Comments by "Ash Roskell" (@ashroskell) on "yvette cooper raids businesses for illegal migrants" video.

  1. They don’t, “need,” cheap labour. They, “prefer,” it when they don’t have to pay tax or insurance on employees who never show up in their books. That’s called exploitation and it is stealing from the economy. You can still pay low wages, legally, and pay your fair share, and your employees pay income tax too. THAT’S how you boost the economy. Your plan only benefits the single employer, who is also a criminal and an exploiter of human desperation. That’s immoral and financially bankrupting for the country.
    11
  2.  johnslavin2270 : As to the morality of my view, that can only be judged by every individual for themself. But, for me, exploitation of this type is unconscionable. As to the legality of what these, “employers,” are doing, that is all on the statute books of national and international law, for you to read at your leisure. As to statistics of the finances, there are two answers to that, which I offer in lieu of having any figures to offer you: 1) There is the common sense conclusion that an employer who does not pay tax or insurance for their, “employees,” is robbing the state of income. And employees who do not pay income tax are also robbing the state of income. Three sources of income absent from the economy, which yet must provide services, education, healthcare, street maintenance, policing, etc for these people, whether they show up on the books or not. 2) You will not find any of the five major parties in Parliament who disagree with this obvious (not received) common sense conclusion. Therefore, to deny it would be to contradict all parties simultaneously. I say this because, if you take a look at the manifestos of each party, and particularly the one you support, (or at least voted for) you will find in that section, the same conclusions I have just laid out for you, but with their unique take on that; especially when it comes to the best course of action.
    4
  3. I think people, including Prof Wilson here, are leaping to conclusions without seeing the potential for a bigger picture, let alone looking at it. Labour made a manifesto promise, to go after the traffickers. How do you go about that, if not by rounding up a whole bunch of people who use exploitative labour, isolating them simultaneously and squeezing them for their connections? You work your way up the chain. Why is anyone assuming this operation is, “one week,” long? And, does anyone seriously think that Yvette Cooper cooked up a plan, put on a flack jacket, rounded up her A Team and started kicking in doors? Or, do you think, perhaps, she asked the police to present proposals for getting to the traffickers, as promised, and signed off on THEIR plan, which THEY are executing in the hopes of doing some good with more than a one week shelf life? Better this than using their victims as a political football? As to legislation, Parliament is not even in session, so shall we wait and SEE what they plan to do, before laying accusations of myopia on their doorstep?
    4
  4. Wait a minute? This, “week long crack down,” as you describe it, is actually the first step in getting to the people smugglers! It leads to getting the bastards who exploit these desperate people in the first place! There is FAR MORE than just display going on here. Just think about it? How DO you get the smugglers? Labour did promise that they would go after the traffickers instead of all of this bullying of the migrants themselves, as the Tories prefer! The Home Office will have signed off on this operation, but it will have been the police who proposed them, not Yvette Cooper. All of these business GOT their, “staff,” from somewhere, right? And if you round up a whole bunch of these receivers and exploiters in one go, so they cannot talk to each other, you work on them to get to their sources! You find out who their contacts are, and work your way up the chain! That’s precisely what they SHOULD be doing! And is this Yvette Cooper, or a received response? Is this not the actions of the police? Somehow, I don’t picture Ms Cooper donning a flack jacket and kicking down doors? She merely signed off on a police action, presumably proposed BY the police, didn’t she? Yes, we need changes in policy. But Parliament is not even in session, so GIVE THEM A CHANCE, for crying out loud!? I support the idea of better policy AND going after the evil traffickers AS PROMISED in Labour’s manifesto! You seem to have made too many assumptions here that you cannot possibly be in a position to know? A habit formed from seeing our last government always doing as little as possible while shouting as much as possible, no doubt. But, I suspect this operation is intended to shake more intelligence out of the trees and get to those sods who need catching. And I say, wait and see BEFORE judging! They’ve barely had time to get their suspects into the station and you’re dismissing the whole thing as flannel? Why?
    3
  5.  johnslavin2270  : That’s because my argument is not about, “numbers,” or, “statistics,” in any way, shape or form. Perhaps reread it?
    2
  6.  @michaelgoode9555 : Plus, off-the-books labour, which illegal migrants necessarily are, means no employment taxes, no insurance, and no income tax from the employees themselves. Thus, these, “employers,” have robbed the state (you and me) three times before they sit down in the police station and start confessing to all the other exploitative crap they’ve been doing to these poor sods.
    1
  7. Well, exactly! Hanged if you keep your manifesto promise to go after the traffickers, hanged if you do nothing and let it all get worse on its own whilst blaming the victims like the Tories did! You just can’t win! I say, let’s see what the government does about migration WHEN PARLIAMENT IS BACK IN SESSION and give them a CHANCE to make policy. Meanwhile, grab all the, “employers,” at once (or as many as you can) isolate them and squeeze them for Intel on the bad guys, so you can work your way up the chain.
    1