The immigrant barge - what’s actually wrong with using it?

[NC523]

Educate me!

I looked at pics from the inside, it all looks very much like standard student accommodation to me, including common rooms/relaxation areas/health support on board. Residents can go on & off the boat, it’s passed fire etc safety and been used to house people in lots of other situations. I don’t understand why people think it’s not ok. Can anyone explain please?

Does that make what the Australians did OK? They knew an unseaworthy boat, crowded with hundreds of women and children, was heading for Christmas Island and they did nothing. A previous boat SIEV IV was fired on by the Australian navy.

The Australians totally ignored the law of the sea. I hope they are haunted by the thought of those children drowning every time they look at their children or grandchildren.

Things can go wrong, deliberate actions don't "just happen."

In many countries, out gay people can be imprisoned, tortured or killed.

But that’s what PP means - anyone from those “many countries” could seek asylum claiming that they’re gay. I actually know someone who did exactly that - and later went on to have a straight marriage. It might be understandable on the individual level, when you know the person concerned.
But it’s naive to just assume nobody would pretend to be gay to seek asylum.

@Alexandra2001 Oh are they? i don't think they have anything like the rights you or i have....so they aren't British nationals at all..... .or did we change the law to allow them to come here and claim citizenship very quickly? and then extended to their children....

I think you misunderstand the situation.

BN(O) citizens are permanent residents of Hong Kong who were British Overseas Territories citizens (formerly British Dependent Territories citizens) until 30 June 1997, and chose to remain British by registering for BN(O) citizenship when Hong Kong was a British overseas territory.

Two types of British nationality include British citizens and British overseas citizens. A British citizen is allowed to live and work in the United Kingdom without being subject to immigration rules. A British overseas citizen, on the other hand, has limited rights in the United Kingdom.

HTH

@Alexandra2001 the comparison isn't the same, Uganda threatened to expel these Ugandan Asians, leaving them stateless & homeless, there weren't 5m of them... 27k came to the UK vs 5m.

Uganda was a former British protectorate, and many Ugandan Asians of Indian and Pakistani origin had British passports; some were already studying or working in the UK. That’s why around 27,000 settled here, not as willingly (initially) as the British narrative might have you believe. Six thousand others went to Canada, around 4,500 to India, and 2,500 to Kenya or Pakistan.

So are you saying that people's value should be judged by how many or few, of them there are?

Really?

The Turks are defending their borders aggressively (and have done so for some time)

https://apnews.com/article/turkey-syria-border-shooting-refugees-7a2fcbc48d61e67a95ab3c7583c345d2

Are you going to protest at the Turkish Embassy?

@Iwasafool The Australians totally ignored the law of the sea

Every person who gets into a dingy to cross the Channel or the Med is ignoring the law of the sea by using an unseaworthy vessel.

The law of the sea applies to both equally.

The reason for the tough stance on immigrants is that the Tories are trying to appeal to the large number of UK voters that want all foreigners to go home. If there weren't so many racists in this country this would not be their policy. It is a reflection on our society, sadly.

So the 6 migrants who died in the channel yesterday were from Afghanistan!

Not economic migrants from Albania or anywhere else!

Refuges, trying to escape the Taliban, after yet another of the Govt's cock-ups, our evacuation from Kabul!

Anyone who doesn't think that was a complete cock-up needs to watch the Channel 4 documentary telling the story of what our Military were put through while Dominic Raab was on holiday!

www.channel4.com/programmes/evacuation

What ever the rights & wrongs of the bloody distraction barge this Govt needs to go!

I’m an immigrant in the UK and I don’t feel like there’s a large number of UK voters wanting all foreigners gone. I don’t think generalisations like this help anyone.
There might be some people like that, like in any other country.
But I think for the majority it’s about controlled immigration, and that’s not the same as wanting no immigrants at all.

@inamarina I'm guessing you live in a City.

Calling people you have never met racist is not helpful or fair.

Plenty of people have genuine & legitimate concerns such as not wanting people to risk crossing the channel in overloaded dinghies. It's August and people are drowning. Imagine trying it in November. I doubt a single person on Mumsnet wants people to die but that is what is happening.

And if they arrive safely - where do we put them? There is already a housing crisis. People we already have are struggling to find homes. Where are they supposed to go? Not barges, clearly.

Foreign aid is being cut back to pay £5m a day putting mostly young men up in hotels. How is that right?

So rather than calling people names, why don't you try to come up with practical workable solutions. In detail. Where? How? and when does it stop? There has to be a balance.

And then get the Labour party to commit to it, in writing.

It was a complete cock up. But what happened to the millions given from Nato? Was their own government absolutely innocent in all this? What happened to the Afghanistan Army? What's happening to the women over there? People see men coming over in and very little resilience in defending their country.

I know it's not just as simple as that but this is a major reason why people have little sympathy.

@MintJulia you are incredibly naive.

No, I'm not. I've travelled enough and seen enough to know that causing a significant change to a society seldom ends well. It causes division and resentment, and multiple problems down the line.

Yes, we should and must offer asylum, but in response to need, not just on the basis of who can afford to pay the people smugglers the most. And with the agreement of the communities who will be hosts.

@MintJulia you are talking utter nonsense now.

It's not up to me to clarify your interpretation of my posts as obviously I don't know how your thought processes work (However, I'm flattered that you seem to think I am a mind-reader !)

No-one else seems to have a problem.

Why?

These people crossing the channel are what you would call fussy asylum seekers, they have considered all the countries in Europe and thought, no none of this are good enough for me, I'll pay a complete stranger £5k, to cross the channel in a fourth hand rubber dingy to get to England where they are so soft they will put me up in a nice b and b and get a cooked breakfast in the morning and spending money.

Or you could read about this guy, formerly employed by the UK military and therefore terrified when the British left

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/afghan-arap-rwanda-taliban-defence-b2389616.html

He worked for the Afghanistan Army. He helped the British with defending his country. Plus where is his wife? Ah he left her in an unsafe country apparently!

I don’t actually.

I don’t think we’re that different to other comparable countries.

No one wants boats and drownings whether they’re in Italy or Aus and tension between groups of people can be bad elsewhere (maybe worse?), eg France

There are no easy solutions, only a few countries have tackled it successfully.

How is she talking nonsense? So you don’t believe that a significant change to a society can cause tension and division?
She’s not saying that we shouldn’t offer asylum, but to pretend that the only people who see any potential issues are racists anyway and best to be ignored won’t help anyone.

@inamarina if you think there are no racists in this country, you need to have your head examined. What do you think drove the Brexit vote, it certainly wasn't economics.

Well, unless you think the uk can treble its population, then regardless of the individuals circumstances, we have to put limits on who can claim asylum, there an estimated 110m people who have been forced to flee their homes for various reasons, shall we alone let them all come to the UK?

By letting in, up to 5m Chinese, we limit people fleeing genuine persecution that we can take in.

If you can point me to the millions fleeing war torn HK and living in camps around the region, i'd like to know - done for purely political reasons, though what they are, i ve no idea.