Statement by the Chair of the Conservative Party

[newnamethanks]

"If they don't like barges they should fuck off back to France". 30p Lee Anderson of course, not the BNP. Not the National Front or whatever their current name is. The Chairman of the Conservative Party. Supporters must be so proud. What a statesman. So Churchillian.

The liberals generally haven't thought about that and will refuse to do so. You'll get blank looks if you try. At most you'll get some mumbling about how whatever country you live in is not yet Singapore and therefore there's plenty of room. The leftists will say that the real solution is revolution - i.e. that the problems they're all 'fleeing' from are actually caused by the west anyway, whether through colonialism, capitalism, general interference, causing climate change etc. (this is also why mass immigration is actually both good for you and also a well deserved punishment). So the solution is for western countries to solve all the problems we've caused for all those unfortunate countries that are poorer than us, then people will generally be quite happy to stay home. Easy. Liberals will generally nod along in a bit of a haze to all this.

what planet are you on?

Maybe you should ask yourself this, since your bizarre paragraph in no way resembles anything that anyone in this thread is advocating for.

And for the umpteenth time, people arriving in small boats and claiming asylum are not 'illegal immigration'.

You say provisions of the convention confer a certain right. I am saying such provisions don’t exist. I cannot direct you to provisions which don’t exist.
You say they do exist; so which ones are they?

In the MN world, the majority are genuine asylum seekers...
In the real world, the majority are genuine asylum seekers as the evidence shows.

That the Tories have failed to control the borders is the issue. They've failed on immigration. They've failed on the economy. They've failed on housing. They've failed on the NHS. They've failed on Education. They've failed on women's and children's rights. They've failed on law and order.

Living in a Tory echo chamber and blaming everyone else isn't going to change that.

I agree with him.

Really? You think asylum seekers should fuck off back to where they came from, even if that means them and their children being raped, tortured and killed?

Well he actually said if they don't want to go on the barge they can fuck off back to France, not fuck of back home. But even so, that's a histrionic way to interpret the comment. A more obvious and rational interpretation would be that they should just get on the barge and stop moaning.

You think anyone who knows they are at real risk of being raped, tortured or murdered is going to choose the Fuck Off option versus the barge?

France have already declined saying it would work as a magnet to every asylum seeker in Europe, and I can really see their point.

The British authorities have already floated the idea for years.

Is there ever a discussion on MN these days that doesn't end up with transwomen.

I personally believe that the barge and Travelodge etc is completely inhumane

and Dentention Centres no doubt, so where do you suggest asylum seekers are housed whilst their application is processed @OoopsOhNo ? Presumably not in your leafy part of the UK.

Most of them are single men with no children under the age of 30 but don’t let the facts stand in the way.

Don't worry Braverman is already on the case of buying tents

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jul/28/home-office-buys-tents-to-house-asylum-seekers

@jgw1 just to say many thanks for the link you posted at 18:35; it's good to have the facts and I thought it cut through the hyperbole and shroud-waving really well

Similar hyperbole seems to surround the allegedly "unsafe" nature of the accommodation, with "the next Grenfell" seized upon with glee ... pity really, because that seems to have come from a unnamed "source", which could easily mean something the media invented to make a better story

Happily a much more balanced summary is available:
https://www.fia.uk.com/news/fire-safety-worries-regarding-the-migrant-barge.html

I quite agree the level of ignorance is astonishing. How many times on threads do we have to explain that it is perfectly legal to seek asylum in a safe country no matter how one arrived in that country?

Maybe the men under 30 should stay in Syria/Iraq/Iran/Afghanistan or wherever while the women and children trek thousands of miles to seek asylum instead?

Honestly. It's like total ignorance bingo in this thread.

Who the hell do you think despotic regimes actually persecute as a priority? Hint for you, it isn't small children or old women, its the people who can actually be a genuine nuisance to them, i.e. Young fighting-age or educated men.

Which provision doesn't exist? The one stating that you can't claim asylum in your country of choice?

But one may break the law in the manner of one’s arrival. The government have now legislated to ensure that those who do so will not be able to remain.

@SadOrWickedFairy I think that was half my point, it's not much good a load of middle class lefties (like myself) saying that they shouldn't be placed in xyz unless we'd be prepared to have this situation in our own back yards.

I don't know what the answer is tbh. I like to think I wouldn't object if our council announced 200 young traumatised men were suddenly going to be placed next door, but if I'm totally honest with myself I don't think I'd be all that happy about it...

And we can take them all can we?
Where the hell do you suggest we put them exactly?

Lovely to see the standard of pro-Tory discussion has progressed as far as railing against lefties!

It's ok to still have a remnant instinct of self-preservation.

You appear to be contending that the convention confers a right to claim asylum in the country of your choice. If that is so, it appears to be a right that is currently being ignored by all the states which are party to it. I am asking you which provisions of the convention confer that right. I hope that’s clear.

In the UK, we have plenty of room, and would have plenty of services to accommodate them if -

1. We had a Government that wasn't ideologically opposed to spending money on basic public services
2. People realised that the asylum seekers are frequently highly educated, skilled, trained, and healthy people who would be an enormous boon to any sensible country if they were permitted to work

Here is a helpful link that will explain the situation to you, its quite long, so perhaps just read the summary.

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

The illegal Immigration Bill is more than likely at odds with the UKs obligations under the 1951 Refugee Convention, so it is wide open to legal challenge if the government ever chose to try and put it into effect, which I happen to doubt theey will.

The problem is that you've fallen for right-wing propaganda hook, line and sinker.

Do you really believe every asylum seeker is a fit young man from a safe country? It is simply not true. And why do you think fit young men cannot be asylum seekers? It is often men who are targeted first because of the obvious danger they present to violent regimes if they are opponents of those regimes; also, of course, get the menfolk out of the way and you have free rein to rape, kill and traffic their wives and children.

I can guarantee that they don't believe they can pick and choose where they live at taxpayers' expense, because they know perfectly well that they can't.

People who have lived on the barges have attested to what is wrong with them, and the conditions in which these people will be living will be considerably worse as they will have to share cabins, will be there most of the day, and will be subjected to a fire risk as confirmed by the Fire Brigade.

Yes, we do need a safe affordable solution, but how on earth can you possibly believe this is it? The barge will house around 1000 people, whilst during, due to the government's massive inefficiency, we have a backlog of 50,000 claims.

What would be a safe, very affordable solution would be to accept France's offer of asylum processing facilities there, and make our own asylum processing system much more efficient. We could then quickly deport genuine illegal immigrants and move genuine refugees on so that they can work and become net contributors to our economy. I cannot for the life of me understand why people like you dismiss that and favour ridiculous initiatives like this that manifestly achieve nothing.

Exactly this. Or more likely they will all fuck off back to Pakistan, or Lebanon or Jordan - poorer neighbouring countries absorb the vast majority of the world’s refugees anyway. With Lee’s approach they can have a hundred per cent of them and richer countries can leave them to it and try to ignore the issue. Except we can’t, because a minority, human nature being what it is, will always travel. We should be doing so much better.

They’re all sitting MPs, elected as representatives of this government. 🤷‍♀️