To think people who want "safe routes to migration" into the UK are hopelessly naive

[ForestGoblin]

We could spend every penny of public money on bringing refugees to the UK in comfy and safe boats and planes. We could make it mandatory for every home to provide accommodation and food. We could ban healthcare for anyone except refugees.

And there would still be thousands and thousands of boat crossings every year and millions more people languishing in bad situations and trying to figure out how to get here or elsewhere in northern Europe.

It's a crap situation. Life is bad. I feel dreadful for them.

But "safe routes" is a load of glib nonsense that can't work.

I know people get pissy when losing an argument. Fine.

What I don’t get is why they are so keen on boat arrivals continuing. They must know by now safe routes alone plus catching people or returns is a no go

There’s also no acknowledgment of global trends. How can people not be interested and aware?

All that stopping the boats has done in Aus has caused a switch to alternative routes.
Now, if your goal is to stop deaths by drowning, then that's probably good enough. But if its to "control borders" it isn't.

I posted evidence that your final statement is factually incorrect. Australia is also experiencing a surge in migration.

Why wouldn’t Aus fix another issue?

They led on boats. No reason they can’t lead on a new issue

It’s not incorrect

I said zero on Nauru

A surge in migration? So what? If you mean work visas

It's hardly "getting pissy" by pointing out that numbers of asylum seekers increased after the introduction of off shore processing.

Was it to you?

Can people say why what is going on across the world is so little interest?

Numbers are going up not just across the Channel and yet the focus is so limited

What are people wanting in the end? It’s fine to say you have no limits on people coming to U.K.

Some might actively choose that

Alexandra2001
Between 2015 and 2018, 1395, thats 1395 more than the UK has so far sent back to the EU.... we could have sent back more but chose not too.

We did try to send more back to the EU but we were net recipients in recent years in any case:

During the same period [2015-2018], the UK made 18,953 outgoing requests to transfer people to other Member States, from which 1,395 people were transferred abroad. This amounts to around 7% of outgoing requests by the UK resulting in a transfer.

In 2018, the the UK received a total of 37,453 asylum applications, and made 5,510 outgoing requests under Dublin III. Of these 5,510 requests, 209 migrants were transferred out of the UK under Dublin III, whilst 1,215 came in, making the UK a net recipient in 2018.

In 2019 the UK transferred out 263 asylum seekers to the EU and accepted 714 asylum seekers in return;
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-eurostat-news/-/DDN-20201009-1

2016 and 2017 stats here;
Shadow home secretary Yvette Cooper said the UK needs a "comprehensive new agreement" with the bloc like the Dublin Regulation...

Nick Timothy, who is the Tory candidate for Matt Hancock's seat at the next general election, said: "Here we go again.

"In 2017 under the Dublin Regulation 314 migrants were transferred out of the UK and 461 migrants were transferred to the UK. The year before the numbers were 362 and 558. Dublin didn't work. Labour aren't serious."

https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1800425/yvette-cooper-labour-migrant-returns-deal-eu

Trying to stop the boats is like trying to stop coastal erosion with sand bags. You cannot fight something so overwhelming so more lateral thinking is required.

In my view, the only solution is to improve conditions where these people are coming from to stop migration at source. We in the more prosperous nations need to work harder at sorting out global issues.

The difficulty is that historically our interference abroad has been problematic so it has been scaled back significantly for good reason. However, we have shown considerable support for Ukraine without taking over. Men of fighting age were not allowed to leave but were trained and supported to fight back against evil and we in the west have provided sanctuary to women and children on a temporary basis while the war is ongoing.

I believe there is much more scope for us (the US, Europe etc) to support persecuted groups overseas and use our skills and the global power of trade to push much harder against oppresion and poverty worldwide. The problem is likely to increase exponentially due to climate change so we also need to address this urgently if we don't want to be faced with world war.

We could be doing so much more that would be productive rather than trying to turn back the inevitable tide.

Actually on the Aus plane thing Labor are in so it might take another GE and Liberals proposing hardline action

Highest ever number of asylum seekers - govt lost control of immigration
It's not the "opposite graph" to mexico/us

I wouldn't dismiss Dublin so easily, the boat crossing numbers show that something changed in 2020 and it wasn't the UK getting closer to France.

Covid happened - many of the non-EU countries concerned would surely have been on our red list? Passenger air travel in general was drastically reduced/ more checks at the ports because of Covid requirements... The boat crossing route was established because other routes to the UK were frustrated.

Security around the Eurotunnel terminal and the ports has also been stepped up since 2015;

July 2015
UK home secretary to chair Cobra emergency meeting after body of Sudanese man found amid latest mass attempt to cross Channel to England.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jul/29/calais-one-dead-1500-migrants-storm-eurotunnel-terminal

Fewer asylum seekers being able to sneak in with fake EU identity cards is probably another factor.

Well, of course but Rwanda has capacity only for 500, possibly 1000.

How many crossed the channel last year?

AdamRyan
It was affected by brexit - we are no longer part of it

We are no longer part of a scheme where we were the net recipients.

Dublin requests/applications were processed before the main asylum application so they were not failed asylum seekers.

Boat numbers are still zero which is what we’re after

It’s interesting Labor are in though. I’m pretty sure it’ll be Liberal line of attack at next GE

Planes is odd, I would have thought easier to stop than crossing land borders or sneaking in a dinghy during the night

I ve been on this thread for a while and so far no one has said "unlimited numbers" well, only you do.

Why people leave central and S. America is not why people leave Sudan or Afghanistan, the two are not related.

My point, which you repeatedly ignore, is the UK hasn't a Nauru or PNG, Rwanda is not the answer.

Why you keep banging on about a place that has such limited capacity, as a solution or a deterrent, is beyond me.

I totally get that if Rwanda could take 10k or 20k then of course yes it would be.

Planes is odd, I would have thought easier to stop than crossing land borders or sneaking in a dinghy during the night

Not really, we don't control other countries border/airport controls, once a plane departs airport X thats it, its going to land at Heathrow etc.

Boat numbers are not 0
https://www.refugeecouncil.org.au/asylum-boats-statistics/
2 so far this year, 7 the year before, 51 people this year, 199 the year before. Who reached Australia
Turnbacks and take backs also up as well as plane arrivals

I wasn't commenting on effectiveness, just responding to your incorrect comment to jgw about returns.

If you don’t want unlimited and want a cap on numbers how will you achieve it?

The rest is just you getting riled over the same things, the numbers do not have to be high

AdamRyan
I wasn't commenting on effectiveness, just responding to your incorrect comment to jgw about returns

My post wasn't incorrect at all - they are not failed asylum seekers if their application for asylum has not yet been processed. Dublin decides which EU country processes the application. A failed asylum seeker should be deported to their home country.

The word failed is a new addtion to your argument.

86% of those arriving by boat and claiming asylum received a grant of protection by March 2023

The Aus plane thing is quite interesting. I don’t think it proves mandatory detention is not a deterrent because only those by boat are subject to it. If anything it shows starkly the impact of detention.

‘Many people arrive by plane with a valid visa then claim asylum while they are here. Unlike people who arrive in Australia by boat, people who arrive by plane are generally not subject to mandatory detention.’

I think it shows that asylum seekers use any routes available and whatever is easier.
You can't say whether the (made up for illustration) 1000 asylum seekers who arrived in Aus last week would have been 2000 if there wasn't enforcement of boats, or whether it would be 500 boats, 500 planes.
In any case the numbers show that Aus "stop the boats" policy hasn't reduced migration or numbers of asylum seekers