Asylum Seekers on Ferries!
Discussion
Who was it on here that said maybe we can house the asylum seekers on an island or somewhere while their case is heard?
Looks like your letter to the government was heard!
https://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/news/uk-world-n...
Looks like your letter to the government was heard!
https://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/news/uk-world-n...
We do not need to go to all the expense of setting up asylum centres on remote Islands. The ship was perfectly acceptable for prisoner accommodation in 1997 and I see no reason why this remedial solution to house those who rock up on our shores, isn't used again!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HM_Prison_Weare#:~:t...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HM_Prison_Weare#:~:t...
I don't see what's wrong with being put on a ship - I've spent half of the last 4 years on them!
Ferry cabins usually have their own shower and toilet, and as long as it's run reasonably well it's probably more clean and pleasant than some grotty hovel surrounded by druggies.
Of course it also means they are "contained" so they can't work illegally, or simply abscond if they get refused asylum.
It's hardly inhumane to be on a ship with your own cabin, 3 cooked meals a day and so on, and they won't have to work shifts in board for the privilege...
Ferry cabins usually have their own shower and toilet, and as long as it's run reasonably well it's probably more clean and pleasant than some grotty hovel surrounded by druggies.
Of course it also means they are "contained" so they can't work illegally, or simply abscond if they get refused asylum.
It's hardly inhumane to be on a ship with your own cabin, 3 cooked meals a day and so on, and they won't have to work shifts in board for the privilege...
But why a ship and not a facility on land? This just strikes me as a bit of crap politics to appeal to the part of the base that is over to the right of the party.
Why don't we put all of our prisoners on ships? What makes asylum seekers worse than murderers and rapists that they need to be stored at sea?
It doesn't make sense to me other than from the point of view of them wanting to look really tough.
Why don't we put all of our prisoners on ships? What makes asylum seekers worse than murderers and rapists that they need to be stored at sea?
It doesn't make sense to me other than from the point of view of them wanting to look really tough.
Saleen836 said:
Who was it on here that said maybe we can house the asylum seekers on an island or somewhere while their case is heard?
Looks like your letter to the government was heard!
https://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/news/uk-world-n...
Me. Looks like your letter to the government was heard!
https://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/news/uk-world-n...
I proposed some uninhabited island in the Falklands.
I suppose the Ascencion Islands are a good compromise.
Some Grotty ferries in the channel.......
Fair enough.
As long as the illegal migrants never get to this shore.
PeteinSQ said:
But why a ship and not a facility on land? This just strikes me as a bit of crap politics to appeal to the part of the base that is over to the right of the party.
Why don't we put all of our prisoners on ships? What makes asylum seekers worse than murderers and rapists that they need to be stored at sea?
It doesn't make sense to me other than from the point of view of them wanting to look really tough.
I don't see how it's "worse" than prison. It would be more tough to just put them in actual prison with murderers.Why don't we put all of our prisoners on ships? What makes asylum seekers worse than murderers and rapists that they need to be stored at sea?
It doesn't make sense to me other than from the point of view of them wanting to look really tough.
And illegal entry is already a crime here and in most countries.
https://www.loc.gov/law/help/illegal-entry/chart.p...
JuanCarlosFandango said:
I don't see how it's "worse" than prison. It would be more tough to just put them in actual prison with murderers.
And illegal entry is already a crime here and in most countries.
https://www.loc.gov/law/help/illegal-entry/chart.p...
I didn't say it was worse. I just don't understand why we'd do anything different, it's clearly just politics. Why is a boat better than a secure facility other than to signal that we are being tough. Harking back to the prison hulks of the 18th century. It's just a bit pathetic. Not to mention it will never happen.And illegal entry is already a crime here and in most countries.
https://www.loc.gov/law/help/illegal-entry/chart.p...
What they need to do is get more efficient at processing asylum claims and then deporting those that are unsuccessful. Asylum is a legitimate thing to claim.
PeteinSQ said:
But why a ship and not a facility on land? This just strikes me as a bit of crap politics to appeal to the part of the base that is over to the right of the party.
tough.
Probably because there are literally hundreds of cruise ships anchored all over unused tough.
Many really good ships with plenty of life in them are just being sent for scrap because the likelyhood of fare paying passengers on them again is highly unlikely
So why not use these redundant hotels on water
ks. They're floating this idea purely because of the optics. 
PeteinSQ said:
I didn't say it was worse. I just don't understand why we'd do anything different, it's clearly just politics. Why is a boat better than a secure facility other than to signal that we are being tough. Harking back to the prison hulks of the 18th century. It's just a bit pathetic. Not to mention it will never happen.
What they need to do is get more efficient at processing asylum claims and then deporting those that are unsuccessful. Asylum is a legitimate thing to claim.
Well you said it would be treating them worse than murderers. What they need to do is get more efficient at processing asylum claims and then deporting those that are unsuccessful. Asylum is a legitimate thing to claim.
I agree with you about what we need, but would also add that we should deter people from making illegal and dangerous journeys and paying criminal gangs to help them do so. Even if not for the sake of keeping the numbers down then for the sake of stopping people drowning at sea.
If the symbolism of putting them on a ship helps acheive that then so much the better.
Not long ago, I posted a scenario of sending migrants to an offshore island on this forum but not in this thread - it didn't exist at the time.
I proffered South Georgia as a potentiaL location. A few posters replied and then, I was banned from PH for a month
because my post was claimed to contain 'hate speech'. My post and the replies were summarily deleted. I was somewhat taken
aback at my first ever ban from a channel of communication of any kind.
Not long afterwards, in the thread to which I had posted, this appeared.
Note that I have not included a link to this picture, even though it is still on the forum, nor have I included the poster's user name or the date and time it was posted. This is because unlike some, I am not an amateur judge.
I have come across many examples of double standards in the past but have never seen as example so overt and so apalling.
In my view, a public apology from the person who imposed the ban is richly deserved.
I proffered South Georgia as a potentiaL location. A few posters replied and then, I was banned from PH for a month
because my post was claimed to contain 'hate speech'. My post and the replies were summarily deleted. I was somewhat taken
aback at my first ever ban from a channel of communication of any kind.
Not long afterwards, in the thread to which I had posted, this appeared.
Note that I have not included a link to this picture, even though it is still on the forum, nor have I included the poster's user name or the date and time it was posted. This is because unlike some, I am not an amateur judge.
I have come across many examples of double standards in the past but have never seen as example so overt and so apalling.
In my view, a public apology from the person who imposed the ban is richly deserved.
The issue with all of this is that the open borders fanatics generate much sound and fury and automatically condemn anything that isn't "everyone welcome and here's you free hotel room".
If a ferry or cruise ship can provide a decent standard of accommodation it has the advantage that the migrant cannot work illegally, or disappear into the country, while their claim is being considered. It should not be a "prison ship" but offer opportunities for exercise along with said accommodation.
If the home Office can find such vessels then it is quite acceptable for this to be an policy to be considered. The usual suspects will go into hysterics on twitter but the general public will I imagine be quite willing to see a firm but fair policy for dealing with illegal migration.
If a ferry or cruise ship can provide a decent standard of accommodation it has the advantage that the migrant cannot work illegally, or disappear into the country, while their claim is being considered. It should not be a "prison ship" but offer opportunities for exercise along with said accommodation.
If the home Office can find such vessels then it is quite acceptable for this to be an policy to be considered. The usual suspects will go into hysterics on twitter but the general public will I imagine be quite willing to see a firm but fair policy for dealing with illegal migration.
Troubleatmill said:
Me.
I proposed some uninhabited island in the Falklands.
I suppose the Ascencion Islands are a good compromise.
Some Grotty ferries in the channel.......
Fair enough.
As long as the illegal migrants never get to this shore.
Shag rocks i have heard are nice at this time of the year and covid free. I proposed some uninhabited island in the Falklands.
I suppose the Ascencion Islands are a good compromise.
Some Grotty ferries in the channel.......
Fair enough.
As long as the illegal migrants never get to this shore.
Troubleatmill said:
Me.
I proposed some uninhabited island in the Falklands.
I suppose the Ascencion Islands are a good compromise.
Some Grotty ferries in the channel.......
Fair enough.
As long as the illegal migrants never get to this shore.
I used to be proud of being British. I thought we where a tolerate and compassionate country. With a sence of doing the right thing and fair play.I proposed some uninhabited island in the Falklands.
I suppose the Ascencion Islands are a good compromise.
Some Grotty ferries in the channel.......
Fair enough.
As long as the illegal migrants never get to this shore.
PH has taught me in some cases I was mistaken.
Edited by Mrr T on Friday 2nd October 08:44
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff