RIB with 19 on board intercepted at 2am off Kent coast
Discussion
TTwiggy said:
cptsideways said:
Back on topic, this I see as a major issue that will require some manpower to cull. There are thousands of cheap boats available, there are no licence rules to buy or own one, plenty are capable to cross the channel with some fuel.
Only the major ports have any type of controls, everywhere else is wide open.
You cannot police the entire coast and you cannot police the whole channel/north sea. That said, I don't imagine a large number of people will cross this way as an open-boat navigation of the channel or north sea is not a pleasant experience.Only the major ports have any type of controls, everywhere else is wide open.
The little ships of Dunkirk were 700 private boats that sailed from Ramsgate in England to Dunkirk in France between 26 May and 4 June 1940 as part of Operation Dynamo, helping to rescue more than 338,000 British and French soldiers who were trapped on the beaches at Dunkirk during the Second World War.
cptsideways said:
TTwiggy said:
cptsideways said:
Back on topic, this I see as a major issue that will require some manpower to cull. There are thousands of cheap boats available, there are no licence rules to buy or own one, plenty are capable to cross the channel with some fuel.
Only the major ports have any type of controls, everywhere else is wide open.
You cannot police the entire coast and you cannot police the whole channel/north sea. That said, I don't imagine a large number of people will cross this way as an open-boat navigation of the channel or north sea is not a pleasant experience.Only the major ports have any type of controls, everywhere else is wide open.
The little ships of Dunkirk were 700 private boats that sailed from Ramsgate in England to Dunkirk in France between 26 May and 4 June 1940 as part of Operation Dynamo, helping to rescue more than 338,000 British and French soldiers who were trapped on the beaches at Dunkirk during the Second World War.
TTwiggy said:
Would probably be deemed a hazard to shipping.
Not suggesting putting them in the shipping lanes. Was not totally serious, although a drone-type early warning/detector system could be a possibility. given what we achieved during the war, I am sure someone here in c.21 Britain could engineer a solution.Digga said:
TTwiggy said:
Would probably be deemed a hazard to shipping.
Not suggesting putting them in the shipping lanes. Was not totally serious, although a drone-type early warning/detector system could be a possibility. given what we achieved during the war, I am sure someone here in c.21 Britain could engineer a solution.TTwiggy said:
dudleybloke said:
These illegal migrants claim to be skint but they have enough money to pay the smugglers.
I'm willing to bet that £8k could buy a house where they are from.
I don't think they necessarily hand over £8k upfront...I'm willing to bet that £8k could buy a house where they are from.
Would anyone have sympathy for someone from the UK spending enough money to buy a house in their attempt to sneak onto Necker island?
TTwiggy said:
Are we really that generous compared to the rest of Europe? Again, I'm genuinly curious as I have no idea if we are or if it's just 'received internet wisdom'. France, for instance, is a much morw socialist country than we are, so I would imagine that their benefit system is more generous and easier to access than ours - if the Tory government are able to take benefits away from the severely disabled, I can't imagine them being happy to hand out money on a whim.
I still think that the driver for migration is job/pay prospects and not our 'milk & honey' benefits system.
You would imagine wrong. Yes, the French system is often far more generous than ours, but claimants almost always have to meet criteria such as time in work before becoming eligible to claim them. All claimants - whether immigrant or otherwise - have to meet these criteria, which is why they're not breaking EU law by imposing them on immigrants from other EU countries. Peversely, it's also why the Scots have to provide free University education to Spaniards, Germans et al, but can charge the English & Welsh.I still think that the driver for migration is job/pay prospects and not our 'milk & honey' benefits system.
I remember seeing a table somewhere a while back which showed criteria for access to benefits and to public healthcare across all EU countries. Only the UK provided immediate access in both categories.
Kermit power said:
You would imagine wrong. Yes, the French system is often far more generous than ours, but claimants almost always have to meet criteria such as time in work before becoming eligible to claim them. All claimants - whether immigrant or otherwise - have to meet these criteria, which is why they're not breaking EU law by imposing them on immigrants from other EU countries. Peversely, it's also why the Scots have to provide free University education to Spaniards, Germans et al, but can charge the English & Welsh.
I remember seeing a table somewhere a while back which showed criteria for access to benefits and to public healthcare across all EU countries. Only the UK provided immediate access in both categories.
Then it's a failure of UK government then.I remember seeing a table somewhere a while back which showed criteria for access to benefits and to public healthcare across all EU countries. Only the UK provided immediate access in both categories.
alfie2244 said:
Do we not have any mothballed ship nowadays? - If not then perhaps another lease lend arrangement with our friends across the pond could be arranged.
There's a few, but a destroyer is rather 'overkill' for finding small RIBs (and probably not really suitable). Then there's the cost of crewing these ships. like I said above, this was covered on another thread and got (IMHO) rather silly as people started to suggest locking down the entire coast - presumably at a cost of billions - just to stop a few dozen illegals who would probably either get picked up at some point anyway or just disappear into the (black) job market.TTwiggy said:
alfie2244 said:
Do we not have any mothballed ship nowadays? - If not then perhaps another lease lend arrangement with our friends across the pond could be arranged.
There's a few, but a destroyer is rather 'overkill' for finding small RIBs (and probably not really suitable). Then there's the cost of crewing these ships. like I said above, this was covered on another thread and got (IMHO) rather silly as people started to suggest locking down the entire coast - presumably at a cost of billions - just to stop a few dozen illegals who would probably either get picked up at some point anyway or just disappear into the (black) job market.You can't police every inch of coast in the same way that you can't police 30,000 miles of roads for speeding motorists. You can however ensure that there is a good enough chance of getting caught and serious enough consequences if you do that it isn't worth the risk. If the "risk" is getting picked up by the coastguard and getting across anyway, why not give it a go?
TTwiggy said:
alfie2244 said:
Decommissioned trawlers may have been disposed of I would suspect.....redundant fishermen could have crewed with 1 or 2 members of the forces onboard.....where there's a will etc etc etc.
No doubt. But is it really such a big problem? However people smuggling was rumoured to be going on as told to me by a local trawlermen when I had my boat moored on a very isolated southcoast harbour 30 yrs ago so who knows?
eta this was in a pub mind!Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff