Immigration: "No proper debate for many, many years"

I have to take issue there. What is there not to understand? It's 2015 with world-wide mass media (take the mobile phone and place the blame there). OTHERS can now see daily how some of us live. Very nicely thank you. Many (not the very poorest) have the means to up sticks and wander. When things get too difficult and result in endangerment of life - one up-sticks and moves. Simples. When borders are dissolved the problem becomes even easier to resolve for the would be 'betterment of life pilgrim'. Those with the least wherewithal take the most dangerous and quickest routes - across the water and quite often drown. The rest take the land route and mostly survive. These are what we call 'economic migrants'. We don't want them thank you. Why? Because we have quite sufficient of that coming in from Europe - legally.
Refugees - Any which way and loose - coming from everywhere there is strife - by any means they can. These we have a 'duty' to help and protect. These are the ones that should be corralled on the nearest safe border and enclaved for later settlement or re-distribution as in my previous comments. The problem isn't money it's 'will'. The will to enter into a rational programme in case one's own people scream foul over their own poor and destitute. The charity begins at home syndrome. It's political - as always. As for my social Darwinism - the survival of the fittest - that may well be the last answer to the problem when the 'problem' really gets out of hand. As it ultimately will in times to come.

I suppose you understand as much as you need to. If our politicians had understood better, the situation might not have happened as badly as it has, and Europe might have been better prepared to cope with it.

All they needed to do was to read their history. History tells us what happened and where we went wrong or right as the case may be. We do have 'case history' on this one. It's not rocket science and there is no excuse from politicians not to have 'done their homework'. Pathetic comes to mind.

It seems at least some parts of Europe will be overcrowded before long, what about the countries people are fleeing from, will populations there increase as well? Populations soon seem to replace themselves after the mass casualties of wars.

All European countries could quite easily absorb double their present populations. The problem isn't one of numbers (yet) it's that the infrastructures haven't been provided to handle it all. No government is ever ahead of itself as regards public provision.It's reaction not pro -action in such respects.
Once the 'troubles' are over there will be a moment of relaxation before the 'baby-boom' that will inevitably follow - as follows all wars when the populations begin to again feel secure. History again. Never fails to inform on the questions asked. It's understanding the answers and acting upon them that the really wise man does. Politicians are rarely 'wise'.

Much of the UK relies on patched-up Victorian infrastructure. To cope with the doubling of population and the following baby-boom you describe would mean constructing quite a few new cities from the ground up. Such a lot of new schools, hospitals, prisons would be needed it's difficult to imagine building keeping up with demand.

I don't advocate that this country gets involved with yet more immigration. We already have sufficient for the purpose and should now take a few years restructuring our present numbers and influx. We don't have a need for that sort of expansion until such times as we have absorbed the residue we have now. Get everyone settled and employed and retrained as necessary. We should concentrate on educating those we will need for specialist skills for the next technological generation and expansion as well as providing apprenticeship type courses (3 year) for the more mundane trades we have ignored these last 30 years. WHEN we have accomplished that. THEN we might look for more 'new' blood. But who has the brains and the power to do what is necessary?

Immigration and issues surrounding are complicated, often problematic. The ban on discussing immigration under Labour made it a taboo subject. That, followed by broken promises by the Cameron government have destroyed public confidence.

And I will repeat - it's not a Western governments problem. It's a world wide problem and one that is likely to become more aggravated as the world populations explode. War-torn victims are only a small part of the problems that are coming. People prefer to live where they were born and where they have ties and that means 'enclaves' until the problems have been resolved and returns wherever and whenever possible. It's A UN affair and should be treated as such. :roll:

In response to threats of political non-co-operation from E.U. leaders, Mr. Cameron said today that he sees no answer to the situation that can be found by taking in more and more refugees.

Can the UN do anything useful in the Middle east? It would need some of the 'big players' on the world stage to co-operate.

An emergency meeting of the Security Council should be called to initiate a world-wide programme for temporary transit camps in secured locations as near to the refugees own countries as possible whereby the refugees can be fed and watered and where proper facilities can be managed for the purposes of structured returns when the problems in their own countries have dissipated. Dumping refugees in alien countries or even in countries where they perceive they can start new lives is not an answer. It only serves to exacerbate the residents of those countries and leads to further unrest. Refugee migrants - in other words those that cannot return (asylum seekers etc) should be treated as they always have - on the merit of their applications. This can only be done through the UN who have the clout to 'demand' monies for the application of the projects. Europe will never agree to any long term solution because Europe on its own cannot attend to all the worlds ills. If it attempts to do so it will only go from bad to worse as the EU itself begins to fragment from the consequences of its own actions. It's not rocket science. It's logic - doh!!!!

Sounds like a fair start, the kind of thing that should have been done months ago at least. Europeans have generally lived such sheltered lives, many don't know how to respond to hard realities.

They soon will do if they keep following these sycophantic, pig-troughing, I'm allright Jack European politicians who themselves have nothing to lose. Lions led by donkeys. Get wise people. The buck stops at YOUR doorstep, not the already well-healed.

Lions led by donkeys, sheep herded by wolves, little pigs in straw houses, zoology and politics seem to overlap. Beware of the sharks, mind the hyenas and the wolves in sheeps clothing.

It's the 'jam today' and the 'trust me I'm infallible' merchants that they need to watch out for. People like easy remedies. Trouble is - there aren't any and never were. 70 million people dead and 35 trillion dollars were the cost to the world for the last nation that 'took' the path of least resistance and left it all to others. I rest my case.

The part of europe that migrants are having trouble passing through, Hungary etc, was historically where the kingdoms that fought invading muslim armies in medieval times were. Different countries of europe have different histories and responses, and they may change, if numbers continue to escalate.

Political focus is moving on to the war in Syria, with background rumblings from USA and Russia. Whatever happens there can only put a dint in the flow of migrants, they come from many places.

No sanctions. No rules. No ORDER. I rest my case.

That case seems to be taking frequent rests now. Probably a bit worn out, maybe it should put it's feet up and have a cup of tea.

Mr. Danczuk says it should not be left to Rochdale to bear the burden of refugees from the Middle east and Africa, but, other M.P.s don't seem to want to talk about it.

http://www.rochdaleonline.co.uk/news-features/2/news-headlines/97814/simon-danczuk-letter-from-parliament

They are hardly going to stick them in a conservative borough are they? That would never do. Nothing to lose by picking Rochdale. Perfect fodder. However - Nimby I am not. I'm Nimbcyp.

European reaction to the ever increasing flow of refugees remains mixed, confused and contradictory. Contingency plans should have been in place, but obviously they weren't. Germany seems to be able and willing to absorb a huge number.

The Germans have always aspired to being top dog (one way or another). Germany will need to increase it's own birthrate to keep ahead of the game - alors - 800,000 new blood, mostly young men without families, is grist to the mill. It's not rocket science. It's politics and economics.
As times change many European countries are finding that they are losing out to the age problem - the differentials are constantly widening - and someone has to pay for it - ergo - young taxpayers. You really don't need much of a brain to understand the logic. However - it has a price. Old traditions and customs as opposed to new traditions and customs. You have to give up that which is comfortable to you if you are to integrate without too much trauma. And that's what most indigenous peoples don't want to do - myself included. Therefore - many European countries will NOT go along with encouraging totally open borders for that one reason alone. Hungry was always a fascist state (even under the communists) and will brook no truck with 'incomers' (especially Romanies and Gypsies or anything that has a dark skin). It was ever thus.

Croatia today: Migrants obliged to cross mine-fields dating back to the Balkan Wars of the 1990's in order to reach the borders of a free Europe. That's a neat method we haven't tried before!

And hello and where have you been skulking. Left Rochdale did you? Did you notify the immigration people before you left or are you still listed as 'Missing in Syria'?

Exploring Wales, but wondering what's happening in Bulgaria, seems they are building razor wire fences. Will the E.U. come up with an agreed plan, or will confusion continue in the jigsaw of borders.

Walls (fences) are for corralling livestock 'in' - not 'out'. That's the real purpose. Hungary can build all the fences they want but 'walls do not a prison make' (Lovelace - methinks). Can you tell me of 'any' wall or fence that has ever been successful? Politics of the fool and idiot. As for parity throughout the EU - that's another idiotic dream. Whatever 'fool' thought that one up? Oh yes - the Germans, prior to Maestricht - dearie me!

Walls, fences and trenches are normal items of territorial defence since the year dot. Do they solve any problems? Perhaps not, but if a border is to be defended, walls and fences is the least agressive way to do it.

The political chaos of the E.U. is full of contradictions, what a mess. If no clear agreed policy emerges very soon, all individual countries will have to make their own decisions and arrangements.

Given the improbability of the E.U. arriving at a workable new common policy for dealing with and 'processing' asylum seeker refugees, with Hungary attempting to enforce existing E.U. regulations, and Germany giving push-pull conflicting messages, there is very little sign of european "parity" or cohesion.

The UK will do well to disentangle itself from E.U. regulatory systems which are so obviously problematic.