Britain's estimated 500,000 illegal immigrants should be offered the chance to be legitimate in exchange for a £5,000 fee spread over 5 years, according to Liberal think-tank "Centre Forum". Centre Forum says, "anyone here for more than 3 months illegally should be allowed to begin an "enrollment period", for a £200 fee followed by five annual instalments of about a £1,000 and the possibility of permanent residency"!
Lets just hope that the "Clowns" from Centre Forum, never get their hands on the levers of power!
[Rep]

Beggars belief does it not.....

I wouldn't care what groups like this spouted off it wasn't for the fact they DO have an influence on the levers of power in this country. They are systematically wrecking England.
It has to stop and groups like this have to accept they have some responsibility for what they are doing. Freedom of speech comes with the responsibility of realising that words can result in actions.

Ea of dune
[Rep]

Isn't this just another government advisory think-tank that helps set policy ?

It certainly is in line with the government's policy of extracting as much money as they can from EVERYBODY.
[Rep]

What?

Situation A

I enter the country illegally. I say "oops", and start enrolment after 3 months. I pay £5k and in year 5 I get to stay permanently.

Situation B

I burgle somebody's house. I say "oops", and start enrolment. I pay a hefty fine and then my name is clear.

So are we going to be allowed to buy our way out of all crimes? If not, why not? Either the idea is right in principle or it is wrong. I would imagine those same lefties would froth at the mouth over suggestions that the rich could buy their way out of prison (as would the rest of us), so why are said lefties happy with the idea for immigrants?
[Rep]

Crazy.

It would no doubt be a momumental ****-up where most would never pay and get away with it (and and get citizenship). The ones I could see pay it would the odd cases we get every so often, you know the Zimbabwean farmer who's been here for 4 years, the man accidentally born in the US or the 86 year old New Zealand citizen who has lived here 84 years and never gone abroad!

And what's more, I'm amazed Teletext is still going! :-)
[Rep]

Ah, but immigrants vote for pro-EU lefty parties who favour....more immigration!
[Rep]

Originally Posted by harryaldridge:
What?

Situation A

I enter the country illegally. I say "oops", and start enrolment after 3 months. I pay £5k and in year 5 I get to stay permanently.

Situation B

I burgle somebody's house. I say "oops", and start enrolment. I pay a hefty fine and then my name is clear.

So are we going to be allowed to buy our way out of all crimes? If not, why not? Either the idea is right in principle or it is wrong. I would imagine those same lefties would froth at the mouth over suggestions that the rich could buy their way out of prison (as would the rest of us), so why are said lefties happy with the idea for immigrants?

There is crime, which is merely defined by law, and then there is immorality.
I would not say that immigration is immoral.
[Rep]

When much needed doctors, nurses, academics, engineers, IT specialist, etc. leave the country of origin, that paid for their education, for a fast buck in the U (Ha ha) K. That Mr. Akria is immoral.
[Rep]

Originally Posted by Little Englander (sour):
When much needed doctors, nurses, academics, engineers, IT specialist, etc. leave the country of origin, that paid for their education, for a fast buck in the U (Ha ha) K. That Mr. Akria is immoral.

Maybe, but immoral might be a bit strong.

After all, they may need to feed their families too - it's about survival at the end of the day.

But you make a valid point.
[Rep]

Originally Posted by Little Englander (sour):
When much needed doctors, nurses, academics, engineers, IT specialist, etc. leave the country of origin, that paid for their education, for a fast buck in the U (Ha ha) K. That Mr. Akria is immoral.

There is a point there about taking skilled workers but is that your real objection to immigration? Would you prefer, for example, if we only took unskilled workers?

In any case, migration from developing countries to earn a "fast buck' often entails the immigrants sending money home. In many cases these 'remittances' are not only important for the families of the immigrants but they can be a significant factor in a country's economy.

Originally Posted by :
Remittances are among the most tangible links between migration and development. Officially recorded flows totaled over US$280 billion worldwide in 2006. Nearly three-quarters were sent to developing countries. In 22 countries, remittances were equal to more than 10 percent of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in 2006; in six countries they were equal to more than 20 percent of GDP.

MPI | Data Hub | Global Remittances Guide

Once you factor in such things as remittances, and also allow for the fact that many skilled workers do not have jobs in their own countries, it doesn't seem quite so immoral after all.

If you go further and accept that individuals must make the best of the opportunities for themselves and their families, it may even be turned on its head: to deny them the chance to use their skills where they would benefit financially - and where their skills are in demand - would itself be immoral.
[Rep]