Stopping the boats.

[Scenicgirl]

Honest question.
When Rishi Sunak announced the promise to tackle Channel migrant crossings as one of his five key pledges at the beginning of 2023, and subsequently failed and Keir Starmer appearing not to be concerned about the numbers arriving daily, when other EU countries have taken a much sterner stance sending a clear message, why can't we stop/pause the boats?

Nottodaythankyou123
If every application was done from a safe, clean, functioning processing center then in theory there would be no need for the boats

Would the processing centre in France provide accommodation? How many asylum seekers would be accommodated at one time? What would the target turnaround be?

I’m not necessarily keen on it, I’m keen on a world where no one needs to flee their homes in the first place, but it’s an alternative to the current system that clearly doesn’t work. I get what you’re saying now though; without the physical barrier numbers would increase - I suppose they’d need enough resources that claims could be dealt with within a short timeframe and those whose claim isn’t granted are moved on (to where I don’t know - if it was that easy they’d have done it I guess!)

I think the problem would be that around 70% are granted asylum and even with some rejections the numbers would be very high as barriers to application would be lower

I ponder also. What happens to say Syria when everyone’s fled who wants to. Then what happens to that country. Does it basically then attract those who are like minded into its current control? Would it become a country breeding and growing and arming hate across the world. What then?

I know it has nothing to do with the U.K. taking in asylum seekers but what does happen to this bits of land once all that’s good has left leaving being the rotten… does that then become a bigger problem and now we are back to war and sticking noses in and here we bloody well go again. “Helping” but still ending up the bad guy. Do we leave them to it and say fuck them but that’s not very humane either now is. Bomb them to shit.. no that breeds more hate.

Do we sometimes just have to hold our hands up not just the U.K. and go we cannot fix this and ignore it.

what do you do overall ultimately.

Yes to the accommodation - wouldn’t be cheap but in all likelihood cheaper than the hotels etc at the moment - nothing fancy, but clean and safe and affording basic human dignity and decency. Target turnaround of say a month, so you can keep a constant flow of people either being granted access to the UK or being moved on if their claim is denied (as my pp, I’m not sure how that would work in practice). Given the numbers, I’m not 100% how it would work, probably would need to be a processing village rather a centre!

The UK won't set up processing centres outside the UK because it would encourage people to come to the UK instead of the first safe country. It wouldn't stop people who have been rejected from losing their documents and coming to the UK anyway.

There are already legal routes to get to the UK, there's the resettlement scheme which includes Community Sponsorship and the Mandate Resettlement Scheme. These are refugees the UNHCR has already assessed.

We also accept refugees through the Family Reunion route. We accepted thousands of Ukrainians and people from Hong Kong as well as Afghanistan through these schemes as well as others from Syria and Iran, Sudan and Somalia.

The essential criterion for seeking asylum under the UN Treaty, to which the UK is a signatory, is personal persecution. (Coming from a war torn country is technically a different route.)

When you meet this criterion or believe that you do, the Treaty gives you the freedom to choose your destination. The government at your destination will assess your claim. Your quotation above grossly distorts this process.

We are now 9 pages or about 220 posts past my request for data to back the belief that people claim asylum when they are really economic migrants or, as you would have it, making lifestyle choices. I’ve asked for anything excluding the tabloid press. And we can forget the young Albanian men because while that was a valid or somewhat valid case of economic migration, it’s essentially been dealt with. What other facts have you got?

Be a whole city I reckon.

Ok but then the issue is with the criteria for allowing asylum - all it does is stop the boats and mean that instead of 100 people risk their lives, those same 100 can apply from a place of safety, and the 70 who’s claim is granted can proceed safely. If the argument is that claim approval of 70% is too high, then that’s a whole different ballgame.

Isn’t our approval higher than other countries so although we take in less we approve more.

Be interesting to see the different criteria

Of course they could try but they could be legitimately returned as the processing is done in France, It's not perfect and some will slip through the net but it's a damn site better than the carnage that's going on at the moment, control of the situation needs to be taken away from the traffickers, people are being exploited and literally dying with the way things are now

It’s not about who can be returned it’s about the number of applications which would be very high

Of course we should all want better jobs or better paid jobs for everyone, but that's if we all lived in lala land and in reality doesn't happen.
We happen to have people who were born here living like that, not to mention people living rough on the streets, the solution has never been found.

well it would have to be capped, I'm not trying to say I'm in any way qualified to suggest what that number would be or even what the actual process would be but it's a starting point and could be looked at properly, the number of applications may be very high but on the other hand they may not, contrary to popular belief not everyone wants to come here surely it's better to suggest something that is doable than finding a problem for every solution

It should be noted that Syria also has less than half the population than the UK.

having come so far and passing through Spain, Italy, France etc why do the the extra leg to reach GB in dangerous conditions?

No ID cards in UK.

Good point but some would say that they have lost their papers/left them when they fled their country so that would be difficult to administer.
There is a lot of unrest about ID cards being introduced in the UK but I'm not against them.

Indeed which is why we shouldn’t be open arms for everyone.

The poster you quoted is wrong. If they are bypassing immigration control, then they are committing an offence under immigration laws. I posted this earlier with a link to the exact laws that set out the laws and punishments for it.

HRTFT but am now relieved to see you meant 'Those' boats not generally stopping 'Boats' as a thing; which given how near to any water suitable for boating is for any UK resident would be a very bad and culturally genocidal thing to do.

Ye mean, the boats carrying loads of people risking their lives in order to make some very unsavoury people richer, then well I've no idea and am relying on No Fear Keir to Steer.....

Meanwhile, I do think that removing the ability to speak English as your only tenuous link to finding the UK a safer country to seek asylum rather than the 'safe' EU country where you already have found 'safety' in should be removed.

We're coming into the stormy months now; whereby any illegal migrant 'boat' sets off from safe shores at their peril. And just think about those cunts that are raking in the money before you support this method of international travel.

You’re working on the basis that they bring themselves to the attention of the authorities, rather than taking bigger risks with their safety to avoid the authorities and disappear into the black market. It’s physically impossible to search every single lorry, van and car coming over by ferry. And you can only remove someone if you know who and where they are. And if and when they do come to light, and they’re from a country than requires an emergency travel document rather than a letter (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/documents-for-enforced-removals) what are you suggesting we do with them while we’re waiting for that to be issued? Do we build more detention centres? Do we start locking up children? Or do we just hope that they don’t disappear again? Because there’s not much incentive for them to stay in touch.

We already fine employers 10k per person for hiring people who don’t have the right to work in the UK. And yet, they’re still being hired. What difference do you think ID cards will make?

Nope, because they aren't immigrants and not illegalas they hand themselves in on purpose to the authorities to be able to claim asylum. So they have not arrived illegally. If they keep hidden from authorities then they would be illegal immigrants. That's precisely why the end up being rescued at sea, or if they land on beaches they wait around.
Unfortunately you've read too much from the Daily Mail without reading up on the laws.

https://policyforum.labour.org.uk/commissions/a-fair-and-effective-immigration-policy-building-uk-immigration-centers-in-mainland-france shows the policy

Exactly it’s not ID cards

Germany has them and same issues as here