Please or to access all these features

News

Portsmouth Protests

486 replies

NoisyBrickDog · 07/09/2026 18:10

Why are they all shouting "Shame on You" towards the police - when it was the RNLI who brought them all to shore?

Surly they should be shouting this towards the lifeboat crews....?

OP posts:
Thread gallery
8
ShitHoleDweller · 11/09/2026 20:44

France is pressing Britain to abandon its bilateral Channel migration agreement and replace it with an EU-wide system that would require the UK to accept asylum seekers from across the bloc in return for taking back migrants who cross the Channel.

Laurent Nunez, France’s interior minister, told Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood that Paris wants to end the existing “one in, one out” arrangement and incorporate Britain into a wider agreement with all 27 EU member states.

Under the French proposal, Britain would retain the ability to return migrants who cross the Channel from Europe, but would accept asylum seekers deemed to have legitimate claims from other EU countries.
“For our part, we want to move away from this bilateral relationship with the UK,” Nunez told a French parliamentary inquiry.
“We consider that France should not have to carry it alone, and that it would be better to integrate it into an agreement between the EU and UK.

“So I have already clearly told my counterpart that this pilot agreement, which we signed in August 2025, was not intended to be renewed beyond October 1, 2026.”

Asked whether an EU-wide replacement could be negotiated before the existing arrangement expires, Nunez said: “There is an action plan, there is interest, but it would be naive of me to tell you there will be a mechanism to bridge the gap.”
The proposal threatens to put Paris at odds with the British government, which wants the current arrangement extended.
Mahmood has been seeking to make the scheme permanent and increase the number of Channel migrants returned to France, arguing that greater removals could help deter further crossings.
Prime Minister Andy Burnham also urged French President Emmanuel Macron to maintain the arrangement during their first bilateral meeting last week.

So far, about 1,400 Channel migrants have been returned to France under the agreement, with a broadly similar number of asylum seekers transferred to Britain in return.

An EU-wide arrangement could significantly broaden the system, potentially involving all 27 member states in decisions over which migrants Britain could return and which asylum seekers it would accept.
Britain previously participated in the EU’s Dublin system, which established rules for determining which European country was responsible for processing an asylum claim.

The French proposal faces opposition within the EU, however. Southern European countries including Italy and Greece, which receive large numbers of migrants arriving at the bloc’s external borders, are understood to fear they could bear a disproportionate share of migrants returned from Britain.

The European Commission has indicated that it will not support a new arrangement until member states reach a compromise.
There are also divisions within France. Officials are concerned about the difficulty of deporting migrants returned from Britain to their countries of origin, while France faces a presidential election next year.
Macron is understood to be more receptive to extending the existing bilateral agreement than Nunez.

The dispute comes as Channel crossings have fallen more than 40 per cent so far this year, with average arrivals during favourable weather conditions down 38 per cent.

A Home Office spokesman said: “The Government’s agreement with France has been extended until autumn.

“This will ensure we will continue to remove migrants who arrive on small boats over the summer.”

Labour savaged over plan to make sickness payments easier to claim - London Business News | Londonlovesbusiness.com

Explore how the Labour welfare shake-up could make sickness benefits as easy as possible to claim for those in need.

https://londonlovesbusiness.com/labour-savaged-over-plan-to-make-sickness-payments-easier-to-claim/

ShitHoleDweller · 11/09/2026 20:59

I copy and pasted a news story about a new proposal re. migration. Why on earth did that get hidden?! @MNHQ

TheBers · 11/09/2026 21:02

DeftGoldHedgehog · 11/09/2026 04:03

Why are you trying to discredit the work of the RNLI?

It’s not the RNLI but the rules of the sea.

The boat was in distress in French water. The boat refused help …knowing the RNLI would have to dock them in the UK.

1dayatatime · 11/09/2026 22:23

TheBers · 11/09/2026 21:02

It’s not the RNLI but the rules of the sea.

The boat was in distress in French water. The boat refused help …knowing the RNLI would have to dock them in the UK.

Exactly it's totally unacceptable for the RNLI and its unpaid volunteer members to face personal abuse for simply doing their job and risking their lives.

Its also totally unacceptable when the migrant dinghy radiosthey are in distress when 13 miles off the French coast, the French coastguard then dispatches five vessels and two helicopters at a cost of €90k, the French rescue vessels then offer assistance to rescue them. This offer is then refused by the migrants because they only want to be rescued in British waters by British RNLI vessels and only if they are taken to safety in France. What's more the transfer of the migrants to the RNLI vessels happens in the middle of the Channel putting both the migrants, the French rescue vessels, the two RNLI vessels and other maritime traffic at much greater risk to their lives.

This is not a criticism of the RNLI or their brave crews who are immensely respected. It is a criticism of the rules that they operate under which has turned a respected and much valued rescue service into something akin to a taxi service

CurlewKate · 12/09/2026 11:32

Oh bollocks to the “taxi service” brigade. Apart from anything else there are a lot of lifeboats and crews around the UK-only a tiny minority in the Channel!

IvoryBeach · Yesterday 06:07

love that

TheOnlyWayIsIlford · Yesterday 07:56

1dayatatime · 11/09/2026 22:23

Exactly it's totally unacceptable for the RNLI and its unpaid volunteer members to face personal abuse for simply doing their job and risking their lives.

Its also totally unacceptable when the migrant dinghy radiosthey are in distress when 13 miles off the French coast, the French coastguard then dispatches five vessels and two helicopters at a cost of €90k, the French rescue vessels then offer assistance to rescue them. This offer is then refused by the migrants because they only want to be rescued in British waters by British RNLI vessels and only if they are taken to safety in France. What's more the transfer of the migrants to the RNLI vessels happens in the middle of the Channel putting both the migrants, the French rescue vessels, the two RNLI vessels and other maritime traffic at much greater risk to their lives.

This is not a criticism of the RNLI or their brave crews who are immensely respected. It is a criticism of the rules that they operate under which has turned a respected and much valued rescue service into something akin to a taxi service

On the vast majority of occasions it is the coastguard and border force boats that get them. The coastguards only deploy RNLI if the need them for specific reasons of safety or capacity or whatever.

Migrants, like anyone else at sea, have no way to contact the RNLI direct.

It is a minority of dinghy crossings that involve the RNLI.

This constant ‘taxi’ narrative needs to stop

suburburban · Yesterday 12:54

TheOnlyWayIsIlford · Yesterday 07:56

On the vast majority of occasions it is the coastguard and border force boats that get them. The coastguards only deploy RNLI if the need them for specific reasons of safety or capacity or whatever.

Migrants, like anyone else at sea, have no way to contact the RNLI direct.

It is a minority of dinghy crossings that involve the RNLI.

This constant ‘taxi’ narrative needs to stop

The constant arrival on boats needs to stop, so sick of it

1dayatatime · Yesterday 13:25

TheOnlyWayIsIlford · Yesterday 07:56

On the vast majority of occasions it is the coastguard and border force boats that get them. The coastguards only deploy RNLI if the need them for specific reasons of safety or capacity or whatever.

Migrants, like anyone else at sea, have no way to contact the RNLI direct.

It is a minority of dinghy crossings that involve the RNLI.

This constant ‘taxi’ narrative needs to stop

The migrant dinghy requested assistance when they were 13 miles off the French coast. The French rescue services offered assistance but it was refused. The migrant dinghy wanted to be rescued by British rescue services (RNLI) in British waters and taken to Britain.

It is unacceptable for the migrant dinghy to decide after making a distress call to then decide when, where, by whom they get rescued and where they then get taken to. This is an abuse of the rescue services (which cost just the French €90k). I am surprised that you think that this is OK.

But let me give you another hypothetical example which I hope will be easier for you to understand.

Say I am a multi millionaire that takes friends and family (including women and young children) on a cross channel trip to Honfleur on my million pound motor yacht. On the way back the vessel develops serious engine trouble so I radio for assistance. The French rescue services come out and offer assistance, but then I think "if I get towed back to France then I have to pay for flights for everyone plus I still have to get my multi million pound yacht repaired, whereas if I get towed back to the UK then I save that cost of flights plus I can get my engines repaired for free under warranty ". So I then decline the help of the French rescue services, refuse for passengers to be taken off. I then keep going putting everyone's lives at great risk including the rescue services. Once I get to British waters I then ask for assistance in order to get towed to the UK thus saving me a whole lot of money.

Most rational people would see this as an abuse of the brave rescue services who have put their lives at risk for me. Furthermore they would see the RNLI as a rescue service to save lives at sea and not a "breakdown recovery service " for multi millionaires and their million pound yachts trying to save money.

I just don't see how you think that this is a reasonable use of our rescue service.

TheOnlyWayIsIlford · Yesterday 16:06

1dayatatime · Yesterday 13:25

The migrant dinghy requested assistance when they were 13 miles off the French coast. The French rescue services offered assistance but it was refused. The migrant dinghy wanted to be rescued by British rescue services (RNLI) in British waters and taken to Britain.

It is unacceptable for the migrant dinghy to decide after making a distress call to then decide when, where, by whom they get rescued and where they then get taken to. This is an abuse of the rescue services (which cost just the French €90k). I am surprised that you think that this is OK.

But let me give you another hypothetical example which I hope will be easier for you to understand.

Say I am a multi millionaire that takes friends and family (including women and young children) on a cross channel trip to Honfleur on my million pound motor yacht. On the way back the vessel develops serious engine trouble so I radio for assistance. The French rescue services come out and offer assistance, but then I think "if I get towed back to France then I have to pay for flights for everyone plus I still have to get my multi million pound yacht repaired, whereas if I get towed back to the UK then I save that cost of flights plus I can get my engines repaired for free under warranty ". So I then decline the help of the French rescue services, refuse for passengers to be taken off. I then keep going putting everyone's lives at great risk including the rescue services. Once I get to British waters I then ask for assistance in order to get towed to the UK thus saving me a whole lot of money.

Most rational people would see this as an abuse of the brave rescue services who have put their lives at risk for me. Furthermore they would see the RNLI as a rescue service to save lives at sea and not a "breakdown recovery service " for multi millionaires and their million pound yachts trying to save money.

I just don't see how you think that this is a reasonable use of our rescue service.

The RNLI pick up a small minority of people who come on small boats..

The smuggler gangs tell the migrants to contact the British coastguard once they are in British Waters. At that point they become the responsibility of the UK to claim asylum seeker or refugee status, or to be deported.

UK waters in the channel start 12 miles off the French coast.

The majority of small boat migrants are picked up by Coast Guard or Border Force boats.

The coastguard calls for the RNLI if the coastguard needs them. Migrants cannot contact the RNLI or demand their services.

Those of us who continue to support the RNLI and donate are apparently happy with their mission and philosophy. Clearly they / we are because donations have shot up.

If you don’t support them , fine, don’t donate, and STFU about the actions of volunteers who have none of your money

Address the Gvt who run the Coast Guards and Border Force if what you want is bodies floating in the channel 🤷🏻‍♀️

New posts on this thread. Refresh page