Illegal Immigrants in the United Kingdom

[Coito ergo sum]

(This thread was created as an outgrowth of http://www.rationalia.com/forum/viewtop ... 22&t=35056 - several Ratzians have criticized a proposal that would modify California law to make sure that illegal immigrants in the US are not issued drivers licenses there, and are not given college or other public benefits for free -- that proposed law was varyingly described as racist, garbage, shit, and all sorts of things - those not opposing that proposed law were described as selfish and not willing to "share" -- when it was brought up that the UK and every other western democracy has similar restrictions already -- the comment was made that the thread was not about the UK, but California -- so, here is a thread about the UK's immigration law)

So, as I understand it, the UK has an immigration system which has requirements. Non-UK-ers apply to enter and apply to live there, and if they meet the requirements for living there, they get approved, and if they don't they don't. My understanding is that they need permission to work there too. I also understand that the UK police can check citizenship status and if a person is not legally in the country, they will put the person in jail, process them, and then put them on a plain back to their home country.

In addition, they do not extend NHS benefits or other public benefits like college admission/tuition and driving licenses to illegal immigrants.

Are these UK practices as awful as the California proposal? Or, is there a difference?

[MrJonno]

Illegal immigrants have the 'right' to emergency healthcare (they can still be billed for it but rarely happens) and access to legal representation regarding their immigration status and any other aspect of the legal system. Thats it and thats all they should have.

Genuine asyslum seekers and anyone who wants to be a legal immigrant (I'm quite happy to take anyone who is prepared to leave their country for a better life as they are highly likely to work hard) is a different matter

[Coito ergo sum]

Illegal immigrants have the 'right' to emergency healthcare (they can still be billed for it but rarely happens) and access to legal representation regarding their immigration status and any other aspect of the legal system. Thats it and thats all they should have.

Genuine asyslum seekers and anyone who wants to be a legal immigrant (I'm quite happy to take anyone who is prepared to leave their country for a better life as they are highly likely to work hard) is a different matter

That is the way it is in the US too.

[Rum]

Immigration between EU countries is open and the labour market available to all its citizens. There are increasingly strict rules for non-EU immigrants though and quite right too. I say that not because of any racist view but simply - well have you seen how effing crowded the south of England is!?

Our borders are leaky as hell though and in London and surrounds there is a great deal of illegal working. Indeed some take the view that the economy of some areas would not function without super low wage workers from poorer parts of the world.

The NHS is free to anyone who turns up and needs medical assistance. Questions aren't generally asked.

[Bella Fortuna]

There are increasingly strict rules for non-EU immigrants though and quite right too.

Don't I know it.

[MrJonno]

Immigration between EU countries is open and the labour market available to all its citizens. There are increasingly strict rules for non-EU immigrants though and quite right too. I say that not because of any racist view but simply - well have you seen how effing crowded the south of England is!?

Our borders are leaky as hell though and in London and surrounds there is a great deal of illegal working. Indeed some take the view that the economy of some areas would not function without super low wage workers from poorer parts of the world.

The NHS is free to anyone who turns up and needs medical assistance. Questions aren't generally asked.

I believe the NHS can ask questions but rarely does, if you register with a GP you are required to show proof of address/identity through that doesnt show immigration status. In a joint up public systems they would be able to check

[Rum]

There are increasingly strict rules for non-EU immigrants though and quite right too.

Don't I know it.

I can manage 3.00 and hour if you are looking for an illegal housekeeper job!

[Coito ergo sum]

Immigration between EU countries is open and the labour market available to all its citizens.

Same as among US States. There are no travel restrictions or work restrictions applicable to moving among the US states.

There are increasingly strict rules for non-EU immigrants though and quite right too. I say that not because of any racist view but simply - well have you seen how effing crowded the south of England is!?

Such an attitude on the California thread had folks labeled racist and pretty scornful rebukes about selfishness were bandied about.

Our borders are leaky as hell though and in London and surrounds there is a great deal of illegal working. Indeed some take the view that the economy of some areas would not function without super low wage workers from poorer parts of the world.

This is the same argument made in the US too about illegal workers.

The NHS is free to anyone who turns up and needs medical assistance. Questions aren't generally asked.

Free in emergency situations, yes? Don't medical providers have to verify eligibility for NHS care in non-emergency situations? That was my understanding, based on the fact that non-UK-ers often have "not eligible for NHS" lingo on their travel documents when legally in the UK. It would seem quite incongruous for the UK to take better care of illegal folks than it does legal folks.

[Rum]

Free in emergency situations, yes? Don't medical providers have to verify eligibility for NHS care in non-emergency situations? That was my understanding, based on the fact that non-UK-ers often have "not eligible for NHS" lingo on their travel documents when legally in the UK. It would seem quite incongruous for the UK to take better care of illegal folks than it does legal folks.

To be clear - none of my views about immigration are about race. Or economics come to that.

As to the availability of health care - well it is hard to imagine any GP here refusing treatment for whatever reason. The mindset here is one of universalism. I suppose it may be different in areas where potential illegal immigration is at its most common though. Dover comes to mind -where there has at times been huge pressure on the port in terms of illegal entry.

[MrJonno]

Free in emergency situations, yes? Don't medical providers have to verify eligibility for NHS care in non-emergency situations? That was my understanding, based on the fact that non-UK-ers often have "not eligible for NHS" lingo on their travel documents when legally in the UK. It would seem quite incongruous for the UK to take better care of illegal folks than it does legal folks.

Its not free even in emergency to people without residence status or medical treaties between countries (Australians don't have to pay medical bills while visiting here and we don't have to pay when going to Australia). Treatment is given regardless of status but if there is reason to suspect illegal status you could in theory be billed through it doesnt happen that often (if you have an American accent its a lot more likely as its relatively difficult for an American to get such a status).

Most UK hospitals don't have big billing departments so the effort in catching people may be morally sound doesnt make too much economic sense (sueing a penniless illegal immigrant is pretty pointless)

I don't think many countries even with universal healthcare give free treatment to foreigners, I had a $50k Canadian bill when I was mugged there but holiday medical insurance covered it (they were very nice and asked for my credit card after 3 days in hospital).

While I might critise the American system for not ensuring all its citizens regardless of income get decent healthcare no country can be expected to supply it non-citizens (bar emergencies).

The UK is also known to do random car stops in high crime areas that just happen to have people from the immigration department there to cooperate with the police

[Coito ergo sum]

Free in emergency situations, yes? Don't medical providers have to verify eligibility for NHS care in non-emergency situations? That was my understanding, based on the fact that non-UK-ers often have "not eligible for NHS" lingo on their travel documents when legally in the UK. It would seem quite incongruous for the UK to take better care of illegal folks than it does legal folks.

To be clear - none of my views about immigration are about race. Or economics come to that.

I would never assume that they were. Such assumptions were made against those of us who were comfortable with a very British-like approach. The current American approach is much more liberal -- public benefits extended liberally to illegal immigrants, college admission and even tuition assistance, drivers licenses issued in many states (including California), etc.

As to the availability of health care - well it is hard to imagine any GP here refusing treatment for whatever reason. The mindset here is one of universalism. I suppose it may be different in areas where potential illegal immigration is at its most common though. Dover comes to mind -where there has at times been huge pressure on the port in terms of illegal entry.

I'm talking about the law, rather than mindset. I did the googles earlier about this, and found that UK law prohibits illegal immigrants from accessing NHS, absent emergency. I'll have to pull the link.

[Coito ergo sum]

Free in emergency situations, yes? Don't medical providers have to verify eligibility for NHS care in non-emergency situations? That was my understanding, based on the fact that non-UK-ers often have "not eligible for NHS" lingo on their travel documents when legally in the UK. It would seem quite incongruous for the UK to take better care of illegal folks than it does legal folks.

Its not free even in emergency to people without residence status or medical treaties between countries (Australians don't have to pay medical bills while visiting here and we don't have to pay when going to Australia). Treatment is given regardless of status but if there is reason to suspect illegal status you could in theory be billed through it doesnt happen that often (if you have an American accent its a lot more likely as its relatively difficult for an American to get such a status).

Interesting -- decisions based on "accent."

Most UK hospitals don't have big billing departments so the effort in catching people may be morally sound doesnt make too much economic sense (sueing a penniless illegal immigrant is pretty pointless)

I don't think many countries even with universal healthcare give free treatment to foreigners, I had a $50k Canadian bill when I was mugged there but holiday medical insurance covered it (they were very nice and asked for my credit card after 3 days in hospital).

You mean ** gasp ** Canada did not extend free medical care?

My gosh -- we need to lecture the Canadians on the virtues of sharing. On the California thread, we were told that Americans were selfish for not sharing, and giving free health care and other free public benefits, and drivers licenses, to illegal aliens.

I wonder why the disconnect. It seems that what most folks seem to view as normal and non-atrocious when it comes to other western countries, quite often receive cries and accusations of racism, selfishness and draconian anti-immigration sentiment....

While I might critise the American system for not ensuring all its citizens regardless of income get decent healthcare no country can be expected to supply it non-citizens (bar emergencies).

The UK is also known to do random car stops in high crime areas that just happen to have people from the immigration department there to cooperate with the police

According to my googles of the subject, the UK may check the citizenship of anyone taken into custody, and when they are found to be illegally in the country, they are put in detention, processed, and sent to their country of citizenship (without even the courtesy of being allowed back to their flat to collect their personal effects).

[MrJonno]

According to my googles of the subject, the UK may check the citizenship of anyone taken into custody, and when they are found to be illegally in the country, they are put in detention, processed, and sent to their country of citizenship (without even the courtesy of being allowed back to their flat to collect their personal effects).

Sounds reasonable to me, they might even on a good day check if you have a criminal record or any outstanding arrest warrants.

As for accents and health care you do know there is no difference between American and Canadian accents to someone who is British. There are loads of people of African decent (in the last few generations as opposed to million years or so) who are resident/permanent citizens in the UK there are relatively few people from America who do through students/people with work visa's get full access to the NHS.

Who are these people having ago at US immigration policy anyway, is there a problem with the police shooting unarmed illegal immigrants trying to go across the border (I would have moral issues with that) or civilian vigilantes doing the same thing (seen Hollywood movies where that happens but no idea if it happens in real life). Immigration isnt like abortion or guns which are basically American only issues its pretty universal problem for every country on Earth

[Coito ergo sum]

See the link I provided in the first thread.

No, there is no problem with police shooting unarmed illegal immigrants. There is a problem with people crossing the border from Mexico and shooting American civilians and border patrol agents.

In the US police can't even check a person's immigration status. The federal government is suing the State of Arizona right now for trying to enact a law that would allow State police to check citizenship of someone they took into custody for a criminal offense (no mere suspicionless stops for paper-checking). On the other thread, the discussion is about California enacting a rule that would require state law enforcement to honor a federal government request to turn over an illegal immigrant taken into custody who has been ordered deported -- the California law would require that illegal immigrants be denied driving licenses and be denied most non-emergency public benefits. That sort of thing - common in Canada, the UK and all of western Europe -- is apparently unacceptable in the US (it's selfish, racist and not in accord with basic values of "sharing").

[MrJonno]

From what I've seen on the internet most the people who object to these laws are Americans themselves who don't want America to become like evil police state Europe not Europeans.

Lots of Europeans countries require ID cards to be carried which while I wouldnt be happy about this doesn't even become close to being a police state.

Whats this about illegal immigrants wanting driving licenses anyway why don't they just drive without one which is what most illegals do in the UK (applying for one is a good way of getting caught)