We can't stop the boats without leaving the ECHR, right?

[Notmycircusnotmyotter]

forgive my ignorance, but this is the case isn't it? And yet other countries ignore judgments and deport illegal immigrants (Poland for example).

I don't really know where I sit so this isn't supposed to be goady but the collective mind will know more. My question is, why isn't this part of the discussion? Government / media never shut up about small boat crossings but short of drastic action (towing them back? Deportations?) what can they actually do?

1% of the global total. That is staggering. If you look at land mass and population we must be taking in far above what 1% of those factors would look like. And yes happy to adjust for usable land vs desert vs mountain etc.

For the UK I'll leave others to debate that, but for the sake of Kent we need to. As a county we can no longer afford to subsidise this. At the last stats Kent supports over 900 "unaccompanied young" people. I know through work that young is a stretch. That really means mostly male adults who are under 25 but look younger.

Enter the UK at an airport. You need to provide ID at passport control to get in. Some get refused entry.

Enter by boat over the Channel. You get put in a hotel and are free to move around at your own will without anybody knowing the smallest detail about you.

Christ.

75% of people working their way through the system are eventually deemed unreturnable. Not because they have well founded fear of persecution. And there’s a pressure to clear backlogs.
Of course we need to stop this nonsense. We don’t even know who these people are. When some poor soul dies and effort is put in to establishing who they are the truth comes out. Another young person following the well established path for economic reasons. The BBC cited some study that said 60% of young Pakistani men for example were thinking of trying their luck abroad.
There’s a great deal of asylum shopping around Europe too. Some have been bouncing around different countries for many years. That poor toddler who died on a crossing recently was born in Sweden.

Agree with PPs. Detention. It’s the only solution. No document no entry.

@thedeadneverdie

Yes we can ….Australia have. Since 2014 when they implemented their sovereign border policy, they have reduced people arriving in boats from over 50,000 a year to single digits

Who counts the boat people? What about people who arrive and go off to their connections? How do we count them?

I agree with you on this, but believe enforcement will be the issue. At the moment the gangs prefer to concentrate in centres of high population. But yes I would hope a genuine refugee would be amenable le to going where genuine, non-exploitive work and income is.

They did this mostly by push backs which is not only illegal but impossible. France won't take them back.

Where do you want to push them back to?

In 2024, a total of 35,559 people were granted refugee status in the UK following initial decisions on asylum claims. This figure represents 90% of the total number of people granted refugee protection or other leave at initial decision.

That’s £35k out of SIXTY MILLION PEOPLE. Get a grip FGS @PlantFodder

So make it possible to request asylum from abroad and that won't happen!

@MiloMinderbinder925 there must be some area in the chanel waters that if they don't get to a certain point then they have to go to France or Belgium.

@CorneliaCupp so no one gets moved here from aboard? How come we took Syrian refuges years ago from camps etc?
We took vetted refuges and Ukraine refugee.

I think you're misinterpreting my point! The pp is suggesting we offer a system where asylum seekers can legally apply for asylum outside the UK. These applications would surely increase, so a million wouldn't be unthinkable, given the countries they're fleeing from and the types of persecution . If asylum applications currently have a success rate of 75% ( refugee councils figures, not mine!), Then a million asylum applications could lead to 750,000 refugee statuses granted, no?

Then you'll be in French water. France don't want them back and have refused to have British officials on the coast to stop people.

They also refused to get people back as they said it was dangerous.

They did not do mainly by push backs - what a load of nonsense. It’s incredibly well documented. They said loud and clear if you come and illegal land in a boat, you will automatically be rejected and removed to a third party country paid to take you. From there, you can either stay there or go home. That was it - no matter how genuine the claim may be, if you enter illegally, you will not be granted asylum. And they followed through.

If Aus can do it we can. It’ll take a mandate at a GE.

@PlantFodderI get what you mean.

I didn't say that no one every gets moved here from abroad, I don't even know what that means!
We have some limited routes for people from specific countries, namely Ukraine and Hong Kong, but that's it.

Leaving ECHR won't stop illegal immigration or the boats.

Out of 60 million. That isn't the current UK population by a mile. We are just under 70 million. Perhaps you are like me astounded by our population growth for a small island that hasn't changed its land mass at all.

It's not me who doesn't know what they're talking about.

In 2013, Abbot and co instigated a policy called Operation Sovereign Borders or "turn backs" which is where they intercepted boats and turned them around.

Why not?

Just astonishing how someone can be so naive

But when do you stop. Not EVERYONE applying can have a space here. Surely you can understand that. Your comments on this thread are so misleading - I am now starting to doubt your sincerity. I don't mean you are a troll. But that you have no idea as to the impact to the existing communities, which does include accepted asylum seekers, people on special immigration visas, and those on work/student visas.

What do you mean? About what?