Stopping the boats is easy...

[titbumwillypoo]

All we have to do is abandon the ECHR, the Refugee Convention, the UN, the G7, NATO and the WTO. Then we can break maritime law and start sinking the boats. Obviously we'd have to proscribe the RNLI and change the job description of the coast guard to encourage people who want to sink boats to sign up. The fishermen will be fine.
Once we start with this deterrent we can start kicking out other undesirables. I'd start with the students. Coming over here using our universities as a gateway to benefits street. So we ban them, no more student visas. We might see a few universities close but no great loss, you learn more in the school of life.
After that take away access to ALL benefits for anyone not born here. Don't care if you've always worked and paid your taxes you're not ENGERLISH so less Dr Khalid more Dr Callum.
Obviously once we start making Britain Great again there may be a couple of teensy issues. Food might cost a lot more because the lefty EU might not want to trade with a nation that wants to isolate itself and kill innocent people. It'll be fine because there will be 100% employment because instead of benefits you'll have to do your 60 hours on the food farm to earn your pound credits.
Family will be legally obliged to look after any living relative as there won't be anyone left to do it because we deported them all. And obviously the NHS was full of loony lefties who went round caring for people instead of focusing on what really mattered, which is profit.
They're just a couple of the benefits of stopping the boats, because who cares about the bigger picture or unintended consequences eh?
Giving up our place on the world stage is a small price to pay for stopping a handful of people coming from countries we benefited from or bombed isn't it?

There are 170 million unique book titles in the world today, interestingly.

Well they certainly weren’t rowboats. The fishing boats and similar used may not have been seaworthy, but I was comparing to the dinghies used to cross the Channel, with outboard motors if any.

The fishing boats used in the South Pacific were very large by comparison, with inboard motors. And the Australians used methods legally unavailable here to deal with the people on them.

Sometimes people misunderstand what they read, or it is ambiguous and instead of asking - as I did of you - they prefer to assume that the other person was factually incorrect. It just leads to a tiresome time untangling things.

If you look it up you’ll see more on this

What the Boats Were Actually Like

• Overcrowded: Boats designed for 10 or 15 fishermen often carried over 100 people packed tightly into the holds and decks.
• Mechanically Poor: The vessels typically relied on cheap, old, or poorly maintained diesel engines that frequently broke down at sea.
• Structurally Unsound: Many boats were old, rotting wooden craft with structural leaks, relying heavily on manual pumps to stay afloat.
• Lacking Safety Gear: The vast majority of these boats carried no navigation systems, no satellite phones, and not enough life jackets for the passengers.
• Sinking Hazards: Because they were so heavy and unstable, many boats capsized or smashed against rocks, leading to catastrophic loss of life.

Great minds think alike. I have already read this, and it contradicts nothing I’ve said. The key fact is that the Australians solved their problems with means unavailable to us.

When do you plan to tell us how your ideas can realistically be accomplished?

It contradicts your earlier claim the boats weren’t rickety. As you can see they were.

As for your last part when do you plan to accept what you’ve misunderstood about Aus

As for the ‘us’ part it seems to be just you asking again.

Sigh.

When will you advance your own agenda by telling us how it can be accomplished? I actually thought you were a cut above those making ill thought out social prescriptions. Was I wrong?

Sigh.

When will you stop making digs. I mean I don’t mind but you can keep asking, you’d probably get responses if you did stop.

Completely easy. I'm old enough to remember when the British navy blocked Icelandic fishing boats in the north sea. We have satellite imagery, drones that can fly at 50,000 and spot a man walking along the road. So we can intercept the small boats as soon as they enter British waters. We take the occupants to a processing centre not on mainland Britain....then follow the Aussie process

Of course the UK focuses on it's culture and history. Every country/people does. Look at the numbers of people signing up for DNA tests and tracing their family tree.

But something Britain did 80 years ago should not be an excuse for 10,000s of people to be allowed to claim asylum in the UK.

I'm particularly proud that my grandfer joined up at 17 and fought in France in 1918. It was a bloody stupid war, ran really badly, but he was a brave and courageous young man.

And of my wife's uncle who landed in Normandy in a wooden glider and saw his best mate die a few hours later. I am glad they did this, otherwise we'd be writing this in German and millions more innocent people would have died. Remember Britain and it's empire stood alone facing nazi Germany and it's allies...if you don't have a sense on pride in that fact I am surprised.

All the boats are coming from France. So who's bombing France?

The nationality most represented by small boat migrants is Eritrea, so who's bombing Eritrea ? Certainly not anyone in UK or Europe for that matter.