Refugees / Asylum seekers crossing the channel
Discussion
LukeBrown66 said:
We are not equipped to deal with it quite honestly and politicians can huff and puff all they want, investment in border force and a change in the law is what is required. You will never stop it in reality the crossing is too short and the coast in both coasts is too wide.
You would have to go extreme to stop it. Australia for example put every migrant that arrived on a boat to a remote island and left them there till their claim was approved.If you immediately house and feed them in mainland England than that's no disincentive.
But its whether we as a nation would feel comfortable doing with it?
768 said:
coolg said:
768 said:
Certainly the asylum seeker who drowned in the Channel the other day seems to have left France because they rejected his application.
Because he wasn’t an asylum seeker but an economic migrant ?LukeBrown66 said:
Been keeping an eye on this for quite a while, it does seem that we are a dumping ground for these people as are other Euro nations, I have seen countless videos and also seen first and the mobs of them hanging around near certain coastal port towns in France, chasing after lorries.
Destitute they do not look, desperate for money, to get to the promised land where they will receive all they want for free they do look.
We are not equipped to deal with it quite honestly and politicians can huff and puff all they want, investment in border force and a change in the law is what is required. You will never stop it in reality the crossing is too short and the coast in both coasts is too wide.
Most of them see to fit a profile, young men, certain age, certain countries they come from, Iran, Eritrea, Sudan etc. And the point has to be made if you are seeking asylum you will likely stop at the first port of call, not travel through several countries, mainly coz your mate who got here years ago told you it was great, that is not asylum it is economic illegal migration, and with all that's going on, the cost must be horrific in places like Kent
Some of it costs nothing, it actually makes your Indian cheaper. I think it was panorama where they found the Indian guy working in the kitchen 24 hrs a day, and sleeping on a mattress in the kitchen itself. Destitute they do not look, desperate for money, to get to the promised land where they will receive all they want for free they do look.
We are not equipped to deal with it quite honestly and politicians can huff and puff all they want, investment in border force and a change in the law is what is required. You will never stop it in reality the crossing is too short and the coast in both coasts is too wide.
Most of them see to fit a profile, young men, certain age, certain countries they come from, Iran, Eritrea, Sudan etc. And the point has to be made if you are seeking asylum you will likely stop at the first port of call, not travel through several countries, mainly coz your mate who got here years ago told you it was great, that is not asylum it is economic illegal migration, and with all that's going on, the cost must be horrific in places like Kent
coolg said:
OddCat said:
coolg said:
I would assume the process the ones that claim asylum, those that don’t appear to (be allowed to) live illegally
FTFYThs only reason France wouldn't deal with them is that the French authorities are hoping they will bugger off to another country and save them the bother...
LukeBrown66 said:
the cost must be horrific in places like Kent
Whilst not covid horrific they are huge. Each "under 16 " placed in an independent fostering agency cost over £1000 a week, every week month and year until 18. KCC has recently said it cant cope with anymore and wants the rest of the UK to take a share. The problem is you have a large number of 16-28 year old men who dont have a society position to slot into. There is nobody to tell them to reign it in and stop rocking the boat as they are surrounded by young men the same age. They come from countrys with very different views to us on all sorts of things and have been promissed all sorts of things by the smugglers. When they get here an realise its not all they were told they are understandably a bit unhappy. Out of 5 I know details of only one wasnt angry about the situation and he was the only one who I thought had a genuine asylum case. I think the other 4 were upset as they didnt get the deal they were promissed and paid for.hyphen said:
You would have to go extreme to stop it. Australia for example put every migrant that arrived on a boat to a remote island and left them there till their claim was approved.
If you immediately house and feed them in mainland England than that's no disincentive.
But its whether we as a nation would feel comfortable doing with it?
Do you have a remote island in mind?If you immediately house and feed them in mainland England than that's no disincentive.
But its whether we as a nation would feel comfortable doing with it?
Europa1 said:
Do you have a remote island in mind?
We have a fewhttps://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_islands_of...
Australia was just striking financiall deals with Fiji, Papeau New Guinea and others I think.
But as said, its a controversial policy to adopt.
Edited by hyphen on Sunday 23 August 01:34
hyphen said:
Europa1 said:
Do you have a remote island in mind?
We have a fewhttps://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_islands_of...
Australia was just striking financiall deals with Fiji, Papeau New Guinea and others I think.
But as said, its a controversial policy to adopt.
Edited by hyphen on Sunday 23 August 01:34
hyphen said:
Europa1 said:
Do you have a remote island in mind?
We have a fewhttps://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_islands_of...
Australia was just striking financiall deals with Fiji, Papeau New Guinea and others I think.
But as said, its a controversial policy to adopt.
Edited by hyphen on Sunday 23 August 01:34
OddCat said:
No, I meant they should be rounding them up and detaining them as illegal immigrants. Because if they are not asylum seekers (which they are not by dint of not having sought asylum) then they are illegal immigrants.
Ths only reason France wouldn't deal with them is that the French authorities are hoping they will bugger off to another country and save them the bother...
Since the UK authorities do not round up people to check their immigration status you want the French police to do so to stop a few trying to get into the UK?Ths only reason France wouldn't deal with them is that the French authorities are hoping they will bugger off to another country and save them the bother...
768 said:
It'd suggest he wasn't a refugee, I'm not sure it stops him seeking asylum elsewhere.
It does not stop him making the claim but unless he can prove French authorities did not properly handly the case the UK does not need to consider the claim and can deport him back to France. Lots of department stores closing. Their massive floorspaces easily converted into lots of little living spaces to be filled with immigrants. The local populace & retailers will hugely benefit from knowing that Christian kindness is being extended & the local cafes will enjoy increased income & customers will enjoy the consequent jolly atmosphere created by so many new residents.
Then there are numerous brown field sites with empty warehousing ............so we have lots of room.
Those who think they are remote from such insurgencies don't get too smug for 'they' soon travel & every corner of this land will benefit from their presence - eventually, so embrace & love them for there's many many more to come. Get used to it.
Then there are numerous brown field sites with empty warehousing ............so we have lots of room.
Those who think they are remote from such insurgencies don't get too smug for 'they' soon travel & every corner of this land will benefit from their presence - eventually, so embrace & love them for there's many many more to come. Get used to it.
Tankrizzo said:
The other thing to remember is that sometimes the perception is that 99% of immigrants pass through every other European country to come here. This isn't the case though, hundreds of thousands disappear into the black economies of Germany/France etc every year. Germany has a terrible problem with unregistered immigrant workers in some cities.
Of course, but what percentage pass through through the UK to reach another European country?The question - that has broadly been answered - is why take the extra (dangerous) step to reach the UK.
It's a bit like the gameshow 'who wants to be a millionaire' - if the final jump was from £500,000 to £500,050 (with the risk of losing it all), no-one would take that risk. It's only because the reward is so high, that some people are prepared to gamble.
In crossing the channel, the stakes are infinitely higher (risking their lives), so the rewards must be much greater also.
LukeBrown66 said:
We are not equipped to deal with it quite honestly and politicians can huff and puff all they want, investment in border force and a change in the law is what is required. You will never stop it in reality the crossing is too short and the coast in both coasts is too wide.
It certainly needs addressing, as if it was properly (and perhaps, 'harshly' controlled), there would likely be more tolerance and acceptance in the UK (and dare I say, welcoming) for those poor souls who genuinely need refuge.Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff