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?

Ok explain why, when Hungary initially stopped crossings at it's boarder to the east, and was subsequently forced to open it...why did the bulk of the immigrants aim for Sweden and the English channel?

@Limeandfigs "The commonality of English as a spoken language around the globe. "
That's not quite correct.
The most commonly spoken language in the world is Mandarin Chinese, followed by Spanish.
English only comes in at No 3 🙂
Hasta Luego !

Exactly. But they don't want to stay in France because they won't be able to tap the French benefits system.

Get a new hobby.

Also France reject far more asylum applications than we do.

Yes, which is why English classes are run for migrants and asylum seekers.

No. 3 in the world is still extremely common, and besides English is the or an official language of 88 countries. Spanish, by contrast, is only 21; less than a quarter. Mandarin, 3.

English is also taught more widely in countries where it is not an official language.

If you speak English you can be confident of going pretty much anywhere in the world and being able to have a conversation or at least make yourself understood. Spanish and Mandarin, not so much.

The only reason anyone claims asylum in the UK is because of the benefits system.
It's such a tiny country and currently on it's arse financially.
It's not exactly in a position to help out.

Actually, your point is incorrect. Under domestic law (which you know, is the law that actually governs countries) they have committed a crime. However, if they are ‘seeking asylum’ then yes, they have refugee protection under international law. However, if that claim is rejected - they are then illegally in our country.

Lugol, why shouldn't they get benefits when their application has been processed?

if they are ‘seeking asylum’ then yes, they have refugee protection under international law

I refer you to this part of your own post.

If they are making an asylum claim then domestic law is superseded by Art 31 of the Refugee Convention which renders your first sentence moot.

We can’t afford it? We spend billions on benefits as it is! Why should we have an extra burden?

Regarding (A), entering the UK illegally is in fact a criminal offence. However then claiming asylum is permitted by the 1951 UN Convention on Human Rights which the UK signed.

The tension here is a source of political difficulty in many countries. Reneging on the Convention is considered reactionary in the extreme, bringing international condemnation with its consequences - the OP hinted at some of them. I would note that immigrants, overall, contribute a net +£3 billion pa to the British economy. (Source: uk.gov) I suspect that the country would become a much less attractive destination if it started down this path. We would literally be the poorer for it.

My information is different with English being an official language in 58 countries. Of those only 5/10% have the majority of their citizens speaking it.

So I would dispute this If you speak English you can be confident of going pretty much anywhere in the world and being able to have a conversation or at least make yourself understood.

Legal immigration contributes to the economy, what does illegal immigration contribute once asylum has been granted? Many go into the black economy. Many go on benefits. Many bring their family over, adding to the burden, and strain on housing, health care, education etc.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English-speaking_world

English is the largest language spoken globally by number of speakers...

English is spoken more widely but by less people than mandarin and Spanish

• Somewhere to live (for free - no bills or rent)
• £49.18 for each person in the household.
• Access to the NHS
• Often additional support depending on the LA or charities

If asylum is granted, they have access to wider benefits (and claims for this are significant from this population - about 70% and upwards depending on the year)

And let’s not forget that huge numbers are actually working here illegally, and so are earning money on top, particularly for things like Uber Eats etc.

I’d make it National law to understand international law and asylum seeking so people didn’t spout incorrect rubbish like this.

OK.

Why are you downplaying the cost? You have not included the £1000 per week for hotel accommodation I note. Not to mention the cost of interpreters, dentists, Drs, travel, food vouchers.. It all adds up to a lot more than the tenner you have quoted.

They also get access to foodbanks on top of this, free education for their children, and donations of clothes from charities.

Plus then the money to be made doing Deliveroo on someone else's account.

My point is that it is impossible to pick and choose. Desirable immigrants are likely to take a dim view of countries reneging on their obligations to UN treaties when good alternatives exist.

The big drop in Overseas student numbers (with their much higher tuition fees) has already been a key factor in the fact that about half of UK universities are operating in deficit. That drop is down largely to tightening restrictions on student visas.

Ironically, none of the conditions seriously impacted the large majority of undergraduate or taught postgraduate students, but the tightening was perceived as hostile by the international student community.

The Higher Education Policy Institute estimated earlier this year that losses to the economy in the first two years were £2.9B.

And that was just students, not people who came here to work ( at fairly high economic thresholds).