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?

@WorkHardPlay "If their asylum is rejected and they don’t leave, they are here illegally."

Really, as criminals, they should be locked up, instead they are allowed to wander about committing sex crimes.

The point I am making is, if the boat people are arriving legally, why do politicians who are fully aware of the point you made, describe them as illegal ? Not me who is the dumb dumb here!

Because they’re not arriving legally 😂 Small boat crossings are illegal and the people who do it are committing a crime.

However, if they then go on to make an asylum claim when they get here, then international law protects them - and so the crime is basically wavered whilst their claim is processed. If their claim is rejected, then they are not a legal migrant who can stay here.

You realise some of those people on boats don’t actually make an asylum claim right? And that it’s actually impossible to track the numbers of people who have came here illegally and not sought asylum?

You very much are not understanding it 😂

Can you not manage to discuss things without resorting to personal insults?

It’s extremely difficult when some of the points being made are false, fabricated or completely misleading. I’ll try harder.

This

They’re not claiming any money from the Spanish government, and usually have to pay tax if resident.

They also have to pay for their own interpreter (if needed) for any medical treatment or legal documentation. They also have to pay for additional health insurance as they’re not fully covered by the Spanish health system.

None of which is relevant to the post I was responding to (not yours) which started this chain.

You can leave the ECHR and the refugee convention. Not all countries are in either. Many countries aren't even a signatory to the refugee convention. If the boats come, arrest for illegal entry, detain and deport.

International law is only applicable if a domestic country chooses to apply/enforce the treaty. Many countries aren't signatory to the refugee convention. They just detain and deport. If they tear up their passports that's another crime as well.

@WorkHardPlay "You very much are not understanding it 😂"

Oh, I think we are understanding it only too well !

I know they’re illegal! Yet supporters of boat people insist that they are not illegal at any point. Opposers state they are

I honestly read the first paragraph and rolled my eyes so hard im not sure they’ll ever face forward again.

www.dailymail.com/news/article-16069547/European-country-slashed-number-asylum-cut.html

And we have safe routes for this do we?

What do you disagree with?

I honestly think we don't need to process any asylum. As a sovereign nation we can just say "no you can't stay"

I'm interested in why, too. I read the article and it seems to make sense.

What planet are you on, |Korean War, Vietnam War, Biafran War, Israel Egypt - I/m sure there are more

Why will they change? That argument's always used to defend the out of hand situation we are now faced with. Why would our domestic law need to change.

Why do we need more "Safe Routes" ? We just tell the country of origin if they don't take them back, no more Visas and no more Foreign Aid.

Then we apply Tariffs to their imports.

After that we just ask them which airport they want us to land at....

We think alike

EvangelicalAboutButteredToast- I’m curious as to why you rolled your eyes that hard! I didn’t see anything untrue in that article!

Me too as knowing @EvangelicalAboutButteredToast and her stance on this, I had to check I got the poster right???

Can I ask those who think its really simple, why do you think this government and the previous one didnt/arent doing it?

Its been one of the most talked about issues for years now, at least since brexit.

Its clearly hugely important to the electorate. Even relatively liberal people arent generally in favour of boats of undocumented men arriving and slipping into the black economy. They may be more in favour of asylum seeking as a concept. They may prefer processessing claims quickly and deporting those that fail, but they more generally want 'safe routes' for documented families like happened with Ukraine than random boats. Its rare for people to genuinely believe this is the ideal.

I simply cant work out why if it was so simple each party risks losing the election on this issue?

Maybe none of the parties really want to stop the boats. Don't ask me why but it's a feeling I'm increasingly getting. As a die hard Tory I became suspicious during Johnson's term.