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?

FFS!

I know. I’m sitting on my hands.

I don’t wish to get in the middle of your discussion but it’s actually quite common. You have the Sikh community in Afghanistan, Kurds in Turkey, you’ve got the Citizens Amendment Bill in India, where Muslims whose families came from Bangladesh decades ago are now having to fight to prove that they are entitled to their Indian citizenship, you’ve got Roma communities in various countries, the Tamil community in Sri Lanka, etc. It goes on all over the world.

They have not paid for their accommodation, they have paid criminal gangs for illegal entry into the uk

I do think the most popular reason most people seek asylum is because they are being persecuted for being “other” because of their culture.

Re Afghanistan it’s literally the point I made earlier. No one wants to live there. Every single person could have a valid claim for asylum under our rules if they can get here, which many are indeed are doing. They are going through safe countries to make it to the U.K though so it’s clearly an economic choice. I don’t blame them either. The boats are wrong and deadly but thats their choice.

So given entire countries technically meet the criteria for asylum what’s your solution. Do you have an objection to U.K. passports for all? What would be your grounds for refusal?

I do think the most popular reason most people seek asylum is because they're being persecuted for being "other" because of their culture.

What do you think is the least popular reason? What are you basing your grading system on?

Its not my definition, the government has counted nearly 700,000.

I think it is about me and only me, and it is terribly rude of @Blossomtoes to call my factual interventions rollocks. I know facts challenge some people and they do not like them, but really, barnacles to them.

I think the problem may be that Brexit didn't achieve that for the economy quite enough, so we need to find another way.

Apologies to those who have been on the thread long enough and s are aware of this facts.

Asylum seekers are not illegal. It is legal in UK and internatonal law to seek asylum in any country you choose and the route of entry is irrelevant to that asylum claim.

There is a good discussion of the law around asylum seekers here.
You may find it enlightening.

https://levinslaw.co.uk/dinghies-in-the-channel-illegal-entrants-and-immigration-offences/

In the interests of factual accuracy it is not the UKs rules. The same rules apply in the UK as they do in other countries that have signed up to the 1951 convention.

You don’t though. Your post earlier was indeed made up
when you stated Australia only reduced numbers due to safe routes so actually maybe you’ve realised that at least.

‘Factual interventions’ is indeed pushing it.

It’s not my definition, the government has counted nearly 700,000.

jgw1 ok and are you going to answer my other questions about empty houses?

I would like the acknowledgment that safe routes will not replace boats as international law will still apply

The outcome will not be as people claim, that safe routes will stop people dying crossing and stop smugglers

It will be in addition to boats, you’ll get both. Unless the location of protection is changed.

Australia is a good example of how to do that.

No Aus gov thinks other methods will work which is why when the opposition inherited them they didn’t switch to anything being proposed on these threads and elsewhere, they’d know numbers would go up in thousands again.

The important question that needs addressing is why the is so much ire at those fleeing persecution and not those who have ensured a cost of living, housing and health crisis in the UK.

Why are people angry at asylum seekers and not those who are millionaires and pay a lower proportion of their income in tax than teachers and nurses?

One thing that no one answers is how many people would want to apply if the system was changed to safe routes

And how many would need to be accepted to stop those who get a no paying smugglers to cross

The whole point of it is to show how tough we are on asylum seekers for the benefit of daily mail readers. Not to find a practical solution.

This is from a government that's using oil licences and considering dumping net zero. Climate change will create a flow of refugees far higher than anything we've ever seen.

Presumably the acceptable number is significantly above the 5million HKers the government has provided safe routes to?

As foolish as the government is, I think they know that stopping their boats isn't in their interests, since it is a useful device to keep people angry and distract from the real reasons there is so much poverty in the UK.

We’re going to need energy security as much as any other country but how much will stopping those oil licences do globally for climate change?

Refugees will be far higher though, I agree on that. Countries will need to handle it either by accepting a high steady flow or deal with it another way

So above 5m - for each country. How many countries need safe routes?

Significantly above 5m, what 20m? How will that work in your mind

how do you know what they have paid for accommodation? What do you pay for your? They could have paid 10x as much.

Suppose you work overtime for 20 years to pay of your mortgage, and then become a refugee? You could have paid far more for accommodation already in your life than the people moaning at you in your new country.

How much of your mortgage have you paid? What if you are a refugee this time next year? How would you feel about people moaning that you have not paid for your accommodation? How would you feel if the people moaning about you "not paying" for your accommodation where the same ones recklessly car driving and turning on their heating and throwing away plastic, and causing the climate change and resulting conflicts that lead to the destruction of the home you have paid for?

Do you drive a car? Use central heating? Throw away plastic? You are contributing to the loss of housing in other areas of the world, housing that may well have been paid for.

The issue is the overcrowding, the fire risk and the public health risk.

The government should be processing people so they can either live here or return to live at home. It's expensive and damaging to leave people in stasis.

The barge is just a small performance, designed to look like toughness to the type of person who doesn't look too deeply behind the Daily Mail headlines.

It may surprise you to learn that it wasn't my idea to allow 5million HKers into the UK, quite why you and others are worked up about a much smaller number of asylum seekers is a very interesting question.