Record channel migration- 235 in one day

[debtlessmanc]

24 minutes ago, dugsbody said:

Yes, it is quite interesting.

"Asked why they don’t stay in the first safe country, she is incensed. “They do! France has four times as many asylum seekers as the UK, and Germany even more. The question shouldn’t be ‘Why are people trying to reach the UK?’, it should be ‘Why shouldn’t they try to reach the UK?’ For some, that is where they have family; others can’t get protection anywhere else.”"

Go to the link in the article - figure 3

https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/images/7/70/Number_of_first-time_asylum_applicants_(non-EU-27_citizens)%2C_2018_and_2019_(thousands).png

2019 France has 120,000. UK 40,000 so three times as many , the article also claims the figures proved that Germany, France, Italy and Greece have more than the UK, as you can see Italy has less. This is also only a snapshot in time, historically the UK took more than these countries

look in a sense we have less of them loose in the country (because we are an island) than those other countries but why resort to bareface lies to make a political point. I thought was the job of the buffoon in number 10.

mean while why not france?

https://www.thelocal.fr/20180221/france-unveils-controversial-migrant-bill

"France received 100,000 asylum applications last year, 30,000 were accepted rest refuded with 15,000 forceably removed"

meanwhile the uk accepted 23,000 people as refugees, close to the same!

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/immigration-statistics-year-ending-march-2020/how-many-people-do-we-grant-asylum-or-protection-to

The UK is bearing the burden of legitimate cases almost equally with france.

 

Edited August 10, 2020 by debtlessmanc

[spyguy]

The asylum laws were set up when France was a long long way away, before Jumbo jets and needs based, non time limited benefit systems

And when an asylum seeker was someone like Marx, who shacked up in his mates spare room.

The reality is that every single person floating in on arubber ring is an economic migrant.

As it stands, the European rules are that asylum seeker must seek asylum in the first safe country.

The UN guidelines, they are not laws as there is no-one to enforce them, are a bit more vague. And the UN does not provide any funding.

Theres no reason why asylum seekers cannot be charge the full bill for their stay. As there is a flood into the UK and, if allowed to vote, Id guess UKPOP would say No, then asylum seeker funding must be met by charity otherwise there will be mobs waving pitchforks at Dover.

Any asylum seeker arriving i nthe UK can be kicked out after 5 years. All should. There should be a block on access to UK citizenship for asylum seekers mobbing the borders.

Radio 4 had a documentary about a bloke who tries to smuggle a girl into the UK.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000ghxl

I wont spoilt the surprise but the bloke needs jailign and the asylum Dad needs shooting.

[longgone]

On 07/08/2020 at 15:56, MonsieurCopperCrutch said:

Now now. Your mask is slipping.

your mask got slung out with the trash years ago. 

[Riedquat]

2 hours ago, debtlessmanc said:

Go to the link in the article - figure 3

https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/images/7/70/Number_of_first-time_asylum_applicants_(non-EU-27_citizens)%2C_2018_and_2019_(thousands).png

2019 France has 120,000. UK 40,000 so three times as many , the article also claims the figures proved that Germany, France, Italy and Greece have more than the UK, as you can see Italy has less. This is also only a snapshot in time, historically the UK took more than these countries

look in a sense we have less of them loose in the country (because we are an island) than those other countries but why resort to bareface lies to make a political point. I thought was the job of the buffoon in number 10.

What bareface lies were being made? So more do stop in France than carry on, that doesn't change the point in the slightest about the ones that do carry on.

[debtlessmanc]

54 minutes ago, Riedquat said:

What bareface lies were being made? So more do stop in France than carry on, that doesn't change the point in the slightest about the ones that do carry on.

Okay sophistry, the article lists Germany France, Greece and Italy as having received the most refugees in the last year, which is only true if you view europe as the EU, otherwise the UK is in the middle of that lot. It exagerates the actual ratio for UK/France and it does not point out that the UK actually gives asylum status to a similar number of refugees as the other major european countries other than Germany  (when refugee resettlement is taken into account).

what is going really going on is told by this stat. The probability that an asylum claimant is given asylum (a much better situation than the simply tolerated "humanitarian leave to remain") is 44% in the uk, 16% in france and 11% in Italy. These guys know this of course, hence the desperation to get to the UK. Merkel wanted this levelling by essentially allocating refugees centrally, if you want to know which states complained take a look at the right hand side of list of EU states on the figure ( those with the lowest success rates).

Edited August 10, 2020 by debtlessmanc

[Riedquat]

9 minutes ago, debtlessmanc said:

Okay sophistry, the article lists Germany France, Greece and Italy as having received the most refugees in the last year, which is only true if you view europe as the EU, otherwise the UK is in the middle of that lot. It exagerates the actual ratio for UK/France and it does not point out that the UK actually gives asylum status to a similar number of refugees as the other major european countries other than Germany  (when refugee resettlement is taken into account).

Unless I've misunderstood the question (which is possible because I've only skim read the first few and last few posts in this thread) the problem I've got is with the defence of "they do apply in the first safe country, therefore complaining that the ones that head to the UK aren't doing that is nonsense." That is nonsense because it's the ones heading here that we're talking about, not the ones that do apply in the first safe country.

[Confusion of VIs]

On 09/08/2020 at 08:08, Glenn said:

No, just closed to illegal immigrants. And yes the world is a great place, but the world is still there  - It just doesnt all need to be living in our tiny island to make it great

Asylum seekers are not illegal immigrants. 

 

[Houdini]

It doesn't make any difference,

They want to come here, and while we may not want them physical presence is 9/10ths of the battle so we end up with them as we can't ship them back to France as that treaty disappeared back in January.  

[Bruce Banner]

A, sensible, French government minister, regarding Priti Patel's outing on a navy vessel, questioned what the "British right wing Conservative government" intends for the Royal Navy to do about the immigrants, "are they going to shoot them".

French government 10... Right wing Conservative government 0.

 

 

[smash]

The idea of us being an island nation on the periphery of the continent with its piddly land borders between nations was touted as being a strength, almost a justification, certainly a symbolic essence. The reality could be that its a weakness in deterring these kind of migrants. The water that surrounds us is governed by international SOLAS agreement.

[debtlessmanc]

34 minutes ago, Bruce Banner said:

A, sensible, French government minister, regarding Priti Patel's outing on a navy vessel, questioned what the "British right wing Conservative government" intends for the Royal Navy to do about the immigrants, "are they going to shoot them".

French government 10... Right wing Conservative government 0.

 

 

Tell them they cannot dock in dover

https://www.dw.com/en/france-refuses-to-allow-last-private-migrant-ship-to-dock/a-45621733

if (as the french maintain) rescue ships must take them to the nearest safe port surely the thing to do is buy a bunch of civilian boats to rescue them near calais and take them back.

Edited August 10, 2020 by debtlessmanc

[smash]

3 minutes ago, debtlessmanc said:

Tell them they cannot dock in dover

https://www.dw.com/en/france-refuses-to-allow-last-private-migrant-ship-to-dock/a-45621733

 

What French vessels such not be allowed to dock in Dover? Sea France ferries?

[debtlessmanc]

3 minutes ago, smash said:

What French vessels such not be allowed to dock in Dover? Sea France ferries?

dunno, ask the french they told the rescue ships it was a problem

alternatively they could be toed to the principality of sealand, where they could claim asylum or wait for the british govt sorted out the endless bureaucracy.

https://sealandgov.org/

a very french solution...

Edited August 10, 2020 by debtlessmanc

[Bruce Banner]

12 minutes ago, debtlessmanc said:

Tell them they cannot dock in dover

https://www.dw.com/en/france-refuses-to-allow-last-private-migrant-ship-to-dock/a-45621733

if (as the french maintain) rescue ships must take them to the nearest safe port surely the thing to do is buy a bunch of civilian boats to rescue them near calais and take them back.

So how does that work when you're dealing, not with ships, but with overloaded rubber dinghies with no fuel left?

What should the Navy do? Send them back to sea to possibly drown or put them out of their misery with a two second burst from a Vulcan Phalanx?

I hope the Royal Navy has the guts to tell Priti Patel to sod off back to Uganda! 

[MARTINX9]

5 hours ago, debtlessmanc said:

an interesting read and unusually honest

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/aug/09/if-i-die-that-is-ok-calais-refugees-nowhere-to-turn

from the article

"Mohammed now 34, he has spent the past six years being pushed out of several countries in Europe after fleeing what he says was political persecution in Sudan. He was detained for months in Hungary, deported more than once, and finally his asylum case was refused in France."

So essentially because they are terrible countries with awful oppressive governments we should let the entire population of Mauritania, Syria, Sudan, Libya, Afghanistan and Iran come to Europe. A mere 200 million plus people?

Perhaps the answer might be to solve the problem locally - rather than relocate it here?  Prioritising fighting age men peopled  by traffickers as opposed to the women, kids and elderly on the ground - who genuinely need humanitarian aid as they are vulnerable and defenceless doesn't seem a very logical policy.

Alternatively we could do a swap for all those who seem to think the UK is a dreadful place - it might give them a bit of a wake up call about how lucky they are to live here!

[debtlessmanc]

7 minutes ago, Bruce Banner said:

So how does that work when you're dealing, not with ships, but with overloaded rubber dinghies with no fuel left?

What should the Navy do? Send them back to sea to possibly drown or put them out of their misery with a two second burst from a Vulcan Phalanx?

I hope the Royal Navy has the guts to tell Priti Patel to sod off back to Uganda! 

The point is (as i am sure you are aware) that  the french govt is just as keen to get rid of the refugees as the "right wing tory govt". Probably more as it is all bluster with the blond buffoon, the tories love cheap migrant labour.

The solution has already been suggested by the French - Baksheesh.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/france-demands-30m-to-get-a-grip-on-migrant-boats-ll0d9w73h

far far cheaper than cruising a frigate up and down whilst firing the vulcan phalanx

Edited August 10, 2020 by debtlessmanc

[PeanutButter]

Wait until the ice melts. Lots of migrants then.

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2013/09/rising-seas-ice-melt-new-shoreline-maps/

[NobodyInParticular]

On 8/7/2020 at 2:17 PM, longgone said:

 

 

Deleted as it was an offensive slur for which I apologise.

Edited August 10, 2020 by NobodyInParticular

[NobodyInParticular]

2 hours ago, MARTINX9 said:

So essentially because they are terrible countries with awful oppressive governments we should let the entire population of Mauritania, Syria, Sudan, Libya, Afghanistan and Iran come to Europe. A mere 200 million plus people?

We have legal commitments under international law. It does not require accepting all, but it does require accepting genuine asylum seekers. Do you have a problem with this?

[locky82]

1 minute ago, NobodyInParticular said:

We have legal commitments under international law. It does not require accepting all, but it does require accepting genuine asylum seekers. Do you have a problem with this?

I dont think anybody would have a problem with this. Are any in Calais genuine though, as they are safe? 

[Staffsknot]

Generally tried to avoid this like the plague as I knew it would be full of the kind of worst comments and put me of a string of posters / colour my views on their other posts.

To all those advocating towing boats back to France - that is illegal and laws of the sea mean you have to rescue any boat in distress. Royal Navy pickup means UK processing.

Moreover towing a migrant boat that then capsizes and results in fatalities ( the Channel not being a boating lake and those being insubstantial craft) and / or places naval personnel in unnecessary harm - simpler to bring onboard than tow - would be a likely Court martial for Captain, crew and PTSD regardless of outcome. You are also creating a slow moving frigate or coastguard cutter towing a flimsy boat and forcing navigation around them. How are you going to conduct the operation in the dark? No guarantees it happens 3 hrs before sundown?

Moreover if you want to circumvent the towing you simply jump out of the boat - highly risky but RN then must spend a lot of time and effort retrieving someone from the water.

Would armchair generals please leave the armed forces out of their grand plans of stupidity we have an MoD that does enough to screw things up - an ex rupert.

I would love to see how Auf Wiedersehen Pet would be viewed if the cast hadn't been English heading to Germany. Economic migrants heading over there, sometimes breaking the law and refusing to integrate... but they were loveable Geordies going to Germany so its fine.

If it was Ahmed the builder from Egypt or Piotr from Poland then no way, coming over here, building our houses ( shortage of builders cited pre-covid).

Hypocrisy thy name is...

[NobodyInParticular]

2 minutes ago, locky82 said:

I dont think anybody would have a problem with this. Are any in Calais genuine though, as they are safe? 

Many will have come from terrible situations in their home countries and the UK has a moral requirement to take some as part of its commitments to the world and not hide behind a moat. I don't condone them trying to go over on small boats, but that sort of risk is not one you are likely to take if you feel safe where you are though. It's entirely possible that at least some are migrants rather than refugees, though. Perhaps I feel a certain sympathy due to my wife's family history where some of her family that were by one definition were economic migrants were also fleeing from oppression by another.

[winkie]

France is not the first country the same as we are not the first country of safety.......we will not be the first safe country an asylum seeker reaches........why should countries like Greece and Italy take all the refugees?.......surely the numbers should be shared, we take fewer than others.?

[smash]

What about sending in RN submarines? Key advantage would be stealth we could tw@t up the dingies and migrants with torpedoes ! And no one would know we was there. The bodies would wash up on French beaches and serve as a warning. No one fvcks with us !! 

[locky82]

I agree, we do have an obligation to protect those who are facing persecution.  However the fact remains these people are now fleeing France. A member state, a safe county.