Farage needs to be careful. Jaywick is not 1 of those places where you say 1 thing and do another. There are stunts he could pull that he could get away with in Clacton that will not wash in Jaywick. Love to see the old chancer buy a house in Jaywick. But he won't, of course.
Residents of Jaywick have been marginalised for too long. They still remember Trump showing old pictures of Jaywick to show them in a terrible light.
Farage needs to be careful. Jaywick is not 1 of those places where you say 1 thing and do another. There are stunts he could pull that he could get away with in Clacton that will not wash in Jaywick. Love to see the old chancer buy a house in Jaywick. But he won't, of course.
Residents of Jaywick have been marginalised for too long. They still remember Trump showing old pictures of Jaywick to show them in a terrible light.
The people of Jaywick featured in a Brexit documentary that I saw.
Farage needs to be careful. Jaywick is not 1 of those places where you say 1 thing and do another. There are stunts he could pull that he could get away with in Clacton that will not wash in Jaywick. Love to see the old chancer buy a house in Jaywick. But he won't, of course.
Residents of Jaywick have been marginalised for too long. They still remember Trump showing old pictures of Jaywick to show them in a terrible light.
I stayed in a St Osyth caravan park a few years ago and Jaywick is just a stroll along the sea path so I thought I'd see what all the negative media was about. Me and my dog set off and when we entered Jaywick I've never been met by more friendlier people, almost everyone we passed said "Good Morning" "Hello" or stopped to have a quick chat, yes, some of the area is very rundown but you couldn't meet nicer people, it actually shocked me how friendly they were (given the way people were portrayed by media). I've been to some very snooty places and you're lucky to get a grunt out of the locals, I know who I'd rather be around.
The BBC’s “fact-checking service” has dismissed Reform UK’s flagship immigration policy just hours before its party conference.
BBC Verify said there was “no evidence” that the party would legally be able to take migrants who are intercepted while crossing the English Channel back to France.
An article published on Friday morning by BBC Verify, a unit which consists of about 60 staff, said: “Both the party’s leader Nigel Farage and party chairman Richard Tice have claimed that the UK is legally entitled to do this.
“But BBC Verify has found no evidence that this is the case.”
The article added that the United Nations Convention on the Law of Sea would not allow people to be taken to another country without that country agreeing.
It went on to quote a shipping lawyer at Quadrant Chambers and a maritime law expert at the University of Southampton who said migrants could not be returned to France “unilaterally”.
Used to be a quality, albeit right wing, paper. Whereas this is typical of its output today.
BBC Verify is not a "fact-checking service". It is a fact checking service. That is what it does. you can agree with its findings. Or disagree. But that is what its role is. Much like the Telegraph is not a "newspaper". With "deranged rabid right journalists who quote opinions and ignore facts". It is a Newspaper. With deranged rabid right wing journalists who quote opinions and ignore facts.
Similarly, when it says there is "no evidence" in support that is because, in Verify's opinion, it has found no evidence in support.
It then goes on to quote 2 fairly decent sources in support of this. A specialist Barrister in this field. And a specialist academic.
That doesn't make the BBC right. Here is an ideal opportunity to counter those arguments with clear evidence to rebut this.
What do we get instead? Richard Tice. No expert in all of this. Saying "nerdy, nerdy custard". And providing precisely no evidence whatsoever to back up his claims.
Here's a question. If it really was that simple, why did the EU go to all that trouble of having an elaborate agreement in relation to all of this? 1 we are no longer party to.
"The article added that the United Nations Convention on the Law of Sea would not allow people to be taken to another country without that country agreeing."
The French routinely escort small boats into British waters for us to pick up. If we stopped agreeing to take them, wouldn't that be a deterrent?
of course if trump wins then Farage will be the only man that can save the UK. because trump will cosy up with Russia and pull the US out of NATO. He dislikes labour and will hang the UK out to dry but Farage is best buddies with Trump and if Farage is foreign sectary or Minister to America (dont think that exists but they make it for him if not) then he might persaude Trump to keep protecting the UK.
We would be in a position where the only man that could save the UK would be Nigel Farage can you imagine that?
of course if trump wins then Farage will be the only man that can save the UK. because trump will cosy up with Russia and pull the US out of NATO. He dislikes labour and will hang the UK out to dry but Farage is best buddies with Trump and if Farage is foreign sectary or Minister to America (dont think that exists but they make it for him if not) then he might persaude Trump to keep protecting the UK.
We would be in a position where the only man that could save the UK would be Nigel Farage can you imagine that?
Farage the Saviour of the UK?
Are we talking opposites here?
He has done nothing but put the UK in jeopardy IMHO.
of course if trump wins then Farage will be the only man that can save the UK. because trump will cosy up with Russia and pull the US out of NATO. He dislikes labour and will hang the UK out to dry but Farage is best buddies with Trump and if Farage is foreign sectary or Minister to America (dont think that exists but they make it for him if not) then he might persaude Trump to keep protecting the UK.
We would be in a position where the only man that could save the UK would be Nigel Farage can you imagine that?
Farage the Saviour of the UK?
Are we talking opposites here?
He has done nothing but put the UK in jeopardy IMHO.
I dont like Farage I think he is BNP lawyered up in a suit and I think he has done a lot of damage to the UK. I am no fan of Farage, nor am I a fan of Trump. Just I am aware that if Trump wins the only way to keep him protecting the UK would be Farage this is not a reality I want to see of course.
"The article added that the United Nations Convention on the Law of Sea would not allow people to be taken to another country without that country agreeing."
The French routinely escort small boats into British waters for us to pick up. If we stopped agreeing to take them, wouldn't that be a deterrent?
@Essexphil would be the best person to answer this. I believe that the French are unable to intervene once the boat is in the water. Where they are in some difficulties the French will escort them into our waters. They then become our responsibility. If you have 70 people in a boat that have paid thousands to get to the UK, they are unlikely to be persuaded to turn back, for any reason. I dont think we can just stop agreeing to take them. If the was possible then surely the Tories would have done it long ago.
Comments
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/row-erupts-over-farage-s-claim-safety-fears-block-him-from-constituency-surgery/ar-AA1qQuFv?ocid=msedgntp&pc=NMTS&cvid=b8ec976891844b118e22c21c4624d324&ei=30#fullscreen
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/lee-anderson-slams-woke-britain-as-he-declares-nigel-farage-s-party-can-win-2029-election/ar-AA1qRhLM?ocid=msedgntp&pc=NMTS&cvid=8527fe0db1374b5d814497434519a7b7&ei=62#fullscreen
Thrown out of the Labour Party. For being a racist.
Thrown out of the Conservative Party. For being a racist.
Welcomed by the Reform Party.
See a theme here?
https://uk.yahoo.com/news/could-more-clacton-split-over-040004178.html
Farage needs to be careful. Jaywick is not 1 of those places where you say 1 thing and do another. There are stunts he could pull that he could get away with in Clacton that will not wash in Jaywick. Love to see the old chancer buy a house in Jaywick. But he won't, of course.
Residents of Jaywick have been marginalised for too long. They still remember Trump showing old pictures of Jaywick to show them in a terrible light.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/farage-dodges-questions-on-gifted-30k-us-trip-as-he-pokes-fun-at-starmer/ar-AA1qVmZa?ocid=msedgntp&pc=NMTS&cvid=fa97c9352de34ef99f24f07112e5e784&ei=9#fullscreen
The BBC’s “fact-checking service” has dismissed Reform UK’s flagship immigration policy just hours before its party conference.
BBC Verify said there was “no evidence” that the party would legally be able to take migrants who are intercepted while crossing the English Channel back to France.
An article published on Friday morning by BBC Verify, a unit which consists of about 60 staff, said: “Both the party’s leader Nigel Farage and party chairman Richard Tice have claimed that the UK is legally entitled to do this.
“But BBC Verify has found no evidence that this is the case.”
The article added that the United Nations Convention on the Law of Sea would not allow people to be taken to another country without that country agreeing.
It went on to quote a shipping lawyer at Quadrant Chambers and a maritime law expert at the University of Southampton who said migrants could not be returned to France “unilaterally”.
https://uk.yahoo.com/news/bbc-farage-t-send-migrants-121339778.html
Used to be a quality, albeit right wing, paper. Whereas this is typical of its output today.
BBC Verify is not a "fact-checking service". It is a fact checking service. That is what it does. you can agree with its findings. Or disagree. But that is what its role is. Much like the Telegraph is not a "newspaper". With "deranged rabid right journalists who quote opinions and ignore facts". It is a Newspaper. With deranged rabid right wing journalists who quote opinions and ignore facts.
Similarly, when it says there is "no evidence" in support that is because, in Verify's opinion, it has found no evidence in support.
It then goes on to quote 2 fairly decent sources in support of this. A specialist Barrister in this field. And a specialist academic.
That doesn't make the BBC right. Here is an ideal opportunity to counter those arguments with clear evidence to rebut this.
What do we get instead? Richard Tice. No expert in all of this. Saying "nerdy, nerdy custard". And providing precisely no evidence whatsoever to back up his claims.
Here's a question. If it really was that simple, why did the EU go to all that trouble of having an elaborate agreement in relation to all of this? 1 we are no longer party to.
The French routinely escort small boats into British waters for us to pick up.
If we stopped agreeing to take them, wouldn't that be a deterrent?
We would be in a position where the only man that could save the UK would be Nigel Farage can you imagine that?
Are we talking opposites here?
He has done nothing but put the UK in jeopardy IMHO.
I believe that the French are unable to intervene once the boat is in the water.
Where they are in some difficulties the French will escort them into our waters.
They then become our responsibility.
If you have 70 people in a boat that have paid thousands to get to the UK, they are unlikely to be persuaded to turn back, for any reason.
I dont think we can just stop agreeing to take them.
If the was possible then surely the Tories would have done it long ago.