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.

Yes but mandatory detention works when it’s applied. It’s only been applied to boat entry so far.

Whether Aus decides to use it for planes too we’ll see but if they do then that number will drop.

If they do there will be no other way to arrive that is easier. If boats and planes are out how would it happen?

Planes is too simplistic actually. Its people arriving on visas then claiming asylum. I don't know how they can stop that.
Just shows its more complex than "stop the boats" suggests

They could process the asylum claims off shore as they do with boats. Processing claims at another location is fine. Why wouldn’t it be legally possible? I can’t see a reason why not

It’d be interesting to see what kind of visa people arrive on, I’m assuming temporary and they use it to get through passport control but are meant to leave after a couple of years.

But it's the same as here. If they allowed people to arrive, then removed them for processing, all they are doing is providing an incentive for people to not report to authorities. Its not deterring people arriving.

DuncinToffee
The word failed is a new addition to your argument

I wasn't the one who described the asylum seekers [returned under Dublin rules] as failed.

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

Not quite - only a small share had received a decision by March 2023;

Ninety two percent of people arriving in small boats from 2018 to March 2023 claimed asylum; of the small share who had received a decision by March 2023, 86% received a grant of protection.

What do you mean by not report to authorities? If people are applying for asylum they have to go to the state authorities

It's still 86% of those who claimed asylum.

Anyway, the majority has their asylum granted once the government gets round to processing their claim.

I mean they arrive and don't report - so are illegal.

DuncinToffee
It's still 86% of those who claimed asylum

No it's not - it's 86% of the small number of people receiving a decision.

We have 400 in hotels (4 star some) in very close proximity to where I live. I have to be honest and say I am absolutely fucking sick of it. I haven’t see a woman or kid yet. All men. All 20-40. Tories are a shambles on this and Labours manifesto was even worse last time. What a soft country we have become.

One of the main attractions of the Uk to illegal migrants is the lack of ID cards which make it very easy to simply disappear into society with few checks once they arrive with no fear of being sent back.

ID cards have nothing at all to do with it. ID cards are meaningless without full compulsion to have and carry them - a draconian and expensive measure, and without enforcement i.e. regular demands to show ID - and if we had enough Police and other officials to enforce the use of ID cards, we wouldn't need ID cards. It's a ridiculous "solution" trotted out by people who haven't thought about it.

Being illegal in Aus is no great shakes.

Speaking to SBS the young man said he went to Australia on a three-month tourist visa last year and now lives in fear of being discovered. This means he cannot apply for his driver’s licence. He cannot seek medical treatment and he can do nothing but menial labour out of fear that he will be found handed a criminal record and be deported.

He also would find it hard to leave via the airport without a record

74k of those people who have used air, visa and tried for asylum have been rejected. So legally they could go back to country of origin.

Well, we are an outlier on this in Europe, i don't think anyone holidaying in France or Spain think "Won't be coming back to this Draconian country"

Atm anyone can be anybody if stopped or wishing to access health services, there is no requirement for photo ID.

There are thought to be around 1.2m people living here illegally, they can work for cash in hand, be exploited... the highest in Europe.

Its not a coincidence & French immigration minister has already said its why the UK is so attractive to migrants.. backed up by interviews with migrants in France - they see the UK as a land of opportunity.

Given the increased Med crossings to EU I doubt it’s much of a factor. People risk drownings to get there too.

Not comparable, conditions in North Africa etc are terrible and anything is better but thats not the case once in Europe, so why not go one better and come to the UK where 1.2m illegal migrants can move about freely, earn money, access healthcare...

I thought it was the language and family connections people were after, I’m sure those posts come up often

After your last post getting riled you didn’t answer

If you want a limit on numbers how will you achieve it?

I agree 100%.

We've now bunged the French nearly £1billion and still the boats keep coming.

We need to get tough,

1. Leave the UNCHR
2. Stop issuing licences for French fishing boats in our waters
3. Cut all Foreign Aid to those countries that won't accept failed asylum seekers back - such as Eritrea, Pakistan, India,* Ethiopea and Sudan
4. Start doing 'pushbacks' in the Channel.

I'm sick of this pansy-assed government not wanting to upset the French even when they are taking us for fools.

*India launched a space rocket in July this year ffs - they don't need our Aid

In all honesty, unless we stop/limit the reasons people leave, then the numbers will still keep coming, we've removed ourselves from EU return agreements, which whilst you dismiss, the evidence is very few crossed pre 2019.... again, what changed?
Brexit removed ourselves from any influence & cooperation we had within the EU, took us out of Europol and criminal DB's, so making tackling the smuggling gangs even harder.... perhaps a UK still in the EU could have ensured the stream of small boats coming to northern France could be halted.

I said many times, that unless Rwanda can support 10k plus then 1000 places will not deter... how can it? with in 3 planes landing, the facilities will be full and no further possibility of being deported....

So far you ve failed to explain what happens after the 1000 places are full...

One thing escorting back a large & substantial boat back into international waters, quite another a flimsy dingy, so what happens when the dingy sinks? or people fall off? or the French meet the English escort with a war ship?

Push back would require the crews to let people drown.

Neither India or Pakistan need our aid, they have huge standing armies & both have nuclear weapons plus as we see with the Sunaks, many Indian families are extremely rich, owning very powerful companies too, such as TATA.

There’s no point in going back to Dublin III as a reason as already said. Med crossings up and Mexico to US in same timeframe.

Introduced in 2014, 2015 saw EU migrant crisis

Catching smugglers is incredibly hard. Night vision and spotters won’t do it. French spokeswomen said ‘completely delusional’ for those who think they can catch everyone, people hide behind dunes or whatever. You won’t be able to do it. French police already have the kit to try, it’s not fool proof. Smugglers are very good at what they do and adapting.

So you don’t have a way to limit numbers. You’ve just listed things that aren’t relevant.

As for Rwanda, well some who have done it before say numbers don’t need to be high. He had a compelling argument, so you can keep asking same questions the answer is still the same. It doesn’t have to be high numbers.

The small number is all the government managed to process hence the massive backlog. If you want a larger number, In the year ending June 2022, 76% of initial decisions resulted in a grant of asylum or other form of protection.

You are not disputing the fact that the majority of asylum claims are successful?

@Jennygosoftly

its a joke isn’t it. Shambles of a country we are currently.

All the parents around here have now had to ban their kids from the park next to the hotel due to an incident. Shocking. If we keep allowing this, there will be 1.5m asylum seekers arriving in the next 10 years.

People are already taking matters into their own hands. Policies Europe-wide aren't working;

https://www.birmingham.ac.uk/news/2023/evidence-that-greek-coastguard-caused-sinking-of-boat-leaving-500-missing-isnt-surprising

@Alexandra2001 "Push back would require the crews to let people drown."

Anyone who is stupid enough to get into a flimsy unseaworthy dingy accepts the risk of drowning.

Why should we be emotionally blackmailed to save people from their own reckless behaviour?