Immigrants must improve English in two-and-a-half years or face deportation

[r3gul8r]

As an officer that works along the southwest border, I don't understand how we don't enforce something like this.

There's US citizens crossing the border on a daily basis that don't even speak English. It's such a joke how we cater to the Spanish language in this country.

[Kalis]

How do immigrants benefit from getting kicked out if they don't speak english?

The idea is not to kick anybody out as it is a pain in the arse to do so.

We have problems and in order to ensure that we don't have continuing problems, we have legislation in place to resolve the issue. If they refuse to follow legislation, then that's entirely their fault. We aren't a charity.


I'm still waiting for you to explain who these non-immgrants that don't speak English or Welsh are.

[Wells]

The idea is not to kick anybody out as it is a pain in the arse to do so.

We have problems and in order to ensure that we don't have continuing problems, we have legislation in place to resolve the issue. If they refuse to follow legislation, then that's entirely their fault. We aren't a charity.


I'm still waiting for you to explain who these non-immgrants that don't speak English or Welsh are.

So the kicking them out isn't in everyone's interest, ok. Then my point about nativist fervor stands. This isn't about security, its about fear and national identity.

Jesus dude, its already been discussed, there are, admittedly rare, Scots and Welsh speakers without English proficiency.

[Kalis]

So the kicking them out isn't in everyone's interest, ok. Then my point about nativist fervor stands. This isn't about security, its about fear and national identity.

It's an agreement, we provide the protections that we do as a nation and in return we ask that they have a level of competency in the language and don't break the law.

They get by far the better end of the deal, barring the tests they don't even have to speak English if they don't want to.

You're claiming we don't have issues with it in the UK, but we do, so prove to British people that it isn't a problem to have second class citizens within our nation.

Jesus dude, its already been discussed, there are, admittedly rare, Scots and Welsh speakers without English proficiency.

Welsh speakers are covered and Scots speakers are in Scotland, so no, it hasn't been covered at all. There are 900,000 people in England and Wales that don't speak English or Welsh with proficiency, and they would be almost entirely immigrants.

[Wells]

It's an agreement, we provide the protections that we do as a nation and in return we ask that they have a level of competency in the language and don't break the law.

They get by far the better end of the deal, barring the tests they don't even have to speak English if they don't want to.

The problem here is that your solution is brutally inelegant. If its about security, your approach makes no differentiation between immigrant gangs and some 70 year old woman who moved to the UK because her son lives there. One is an actual bad thing and the other is frankly a waste of resources to worry about integrating too much.

You're claiming we don't have issues with it in the UK, but we do, so prove to British people that it isn't a problem to have second class citizens within our nation.

No, we've already covered that the "kick them out" provision isn't for their own good, so let's not have any more concern about second class citizens if you're going to defend it.

[Kalis]

The problem here is that your solution is brutally inelegant. If its about security, your approach makes no differentiation between immigrant gangs and some 70 year old woman who moved to the UK because her son lives there. One is an actual bad thing and the other is frankly a waste of resources to worry about integrating too much.

This legislation deals with spouses coming into the country.

I'm not interested if it is elegant or not. We don't think it is a waste of resources to have people in Britain being able to communicate.

No, we've already covered that the "kick them out" provision isn't for their own good, so let's not have any more concern about second class citizens if you're going to defend it.

Why should they be allowed to stay if they aren't willing to integrate? They are immigrants, not refugees, part of the package deal in being an immigrant into Britain is a proficiency in English. Don't like it? Don't come, it isn't compulsory.

[Mormolyce]

I feel like the level of English competency is a misaimed argument. Most immigrants learn to speak English just fine, the real problem is in lingering negative cultural perspectives. We need to have a serious discussion with immigrants about tolerance for other people, religions, sexualities, gender identities, and the treatment of women, and how those things are central pillars of Western culture which they have to accept if they want to live in Western countries.

We don't have many rules in the West, but tolerance is non-negotiable and it's not a lot to ask. You have all the freedom you like, as long as you aren't intruding on other people's. I feel that this message is not coming across to some (by no means all) immigrants.

And it would be really nice if we could have that discussion in a mature and sensible way without it being hijacked by rabid xenophobes and rabid anti-xenophobes who turn it into a big retarded tug of war for the sake of their endless pissing contest.

[GennGreymane]

I cant say thats unfair or anything like that.

[Damajin]

I feel like the level of English competency is a misaimed argument. Most immigrants learn to speak English just fine, the real problem is in lingering negative cultural perspectives. We need to have a serious discussion with immigrants about tolerance for other people, religions, sexualities, gender identities, and the treatment of women, and how those things are central pillars of Western culture which they have to accept if they want to live in Western countries.

We don't have many rules in the West, but tolerance is non-negotiable and it's not a lot to ask. You have all the freedom you like, as long as you aren't intruding on other people's. I feel that this message is not coming across to some (by no means all) immigrants.

And it would be really nice if we could have that discussion in a mature and sensible way without it being hijacked by rabid xenophobes and rabid anti-xenophobes who turn it into a big retarded tug of war for the sake of their endless pissing contest.

Good luck with that talk.

[Kalis]

I feel like the level of English competency is a misaimed argument. Most immigrants learn to speak English just fine, the real problem is in lingering negative cultural perspectives. We need to have a serious discussion with immigrants about tolerance for other people, religions, sexualities, gender identities, and the treatment of women, and how those things are central pillars of Western culture which they have to accept if they want to live in Western countries.

One of the issues we are facing is crimes against women going unreported, and one of the reasons they don't report those crimes is due to not being able to communicate, as they are entirely reliant on the people committing the crimes for dealing with the population at large.

[Wells]

This legislation deals with spouses coming into the country.

I'm not interested if it is elegant or not. We don't think it is a waste of resources to have people in Britain being able to communicate.

You're still tilting at strawmen here. I have no problem with seeking 100% english proficiency. I have a problem with kicking people out for not. Punishing people for things that have no business being crimes is nuts.

Why should they be allowed to stay if they aren't willing to integrate?

I have zero faith in any government's ability to fairly determine sufficient integration. Laws can't just be about what you want, but what you can reasonably be expected to pull off well.

[Snowfunk]

If only we could do this in Sweden as well.

2'nd and 3'd generation immigrants who don't speak a single word Swedish.

[Wells]

If only we could do this in Sweden as well.

2'nd and 3'd generation immigrants who don't speak a single word Swedish.

If you have third generation immigrants who can't speak the native language you have a serious failure in government policy that won't be addressed by deportation.

[Kalis]

You're still tilting at strawmen here. I have no problem with seeking 100% english proficiency. I have a problem with kicking people out for not. Punishing people for things that have no business being crimes is nuts.

You clearly do have a problem with seeking 100% English proficiency, considering you are railing against educational legislation to ensure it.

Why should we accept people into the UK on their conditions? Why is Britain expecting something from immigrants not acceptable?

I have zero faith in any government's ability to fairly determine sufficient integration. Laws can't just be about what you want, but what you can reasonably be expected to pull off well.

I don't give a toss what you have faith in.

[Techno-Druid]

To be completely fair, two and half years is a pretty decent amount of time to learn basic English or really any rudimentary knowledge of a language.

[Kezotar]

2,5 years to learn broken English? Really?
I've seen people learn Norwegian in months!

[Wells]

You clearly do have a problem with seeking 100% English proficiency, considering you are railing against educational legislation to ensure it.

No I'm not, and I've already clearly explained this to you. I've against deporting people for not speaking a language. I'm entirely for teaching people to do so at government expense.

Why should we accept people into the UK on their conditions? Why is Britain expecting something from immigrants not acceptable?

Expect whatever you like. I don't care. What I care about is punishing people for speaking the wrong language.

[Kalis]

No I'm not, and I've already clearly explained this to you. I've against deporting people for not speaking a language. I'm entirely for teaching people to do so at government expense.

Hoping they will speak English hasn't worked, so we've had to try something else.

We have problems, burying our heads in the sand and pretending those problems don't exist isn't going to make them go away. This legislation also makes sure they aren't blocked from being able to communicate, which is one of the problems we've had.

Expect whatever you like. I don't care. What I care about is punishing people for speaking the wrong language.

They aren't being punished for speaking the wrong language, they are free to speak whatever language they want, however they must also have competency in English if they want to qualify for residence.

[Wells]

Hoping they will speak English hasn't worked, so we've had to try something else.

I'm not advocating "hope they learn English".

We have problems, burying our heads in the sand and pretending those problems don't exist isn't going to make them go away.

Neither do bad solutions. Unless the real problem is that there are too many people around who are different, which is where I think most of the support for stuff like this comes from.

They aren't being punished for speaking the wrong language, they are free to speak whatever language they want, however they must also have competency in English if they want to qualify for residence.

They're being deported if they can't speak English. Any government with a pretense of personal freedom has no business punishing people for language.

[Kalis]

I'm not advocating "hope they learn English".

You aren't advocating anything beyond making the courses available and crossing your fingers they make use of them...that hasn't worked.

Neither do bad solutions. Unless the real problem is that there are too many people around who are different, which is where I think most of the support for stuff like this comes from.

It has nothing to do with people being different. You want it to be racism so you can scream racism, well tough shit, this is about making sure that people have the ability to be functioning members of society and has nothing to do with them being different.

You do know that the people this benefits the most are women in abusive relationships, don't you?

They're being deported if they can't speak English. Any government with a pretense of personal freedom has no business punishing people for language.

They'd be deported for not fulfilling their part of the deal when they emigrate to Britain. It is a two way street, they have no right to emigrate to Britain beyond what we give them and so they abide by the terms or they can bugger off.

They can speak Spanish, Urdu, or whatever they want, as long as they have a competency in English.