ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Non-USA & General Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 18th April 2018, 12:14 PM   #41
Information Analyst
Philosopher
 
Information Analyst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: London, UK.
Posts: 7,380
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
I have done lots of fascinating research at the National Archives and I am surprised the landing cards, or passenger list were not transferred there. This is part of our national heritage and history. It has nothing at all to do with the Data Protection Act as keeping a list does not contravene that Act (cf unlike the USA privacy laws). Someone having your name on a card isn't breaking the law. The DPA argument sounds like a knee jerk counter-debate by someone trying to justify it off the top off their heads.
Trying to cite the DPA is indeed a very poor excuse. If there had been concerns, the documents could have been deposited with the National Archive, pending a sufficient lapse of time before release. The recent release of the 1939 ID card register would provide a good model, as presumably the landing cards will have included dates of birth as matter of course. The unrestricted version, however, would remain available for official use.
Information Analyst is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th April 2018, 12:18 PM   #42
GlennB
Loggerheaded, earth-vexing fustilarian
 
GlennB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Pie City, Arcadia
Posts: 22,702
Originally Posted by Information Analyst View Post
GP records are a central resource, nominally owned by the Secretary of State for Health - they are not the property of any one practice. When you moved from the Docklands practice to the Brixton one, your records would have followed you as a matter of absolute routine.
And how would they have known we'd moved, pray tell, long before the arrival of computerised systems? Many years later I ended up in Somerset and my GP's file was a new one. No record whatsoever of many previous GPs, partly because I couldn't even name any of the doctors, let alone the names and locations of practices from 30/40 years before, mostly because they were paper records. Whether they could have have tracked and retrieved those records is highly doubtful, and that's a massive understatement.

I had loads of NHS dentistry back in my school days in London, but later dentists had no access to my old dental records or x-rays. NHS, in case you didn't notice. How much time do you seriously suppose medical practitioners can devote to tracking ancient records for patients who have moved? The police would baulk at it when investigating a sodding suspected murderer.

You're making fanciful stuff up to defend your original, very unsympathetic and accusatory, position. What you're claiming bears no resemblance to the realities of moving around over the decades and the realities of tracking those movements. You have stored ~300 printed bank statements and a similar number of printed payslips over the years? Few do, and you shouldn't judge based on your own obsessive retention of records (if, indeed, what you say is actually true).
__________________
"Even a broken clock is right twice a day. 9/11 truth is a clock with no hands." - Beachnut
GlennB is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th April 2018, 12:20 PM   #43
Captain_Swoop
Penultimate Amazing
 
Captain_Swoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 15,774
Originally Posted by GlennB View Post
And May dodged a bullet at PMQs by, effectively, blaming it on the Labour Home Secs. of 2009. What a shameless bitch.
It was a set up. Yesterday the briefings to press were that it was 2010 that it was decided. Then today they announce that was a mistake it was 2009.

It was a deliberate trap for Corbyn
Captain_Swoop is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th April 2018, 12:24 PM   #44
Information Analyst
Philosopher
 
Information Analyst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: London, UK.
Posts: 7,380
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
You have the right to see your medical records these days. However, most GP's will charge you if you want a photocopy of something.

If you are low income, having lost your job, home and benefits, the cost of obtaining 50 years' worth could be all too much. There might still be gaps in years.
There would probably only be a need to photocopy selected cards/pages of a medical record. Then again, the fact that they are not actually owned by the GP, could be used as leverage in such cases. It would be trivially easy for the records to be returned temporarily to the local CCG or their administrative agency for copying, before being returned to the GP. I recall a couple of occasions when we did that when I worked for a health authority when people who had moved abroad wanted a copy of the records, which were still at their old GP. The latter were usually adamant the patient was coming back, so didn't want them removed from their list (i.e. they wanted the continuing capitation payments), but they were happy to return the record to us for copying, which I don't recall we bothered charging for.
Information Analyst is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th April 2018, 12:46 PM   #45
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Moomin Valley
Posts: 12,706
Originally Posted by Information Analyst View Post
There would probably only be a need to photocopy selected cards/pages of a medical record. Then again, the fact that they are not actually owned by the GP, could be used as leverage in such cases. It would be trivially easy for the records to be returned temporarily to the local CCG or their administrative agency for copying, before being returned to the GP. I recall a couple of occasions when we did that when I worked for a health authority when people who had moved abroad wanted a copy of the records, which were still at their old GP. The latter were usually adamant the patient was coming back, so didn't want them removed from their list (i.e. they wanted the continuing capitation payments), but they were happy to return the record to us for copying, which I don't recall we bothered charging for.
There is also the issue of medical confidentiality. People shouldn't be expected to let non-medical border staff to see their medical history.

I had a work colleague who was trying to claim a disability and wanted her GP to send just the relevant part to her employers. To her horror, they sent the whole lot. She joked, 'Now the boss knows I had treatment for piles.'

Anyway it's a catch-22 now because without 'documentation' you can no longer have a GP...
__________________
If man has no tea in him, he is incapable of understanding truth and beauty. ~ Japanese Proverb
Vixen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th April 2018, 01:40 PM   #46
Information Analyst
Philosopher
 
Information Analyst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: London, UK.
Posts: 7,380
Originally Posted by GlennB View Post
And how would they have known we'd moved, pray tell, long before the arrival of computerised systems? Many years later I ended up in Somerset and my GP's file was a new one. No record whatsoever of many previous GPs, partly because I couldn't even name any of the doctors, let alone the names and locations of practices from 30/40 years before, mostly because they were paper records. Whether they could have have tracked and retrieved those records is highly doubtful, and that's a massive understatement.
Your incredulity is sorely misplaced. Before computerisation the system used the methods first used in 1912, i.e. card indexes and ledgers, with a Central Register for the whole country in Southport. The country was split up broadly along the lines of what eventually became health authorities. These started as Insurance Committees in 1912, then Executive Committees after 1948, then becoming Family Practitioner Committees (FPCs), then Family Health Services Authorities, before being amalgamated with the equivalent Health Authority in the 1990s. I started working in an FPC in 1989, and saw it through all the subsequent transitions. Later HAs were split into smaller PCGs, PCTs, and now CCGs, but the GP registration side of things usually remained at a higher level.

Quote:
I had loads of NHS dentistry back in my school days in London, but later dentists had no access to my old dental records or x-rays. NHS, in case you didn't notice.
NHS dentistry is completely separate, and records do no "follow" a patient the way GP records do.

Quote:
How much time do you seriously suppose medical practitioners can devote to tracking ancient records for patients who have moved? The police would baulk at it when investigating a sodding suspected murderer.
None, because it has never been the medical practitioner's job to do that.

I'll try to make this nice and simply. Imagine it's 1989 and a person registers with a new GP. To do so they have to hand in their existing medical card, or fill out a form at the surgery. The medical card or form then goes off to the FPC via its courier service. At the FPC the staff will look at the medical card/form an dsee if it matches a current local registration. If it does, they will transfer the patient to the new GP's register, and inform the old GP the patient has left theirs, and they are to return the patient's medical record to the FPC. The FPC then issues a new medical card with the new GP details to the patient. A couple of days later the patient's records arrive at the FPC from the old GP, and are then sent on to the new GP in turn.

If the FPC found no current or previous registration for the patient in their area, the staff would transfer all the personal details from the medical card/form, which would usually include the previous address outside of the area, so the patient would be nominally linked to that area. These new registration details would go off electronically to the Central Register, which would either confirm the previous area registration, or correct it if necessary. A request would then go off to the previous area FPC, which would in turn cancel their local GP registration, and request the patient's records. Subsequently that FPC would send the records on to the new FPC, which would in turn send them on to the new GP.

If the Central Register was unable to trace a previous registration, especially if the patients had indicated they'd arrived from abroad, they would issue a new NHS number. On the basis of a new arrival - or birth - the new FPC would have already sent a new record envelope to the GP, ready for filling. Obviously the system also allowed for new birth registrations (NHS numbers were and are allocated at the local registrar level), adoptions (new NHS number, GP record with old name details removed), people going into the services and then leaving them, leaving the country, etc.

The same basic system is in use now as it was in 1989, and previously all that was different was that it was done with card indexes and ledgers, and took longer for records to go from the old GP to the new. Obviously it's not 100% foolproof, but for the vast majority of people their GP records do indeed follow them from first registration to last

Quote:
You're making fanciful stuff up to defend your original, very unsympathetic and accusatory, position.
Hmmm.... describing the job I actually did for six years is "making fanciful stuff up"? Six years of processing medical cards and registration forms, logging incoming and outgoing medical records, stuffing them in courier bags to both local GPs and other area FPCs, opening courier bags from both local GPS and other area FPC and sorting to contents appropriately, etc....

I must have imagined it all.

Or maybe you're just wrong.

Last edited by Information Analyst; 18th April 2018 at 01:51 PM.
Information Analyst is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th April 2018, 02:21 AM   #47
Information Analyst
Philosopher
 
Information Analyst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: London, UK.
Posts: 7,380
[Previously posted in teh Brext thread in error]

It seems that the press has cottoned on that the landing cards should have been offered to the National Archives first...

The Times: Windrush landing card destruction angers historian [paywalled]

"The Home Office may have broken the law by destroying landing cards for passengers of the Windrush generation, a former adviser to the National Archives has said.

Bendor Grosvenor, an art historian and broadcaster who served as an official advisor to the National Archives for seven years, said that items of potentially historic importance were meant to be considered by the Archives’ Advisory Council on Public Records before destruction. While the Home Office was responsible for deciding whether to destroy records or archive them in Kew, southwest London, he said it should have sought advice from the panel."
Information Analyst is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th April 2018, 04:10 AM   #48
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Moomin Valley
Posts: 12,706
Originally Posted by Information Analyst View Post
[Previously posted in teh Brext thread in error]

It seems that the press has cottoned on that the landing cards should have been offered to the National Archives first...

The Times: Windrush landing card destruction angers historian [paywalled]

"The Home Office may have broken the law by destroying landing cards for passengers of the Windrush generation, a former adviser to the National Archives has said.

Bendor Grosvenor, an art historian and broadcaster who served as an official advisor to the National Archives for seven years, said that items of potentially historic importance were meant to be considered by the Archives’ Advisory Council on Public Records before destruction. While the Home Office was responsible for deciding whether to destroy records or archive them in Kew, southwest London, he said it should have sought advice from the panel."

I can't believe Alan Johnson's comments confirming it was a decision under the Labour Party in 2009, but that he knew nothing about it and that it was an 'Administratiive decision' made by UK Border Agency. He added that there was a 'lot of paperwork' lying around and they were going paperless.

Well, the accountancy practice I worked for went paperless around 2010, and being insolvency specialists, you can imagine the sheer volume of paper, as the bankruptcies, administrations and liquidations had to go through High Court, plus each had to have their own bank account set up by us, plus we were then responsible for filing the Annual Accounts for each company, as well as VAT Returns and Corporation Tax Return. Multiply that by 1,500 live cases, you get the picture of the sheer volume of files and archives.

A small team of two receptionists and the filing clerk were set up, who diligently scanned every single sheet of paper in the files, a colossal job, whilst the more IT savvy managers installed a programme called 'Filestream' (a 'paperless' software from which one could access the scanned documents).

It is just bollocks that the UK Border Agency could not do the same. To actually destroy potentially useful information is wanton vandalism.

The sight of Amber Rudd and Theresa May 'apologising', when they knew what was going on all along is so unconvincing (in fact it was under May's 2010 Home Secretariatship that the destruction took place, together with Cameron's campaign to create a 'hostile environment' for illegal immigrants and sending around 'GO HOME OR BE ARRESTED' vans around high-immigrant areas).

It's shocking that no-one has resigned for the amazing cock-up.
__________________
If man has no tea in him, he is incapable of understanding truth and beauty. ~ Japanese Proverb

Last edited by Vixen; 20th April 2018 at 04:11 AM.
Vixen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th April 2018, 07:58 AM   #49
Information Analyst
Philosopher
 
Information Analyst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: London, UK.
Posts: 7,380
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
I can't believe Alan Johnson's comments confirming it was a decision under the Labour Party in 2009, but that he knew nothing about it and that it was an 'Administratiive decision' made by UK Border Agency. He added that there was a 'lot of paperwork' lying around and they were going paperless.
Well, Johnson has never been the sharpest tool in the box, as demsontrated by his mishandlign of the ACMD around the same time. Very much out of his depth.

Quote:
Well, the accountancy practice I worked for went paperless around 2010, and being insolvency specialists, you can imagine the sheer volume of paper, as the bankruptcies, administrations and liquidations had to go through High Court, plus each had to have their own bank account set up by us, plus we were then responsible for filing the Annual Accounts for each company, as well as VAT Returns and Corporation Tax Return. Multiply that by 1,500 live cases, you get the picture of the sheer volume of files and archives.

A small team of two receptionists and the filing clerk were set up, who diligently scanned every single sheet of paper in the files, a colossal job, whilst the more IT savvy managers installed a programme called 'Filestream' (a 'paperless' software from which one could access the scanned documents).

It is just bollocks that the UK Border Agency could not do the same. To actually destroy potentially useful information is wanton vandalism.

The sight of Amber Rudd and Theresa May 'apologising', when they knew what was going on all along is so unconvincing (in fact it was under May's 2010 Home Secretariatship that the destruction took place, together with Cameron's campaign to create a 'hostile environment' for illegal immigrants and sending around 'GO HOME OR BE ARRESTED' vans around high-immigrant areas).

It's shocking that no-one has resigned for the amazing cock-up.
The fact that the documents were not offered to the National Archives' Advisory Council on Public Records remains utterly unfathomable.

The 1939 ID Card Register demonstrates what could have been done. The original records for England & Wales remain in the possession of what is now NHS Digital, but the scanned images are available to view for free at Kew, and remotely via one of the subscription record services (I forget which), subject to some redaction for people who may still be alive. There are some 40 million individuals in the Register, and although the details are limited (full name, occupation, date or birth, and address), I would be very surprised if the landing cards did not represent only a small comparable percentage.

Intriguingly, landing cards for 1940-1946 are included in the National Archives' catalogue, albeit it indicating that they are closed and still held by the Home Office.

Last edited by Information Analyst; 20th April 2018 at 08:22 AM.
Information Analyst is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th April 2018, 02:21 PM   #50
GlennB
Loggerheaded, earth-vexing fustilarian
 
GlennB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Pie City, Arcadia
Posts: 22,702
[May] added: “These [Windrush] people are British. They are part of us; they helped to build Britain and we are all the stronger for their contributions.”

Thanks for finally noticing Theresa, you shameless arse.
__________________
"Even a broken clock is right twice a day. 9/11 truth is a clock with no hands." - Beachnut
GlennB is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th April 2018, 02:25 PM   #51
Garrison
Illuminator
 
Garrison's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,166
Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop View Post
It was a set up. Yesterday the briefings to press were that it was 2010 that it was decided. Then today they announce that was a mistake it was 2009.

It was a deliberate trap for Corbyn
And frankly when the decision was taken it would have been a bureaucratic cockup, it was the 'hostile environment' policy that created the real problem. This seems to be typical with these so called crackdowns on illegal immigrants, its the soft targets who bear the brunt while the people you really want gone can all too often duck these efforts and carry on unaffected.
__________________
So I've started a blog about my writing. Check it out at: http://fourth-planet-problem.blogspot.com/
And my first book is on Amazon: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B077W322FX
Garrison is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th April 2018, 04:23 PM   #52
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Moomin Valley
Posts: 12,706
Originally Posted by GlennB View Post
[May] added: “These [Windrush] people are British. They are part of us; they helped to build Britain and we are all the stronger for their contributions.”

Thanks for finally noticing Theresa, you shameless arse.

She tripped up when the GUARDIAN disclosures came to light because the idea of harmless elderly Caribbean folk being carted off to Heathrow departure lounges captured the nation's sympathy. She didn't see it coming.

How dare she embarrass Her Majesty the Queen in front of all her Commonwealth heads of state?

'Er, we've just kicked a whole load of your lot out'.

Er, bad timing!
__________________
If man has no tea in him, he is incapable of understanding truth and beauty. ~ Japanese Proverb
Vixen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2018, 03:19 AM   #53
baron
Philosopher
 
baron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 6,045
Originally Posted by Garrison View Post
And frankly when the decision was taken it would have been a bureaucratic cockup, it was the 'hostile environment' policy that created the real problem. This seems to be typical with these so called crackdowns on illegal immigrants, its the soft targets who bear the brunt while the people you really want gone can all too often duck these efforts and carry on unaffected.
The legal aid bill (i.e. taxpayer funded) for the terrorist Abu Qatada stood at something approaching £2m.

Another terrorist, Abu Hamza al-Masri, received £1m of taxpayers' money to fight his corner. This was after claiming enough state benefits to send his children to a £9K fee paying school

An unnamed illegal immigrant and convicted terrorist was awarded £250,000 in illegal aid to fight his deportation after his release from jail. On top of that he claimed six figures in benefits.

If it weren't so depressing I could list examples all day. The Windrush victims were denied all access to legal aid. If they wanted to take their cases to court they would have had to pay the entire bill themselves, something impossible for anybody other than a multi-millionaire. The government (actually, the governments) saw the Windrush crowd as easy targets that would bump up their figures and be out of the country before anybody noticed. Fortunately, that didn't work out too well for them.
__________________
"I am a liar as well as a dwarf!"
baron is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2018, 04:52 AM   #54
Lothian
should be banned
 
Lothian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: No no he's not dead, he's, he's restin'
Posts: 13,403
Oooops it appears it was all part of Rudd's plan which May knew about.


The trouble with targets and limited /reducing resources to meet them is that the temptation is to pick the low hanging fruit as opposed to the most worthwhile cases.

Criminal cashpoint skimming gangs or Windrush pensioners who would be easier to find and deport?
Lothian is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2018, 05:37 AM   #55
Captain_Swoop
Penultimate Amazing
 
Captain_Swoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 15,774
Alexis Conran noted

Is it possible that Labour destroyed the Windrush documents in 2009 not out of malice but because Home Sec Alan Johnson thought it unimaginable that any future government could possibly be so vindictive as to start turfing out people who'd lived here and paid taxes for 40+ years?
Captain_Swoop is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2018, 05:55 AM   #56
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Moomin Valley
Posts: 12,706
Originally Posted by Lothian View Post
Oooops it appears it was all part of Rudd's plan which May knew about.


The trouble with targets and limited /reducing resources to meet them is that the temptation is to pick the low hanging fruit as opposed to the most worthwhile cases.

Criminal cashpoint skimming gangs or Windrush pensioners who would be easier to find and deport?
Bearing in mind, the Windrush pensioners were not even illegal in the first place.

It's all part of the government's heartless scheme to deprive people of their pensions and health care in old age. It knew perfectly well what was going on, and hoped no-one would notice. That is what is galling. Pretending it was all 'a mistake' and mumbling fake apologies. Worse still, blaming the civil servants like a true blackguard.
__________________
If man has no tea in him, he is incapable of understanding truth and beauty. ~ Japanese Proverb
Vixen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2018, 07:18 AM   #57
Garrison
Illuminator
 
Garrison's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,166
Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop View Post
Alexis Conran noted

Is it possible that Labour destroyed the Windrush documents in 2009 not out of malice but because Home Sec Alan Johnson thought it unimaginable that any future government could possibly be so vindictive as to start turfing out people who'd lived here and paid taxes for 40+ years?
I would go with that, Cameron in yet another panic to placate his backbenchers created a half assed immigration policy that in turn created pressure on official to make it seem to be working. Much like targeting the DACA recipients in the US it was so much easier to go after law abiding individuals than the people who knew they would be removed from the country if caught and thus did their best to stay under the radar.
__________________
So I've started a blog about my writing. Check it out at: http://fourth-planet-problem.blogspot.com/
And my first book is on Amazon: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B077W322FX
Garrison is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2018, 07:19 AM   #58
megaresp
Muse
 
megaresp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 715
The Home Office requires a standard of documentation of the people affected that it can't itself provide. It brings to mind a 'Family values' politician who fails to live up to the standards s/he demand of the rest of us.
__________________
I've been called a "Big Thinker", but curiously, only by people with a lisp.
megaresp is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2018, 02:57 PM   #59
Airfix
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 380
It's absolutely disgusting really, but it just shows how badly immigrants from the rest of the world have been treated in order to make room for an unlimited number of migrants from the EU, whilst trying to pretend that the government was reducing immigration.

You cannot "reduce" immigration, while allowing an unlimited number of white people free movement. You can only reduce immigration by adopting a fair system of immigration based on skills and quotas based on the needs of the employment market rather than on the nationalities of the people wanting to come. It is wholly unacceptable to deport a legal immigrant, who has not committed a crime.

Last edited by Airfix; 21st April 2018 at 02:58 PM.
Airfix is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd April 2018, 02:00 AM   #60
Information Analyst
Philosopher
 
Information Analyst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: London, UK.
Posts: 7,380
Originally Posted by Airfix View Post
It's absolutely disgusting really, but it just shows how badly immigrants from the rest of the world have been treated in order to make room for an unlimited number of migrants from the EU, whilst trying to pretend that the government was reducing immigration.

You cannot "reduce" immigration, while allowing an unlimited number of white people free movement. You can only reduce immigration by adopting a fair system of immigration based on skills and quotas based on the needs of the employment market rather than on the nationalities of the people wanting to come. It is wholly unacceptable to deport a legal immigrant, who has not committed a crime.
There's a certain irony in your objections, given that the Windrush migrants were benefitting from the freedom of movement that previously existed within the Commonwealth.
Information Analyst is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd April 2018, 02:09 AM   #61
Information Analyst
Philosopher
 
Information Analyst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: London, UK.
Posts: 7,380
Originally Posted by Airfix View Post
It's absolutely disgusting really, but it just shows how badly immigrants from the rest of the world have been treated in order to make room for an unlimited number of migrants from the EU, whilst trying to pretend that the government was reducing immigration.

You cannot "reduce" immigration, while allowing an unlimited number of white people free movement. You can only reduce immigration by adopting a fair system of immigration based on skills and quotas based on the needs of the employment market rather than on the nationalities of the people wanting to come. It is wholly unacceptable to deport a legal immigrant, who has not committed a crime.
There's a certain irony in your objections, given that the Windrush migrants were benefitting from the freedom of movement that previously existed within the Commonwealth.
Information Analyst is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd April 2018, 05:59 AM   #62
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 81,305
Originally Posted by Airfix View Post
It's absolutely disgusting really, but it just shows how badly immigrants from the rest of the world have been treated in order to make room for an unlimited number of migrants from the EU, whilst trying to pretend that the government was reducing immigration.

You cannot "reduce" immigration, while allowing an unlimited number of white people free movement. You can only reduce immigration by adopting a fair system of immigration based on skills and quotas based on the needs of the employment market rather than on the nationalities of the people wanting to come. It is wholly unacceptable to deport a legal immigrant, who has not committed a crime.
You may not be aware but there are a lot of EU citizens with the right to live anywhere in the EU who are not white!
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd April 2018, 07:13 AM   #63
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Moomin Valley
Posts: 12,706
It's helpful to be clear what we are talking about. The 1971 Immigration Act was intended to staunch the flow of immigrants and their dependents from the old Commonwealth countries, fuelled by populist Enoch Powell sentiment.

Joining the EU was state membership of a 'European Commonwealth', if you like, wherein member states promised free flow of movement, trade and labour for mutual benefit.

Next enter the Asylum Seekers from conflicts in the Middle East, mainly Syria, yet another group.

Their mass influx into Germany was probably one major cause of people voting Brexit, for fear of Angela Merkel expecting the UK to take some of their offload.

The problem is, the world is divided into haves and have-nots. Migration is largely for economic reasons. The early settlers from Pakistan and India, for example, never originally intended to settle in the UK, hence the men outnumbering the women enormously. Their aim was to send money back home from relatively well-paid jobs in the UK, especially around the West Midlands motor industry. (However, they soon were sending for their wives to join them once discussions started to tighten the Immigration Acts).

So, we have a world where the have-nots want to migrate to the lands of plenty (from their POV) coming up against the haves, in Western Europe and the North Americas, who are equally keen to keep them out.

Then there is the issue of massive overpopulation.

If there could be some way to redistribute the world's wealth and stem the near exponential increase in the world's population, people wouldn't want to migrate away from their own cultures, except for adventure, and imperialism, I guess.
__________________
If man has no tea in him, he is incapable of understanding truth and beauty. ~ Japanese Proverb
Vixen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd April 2018, 08:43 AM   #64
Captain_Swoop
Penultimate Amazing
 
Captain_Swoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 15,774
Son of Windrush immigrant threatened with deportation despite being born in the UK

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-a8313076.html

People who came to live here from New Zealand, Australia and Canada don’t appear to be having this problem. What must the determining factor be?

The right to automatic UK citizenship by birth no longer applies since the British Nationality Act 1981 came into force. Since 1983, a child born in the United Kingdom or British Territory needs to have at least one British or PR parent to acquire British citizenship.

Also the Immigration Act 2014 has the provision to remove citizenship.
It was sold on the back of scare stories over ISIS fighters returning to the UK.

Now we are starting to see the real intent.
Captain_Swoop is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd April 2018, 09:11 AM   #65
baron
Philosopher
 
baron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 6,045
Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop View Post
Son of Windrush immigrant threatened with deportation despite being born in the UK

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-a8313076.html

People who came to live here from New Zealand, Australia and Canada donít appear to be having this problem. What must the determining factor be?

The right to automatic UK citizenship by birth no longer applies since the British Nationality Act 1981 came into force. Since 1983, a child born in the United Kingdom or British Territory needs to have at least one British or PR parent to acquire British citizenship.

Also the Immigration Act 2014 has the provision to remove citizenship.
It was sold on the back of scare stories over ISIS fighters returning to the UK.

Now we are starting to see the real intent.
It's enough to criticise the governments based on the facts without manufacturing some mass ethnic cleansing conspiracy.
__________________
"I am a liar as well as a dwarf!"
baron is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd April 2018, 09:20 AM   #66
Captain_Swoop
Penultimate Amazing
 
Captain_Swoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 15,774
Conspiracy? It's Tory party dogma it always has been.
Captain_Swoop is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd April 2018, 10:44 AM   #67
Information Analyst
Philosopher
 
Information Analyst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: London, UK.
Posts: 7,380
Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop View Post
Son of Windrush immigrant threatened with deportation despite being born in the UK

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-a8313076.html

People who came to live here from New Zealand, Australia and Canada donít appear to be having this problem. What must the determining factor be?

The right to automatic UK citizenship by birth no longer applies since the British Nationality Act 1981 came into force. Since 1983, a child born in the United Kingdom or British Territory needs to have at least one British or PR parent to acquire British citizenship.
Which, of course, explains why "Jay, now in his twenties" isn't a British citizen by birth, so the article saying "despite being born in the UK" is misleading. Being born here stopped being enough before this unfortunate young man was born.

Quote:
Also the Immigration Act 2014 has the provision to remove citizenship.
It was sold on the back of scare stories over ISIS fighters returning to the UK.

Now we are starting to see the real intent.
Or the more usual occurrence that once new powers are available, those with them think of different ways to apply them than was originally intended.
Information Analyst is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd April 2018, 11:55 AM   #68
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Moomin Valley
Posts: 12,706
Originally Posted by Information Analyst View Post
Which, of course, explains why "Jay, now in his twenties" isn't a British citizen by birth, so the article saying "despite being born in the UK" is misleading. Being born here stopped being enough before this unfortunate young man was born.



Or the more usual occurrence that once new powers are available, those with them think of different ways to apply them than was originally intended.
The salient point here is that this man's mother was a 'Windrush' immigrant (pre-1971 and [presumably] legal). What seems to have happened which the article doesn't mention, but is mentioned in the OBSERVER is that children who were put into care should have had the local authority in whose care they were under establish their 'documentation', many apparently having omitted to do so, leading to a problem for children of Windrush parents taken into care.

I think British nationality has always been jus sanguine 'by bloodline' and ex-pats with at least one British grandparent could claim British citizenship, which is why those immigrants from Australia, Canada and South Africa have not experienced the same problem, because many of them do meet the 'Brit grandparent' criteria*, whereas the Caribbean/Indian ones post-1945 - 1971, probably do not.

I don't think Great Britain has ever been jus solis 'by soil' , unlike France or the USA, where being born in that country qualifies you for citizenship.

In the Scandinavian countries, IIRC, it is even more strict and applies to mother's bloodline, if you want automatic citizenship of those countries (I might be out of date here).


*Many of the others can only come here on limited visas of three or four years IIRC.
__________________
If man has no tea in him, he is incapable of understanding truth and beauty. ~ Japanese Proverb

Last edited by Vixen; 22nd April 2018 at 12:04 PM.
Vixen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd April 2018, 12:03 PM   #69
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Moomin Valley
Posts: 12,706
Originally Posted by Information Analyst View Post
[Previously posted in teh Brext thread in error]

It seems that the press has cottoned on that the landing cards should have been offered to the National Archives first...

The Times: Windrush landing card destruction angers historian [paywalled]

"The Home Office may have broken the law by destroying landing cards for passengers of the Windrush generation, a former adviser to the National Archives has said.

Bendor Grosvenor, an art historian and broadcaster who served as an official advisor to the National Archives for seven years, said that items of potentially historic importance were meant to be considered by the Archivesí Advisory Council on Public Records before destruction. While the Home Office was responsible for deciding whether to destroy records or archive them in Kew, southwest London, he said it should have sought advice from the panel."

Apparently, the National Archive has now located a few boxes of passenger list archives, which they believe could help.

Quote:
The claims of Windrush migrants struggling to prove their right to remain in Britain have been backed by tens of thousands of arrival records stored in the National Archives, it has emerged.

Ledgers recording the details of all passengers arriving at British ports from the late 19th century until 1960 are now known to include more than 85,000 from Caribbean countries such as Jamaica.

The material - which includes personal details of those who arrived in the UK on the Empire Windrush and other ships from 1948 - could provide vital evidence for those who have struggled to claim UK citizenship in the face of Home Office obstruction.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...migrants-case/
__________________
If man has no tea in him, he is incapable of understanding truth and beauty. ~ Japanese Proverb
Vixen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd April 2018, 01:45 PM   #70
Information Analyst
Philosopher
 
Information Analyst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: London, UK.
Posts: 7,380
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
The salient point here is that this man's mother was a 'Windrush' immigrant (pre-1971 and [presumably] legal). What seems to have happened which the article doesn't mention, but is mentioned in the OBSERVER is that children who were put into care should have had the local authority in whose care they were under establish their 'documentation', many apparently having omitted to do so, leading to a problem for children of Windrush parents taken into care.

I think British nationality has always been jus sanguine 'by bloodline' and ex-pats with at least one British grandparent could claim British citizenship, which is why those immigrants from Australia, Canada and South Africa have not experienced the same problem, because many of them do meet the 'Brit grandparent' criteria*, whereas the Caribbean/Indian ones post-1945 - 1971, probably do not.

I don't think Great Britain has ever been jus solis 'by soil' , unlike France or the USA, where being born in that country qualifies you for citizenship.

In the Scandinavian countries, IIRC, it is even more strict and applies to mother's bloodline, if you want automatic citizenship of those countries (I might be out of date here).

*Many of the others can only come here on limited visas of three or four years IIRC.
The point I was making was the headline saying "despite being born in the UK" is misleading, because simply being born in the UK has not been enough for some time (if it ever was).
Information Analyst is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd April 2018, 01:56 PM   #71
Information Analyst
Philosopher
 
Information Analyst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: London, UK.
Posts: 7,380
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Apparently, the National Archive has now located a few boxes of passenger list archives, which they believe could help.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...migrants-case/
Yes, these are the passenger lists I mentioned in post #17 five days ago. I've found some of the indexing to be a bit iffy in the past, but they've "always" been there, so any reporting suggesting they only just been "found" is misleading.
Information Analyst is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd April 2018, 03:01 PM   #72
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Moomin Valley
Posts: 12,706
Originally Posted by Information Analyst View Post
Yes, these are the passenger lists I mentioned in post #17 five days ago. I've found some of the indexing to be a bit iffy in the past, but they've "always" been there, so any reporting suggesting they only just been "found" is misleading.
I saw the page. I didn't realise it was the same thing. On the link it says the documents are in the possession of the Home Office, so Catch-22, if they've shredded them in the meantime.
__________________
If man has no tea in him, he is incapable of understanding truth and beauty. ~ Japanese Proverb
Vixen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd April 2018, 04:54 PM   #73
Dabop
Muse
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Oz
Posts: 615
Originally Posted by GlennB View Post
Nobody was asking them to. It was Theresa May's introduction of a hard-line attitude in the HO that led to newcomers there adopting a "gotcha" attitude, often to the disgust of established HO immigration staff.

Meanwhile "Home Office claims that the destruction of Windrush-era landing cards in 2010 had no impact on the rights of those individuals to stay in the UK have been dramatically undermined by the evidence of two new whistleblowers. "


Could you provide four documents per year, from 1973 to the present, to prove your residence (wherever that might be)? I was finishing Uni and starting work around that time but I'm damned if I could. My first mortgage in 1981 could be the start year for proving anything, and even then I have no idea how long that little Building Society archives their records, or whether it even still exists.

p.s. you're quite right about the phasing-in of pensionable age changes for women. They were introduced gradually.
Interestingly, I couldnt even prove I am a legal resident under those rules either, and I was born here (and like everyone in our family apart from my mum, dont have a passport either)
I couldnt even prove I live here this year under those rules

I wonder if May could 'prove' her eligibility to live in the UK by providing all the required documents- bet she couldnt....

__________________
It's a kind of a strawman thing in that it's exactly a strawman thing. Loss Leader

'When you're born into this world, you're given a ticket to the freak show. If you're born in America you get a front row seat.' George Carlin
Dabop is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd April 2018, 01:46 AM   #74
Captain_Swoop
Penultimate Amazing
 
Captain_Swoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 15,774
Story in the Times today
Adrian Bovelle, 56, has lived in the UK since 67. .Served in the army for 14 yrs and actually worked for the Home Office at the immigration removal centre in Dover.
He has been asked to prove his status and right to remain in the UK.
Has a Barbadian Passport with the indefinite leave to remain stamp in it but was told by officials that it could be a forgery. It was the second such incident in two years.
Captain_Swoop is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd April 2018, 01:48 AM   #75
Captain_Swoop
Penultimate Amazing
 
Captain_Swoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 15,774
Originally Posted by Dabop View Post
Interestingly, I couldnt even prove I am a legal resident under those rules either, and I was born here (and like everyone in our family apart from my mum, dont have a passport either)
I couldnt even prove I live here this year under those rules

I wonder if May could 'prove' her eligibility to live in the UK by providing all the required documents- bet she couldnt....

The company where my wife worked for years until the start of the year asked all staff to prove their right to work in the UK.
She is working in the town where she was born and went to school with her manager.
They will only accept a passport as proof.
Her only passport is one that expired in the early 90s and is under her maiden name.They wouldn't accept it.
In the end they relaxed their requirements and will take a full birth certificate and photo driving license.

A colleague had problems wit the birth certificate as she was adopted as a baby and doesn't have a full certificate with the birth parents names on it so they wouldn't accept it.
Captain_Swoop is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd April 2018, 03:01 AM   #76
Information Analyst
Philosopher
 
Information Analyst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: London, UK.
Posts: 7,380
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
I saw the page. I didn't realise it was the same thing. On the link it says the documents are in the possession of the Home Office, so Catch-22, if they've shredded them in the meantime.
The Telegraph piece describes them as "ship's landing lists," but they're clearly the ship passenger lists. The report states:

"Ledgers recording the details of all passengers arriving at British ports from the late 19th century until 1960 are now known to include more than 85,000 from Caribbean countries such as Jamaica."

The NA's research guides on them is here, and states:

"The majority of inward passenger lists from 1878 to 1960 and outward passenger lists from 1890 to 1960 have survived. There are very few records in The National Archives of passengers before 1878."

So, yes, these are basically the same records, but the originals have been at Kew for a long time. I've consulted them myself from time to time, but they've also been transcribed and are available on Ancestry for a fee. I doubt the Archives would trust the Home Office with anything other than a link to the digital versions, not least because the originals are regularly consulted by researchers at Kew. This, for example, is the catalogue entry for HMT Empire Windrush's arrival from Kingston in 1948. They're also mention in this 2011 BBC guide to tracing Caribbean ancestry.

Last edited by Information Analyst; 23rd April 2018 at 03:19 AM.
Information Analyst is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd April 2018, 03:06 AM   #77
Information Analyst
Philosopher
 
Information Analyst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: London, UK.
Posts: 7,380
Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop View Post
Story in the Times today
Adrian Bovelle, 56, has lived in the UK since 67. .Served in the army for 14 yrs and actually worked for the Home Office at the immigration removal centre in Dover.
He has been asked to prove his status and right to remain in the UK.
Has a Barbadian Passport with the indefinite leave to remain stamp in it but was told by officials that it could be a forgery. It was the second such incident in two years.
It's fairly obvious that the Home Office have been under such pressure to deport as many people as possible, that they're being ridiculously over-zealous with the low-hanging fruit. It's beyond clutching at straws of them, though, having presumably destroyed their records of who had ILR, to start claiming that their own passport stamps could be forgeries.
Information Analyst is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd April 2018, 04:14 AM   #78
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Moomin Valley
Posts: 12,706
Originally Posted by Dabop View Post
Interestingly, I couldnt even prove I am a legal resident under those rules either, and I was born here (and like everyone in our family apart from my mum, dont have a passport either)
I couldnt even prove I live here this year under those rules

I wonder if May could 'prove' her eligibility to live in the UK by providing all the required documents- bet she couldnt....

Exactly, Dabop.

If the local authorities didn't realise they needed to 'document' children leaving care, how are the careleavers supposed to know?
__________________
If man has no tea in him, he is incapable of understanding truth and beauty. ~ Japanese Proverb
Vixen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd April 2018, 04:22 AM   #79
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Moomin Valley
Posts: 12,706
Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop View Post
Story in the Times today
Adrian Bovelle, 56, has lived in the UK since 67. .Served in the army for 14 yrs and actually worked for the Home Office at the immigration removal centre in Dover.
He has been asked to prove his status and right to remain in the UK.
Has a Barbadian Passport with the indefinite leave to remain stamp in it but was told by officials that it could be a forgery. It was the second such incident in two years.
Echoes of the paranoia surrounding Jews in Hitler's Germany. An exhibition at British Library a few years ago on propaganda showed a similar obsession of 'identifying the aliens amongst us, based on superficial physical features'.

People's noses were being measured and many swore they could spot a Jew or suspect one. It's not very different from landlords', employers', NHS staff's (now acting as quasi-border guards for the Home Office) suspicions. They have a stereotypical vision in their minds of what an illegal immigrant looks like, thus feel an urge to wrongly report certain people if they represent themselves as British.
__________________
If man has no tea in him, he is incapable of understanding truth and beauty. ~ Japanese Proverb

Last edited by Vixen; 23rd April 2018 at 04:30 AM.
Vixen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd April 2018, 04:29 AM   #80
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Moomin Valley
Posts: 12,706
Originally Posted by Information Analyst View Post
It's fairly obvious that the Home Office have been under such pressure to deport as many people as possible, that they're being ridiculously over-zealous with the low-hanging fruit. It's beyond clutching at straws of them, though, having presumably destroyed their records of who had ILR, to start claiming that their own passport stamps could be forgeries.
I am not even sure it is over-zealousness.

The more I hear about this issue, the more and more it reads as open calculated callousness, not dissimilar to the treatment of the disabled or those having their benefits or pensions removed, when even a simpleton would realise this will cause distress to the affected.

I initially thought it was 'just a mistake', but it just gets worse and worse.

It is embarrassing.
__________________
If man has no tea in him, he is incapable of understanding truth and beauty. ~ Japanese Proverb
Vixen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Non-USA & General Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:05 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.