@kibcol1049 Don't keep us in suspense! Was it pro- or anti-immigration?
@h4890 Against illegal immigration and in particular the small boat crossings it seems. Apart from the extreme dangers of these, to the people on the boats and the rescuers, it occurred to me that the total cost to the UK must be huge. In order to pay for it I suppose some deserving UK citizen doesn’t get some help they need. That's just my opinion though.
@kibcol1049 The only two solutions I can think of are...
1. Sink the boats. Once immigrants realize this, they will go to the EU instead of risking this.
2. Deduct the money it costs to patrol and handle immigrants from foreign aid, and if that is not enough, play hardball and add the cost to exports to the country or region the immigrant comes from.
A 3 can of course be to lower the cost of handling them. That is, water and bread, no hotels, immediate shipment to rwanda,
@Disputatore @kibcol1049 Cutting foreign aid does not punish british companies. Adding an export tax does, sadly, punish the companies to a certain extent, but it also punishes the countries who use immigrants as a weapon. So the countries will first of all, get no aid, second of all, more expensive british goods and services. But this is nothing new. Taxes already exist and hurt companies and individuals, but we think the trade off is worht it. The same goes for this scenario.