That it's a massive waste of time, effort, money, lives and we should just bring them over by coach and ferry.

Numbers fluctuate. Last week they were high again. Labour will struggle if they go up further.

@BrezhnevsLuxuriantEyebrows totally agree. Someone genuinely in fear of their life should be relieved to reach any safe European country . Why are they so intent on reaching the UK ? I think we all know the answer really .

Played down? If only! We hear nothing else despite numbers reducing dramatically since Labour came to power. The time taken to process an application for asylum has also come down massively, conservatives artificially inflated it by cutting civil service numbers.

I wonder in who's interest it is to pretend the UK is overwhelmed with such problems?!

Yes, but surely somebody is actually driving the boat? And if the boat is returned to shore and then confiscated. I guess it can't be that simple or they would do it, wouldn't they?

“Some gammons”?

Sure, why not just roll out a red carpet while you’re at it? We can’t take these people. They’re mostly men from misogynistic cultures, low skilled with minimal English. They will not make a meaningful contribution and in many cases will actively cause harm. Many aren’t refugees - they’re just economic migrants chancing their arm.

Enough.

No just stop them coming, it’s becoming ridiculous, feels like we are being invaded and taken over.

Where do you live op? Can we house them there?

Denmark got it under control with detention plus faster processing and bigger restrictions on who could stay. If we did offshore it to one of our islands or run detention on MOD camps combined with swift returns and no right to ILR, we would cut the pull factor swiftly.

However, that would require a change in the law as it's not illegal to apply for asylum and seekers abscond when they get told their claim is refused with no consequences.

If we tried detention, there would be an immediate challenge in the courts.

That's why the Conservatives attempted a processing centre in Rwanda. It was a showcase that cost a fuckton of money, but the idea was you could not freely move around Britain or disappear into the black market. I do think a lot of migrants here have economic reasons mixed into their aims because most will have passed through Europe and part of Africa just to get here.

Long term, there will be a campaign for the UK to withdraw from the ECHR. Which is an alarming possibilty, but if enough people see their safety and quality of life chucked under a bus, may agree.

The really bleak bit is the racism that's going to increase, if people feel it's not controlled and we're supposed to accept everyone regardles. I don't want to see British born Asian or Black people getting more hassle from idiots in the street.

International crime gangs seem to have diversified from drugs to people to become both drug AND people traffickers. They obviously have the networks in place already through their existing operations. It seems to be a very lucrative game, and the traffickers obviously have a lot of clout and/or power since no one can or will stop them at source. The war against drugs didn't succeed, so it's a good bet that a war against traffickers won't either.

But it is the root of the issue no doubt in my mind anyway.

I don’t think traffickers are on board. It’s just people who’ve paid.

Well quite.

Someone must be driving the boat. Why aren't they arrested and the boat confiscated?

Nothing. The UK is a soft touch unfortunately and the situation will not change until the government get a grip on it and Labour aren’t going to do that.

This would be ideal to stop the cycle

And that’s our problem or France’s problem because? If they hop aboard a boat and come across they risk their own lives so why should we worry about their lives when they don’t seem to care about their lives or ours who they wre impacting by coming to our country

It’s a mixture though, gangs, suppliers of boats, French police , pull factor to U.K. It doesn’t help that the PM is half hearted about it, and the problem is played down.

This is my main issue with it and I feel it’s overlooked far too often.

Yes, there may be people trying to come over illegally, but the root of the problem are the traffickers. The vast majority wouldn’t just pop on a dinghy if there was no network available.

I’m not sure if you’re being serious or not.

But assuming you aren't actually suggesting effectively killing the people aboard them, and slashing the boats once they were close enough to swim or be rescued ashore, the gang-masters would just up their prices to allow for needing to replace the boat each time... or worse, they would botch-repair them and just send them back with the next group of people anyway.

So, why aren’t they doing that?

Much better if the French slashed the boats close to shore and any that made it out to sea were collected by the RNLI and returned ot the place they set sail from in France. Do that for a couple of months, and the whole thing would stop very quickly. You could even make an underwater drone to slash them.

How on earth could that work with free movement through Schengen, though? Would they put tags on their ankles like the ones they sometimes fit to supermarket trolleys, to bring them to an abrupt stop if people try to take them past the edge of the car park?!

They could 'allocate' them to poorer countries all they liked, but they'd all end up in Germany, France, Austria and Italy et al in no time at all - not counting the ones who then headed for the UK. It's highly dubious to call any of them asylum seekers, really, as there's no way that there's not a single country in their own continent where they wouldn't be safe. We can't just be shutting down and evacuating entire continents, declaring them unsafe for anybody to live there. On the other hand, how can we know that the ones whose lives are in danger happen to be the ones who have consorted with criminal gangs to escape; and presumably those who haven't chosen to/been able to are all perfectly safe and happy?!

The reason they've chosen to take the gamble and go on a perilous journey to western Europe is so obviously based purely on economic betterment, with 'asylum' being nothing more than a pretext. That done, why would they go all that way to stay in a poorer European country when they can then so easily get to a wealthier one?

WTAF?
No.
We shouldn't be putting buses on FFS- we should be turning the dingys around and sending them back to the safe country they decided to leave.
Are there any buses for me? I fancy a new life in Canada... I just turn up and walk right in, yes?

Well, if you are lucky, some of the greedy men who want more land have threatened UK in the last few years too, so if they do bomb us and leave our country looking like Gaza does, you might grow some empathy. Anything is possible.