To ask what you think about Starmer’s plan to stop the boats?

[WhereIsMyJumper]

I cannot see how his ‘one in one out’ plan is going to help. I also can’t understand why France is cooperating with us. What’s the incentive?

If you don’t agree with this plan, what would your answer be?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/ckg6x4g6gg6t

You don't want to engage in a factual discussion?

Syrians are dying and being tortured. The UK took in 17,390 Ukrainian men u see the sponsorship scheme. There is no national army for Syrian men to join to solve the problem, it is a civil war.

But glad to see you would happily grant asylum to Syrian women and children. There were over 30,000 of them who applied in 2024.

The 1951 convention and the 1967 protocol define a refugee as someone outside their country with a well founded fear of persecution based on race, religion, nationality, social group or political opinion. A refugee can also flee due to a lack of protection from their government. There is no term within the convention or protocol which says “immediate danger”. The protocol removed the geographical and time limitations of the original convention.

(This stuff is embarrassingly easy to find)

Again, I ask, what is the safe legal route for someone to claim asylum in the U.K.?

Yep, I did google that - I may not have mentioned those specific countries in my post but essentially, this is the point I was making.

I think a lot of posters are forgetting about geographical proximity also. The US, for example, is not as easy to access from unstable countries in the ME as Europe is.

What more do you want to give them? Camelot castle hotel was also considered a place to house these people but the owner refused to do so because it would have meant staff being out of a job and he didn’t want his hotel ruined so I’m not sure why you think all the hotels being offered to them are grotty.

It isn’t true that no one has come up with a way to deal with it, @HoppingPavlovapost shows how

It's not about the UK being a soft touch. Remember "they are here, because you were there". Many people seeking asylum come from countries which were once colonized by the UK.

The argument that they are 'taking our houses and GP appointments' well there are generations of White British families sitting on benefits in council houses with no desire to work. Maybe we should all start looking at the issues in our own population first.

Immigrants are the backbone of this country right from the 50s when they were invited to work in the UK as white people didn't want to work as bus drivers or in the NHS. This continues. A couple of years ago, Eastern Europeans had to be flown in just to pick our strawberries! Those people seeking asylum have work aspirations which is more than can be said for some groups of people from the UK.

I prefer to engage with people who are tolerant of the views of others and reflect that in their posts. It can be done. Plenty of people I completely disagree with on here seem to be able to type in a way that isn't abusive of people that may have a different view to them. So there you go! I just don't want you to waste your typing time! 😃

@Busybeemumm exactly don't we have enough home grown problem without importing more we do not want or need.

Ok but let's just have the useful ones that pay their way.

I think the point I am trying to make, although I don’t know how it would work, is - wouldn’t attempting to strengthen foreign relationships both with our European neighbours and with some of the more unstable places in the ME be the best prevention? I.e. stop people from wanting to flee their home countries in the first place?

@Alexandra2001 Have you asked these Island nations? Sunak went round the world looking for places to send migrants, he found just Rwanda, who agreed to take just 500 to 1000 per year, up to 5000 in total. Australia could force PNG into accepting due to the v strong economic ties. Why not the Falklands? or a Scottish Island?

Well, I doubt Sunak has ‘asked’ them. It’s not really an asking situation. It’s a deal. Those particular island countries are completely economically depressed, if you threw even half decent money at them, they would bite your arm off. That’s obviously why you would target them and not a Scottish island or the Falklands.

@WhereIsMyJumper

You want us to strengthen ties to the EU to stop them fleeing...the EU ??

Secondly we have gone through massive periods of instability and revolts to get to where we are today.

Unfortuntly people need to stay and fight for the type of country they want.

Which seems to be us and the type we have.

The Falklands would be free, we wouldn't need to pay them anything, other than the costs to build camps, same as in a developing country.

What Island nations did we seek a deal with?

Someone has to open the conversation, so of course its an ask....

I seem to recall at the time, the UK was desperate to find somewhere, anywhere....

@Busybeemumm and we need to help those people don't we not import people who will squash them down even further.
No child says I want to grow up and be on benefits for the rest of my life living in a depressing estate with no real education to speak of.

You see i rather think we have a responsibility to our own first.

I'm not tolerant of ignorance and lies. For example you keep saying that sexual abuse has gone up and women feel unsafe because of asylum seekers. When asked for evidence you point at posts on MN written by Reform supporters. You call asylum seekers "illegals" despite knowing that it's not illegal to claim asylum. This is repeated by you and your ilk over and over again as though people are stupid.

Throw enough shite and some will eventually stick...

It is the same with "but Australia stopped the boats..." ignoring the geography, ignoring the economic ties to PNG or that initially it had no effect and perhaps a bigger reason it eventually did was because Vietnams economy improved.

The Falklands would be free, we wouldn't need to pay them anything, other than the costs to build camps, same as in a developing country

It’s a British territory? If so, why on earth would you want to use that. Not exactly solving your problem, but shifting it somewhat.

What Island nations did we seek a deal with? Someone has to open the conversation, so of course it’s an ask. I seem to recall at the time, the UK was desperate to find somewhere, anywhere

Well now, that is the question. I’d bet excellent money that none I named would have been approached with a deal. Do you know that they were? You seem very keen to believe that every option, including them, must have been approached with a deal. You seem very trusting in your government and to believe what you are told😁.

No, sorry - I don’t think I was clear.

Strengthening ties with our European neighbours to have some kind of common foreign policy where we work with unstable nations in the Middle East to help stabilise them so citizens do not want to flee in the first place.

I may be talking absolute bollocks, I’m no expert. But it seems better than causing the conditions that lead to destabilisation in the first place. As someone upthread mentioned, the countries they are mainly coming from are ones we’ve had a hand in fucking up in the first place. And you can’t compare British history of revolts and invasions with what’s going on in the ME now. It’s a different world entirely.

Are you saying that sending all migrants to a remote Island in the southern seas, 1000s of miles from anywhere, wouldn't be a deterrent?

Very strange logic, i doubt the migrant is concerned about the ownership of said Island, do you?

Haha. Doing his best for France more like. He gave in over the fishing rights and he has given in again. I bet Macron can't believe how easy it was.

It is the same with "but Australia stopped the boats..." ignoring the geography, ignoring the economic ties to PNG or that initially it had no effect and perhaps a bigger reason it eventually did was because Vietnams economy improved

Get your timeline right. The Stop The Boats political campaign and implementation was long after the boat demographic swapped from Vietnamese to other. There were basically no Vietnamese ‘boat people’ when we introduced the new system, because as you say their economy had improved and they were happy to be there accordingly, not on the boats.

As part of his manifesto Starmer said he was going to stop the boats by smashing the people smuggling gangs, well clearly that hasn’t worked.

You think a single mother diagnosed with a disability raising a child diagnosed with a disability and by definition is a vulnerable person shouldn’t receive help from the government?

So isn't that the longer term solution?

Help developing countries....

Much harder to stop wars, but maybe not starting them in the first place would be a start?

It's language like 'import' which dehumanises people and their experiences.

We also have a responsibility to people seeking asylum especially as it's likely they may be coming from a country which the UK once ruled and left broken.