This maybe a silly question but how are these people entering France in the first place ? Do they not have border controls with neighbouring countries ? I know the EU allows freedom of movement of its citizens but surely there must be some kind of border controls to check who is actually entering the country ?
All asylum seekers must have entered French territory before starting their formal application, otherwise it cannot be accepted. To satisfy this condition, applicants can either request a special visa for asylum application from a French embassy/consulate or get a temporary visa for up to 8 days at the crossing point of the French border. Asylum in France - Wikipedia en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asylum_in_France en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asylum_in_France
This maybe a silly question but how are these people entering France in the first place ? Do they not have border controls with neighbouring countries ? I know the EU allows freedom of movement of its citizens but surely there must be some kind of border controls to check who is actually entering the country ?
Silly? No. But we are an island nation. And our border controls are rather simpler (even so, we fail spectacularly).
Our total land borders total just over 300 miles. All with a country (Ireland) which has had freedom of movement to the UK since before the EU began. With (despite recent headlines) very little traffic from outside the 2 countries via that route.
France has nearly 2,500 miles of land borders. As part of that, French Guiana is part of France, so 800 miles of it is Brazil/Surinam.
Then add in the fact that there is freedom of movement within the EU. Then add in the Schengen Agreement. Finally, the various former French colonies that are really close, such as Morocco and Tunisia.
And that is all in addition to the far greater sea borders and their proximity to where "illegals" tend to come from, particularly via the Mediterranean.
They choose to live in the UK because we are a soft touch NO OTHER reason. Money, housing, medical care, welfare system. A legal system that does little to punish the criminal element amongst them and a total lack of ability to properly monitor them.
The numbers arriving by small boats might be "a very small percentage of net migration". However they are all "ILLEGAL" migrants, so one could assume they are a very large percentage of that particular demographic.
So whilst I feel that Rawanda is not an effective solution. These people do now have a choice. Stay in France and make a life there or come to the UK and maybe get shipped off to Rawanda. That's THEIR choice, nobody forces them to come over.
Although it would appear that Ireland now has an allure that the UK lacks.
Christianity?
Fair point.
Ok, I'm not sure if this means that you can't equate my beliefs with my stance on Illegal immigration or whether you believe that the illegal immigrants prefer Ireland because of it's deep rooted Catholicism.
Firstly, as I have often stated, I am NOT against refugees fleeing war, famine, persecution etc. Neither am I against people emigrating to another country to seek a better life. God's people did that for Centuries.
However, I am also a firm believer in removing the log from my own eye before trying to remove the speck of dust from another's. We have homelessness, poverty, neglect, persecution and despair and I truly believe that we should fix ourselves first and foremost.
Let's get one thing absolutely clear, NOBODY arriving by small boat is fleeing conflict. There is no war in France, Spain, Italy, The Netherlands, Germany, Turkey, Poland, Belgium etc. There is no risk of torture, or real persecution. Yes they may experience some racism and xenophobia, but that's a risk anywhere where people are from different cultures.
Also the list of Nations that the boat crossers come from, so perfectly illustrated by @HAYSIE shows that there are several countries between the point of origin and the UK. This would prove that the desire is specifically to reach the UK not to obtain safe haven.
That brings me to the second point, which is, what is the allure of Ireland ?. Well it could be that the arriving illegals believe that the aforementioned deep rooted Catholicism means that they will receive a sympathetic and loving welcome. The attitude of the Irish however would seem to counter that belief.
Or could it be that the Ireland is a place rich in opportunity, a place where one can settle and look forward to a better life.
It's an interesting debate. However I can't help but feel that the fact that Ireland has no Rawanda style plan might just have something to do with it.
They choose to live in the UK because we are a soft touch NO OTHER reason. Money, housing, medical care, welfare system. A legal system that does little to punish the criminal element amongst them and a total lack of ability to properly monitor them.
The numbers arriving by small boats might be "a very small percentage of net migration". However they are all "ILLEGAL" migrants, so one could assume they are a very large percentage of that particular demographic.
So whilst I feel that Rawanda is not an effective solution. These people do now have a choice. Stay in France and make a life there or come to the UK and maybe get shipped off to Rawanda. That's THEIR choice, nobody forces them to come over.
Although it would appear that Ireland now has an allure that the UK lacks.
Christianity?
Fair point.
Ok, I'm not sure if this means that you can't equate my beliefs with my stance on Illegal immigration or whether you believe that the illegal immigrants prefer Ireland because of it's deep rooted Catholicism.
Firstly, as I have often stated, I am NOT against refugees fleeing war, famine, persecution etc. Neither am I against people emigrating to another country to seek a better life. God's people did that for Centuries.
However, I am also a firm believer in removing the log from my own eye before trying to remove the speck of dust from another's. We have homelessness, poverty, neglect, persecution and despair and I truly believe that we should fix ourselves first and foremost.
Let's get one thing absolutely clear, NOBODY arriving by small boat is fleeing conflict. There is no war in France, Spain, Italy, The Netherlands, Germany, Turkey, Poland, Belgium etc. There is no risk of torture, or real persecution. Yes they may experience some racism and xenophobia, but that's a risk anywhere where people are from different cultures.
Also the list of Nations that the boat crossers come from, so perfectly illustrated by @HAYSIE shows that there are several countries between the point of origin and the UK. This would prove that the desire is specifically to reach the UK not to obtain safe haven.
That brings me to the second point, which is, what is the allure of Ireland ?. Well it could be that the arriving illegals believe that the aforementioned deep rooted Catholicism means that they will receive a sympathetic and loving welcome. The attitude of the Irish however would seem to counter that belief.
Or could it be that the Ireland is a place rich in opportunity, a place where one can settle and look forward to a better life.
It's an interesting debate. However I can't help but feel that the fact that Ireland has no Rawanda style plan might just have something to do with it.
I was just making the point that it seems that I have spent just about my whole life correcting people who have misquoted, ie money is the root of all evil. When as Phil said it is the "love of money". The two things are completely different. You can do many good things with money. Like give it to charity for instance.
They choose to live in the UK because we are a soft touch NO OTHER reason. Money, housing, medical care, welfare system. A legal system that does little to punish the criminal element amongst them and a total lack of ability to properly monitor them.
The numbers arriving by small boats might be "a very small percentage of net migration". However they are all "ILLEGAL" migrants, so one could assume they are a very large percentage of that particular demographic.
So whilst I feel that Rawanda is not an effective solution. These people do now have a choice. Stay in France and make a life there or come to the UK and maybe get shipped off to Rawanda. That's THEIR choice, nobody forces them to come over.
Although it would appear that Ireland now has an allure that the UK lacks.
Christianity?
Fair point.
Ok, I'm not sure if this means that you can't equate my beliefs with my stance on Illegal immigration or whether you believe that the illegal immigrants prefer Ireland because of it's deep rooted Catholicism.
Neither. I was just agreeing with Phil, in that you misquoted.
Firstly, as I have often stated, I am NOT against refugees fleeing war, famine, persecution etc. Neither am I against people emigrating to another country to seek a better life. God's people did that for Centuries.
No, you just accuse them of being something that the majority are not.
However, I am also a firm believer in removing the log from my own eye before trying to remove the speck of dust from another's. We have homelessness, poverty, neglect, persecution and despair and I truly believe that we should fix ourselves first and foremost.
You only have to examine the numbers of asylum seekers over the period of this Tory Government to realise that irrespective of the numbers, there has been no improvement in the stuff you care about.
Let's get one thing absolutely clear, NOBODY arriving by small boat is fleeing conflict. There is no war in France, Spain, Italy, The Netherlands, Germany, Turkey, Poland, Belgium etc. There is no risk of torture, or real persecution. Yes they may experience some racism and xenophobia, but that's a risk anywhere where people are from different cultures.
I posted the origins of where they come from yesterday. You obviously havent read that. Some of these countries still execute people for being gay. Go and tell them that it is just bad luck. We make the rules on who qualifies. 67% of initial applications are successful. About one third of the 33% that initially fail, are later succesful. That takes the overall success rate up to 78%. You must therefore have your wires crossed. We also have a Foreign Aid budget, the clue is in the name. This also doesnt get spent on the stuff that concerns you. It is spent on helping others, elsewhere.
Also the list of Nations that the boat crossers come from, so perfectly illustrated by @HAYSIE shows that there are several countries between the point of origin and the UK. This would prove that the desire is specifically to reach the UK not to obtain safe haven.
Well spotted. How on earth could anyone possibly think otherwise. They get to France, then pay a people smuggler thousands of pounds, then risk their lives crossing the channel, when really they didnt mind staying in France. Really? Some come over because they have family here, others because they can speak English. Sky interviewed one young girl that arrived on a small boat this week, it was her 30th attempt to cross the channel, they are obviously not half hearted.
That brings me to the second point, which is, what is the allure of Ireland ?. Well it could be that the arriving illegals believe that the aforementioned deep rooted Catholicism means that they will receive a sympathetic and loving welcome. The attitude of the Irish however would seem to counter that belief.
The arrivals in Ireland did not start until the Rwanda legislation went through, as you know. They can only get there because we cant control our borders.
Or could it be that the Ireland is a place rich in opportunity, a place where one can settle and look forward to a better life. Ireland have FoM.
It's an interesting debate. However I can't help but feel that the fact that Ireland has no Rawanda style plan might just have something to do with it.
Or perhaps you are happy to move our problem elsewhere, and do not care about the people involved?
They choose to live in the UK because we are a soft touch NO OTHER reason. Money, housing, medical care, welfare system. A legal system that does little to punish the criminal element amongst them and a total lack of ability to properly monitor them.
The numbers arriving by small boats might be "a very small percentage of net migration". However they are all "ILLEGAL" migrants, so one could assume they are a very large percentage of that particular demographic.
So whilst I feel that Rawanda is not an effective solution. These people do now have a choice. Stay in France and make a life there or come to the UK and maybe get shipped off to Rawanda. That's THEIR choice, nobody forces them to come over.
Although it would appear that Ireland now has an allure that the UK lacks.
Christianity?
Fair point.
Ok, I'm not sure if this means that you can't equate my beliefs with my stance on Illegal immigration or whether you believe that the illegal immigrants prefer Ireland because of it's deep rooted Catholicism.
Neither. I was just agreeing with Phil, in that you misquoted.
Firstly, as I have often stated, I am NOT against refugees fleeing war, famine, persecution etc. Neither am I against people emigrating to another country to seek a better life. God's people did that for Centuries.
No, you just accuse them of being something that the majority are not.
WHEN I SEE SMALL BOATS PACKED WITH YOUN SINGLE MALES IT DOES NOT EQUATE INTO DESPERATE FAMILIES SEEKING SAFETY. THEY ARE ALREADY IN A COUNTRY OF SAFETY SO ASK THE QUESTION WHY DO THEY WANT TO SPEND THOUSANDS OF POUNDS TO LEAVE.
However, I am also a firm believer in removing the log from my own eye before trying to remove the speck of dust from another's. We have homelessness, poverty, neglect, persecution and despair and I truly believe that we should fix ourselves first and foremost.
You only have to examine the numbers of asylum seekers over the period of this Tory Government to realise that irrespective of the numbers, there has been no improvement in the stuff you care about.
YEP THAT'S TRUE BUT THAT DOESN'T EXCUSE THE FACT THAT WE SPEND MORE ON THE ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT PROBLEM THAN WE DO ADRESSING OUR OWN ISSUES.
Let's get one thing absolutely clear, NOBODY arriving by small boat is fleeing conflict. There is no war in France, Spain, Italy, The Netherlands, Germany, Turkey, Poland, Belgium etc. There is no risk of torture, or real persecution. Yes they may experience some racism and xenophobia, but that's a risk anywhere where people are from different cultures.
I posted the origins of where they come from yesterday. You obviously havent read that. Some of these countries still execute people for being gay. Go and tell them that it is just bad luck. We make the rules on who qualifies. 67% of initial applications are successful. About one third of the 33% that initially fail, are later succesful. That takes the overall success rate up to 78%. You must therefore have your wires crossed. We also have a Foreign Aid budget, the clue is in the name. This also doesnt get spent on the stuff that concerns you. It is spent on helping others, elsewhere.
THEY COME HERE FOR THE FREE MONEY, HOUSING, HEALTH CARE, LAX LAW AND ORDER AND EVERY OTHER BENEFIT FROM LIVING IN THE UK.
FRANCE DOESN'T EXECUTE FOR BEING GAY OR TORTURE OR PERSECUTE OR ETHNIC CLEANSE.
ASYLUM RULES/LAWS STATE THAT AN APPLICATION FOR ASYLUM SHOULD BE MADE UPON ENTERING THE FIRST SAFE COUNTRY.
WHY SHOULD OUR TINY ISLAND EVEN HAVE THIS PROBLEM, IT'S NOT LIKE THEIR ISN'T A WHOLE CONTINENT TO CROSS THROUGH FIRST.
Also the list of Nations that the boat crossers come from, so perfectly illustrated by @HAYSIE shows that there are several countries between the point of origin and the UK. This would prove that the desire is specifically to reach the UK not to obtain safe haven.
Well spotted. How on earth could anyone possibly think otherwise. They get to France, then pay a people smuggler thousands of pounds, then risk their lives crossing the channel, when really they didnt mind staying in France. Really? Some come over because they have family here, others because they can speak English. Sky interviewed one young girl that arrived on a small boat this week, it was her 30th attempt to cross the channel, they are obviously not half hearted.
WHERE DO THEY GET THE THOUSANDS OF POUNDS THEY PAY SMUGGLERS. SERIOUSLY THEY JUST WALK OUT OF THEIR OWN COUNTRIES WITH BRICKS OF CURRENCY DO THEY. I SUGGEST IT'S RAISED THROUGH ILLEGAL ACTIVITIES. ALSO 30TH ATTEMPT EVEN AT £3,000 A POP IS £90,000 WHERE THE FK DOES A YOUNG GIRL GET THAT KIND OF MONEY. IN FACT IF AS AN ILLEGAL I CAN MAKE THAT AMOUNT OF MONEY ON THE BLACK I'LL MOVE TO FRANCE TOMMORROW.
ONCE MORE THE NARRATIVE DOES NOT BEAR EXAMINATION
That brings me to the second point, which is, what is the allure of Ireland ?. Well it could be that the arriving illegals believe that the aforementioned deep rooted Catholicism means that they will receive a sympathetic and loving welcome. The attitude of the Irish however would seem to counter that belief.
The arrivals in Ireland did not start until the Rwanda legislation went through, as you know. They can only get there because we cant control our borders.
SO THEY BECOME SOMEONE ELSES PROBLEM AMD THAT IS WRONG. YET IT'S OK WHEN THEY BECAME THE UK'S PROBLEM. STOP WITH THE DOUBLE STANDARDS
WE CAN'T CONTROL OUR BORDERS BECAUSE THE LIBERAL WOKES WON'T LET US. IMAGINE THE FURRORE IF WE STOPPED, SENT BACK OR SANK EVERY BOAT ACTING ILLEGALLY IN OUR WATERS. YES THAT WOULD BE A BARBARIC ACT THAT I WOULD NEVER SUPPORT. HOWEVER, PROBLEM WOULD BE SOLVED I FEEL.
Or could it be that the Ireland is a place rich in opportunity, a place where one can settle and look forward to a better life. Ireland have FoM.
WELL THAT'S THEIR FAULT IF IT ALLOWS UNDESIRABLES IN. ACCORDING TO ITS SUPPORTERS FREEDOM OF MOVEMENT IS ONE OF THE GREAT BENEFITS OF EU MEMBERSHIP. AGAIN UNTIL IT ISN'T. MIND YOU IF THEY DON'T LIKE IRELAND THEY ARE FREE TO TRAVEL TO ANY OTHER EU COUNTRY THEY CHOOSE.
It's an interesting debate. However I can't help but feel that the fact that Ireland has no Rawanda style plan might just have something to do with it.
Or perhaps you are happy to move our problem elsewhere, and do not care about the people involved?
TO SAY I DON'T CARE WHEN I AM INVOLVED WITH ASYLUM SUPPORT GROUPS IS A LITTLE INSULTING. HOWEVER I CAN DISTINGUISH BETWEEN A DESPERATE FAMILY ESCAPING FROM BRUTAL TYRANNY AND DOZENS OF YOUNG MEN WANTING THE EASY LIFE THAT THE UK AFFORDS THEM. IT'S THE NAIVETY OF JOE WOKE THAT GALLS ME.
AS FOR MOVING THE PROBLEM ON, IT'S THE WAY OF THE WORLD TONY. EVERYDAY WE MOVE TRAVELLERS ON TO BECOME SOMEONE ELSES PROBLEM, SAME WITH BEGGARS, THE HOMELESS AND GROUPS OF ALCOHOLICS. THE NIMBY HYPOCRISY THAT PERMEATES SOCIETY MEANS THAT PEOPLE ONLY SUPPORT HELPING THESE GROUPS UNTIL THEY LAND ON THEIR OWN DOORSTEP.
Sorry about the capitals I don't know how else to highlight my responses to your responses. It's not me shouting.
They choose to live in the UK because we are a soft touch NO OTHER reason. Money, housing, medical care, welfare system. A legal system that does little to punish the criminal element amongst them and a total lack of ability to properly monitor them.
The numbers arriving by small boats might be "a very small percentage of net migration". However they are all "ILLEGAL" migrants, so one could assume they are a very large percentage of that particular demographic.
So whilst I feel that Rawanda is not an effective solution. These people do now have a choice. Stay in France and make a life there or come to the UK and maybe get shipped off to Rawanda. That's THEIR choice, nobody forces them to come over.
Although it would appear that Ireland now has an allure that the UK lacks.
Christianity?
Fair point.
Ok, I'm not sure if this means that you can't equate my beliefs with my stance on Illegal immigration or whether you believe that the illegal immigrants prefer Ireland because of it's deep rooted Catholicism.
Neither. I was just agreeing with Phil, in that you misquoted.
Firstly, as I have often stated, I am NOT against refugees fleeing war, famine, persecution etc. Neither am I against people emigrating to another country to seek a better life. God's people did that for Centuries.
No, you just accuse them of being something that the majority are not.
WHEN I SEE SMALL BOATS PACKED WITH YOUN SINGLE MALES IT DOES NOT EQUATE INTO DESPERATE FAMILIES SEEKING SAFETY. THEY ARE ALREADY IN A COUNTRY OF SAFETY SO ASK THE QUESTION WHY DO THEY WANT TO SPEND THOUSANDS OF POUNDS TO LEAVE.
However, I am also a firm believer in removing the log from my own eye before trying to remove the speck of dust from another's. We have homelessness, poverty, neglect, persecution and despair and I truly believe that we should fix ourselves first and foremost.
You only have to examine the numbers of asylum seekers over the period of this Tory Government to realise that irrespective of the numbers, there has been no improvement in the stuff you care about.
YEP THAT'S TRUE BUT THAT DOESN'T EXCUSE THE FACT THAT WE SPEND MORE ON THE ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT PROBLEM THAN WE DO ADRESSING OUR OWN ISSUES.
Let's get one thing absolutely clear, NOBODY arriving by small boat is fleeing conflict. There is no war in France, Spain, Italy, The Netherlands, Germany, Turkey, Poland, Belgium etc. There is no risk of torture, or real persecution. Yes they may experience some racism and xenophobia, but that's a risk anywhere where people are from different cultures.
I posted the origins of where they come from yesterday. You obviously havent read that. Some of these countries still execute people for being gay. Go and tell them that it is just bad luck. We make the rules on who qualifies. 67% of initial applications are successful. About one third of the 33% that initially fail, are later succesful. That takes the overall success rate up to 78%. You must therefore have your wires crossed. We also have a Foreign Aid budget, the clue is in the name. This also doesnt get spent on the stuff that concerns you. It is spent on helping others, elsewhere.
THEY COME HERE FOR THE FREE MONEY, HOUSING, HEALTH CARE, LAX LAW AND ORDER AND EVERY OTHER BENEFIT FROM LIVING IN THE UK.
FRANCE DOESN'T EXECUTE FOR BEING GAY OR TORTURE OR PERSECUTE OR ETHNIC CLEANSE.
ASYLUM RULES/LAWS STATE THAT AN APPLICATION FOR ASYLUM SHOULD BE MADE UPON ENTERING THE FIRST SAFE COUNTRY.
WHY SHOULD OUR TINY ISLAND EVEN HAVE THIS PROBLEM, IT'S NOT LIKE THEIR ISN'T A WHOLE CONTINENT TO CROSS THROUGH FIRST.
Also the list of Nations that the boat crossers come from, so perfectly illustrated by @HAYSIE shows that there are several countries between the point of origin and the UK. This would prove that the desire is specifically to reach the UK not to obtain safe haven.
Well spotted. How on earth could anyone possibly think otherwise. They get to France, then pay a people smuggler thousands of pounds, then risk their lives crossing the channel, when really they didnt mind staying in France. Really? Some come over because they have family here, others because they can speak English. Sky interviewed one young girl that arrived on a small boat this week, it was her 30th attempt to cross the channel, they are obviously not half hearted.
WHERE DO THEY GET THE THOUSANDS OF POUNDS THEY PAY SMUGGLERS. SERIOUSLY THEY JUST WALK OUT OF THEIR OWN COUNTRIES WITH BRICKS OF CURRENCY DO THEY. I SUGGEST IT'S RAISED THROUGH ILLEGAL ACTIVITIES. ALSO 30TH ATTEMPT EVEN AT £3,000 A POP IS £90,000 WHERE THE FK DOES A YOUNG GIRL GET THAT KIND OF MONEY. IN FACT IF AS AN ILLEGAL I CAN MAKE THAT AMOUNT OF MONEY ON THE BLACK I'LL MOVE TO FRANCE TOMMORROW.
ONCE MORE THE NARRATIVE DOES NOT BEAR EXAMINATION
That brings me to the second point, which is, what is the allure of Ireland ?. Well it could be that the arriving illegals believe that the aforementioned deep rooted Catholicism means that they will receive a sympathetic and loving welcome. The attitude of the Irish however would seem to counter that belief.
The arrivals in Ireland did not start until the Rwanda legislation went through, as you know. They can only get there because we cant control our borders.
SO THEY BECOME SOMEONE ELSES PROBLEM AMD THAT IS WRONG. YET IT'S OK WHEN THEY BECAME THE UK'S PROBLEM. STOP WITH THE DOUBLE STANDARDS
WE CAN'T CONTROL OUR BORDERS BECAUSE THE LIBERAL WOKES WON'T LET US. IMAGINE THE FURRORE IF WE STOPPED, SENT BACK OR SANK EVERY BOAT ACTING ILLEGALLY IN OUR WATERS. YES THAT WOULD BE A BARBARIC ACT THAT I WOULD NEVER SUPPORT. HOWEVER, PROBLEM WOULD BE SOLVED I FEEL.
Or could it be that the Ireland is a place rich in opportunity, a place where one can settle and look forward to a better life. Ireland have FoM.
WELL THAT'S THEIR FAULT IF IT ALLOWS UNDESIRABLES IN. ACCORDING TO ITS SUPPORTERS FREEDOM OF MOVEMENT IS ONE OF THE GREAT BENEFITS OF EU MEMBERSHIP. AGAIN UNTIL IT ISN'T. MIND YOU IF THEY DON'T LIKE IRELAND THEY ARE FREE TO TRAVEL TO ANY OTHER EU COUNTRY THEY CHOOSE.
It's an interesting debate. However I can't help but feel that the fact that Ireland has no Rawanda style plan might just have something to do with it.
Or perhaps you are happy to move our problem elsewhere, and do not care about the people involved?
TO SAY I DON'T CARE WHEN I AM INVOLVED WITH ASYLUM SUPPORT GROUPS IS A LITTLE INSULTING. HOWEVER I CAN DISTINGUISH BETWEEN A DESPERATE FAMILY ESCAPING FROM BRUTAL TYRANNY AND DOZENS OF YOUNG MEN WANTING THE EASY LIFE THAT THE UK AFFORDS THEM. IT'S THE NAIVETY OF JOE WOKE THAT GALLS ME.
AS FOR MOVING THE PROBLEM ON, IT'S THE WAY OF THE WORLD TONY. EVERYDAY WE MOVE TRAVELLERS ON TO BECOME SOMEONE ELSES PROBLEM, SAME WITH BEGGARS, THE HOMELESS AND GROUPS OF ALCOHOLICS. THE NIMBY HYPOCRISY THAT PERMEATES SOCIETY MEANS THAT PEOPLE ONLY SUPPORT HELPING THESE GROUPS UNTIL THEY LAND ON THEIR OWN DOORSTEP.
Sorry about the capitals I don't know how else to highlight my responses to your responses. It's not me shouting.
That means you are very clever. You should offer your services to The Home Office. Why bother with the whole application process, when you could give them the once over instead.
In all seriousness there are three problems with your argument,
The first is that they all go through the application process, and despite probably erring on the side of caution, we actually accept 78% of them. This makes a nonsense of your claim that they are not really asylum seekers.
The second is that the list of countries below, where the vast majority have arrived from over the last 5 years, are particularly cruel regimes, or are at war. That is a fact. You cant blame people for escaping from any of them. As I said, Albania is now sorted.
Three quarters of all small boat arrivals between 2018 and 2023 were nationals from just six countries: Iran (21,546), Afghanistan (16,636), Iraq (15,388), Albania (14,480), Syria (8,528) and Eritrea (8,068). Chart: Who Is Crossing the English Channel? | Statista www.statista.com/chart/32171/share-of-small-boat-arrivals-to-uk-by-nationality/ www.statista.com/chart/32171/share-of-small-boat-arrivals-to-uk-by-nationality/
Thirdly, we have created the problem in Ireland. This is a recent problem which appears to have been created by our asylum seekers escaping to Ireland in order to escape deportation to Rwanda. Ireland is a friend and ally of ours, and we should not be sh1tting on them. Sh1tting on others will always result on you getting some back. We are supposed to be controlling our borders. So how on earth is it possible for our illegal immigrants to escape to Ireland? Why cant we control our borders? How will we deport any if they are free to disappear? We shouldnt blame others for our utter incompetence.
They choose to live in the UK because we are a soft touch NO OTHER reason. Money, housing, medical care, welfare system. A legal system that does little to punish the criminal element amongst them and a total lack of ability to properly monitor them.
The numbers arriving by small boats might be "a very small percentage of net migration". However they are all "ILLEGAL" migrants, so one could assume they are a very large percentage of that particular demographic.
So whilst I feel that Rawanda is not an effective solution. These people do now have a choice. Stay in France and make a life there or come to the UK and maybe get shipped off to Rawanda. That's THEIR choice, nobody forces them to come over.
Although it would appear that Ireland now has an allure that the UK lacks.
Christianity?
Fair point.
Ok, I'm not sure if this means that you can't equate my beliefs with my stance on Illegal immigration or whether you believe that the illegal immigrants prefer Ireland because of it's deep rooted Catholicism.
Neither. I was just agreeing with Phil, in that you misquoted.
Firstly, as I have often stated, I am NOT against refugees fleeing war, famine, persecution etc. Neither am I against people emigrating to another country to seek a better life. God's people did that for Centuries.
No, you just accuse them of being something that the majority are not.
WHEN I SEE SMALL BOATS PACKED WITH YOUN SINGLE MALES IT DOES NOT EQUATE INTO DESPERATE FAMILIES SEEKING SAFETY. THEY ARE ALREADY IN A COUNTRY OF SAFETY SO ASK THE QUESTION WHY DO THEY WANT TO SPEND THOUSANDS OF POUNDS TO LEAVE.
However, I am also a firm believer in removing the log from my own eye before trying to remove the speck of dust from another's. We have homelessness, poverty, neglect, persecution and despair and I truly believe that we should fix ourselves first and foremost.
You only have to examine the numbers of asylum seekers over the period of this Tory Government to realise that irrespective of the numbers, there has been no improvement in the stuff you care about.
YEP THAT'S TRUE BUT THAT DOESN'T EXCUSE THE FACT THAT WE SPEND MORE ON THE ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT PROBLEM THAN WE DO ADRESSING OUR OWN ISSUES.
Let's get one thing absolutely clear, NOBODY arriving by small boat is fleeing conflict. There is no war in France, Spain, Italy, The Netherlands, Germany, Turkey, Poland, Belgium etc. There is no risk of torture, or real persecution. Yes they may experience some racism and xenophobia, but that's a risk anywhere where people are from different cultures.
I posted the origins of where they come from yesterday. You obviously havent read that. Some of these countries still execute people for being gay. Go and tell them that it is just bad luck. We make the rules on who qualifies. 67% of initial applications are successful. About one third of the 33% that initially fail, are later succesful. That takes the overall success rate up to 78%. You must therefore have your wires crossed. We also have a Foreign Aid budget, the clue is in the name. This also doesnt get spent on the stuff that concerns you. It is spent on helping others, elsewhere.
THEY COME HERE FOR THE FREE MONEY, HOUSING, HEALTH CARE, LAX LAW AND ORDER AND EVERY OTHER BENEFIT FROM LIVING IN THE UK.
FRANCE DOESN'T EXECUTE FOR BEING GAY OR TORTURE OR PERSECUTE OR ETHNIC CLEANSE.
ASYLUM RULES/LAWS STATE THAT AN APPLICATION FOR ASYLUM SHOULD BE MADE UPON ENTERING THE FIRST SAFE COUNTRY.
WHY SHOULD OUR TINY ISLAND EVEN HAVE THIS PROBLEM, IT'S NOT LIKE THEIR ISN'T A WHOLE CONTINENT TO CROSS THROUGH FIRST.
Also the list of Nations that the boat crossers come from, so perfectly illustrated by @HAYSIE shows that there are several countries between the point of origin and the UK. This would prove that the desire is specifically to reach the UK not to obtain safe haven.
Well spotted. How on earth could anyone possibly think otherwise. They get to France, then pay a people smuggler thousands of pounds, then risk their lives crossing the channel, when really they didnt mind staying in France. Really? Some come over because they have family here, others because they can speak English. Sky interviewed one young girl that arrived on a small boat this week, it was her 30th attempt to cross the channel, they are obviously not half hearted.
WHERE DO THEY GET THE THOUSANDS OF POUNDS THEY PAY SMUGGLERS. SERIOUSLY THEY JUST WALK OUT OF THEIR OWN COUNTRIES WITH BRICKS OF CURRENCY DO THEY. I SUGGEST IT'S RAISED THROUGH ILLEGAL ACTIVITIES. ALSO 30TH ATTEMPT EVEN AT £3,000 A POP IS £90,000 WHERE THE FK DOES A YOUNG GIRL GET THAT KIND OF MONEY. IN FACT IF AS AN ILLEGAL I CAN MAKE THAT AMOUNT OF MONEY ON THE BLACK I'LL MOVE TO FRANCE TOMMORROW.
ONCE MORE THE NARRATIVE DOES NOT BEAR EXAMINATION
That brings me to the second point, which is, what is the allure of Ireland ?. Well it could be that the arriving illegals believe that the aforementioned deep rooted Catholicism means that they will receive a sympathetic and loving welcome. The attitude of the Irish however would seem to counter that belief.
The arrivals in Ireland did not start until the Rwanda legislation went through, as you know. They can only get there because we cant control our borders.
SO THEY BECOME SOMEONE ELSES PROBLEM AMD THAT IS WRONG. YET IT'S OK WHEN THEY BECAME THE UK'S PROBLEM. STOP WITH THE DOUBLE STANDARDS
WE CAN'T CONTROL OUR BORDERS BECAUSE THE LIBERAL WOKES WON'T LET US. IMAGINE THE FURRORE IF WE STOPPED, SENT BACK OR SANK EVERY BOAT ACTING ILLEGALLY IN OUR WATERS. YES THAT WOULD BE A BARBARIC ACT THAT I WOULD NEVER SUPPORT. HOWEVER, PROBLEM WOULD BE SOLVED I FEEL.
Or could it be that the Ireland is a place rich in opportunity, a place where one can settle and look forward to a better life. Ireland have FoM.
WELL THAT'S THEIR FAULT IF IT ALLOWS UNDESIRABLES IN. ACCORDING TO ITS SUPPORTERS FREEDOM OF MOVEMENT IS ONE OF THE GREAT BENEFITS OF EU MEMBERSHIP. AGAIN UNTIL IT ISN'T. MIND YOU IF THEY DON'T LIKE IRELAND THEY ARE FREE TO TRAVEL TO ANY OTHER EU COUNTRY THEY CHOOSE.
It's an interesting debate. However I can't help but feel that the fact that Ireland has no Rawanda style plan might just have something to do with it.
Or perhaps you are happy to move our problem elsewhere, and do not care about the people involved?
TO SAY I DON'T CARE WHEN I AM INVOLVED WITH ASYLUM SUPPORT GROUPS IS A LITTLE INSULTING. HOWEVER I CAN DISTINGUISH BETWEEN A DESPERATE FAMILY ESCAPING FROM BRUTAL TYRANNY AND DOZENS OF YOUNG MEN WANTING THE EASY LIFE THAT THE UK AFFORDS THEM. IT'S THE NAIVETY OF JOE WOKE THAT GALLS ME.
AS FOR MOVING THE PROBLEM ON, IT'S THE WAY OF THE WORLD TONY. EVERYDAY WE MOVE TRAVELLERS ON TO BECOME SOMEONE ELSES PROBLEM, SAME WITH BEGGARS, THE HOMELESS AND GROUPS OF ALCOHOLICS. THE NIMBY HYPOCRISY THAT PERMEATES SOCIETY MEANS THAT PEOPLE ONLY SUPPORT HELPING THESE GROUPS UNTIL THEY LAND ON THEIR OWN DOORSTEP.
Sorry about the capitals I don't know how else to highlight my responses to your responses. It's not me shouting.
I cant see why on earth you would if they are not really asylum seekers?
They choose to live in the UK because we are a soft touch NO OTHER reason. Money, housing, medical care, welfare system. A legal system that does little to punish the criminal element amongst them and a total lack of ability to properly monitor them.
The numbers arriving by small boats might be "a very small percentage of net migration". However they are all "ILLEGAL" migrants, so one could assume they are a very large percentage of that particular demographic.
So whilst I feel that Rawanda is not an effective solution. These people do now have a choice. Stay in France and make a life there or come to the UK and maybe get shipped off to Rawanda. That's THEIR choice, nobody forces them to come over.
Although it would appear that Ireland now has an allure that the UK lacks.
Christianity?
Fair point.
Ok, I'm not sure if this means that you can't equate my beliefs with my stance on Illegal immigration or whether you believe that the illegal immigrants prefer Ireland because of it's deep rooted Catholicism.
Neither. I was just agreeing with Phil, in that you misquoted.
Firstly, as I have often stated, I am NOT against refugees fleeing war, famine, persecution etc. Neither am I against people emigrating to another country to seek a better life. God's people did that for Centuries.
No, you just accuse them of being something that the majority are not.
WHEN I SEE SMALL BOATS PACKED WITH YOUN SINGLE MALES IT DOES NOT EQUATE INTO DESPERATE FAMILIES SEEKING SAFETY. THEY ARE ALREADY IN A COUNTRY OF SAFETY SO ASK THE QUESTION WHY DO THEY WANT TO SPEND THOUSANDS OF POUNDS TO LEAVE.
However, I am also a firm believer in removing the log from my own eye before trying to remove the speck of dust from another's. We have homelessness, poverty, neglect, persecution and despair and I truly believe that we should fix ourselves first and foremost.
You only have to examine the numbers of asylum seekers over the period of this Tory Government to realise that irrespective of the numbers, there has been no improvement in the stuff you care about.
YEP THAT'S TRUE BUT THAT DOESN'T EXCUSE THE FACT THAT WE SPEND MORE ON THE ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT PROBLEM THAN WE DO ADRESSING OUR OWN ISSUES.
Let's get one thing absolutely clear, NOBODY arriving by small boat is fleeing conflict. There is no war in France, Spain, Italy, The Netherlands, Germany, Turkey, Poland, Belgium etc. There is no risk of torture, or real persecution. Yes they may experience some racism and xenophobia, but that's a risk anywhere where people are from different cultures.
I posted the origins of where they come from yesterday. You obviously havent read that. Some of these countries still execute people for being gay. Go and tell them that it is just bad luck. We make the rules on who qualifies. 67% of initial applications are successful. About one third of the 33% that initially fail, are later succesful. That takes the overall success rate up to 78%. You must therefore have your wires crossed. We also have a Foreign Aid budget, the clue is in the name. This also doesnt get spent on the stuff that concerns you. It is spent on helping others, elsewhere.
THEY COME HERE FOR THE FREE MONEY, HOUSING, HEALTH CARE, LAX LAW AND ORDER AND EVERY OTHER BENEFIT FROM LIVING IN THE UK.
FRANCE DOESN'T EXECUTE FOR BEING GAY OR TORTURE OR PERSECUTE OR ETHNIC CLEANSE.
ASYLUM RULES/LAWS STATE THAT AN APPLICATION FOR ASYLUM SHOULD BE MADE UPON ENTERING THE FIRST SAFE COUNTRY.
WHY SHOULD OUR TINY ISLAND EVEN HAVE THIS PROBLEM, IT'S NOT LIKE THEIR ISN'T A WHOLE CONTINENT TO CROSS THROUGH FIRST.
Also the list of Nations that the boat crossers come from, so perfectly illustrated by @HAYSIE shows that there are several countries between the point of origin and the UK. This would prove that the desire is specifically to reach the UK not to obtain safe haven.
Well spotted. How on earth could anyone possibly think otherwise. They get to France, then pay a people smuggler thousands of pounds, then risk their lives crossing the channel, when really they didnt mind staying in France. Really? Some come over because they have family here, others because they can speak English. Sky interviewed one young girl that arrived on a small boat this week, it was her 30th attempt to cross the channel, they are obviously not half hearted.
WHERE DO THEY GET THE THOUSANDS OF POUNDS THEY PAY SMUGGLERS. SERIOUSLY THEY JUST WALK OUT OF THEIR OWN COUNTRIES WITH BRICKS OF CURRENCY DO THEY. I SUGGEST IT'S RAISED THROUGH ILLEGAL ACTIVITIES. ALSO 30TH ATTEMPT EVEN AT £3,000 A POP IS £90,000 WHERE THE FK DOES A YOUNG GIRL GET THAT KIND OF MONEY. IN FACT IF AS AN ILLEGAL I CAN MAKE THAT AMOUNT OF MONEY ON THE BLACK I'LL MOVE TO FRANCE TOMMORROW.
ONCE MORE THE NARRATIVE DOES NOT BEAR EXAMINATION
That brings me to the second point, which is, what is the allure of Ireland ?. Well it could be that the arriving illegals believe that the aforementioned deep rooted Catholicism means that they will receive a sympathetic and loving welcome. The attitude of the Irish however would seem to counter that belief.
The arrivals in Ireland did not start until the Rwanda legislation went through, as you know. They can only get there because we cant control our borders.
SO THEY BECOME SOMEONE ELSES PROBLEM AMD THAT IS WRONG. YET IT'S OK WHEN THEY BECAME THE UK'S PROBLEM. STOP WITH THE DOUBLE STANDARDS
WE CAN'T CONTROL OUR BORDERS BECAUSE THE LIBERAL WOKES WON'T LET US. IMAGINE THE FURRORE IF WE STOPPED, SENT BACK OR SANK EVERY BOAT ACTING ILLEGALLY IN OUR WATERS. YES THAT WOULD BE A BARBARIC ACT THAT I WOULD NEVER SUPPORT. HOWEVER, PROBLEM WOULD BE SOLVED I FEEL.
Or could it be that the Ireland is a place rich in opportunity, a place where one can settle and look forward to a better life. Ireland have FoM.
WELL THAT'S THEIR FAULT IF IT ALLOWS UNDESIRABLES IN. ACCORDING TO ITS SUPPORTERS FREEDOM OF MOVEMENT IS ONE OF THE GREAT BENEFITS OF EU MEMBERSHIP. AGAIN UNTIL IT ISN'T. MIND YOU IF THEY DON'T LIKE IRELAND THEY ARE FREE TO TRAVEL TO ANY OTHER EU COUNTRY THEY CHOOSE.
It's an interesting debate. However I can't help but feel that the fact that Ireland has no Rawanda style plan might just have something to do with it.
Or perhaps you are happy to move our problem elsewhere, and do not care about the people involved?
TO SAY I DON'T CARE WHEN I AM INVOLVED WITH ASYLUM SUPPORT GROUPS IS A LITTLE INSULTING. HOWEVER I CAN DISTINGUISH BETWEEN A DESPERATE FAMILY ESCAPING FROM BRUTAL TYRANNY AND DOZENS OF YOUNG MEN WANTING THE EASY LIFE THAT THE UK AFFORDS THEM. IT'S THE NAIVETY OF JOE WOKE THAT GALLS ME.
AS FOR MOVING THE PROBLEM ON, IT'S THE WAY OF THE WORLD TONY. EVERYDAY WE MOVE TRAVELLERS ON TO BECOME SOMEONE ELSES PROBLEM, SAME WITH BEGGARS, THE HOMELESS AND GROUPS OF ALCOHOLICS. THE NIMBY HYPOCRISY THAT PERMEATES SOCIETY MEANS THAT PEOPLE ONLY SUPPORT HELPING THESE GROUPS UNTIL THEY LAND ON THEIR OWN DOORSTEP.
Sorry about the capitals I don't know how else to highlight my responses to your responses. It's not me shouting.
I cant see why on earth you would if they are not really asylum seekers?
NOT MANY FAMILIES FLEEING PERSECUTION AND WAR ARE THERE. It would seem single males in their 20's make up the vast majority.
Are you saying that only families can suffer from persecution, wars, and famine?
No I am saying that the media sells us the impression that it's mostly desperate families trying to get here when film and pictures prove otherwise. The media sells it and we play the role though don't we.
You have failed to explain where you think these poor impoverished asylum seekers obtain the thousands of pounds to pay the smugglers.
NOT MANY FAMILIES FLEEING PERSECUTION AND WAR ARE THERE. It would seem single males in their 20's make up the vast majority.
Are you saying that only families can suffer from persecution, wars, and famine?
No I am saying that the media sells us the impression that it's mostly desperate families trying to get here when film and pictures prove otherwise. The media sells it and we play the role though don't we.
They clearly dont.
You have failed to explain where you think these poor impoverished asylum seekers obtain the thousands of pounds to pay the smugglers.
Why would I? I am not the one making any claims at all.
What I am saying is that 78% of their applications are accepted. Therefore, either the overwhelming majority are genuine asylum seekers, or the Home Office is completely unable to tell the difference.
They choose to live in the UK because we are a soft touch NO OTHER reason. Money, housing, medical care, welfare system. A legal system that does little to punish the criminal element amongst them and a total lack of ability to properly monitor them.
The numbers arriving by small boats might be "a very small percentage of net migration". However they are all "ILLEGAL" migrants, so one could assume they are a very large percentage of that particular demographic.
So whilst I feel that Rawanda is not an effective solution. These people do now have a choice. Stay in France and make a life there or come to the UK and maybe get shipped off to Rawanda. That's THEIR choice, nobody forces them to come over.
Although it would appear that Ireland now has an allure that the UK lacks.
Christianity?
Fair point.
Ok, I'm not sure if this means that you can't equate my beliefs with my stance on Illegal immigration or whether you believe that the illegal immigrants prefer Ireland because of it's deep rooted Catholicism.
Neither. I was just agreeing with Phil, in that you misquoted.
Firstly, as I have often stated, I am NOT against refugees fleeing war, famine, persecution etc. Neither am I against people emigrating to another country to seek a better life. God's people did that for Centuries.
No, you just accuse them of being something that the majority are not.
WHEN I SEE SMALL BOATS PACKED WITH YOUN SINGLE MALES IT DOES NOT EQUATE INTO DESPERATE FAMILIES SEEKING SAFETY. THEY ARE ALREADY IN A COUNTRY OF SAFETY SO ASK THE QUESTION WHY DO THEY WANT TO SPEND THOUSANDS OF POUNDS TO LEAVE.
However, I am also a firm believer in removing the log from my own eye before trying to remove the speck of dust from another's. We have homelessness, poverty, neglect, persecution and despair and I truly believe that we should fix ourselves first and foremost.
You only have to examine the numbers of asylum seekers over the period of this Tory Government to realise that irrespective of the numbers, there has been no improvement in the stuff you care about.
YEP THAT'S TRUE BUT THAT DOESN'T EXCUSE THE FACT THAT WE SPEND MORE ON THE ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT PROBLEM THAN WE DO ADRESSING OUR OWN ISSUES.
Let's get one thing absolutely clear, NOBODY arriving by small boat is fleeing conflict. There is no war in France, Spain, Italy, The Netherlands, Germany, Turkey, Poland, Belgium etc. There is no risk of torture, or real persecution. Yes they may experience some racism and xenophobia, but that's a risk anywhere where people are from different cultures.
I posted the origins of where they come from yesterday. You obviously havent read that. Some of these countries still execute people for being gay. Go and tell them that it is just bad luck. We make the rules on who qualifies. 67% of initial applications are successful. About one third of the 33% that initially fail, are later succesful. That takes the overall success rate up to 78%. You must therefore have your wires crossed. We also have a Foreign Aid budget, the clue is in the name. This also doesnt get spent on the stuff that concerns you. It is spent on helping others, elsewhere.
THEY COME HERE FOR THE FREE MONEY, HOUSING, HEALTH CARE, LAX LAW AND ORDER AND EVERY OTHER BENEFIT FROM LIVING IN THE UK.
FRANCE DOESN'T EXECUTE FOR BEING GAY OR TORTURE OR PERSECUTE OR ETHNIC CLEANSE.
ASYLUM RULES/LAWS STATE THAT AN APPLICATION FOR ASYLUM SHOULD BE MADE UPON ENTERING THE FIRST SAFE COUNTRY.
WHY SHOULD OUR TINY ISLAND EVEN HAVE THIS PROBLEM, IT'S NOT LIKE THEIR ISN'T A WHOLE CONTINENT TO CROSS THROUGH FIRST.
Also the list of Nations that the boat crossers come from, so perfectly illustrated by @HAYSIE shows that there are several countries between the point of origin and the UK. This would prove that the desire is specifically to reach the UK not to obtain safe haven.
Well spotted. How on earth could anyone possibly think otherwise. They get to France, then pay a people smuggler thousands of pounds, then risk their lives crossing the channel, when really they didnt mind staying in France. Really? Some come over because they have family here, others because they can speak English. Sky interviewed one young girl that arrived on a small boat this week, it was her 30th attempt to cross the channel, they are obviously not half hearted.
WHERE DO THEY GET THE THOUSANDS OF POUNDS THEY PAY SMUGGLERS. SERIOUSLY THEY JUST WALK OUT OF THEIR OWN COUNTRIES WITH BRICKS OF CURRENCY DO THEY. I SUGGEST IT'S RAISED THROUGH ILLEGAL ACTIVITIES. ALSO 30TH ATTEMPT EVEN AT £3,000 A POP IS £90,000 WHERE THE FK DOES A YOUNG GIRL GET THAT KIND OF MONEY. IN FACT IF AS AN ILLEGAL I CAN MAKE THAT AMOUNT OF MONEY ON THE BLACK I'LL MOVE TO FRANCE TOMMORROW.
ONCE MORE THE NARRATIVE DOES NOT BEAR EXAMINATION
That brings me to the second point, which is, what is the allure of Ireland ?. Well it could be that the arriving illegals believe that the aforementioned deep rooted Catholicism means that they will receive a sympathetic and loving welcome. The attitude of the Irish however would seem to counter that belief.
The arrivals in Ireland did not start until the Rwanda legislation went through, as you know. They can only get there because we cant control our borders.
SO THEY BECOME SOMEONE ELSES PROBLEM AMD THAT IS WRONG. YET IT'S OK WHEN THEY BECAME THE UK'S PROBLEM. STOP WITH THE DOUBLE STANDARDS
WE CAN'T CONTROL OUR BORDERS BECAUSE THE LIBERAL WOKES WON'T LET US. IMAGINE THE FURRORE IF WE STOPPED, SENT BACK OR SANK EVERY BOAT ACTING ILLEGALLY IN OUR WATERS. YES THAT WOULD BE A BARBARIC ACT THAT I WOULD NEVER SUPPORT. HOWEVER, PROBLEM WOULD BE SOLVED I FEEL.
Or could it be that the Ireland is a place rich in opportunity, a place where one can settle and look forward to a better life. Ireland have FoM.
WELL THAT'S THEIR FAULT IF IT ALLOWS UNDESIRABLES IN. ACCORDING TO ITS SUPPORTERS FREEDOM OF MOVEMENT IS ONE OF THE GREAT BENEFITS OF EU MEMBERSHIP. AGAIN UNTIL IT ISN'T. MIND YOU IF THEY DON'T LIKE IRELAND THEY ARE FREE TO TRAVEL TO ANY OTHER EU COUNTRY THEY CHOOSE.
It's an interesting debate. However I can't help but feel that the fact that Ireland has no Rawanda style plan might just have something to do with it.
Or perhaps you are happy to move our problem elsewhere, and do not care about the people involved?
TO SAY I DON'T CARE WHEN I AM INVOLVED WITH ASYLUM SUPPORT GROUPS IS A LITTLE INSULTING. HOWEVER I CAN DISTINGUISH BETWEEN A DESPERATE FAMILY ESCAPING FROM BRUTAL TYRANNY AND DOZENS OF YOUNG MEN WANTING THE EASY LIFE THAT THE UK AFFORDS THEM. IT'S THE NAIVETY OF JOE WOKE THAT GALLS ME.
AS FOR MOVING THE PROBLEM ON, IT'S THE WAY OF THE WORLD TONY. EVERYDAY WE MOVE TRAVELLERS ON TO BECOME SOMEONE ELSES PROBLEM, SAME WITH BEGGARS, THE HOMELESS AND GROUPS OF ALCOHOLICS. THE NIMBY HYPOCRISY THAT PERMEATES SOCIETY MEANS THAT PEOPLE ONLY SUPPORT HELPING THESE GROUPS UNTIL THEY LAND ON THEIR OWN DOORSTEP.
Sorry about the capitals I don't know how else to highlight my responses to your responses. It's not me shouting.
I cant see why on earth you would if they are not really asylum seekers?
NOT MANY FAMILIES FLEEING PERSECUTION AND WAR ARE THERE. It would seem single males in their 20's make up the vast majority.
Are you saying that only families can suffer from persecution, wars, and famine?
No I am saying that the media sells us the impression that it's mostly desperate families trying to get here when film and pictures prove otherwise. The media sells it and we play the role though don't we.
They clearly dont.
You have failed to explain where you think these poor impoverished asylum seekers obtain the thousands of pounds to pay the smugglers.
Why would I? I am not the one making any claims at all.
What I am saying is that 78% of their applications are accepted. Therefore, either the overwhelming majority are genuine asylum seekers, or the Home Office is completely unable to tell the difference.
Ah but you did. You said that they pay thousands to the smugglers. So I ask again, where does all that money come from.
Also you are using stats to cloud the issue. That's 78% of those who claim asylum. What about the hundreds, maybe thousands that make landfall and simply disappear. Or does that not happen either.
They choose to live in the UK because we are a soft touch NO OTHER reason. Money, housing, medical care, welfare system. A legal system that does little to punish the criminal element amongst them and a total lack of ability to properly monitor them.
The numbers arriving by small boats might be "a very small percentage of net migration". However they are all "ILLEGAL" migrants, so one could assume they are a very large percentage of that particular demographic.
So whilst I feel that Rawanda is not an effective solution. These people do now have a choice. Stay in France and make a life there or come to the UK and maybe get shipped off to Rawanda. That's THEIR choice, nobody forces them to come over.
Although it would appear that Ireland now has an allure that the UK lacks.
Christianity?
Fair point.
Ok, I'm not sure if this means that you can't equate my beliefs with my stance on Illegal immigration or whether you believe that the illegal immigrants prefer Ireland because of it's deep rooted Catholicism.
Neither. I was just agreeing with Phil, in that you misquoted.
Firstly, as I have often stated, I am NOT against refugees fleeing war, famine, persecution etc. Neither am I against people emigrating to another country to seek a better life. God's people did that for Centuries.
No, you just accuse them of being something that the majority are not.
WHEN I SEE SMALL BOATS PACKED WITH YOUN SINGLE MALES IT DOES NOT EQUATE INTO DESPERATE FAMILIES SEEKING SAFETY. THEY ARE ALREADY IN A COUNTRY OF SAFETY SO ASK THE QUESTION WHY DO THEY WANT TO SPEND THOUSANDS OF POUNDS TO LEAVE.
However, I am also a firm believer in removing the log from my own eye before trying to remove the speck of dust from another's. We have homelessness, poverty, neglect, persecution and despair and I truly believe that we should fix ourselves first and foremost.
You only have to examine the numbers of asylum seekers over the period of this Tory Government to realise that irrespective of the numbers, there has been no improvement in the stuff you care about.
YEP THAT'S TRUE BUT THAT DOESN'T EXCUSE THE FACT THAT WE SPEND MORE ON THE ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT PROBLEM THAN WE DO ADRESSING OUR OWN ISSUES.
Let's get one thing absolutely clear, NOBODY arriving by small boat is fleeing conflict. There is no war in France, Spain, Italy, The Netherlands, Germany, Turkey, Poland, Belgium etc. There is no risk of torture, or real persecution. Yes they may experience some racism and xenophobia, but that's a risk anywhere where people are from different cultures.
I posted the origins of where they come from yesterday. You obviously havent read that. Some of these countries still execute people for being gay. Go and tell them that it is just bad luck. We make the rules on who qualifies. 67% of initial applications are successful. About one third of the 33% that initially fail, are later succesful. That takes the overall success rate up to 78%. You must therefore have your wires crossed. We also have a Foreign Aid budget, the clue is in the name. This also doesnt get spent on the stuff that concerns you. It is spent on helping others, elsewhere.
THEY COME HERE FOR THE FREE MONEY, HOUSING, HEALTH CARE, LAX LAW AND ORDER AND EVERY OTHER BENEFIT FROM LIVING IN THE UK.
FRANCE DOESN'T EXECUTE FOR BEING GAY OR TORTURE OR PERSECUTE OR ETHNIC CLEANSE.
ASYLUM RULES/LAWS STATE THAT AN APPLICATION FOR ASYLUM SHOULD BE MADE UPON ENTERING THE FIRST SAFE COUNTRY.
WHY SHOULD OUR TINY ISLAND EVEN HAVE THIS PROBLEM, IT'S NOT LIKE THEIR ISN'T A WHOLE CONTINENT TO CROSS THROUGH FIRST.
Also the list of Nations that the boat crossers come from, so perfectly illustrated by @HAYSIE shows that there are several countries between the point of origin and the UK. This would prove that the desire is specifically to reach the UK not to obtain safe haven.
Well spotted. How on earth could anyone possibly think otherwise. They get to France, then pay a people smuggler thousands of pounds, then risk their lives crossing the channel, when really they didnt mind staying in France. Really? Some come over because they have family here, others because they can speak English. Sky interviewed one young girl that arrived on a small boat this week, it was her 30th attempt to cross the channel, they are obviously not half hearted.
WHERE DO THEY GET THE THOUSANDS OF POUNDS THEY PAY SMUGGLERS. SERIOUSLY THEY JUST WALK OUT OF THEIR OWN COUNTRIES WITH BRICKS OF CURRENCY DO THEY. I SUGGEST IT'S RAISED THROUGH ILLEGAL ACTIVITIES. ALSO 30TH ATTEMPT EVEN AT £3,000 A POP IS £90,000 WHERE THE FK DOES A YOUNG GIRL GET THAT KIND OF MONEY. IN FACT IF AS AN ILLEGAL I CAN MAKE THAT AMOUNT OF MONEY ON THE BLACK I'LL MOVE TO FRANCE TOMMORROW.
ONCE MORE THE NARRATIVE DOES NOT BEAR EXAMINATION
That brings me to the second point, which is, what is the allure of Ireland ?. Well it could be that the arriving illegals believe that the aforementioned deep rooted Catholicism means that they will receive a sympathetic and loving welcome. The attitude of the Irish however would seem to counter that belief.
The arrivals in Ireland did not start until the Rwanda legislation went through, as you know. They can only get there because we cant control our borders.
SO THEY BECOME SOMEONE ELSES PROBLEM AMD THAT IS WRONG. YET IT'S OK WHEN THEY BECAME THE UK'S PROBLEM. STOP WITH THE DOUBLE STANDARDS
WE CAN'T CONTROL OUR BORDERS BECAUSE THE LIBERAL WOKES WON'T LET US. IMAGINE THE FURRORE IF WE STOPPED, SENT BACK OR SANK EVERY BOAT ACTING ILLEGALLY IN OUR WATERS. YES THAT WOULD BE A BARBARIC ACT THAT I WOULD NEVER SUPPORT. HOWEVER, PROBLEM WOULD BE SOLVED I FEEL.
Or could it be that the Ireland is a place rich in opportunity, a place where one can settle and look forward to a better life. Ireland have FoM.
WELL THAT'S THEIR FAULT IF IT ALLOWS UNDESIRABLES IN. ACCORDING TO ITS SUPPORTERS FREEDOM OF MOVEMENT IS ONE OF THE GREAT BENEFITS OF EU MEMBERSHIP. AGAIN UNTIL IT ISN'T. MIND YOU IF THEY DON'T LIKE IRELAND THEY ARE FREE TO TRAVEL TO ANY OTHER EU COUNTRY THEY CHOOSE.
It's an interesting debate. However I can't help but feel that the fact that Ireland has no Rawanda style plan might just have something to do with it.
Or perhaps you are happy to move our problem elsewhere, and do not care about the people involved?
TO SAY I DON'T CARE WHEN I AM INVOLVED WITH ASYLUM SUPPORT GROUPS IS A LITTLE INSULTING. HOWEVER I CAN DISTINGUISH BETWEEN A DESPERATE FAMILY ESCAPING FROM BRUTAL TYRANNY AND DOZENS OF YOUNG MEN WANTING THE EASY LIFE THAT THE UK AFFORDS THEM. IT'S THE NAIVETY OF JOE WOKE THAT GALLS ME.
AS FOR MOVING THE PROBLEM ON, IT'S THE WAY OF THE WORLD TONY. EVERYDAY WE MOVE TRAVELLERS ON TO BECOME SOMEONE ELSES PROBLEM, SAME WITH BEGGARS, THE HOMELESS AND GROUPS OF ALCOHOLICS. THE NIMBY HYPOCRISY THAT PERMEATES SOCIETY MEANS THAT PEOPLE ONLY SUPPORT HELPING THESE GROUPS UNTIL THEY LAND ON THEIR OWN DOORSTEP.
Sorry about the capitals I don't know how else to highlight my responses to your responses. It's not me shouting.
I cant see why on earth you would if they are not really asylum seekers?
......maybe read the rest of the paragraph
And?
You have gone very quiet. The obvious point I was clearly making was, Why would you bother to involve yourself with asylum support, when you are adamant that these people arent really asylum seekers.
Comments
Asylum in France - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asylum_in_France
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asylum_in_France
Our total land borders total just over 300 miles. All with a country (Ireland) which has had freedom of movement to the UK since before the EU began. With (despite recent headlines) very little traffic from outside the 2 countries via that route.
France has nearly 2,500 miles of land borders. As part of that, French Guiana is part of France, so 800 miles of it is Brazil/Surinam.
Then add in the fact that there is freedom of movement within the EU. Then add in the Schengen Agreement. Finally, the various former French colonies that are really close, such as Morocco and Tunisia.
And that is all in addition to the far greater sea borders and their proximity to where "illegals" tend to come from, particularly via the Mediterranean.
That is really disappointing.
Firstly, as I have often stated, I am NOT against refugees fleeing war, famine, persecution etc. Neither am I against people emigrating to another country to seek a better life. God's people did that for Centuries.
However, I am also a firm believer in removing the log from my own eye before trying to remove the speck of dust from another's. We have homelessness, poverty, neglect, persecution and despair and I truly believe that we should fix ourselves first and foremost.
Let's get one thing absolutely clear, NOBODY arriving by small boat is fleeing conflict. There is no war in France, Spain, Italy, The Netherlands, Germany, Turkey, Poland, Belgium etc. There is no risk of torture, or real persecution. Yes they may experience some racism and xenophobia, but that's a risk anywhere where people are from different cultures.
Also the list of Nations that the boat crossers come from, so perfectly illustrated by @HAYSIE shows that there are several countries between the point of origin and the UK. This would prove that the desire is specifically to reach the UK not to obtain safe haven.
That brings me to the second point, which is, what is the allure of Ireland ?. Well it could be that the arriving illegals believe that the aforementioned deep rooted Catholicism means that they will receive a sympathetic and loving welcome. The attitude of the Irish however would seem to counter that belief.
Or could it be that the Ireland is a place rich in opportunity, a place where one can settle and look forward to a better life.
It's an interesting debate. However I can't help but feel that the fact that Ireland has no Rawanda style plan might just have something to do with it.
When as Phil said it is the "love of money".
The two things are completely different.
You can do many good things with money.
Like give it to charity for instance.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/migrant-crisis-711-asylum-seekers-crossed-english-channel-yesterday-in-record-breaking-day-so-far-this-year/ar-AA1o1O7R?ocid=msedgntp&pc=NMTS&cvid=89659330c746489eeaf760e0de009b9b&ei=18
AS FOR MOVING THE PROBLEM ON, IT'S THE WAY OF THE WORLD TONY. EVERYDAY WE MOVE TRAVELLERS ON TO BECOME SOMEONE ELSES PROBLEM, SAME WITH BEGGARS, THE HOMELESS AND GROUPS OF ALCOHOLICS. THE NIMBY HYPOCRISY THAT PERMEATES SOCIETY MEANS THAT PEOPLE ONLY SUPPORT HELPING THESE GROUPS UNTIL THEY LAND ON THEIR OWN DOORSTEP.
Sorry about the capitals I don't know how else to highlight my responses to your responses. It's not me shouting.
You should offer your services to The Home Office.
Why bother with the whole application process, when you could give them the once over instead.
In all seriousness there are three problems with your argument,
The first is that they all go through the application process, and despite probably erring on the side of caution, we actually accept 78% of them.
This makes a nonsense of your claim that they are not really asylum seekers.
The second is that the list of countries below, where the vast majority have arrived from over the last 5 years, are particularly cruel regimes, or are at war.
That is a fact.
You cant blame people for escaping from any of them.
As I said, Albania is now sorted.
Three quarters of all small boat arrivals between 2018 and 2023 were nationals from just six countries: Iran (21,546), Afghanistan (16,636), Iraq (15,388), Albania (14,480), Syria (8,528) and Eritrea (8,068).
Chart: Who Is Crossing the English Channel? | Statista
www.statista.com/chart/32171/share-of-small-boat-arrivals-to-uk-by-nationality/
www.statista.com/chart/32171/share-of-small-boat-arrivals-to-uk-by-nationality/
Thirdly, we have created the problem in Ireland.
This is a recent problem which appears to have been created by our asylum seekers escaping to Ireland in order to escape deportation to Rwanda.
Ireland is a friend and ally of ours, and we should not be sh1tting on them.
Sh1tting on others will always result on you getting some back.
We are supposed to be controlling our borders.
So how on earth is it possible for our illegal immigrants to escape to Ireland?
Why cant we control our borders?
How will we deport any if they are free to disappear?
We shouldnt blame others for our utter incompetence.
You have failed to explain where you think these poor impoverished asylum seekers obtain the thousands of pounds to pay the smugglers.
I am not the one making any claims at all.
What I am saying is that 78% of their applications are accepted.
Therefore, either the overwhelming majority are genuine asylum seekers, or the Home Office is completely unable to tell the difference.
Also you are using stats to cloud the issue. That's 78% of those who claim asylum. What about the hundreds, maybe thousands that make landfall and simply disappear. Or does that not happen either.
The obvious point I was clearly making was,
Why would you bother to involve yourself with asylum support, when you are adamant that these people arent really asylum seekers.