Members on the London Assembly today backed calls for a scheme to allow so-called irregular migrants “who have been in the UK for many years” to earn UK citizenship.
Assembly Members were voting on a motion brought put forward by Green Party AM Darren Johnson which called on the Mayor to join the Assembly in urging the UK Government to introduce “a one-off, time-limited, earned regularisation of suitable irregular migrants, many of whom live and work in London, which would allow those who have been in the UK for many years to be admitted to a two-year pathway to citizenship.”
The motion was backed by a coalition of Labour, Liberal Democrat and Green AMs with sources close to Labour attempting to embarrass Conservatives on the Assembly for voting against the motion alongside BNP member Richard Barnbrook.
However Conservative AM Roger Evans told MayorWatch his group “believe the policy is unworkable without more details and stronger border controls to deal with the inevitable spike of people who would be tempted to follow the regularised migrants. In fact I expressed my sympathy and offered to discuss more constructive ways forward with the other parties. The government have not implemented the scheme for similar reasons.”
Evans added that “Barnbrook voted the same way but I don’t see why his decision should dictate the position taken by anyone else.”
anon says
October 8, 2008 at 9:38 pm“sources close to Labour attempting to embarrass Conservatives on the Assembly for voting against the motion alongside BNP member Richard Barnbrook”
surely the conservatives did enough to embarrass themselves by voting with barnbrook???
Viz says
October 9, 2008 at 2:27 amI can’t see what’s wrong with allowing decent people who have lived here for donkeys’ year to follow a pathway to earn their rights to live as the rest of us.
My only explanation is selfishness only and nothing else: some people don’t give a damn what’s happening to their neighbours as long as they are fine. Nobody is here forever -live and let live
Roger Evans says
October 9, 2008 at 8:18 amSo every time Barnbrook votes one way we’ve all got to vote the other way regardless?
That’s giving him far more influence than he deserves – it’s also puerile and Londoners have a right to expect more maturity from members.
No wonder the first comment and the ‘sources close to Labour’ want to remain anonymous. They should grow up.
bertie bert says
October 9, 2008 at 10:05 amA good number of Conservatives never even bothered to turn up.
anon , and what exactly is that supposed to mean, please enlighten us.
shadi says
October 9, 2008 at 10:20 pmi think every body in the world deserve to have a safe life and if people from other country are here to save their live and still dont have it .they should have chance to try and see how much they can bring to this country.
Adam says
October 9, 2008 at 10:37 pm‘every body in the world deserve to have a safe life’
nice sentiment but it’s not down to us to provide a nice life to everyone in the world.
jeff says
October 10, 2008 at 3:27 pmRoger – why did half your group conveniently leave the chamber just before the vote was taken? anything to do with embarrassment?
and… are you not embarrassed that,according to the evening standard today, barnbrook said you “took the words out of his mouth” with your speech?
Cllr Colin Smith (Bromley) says
October 10, 2008 at 5:12 pmRoger,
Again. Well done. Totally common sense correct decision. Whether AM Barnbrook concurs is irrelevant.
Please continue to ignore the opposition and their silly games. It’s well gone time that someone stood up and challenged this nonsense head on.
You can see from ‘jeff’s’ perjorative use of ‘your’ that he’s just another opposition troll.
Roger Evans says
October 10, 2008 at 10:44 pmJeff, only two of my group left just before the vote was taken, which is not even a fifth – I guess you weren’t there, so we must view your comment in that light.
Colin – thank you for your support. Gesture politics is going to get short shrift from me.
As for Barnbrook, if the government really didn’t want him, why did they introduce proportional representation? It’s not as if nobody warned them…
Thomas the Taxi says
October 11, 2008 at 6:13 amProportional representation was introduced because the Government knew without it, the Greens would never get a seat on the Assembly.
Now it’s backfired, you have to put up with the consequences.
David Akin-Samuels says
November 22, 2008 at 4:16 pmI strongly support the idea of amnesty for those who are in the first instance at work and who can show clearly that they are able to earn enough to keep themselves, I think if they are given five years to stay in the UK and after whichs their records should be checked for any crime or offence, then they could be given ILR (without benefit) for another five years. I am willing to work with the Mayor on this study (if given the opportunity).
Jason says
November 23, 2008 at 2:58 amComing to a country illegally and working without a visa is a criminal offence.
Robbing banks is a criminal offence.
Would you give a bank robber amnesty because he has been doing the same job for a few years?
Giving illegal immigrants amnesty is rewarding people for braking the law. By giving illegal immigrants in London amnesty, you are inviting all the illegal immigrants in the country to come to London.
Also you are putting out a message to others illegal immigrants abroad to come here, because there is hope they will eventually be able to stay.
If you don’t want to be seen voting the same way as the BNP then scrap proportional representation. That way you will get rid of all the loony parties as Thomas said earlier.
Roger Evans says
November 23, 2008 at 11:21 pmPersonally I would like to see PR scrapped, as it weakens government and creates higher cost pressures, as the administration buy off minority parties with taxpayers’ money.
A London Assembly without PR would probably be Labour more often than Conservative, considering the demographics of the capital. The Lib Dems might get some seats from South West London, the Greens and BNP would not be elected.
Peter Hulme Cross says
November 24, 2008 at 5:08 pmThis is what Roger Evans wrote on 15th May this year…
“And BNP man Barnbrook has taken up residence…. He raised a number of challenges at the assembly AGM and clearly sees himself as some sort of enfant terrible. However much we detest his views, he was democratically elected and has a right to play a full part in assembly committees, so we wait to see how he will interpret his role. He supported green member Darren Johnson in his bid to be deputy chair of the assembly…”
Has Roger changed his view since then?? It sounds as though he would like to see only Labour and Conservatives on the Assembly with the odd Lib Dem thrown in for good measure. That is what would happen if the Proportional Representation (PR) vote was abolished. It would hardly represent the different views among the Capital’s population and would make the Assembly Oh! so very dull and predictable.
Has Roger forgotten that while the Conservatives lost one Constituency seat last May, namely Bob Blackman in Harrow, they gained three PR seats, presumably from people voting Conservative across the board. So they did rather well out of PR after all.
Jim bob says
November 24, 2008 at 8:27 pmPeter,
Why do you assume that Tory or Labour assembly members cannot represent the views of the population of London.
Why should we be served by members who don’t have a real grasp on reality, like the Greens and the BMP. If your party put you up for election and you don’t get elected that’s what you’re constituents want and you don’t get a seat. Why then should you be given a free seat that you cant win under your own agenda?
I live in Harrow and Cllr Blackman never lost his seat because he was a Tory. He lost his seat because the constituents thought he was not doing a good enough job on their behalf. We vote you in, so we can vote you out. Surely that’s what true democracy brings, accountability!