Another excuse will be 'the previous government', despite both candidates for Tory leader --> PM having been cabinet ministers in that government.

  2. Warm Braw

    Provision Of Scrum Teams

    Lost in the POST?

    Whatever you may think of Agile (and, mostly, I try not to), even its most dewy-eyed proponents would expect it to struggle in the face of dogged stupidity. There is no reason for a system of this sort to cope with a step change in the number of urgent - and likely incomplete - emergency applications when the obvious fix is in the political realm: allowing entry without a visa on a temporary basis and resolving the visa issue at greater leisure.

    However, such is the rampant xenophobia of the Home Office that they'd rather see NHS-recruited doctors and nurses unable to work rather than let one undocumented alien past an immigration desk.

    The most practical and economic solution is probably for Atos, Deloitte Digital, HP, et al. to offer free boats on the beaches of northern France.

  3. elsergiovolador Silver badge

    A hack

    There is a little hack that can skip all the hassle with immigration systems.

    Just use an inflatable boat and you won't even need a passport.

    1. codejunky Silver badge

      Re: A hack

      @elsergiovolador

      "Just use an inflatable boat and you won't even need a passport."

      The good ol French will shadow your dinghy to make sure it arrives safely in UK waters and our so called 'border force' will pick them up and bring them to England. Attempts to send these criminals to Rwanda for legitimate non-queue jumping is met with legal resistance somehow.

      And some people here even think this is acceptable!

      1. LogicGate Silver badge

        Re: A hack

        So just to be sure that I have not misunderstood you:

        You want the french to arrest / stop people that try to LEAVE their country?

        Am I the only one that gets DDR vibes from this?

        1. Jellied Eel Silver badge

          Re: A hack

          You want the french to arrest / stop people that try to LEAVE their country?

          Yep. The French have the legal responsibility to prevent illegal migration, and responsibility for migrants already inside their (ok, the EU's) borders. The French also have duties under SOLAS (Safety Of Life At Sea) to prevent people trying to make unsafe crossings.

          The British should just intercept France's illegal migrants and return them to France. French wouldn't be happy, but they've rarely been our allies since De Gaulle tried to block our entry to the EU..

          1. gandalfcn Silver badge

            Re: A hack

            You are referring to the EU system. The UK left that.

            1. NeilPost Silver badge

              Re: A hack

              https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dublin_Regulation

              1. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: A hack

                The regulation defines the rights that EU countries have when dealing with immigrants that entered through another EU country.

                Nothing prevents France to allow them to leave the EU on a boat.

        2. Loyal Commenter Silver badge

          Re: A hack

          It scares me just how unaware of international law a lot of internet commenters are.

          In most civilised countries, it is not against the law to leave that country. It might be against the law to enter without the proper visa or identity documents, but this is not the same thing.

          It's also worth pointing out that between France and England lie international waters. It's perfectly legal for anyone to be in international waters, although it's pretty dumb to be doing it in a dinghy, so people will only be doing this out of desperation, not out of choice.

          We left the EU, against all sensible judgement, we "took back control" of our borders, and now the snowflakes who angrily voted for brexit are whining that we have to control our borders, and that the French should be doing it for us. Anyone's fault but our own. The French are under no obligation to do anything more than that which our government pays them to do. Reasonably enough, they have decided not to agree to spend their own money preventing free people from leaving their country in order to assist ours, free of charge.

          Also, I'll add here that we are (rightly) a signatory to an international convention that states that we take in refugees. Referring to refugees as "illegal immigrants" doesn't change this, it just amplifies the right-wing rhetoric whereby somehow some people are "illegal". This is just naked xenophobia, the idea that certain people are undesirable because of their country of origin, or their skin colour, or their religious beliefs.

          I've read at least one comment here decrying that these people are not coming here through legal routes, and that this is the problem. No. The problem is that our government has REMOVED the legal routes, so this is the only route left open for a lot of people.

          For anyone spouting any of this bullshit: Put down the Daily Mail, turn off GB News, stop cowering behind your 12 foot fence and your England flag, in your entirely white village and try to actually go and meet some of these people you are so scared of. It's no coincidence that the parts of the country where people are most against immigration are the parts that experience the least of it.

          1. Jellied Eel Silver badge

            Re: A hack

            Referring to refugees as "illegal immigrants" doesn't change this, it just amplifies the right-wing rhetoric whereby somehow some people are "illegal". This is just naked xenophobia, the idea that certain people are undesirable because of their country of origin, or their skin colour, or their religious beliefs.

            I guess if you're sitting on the extreme left, everything appears right-wing. Otherwise, there's the boring legal distinction between migrants, refugees, asylum seekers etc.

            If someone's looking to live in the UK, legal routes are available, and generally far safer than trying to cross the Channel in an inflatable. Pop into the nearest embassy or attache and apply for a visa. If however the person does not do that, and is simply looking for work/better life/benefits, they're an economic migrant, and if they don't have a right to enter the UK, an illegal immigrant.

            AFAIK, refugees are more optional, ie the steps we've taken to host Ukrainian refugees. Providing they're not from the Donbas I guess. Of course if those are Russian speaking Ukrainians, then they might be able to request either refugee or asylum status given the way Ukraine's been oppressing it's population that identifies as Russian-Ukrainian.

            If they're asylum seekers, then they can simply request asylum in the first safe country they enter. Which generally isn't the UK.

            The problem is human trafficers coach economic migrants to claim asylum, and then that claim has to be investigated. Obviously that takes time & money, especially when the far-left seems to do everything in it's power to keep illegal immigrants in the UK.. other than pay to support them. I still think an 'adopt an immigrant' scheme would be a good solution, building on the Ukraine refugee model. I'm sure those on the far-left would jump at the chance to practice what they preach.

            1. elsergiovolador Silver badge

              Re: A hack

              given the way Ukraine's been oppressing it's population that identifies as Russian-Ukrainian.

              You have some valid points, but stop spreading Russian propaganda.

              1. Jellied Eel Silver badge

                Re: A hack

                You have some valid points, but stop spreading Russian propaganda.

                Yeh, I guess maybe I should, especially after this-

                https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jul/26/british-pro-kremlin-video-blogger-graham-phillips-added-to-uk-government-russia-sanctions-list

                Graham Phillips, who has been accused of being a conduit for pro-Russian propaganda, is one of 42 new designations added to the UK’s Russia sanctions list...

                ...His rise from obscure Briton abroad to figure of national political interest was unlikely. According to a 2014 interview with BuzzFeed News, Phillips first went to Ukraine when travelling as an away fan to an England football match.

                Or these demands-

                https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yoIZD8Ebjxs

                For the US to censor & sanction US citizens, including Rand Paul. Ukraine just doesn't seem to have got the hang of democracy, or how the US has enshrined 'free speech' in it's constitution. Then again, Phillips, along with the Bbc and others have reported in the past about Ukraine's far-right problems. I've no idea who Philips is, but did have some friends who wanted to go watch the football competition in Ukraine, but decided it was too risky for them on account of being black.

                So in future, I guess I should be more careful in future to only promote Ukrainian propaganda..

              2. GNU SedGawk Bronze badge

                Re: A hack

                "given the way Ukraine's been oppressing it's population that identifies as Russian-Ukrainian."

                I think you should tell the American Human Rights Watch org, they are Russian Propagandists, https://www.hrw.org/news/2022/01/19/new-language-requirement-raises-concerns-ukraine

                I think you should tell the EU Parliament they are also Russian Propagandists.

                ```According to a number of reports,[1][2] the Ukrainian Parliament has adopted a bill banning the use of minority languages such as Greek, Russian and Hungarian, thereby undermining any notions of justice, freedom, civilisation, progress and democracy.

                In particular, the body representing the Ukrainian teaching profession has submitted a written demand for an immediate end to the use by ethnic Greeks of an enemy language, that of ‘Putin’. In a written reply, Alexandra Protsenko-Pitsantzi, the President of the Federation of Greek Associations in Ukraine, indicated that the language ban was an act of extremism, a direct violation of human rights and the ‘privilege’ of a totalitarian regime[3].

                Appearing on a Greek-language television broadcast, Ms Protsenko-Pitsantzi spoke of a climate of fear, accompanied by both verbal and physical violence. The Hungarian Government has also expressed great concern at attacks on members of the Hungarian minority.

                The ban on the use of minority languages was also condemned at a press conference given by Jean Asselborn, the Luxembourg Foreign Minister[4].

                In view of this:

                —Will the Commission condemn the action of the Ukrainian Parliament and the nationalistic attacks on minority communities in Ukraine?—Will it take action to protect the cultural heritage of Greek and other minorities?

                ```

                https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/E-8-2014-010539_EN.html?redirect

                Did you hear of Ukraine prior to the Americans commanding you to worship CokeheadPrez.

                Because it seems that https://www.theguardian.com/news/2015/feb/04/welcome-to-the-most-corrupt-nation-in-europe-ukraine Everybody who did had a different opinion.

                ```My source looked exhausted, and started explaining the situation before he had even removed his coat.

                We are fighting real guys, you know. They look fine, they look respectable, but behind the curtain there is blood

                “It’s really difficult to beat these people. They control everything. It is like a hydra. They have secret service officers, prosecutors,” he said. “We are fighting real guys, you know. I would make a parallel with Colombia and the drugs cartels. They look fine, they look respectable, but behind the curtain there is blood.”

                ```

            2. NeilPost Silver badge

              Re: A hack

              (White) Ukrainian (Christian) refugees - good.

              (Tanned) Syrian (Moslem) illegals - boo, hiss, go to Rwanda..

              … is what is demonstrated.

              1. GNU SedGawk Bronze badge

                Re: A hack

                Wait until they find out that Ukraine has a lot of White Muslims.

            3. Loyal Commenter Silver badge

              Re: A hack

              I guess if you're sitting on the extreme left, everything appears right-wing

              Yes, and if you're a swivel-eyed Nazi, everything looks extreme-left to you.

              See how helpful and constructive that sort of "culture war" nonsense is?

          2. codejunky Silver badge

            Re: A hack

            @Loyal Commenter

            How about the guardian-

            https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jun/03/denmark-passes-law-to-let-it-relocate-asylum-seekers-outside-europe

            Denmark is looking at similar plans and guess where the processing centre would be... Rwanda!! Also consider the previous suggestions in the EU (during Merkels middle east invite) was to process them in 'migration centres' outside the EU.

            1. NeilPost Silver badge

              Re: A hack

              It’s still morally bankrupt.

              1. codejunky Silver badge

                Re: A hack

                @NeilPost

                "It’s still morally bankrupt."

                To illegally enter a country, often by means of putting lives at risk and trying to jump the immigration queue? Or not outright rejecting such asylum requests and instead being willing to actually process their claim even though at our expense we have to put them somewhere while we process the claim?

                Which part?

          3. ICL1900-G3

            Re: A hack

            Brilliantly put, thank you, I owe you a pint.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: A hack

        We won. We took back control. No one to blame but ourselves. Unless we need to scapegoat just to hide our inadequacies and short comings as a nation. In which case, "It's [fill in the scapegoat of your choice]'s fault!" The good old English. Can't even manage our own borders. The governing party is too busy playing Game of Thrones ?

        1. codejunky Silver badge

          Re: A hack

          @AC

          "The good old English. Can't even manage our own borders"

          Assuming your not trolling (I do have a pet AC troll that follows me) the UK actually pays the French to meet their legal responsibilities of stopping illegal immigration and safety in the channel. Failure would be French inadequacy. However I do agree with that comment as we cant seem to send the illegals to Rwanda for some stupid excuse nor have a border force willing to push back boats as they should to protect our border.

          "The governing party is too busy playing Game of Thrones ?"

          The worst part is looking at them and for any opposition and I dont see anyone to step up and do anything. Hopefully there will be a worthwhile party running in the next election.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: A hack

            the UK actually pays the French to meet their legal responsibilities of stopping illegal immigration and safety in the channel

            Only the UK don't actually pay, they just stood with a megaphone on the white cliffs of Dover and get the diplomacy faithfully transcribed and recorded for domestic media to get the credulous riled up.

            Pushing back migrants out of UK waters instead of rescuing them is illegal by the way.

            And finally on to more mundane matters (this weekend in Dover), Simon Calder is right about everything travel related. But I guess the British government decided it's cheaper to blame the French instead of building more passport booths.

            1. codejunky Silver badge

              Re: A hack

              @AC

              "Only the UK don't actually pay,"

              You may need to read your source to understand why the payment was withheld. Because the French didnt do their part so why pay them.

              "Pushing back migrants out of UK waters instead of rescuing them is illegal by the way."

              Back into French waters where they came. Where they can be picked up by the French which our border force communicate with. But again it demonstrates why the UK withheld payment to the French not doing enough.

              "And finally on to more mundane matters (this weekend in Dover), Simon Calder is right about everything travel related. But I guess the British government decided it's cheaper to blame the French instead of building more passport booths."

              Except the solution to the backlog was for the French to decide to actually man the booths that already exist. Because the booths wernt fully manned in the first place. If they aint there they cant do the work! Shocking!

              1. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: A hack

                But again it demonstrates why the UK withheld payment to the French not doing enough.

                As a Brexiteer all answers are easy, but as a free marketeer I'm sure you understand that what happens is that first you pay a business or organisation for goods or services and secondly they give you the finished product or service. At the very least the customer needs to show willing with a down payment. It's a not insubstantial investment after all, isn't it?

                Because the booths wernt fully manned in the first place. If they aint there they cant do the work! Shocking!

                They were stuck in a traffic jam on the A20, according to Simon Calder. They couldn't actually get to their place of work because of the traffic queues building up as Dover doesn't have the space to operate at such a scale after Brexit. Ironic, n'est-ce pas?

                1. codejunky Silver badge

                  Re: A hack

                  @AC

                  "As a Brexiteer all answers are easy, but as a free marketeer I'm sure you understand that what happens is that first you pay a business or organisation for goods or services and secondly they give you the finished product or service."

                  Yup. So we offer more money for them to do the service they should already be doing but instead of stopping such illegal migration their ships shadow the boats to help them cross into English waters. However as the French seemed more complicit in allowing the crossings while taking UK money the UK refused to pay for a lack of service. As a free marketeer or not surely you expect the other half to fulfil their obligations or you dont reward them with your money.

                  "At the very least the customer needs to show willing with a down payment. "

                  Which we already do. That was additional money.

                  "They couldn't actually get to their place of work because of the traffic queues building up as Dover doesn't have the space to operate at such a scale after Brexit."

                  Oh wow! Just imagine if the French booths were actually manned in the first place! Do you think maybe that might make a difference instead of manning the booths AFTER the problem built up? The situation only improving AFTER the French decided to provide enough manpower to open the booths they already have!

                  Are you claiming brexit made the French incompetent? Lazy? Stupid? Because if the problem is too many vehicles to process for all the booths then you could potentially be right, but thats not what happened. Not enough booths were open to process the traffic, the booths already exist and did at the time. Brexit not the problem. Under-staffing by the French was.

                  1. Anonymous Coward
                    Anonymous Coward

                    Re: A hack

                    You may be interested to read that the after the UK paid the £54m France stopped 11,000 small boat crossings and the UK will be paying France another £50m so presumably France feels vindicated.

                    Brexit not the problem. Under-staffing by the French was.

                    As Simon Calder said, the booths were fully staffed apart from this problem at the beginning of the day because the whole of Dover was gridlocked.

                    As the UK placed itself out of the EEA, the very minimum checks that can be done when entering the EEA and Schengen area is checking the passport for compliance with the 90/180 day rule and stamping.

                    The port of Dover asked for booths to be doubled, it was rejected by the UK government.

                    You will also see in the same article "France is deploying 700 extra customs officers and veterinary inspectors to its Channel ports, including the entrance to the Channel Tunnel near Calais, and has spent €40m on a new IT system and handling facilities. New parking zones have been paved and set aside for trucks without the correct paperwork."

                    So any accusations of underfunding infrastructures or understaffing on the French side appear to be without merit. Meanwhile, on the UK side...

                    1. codejunky Silver badge

                      Re: A hack

                      @AC

                      "So any accusations of underfunding infrastructures or understaffing on the French side appear to be without merit. Meanwhile, on the UK side..."

                      Hmm. https://www.theguardian.com/business/2022/jul/23/dover-travel-chaos-border-gridlock-brexit

                      Look at the dreamy article, its not the French yadda yadda so on. And yet with desperation to support that argument look at the end of the article-

                      A regional government official for Nord-Pas-de-Calais said in a statement on Friday evening that French officials had “of course anticipated the increased traffic levels” and put in place “an appropriate level of staffing”.

                      He said a “technical incident” at the Channel tunnel meant French border police had not been at full operating capacity in Dover until 8.45am on Friday, an hour later than planned, by which time long delays had built up.

                      Even the desperate cant cover up that the French police were not running at capacity no matter how they try to minimise the blame on the French. Apparently this was the French being prepared and anticipating the work! This is the rosy spectacle picture.

                      Even when it talks about adding more capacity at Dover this gem is mentioned-

                      The port said the extra booths would be “installed before the summer getaway weekend” of 22-24 July, but conceded their operation would depend on French “resourcing levels, and we know resourcing around Europe … is tight”.

                      Even the guardian cant put a positive spin on this. Now look elsewhere-

                      https://www.connexionfrance.com/article/French-news/French-authorities-say-technical-issue-led-to-Dover-staff-shortages

                      “We are deeply frustrated that the resource at the French border overnight and early this morning has been woefully inadequate to meet our predicted demand and even more deeply regret the consequences that will now be felt by so many,” a statement issued by the Port reads.

                      1. Anonymous Coward
                        Anonymous Coward

                        Re: A hack

                        I'm only going on what Simon Calder said in the link above, who I've never known to be wrong on travel matters.

                        But anyway, whatever caused the late arrival of French border police, the passport booths (the reduced number of booths as the British government did not okay the £33m investment) were not fully manned until 8:45am on Friday and that's why Dover was in gridlock through the entire weekend. And it's France's fault.

                        Bien sûr, but of course!

                        1. Anonymous Coward
                          Anonymous Coward

                          Re: A hack

                          The Gammons are only frothing because France, a country both part of the EU and Schengen, keeps controlling its border in a fashion that the Brexit peddlers said was not possible. Thus highlighting Gammons as monumentally stupid and gullible.

                        2. codejunky Silver badge

                          Re: A hack

                          @AC

                          "I'm only going on what Simon Calder said in the link above, who I've never known to be wrong on travel matters."

                          Thats ok we all have our favorite sources and they cant be right all the time either. But unless some stunning new piece of information comes out the French seem to have been caught unprepared and its causing a big enough problem that light is being shone on the incident. If it didnt cause so much disruption the media probably wouldnt have said much and the politicians wouldnt have highlighted the lack of staff.

                          Whatever happened has buggered up plans for lots of people. The cynic in me wonders if the French intentionally did it to then suggest we rejoin (as they have) but rationally I just expect it was a simple screw up that wouldnt have been noticed if the impact wasnt so bad.

                          1. Anonymous Coward
                            Anonymous Coward

                            Re: A hack

                            Happily it turns out both assertions are true - to get from Eurotunnel to the ferry terminal they need to go on the A20 or on a road adjacent to it. Therefore there can be a technical problem in Eurotunnel causing a delay and they can be snarled up in traffic from the A20 on the same day.

                            If three French people turning up to start work a little late at 8:45am is enough to bring the entire system to a halt over the weekend, there's a problem with the system.

                            1. codejunky Silver badge

                              Re: A hack

                              @AC

                              "If three French people turning up to start work a little late at 8:45am is enough to bring the entire system to a halt over the weekend, there's a problem with the system."

                              I agree. Something seems a little off if the French undermanned by 3 people for a short time can cause such a huge problem but when they get their thumb out and staff appropriately the backlog eases.

                              1. GNU SedGawk Bronze badge

                                There is nothing "wrong" with the system.

                                You are experiencing lock contention, as a result processing of queue entries is now extremely high latency,

                                resulting in unbounded queue growth, which we see backed up through Dover.

                                the growth is unbounded but happily you will top out at the usable road space of GB, as the sea based garbage collection kicks in.

                                You can't add enough people to the booths to make this work, due to requirements to enforce limited time in the EU.

                                Google queuing theory, and perhaps you might understand why this is unfixable outside of the single market.

                                1. codejunky Silver badge

                                  Re: There is nothing "wrong" with the system.

                                  @GNU SedGawk

                                  "You can't add enough people to the booths to make this work, due to requirements to enforce limited time in the EU."

                                  Except they have and the problem is reducing. The solution apparently being for more French to man their border controls at Dover.

                                  "Google queuing theory, and perhaps you might understand why this is unfixable outside of the single market."

                                  Or look at the problem being resolved and see that whatever theories may not apply since the solution was more manpower. Then look at the rest of the world and see how many are in the Schengen zone. And then check the reality against your proposed only solution which is an unusual arrangement recently being tested by a few countries in the world.

                                  1. GNU SedGawk Bronze badge

                                    Re: There is nothing "wrong" with the system.

                                    Oh right. all the lorries cleared now have they, right my mistake.

                                    1. codejunky Silver badge

                                      Re: There is nothing "wrong" with the system.

                                      @GNU SedGawk

                                      "Oh right. all the lorries cleared now have they, right my mistake."

                                      That is what you got from my comment (bold for emphasis)-

                                      Except they have and the problem is reducing.

                                      Or look at the problem being resolved

                                      "my mistake."

                                      Quick search-

                                      https://inews.co.uk/inews-lifestyle/travel/dover-port-traffic-chaos-critical-incident-queues-hour-passport-control-1759672

                                      Mistakes happen, you are forgiven

                                      1. Anonymous Coward
                                        Anonymous Coward

                                        Re: There is nothing "wrong" with the system.

                                        Urban Dictionary Citation

                        3. NeilPost Silver badge

                          Re: A hack

                          … and it was only 3 of 9 booths temporarily out of service … though the satire of Frenchie Border Police travelling daily through Eurostar or on a Ferry to man border posts in Dover Port is not lost on me.

                          I’m assuming they can’t afford a property in Kent, or are probably raking it in on a ‘foreign assignment’ premium.

                          1. Fred Dibnah

                            Re: A hack

                            Or maybe they want to live in France instead of Kent. I know I would.

                            1. Anonymous Coward
                              Anonymous Coward

                              Re: A hack

                              Kent is OK. But the traffic is horrendous. Lots of truck and traffic jams apparently.

                2. gandalfcn Silver badge

                  Re: A hack

                  Never, ever forget, Brexiteers are neither honest nor too bright.

          2. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: A hack

            "the UK actually pays the French to meet their legal responsibilities of stopping illegal immigration"

            With great control comes great responsibility. If we abrogate our responsibility to maintain our own borders then we are nothing but a failed state. We have been brought low by populist nonsense and unmitigated arseholes peddling make-believe panacea for conjured-up enemies and fairytale problems.

            1. codejunky Silver badge

              Re: A hack

              @AC

              "If we abrogate our responsibility to maintain our own borders then we are nothing but a failed state."

              I agree. The border force should be the border force and not determined to help people breach the borders. We shouldnt be having problems deporting illegals to Rwanda to await processing.

              "We have been brought low by populist nonsense and unmitigated arseholes peddling make-believe panacea for conjured-up enemies and fairytale problems."

              However the disagreement is on what/who is the populist nonsense and unmitigated arseholes peddling make believe etc.

              1. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: A hack

                Do not fall for this mumbo-jumbo about "illegals" peddled by these proven liars and incompetents, Sir! Rise above and see it for the divisive rabble-rousing smoke and mirrors that it is. Fight for our country, don't drag it down into the filth. Take Back Your Soul.

                1. Loyal Commenter Silver badge

                  Re: A hack

                  Don't waste your breath, he's one of the peddlers.

          3. NeilPost Silver badge

            Re: A hack

            That would have been a breach of https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dublin_Regulation

            However since we left the EU other than ‘Entente Cordiale’ I’m not sure what Illegal Immigration the Dastardly Frenchies are involved in perpetuating.

            The French have not demonstrated bad faith in -say - breaching International Law, or even threatening it.

            1. codejunky Silver badge

              Re: A hack

              @NeilPost

              "I’m not sure what Illegal Immigration the Dastardly Frenchies are involved in perpetuating."

              Really? I am not sure what is right with that line at all which kinda makes an irrelevance of the rest of your comment.

              Illegal migration to the UK is real. They travel from France. The UK and the French agree to work together to stop it from happening.

              1. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: A hack

                >>>Illegal migration to the UK is real. They travel from France. <<<

                The overwhelming vast majority of 'illegal immigrants' in the UK arrive by plane. From multiple embarkation points. Is that France's fault too?

                The dinghy-nonces and flag-shaggers are easily distracted from this fact. But this does nothing to hide that even now, after a glorious Brexit, the UK is unable to control its borders, is unable to track who is in country and unable to control and remove people with irregular immigration status.

                No amount of finger pointing and distraction will ever fix this underlying fact.

                1. codejunky Silver badge

                  Re: A hack

                  @AC

                  "The overwhelming vast majority of 'illegal immigrants' in the UK arrive by plane."

                  So they legally enter the country and become illegal immigrants by not leaving? That somehow has what to do with illegal immigrants breaching the border illegally?

                  "But this does nothing to hide that even now, after a glorious Brexit, the UK is unable to control its borders, is unable to track who is in country and unable to control and remove people with irregular immigration status."

                  Brexit has little to do with it since the problem existed while in the EU. And I am not disagreeing with this, but it has little to do with the post you are replying to nor seemingly the conversation.

                2. EvilDrSmith Silver badge

                  Re: A hack

                  Gov UK states that there were 48,540 asylum applications in the UK (main applicant) in 2021.

                  BBC states that 28,431 migrant crossings of the channel in 2021.

                  Clearly, the dinghy crossing numbers are a significant proportion of the total asylum seekers arriving in the UK.

                  Others will have arrived by plane, or by 'formal' cross Channel methods (i.e commercial ferry, smuggled on trucks).

                  1. Anonymous Coward
                    Anonymous Coward

                    Re: A hack

                    'Asylum seekers' or refugees are not illegal immigrants. The vast majority of illegal immigrants are visa overstays and other forms of irregular immigration status.

                    The number of people illegally in the UK is ESTIMATED to be between 800,000 and 1.2 MILLION.*

                    Estimated because the UK is incapable of controlling its borders and the immigration status of residents.

                    Fannying around with a few 10s of K of refugees is just window dressing to curry favour with the flag-botherers.

                    *https://www.pewresearch.org/global/fact-sheet/unauthorized-immigrants-in-the-united-kingdom/

              2. Fred Dibnah

                Re: A hack

                There is no 'illegal' way to travel to the UK, no matter what the mode of transport. Anyone travelling here has the right under international law to claim asylum, and only if that claim is rejected do they become an 'illegal' as you so eloquently describe them.

                To pre-empt you telling us that they could claim asylum in France: under international law, someone can claim asylum in the country of their choice.

                1. codejunky Silver badge

                  Re: A hack

                  @Fred Dibnah

                  "There is no 'illegal' way to travel to the UK, no matter what the mode of transport"

                  A very quick and simple google search-

                  https://newseu.cgtn.com/news/2019-10-26/What-are-the-UK-s-laws-on-people-smuggling-and-why-don-t-they-work--L5uH6yGF3i/index.html

                  1. Anonymous Coward
                    Facepalm

                    Re: A hack

                    CGTN? Are you citing an op piece by Chinese State Controlled TV?

                    1. Fred Dibnah

                      Re: A hack

                      It's an article about people-trafficking and not refugees or other migrants coming here of their own free will, so it's irrelevant to this discussion.

                      1. codejunky Silver badge

                        Re: A hack

                        @Fred Dibnah

                        "It's an article about people-trafficking and not refugees or other migrants coming here of their own free will, so it's irrelevant to this discussion."

                        It was the first link I ran into from a very simple search. But for those hard of reading at the start of the article-

                        "Smuggling is entering a country illegally, a crime against the state, so it would be the person involved who is criminalized,"

                        Or a little further-

                        For smuggling, he says, there would be a number of offences under the Immigration Act 1971: "the main one would be assisting unlawful immigration to a member state (facilitation)."

                        Do I have to highlight words specifically or can you read the point there?

                        Or even the risk of being caught-

                        Brewer agrees: while the fear of deportation tops his list of reasons that victims don't come forward

                        Why would they be deported? Possibly because they are illegally in the country?

                        1. Fred Dibnah
                          Facepalm

                          Re: A hack

                          @codejunky

                          You can continue to reply in your patronising tone ("hard of reading" etc) if you like, but as I already said, this discussion is about people migrating of their own free will. I'm not going further down your rabbit hole.

                          In most respects el Reg is a much more civilised forum than Twitter, but now and again I dearly wish it had a block button.

                          1. codejunky Silver badge

                            Re: A hack

                            @Fred Dibnah

                            "You can continue to reply in your patronising tone ("hard of reading" etc) if you like, but as I already said, this discussion is about people migrating of their own free will."

                            Read part 1 of your sentence then read part 2. Part 2 explains part 1. I am also talking about people willingly coming to the UK illegally. Are you unaware they pay smugglers to help them cross?

                            "In most respects el Reg is a much more civilised forum than Twitter, but now and again I dearly wish it had a block button."

                            I am sure you do. Yet you keep replying as though you have no idea what the comment you are responding to said. I have disagreed with you, I have posted links and I have copied quotes from the link for you and yet you consistently either dont read what is there or somehow miss the point, so yes I get sarcastic and take you less seriously. If you dont like that then read the comment and dont pretend its not what we are talking about or stop responding. I dunno if thats behaviour you would get on Twitter (dont use it) but I cant make it much simpler for you.

      3. GNU SedGawk Bronze badge

        Re: A hack

        No. People think its disgusting behaviour which is nakedly racist in its use of an African Country explicitly both as a punishment, and as a "dumping ground" for "undesirables".

        It's not remotely illegal to put ones life at risk crossing the worlds busiest shipping lane in a laughably unseaworthy vessel, in order to demand that country abide by the treaties it signed.

        It's flagrantly unlawful according to those enemies of the swivel eyed foamers, the English Judiciary,

        ```Laura Dubinsky QC, representing the UN refugee agency, told the court "in light of inaccuracies" she wanted to clarify that it in no way endorsed the UK-Rwanda arrangement.

        The UNHCR has responsibility for oversight of international refugee law and institutional expertise.

        Ms Dubinksy said two meetings between the agency and the Home Office took place in April - one in UK, the other in Rwanda - at which concerns were raised.

        "At those April meetings, capacity issues and specific recent incidents of refoulement were raised by UNHCR," she said.

        Refoulement is the practice of forcibly returning refugees or asylum seekers to a country where they are liable to be subjected to persecution. It is illegal under international law.

        She said the UNHCR had informed the Home Office that the risk of refugees being refouled by Rwanda meant the scheme was unlawful.

        The lawyer added that the agency was concerned about the risk of "serious, irreparable harm" caused to refugees sent to Rwanda, emphasising the body "in no way endorses the UK-Rwandan arrangement".```

        1. Jellied Eel Silver badge

          Re: A hack

          It's not remotely illegal to put ones life at risk crossing the worlds busiest shipping lane in a laughably unseaworthy vessel, in order to demand that country abide by the treaties it signed.

          Yes it is, and France signed UNCLOS. It's even more illegal if the unworthy vessel is 'for hire', which it is as the illegal immigrants are paying to be transported.

          Refoulement is the practice of forcibly returning refugees or asylum seekers to a country where they are liable to be subjected to persecution. It is illegal under international law.

          Are you suggesting illegal immigrants would be subject to persecution, if we returned them to France/the EU?

          I guess there's a future Plan-B. So at the moment Ukraine is being steadily de-populated, both by policy and by conflict. It's going to need a lot of people to repair it's infrastructure and economy. So a potentially perfect place to populate with migrants. Ukraine''s nationalists might disagree, but if it's birth rate continues below replacement levels, there won't be a Ukraine for much longer.

          1. GNU SedGawk Bronze badge

            Re: A hack

            Rawanda is not France, returning someone to the last country like France, I think is entirely different to Rwanda.

            For a start in the last few years, we have not accepted many if any French refugees fleeing persecution, however Rwanda is a different story.

            https://www.rescue.org/uk/article/why-uk-government-should-rethink-its-plan-send-asylum-seekers-uk-rwanda

            ```

            According to Toufique Hossain, one of the lawyers representing the coalition and some of the asylum seekers, seven of the more than 100 people originally scheduled to be removed to Rwanda will actually be on the plane. The rest have succeeded in individual claims to delay their deportation.

            “This policy goes to the very heart of challenging human dignity, and is in breach of both domestic and international law,” says Hossain, referring to the U.K.’s Human Rights Act 1998 and the multilateral U.N. 1951 Refugee Convention, which enshrine asylum seekers’ right to protection.

            ```

            1. NeilPost Silver badge

              Re: A hack

              https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dublin_Regulation

              No longer applies to Brexitland.

        2. codejunky Silver badge

          Re: A hack

          @GNU SedGawk

          "No. People think its disgusting behaviour which is nakedly racist in its use of an African Country explicitly both as a punishment, and as a "dumping ground" for "undesirables"."

          Why is it as a punishment or even racist? Illegal (hence criminal) immigration by people smuggling into the country, avoiding any asylum application to enter the country, being sent somewhere suitable for processing. And you might be right about undesirables as criminals who dont wish to be processed by claiming asylum travel these routes.

          "It's not remotely illegal to put ones life at risk crossing the worlds busiest shipping lane in a laughably unseaworthy vessel, in order to demand that country abide by the treaties it signed."

          It is absolutely illegal. And the UK is abiding by its treaties. In fact the UK could automatically reject just applications as it is only obliged to consider asylum applications.

          "Refoulement is the practice of forcibly returning refugees or asylum seekers to a country where they are liable to be subjected to persecution. It is illegal under international law."

          So they need returning to France? But they dont want to be there, they broke the law to enter a country illegally at great risk to their lives. They are criminals by that point so if they wish for the UK to hear their application at that point they shouldnt be allowed to jump the queue over those legally requesting asylum.

          "The lawyer added that the agency was concerned about the risk of "serious, irreparable harm" caused to refugees sent to Rwanda, emphasising the body "in no way endorses the UK-Rwandan arrangement".```"

          Maybe this will promote the use of legal means instead of illegally entering the country.

          1. GNU SedGawk Bronze badge

            Re: A hack

            It is nakedly racist as the purpose of sending people to Rwanda is explicitly colonial in its imagery and intent.

            It fundamentally rests as a "deterrent" on a deeply malign world view towards that continent, it's defenders are more explicit ```Former Tory MP Sir Gerald Howarth was on @lbc

            earlier defending the Rwanda policy and explaining to Matt Frei that:

            "Africa is a very large country."

            When Frei explained that "Africa is a continent not a country" Sir Gerald got the hump.```

            Burden a "poor country" with "undesirables", lot of countries in the world, but sure treat a majority black country as a dumping ground for people Europe doesn't want.

            No parallels to be drawn there at all. /s

            The law of England/Wales requires a person be physically present to make an claim, provided the person should present themselves to the "appropriate authorities" at the "soonest practical opportunity", that journey in a boat, a lorry, whatever is not relevant.

            They did use legal means, and if we wanted to stop them coming we'd tactically put infrastructure in France, and allow the application to be made remotely, so a physical presence is no longer required.

            Strategically we can reduce the requirement for refugees by stopping our support for the Apartheid regime occupying Palestine, as Palestinians form the largest refugee population in the world. We could also stop helping the Americans bombing the shit out of the homelands of the remainder of the refugee population.

            1. Jellied Eel Silver badge

              Re: A hack

              Burden a "poor country" with "undesirables", lot of countries in the world, but sure treat a majority black country as a dumping ground for people Europe doesn't want.

              That's nakedly racist in assuming Rwanda doesn't want to boost it's population. Many countries are facing population declines.

              They did use legal means, and if we wanted to stop them coming we'd tactically put infrastructure in France, and allow the application to be made remotely, so a physical presence is no longer required.

              But France has it's own legal obligations. And we do have off-shore asylum processing centres, but illegal immigrants don't want to use those because many know they don't have legitimate asylum claims. The UN also points out that being an asylum seeker doesn't automatically permit venue shopping, ie if the principle that asylum should be claimed in the first safe country. Of course that puts pressure on the EU's border countries, but that's the EU's problem. See Hungary for more info.

              Personally I think we should build on the Ukrainian refugee model. Failed asylum seekers could be sponsored by human rights lawyers, who could take full legal and financial responsibility for the migrants they adopt.

              1. LogicGate Silver badge

                Re: A hack

                "That's nakedly racist in assuming Rwanda doesn't want to boost it's population. Many countries are facing population declines."

                Bullshit.

                Rwanda is suffering from overpopulation, and has a continuous population growth.

                https://worldpopulationreview.com/countries/rwanda-population

                1. Jellied Eel Silver badge

                  Re: A hack

                  Rwanda is suffering from overpopulation, and has a continuous population growth.

                  And? Rwanda wants these migrants. Why are you taking a colonial position that you know better what's good for Rwanda?

                  Also, care to explain why so many migrants are seeking asylum from France? The whole point of asylum is protection from harm or opression. Are they being harmed and opressed in France? Sure, there's rampant lawlessness, ie France seems utterly incapable of policing it's borders, or finding a use for a slightly used Macron. But if the asylum seekers aren't threatened inside the EU, they're safe, and thus don't need asylum in the UK.

                  1. Loyal Commenter Silver badge

                    Re: A hack

                    And? Rwanda wants these migrants.

                    Nope, the Rwandan government wants the money, and they're being given quite a lot of it, paid for from our taxes.

                    Buried in the small print that none of the overtly racist "send 'em to Africa" brigade that the far-right Tories are courting have read (probably because they are barely capable of doing so), is the fact that for every refugee we offload to Rwanda, they get to send one back to us.

                    So, not only is the policy highly ethically questionable (Rwanda doesn't exactly have a good human rights record, and our government purposefully ignored its own reports telling them this), it is also extremely costly, and won't even achieve the stated goal.

                    There are only two possible reasons why it is being done:

                    1) It's to gain the "I'm not racist, but" vote.

                    2) Someone is getting a backhander from it. Probably the usual suspects getting paid well over the odds to run "the systems".

                    My money's on both.

                    1. Jellied Eel Silver badge

                      Re: A hack

                      1) It's to gain the "I'm not racist, but" vote.

                      I guess Labour needs the votes..

                      2) Someone is getting a backhander from it. Probably the usual suspects getting paid well over the odds to run "the systems".

                      Well, due to the 'energy crisis', aluminium prices have increased, so your supply of tinfoil must be getting expensive.

                      But such is politics.

                      Can you explain though why so many people are requesting asylum from France/the EU? Is it really so dysfunctional and unsafe that thousands of people are risking their lives to flee the EU, in the hope of safety in the UK? I thought immigration laws and treaties allowed illegal migrants to be returned to their country of origin, especially if safe to do so.

                      As for Rwanda, you ignore a few minor details. So an ability for migrants to assimilate into society. That's obviously more challenging when cultures are far apart. Interestingly, Shamima Begum's making another appeal to return to the UK. This is curious given she dreamed of living in an Islamic state. Other Islamic states are available, so why the UK?

                      But thanks for demonstrating the tendency of the extreme-left to assume everything is racist. This projection syndrome is also becoming obvious across the pond in the US. There, the far-left declared some places like LA, Washington, Portland, Seattle etc as 'sanctuary cities', where all migrants would be welcomed.. Until border states like Texas started bussing illegal imigrants to those cities. Which is also a rather weird bit of American politics where various 'charities' seem to compete to bus migrants to red/blue states.

                    2. Anonymous Coward
                      Anonymous Coward

                      Re: A hack

                      Loyal Commenter>>> Buried in the small print that none of the overtly racist "send 'em to Africa" brigade that the far-right Tories are courting have read (probably because they are barely capable of doing so), is the fact that for every refugee we offload to Rwanda, they get to send one back to us.

                      This is the best bit. The "Send 'em Back!!!!" brigade did not want to understand that the planes were not meant to be coming home empty. Seeing the faces on the right-whingers when you tell them is very enjoyable. Some just refuse to believe such a scheme could have been cooked up and ignore it.

                      1. Loyal Commenter Silver badge

                        Re: A hack

                        Some of them even instinctively down-vote you on internet comment boards, out of reflexive blind rage, as if that somehow makes their opinion more valid than actual facts.

              2. NeilPost Silver badge

                Re: A hack

                https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/rwanda-population/

                Declining Population - nope… fixed that for you within 20 seconds.

            2. codejunky Silver badge

              Re: A hack

              @GNU SedGawk

              "It is nakedly racist as the purpose of sending people to Rwanda is explicitly colonial in its imagery and intent."

              Eh? Is this just woke words for fun?

              "It fundamentally rests as a "deterrent""

              Yes. To deter criminals from trying to skip the asylum process and jump to the front of the queue while people following the legal asylum process are impacted.

              "The law of England/Wales requires a person be physically present to make an claim"

              Which they can enter the country legally (e.g. by travel or student visa). Smuggling through the many European countries illegally to risk crossing the channel to get to the UK should not put them at the front of the queue.

              "if we wanted to stop them coming we'd tactically put infrastructure in France"

              Dont we pay the French for this?

              "and allow the application to be made remotely, so a physical presence is no longer required."

              Why? We would only do that if we wanted people to be applying from abroad. Surely its our choice not to? And these people are in a safe country already.

              1. Loyal Commenter Silver badge
                Facepalm

                Re: A hack

                You are aware, are you not, that by using the word "woke" as an insult (or indeed, using it at all, as anyone it accurately describes has moved on from using the term about ten years ago), all you are doing is advertising the fact that you are the antithesis of "woke".

                Given that all this word means is to be aware of social issues and considerate of others, you are, in fact, just drawing attention to the fact that you are inconsiderate and unaware. We have a shorter four-letter word for that, as well. In fact, we have several...

                1. codejunky Silver badge
                  Facepalm

                  Re: A hack

                  @Loyal Commenter

                  "You are aware, are you not, that by using the word "woke" as an insult (or indeed, using it at all, as anyone it accurately describes has moved on from using the term about ten years ago), all you are doing is advertising the fact that you are the antithesis of "woke"."

                  Yes. I would be insulted to be considered 'woke'. Because 'woke' became an insult due to the kinds of people who labelled themselves 'woke' as a badge of pride. Are you 'woke'?

                  "Given that all this word means is to be aware of social issues and considerate of others"

                  I think we have an answer. Damn. Well you go wear it with pride, prominently please so everyday people know to avoid.

                  1. Anonymous Coward
                    Anonymous Coward

                    Re: A hack

                    It may surprise you to learn that not all everyday people are ignorant of social issues and inconsiderate to others. There seems to be a bit of projectionism going on in your post.

                    1. codejunky Silver badge
                      FAIL

                      Re: A hack

                      @AC

                      "It may surprise you to learn that not all everyday people are ignorant of social issues and inconsiderate to others"

                      And probably wouldnt insult themselves by identifying as 'woke' either

                      1. Loyal Commenter Silver badge

                        Re: A hack

                        "woke" is only an insult when used by idiots that think social responsibility and consideration of others is a bad thing. I expect that you're going to revert to using that other old twattish insult of "SJW" next.

                        And well done, if you are so offended by the thought that you might find yourself referring to yourself as "woke", it is because you are not. You are, instead, the opposite of "woke". Just because you think that "woke" is an insult, does not make it so, but it does make you a nasty, vicious, venal, self important, selfish, bigoted piece of middle-Englander trash. By your very own definition.

                        Again, anyone with a modicum of brain-matter in their skull would shorten this to one of several commonly used Anglo-Saxon four-letter words. Incidentally, the one I'm thinking of has only been considered rude for a couple of centuries, and before that it referred (positively) to a strong-willed and forthright woman. It's only since it started to be used as an insult by bigoted men that the meaning changed. Much like "woke".

                        1. codejunky Silver badge
                          Facepalm

                          Re: A hack

                          @Loyal Commenter

                          ""woke" is only an insult when used"

                          As an insult. As a good portion of the UK also seems to understand it (a similar size see it as a positive).

                          "I expect that you're going to revert to using that other old twattish insult of "SJW" next."

                          So you understand that one is an insult. Even though some people wear that as a badge of pride.

                          "Just because you think that "woke" is an insult, does not make it so"

                          However as it is socially accepted as an insult that does make it so.

                          "but it does make you a nasty, vicious, venal, self important, selfish, bigoted piece of middle-Englander trash"

                          Oh you seem such a nice person. Just because I do not qualify for the insult somehow makes me qualify for your insults. idiot..

                          "Again, anyone with a modicum of brain-matter in their skull would shorten this to one of several commonly used Anglo-Saxon four-letter words. Incidentally, the one I'm thinking of has only been considered rude for a couple of centuries, and before that it referred (positively) to a strong-willed and forthright woman."

                          I have no idea what word you are shooting for there but just checking, do you consider yourself woke? Even if its the positive connotation not the negative?

                          1. Loyal Commenter Silver badge

                            Re: A hack

                            What part of social justice is it that you have a problem with? Do you yearn for a time when you could put up a sign saying "No Blacks, No Irish, No Dogs" and not get in trouble for it? Only those who somehow think that social justice is a bad thing think that "SJW" is an insult.

                            As for "woke" being "socially accepted as an insult", I think you might be suffering a little from the "echo-chamber-effect" here. If you think it is commonly used as an effective insult, it is because you are keeping company that commonly uses it as that. Meanwhile, outside of that particular little insular closed-minded group, everyone else hears you use it and thinks, "oh, one of THEM". According to a recent yougov poll, even among people who fill out yougov polls, you are in the minority here.

                            Also, it's a bit like "snowflake", in that the people who get most offended by that term, when it is used against them, is the group that uses the term. They think it's an effective insult, because it offends them, but really, it is not. Those they target with it laugh at them, because it's all just so pathetic.

                            And no, I'm pointedly not insulting you, I'm pointing out that your very own language damns you. By proudly declaring that you are not "woke", you are declaring that you are the opposite of "woke". All I did is list some synonyms for "anti-woke", and then I alluded to the most succinct one, that most people already think about you, if the number of downvotes you consistently attract to your ill-thought-out and uninformed posts are any indicator to go by.

                            1. Anonymous Coward
                              Anonymous Coward

                              Re: A hack

                              "What part of social justice is it that you have a problem with?"

                              PFC codejunky is just trying to be a good little footsoldier in the faux culture/outrage wars. Invented by the right to distract from the messes they've created.

                            2. codejunky Silver badge

                              Re: A hack

                              @Loyal Commenter

                              I am not sure if you are trolling or honestly consider these things badges of honour, so I will assume you are being honest.

                              "As for "woke" being "socially accepted as an insult", I think you might be suffering a little from the "echo-chamber-effect" here"

                              Nope. Seriously no. You are just as likely to be in an echo chamber with your interpretation-

                              https://www.kcl.ac.uk/news/public-split-on-whether-woke-is-compliment-or-insult-and-unsure-what-culture-wars-means-despite-huge-surge-in-media-coverage

                              Simple fact is it is used both as a label of pride and an insult. I am assuming you interpret it as a positive and you probably think the bits of it you agree with are fluffy and nice. I interpret it as a negative considering it is a world view at complete odds with reality.

                              To make my point you instantly jump to Do you yearn for a time when you could put up a sign saying "No Blacks, No Irish, No Dogs" as if you would have to be woke to disagree with that. That kind of thinking leads to the fascist groups who are right and everyone else is wrong, no debate, no discussion, no questioning. Shockingly those are very actions being associated with SJW/woke terms.

                              I am not trying to exaggerate saying fascist it is literally the cancelling of views different to a few people (in universities too! Places where views should be challenged). I was amused to find even the urban dictionary has this- https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Woke%20Fascism

                              "And no, I'm pointedly not insulting you, I'm pointing out that your very own language damns you."

                              Unfortunately when you think your 'in-group' is the only 'right thinking group' then you may believe what you say. And would also explain why you have some strange narrative that the only people who would consider your 'in-group' as 'not good' must be bad people.

                              1. Anonymous Coward
                                Anonymous Coward

                                Re: A hack

                                Is Urban Dictionary a quotable source now?

                                Gish Gallop

              2. GNU SedGawk Bronze badge

                Re: A hack

                The people have a right to apply given the HMG signature of various treaties which established that right.

                Allowing such applications to be made remotely would largely eliminate the requirement for the crossings, making the processing and acceptance of such requests, considerably more efficient.

                As you make clear, your interest is that a few people as possible should exercise the rights our country negotiated to offer them.

                Given the reason many of them are here is HMG occupied and attacked their homelands, that seems rather short sighted.

                Given the history of the British Empire, simply, we don't get to whine about immigration or refugees.

                We especially don't get to whine about countries where we are still actually causing the problem the refugees are fleeing.

                The reason they are coming here in large part is that the historical colonial occupier of their home country was an English speaking nation - so likely Britain.

                I speak English - if I took refuge from the Fascist Dystopia that the Tories/Starmer Axis are leading us towards, and I got to France, I'd be moving on as I don't speak French.

                You are not really able to function as a tech worker if you can't read or write in the language of the country.

                Don't let the massive dominance of English (oh there's that pull factor again) fool you.

                It's England/Scotland/Wales/Ireland or America.

                You best start learning some other language, while fleeing persecution, so people who invaded most of the planet don't feel a bit crowded.

                1. codejunky Silver badge

                  Re: A hack

                  @GNU SedGawk

                  "Allowing such applications to be made remotely would largely eliminate the requirement for the crossings, making the processing and acceptance of such requests, considerably more efficient."

                  Assuming the UK wants to do such. The UK could allow remote applications, if the UK wanted to do so.

                  "As you make clear, your interest is that a few people as possible should exercise the rights our country negotiated to offer them."

                  Eh? What garbage are you spouting here? Because I dont like people travelling via dangerous routes to breach the UK borders and abuse the people and country? Because I am more supportive of those who use the legal routes and dont think they should be pushed out to accommodate criminals.

                  "Given the history of the British Empire, simply, we don't get to whine about immigration or refugees."

                  Go 'woke'! No thanks.

                  "I speak English - if I took refuge from the Fascist Dystopia that the Tories/Starmer Axis are leading us towards, and I got to France, I'd be moving on as I don't speak French."

                  Not pretty much any country where English is spoken and landlocked to Europe so not a dangerous crossing? Why?

                  1. GNU SedGawk Bronze badge

                    Re: A hack

                    Fundamentally your objection is just nonsense, you don't want people coming here.

                    Short term fix if you don't want them coming here, let the application be processed without them coming here.

                    Long term fix, stop creating the problem they are fleeing in the first place.

                    Unless you can do both of those things, sit down, and read the above again until it sinks in.

                    Oh and please take your pith helmet and try to work in Germany or Holland without professional written fluency in those languages. It's a joke, yes they speak six languages but the official forms need filling in the correct language, just like here, you have to fill out the form in English, or it becomes a nightmare.

                    1. codejunky Silver badge

                      Re: A hack

                      @GNU SedGawk

                      "Fundamentally your objection is just nonsense, you don't want people coming here."

                      So your perception of wanting people to legally come here but not illegally come here is that I dont want people coming here? While you seem to be supportive of criminals illegally crossing. Congrats.

                      "Short term fix if you don't want them coming here, let the application be processed without them coming here."

                      Why? There is a process that can legally be followed so why must the UK do that? Not saying its good or bad to do so but its up to the UK if it wished to offer such, not criminals.

                      "Long term fix, stop creating the problem they are fleeing in the first place."

                      Poverty? And yes we can point fingers at blowing up dictators and interfering in other countries. I recall the trigger being a plane crashing into 2 buildings in the US which does not justify what came after but didnt make the world a better place.

                      "Unless you can do both of those things, sit down, and read the above again until it sinks in."

                      You dont seem to be sinking much in. Your still arguing against legal immigration in favour of illegal with splashings of woke nonsense to justify it.

                      "Oh and please take your pith helmet and try to work in Germany or Holland without professional written fluency in those languages"

                      I dont know about Germany but Holland is very good at English.

                      "It's a joke, yes they speak six languages but the official forms need filling in the correct language"

                      Dutch or English. They actually send out their official forms to you in Dutch and English. I was impressed

                      1. GNU SedGawk Bronze badge

                        Re: A hack

                        It may surprise you to learn that England is rather good at Foreign languages, however if you speak little or no English, and cannot read/write English well, life will be difficult for you in England.

                        You might find the Environment has become somewhat Hostile.

                        1. codejunky Silver badge

                          Re: A hack

                          "It may surprise you to learn that England is rather good at Foreign languages, however if you speak little or no English, and cannot read/write English well, life will be difficult for you in England."

                          You just replied twice to my comment but this response has absolutely nothing to do with what we were talking about. I assume it was to someone else.

                      2. GNU SedGawk Bronze badge

                        Re: A hack

                        The sea crossings have no bearing on legality or an application.

                        The sea crossings only happen because we insist on a physical presence.

                        You understand this but don't care what happens to these people.

                        It's fine, if contemptible to hold such views, I support your right to have only only lactose intolerance where the milk of human kindness should flow, but it's tedious that you won't openly defend the, "I don't care, don't want them position openly".

                        Immigration and refugees are not the same issue. Immigration is not relevant to boat crossings. That conflation is another tell tale sign of the underlying motivation being simple desire to exclude as many people as possible from coming here.

                        A fan of Brexit, you don't say, never would have put those two inward looking and ahistorical positions together.

                        1. codejunky Silver badge

                          Re: A hack

                          @GNU SedGawk

                          "The sea crossings have no bearing on legality or an application."

                          Illegally entering a country has no legal bearing on an application? Ok so off they go to Rwanda while their application is processed. Alternatively they could legally enter the country and apply.

                          "The sea crossings only happen because we insist on a physical presence."

                          You are saying illegal things happen because they are illegal? Sounds like illegal activity needs deterring.

                          "You understand this but don't care what happens to these people.

                          It's fine, if contemptible to hold such views"

                          Criminals? Illegals intentionally illegally crossing to try and push in front of legal applications? You are right I dont really care what happens and I find it odd you consider it contemptible to be against illegal behaviour.

                          "Immigration and refugees are not the same issue."

                          Ok. Happen legally applying for immigration should be done and happen refugees should be handled legally. So whats wrong?

                          "Immigration is not relevant to boat crossings."

                          Do I assume you are now running away with goal posts and talking about something other than the posts of mine you have been responding to? Illegal crossings by boat (which is what I have been talking about) is illegal and I am against illegal (criminals) crossings into the country. You sound pro-illegal (criminal) crossings which you keep trying to justify then accusing me of contemptible views.

                          "it's tedious that you won't openly defend the, "I don't care, don't want them position openly"."

                          So you say its tedious that I wont say what you want me to say that is nothing to do with my views? Do you not think it tedious to read you argue with a figment of your imagination and attributing it to me? Maybe you should consider the possibility that I dont say the garbage you want me to say because I dont believe it? if you want to argue with someone who thinks like that you will need to go find someone else.

                          "Immigration and refugees are not the same issue. Immigration is not relevant to boat crossings."

                          So why are you changing the subject to immigration and refugees instead of what we have been talking about which was the illegal boat crossings?

                          "A fan of Brexit, you don't say, never would have put those two inward looking and ahistorical positions together."

                          I wouldnt trust you to put 2 magnets together.

                          1. GNU SedGawk Bronze badge

                            they did "legally enter the country and apply."

                            "Illegally entering a country has no legal bearing on an application? Ok so off they go to Rwanda while their application is processed. Alternatively they could legally enter the country and apply."

                            It's perfectly legal to sail from France to England. You don't seem to understand that, it's fine and dandy, no offence has been committed.

                            Assuming you are a refugee, If once you arrive in the UK, you don't take the first practical chances to make yourself known to the authorities, then that will prejudice your application somewhat depending on the actual circumstances.

                            But assuming you land on the beach and within a day or so walk into the police station and declare yourself, you have committed no crime.

                            The entire point of the treaty is to allow for people running without documentation from people who would not willingly let them leave, so your requirements are utterly in opposition to the aims of the refugee convention.

                            1. codejunky Silver badge

                              Re: they did "legally enter the country and apply."

                              @GNU SedGawk

                              "It's perfectly legal to sail from France to England. You don't seem to understand that, it's fine and dandy, no offence has been committed."

                              Assuming a vessel that is capable of safely transporting people. However entering the country without permission is illegal.

                              "Assuming you are a refugee"

                              Fleeing the third world hell hole- France. France being the last jump of a journey through that third world hell hole of continental Europe. Fleeing for their lives from the barbarian Western Europeans.

                              "But assuming you land on the beach and within a day or so walk into the police station and declare yourself, you have committed no crime."

                              And then we send them somewhere suitable while they wait to be processed. Such as Rwanda. The same place the EU and Denmark looked at for the same purpose.

        3. EvilDrSmith Silver badge

          Re: A hack

          Why is it naked racist to use an African country?

          What is it about Africa that you think makes it unsuitable for refugee resettlement? Do you have some sort of bigoted, unsubstantiated opinion that Africa is somehow less...civilised... than the rest of the world?

          Why do you consider being sent to an African Country as being 'punishment'?

          It appears that the bigot here is you.

          And if you are so upset about the UK plan to send migrants to Rwanda, presumably, you were equally vocal in condemning the EU when it proposed to move refugees from Libya to Rwanda in 2019.

          Or is sending migrants to Rwanda not disgusting when it's proposed by the EU?

          1. GNU SedGawk Bronze badge

            Re: A hack

            The premise of using another country as a "deterrent" is racist.

            That it happens to be a poorer blacker country which feeds into the colonial mindset of seeing poorer blacker countries as resources to be exploited, I'm sure is entirely coincidental /s.

            1. codejunky Silver badge

              Re: A hack

              @GNU SedGawk

              "The premise of using another country as a "deterrent" is racist."

              How is it racist to expect our borders to be respected? That our immigration process be respected? It doesnt matter where they are from if they are criminal aka illegally breaching the borders. We dont have an open borders policy.

              "That it happens to be a poorer blacker country"

              That agrees, shockingly for money. They are willing to do so which is possibly why Denmark and the EU looked at Rwanda too for the same purposes.

              "which feeds into the colonial mindset of seeing poorer blacker countries as resources to be exploited"

              That is where it seems to fall into the woke rabbit hole of uselessness. Should we not be willing to do business with poor black countries because *woke*? That sounds kinds racist just because they are poorer and darker than we are. I'm sure is entirely coincidental /s.

          2. GNU SedGawk Bronze badge

            Re: A hack

            Sending refugees to Rwanda was proposed first by the Apartheid Regime,

            ```In 2014, the Netanyahu government began sending refugees – allegedly "willingly" – to Rwanda. In reality, consent was obtained by imprisoning them, harassment and/or denial of basic human rights.

            After a legal challenge, the Israeli Supreme Court ruled in August 2017 that refugees who refused to leave could not be imprisoned indefinitely, and that those who went to Rwanda had to go willingly. Netanyahu then agreed with Rwanda to accept unwilling refugees for a payment of about $5,000 each. In other words, Israeli taxpayers were paying millions of dollars to the dictatorship of Paul Kagame.```

            https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/refugees-migrants-israel-britain-rwanda-b2060595.html

            ```

            The inclusion of Rwanda as a potential destination, however, is bound to raise eyebrows.

            Of about 4,000 people estimated to have been deported by Israel to Rwanda and Uganda under a “voluntary departure” scheme between 2014 and 2017, almost all are thought to have left the country almost immediately, with many attempting to return to Europe via people-smuggling routes.

            In addition, at least one deportee still in Rwanda, tracked down by Israel’s Haaretz newspaper in 2018, described being destitute and living on the streets of Rwanda’s capital, Kigali.```

            https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jan/17/rwanda-uk-asylum-seekers-deportees-israel-scheme

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: A hack

              Priti Patel got fired for running an off-the-books op in Israel. What a coincidence.

              1. GNU SedGawk Bronze badge

                Re: A hack

                Alan Duncan makes quite some interesting allegation in his memoirs.

                https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2021-06-04-former-british-minister-the-israelis-think-they-control-the-foreign-office-and-they-do/

                He accuses the CFI of have vetoed his appointment to a senior Cabinet position.

                https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jan/08/why-might-an-israeli-diplomat-believe-alan-duncan-needs-taking-down

                What was interesting was the Patel affair was her meeting to reclassify Aid to be given to the IDF https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/priti-patel-israel-army-idf-foreign-aid-money-british-holiday-meetings-netanyahu-international-development-a8041716.html

                This needs to been in the context of the IDF treating the Al-Nusra front - who are basically Al-Qadia in Syria, i.e. terrorists nut jobs - https://www.timesofisrael.com/yaalon-syrian-rebels-keeping-druze-safe-in-exchange-for-israeli-aid/ the Zionist army working hand in glove with yet another dodgy US backed group of fascist nutters https://www.haaretz.com/2015-07-20/ty-article/idf-stops-treating-wounded-members-of-syrias-nusra-front/0000017f-f53e-ddde-abff-fd7f63510000 So Patel was there to redirect aid money from the Palestinians to the IDF to have a source of funding which looked less problematic to the Israeli public, and sod the British TaxPayer.

  4. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

    The Infrastructure and Projects Authority hasn't really grasped that big projects are things for ministers to announce, not for anyone to do. Productivity in government terms is about inputs (projects announced, taxpayers' money spent, bums on seats*) rather then outputs such as projects completed, results achieved or work done.

    * Hence Moggy's mewing about not being able to see Civil Servants at their desks when they're working from home.

  5. batfink

    Ah yes..

    The old "Operational Efficiencies". In other words, sackings of staff.

    1. codejunky Silver badge

      Re: Ah yes..

      @batfink

      "The old "Operational Efficiencies". In other words, sackings of staff."

      The public sector does need to do this. Covid allowed for a large expansion of an already bloated public sector which never seems to shrink but only grow and consume. In 2020 the NHS was finally banned from buying fax machines! So much for envy of the world.

  6. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Ah, I see the usual suspects with their corporate snouts in the trough.

    As I've written before, the fundamental problem is that the departments responsible for specifying and procuring these projects are massively underfunded and subject to political bigotry when it comes to pay. I'm not in any of those departments, but I an a civil servant working in another area on a very large and high profile project (hence posting anon). When I look around, I see departments that are short staffed, and often people leaving for industry where they can make a lot more money - even after allowing for benefits like the civil service pension (which is nowhere near as "gold plated" as many seem to think thanks to political "tinkering" over the years).

    Think about it - you work in an environment where senior politicians see us as a punch bag to be insulted and denigrated at any opportunity, who in turn feed the popular (and untrue) myth that we're all a bunch of lazy b'stards simply polishing our pensions so we can take early retirement and live like kings. We get such support from our masters that they'll inform the press before us that they intend to cull 1 in 5 of us without any thought about which functions they no longer want us to perform, and a posh [insert your own expletive here] thinks it's OK to go round leaving notes on peoples' desks chiding them for following government policy and working from home. And each year you see your pay fall behind both equivalent jobs in the private sector (even allowing for benefits like the pension), and falling behind inflation so each year you are taking a real-terms pay cut. It doesn't make you feel valued !

    Against that, especially for the best systems analysts and program managers who are needed to make these projects work - you can move to industry (such as one of the usual suspects mentioned in the article) and get paid a lot more to work on the other side of the contract. Except now you have the brightest and best working in order to maximise returns for their employer rather than maximise what's best for the country.

    Don't get me wrong, we do have some very good people around. But the way things are, they have to have their own reasons for staying because pay and respect aren't on the list.

    .

    So next time you read of yet another government IT project that's not gone to plan - just remember that it was probably done to silly timescales to suite some politician's soundbite announcement, suffered from changes to suit other soundbites with no properly time allowance, staffed by too few people, paid too little, and facing experts in screwing over the government and CS by picking up (for massively inflated change costs) every little oversight made by the too few and massively overworked people trying to run our side of the project trying to keep track of where the politicians have moved the goalposts (or indeed, the whole playing field) this week.

    1. SImon Hobson Bronze badge

      OK, would the downvoter be kind enough to say what they think is wrong in the above ?

      It's OK, you're entitled to your opinion, but I am interested to know what it is.

  7. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    "Struggles to process Ukrainian refugees"

    Thanks the wails and teeth gnashing of the gammon herders and having the worst HomeSec in History in charge, the UK did not grant refugee status to any Ukrainians. They all had to apply for visas like everyday tourists.

    That's how toxic the UK is now. Can we get any worse? From the tone of many posts here the answer is clear: Some won't be happy until immigration control means machine gunning refugees in the Channel.

    Look how far we've sunk in just over 5 years.

    Commissioning new IT is no more than re-arranging the chairs on the deck of this once great unsinkable ship.

    1. codejunky Silver badge

      Re: "Struggles to process Ukrainian refugees"

      @AC

      "the UK did not grant refugee status to any Ukrainians"

      Are you claiming the UK didnt take in any Ukrainians? Guess this didnt happen-

      https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/ukrainian-refugee-who-ran-dad-27035791

      But yes Ukrainian refugees are in the UK so you are lying.

      "That's how toxic the UK is now."

      Since you are wrong in your claim I guess that makes you wrong in your conclusions too.

      "Commissioning new IT is no more than re-arranging the chairs on the deck of this once great unsinkable ship."

      Ok I guess your comment has something right.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: "Struggles to process Ukrainian refugees"

        From your post it looks like English is not your first language so apologies.

        To clarify: The UK only allowed Ukrainians into the country once they had applied for a visa. They were not allowed into the UK as refugees. Their legal status in the UK is not that of refugees. They have been granted 3 year visas. Is that clear enough for you?

        Withdraw your accusation of lying, please.

        1. codejunky Silver badge

          Re: "Struggles to process Ukrainian refugees"

          @AC

          "Withdraw your accusation of lying, please."

          You just had to clarify your entire comment to accept that the UK has allowed Ukrainian refugees into the UK. You claimed they were treated like every day tourists. There are two routes for Ukrainian refugees to apply to come to the UK, the Ukraine family scheme and the homes for Ukraine scheme which are specific to Ukrainians. They can be extended after the 3 years, all of this for free.

          Ukrainians have visa free access to Schengen states which just so happen to be safe countries a hell of a lot nearer than the UK and can apply to come to the UK from those safe countries as well! This is on top of the normal legal routes to enter the UK.

          https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/immigration-information-for-ukrainians-in-the-uk-british-nationals-and-their-family-members/immigration-information-for-ukrainians-in-the-uk-british-nationals-and-their-family-members

          "They were not allowed into the UK as refugees"

          I guess they could take similar routes as other asylum seekers but the Ukraine systems are specific to supporting Ukrainian refugees. What is the problem with that?

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: "Struggles to process Ukrainian refugees"

            Refugee status has a legal definition. Ukrainians have not been granted this by the UK. Your ignorance on this subject is frighteningly clear. So continuing any further with would be utterly pointless. This country is doomed by hacks and imposters who lack any intellectual rigour. Some even wield the levers of State. Lord help us all.

            1. Jellied Eel Silver badge

              Re: "Struggles to process Ukrainian refugees"

              Refugee status has a legal definition. Ukrainians have not been granted this by the UK. Your ignorance on this subject is frighteningly clear.

              Et tu..

              A refugee, generally speaking, is a displaced person who has crossed national borders and who cannot or is unwilling to return home due to well-founded fear of persecution

              .. and requests refugee status/asylum. Which would then trigger all the bureaucracy and restrictions that come with that process. The visa system was a simple way to expedite the process, and give rights that regular asylum seekers wouldn't be granted.

              Challenge is what happens next, ie what happens to Ukraine. Which will potentially get messy, ie if the 'refugees' decide they want to remain in the UK. Or who ends up winning. If the current regime wins, then theoretically there'll be no fear of persecution and they can return to Ukraine. If not, it'll be a much bigger mess, eg-

              https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-62304573

              A cruise ship docked in Edinburgh has welcomed its first group of refugees fleeing war-torn Ukraine.

              The MS Victoria has 739 rooms and will initially house between 1,600 and 1,700 people.

              The UK has a long tradition of using hulks for housing people. But if you think the UK hasn't taken on a lot of refugees, you're the ignorant one.

              1. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: "Struggles to process Ukrainian refugees"

                Are you suggesting putting Ukrainians in prison hulks ?

                "Et tu.."

                It is understandable that you are feeling betrayed, at this point, by a government with such an awful track record. On this and many other issues.

                Therefore you deserve only sympathy as this betrayal appears to be clouding your mind. Making it difficult to grasp simple concepts. Such as the granting, or otherwise, of refugee status by the UK government.

                1. Jellied Eel Silver badge

                  Re: "Struggles to process Ukrainian refugees"

                  Are you suggesting putting Ukrainians in prison hulks ?

                  You used the 'p' word, not me. But yes, they're things we've used in the past to store surplus population. Or soldiers in the Falklands. Rest is just politics. A while ago, Merkel told the world to send Germany all their migrants. That caused Germany a few problems. Sturgeon just copied her as a publicity stunt.

                  But being politics, there are challenges with accepting even only a few thousand 'pesons*', ie housing, education, health care etc etc. It's easy for rabid politicians to virtue signal with variations on 'bring us your poor, your tired huddled masses', but harder to actually support those migrants or refugees properly. Especially if your running a large budget deficit due to previous vote buying poliicies.

                  So we've been cramming refugees into bedsits, old barracks, hotels, and now hulks. Granting refugees asylum is a humane thing to do, but it comes at a cost.. which can also be political. So countries that had previously been pretty open to migration start drifting towards nationalism, and all the problems that follow due to real or perceived problems with immigration.

  8. This post has been deleted by its author

  9. gandalfcn Silver badge

    HMRC is not the only one, DWP doesn't seem able to cope generally, nor the NHS, but when there have been years of underfunding and government corruption what else is to be expected.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like