West Ham Online

XKhammer wrote: ↑16 Nov 2025, 12:13

Mike Oxsaw" wrote: ↑16 Nov 2025, 11:32

XKhammer wrote: ↑16 Nov 2025, 11:09

Your very lucky l ain't a grass unlike you when worked TV detector vans..ironically lol 

You fall for it every time. You NEED to fall for it every time. You're clearly MY bitch.

Any chance of you showing respect for your fellow posters and moving this grudge onto PM instead of spamming up every thread?

"Enter at own risk"...did you read that on thread title?
Plus I'm making fair point about digital ID cards which I'm all for and clearly you're not which l understand would financially affect you 
Sorry if this triggers and upsets you....actually I'm not Sorry at all its hilarious 

Mike Oxsaw" wrote: ↑16 Nov 2025, 11:32

XKhammer wrote: ↑16 Nov 2025, 11:09

Mike Oxsaw" wrote: ↑16 Nov 2025, 09:12

And we can all see that you have absolutely zero knowledge and experience of living and working abroad.

Incidentally, all UK pensioners are specifically excluded from being required to hold a Karmercard, so how would that impact me?

Your very lucky l ain't a grass unlike you when worked TV detector vans..ironically lol 

You fall for it every time. You NEED to fall for it every time. You're clearly MY bitch.

Any chance of you showing respect for your fellow posters and moving this grudge onto PM instead of spamming up every thread?

XKhammer wrote: ↑16 Nov 2025, 11:09

Mike Oxsaw" wrote: ↑16 Nov 2025, 09:12

XKhammer wrote: ↑16 Nov 2025, 09:02

We all know why you don't want the digital ID cards because it would catch you out wouldn't it!

And we can all see that you have absolutely zero knowledge and experience of living and working abroad.

Incidentally, all UK pensioners are specifically excluded from being required to hold a Karmercard, so how would that impact me?

Your very lucky l ain't a grass unlike you when worked TV detector vans..ironically lol 

Mike Oxsaw" wrote: ↑16 Nov 2025, 09:12

XKhammer wrote: ↑16 Nov 2025, 09:02

Mike Oxsaw" wrote: ↑16 Nov 2025, 08:28

 

If they have a legitimate job offer and are sponsored by the employer, no problem, but there's already an immigration channel/path set up for such cases.

Additionally, there's probably a legal requirement for councils to address homelessness and these illegal immigrants would be the easiest to deal with, and doing so hits targets/ticks boxes.

On the issue if ID cards, no it won't help if (IF) someone is working cash-in-hand below the radar, and the CPS is already overwhelmed with a backlog of cases, so even if it is introduced in theory, in practice it would probably take many years for such cases to reach the review and assessment stage.

If someone can't get work, given that they've already committed an offence by entering the country, it wouldn't be that surprising if a fair percentage of these people turn to (more) crime for support if they can't work (but are free to wander around the community to commit that crime). Guaranteed that such data won't be available though.

And the one-in-one out policy has already been identified as flawed, so that's another waste of taxpayers' money; add in the fact that France doesn't seem too keen to keep such people within it's own national boundaries and it's clear that the solution needs to be 100% home-grown and home-driven.

As for reallocation of resources, the NHS has got to find 1 billion (1 BILLION!!!) pounds to pay for the redundancy of a handful of managers and administrators. Instead of paying them off, open up an avenue for these people to move into a department that helps address illegal immigration and there's an instant win-win for the government (but not the State).

We all know why you don't want the digital ID cards because it would catch you out wouldn't it!

And we can all see that you have absolutely zero knowledge and experience of living and working abroad.

Incidentally, all UK pensioners are specifically excluded from being required to hold a Karmercard, so how would that impact me?

XKhammer wrote: ↑16 Nov 2025, 09:02

Mike Oxsaw" wrote: ↑16 Nov 2025, 08:28

Fauxstralian wrote: ↑16 Nov 2025, 07:43 Mike
Isnt the concern people coming in and getting benefits & housing rather than them coming in and working?

Apart from acknowledging that anyone travelling from France (ie a safe country) isn’t a refugee you don’t think making refugee status a temporary thing isn’t an improvement?
Or that introducing a Digital ID  & prosecuting anyone employing someone without one also would help

More resources are obviously needed
Perhaps in the modern era of communications we could decrease the number of MP’s from 600 to 60 & the rest could be employed rooting out illegal workers. 

 

If they have a legitimate job offer and are sponsored by the employer, no problem, but there's already an immigration channel/path set up for such cases.

Additionally, there's probably a legal requirement for councils to address homelessness and these illegal immigrants would be the easiest to deal with, and doing so hits targets/ticks boxes.

On the issue if ID cards, no it won't help if (IF) someone is working cash-in-hand below the radar, and the CPS is already overwhelmed with a backlog of cases, so even if it is introduced in theory, in practice it would probably take many years for such cases to reach the review and assessment stage.

If someone can't get work, given that they've already committed an offence by entering the country, it wouldn't be that surprising if a fair percentage of these people turn to (more) crime for support if they can't work (but are free to wander around the community to commit that crime). Guaranteed that such data won't be available though.

And the one-in-one out policy has already been identified as flawed, so that's another waste of taxpayers' money; add in the fact that France doesn't seem too keen to keep such people within it's own national boundaries and it's clear that the solution needs to be 100% home-grown and home-driven.

As for reallocation of resources, the NHS has got to find 1 billion (1 BILLION!!!) pounds to pay for the redundancy of a handful of managers and administrators. Instead of paying them off, open up an avenue for these people to move into a department that helps address illegal immigration and there's an instant win-win for the government (but not the State).

We all know why you don't want the digital ID cards because it would catch you out wouldn't it!

Mike Oxsaw" wrote: ↑16 Nov 2025, 08:28

Fauxstralian wrote: ↑16 Nov 2025, 07:43 Mike
Isnt the concern people coming in and getting benefits & housing rather than them coming in and working?

Apart from acknowledging that anyone travelling from France (ie a safe country) isn’t a refugee you don’t think making refugee status a temporary thing isn’t an improvement?
Or that introducing a Digital ID  & prosecuting anyone employing someone without one also would help

More resources are obviously needed
Perhaps in the modern era of communications we could decrease the number of MP’s from 600 to 60 & the rest could be employed rooting out illegal workers. 

 

If they have a legitimate job offer and are sponsored by the employer, no problem, but there's already an immigration channel/path set up for such cases.

Additionally, there's probably a legal requirement for councils to address homelessness and these illegal immigrants would be the easiest to deal with, and doing so hits targets/ticks boxes.

On the issue if ID cards, no it won't help if (IF) someone is working cash-in-hand below the radar, and the CPS is already overwhelmed with a backlog of cases, so even if it is introduced in theory, in practice it would probably take many years for such cases to reach the review and assessment stage.

If someone can't get work, given that they've already committed an offence by entering the country, it wouldn't be that surprising if a fair percentage of these people turn to (more) crime for support if they can't work (but are free to wander around the community to commit that crime). Guaranteed that such data won't be available though.

And the one-in-one out policy has already been identified as flawed, so that's another waste of taxpayers' money; add in the fact that France doesn't seem too keen to keep such people within it's own national boundaries and it's clear that the solution needs to be 100% home-grown and home-driven.

As for reallocation of resources, the NHS has got to find 1 billion (1 BILLION!!!) pounds to pay for the redundancy of a handful of managers and administrators. Instead of paying them off, open up an avenue for these people to move into a department that helps address illegal immigration and there's an instant win-win for the government (but not the State).

Fauxstralian wrote: ↑16 Nov 2025, 07:43 Mike
Isnt the concern people coming in and getting benefits & housing rather than them coming in and working?

Apart from acknowledging that anyone travelling from France (ie a safe country) isn’t a refugee you don’t think making refugee status a temporary thing isn’t an improvement?
Or that introducing a Digital ID  & prosecuting anyone employing someone without one also would help

More resources are obviously needed
Perhaps in the modern era of communications we could decrease the number of MP’s from 600 to 60 & the rest could be employed rooting out illegal workers. 

Fauxstralian wrote: ↑16 Nov 2025, 07:43 Mike
Isnt the concern people coming in and getting benefits & housing rather than them coming in and working?

Apart from acknowledging that anyone travelling from France (ie a safe country) isn’t a refugee you don’t think making refugee status a temporary thing isn’t an improvement?
Or that introducing a Digital ID  & prosecuting anyone employing someone without one also would help

More resources are obviously needed
Perhaps in the modern era of communications we could decrease the number of MP’s from 600 to 60 & the rest could be employed rooting out illegal workers. 

1. The government lacks the resources to chase down and deport all who arrive. The State/Establishment certainly lack the enthusiasm to do so,
2. Those arriving know they can easily find work in the black/grey economy, out of sight of any authority,
3. There are people (legally) in the country knowledgeable enough on the way things work to get around any legal/authoritarian restrictions and make a fast buck themselves while doing so.

Fauxstralian wrote: ↑15 Nov 2025, 11:55 Of course
Starmer Sunak Truss Johnson & Cameron … probably the worst 5 PM’s in living memory. 

This government has been as dithering & incompetent as the last
Starmer is supposed to be a Kings Counsel so you’d expect some charisma & eloquence but he is a gibbering confused mess
Reeves is promoted well beyond her competence & this delayed budget & flip flopping is beyond belief 
I hear the latest wheeze is restricting salary sacrifice into pensions so people are less likely to provide for their own retirement. All while politicians sit on gold plated pensions
They are all dismal which could see an even worse result … the idiot Farage
What a time to be alive 

Pshyco scored all 4" wrote: ↑15 Nov 2025, 15:18 And farage is a fucking traitor. 

Nurse Ratched" wrote: ↑15 Nov 2025, 12:26

Fauxstralian wrote: ↑15 Nov 2025, 11:55 Of course
Starmer Sunak Truss Johnson & Cameron … probably the worst 5 PM’s in living memory. 

This government has been as dithering & incompetent as the last
Starmer is supposed to be a Kings Counsel so you’d expect some charisma & eloquence but he is a gibbering confused mess
Reeves is promoted well beyond her competence & this delayed budget & flip flopping is beyond belief 
I hear the latest wheeze is restricting salary sacrifice into pensions so people are less likely to provide for their own retirement. All while politicians sit on gold plated pensions
They are all dismal which could see an even worse result … the idiot Farage
What a time to be alive 

"Starmer is supposed to be a Kings Counsel so you’d expect some charisma & eloquence but he is a gibbering confused mess"

I've made this point before. It blows my mind how dull he is. I've known barristers socially, and although they are slippery, disingenuous buggers, they are not short on wit and charisma. I wonder how much time Starmer actually spent in court, as opposed to background managerial stuff. I just can't see him being successful at trial. 

Fauxstralian wrote: ↑15 Nov 2025, 10:24 It was hard given the Tories were in power for 14 years
How did THEY get on?

Fauxstralian wrote: ↑15 Nov 2025, 11:55 Of course
Starmer Sunak Truss Johnson & Cameron … probably the worst 5 PM’s in living memory. 

This government has been as dithering & incompetent as the last
Starmer is supposed to be a Kings Counsel so you’d expect some charisma & eloquence but he is a gibbering confused mess
Reeves is promoted well beyond her competence & this delayed budget & flip flopping is beyond belief 
I hear the latest wheeze is restricting salary sacrifice into pensions so people are less likely to provide for their own retirement. All while politicians sit on gold plated pensions
They are all dismal which could see an even worse result … the idiot Farage
What a time to be alive 

only1billybonds wrote: ↑15 Nov 2025, 11:21 Yes Sven, the Tories were as equally useless as this lot. But that was then, they can only blame the past for so long and then they realise its now their shit to not out. In a few short months we have gone from all being labelled as far right for expressing concerns over illegal immigration to we're getting this sorted.
Disingenuous scum the lot of them.

THUNDERCLINT wrote: ↑15 Nov 2025, 09:53 Asylum no longer to be granted permanently apparently. And that needs to be applied retroactively to every asylum claim since it's inception.

Kweer is absolutely shitting himself.