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

So eventually we'll be just left with lots of "Kerry katonas" and deliveroo/drug dealers as UK citizens. Should just write the place off now. Or move to Oz like the savvy one's have.

As a pp quoted somewhere on this thread, the government (any government) does not want things to change. They let this happen, they could have put a stop to it years ago, but decided not to. Personally, I think life in the UK is extremely bleak and about to get a whole lot bleaker. For those who are currently cushioned from reality by wealth and living in " naice, " areas, who support asylum seekers because it's not happening on their patch, let's see how you feel about things when communities start to change in your towns. When that day comes, and it will be sooner rather than later, I can well imagine that Jeremiah and Isabella and little baby Tobias will hypocritically be the first ones to hot foot it out of here.

And the U.K. recruited nurses from India Ghana etc during Covid. Offered a lot of money to encourage this.

Your point is? They're legal ,skilled, requested workers? How on earth does that compare to the "boat men" ?????

@Pinkfluffypencilcase or did you wrongly assume all realists just hated black and brown people? They sincerely don't. stop banging that tired and ignorant drum.

@Namitynamename

Any legal route would need to be capped though, so wouldn't remove the issue entirely. It also wouldn't stop those who are economic migrants.

The U.K. accepts some refugees who are most in need through the UNHCR. There would be scope to take in more of the most vulnerable if we weren't having to spend billions on those coming on boats.

That the movement of people is global.
that the U.K. goes to other countries and tells them that the U.K. is a great place etc

So of course that message spreads.

I work with asylum seekers. And many are educated and qualified. The social worker who was tortured. The doctor who was a political prisoner. They co e here and they are held in limbo. On purpose. The process is slow on purpose. The doctor eventually got her asylum approved and is now in the process of meeting requirements to practice here.

These people want to contribute. They want to work.

Where have I said this?

Talk about trashing the UK.

How about "some" support for the only plan on the table? a plan first suggested by Robert Jenrick, he suggested this exact plan as a way to break the traffickers model, wrote about it in a national paper...

Once its past the trial, anyone crossing the channel will be returned, so basically a waste of money to pay to cross, with no right to come here via any regular route.

But oh no, lets just trash the country and plan because you hate Labour.

Wont even give it a chance..... whilst unable to suggest anything positive.

Yep and I think they were probably exploiting the locals as the British were

Exactly, it’s an absolute racket

there has also been the issue with people arriving from Chagos as again they need to live somewhere

I'm not sure why people keep repeating this. It's well known that people are paying smugglers to take them through Europe to the UK. They get boats from France across the channel.

By law, you can claim asylum in any country you choose and they're choosing to claim in the UK. Perhaps because they speak English, have relatives here or have no choice as this is where the gangs are bringing them.

They then make a claim for asylum, and 70% receive refugee status. That means the majority have valid claims.

Chagos. Smash the gangs, fastest growth etc. probably why Starmer’s plans get the reception they do, except from a few.

@MiloMinderbinder925

Europe is a huge vast space if 70 are getting refugee status and we cannot take anymore we need to look at what refugee status means
We should have a quota we can take and stick to that limit not have endless refugees we can't process ,house etc forced on us

We should only be taking the vulnerable ,women'sand children and those in dire need.
Then we should be able to provide better and assimilate them with more success until they want to return home .

The reaction in Calais from migrants is fine we’ll go anyway but people on the French coast are not happy.

The mayor of Calais, Natacha Bouchart, led the chorus of disapproval, saying: ‘I’m very angry, stunned, to see there was no consultation with those of us along the coast.

‘We are going to find ourselves in a vice, because we are already struggling to manage the problem of crossings and arrivals. Now we will have to manage the migrants that the British Government chooses to return to France.

‘And when we say “to France”, we don’t mean “to Paris, Marseille, or Le Touquet”, we mean “to Calais”.’

Hauts-de-Seine regional council covers Calais and most of the beaches from where the small boats head off to England – and its president Xavier Bertrand said the new deal ‘will make the situation even worse’.

I don’t blame them. I’d make a lot of noise if I were them to get their politicians to listen.

Of course there will be some such as those. The doctor must have some evidence of who she is to prove her qualifications. A genuine asylum seeker. Unfortunately the system, which is there to help people like her, is being abused. Surely someone who wants to use their expertise to find work here doesn’t hide their origins? Yet so many, who must have £££ to pay the gangs, are not bringing vital documents.

Not having documents should lead to immediate exclusion being finger printed here first before sent back.

Unfortunately if you comply with international law, picking and choosing who to take is illegal. Secondly, you can't send people back to countries where they'll be harmed. Even if Farage gets in and tears up every human rights act, (with his supporters clapping and cheering), he doesn't control the courts.

NZ uses a quota system

Milo

Laws can be changed and laws do need updating every so often

Clearly the laws are prioritising fit and healthy young men aren't they .

Do you think they should be given priority over mums and young children ?

I do not.

@EasternStandard I've heard lots of different commentary on this over the years and the bottom line is a strange attitude here which means we prioritise others over our own citizens well being. There are so many things we can be doing and chose not too.

I see care for calais is considering it's legal options
Those are the people with the unite banners who were caught giving migrants wire cutters etc

It's not as simple as 'changing laws' - people don't seem to understand that the laws they want to get rid off also apply to and protect them. That's the problem with tunnel vision.

Do you think they should be given priority over mums and young children ?

No one does. Can you point out where this has been the case?

Sent back where? Who will take them?

No Milo the definitions obviously need to be addressed and updated for the modern world don't they I believe we are still using world war 2 parameters.

• Milo it's self selection isn't it , do you see that if they are choosing to abandon their most vulnerable to come here and we are faced with 1000s of young men then it's young men we are taking .

France .France has allowed them to come in send them back there.

We could assume they are french