FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Small boat crossings increase 26%

Small boat crossings increase 26%

Jump to: Newest in thread

By *ingdomNightTimePleasures OP Man 39 weeks ago

nearby

41,800 attempts to cross the channel in the first seven months of 2025, a 26% increase.

Irregular EU border crossings are down 18%.

Half a billion paid to France and one in, one out policy soon to come into force.

Will it be enough

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ools and the brainCouple 39 weeks ago

couple, us we him her.

"41,800 attempts to cross the channel in the first seven months of 2025, a 26% increase.

Irregular EU border crossings are down 18%.

Half a billion paid to France and one in, one out policy soon to come into force.

Will it be enough "

Nope not even close.

Whilst there's big money to be made by organised criminals they will find a way round it, probably via big pay offs to corrupt officials willing to turn a blind eye for the right price.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *uffolkcouple-bi onlyCouple 39 weeks ago

West Suffolk

One in one out is a joke. It implies they are going to remove someone that they were going to let stay. But they tell us they can’t do that because it violates international law. So they are removing someone who they were going to remove anyway without taking an extra one in return. But now they are going to take an extra one.

This isn’t a policy to decrease immigration it’s a policy to increase it. At a time when so many people are unhappy with the numbers. That’s basically saying they don’t care what the public thinks or wants

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *007ManMan 39 weeks ago

Worthing

One in none out will probably be a regular thing.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *enisorousMan 39 weeks ago

sunderland

They are invaders..just shoot them as soon as they enter our waters

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *otMe66Man 39 weeks ago

Terra Firma

The only potential positive I can take from 1 in 1 out, is the worry it may cause if they are returned, they will have lost their crossing money and are now known to our authorities.

I'm not convinced it will put off too many as most know as long as they ditch their ID and stick to the plan, they are in.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *uddy laneMan 39 weeks ago

dudley

Funny how the echr ignore these people all the way across the borderless European Union until they reach UK waters, even the overcrowded inflatables being pushed out are not recognised as a potential risk to life by the echr, the home secretary said any inflatable with more than 80 people the pilot would be arrested for danger to life there was one with 83 the other day, the uk helped bomb Syria into the stone age for so called human rights abuse why aren't we bombing France they allow human trafficking and human misery from their country and we pay them.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *uffolkcouple-bi onlyCouple 39 weeks ago

West Suffolk

I don’t see how someone with no ID can prove they are in fear of torture.

But if you follow their logic, those engaged in peaceful protest live in fear of violence at the hands of the police. So surely they can get a free meal ticket?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *m3232Man 39 weeks ago

maidenhead

Just shows you we are a laughing stock

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 39 weeks ago

"Just shows you we are a laughing stock "

Agreed. Laughing at how easily distracted and manipulated the electorate are by the anti-immigrant propaganda.

Here's some data:

Germany: with the highest number of asylum applicants in 2024, with 229,695 first-time applicants.

Spain: Received 164,010 first-time asylum applications in 2024,

Italy: Received 151,120 first-time asylum applicants in 2024,

France: Received 130,860 first-time asylum applicants in 2024

UK: Received around 108,100 asylum applications in 2024

Are the Spanish, French, Italians, and Germans as susceptible?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *pa-LoverMan 39 weeks ago

Coventry

"They are invaders..just shoot them as soon as they enter our waters"
Messy, might be easier if the UK Border Force trafficked them back to the French coast instead of the Kent coast.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 39 weeks ago

"Just shows you we are a laughing stock

Agreed. Laughing at how easily distracted and manipulated the electorate are by the anti-immigrant propaganda.

Here's some data:

Germany: with the highest number of asylum applicants in 2024, with 229,695 first-time applicants.

Spain: Received 164,010 first-time asylum applications in 2024,

Italy: Received 151,120 first-time asylum applicants in 2024,

France: Received 130,860 first-time asylum applicants in 2024

UK: Received around 108,100 asylum applications in 2024

Are the Spanish, French, Italians, and Germans as susceptible?

Here’s some more data for 2024 from Eurostat based on first instance acceptances of asylum claims:

Hungary doesn’t figure as it hardly ever accepts any.

Slovakia: 60

Croatia: 65

Czechia: 160

Latvia: 185

Lithuania: 190

Slovenia: 185

Malta: 230

Denmark: 715

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *deepdiveMan 39 weeks ago

Canterbury and France (26)

Irregular border crossings into the EU are down 18% in the first seven months of the year, but people taking illegal boat journeys across the Channel to the UK are up 25%, according to new statistics issued by the EU’s border agency.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 39 weeks ago

"Just shows you we are a laughing stock

Agreed. Laughing at how easily distracted and manipulated the electorate are by the anti-immigrant propaganda.

Here's some data:

Germany: with the highest number of asylum applicants in 2024, with 229,695 first-time applicants.

Spain: Received 164,010 first-time asylum applications in 2024,

Italy: Received 151,120 first-time asylum applicants in 2024,

France: Received 130,860 first-time asylum applicants in 2024

UK: Received around 108,100 asylum applications in 2024

Are the Spanish, French, Italians, and Germans as susceptible?

Here’s some more data for 2024 from Eurostat based on first instance acceptances of asylum claims:

Hungary doesn’t figure as it hardly ever accepts any.

Slovakia: 60

Croatia: 65

Czechia: 160

Latvia: 185

Lithuania: 190

Slovenia: 185

Malta: 230

Denmark: 715

Do these countries have the same issues we do?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 39 weeks ago

"They are invaders..just shoot them as soon as they enter our waters Messy, might be easier if the UK Border Force trafficked them back to the French coast instead of the Kent coast."

Easier than indiscriminantly murdering people?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ools and the brainCouple 39 weeks ago

couple, us we him her.

Wouldn't it be cheaper just to pay people 50k each not to even try to get here?😇

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *otMe66Man 39 weeks ago

Terra Firma

"Wouldn't it be cheaper just to pay people 50k each not to even try to get here?😇"

It think it would be cheaper to return all people arriving here by small boat crossings to France, and pay the French 3 months maintenance costs.

We would need a returns agreement and away we go, as France and all other mainland EU countries are deemed a safe 3rd countries.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *coptoCouple 39 weeks ago

Côte d'Azur & Great Yarmouth

“Wouldn't it be cheaper just to pay people 50k each not to even try to get here”

You’d think so, wouldn’t you….

BUT, “visitors” to France (word chosen to avoid being accused of racism, although objecting to over half a million uninvited guests to the UK does NOT make me a racist), who can’t establish themselves as having a genuine need to remain, are served with a OQTF (Obligation de Quitter le Territoire Français i.e. get out of here within thirty days) and possibly a IRTF (Interdiction de Retour en France i.e. and don’t even think about coming back).

If they comply, they’re given a financial incentive (can be up to 2,500 EUR) to return quickly to their country of origin (aide au retour et/ou à la réinsertion).

The fact that they’d risk crossing the channel to come here rather than take advantage of the French offer says it all…

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 39 weeks ago

"Just shows you we are a laughing stock

Agreed. Laughing at how easily distracted and manipulated the electorate are by the anti-immigrant propaganda.

Here's some data:

Germany: with the highest number of asylum applicants in 2024, with 229,695 first-time applicants.

Spain: Received 164,010 first-time asylum applications in 2024,

Italy: Received 151,120 first-time asylum applicants in 2024,

France: Received 130,860 first-time asylum applicants in 2024

UK: Received around 108,100 asylum applications in 2024

Are the Spanish, French, Italians, and Germans as susceptible?

Here’s some more data for 2024 from Eurostat based on first instance acceptances of asylum claims:

Hungary doesn’t figure as it hardly ever accepts any.

Slovakia: 60

Croatia: 65

Czechia: 160

Latvia: 185

Lithuania: 190

Slovenia: 185

Malta: 230

Denmark: 715

Do these countries have the same issues we do?"

What “issues” do we have that they don’t?

Aside from having sea in between our country and all neighbouring countries which presumably makes it much easier for illegal immigrants to enter.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 39 weeks ago

"Just shows you we are a laughing stock

Agreed. Laughing at how easily distracted and manipulated the electorate are by the anti-immigrant propaganda.

Here's some data:

Germany: with the highest number of asylum applicants in 2024, with 229,695 first-time applicants.

Spain: Received 164,010 first-time asylum applications in 2024,

Italy: Received 151,120 first-time asylum applicants in 2024,

France: Received 130,860 first-time asylum applicants in 2024

UK: Received around 108,100 asylum applications in 2024

Are the Spanish, French, Italians, and Germans as susceptible?

Here’s some more data for 2024 from Eurostat based on first instance acceptances of asylum claims:

Hungary doesn’t figure as it hardly ever accepts any.

Slovakia: 60

Croatia: 65

Czechia: 160

Latvia: 185

Lithuania: 190

Slovenia: 185

Malta: 230

Denmark: 715

Do these countries have the same issues we do?

What “issues” do we have that they don’t?"

This was my question to you, ie, asking why you posted this data.

Aside from having sea in between our country and all neighbouring countries which presumably makes it much easier for illegal immigrants to enter."

Is this an issue related to the data you shared?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *eroy1000Man 39 weeks ago

milton keynes

"41,800 attempts to cross the channel in the first seven months of 2025, a 26% increase.

Irregular EU border crossings are down 18%.

Half a billion paid to France and one in, one out policy soon to come into force.

Will it be enough "

I don't think even starmer is saying it's likely to be enough. The hope is it acts as a deterrent though wour probably need to be scaled up significantly to provide enough of a deterrent. A dilemma I see for those making the crossing is do they ditch their ID overboard during the crossing or not. If they don't then not easy to make false claims when applying in the UK. If they do ditch their ID and are selected to be sent back then they are back where they started minus the fee and their ID. Wouldn't be surprised if lawyers get involved in this either

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 39 weeks ago

"Just shows you we are a laughing stock

Agreed. Laughing at how easily distracted and manipulated the electorate are by the anti-immigrant propaganda.

Here's some data:

Germany: with the highest number of asylum applicants in 2024, with 229,695 first-time applicants.

Spain: Received 164,010 first-time asylum applications in 2024,

Italy: Received 151,120 first-time asylum applicants in 2024,

France: Received 130,860 first-time asylum applicants in 2024

UK: Received around 108,100 asylum applications in 2024

Are the Spanish, French, Italians, and Germans as susceptible?

Here’s some more data for 2024 from Eurostat based on first instance acceptances of asylum claims:

Hungary doesn’t figure as it hardly ever accepts any.

Slovakia: 60

Croatia: 65

Czechia: 160

Latvia: 185

Lithuania: 190

Slovenia: 185

Malta: 230

Denmark: 715

Do these countries have the same issues we do?

What “issues” do we have that they don’t?

This was my question to you, ie, asking why you posted this data.

Aside from having sea in between our country and all neighbouring countries which presumably makes it much easier for illegal immigrants to enter.

Is this an issue related to the data you shared?"

You posted some carefully selected data to indicate that some countries take in lots of immigrants.

I posted some data to indicate that the data you posted was misleading and unrepresentative, deliberately so obviously.

Taking in immigrants is a matter of choice. It may be a good choice or a bad choice. But it’s still a choice. It’s not some sort of natural order that can’t be avoided.

Plenty of countries do avoid it.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *deepdiveMan 39 weeks ago

Canterbury and France (26)

"Just shows you we are a laughing stock

Agreed. Laughing at how easily distracted and manipulated the electorate are by the anti-immigrant propaganda.

Here's some data:

Germany: with the highest number of asylum applicants in 2024, with 229,695 first-time applicants.

Spain: Received 164,010 first-time asylum applications in 2024,

Italy: Received 151,120 first-time asylum applicants in 2024,

France: Received 130,860 first-time asylum applicants in 2024

UK: Received around 108,100 asylum applications in 2024

Are the Spanish, French, Italians, and Germans as susceptible?

Here’s some more data for 2024 from Eurostat based on first instance acceptances of asylum claims:

Hungary doesn’t figure as it hardly ever accepts any.

Slovakia: 60

Croatia: 65

Czechia: 160

Latvia: 185

Lithuania: 190

Slovenia: 185

Malta: 230

Denmark: 715

Do these countries have the same issues we do?

What “issues” do we have that they don’t?

This was my question to you, ie, asking why you posted this data.

Aside from having sea in between our country and all neighbouring countries which presumably makes it much easier for illegal immigrants to enter.

Is this an issue related to the data you shared?

You posted some carefully selected data to indicate that some countries take in lots of immigrants.

I posted some data to indicate that the data you posted was misleading and unrepresentative, deliberately so obviously.

Taking in immigrants is a matter of choice. It may be a good choice or a bad choice. But it’s still a choice. It’s not some sort of natural order that can’t be avoided.

Plenty of countries do avoid it. "

Looking at the two datasets one is the number of applicants and the other appears to be the number of successful applicants so surely the figures are comparing apple's with pears.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 39 weeks ago

"Just shows you we are a laughing stock

Agreed. Laughing at how easily distracted and manipulated the electorate are by the anti-immigrant propaganda.

Here's some data:

Germany: with the highest number of asylum applicants in 2024, with 229,695 first-time applicants.

Spain: Received 164,010 first-time asylum applications in 2024,

Italy: Received 151,120 first-time asylum applicants in 2024,

France: Received 130,860 first-time asylum applicants in 2024

UK: Received around 108,100 asylum applications in 2024

Are the Spanish, French, Italians, and Germans as susceptible?

Here’s some more data for 2024 from Eurostat based on first instance acceptances of asylum claims:

Hungary doesn’t figure as it hardly ever accepts any.

Slovakia: 60

Croatia: 65

Czechia: 160

Latvia: 185

Lithuania: 190

Slovenia: 185

Malta: 230

Denmark: 715

Do these countries have the same issues we do?

What “issues” do we have that they don’t?

This was my question to you, ie, asking why you posted this data.

Aside from having sea in between our country and all neighbouring countries which presumably makes it much easier for illegal immigrants to enter.

Is this an issue related to the data you shared?

You posted some carefully selected data to indicate that some countries take in lots of immigrants."

Correct. To agree with the chap who proposed that we're a "laughing stock", the data helps to illustrate the point.

I posted some data to indicate that the data you posted was misleading and unrepresentative, deliberately so obviously.

No, you just posted some data, but didn't relate it to the point.

Taking in immigrants is a matter of choice. It may be a good choice or a bad choice. But it’s still a choice. It’s not some sort of natural order that can’t be avoided.

"Immigrants" or asylum seekers?

People emigrating to the UK don't usually arrive on these small boats crossing the channel. Which is what this thread is talking about, and what the data refers to.

Plenty of countries do avoid it. "

Avoid what?

Maybe you can relate this to the topic being discussed or the point I replied to?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 39 weeks ago

"41,800 attempts to cross the channel in the first seven months of 2025, a 26% increase.

Irregular EU border crossings are down 18%.

Half a billion paid to France and one in, one out policy soon to come into force.

Will it be enough "

Probably not for the racists. It isn't the people on boats they hate.

They hate so many black and brown people working down tesco and delivering them curry

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *verysmileMan 39 weeks ago

Canterbury

I see a lot of cash generated by this policy for the legal industry....the former colleagues of the PM

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ostindreamsMan 39 weeks ago

London

Organisations like CareForCalais have already said they will take this to the human rights courts. So I don't expect the 1-in-1-out policy to be in effect for long irrespective of whether it's effective or not.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 39 weeks ago

"Organisations like CareForCalais have already said they will take this to the human rights courts. So I don't expect the 1-in-1-out policy to be in effect for long irrespective of whether it's effective or not."

More like you want labour to fail

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ostindreamsMan 39 weeks ago

London

More like you want labour to fail "

If Labour can put an end to the open borders system, I would be happy. But just like every other politician in Europe, instead of fixing the asylum framework which is the root cause, Labour is also trying to find roundabout ways to fix the problem. It won't work.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 39 weeks ago

Of course you would!

It's the boats right?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 39 weeks ago

So no asylum to people who are suffering?

Ukrainian???

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ostindreamsMan 39 weeks ago

London

"So no asylum to people who are suffering?

Ukrainian???"

A limit on number of people we take every year and prioritising women and children and asylum seekers from countries which we have close connections with.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 39 weeks ago

I see, gay men in desperate need from homophobic countries don't get a look in.

Why women?

Easier to control?

Less frightening?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 39 weeks ago

Why are 40% of these masked white men making fools out side hotels convicted of crimes against women?

Is only ok if it's white men against ",our" women

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ostindreamsMan 39 weeks ago

London

"I see, gay men in desperate need from homophobic countries don't get a look in.

Why women?

Easier to control?

Less frightening?"

Women and children are more vulnerable

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ostindreamsMan 39 weeks ago

London

"Why are 40% of these masked white men making fools out side hotels convicted of crimes against women?

Is only ok if it's white men against ",our" women "

I thought you said there is no such thing as race. And yet you are confidently using racial terms all the time. How?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 39 weeks ago

"I see, gay men in desperate need from homophobic countries don't get a look in.

Why women?

Easier to control?

Less frightening?

Women and children are more vulnerable"

You don't know the women I do

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 39 weeks ago

"Why are 40% of these masked white men making fools out side hotels convicted of crimes against women?

Is only ok if it's white men against ",our" women

I thought you said there is no such thing as race. And yet you are confidently using racial terms all the time. How?

Fire with fire!

I see you, I call you, call me Nigel for the minorities!

So, tell me, why aren't there protests outside every white persons house accused of r@ping "our" women?

Why only hotels?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ostindreamsMan 39 weeks ago

London

"Why are 40% of these masked white men making fools out side hotels convicted of crimes against women?

Is only ok if it's white men against ",our" women

I thought you said there is no such thing as race. And yet you are confidently using racial terms all the time. How?

Fire with fire!

I see you, I call you, call me Nigel for the minorities!

So, tell me, why aren't there protests outside every white persons house accused of r@ping "our" women?

Why only hotels?

If there is no such thing as white person, how would they know a white person's house?

Also, people who grew up in this country are this country's responsibility. The ones who come from other countries are not. And there is no background checks done on these people which makes them more dangerous.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 39 weeks ago

"Why are 40% of these masked white men making fools out side hotels convicted of crimes against women?

Is only ok if it's white men against ",our" women

I thought you said there is no such thing as race. And yet you are confidently using racial terms all the time. How?

Fire with fire!

I see you, I call you, call me Nigel for the minorities!

So, tell me, why aren't there protests outside every white persons house accused of r@ping "our" women?

Why only hotels?

If there is no such thing as white person, how would they know a white person's house?

What are you on about?

The asylum process is a process for a reason! They make sure the people arriving have a claim and those that don't are gone! Mate, I understand people believe in race it's been happening for 500 years!! Science disproves the construct, but the propaganda was real even down to you

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ostindreamsMan 39 weeks ago

London

"Why are 40% of these masked white men making fools out side hotels convicted of crimes against women?

Is only ok if it's white men against ",our" women

I thought you said there is no such thing as race. And yet you are confidently using racial terms all the time. How?

Fire with fire!

I see you, I call you, call me Nigel for the minorities!

So, tell me, why aren't there protests outside every white persons house accused of r@ping "our" women?

Why only hotels?

If there is no such thing as white person, how would they know a white person's house?

What are you on about?

You are the one who has been repeatedly using racial terms in this conversation, not me.

About the asylum process, it's toothless when the men throw away their passports and there is no way to know where they are from.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 39 weeks ago

"Why are 40% of these masked white men making fools out side hotels convicted of crimes against women?

Is only ok if it's white men against ",our" women

I thought you said there is no such thing as race. And yet you are confidently using racial terms all the time. How?

Fire with fire!

I see you, I call you, call me Nigel for the minorities!

So, tell me, why aren't there protests outside every white persons house accused of r@ping "our" women?

Why only hotels?

If there is no such thing as white person, how would they know a white person's house?

What are you on about?

You are the one who has been repeatedly using racial terms in this conversation, not me.

About the asylum process, it's toothless when the men throw away their passports and there is no way to know where they are from. "

It's not true!! The asylum process is there for that!! This radicalising has to stop

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ostindreamsMan 39 weeks ago

London

"Why are 40% of these masked white men making fools out side hotels convicted of crimes against women?

Is only ok if it's white men against ",our" women

I thought you said there is no such thing as race. And yet you are confidently using racial terms all the time. How?

Fire with fire!

I see you, I call you, call me Nigel for the minorities!

So, tell me, why aren't there protests outside every white persons house accused of r@ping "our" women?

Why only hotels?

If there is no such thing as white person, how would they know a white person's house?

What are you on about?

You are the one who has been repeatedly using racial terms in this conversation, not me.

About the asylum process, it's toothless when the men throw away their passports and there is no way to know where they are from.

It's not true!! The asylum process is there for that!! This radicalising has to stop "

Brought to you by left-wing propaganda machinery

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 39 weeks ago

I'm afraid not, we have a process, of people can not come here from torn down infrastructure in they're countries and they make it to our shores we assess them and deem to have asylum or not.

Only your dear leader has turned this into some sort of crisis

A) Brexit

B) no direct access

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ostindreamsMan 39 weeks ago

London

"I'm afraid not, we have a process, of people can not come here from torn down infrastructure in they're countries and they make it to our shores we assess them and deem to have asylum or not.

Only your dear leader has turned this into some sort of crisis

A) Brexit

B) no direct access "

There are videos of people throwing away their documents on the way.

Also, it's a crisis. You admitted in another thread that we don't have money for the poor. How do we get money for these people?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 39 weeks ago

"I'm afraid not, we have a process, of people can not come here from torn down infrastructure in they're countries and they make it to our shores we assess them and deem to have asylum or not.

Only your dear leader has turned this into some sort of crisis

A) Brexit

B) no direct access

There are videos of people throwing away their documents on the way.

Also, it's a crisis. You admitted in another thread that we don't have money for the poor. How do we get money for these people? "

4% of immigration is a crisis?

I said we don't have money for the poor?

Your making shit up pal

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ostindreamsMan 39 weeks ago

London

"I'm afraid not, we have a process, of people can not come here from torn down infrastructure in they're countries and they make it to our shores we assess them and deem to have asylum or not.

Only your dear leader has turned this into some sort of crisis

A) Brexit

B) no direct access

There are videos of people throwing away their documents on the way.

Also, it's a crisis. You admitted in another thread that we don't have money for the poor. How do we get money for these people?

4% of immigration is a crisis?

I said we don't have money for the poor?

Your making shit up pal "

Given the amount of money spent, yes it is. You just mentioned in the other thread about how the poor are struggling and we need to impose wealth tax to pay for them. So how do you pay money for these men?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 39 weeks ago

"I'm afraid not, we have a process, of people can not come here from torn down infrastructure in they're countries and they make it to our shores we assess them and deem to have asylum or not.

Only your dear leader has turned this into some sort of crisis

A) Brexit

B) no direct access

There are videos of people throwing away their documents on the way.

Also, it's a crisis. You admitted in another thread that we don't have money for the poor. How do we get money for these people?

4% of immigration is a crisis?

I said we don't have money for the poor?

Your making shit up pal

They go to work, they pay taxes they do not need to lounge in hotels

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ostindreamsMan 39 weeks ago

London

"I'm afraid not, we have a process, of people can not come here from torn down infrastructure in they're countries and they make it to our shores we assess them and deem to have asylum or not.

Only your dear leader has turned this into some sort of crisis

A) Brexit

B) no direct access

There are videos of people throwing away their documents on the way.

Also, it's a crisis. You admitted in another thread that we don't have money for the poor. How do we get money for these people?

4% of immigration is a crisis?

I said we don't have money for the poor?

Your making shit up pal

They go to work, they pay taxes they do not need to lounge in hotels "

Employment rate of people who got right to work through asylum process is just 52% and those who work earn much less than the national average and pay much less in taxes.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 39 weeks ago

"I'm afraid not, we have a process, of people can not come here from torn down infrastructure in they're countries and they make it to our shores we assess them and deem to have asylum or not.

Only your dear leader has turned this into some sort of crisis

A) Brexit

B) no direct access

There are videos of people throwing away their documents on the way.

Also, it's a crisis. You admitted in another thread that we don't have money for the poor. How do we get money for these people?

4% of immigration is a crisis?

I said we don't have money for the poor?

Your making shit up pal

They go to work, they pay taxes they do not need to lounge in hotels

Employment rate of people who got right to work through asylum process is just 52% and those who work earn much less than the national average and pay much less in taxes."

Can't win can the Marx

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 39 weeks ago

"I'm afraid not, we have a process, of people can not come here from torn down infrastructure in they're countries and they make it to our shores we assess them and deem to have asylum or not.

Only your dear leader has turned this into some sort of crisis

A) Brexit

B) no direct access

There are videos of people throwing away their documents on the way.

Also, it's a crisis. You admitted in another thread that we don't have money for the poor. How do we get money for these people?

4% of immigration is a crisis?

I said we don't have money for the poor?

Your making shit up pal

They go to work, they pay taxes they do not need to lounge in hotels

Employment rate of people who got right to work through asylum process is just 52% and those who work earn much less than the national average and pay much less in taxes."

Thanks for the personal spanking, but no public humiliation?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *elta13Man 39 weeks ago

LLE

Obviously they're moving across the EU and aren't claiming asylum in any other state so they won't register. The first time the undocumented appear is when they hit the GB system.

so, what part of France would you bomb first? Toulouse? Marsaille? I think let's go for Bordeaux eh

"Funny how the echr ignore these people all the way across the borderless European Union until they reach UK waters, even the overcrowded inflatables being pushed out are not recognised as a potential risk to life by the echr, the home secretary said any inflatable with more than 80 people the pilot would be arrested for danger to life there was one with 83 the other day, the uk helped bomb Syria into the stone age for so called human rights abuse why aren't we bombing France they allow human trafficking and human misery from their country and we pay them. "

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 39 weeks ago

"Obviously they're moving across the EU and aren't claiming asylum in any other state so they won't register. The first time the undocumented appear is when they hit the GB system.

so, what part of France would you bomb first? Toulouse? Marsaille? I think let's go for Bordeaux eh

Bomb? Who? For what?

Wanting a home?

You seem kind

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 39 weeks ago

"Obviously they're moving across the EU and aren't claiming asylum in any other state so they won't register. The first time the undocumented appear is when they hit the GB system.

so, what part of France would you bomb first? Toulouse? Marsaille? I think let's go for Bordeaux eh

You go for Bordeaux!! Go far!!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *arry and MegsCouple 39 weeks ago

Ipswich

Why women?

Easier to control?

Less frightening?"

Probably less likely to be seen to resort to criminal activity

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *he Flat CapsCouple 38 weeks ago

Pontypool

"I'm afraid not, we have a process, of people can not come here from torn down infrastructure in they're countries and they make it to our shores we assess them and deem to have asylum or not.

Only your dear leader has turned this into some sort of crisis

A) Brexit

B) no direct access

There are videos of people throwing away their documents on the way.

Also, it's a crisis. You admitted in another thread that we don't have money for the poor. How do we get money for these people?

4% of immigration is a crisis?

I said we don't have money for the poor?

Your making shit up pal

They go to work, they pay taxes they do not need to lounge in hotels

Employment rate of people who got right to work through asylum process is just 52% and those who work earn much less than the national average and pay much less in taxes."

In 2024, the employment rate of working-age migrant men was higher than that of UK-born men (83% and 78%, respectively) (Figure 3). Most region-of-birth groups had higher employment rates than UK-born men. Among women, the employment rate for working-age migrants was 71%, slightly lower than for the UK-born (73%).

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ostindreamsMan 38 weeks ago

London

"I'm afraid not, we have a process, of people can not come here from torn down infrastructure in they're countries and they make it to our shores we assess them and deem to have asylum or not.

Only your dear leader has turned this into some sort of crisis

A) Brexit

B) no direct access

There are videos of people throwing away their documents on the way.

Also, it's a crisis. You admitted in another thread that we don't have money for the poor. How do we get money for these people?

4% of immigration is a crisis?

I said we don't have money for the poor?

Your making shit up pal

They go to work, they pay taxes they do not need to lounge in hotels

Employment rate of people who got right to work through asylum process is just 52% and those who work earn much less than the national average and pay much less in taxes.

We are talking about asylum seekers

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *he Flat CapsCouple 38 weeks ago

Pontypool

"I'm afraid not, we have a process, of people can not come here from torn down infrastructure in they're countries and they make it to our shores we assess them and deem to have asylum or not.

Only your dear leader has turned this into some sort of crisis

A) Brexit

B) no direct access

There are videos of people throwing away their documents on the way.

Also, it's a crisis. You admitted in another thread that we don't have money for the poor. How do we get money for these people?

4% of immigration is a crisis?

I said we don't have money for the poor?

Your making shit up pal

They go to work, they pay taxes they do not need to lounge in hotels

Employment rate of people who got right to work through asylum process is just 52% and those who work earn much less than the national average and pay much less in taxes.

We are talking about asylum seekers "

Asylum seekers are not allowed to work, unless their claim takes over 12 months due to no fault of theirs, and then they are limited to certain jobs. So those figures do not relate to asylum seekers as a whole.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ostindreamsMan 38 weeks ago

London

"I'm afraid not, we have a process, of people can not come here from torn down infrastructure in they're countries and they make it to our shores we assess them and deem to have asylum or not.

Only your dear leader has turned this into some sort of crisis

A) Brexit

B) no direct access

There are videos of people throwing away their documents on the way.

Also, it's a crisis. You admitted in another thread that we don't have money for the poor. How do we get money for these people?

4% of immigration is a crisis?

I said we don't have money for the poor?

Your making shit up pal

They go to work, they pay taxes they do not need to lounge in hotels

Employment rate of people who got right to work through asylum process is just 52% and those who work earn much less than the national average and pay much less in taxes.

We are talking about asylum seekers

The statistics I shared are about asylum seekers whose claims were successful and hence have the right to work. They are clearly a net negative to the economy

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 38 weeks ago

"I'm afraid not, we have a process, of people can not come here from torn down infrastructure in they're countries and they make it to our shores we assess them and deem to have asylum or not.

Only your dear leader has turned this into some sort of crisis

A) Brexit

B) no direct access

There are videos of people throwing away their documents on the way.

Also, it's a crisis. You admitted in another thread that we don't have money for the poor. How do we get money for these people?

4% of immigration is a crisis?

I said we don't have money for the poor?

Your making shit up pal

They go to work, they pay taxes they do not need to lounge in hotels

Employment rate of people who got right to work through asylum process is just 52% and those who work earn much less than the national average and pay much less in taxes.

I think the highlight figures you quote don’t really tell the whole story which as usual is far more complex.

For example, and I don’t know the answer to some of these issues:

It may be that many people in the UK born category just choose not to work but aren’t a burden on the state (though will probably then be contributing less in taxes). They can retire early for example because they have the money to do so, or have a partner that can support them financially without them resorting to benefits. Since Covid we have seen a big increase in people leaving the workforce, I suspect in part because many older people enjoyed furlough and realised that they could afford not to work. Of course a high tax and regulatory environment doesn’t really encourage people to work when they don’t need to.

Foreign participation in the workforce varies hugely by country of origin. There is very high participation from people coming from the US and Romania, but for non-EU migrants generally participation in the workforce is lower than for UK people. For British Overseas Territories originated people it’s down in the 40% range. So the average is subject to wide variations.

Many foreign born participants do low level jobs so while obviously still contributing, they contribute less than average UK participants. I don’t know what the position is on in work benefits.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 38 weeks ago

The number of crossings under Labour has now passed 50,000, a rate higher than under the Tories. So much for smashing the gangs eh? It looks more like the gangs are smashing the hand-wringing lefties.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ingdomNightTimePleasures OP Man 38 weeks ago

nearby

"The number of crossings under Labour has now passed 50,000, a rate higher than under the Tories. So much for smashing the gangs eh? It looks more like the gangs are smashing the hand-wringing lefties. "

Indeed 1120 arrivals in the last four days.

£112,000 a day housing and feeding just these

At least these 34 million tax payers chipping in to pay the bill.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *uddy laneMan 38 weeks ago

dudley

I have a sneaky suspicion that not everyone being transported to England are actually claiming asylum. they can choose which country they claim asylum in and scotland is just over there.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *I TwoCouple 38 weeks ago

near enough

What's your alternative?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 38 weeks ago

What's your alternative?"

Good question, and I realise it's not a simple fix. But some thoughts : firstly we think we have to ask if the ECHR is working as intended or is it being abused. Then there's the criminal gangs that evade the law. If the BBC can find and confront them, why can't the law enforcement agencies across Europe? (Because they don't want to?). Do we offer overly generous benefits and support that acts as a magnet to bogus asylum seekers? Why did Labour dump the Rwanda scheme after so much cost just when there was some evidence it was having the desired effect? Finally, stand up to France. Trump has shown us the power of a belligerent and pugnacious approach to bad actors. Our politicians are too weak.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *deepdiveMan 38 weeks ago

Canterbury and France (26)

What's your alternative?

Perhaps we shouldn't have believed Farage.

Boat crossings have increased dramatically ever since Brexit!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 38 weeks ago

What's your alternative?

Perhaps we shouldn't have believed Farage.

Boat crossings have increased dramatically ever since Brexit!"

It's hard to see Brexit made much difference tbh. France, and the EU generally, were uncooperative before and after Brexit. As for Farage, I doubt he has a silver bullet either, but what's for sure is that unless the crossings stop, Nigel is destined for PM.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *rDiscretionXXXMan 38 weeks ago

Gilfach

"Boat crossings have increased dramatically ever since Brexit!"

No they've stayed pretty much the same.

When we were in the EU, asylum seekers could just get on the ferry and cross using Freedom of Movement. Now that we've left the EU, they have to use a different sort of boat, but the amounts are still about the same.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *eroy1000Man 38 weeks ago

milton keynes

What's your alternative?

The BBC showed it was possible to find those that organise the crossing and prey on people. Only wish they had invited police officers to shadow them until a point where they could arrest these people as opposed to just letting them run away

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ostindreamsMan 38 weeks ago

London

From the independent today,

"The latest National Crime Agency (NCA) data shows 192 people were arrested for organised immigration crime in the year to April – down 16 per cent from 229 under the Tory government the previous year"

So Starmer came in promising to "smash the gangs" but apparently the Tories were doing this already and even better.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *otlovefun42Couple 38 weeks ago

Costa Blanca Spain...

"From the independent today,

So Starmer came in promising to "smash the gangs" but apparently the Tories were doing this already and even better."

"Smash the gangs" was just a soundbite. Starmer knew only too well that it was a hopeless cause. Besides his heart was never truly into it and still isn't.

The same as "island of strangers" just another soundbite to make him appear tough. He soon backtracked on that one after the first whiff of criticism. Tough? About as tough as a wet teabag.

Barring some biblical style miracle Labour are going to be in power for another 3 and a half years.

On my reckoning that's another 175,000 chancers, criminals and potential terrorists that are going to wash up on Britain's shores.

We're going to need a bigger hotel.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *uffolkcouple-bi onlyCouple 38 weeks ago

West Suffolk

Seems half of Europe has closed its borders so numbers are probably going to increase, not decrease, unless we close ours, which isn’t going to happen.

I don’t see how Starmer has the nerve to keep blatantly lying and expect people to believe him.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 38 weeks ago

If only we hadn't given up our right to return them to the point that they entered the EU...

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ingdomNightTimePleasures OP Man 38 weeks ago

nearby

"Seems half of Europe has closed its borders so numbers are probably going to increase, not decrease, unless we close ours, which isn’t going to happen.

I don’t see how Starmer has the nerve to keep blatantly lying and expect people to believe him. "

Another 2038 this last week

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *uffolkcouple-bi onlyCouple 38 weeks ago

West Suffolk

The latest figure just published by the Sun says up 50% on this time last year.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *rDiscretionXXXMan 38 weeks ago

Gilfach

"If only we hadn't given up our right to return them to the point that they entered the EU..."

We never had that right. The Dublin Agreement only allowed us to return people that had already applied in another EU country, and had been rejected. In every year that the agreement applied, we were required to take in more immigrants than we sent back.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *otMe66Man 38 weeks ago

Terra Firma

1 in, 1 out seems to have been a roaring success as a deterrent.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *uddy laneMan 38 weeks ago

dudley

Hypothetical,

Do the migrants being transported to the uk by border force have to claim asylum, and if they don't claim asylum are the uk government letting them go free to claim asylum in the country of their choosing echr rules or are the uk government putting them up in hotels regardless, and is that the reason the processing numbers are so low because they have not claimed asylum.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *uffolkcouple-bi onlyCouple 38 weeks ago

West Suffolk

"Hypothetical,

They claim asylum. Under international law, anyone entering a country and claiming asylum has a legal right to have their case heard to remain in that country. Historically this was people fleeing torture or death at the hands of their own government. The former Syrian regime used chemical weapons against its own people if they even looked at the leadership funny. Syria was not the only country guilty of atrocities of course but that’s a good example.

While waiting for your case to be heard, the government is obligated to take care of you. That’s where the hotels come in. Because of employment laws, they are not allowed to work while waiting for their case to be heard.

If they are granted asylum they essentially get the same rights as a British citizen and can ultimately apply for citizenship.

But more recently it’s been figured out by some that you can lie and still get the same benefits. So some people aren’t fleeing anything, they just like the idea of a free house, free healthcare and claim benefits. Some of course will get jobs and work.

And of course 18 months in a 4star hotel with 3 free meals a day and all the other benefits, while waiting for your case to be heard.

But nobody knows who these people are, the smuggling gangs tell them to ditch their ID. So terrorists organisations use it as an easy route to infiltrate our country, and foreign governments send in agents via the same route.

The hard part is it’s almost impossible to tell who’s being honest and who’s scamming us for the freebies. And the human rights barristers like Starmer have made small fortunes keeping criminals in the country against the wishes the government. So we have a poacher turned gamekeeper situation.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *uddy laneMan 38 weeks ago

dudley

"Hypothetical,

If they are granted asylum they essentially get the same rights as a British citizen and can ultimately apply for citizenship.

And of course 18 months in a 4star hotel with 3 free meals a day and all the other benefits, while waiting for your case to be heard.

under echr they can claim asylum in any country they see fit or not to claim asylum, my hypothetical was what happens if they don't claim asylum in the UK, are they still put up on hotels by the government.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *eroy1000Man 38 weeks ago

milton keynes

"Hypothetical,

If they are granted asylum they essentially get the same rights as a British citizen and can ultimately apply for citizenship.

And of course 18 months in a 4star hotel with 3 free meals a day and all the other benefits, while waiting for your case to be heard.

I assume you mean if their ultimate goal is to claim asylum in somewhere like southern Ireland and just passing through. I would guess that they would be arrested for illegal entry as they can no longer use the asylum situation to avoid that charge. What happens after that, I don't know but would like to think they are either deported or moved to southern Ireland to be processed. All pure guess work on my behalf

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *uddy laneMan 38 weeks ago

dudley

"Hypothetical,

If they are granted asylum they essentially get the same rights as a British citizen and can ultimately apply for citizenship.

And of course 18 months in a 4star hotel with 3 free meals a day and all the other benefits, while waiting for your case to be heard.

Ahh that's the reason the uk government are detaining all migrants all of a sudden.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *uddy laneMan 38 weeks ago

dudley

"Hypothetical,

If they are granted asylum they essentially get the same rights as a British citizen and can ultimately apply for citizenship.

And of course 18 months in a 4star hotel with 3 free meals a day and all the other benefits, while waiting for your case to be heard.

They pass through the eu under echr rules without being arrested so why would they be arrested in the uk.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *eroy1000Man 38 weeks ago

milton keynes

"Hypothetical,

If they are granted asylum they essentially get the same rights as a British citizen and can ultimately apply for citizenship.

And of course 18 months in a 4star hotel with 3 free meals a day and all the other benefits, while waiting for your case to be heard.

They pass through the eu under echr rules without being arrested so why would they be arrested in the uk."

Because they arrived by illegal means assuming you are referring to those that arrive by dingy?. If you don't mean that group then my original post was incorrect

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *uddy laneMan 38 weeks ago

dudley

"Hypothetical,

If they are granted asylum they essentially get the same rights as a British citizen and can ultimately apply for citizenship.

And of course 18 months in a 4star hotel with 3 free meals a day and all the other benefits, while waiting for your case to be heard.

They pass through the eu under echr rules without being arrested so why would they be arrested in the uk.

Because they arrived by illegal means assuming you are referring to those that arrive by dingy?. If you don't mean that group then my original post was incorrect "

They have been arriving illegally for years so why start detaining them now if they are irregular migrants.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *eroy1000Man 38 weeks ago

milton keynes

"Hypothetical,

If they are granted asylum they essentially get the same rights as a British citizen and can ultimately apply for citizenship.

And of course 18 months in a 4star hotel with 3 free meals a day and all the other benefits, while waiting for your case to be heard.

They pass through the eu under echr rules without being arrested so why would they be arrested in the uk.

Because they arrived by illegal means assuming you are referring to those that arrive by dingy?. If you don't mean that group then my original post was incorrect

They have been arriving illegally for years so why start detaining them now if they are irregular migrants."

I was working on your question of what if they don't claim asylum. My question was do you mean if they are just passing through to claim asylum in another country. If that is what you mean then I would expect them to be a serious risk of arrest for arriving illegally. My understanding is that those that claim asylum are guilty of arriving illegally but are waved and arrest or prosecution due to being an asylum seeker, or at least claiming to be an asylum seeker.in short the only way to not be at risk of arrest after crossing in a dingy is to claim asylum. It's just bits and pieces I have picked up on here, I'm sure there are far more knowledgeable people on the subject

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *uddy laneMan 38 weeks ago

dudley

"Hypothetical,

If they are granted asylum they essentially get the same rights as a British citizen and can ultimately apply for citizenship.

And of course 18 months in a 4star hotel with 3 free meals a day and all the other benefits, while waiting for your case to be heard.

They pass through the eu under echr rules without being arrested so why would they be arrested in the uk.

Because they arrived by illegal means assuming you are referring to those that arrive by dingy?. If you don't mean that group then my original post was incorrect

They have been arriving illegally for years so why start detaining them now if they are irregular migrants.

They can not be arrested for passing through England to claim asylum in Scotland or the Isle of Mann, echr rules they don't have to claim asylum in the first safe country or even the 20th.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ools and the brainCouple 38 weeks ago

couple, us we him her.

I blame climate change.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *eroy1000Man 38 weeks ago

milton keynes

"Hypothetical,

If they are granted asylum they essentially get the same rights as a British citizen and can ultimately apply for citizenship.

And of course 18 months in a 4star hotel with 3 free meals a day and all the other benefits, while waiting for your case to be heard.

They pass through the eu under echr rules without being arrested so why would they be arrested in the uk.

Because they arrived by illegal means assuming you are referring to those that arrive by dingy?. If you don't mean that group then my original post was incorrect

They have been arriving illegally for years so why start detaining them now if they are irregular migrants.

They can not be arrested for passing through England to claim asylum in Scotland or the Isle of Mann, echr rules they don't have to claim asylum in the first safe country or even the 20th."

I don't think it's the act of passing through to claim asylum in another country that's putting them at risk of arrest. I think it's the original act of breaking a law by entering the country illegally that puts them at risk. They can overcome that risk by claiming asylum in England but if they don't then I assume that protection goes away. As I say I may be completely wrong and in practice it may be perfectly possible to arrive here via dingy and not break any laws.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *uddy laneMan 38 weeks ago

dudley

"Hypothetical,

If they are granted asylum they essentially get the same rights as a British citizen and can ultimately apply for citizenship.

And of course 18 months in a 4star hotel with 3 free meals a day and all the other benefits, while waiting for your case to be heard.

They pass through the eu under echr rules without being arrested so why would they be arrested in the uk.

Because they arrived by illegal means assuming you are referring to those that arrive by dingy?. If you don't mean that group then my original post was incorrect

They have been arriving illegally for years so why start detaining them now if they are irregular migrants.

They can not be arrested for passing through England to claim asylum in Scotland or the Isle of Mann, echr rules they don't have to claim asylum in the first safe country or even the 20th.

They are protected by the echr to have free movement to cross any border of a country signed up the the act and they can not be arrested.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ctionSandwichCouple 38 weeks ago

Newcastle under Lyme

It's like watching the Titanic sink these days.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *rDiscretionXXXMan 38 weeks ago

Gilfach

"They are protected by the echr to have free movement to cross any border of a country signed up the the act and they can not be arrested."

This is completely wrong. The ECHR rulings say that no one can be denied asylum purely on the grounds that they have passed through a 'friendly' country. They do not give anyone the right to enter a country in order to pass through it.

Anyone entering the UK without permission is committing an offence, whether they just pass through or not.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *uddy laneMan 38 weeks ago

dudley

"They are protected by the echr to have free movement to cross any border of a country signed up the the act and they can not be arrested.

Anyone entering the UK without permission is committing an offence, whether they just pass through or not."

So how did they get to France and how many countries did they pass through. Echr and the un convention states they don't have to claim asylum in the first safe country or impead their journey.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *mateur100Man 38 weeks ago

nr faversham

"They are protected by the echr to have free movement to cross any border of a country signed up the the act and they can not be arrested.

Anyone entering the UK without permission is committing an offence, whether they just pass through or not.

So how did they get to France and how many countries did they pass through. Echr and the un convention states they don't have to claim asylum in the first safe country or impead their journey."

I don't understand your point?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ornucopiaMan 38 weeks ago

Bexley

"They are protected by the echr to have free movement to cross any border of a country signed up the the act and they can not be arrested.

Anyone entering the UK without permission is committing an offence, whether they just pass through or not.

So how did they get to France and how many countries did they pass through. Echr and the un convention states they don't have to claim asylum in the first safe country or impead their journey."

Maybe some of them didn't actually become asylum seekers until they knew they could afford a place on an 80 seater RIB?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ggdrasil66Man 38 weeks ago

Saltdean

"They are protected by the echr to have free movement to cross any border of a country signed up the the act and they can not be arrested.

Anyone entering the UK without permission is committing an offence, whether they just pass through or not.

So how did they get to France and how many countries did they pass through. Echr and the un convention states they don't have to claim asylum in the first safe country or impead their journey.

I don't understand your point?"

I do. Those migrants who are crossing from France probably crossed though handfuls of safe countries en rout. The reason they didn’t do the right thing and stay in any of them, is because they know how much better the benefits and so called refugee rights are here. This is the land of milk and honey, and all of this madness has got to stop.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *rDiscretionXXXMan 38 weeks ago

Gilfach

"They are protected by the echr to have free movement to cross any border of a country signed up the the act and they can not be arrested."

"This is completely wrong. The ECHR rulings say that no one can be denied asylum purely on the grounds that they have passed through a 'friendly' country. They do not give anyone the right to enter a country in order to pass through it.

Anyone entering the UK without permission is committing an offence, whether they just pass through or not."

"So how did they get to France and how many countries did they pass through."

They got into France illegally, same as all the other countries they passed through. The EU has no internal borders, so once they're into one EU country, it's easy to move to several others.

"Echr and the un convention states they don't have to claim asylum in the first safe country or impead their journey."

Correct. They do not have to claim asylum in the first safe country they reach. However no country has a duty to allow them to enter, or pass through.

The 1951 Convention doesn't say anything about crossing borders, as it was written to protect people that had already established a life in a host country. The bit about not being able to prosecute asylum seekers for entry offences was added because one particular country was trying to get rid of a certain race by claiming that they hadn't properly registered when they fled Nazi Germany.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *mateur100Man 38 weeks ago

nr faversham

"They are protected by the echr to have free movement to cross any border of a country signed up the the act and they can not be arrested.

Anyone entering the UK without permission is committing an offence, whether they just pass through or not.

So how did they get to France and how many countries did they pass through.

They got into France illegally, same as all the other countries they passed through. The EU has no internal borders, so once they're into one EU country, it's easy to move to several others.

Echr and the un convention states they don't have to claim asylum in the first safe country or impead their journey.

Correct. They do not have to claim asylum in the first safe country they reach. However no country has a duty to allow them to enter, or pass through.

And it was written in 1951...are we not due an update of any sort?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *rDiscretionXXXMan 38 weeks ago

Gilfach

"The 1951 Convention doesn't say anything about crossing borders, as it was written to protect people that had already established a life in a host country. The bit about not being able to prosecute asylum seekers for entry offences was added because one particular country was trying to get rid of a certain race by claiming that they hadn't properly registered when they fled Nazi Germany."

"And it was written in 1951...are we not due an update of any sort?"

The original Convention only covered people displaced by WWII. It was updated in 1967 to cover all people that were being persecuted.

But even with that I'd say we were due another update by now.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *uffolkcouple-bi onlyCouple 38 weeks ago

West Suffolk

Makes you wonder why there’s still borders and passports. Just let anyone go anywhere. After all there’s no bad people who want to harm others. Any law breaking is just a misunderstanding of local culture and customs. Victims were probably asking for it anyway

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *otlovefun42Couple 38 weeks ago

Costa Blanca Spain...

"Makes you wonder why there’s still borders and passports. Just let anyone go anywhere. After all there’s no bad people who want to harm others. Any law breaking is just a misunderstanding of local culture and customs. Victims were probably asking for it anyway "

There really are people who actually believe that.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 38 weeks ago

Once again everyone just shouting in echo chambers.

Despite claiming asylum being legal and that's the only route.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *eroy1000Man 38 weeks ago

milton keynes

"Once again everyone just shouting in echo chambers.

Despite claiming asylum being legal and that's the only route.

Not sure anyone said that claiming asylum wasn't legal

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 38 weeks ago

"Once again everyone just shouting in echo chambers.

Despite claiming asylum being legal and that's the only route.

Not sure anyone said that claiming asylum wasn't legal "

Except every one using the word illegal migrant

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *eroy1000Man 38 weeks ago

milton keynes

"Once again everyone just shouting in echo chambers.

Despite claiming asylum being legal and that's the only route.

Not sure anyone said that claiming asylum wasn't legal

Except every one using the word illegal migrant"

My understanding is the illegal act is arriving in dingies. The act of claiming asylum is not illegal nor have I seen it claimed to be illegal

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 38 weeks ago

"Once again everyone just shouting in echo chambers.

Despite claiming asylum being legal and that's the only route.

Not sure anyone said that claiming asylum wasn't legal

Except every one using the word illegal migrant

My understanding is the illegal act is arriving in dingies. The act of claiming asylum is not illegal nor have I seen it claimed to be illegal "

If arriving was illegal they'd be in prison not hotels.

They have to arrive by IRREGULAR means because theirs no regular routes from their countries!!!

So arriving isn't illegal so long as they claim asylum!!

Then they enter the process of knowing who they are, why they're here and details are ascertained hence why 70% are granted asylum and become refugees!!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *eroy1000Man 38 weeks ago

milton keynes

"Once again everyone just shouting in echo chambers.

Despite claiming asylum being legal and that's the only route.

Not sure anyone said that claiming asylum wasn't legal

Except every one using the word illegal migrant

My understanding is the illegal act is arriving in dingies. The act of claiming asylum is not illegal nor have I seen it claimed to be illegal

If arriving was illegal they'd be in prison not hotels.

They have to arrive by IRREGULAR means because theirs no regular routes from their countries!!!

So arriving isn't illegal so long as they claim asylum!!

Then they enter the process of knowing who they are, why they're here and details are ascertained hence why 70% are granted asylum and become refugees!!"

This came up yesterday and as I said then there are people on here with far better knowledge of this than me. My understanding of the situation is arriving by dingy / irregular means is illegal. If however those arriving claim asylum then although they have committed an offence, the are waved arrest and prosecution due to their asylum claim. This does not mean it suddenly becomes legal, it means that although the have broken the law, they will not face arrest for breaking the law. In other words the claim for asylum protects them from the law. However it does not change the fact that the law was broken. I'm sure others are better explaining it than me, but that is my understanding

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 38 weeks ago

"Once again everyone just shouting in echo chambers.

Despite claiming asylum being legal and that's the only route.

Not sure anyone said that claiming asylum wasn't legal

Except every one using the word illegal migrant

My understanding is the illegal act is arriving in dingies. The act of claiming asylum is not illegal nor have I seen it claimed to be illegal

If arriving was illegal they'd be in prison not hotels.

They have to arrive by IRREGULAR means because theirs no regular routes from their countries!!!

So arriving isn't illegal so long as they claim asylum!!

Then they enter the process of knowing who they are, why they're here and details are ascertained hence why 70% are granted asylum and become refugees!!

Incorrect. The refugee convention is very clear!!

That happens to fit your biases and so that's the narrative you cling to.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ostindreamsMan 38 weeks ago

London

"Once again everyone just shouting in echo chambers.

Despite claiming asylum being legal and that's the only route.

Not sure anyone said that claiming asylum wasn't legal

Except every one using the word illegal migrant

My understanding is the illegal act is arriving in dingies. The act of claiming asylum is not illegal nor have I seen it claimed to be illegal

If arriving was illegal they'd be in prison not hotels.

They have to arrive by IRREGULAR means because theirs no regular routes from their countries!!!

So arriving isn't illegal so long as they claim asylum!!

Then they enter the process of knowing who they are, why they're here and details are ascertained hence why 70% are granted asylum and become refugees!!

End of the day, people arguing over technicalities. Reality is that the refugee convention has practically created an open border system. You just have to say the magic words "I am seeking asylum" and you won't be arrested. This is the reason why people are against it. It basically takes away any sense of sovereignty and border protection.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 38 weeks ago

"Once again everyone just shouting in echo chambers.

Despite claiming asylum being legal and that's the only route.

Not sure anyone said that claiming asylum wasn't legal

Except every one using the word illegal migrant

My understanding is the illegal act is arriving in dingies. The act of claiming asylum is not illegal nor have I seen it claimed to be illegal

If arriving was illegal they'd be in prison not hotels.

They have to arrive by IRREGULAR means because theirs no regular routes from their countries!!!

So arriving isn't illegal so long as they claim asylum!!

Then they enter the process of knowing who they are, why they're here and details are ascertained hence why 70% are granted asylum and become refugees!!

No it doesn't!

You the. Enter the asylum process and a part of that process is to ascertain who you are and what your fleeing!!

So you still have complete control

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ostindreamsMan 38 weeks ago

London

"Once again everyone just shouting in echo chambers.

Despite claiming asylum being legal and that's the only route.

Not sure anyone said that claiming asylum wasn't legal

Except every one using the word illegal migrant

My understanding is the illegal act is arriving in dingies. The act of claiming asylum is not illegal nor have I seen it claimed to be illegal

If arriving was illegal they'd be in prison not hotels.

They have to arrive by IRREGULAR means because theirs no regular routes from their countries!!!

So arriving isn't illegal so long as they claim asylum!!

Then they enter the process of knowing who they are, why they're here and details are ascertained hence why 70% are granted asylum and become refugees!!

No it doesn't!

You the. Enter the asylum process and a part of that process is to ascertain who you are and what your fleeing!!

So you still have complete control "

They are already inside the country, have the freedom to move around, with free hotel, food and money given by the tax payers. Even if they fail in their asylum claims, they aren't prosecuted for crossing the border. So we do have an open border system.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *otMe66Man 38 weeks ago

Terra Firma

"Once again everyone just shouting in echo chambers.

Despite claiming asylum being legal and that's the only route.

Not sure anyone said that claiming asylum wasn't legal

Except every one using the word illegal migrant

My understanding is the illegal act is arriving in dingies. The act of claiming asylum is not illegal nor have I seen it claimed to be illegal

If arriving was illegal they'd be in prison not hotels.

They have to arrive by IRREGULAR means because theirs no regular routes from their countries!!!

So arriving isn't illegal so long as they claim asylum!!

Then they enter the process of knowing who they are, why they're here and details are ascertained hence why 70% are granted asylum and become refugees!!

No it doesn't!

You the. Enter the asylum process and a part of that process is to ascertain who you are and what your fleeing!!

So you still have complete control "

Fleeing

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 38 weeks ago

"Once again everyone just shouting in echo chambers.

Despite claiming asylum being legal and that's the only route.

Not sure anyone said that claiming asylum wasn't legal

Except every one using the word illegal migrant

My understanding is the illegal act is arriving in dingies. The act of claiming asylum is not illegal nor have I seen it claimed to be illegal

If arriving was illegal they'd be in prison not hotels.

They have to arrive by IRREGULAR means because theirs no regular routes from their countries!!!

So arriving isn't illegal so long as they claim asylum!!

Then they enter the process of knowing who they are, why they're here and details are ascertained hence why 70% are granted asylum and become refugees!!

No it doesn't!

You the. Enter the asylum process and a part of that process is to ascertain who you are and what your fleeing!!

So you still have complete control

If they fail then they are returned and by definition of we don't have a returns agreement they aren't a safe country and deserve asylum.

They walk around because they haven't done anything wrong!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *eroy1000Man 38 weeks ago

milton keynes

"Once again everyone just shouting in echo chambers.

Despite claiming asylum being legal and that's the only route.

Not sure anyone said that claiming asylum wasn't legal

Except every one using the word illegal migrant

My understanding is the illegal act is arriving in dingies. The act of claiming asylum is not illegal nor have I seen it claimed to be illegal

If arriving was illegal they'd be in prison not hotels.

They have to arrive by IRREGULAR means because theirs no regular routes from their countries!!!

So arriving isn't illegal so long as they claim asylum!!

Then they enter the process of knowing who they are, why they're here and details are ascertained hence why 70% are granted asylum and become refugees!!

That's kind of what I was saying that the act of the asylum claim protects from arrest but doesn't change the fact the law had been broken.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 38 weeks ago

"Once again everyone just shouting in echo chambers.

Despite claiming asylum being legal and that's the only route.

Not sure anyone said that claiming asylum wasn't legal

Except every one using the word illegal migrant

My understanding is the illegal act is arriving in dingies. The act of claiming asylum is not illegal nor have I seen it claimed to be illegal

If arriving was illegal they'd be in prison not hotels.

They have to arrive by IRREGULAR means because theirs no regular routes from their countries!!!

So arriving isn't illegal so long as they claim asylum!!

Then they enter the process of knowing who they are, why they're here and details are ascertained hence why 70% are granted asylum and become refugees!!

No it doesn't!

You the. Enter the asylum process and a part of that process is to ascertain who you are and what your fleeing!!

So you still have complete control

Fleeing

Yes fleeing, Iran, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan and Eritrea, are the top 5 nationalities granted asylum. Tell me you wouldn't flee those regimes

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 38 weeks ago

"Once again everyone just shouting in echo chambers.

Despite claiming asylum being legal and that's the only route.

Not sure anyone said that claiming asylum wasn't legal

Except every one using the word illegal migrant

My understanding is the illegal act is arriving in dingies. The act of claiming asylum is not illegal nor have I seen it claimed to be illegal

If arriving was illegal they'd be in prison not hotels.

They have to arrive by IRREGULAR means because theirs no regular routes from their countries!!!

So arriving isn't illegal so long as they claim asylum!!

Then they enter the process of knowing who they are, why they're here and details are ascertained hence why 70% are granted asylum and become refugees!!

That's kind of what I was saying that the act of the asylum claim protects from arrest but doesn't change the fact the law had been broken. "

Because like I said that fits your bias.

The truth is they've done nothing wrong.

They enter an asylum process, that process ascertains who they are what their fleeing.

Either they're granted or returned.

It's all being blown out of all propertion to feed this racist agenda

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *he Flat CapsCouple 38 weeks ago

Pontypool

"Once again everyone just shouting in echo chambers.

Despite claiming asylum being legal and that's the only route.

Not sure anyone said that claiming asylum wasn't legal

Except every one using the word illegal migrant

My understanding is the illegal act is arriving in dingies. The act of claiming asylum is not illegal nor have I seen it claimed to be illegal

If arriving was illegal they'd be in prison not hotels.

They have to arrive by IRREGULAR means because theirs no regular routes from their countries!!!

So arriving isn't illegal so long as they claim asylum!!

Then they enter the process of knowing who they are, why they're here and details are ascertained hence why 70% are granted asylum and become refugees!!

That's kind of what I was saying that the act of the asylum claim protects from arrest but doesn't change the fact the law had been broken.

Because like I said that fits your bias.

The truth is they've done nothing wrong.

They enter an asylum process, that process ascertains who they are what their fleeing.

Either they're granted or returned.

It's all being blown out of all propertion to feed this racist agenda "

But some would have us believe that none of them have legitimate asylum claims and we shouldn't take any of them.

Such a kind and understanding place we live.

Well, Wales is fine. It's a nation of sanctuary.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *eroy1000Man 38 weeks ago

milton keynes

"Once again everyone just shouting in echo chambers.

Despite claiming asylum being legal and that's the only route.

Not sure anyone said that claiming asylum wasn't legal

Except every one using the word illegal migrant

My understanding is the illegal act is arriving in dingies. The act of claiming asylum is not illegal nor have I seen it claimed to be illegal

If arriving was illegal they'd be in prison not hotels.

They have to arrive by IRREGULAR means because theirs no regular routes from their countries!!!

So arriving isn't illegal so long as they claim asylum!!

Then they enter the process of knowing who they are, why they're here and details are ascertained hence why 70% are granted asylum and become refugees!!

That's kind of what I was saying that the act of the asylum claim protects from arrest but doesn't change the fact the law had been broken.

Because like I said that fits your bias.

The truth is they've done nothing wrong.

They enter an asylum process, that process ascertains who they are what their fleeing.

Either they're granted or returned.

It's all being blown out of all propertion to feed this racist agenda "

What bias am I having?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ostindreamsMan 38 weeks ago

London

"Once again everyone just shouting in echo chambers.

Despite claiming asylum being legal and that's the only route.

Not sure anyone said that claiming asylum wasn't legal

Except every one using the word illegal migrant

My understanding is the illegal act is arriving in dingies. The act of claiming asylum is not illegal nor have I seen it claimed to be illegal

If arriving was illegal they'd be in prison not hotels.

They have to arrive by IRREGULAR means because theirs no regular routes from their countries!!!

So arriving isn't illegal so long as they claim asylum!!

Then they enter the process of knowing who they are, why they're here and details are ascertained hence why 70% are granted asylum and become refugees!!

No it doesn't!

You the. Enter the asylum process and a part of that process is to ascertain who you are and what your fleeing!!

So you still have complete control

If they fail then they are returned and by definition of we don't have a returns agreement they aren't a safe country and deserve asylum.

They walk around because they haven't done anything wrong!"

They broke into the border of a country without permission. They should not be left to roam around until we have done enough background checks.

As for the returns, we can do it only to countries that are willing to take them. Either way, using the magic words "I am seeking asylum" saves you from any punishment for breaking into the borders of a country. So we have an open border system.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 38 weeks ago

"Once again everyone just shouting in echo chambers.

Despite claiming asylum being legal and that's the only route.

Not sure anyone said that claiming asylum wasn't legal

Except every one using the word illegal migrant

My understanding is the illegal act is arriving in dingies. The act of claiming asylum is not illegal nor have I seen it claimed to be illegal

If arriving was illegal they'd be in prison not hotels.

They have to arrive by IRREGULAR means because theirs no regular routes from their countries!!!

So arriving isn't illegal so long as they claim asylum!!

Then they enter the process of knowing who they are, why they're here and details are ascertained hence why 70% are granted asylum and become refugees!!

That's kind of what I was saying that the act of the asylum claim protects from arrest but doesn't change the fact the law had been broken.

Because like I said that fits your bias.

The truth is they've done nothing wrong.

They enter an asylum process, that process ascertains who they are what their fleeing.

Either they're granted or returned.

It's all being blown out of all propertion to feed this racist agenda

What bias am I having? "

You clearly disagree with them entering via small boats.

But aren't willing to recognise that it's completely legal under the refugee convention, so you cling to a domestic law stating irregular entry is illegal. Which is true, if they don't claim asylum.

That domestic law was introduced to tighten a loop hole that existed, NOT to contradict the refugee convention.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 38 weeks ago

"Once again everyone just shouting in echo chambers.

Despite claiming asylum being legal and that's the only route.

Not sure anyone said that claiming asylum wasn't legal

Except every one using the word illegal migrant

My understanding is the illegal act is arriving in dingies. The act of claiming asylum is not illegal nor have I seen it claimed to be illegal

If arriving was illegal they'd be in prison not hotels.

They have to arrive by IRREGULAR means because theirs no regular routes from their countries!!!

So arriving isn't illegal so long as they claim asylum!!

Then they enter the process of knowing who they are, why they're here and details are ascertained hence why 70% are granted asylum and become refugees!!

No it doesn't!

You the. Enter the asylum process and a part of that process is to ascertain who you are and what your fleeing!!

So you still have complete control

If they fail then they are returned and by definition of we don't have a returns agreement they aren't a safe country and deserve asylum.

They walk around because they haven't done anything wrong!

They broke into the border of a country without permission. They should not be left to roam around until we have done enough background checks.

Your making stuff up, they aren't left to roam!!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *eroy1000Man 38 weeks ago

milton keynes

"Once again everyone just shouting in echo chambers.

Despite claiming asylum being legal and that's the only route.

Not sure anyone said that claiming asylum wasn't legal

Except every one using the word illegal migrant

My understanding is the illegal act is arriving in dingies. The act of claiming asylum is not illegal nor have I seen it claimed to be illegal

If arriving was illegal they'd be in prison not hotels.

They have to arrive by IRREGULAR means because theirs no regular routes from their countries!!!

So arriving isn't illegal so long as they claim asylum!!

Then they enter the process of knowing who they are, why they're here and details are ascertained hence why 70% are granted asylum and become refugees!!

That's kind of what I was saying that the act of the asylum claim protects from arrest but doesn't change the fact the law had been broken.

Because like I said that fits your bias.

The truth is they've done nothing wrong.

They enter an asylum process, that process ascertains who they are what their fleeing.

Either they're granted or returned.

It's all being blown out of all propertion to feed this racist agenda

What bias am I having?

You clearly disagree with them entering via small boats.

But aren't willing to recognise that it's completely legal under the refugee convention, so you cling to a domestic law stating irregular entry is illegal. Which is true, if they don't claim asylum.

That domestic law was introduced to tighten a loop hole that existed, NOT to contradict the refugee convention."

Where did I say I disagreed with them entering via small boats? I only said my understanding is that the act of entering via small boats was an illegal act and that claiming asylum would mean they will not be arrested

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *he Flat CapsCouple 38 weeks ago

Pontypool

"Once again everyone just shouting in echo chambers.

Despite claiming asylum being legal and that's the only route.

Not sure anyone said that claiming asylum wasn't legal

Except every one using the word illegal migrant

My understanding is the illegal act is arriving in dingies. The act of claiming asylum is not illegal nor have I seen it claimed to be illegal

If arriving was illegal they'd be in prison not hotels.

They have to arrive by IRREGULAR means because theirs no regular routes from their countries!!!

So arriving isn't illegal so long as they claim asylum!!

Then they enter the process of knowing who they are, why they're here and details are ascertained hence why 70% are granted asylum and become refugees!!

No it doesn't!

You the. Enter the asylum process and a part of that process is to ascertain who you are and what your fleeing!!

So you still have complete control

If they fail then they are returned and by definition of we don't have a returns agreement they aren't a safe country and deserve asylum.

They walk around because they haven't done anything wrong!

They broke into the border of a country without permission. They should not be left to roam around until we have done enough background checks.

Your making stuff up, they aren't left to roam!!"

No, they are provided with a roof over their head, a nominal amount on as Aspen card and f* all else until their claim is processed and approved or denied.

And for those who are about to shout that they work cash in hand for fast food delivery companies, some have. Not going to argue over it. BUT it demonstrates a willingness to work and earn money and be self sufficient.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ostindreamsMan 38 weeks ago

London

"Once again everyone just shouting in echo chambers.

Despite claiming asylum being legal and that's the only route.

Not sure anyone said that claiming asylum wasn't legal

Except every one using the word illegal migrant

My understanding is the illegal act is arriving in dingies. The act of claiming asylum is not illegal nor have I seen it claimed to be illegal

If arriving was illegal they'd be in prison not hotels.

They have to arrive by IRREGULAR means because theirs no regular routes from their countries!!!

So arriving isn't illegal so long as they claim asylum!!

Then they enter the process of knowing who they are, why they're here and details are ascertained hence why 70% are granted asylum and become refugees!!

No it doesn't!

You the. Enter the asylum process and a part of that process is to ascertain who you are and what your fleeing!!

So you still have complete control

If they fail then they are returned and by definition of we don't have a returns agreement they aren't a safe country and deserve asylum.

They walk around because they haven't done anything wrong!

They broke into the border of a country without permission. They should not be left to roam around until we have done enough background checks.

Your making stuff up, they aren't left to roam!!

No, they are provided with a roof over their head, a nominal amount on as Aspen card and f* all else until their claim is processed and approved or denied.

But the employment rates and hours of work of people who got the refugee status says otherwise.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 38 weeks ago

"Once again everyone just shouting in echo chambers.

Despite claiming asylum being legal and that's the only route.

Not sure anyone said that claiming asylum wasn't legal

Except every one using the word illegal migrant

My understanding is the illegal act is arriving in dingies. The act of claiming asylum is not illegal nor have I seen it claimed to be illegal

If arriving was illegal they'd be in prison not hotels.

They have to arrive by IRREGULAR means because theirs no regular routes from their countries!!!

So arriving isn't illegal so long as they claim asylum!!

Then they enter the process of knowing who they are, why they're here and details are ascertained hence why 70% are granted asylum and become refugees!!

That's kind of what I was saying that the act of the asylum claim protects from arrest but doesn't change the fact the law had been broken.

Because like I said that fits your bias.

The truth is they've done nothing wrong.

They enter an asylum process, that process ascertains who they are what their fleeing.

Either they're granted or returned.

It's all being blown out of all propertion to feed this racist agenda

What bias am I having?

You clearly disagree with them entering via small boats.

But aren't willing to recognise that it's completely legal under the refugee convention, so you cling to a domestic law stating irregular entry is illegal. Which is true, if they don't claim asylum.

That domestic law was introduced to tighten a loop hole that existed, NOT to contradict the refugee convention.

Which is incorrect!!

Claiming asylum is legal.

You can only claim asylum by reaching our shores because the conservatives closed every legal route apart from Hong Kong, Ukraine and Afghanistan.

Labour have now closed the Afghanistan route.

Expect more refugees from Afghanistan.

Non of this illegal despite what people want you to believe.

The disconnect between rhetoric and what's legal and possible is unbelievable!!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ostindreamsMan 38 weeks ago

London

The disconnect between rhetoric and what's legal and possible is unbelievable!!

So it's all about legality? If we withdraw from refugee conventions and make it illegal, you would be happy with arresting them for crossing borders illegally?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *he Flat CapsCouple 38 weeks ago

Pontypool

"Once again everyone just shouting in echo chambers.

Despite claiming asylum being legal and that's the only route.

Not sure anyone said that claiming asylum wasn't legal

Except every one using the word illegal migrant

My understanding is the illegal act is arriving in dingies. The act of claiming asylum is not illegal nor have I seen it claimed to be illegal

If arriving was illegal they'd be in prison not hotels.

They have to arrive by IRREGULAR means because theirs no regular routes from their countries!!!

So arriving isn't illegal so long as they claim asylum!!

Then they enter the process of knowing who they are, why they're here and details are ascertained hence why 70% are granted asylum and become refugees!!

No it doesn't!

You the. Enter the asylum process and a part of that process is to ascertain who you are and what your fleeing!!

So you still have complete control

If they fail then they are returned and by definition of we don't have a returns agreement they aren't a safe country and deserve asylum.

They walk around because they haven't done anything wrong!

They broke into the border of a country without permission. They should not be left to roam around until we have done enough background checks.

Your making stuff up, they aren't left to roam!!

No, they are provided with a roof over their head, a nominal amount on as Aspen card and f* all else until their claim is processed and approved or denied.

But the employment rates and hours of work of people who got the refugee status says otherwise. "

And how much of that is due to the qualifications they hold not being recognised in the UK? Solicitors, accountants, doctors, police officers?

How much is due to language?

It's easy to spout statistics for a situation far more complex than available statistics would have you believe.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 38 weeks ago

The disconnect between rhetoric and what's legal and possible is unbelievable!!

So it's all about legality? If we withdraw from refugee conventions and make it illegal, you would be happy with arresting them for crossing borders illegally?"

No, because I think this is the right, decent and humane thing to do!

We are a part of the global community we should embrace our past, accept people will want to come here, for varying reasons.

Let's make sure we take our fair share, we treat them humanly, we create routes from the most desperate countries so they don't have to make that journey

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *he Flat CapsCouple 38 weeks ago

Pontypool

The disconnect between rhetoric and what's legal and possible is unbelievable!!

So it's all about legality? If we withdraw from refugee conventions and make it illegal, you would be happy with arresting them for crossing borders illegally?"

Someone on another thread said something about whataboutery.

Nope. There is still a moral obligation to assist those in fear of persecution.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *otMe66Man 38 weeks ago

Terra Firma

"Once again everyone just shouting in echo chambers.

Despite claiming asylum being legal and that's the only route.

Not sure anyone said that claiming asylum wasn't legal

Except every one using the word illegal migrant

My understanding is the illegal act is arriving in dingies. The act of claiming asylum is not illegal nor have I seen it claimed to be illegal

If arriving was illegal they'd be in prison not hotels.

They have to arrive by IRREGULAR means because theirs no regular routes from their countries!!!

So arriving isn't illegal so long as they claim asylum!!

Then they enter the process of knowing who they are, why they're here and details are ascertained hence why 70% are granted asylum and become refugees!!

No it doesn't!

You the. Enter the asylum process and a part of that process is to ascertain who you are and what your fleeing!!

So you still have complete control

If they fail then they are returned and by definition of we don't have a returns agreement they aren't a safe country and deserve asylum.

They walk around because they haven't done anything wrong!

They broke into the border of a country without permission. They should not be left to roam around until we have done enough background checks.

Your making stuff up, they aren't left to roam!!

No, they are provided with a roof over their head, a nominal amount on as Aspen card and f* all else until their claim is processed and approved or denied.

But the employment rates and hours of work of people who got the refugee status says otherwise.

And how much of that is due to the qualifications they hold not being recognised in the UK? Solicitors, accountants, doctors, police officers?

How much is due to language?

It's easy to spout statistics for a situation far more complex than available statistics would have you believe.

Are you suggesting "what if" or have you got figures?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 38 weeks ago

"Once again everyone just shouting in echo chambers.

Despite claiming asylum being legal and that's the only route.

Not sure anyone said that claiming asylum wasn't legal

Except every one using the word illegal migrant

My understanding is the illegal act is arriving in dingies. The act of claiming asylum is not illegal nor have I seen it claimed to be illegal

If arriving was illegal they'd be in prison not hotels.

They have to arrive by IRREGULAR means because theirs no regular routes from their countries!!!

So arriving isn't illegal so long as they claim asylum!!

Then they enter the process of knowing who they are, why they're here and details are ascertained hence why 70% are granted asylum and become refugees!!

No it doesn't!

You the. Enter the asylum process and a part of that process is to ascertain who you are and what your fleeing!!

So you still have complete control

If they fail then they are returned and by definition of we don't have a returns agreement they aren't a safe country and deserve asylum.

They walk around because they haven't done anything wrong!

They broke into the border of a country without permission. They should not be left to roam around until we have done enough background checks.

Your making stuff up, they aren't left to roam!!

No, they are provided with a roof over their head, a nominal amount on as Aspen card and f* all else until their claim is processed and approved or denied.

But the employment rates and hours of work of people who got the refugee status says otherwise. "

Mate....... desperate

I'd worry more about British youngsters not getting into work.

The numbers of refugees is minute

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *he Flat CapsCouple 38 weeks ago

Pontypool

"Once again everyone just shouting in echo chambers.

Despite claiming asylum being legal and that's the only route.

Not sure anyone said that claiming asylum wasn't legal

Except every one using the word illegal migrant

My understanding is the illegal act is arriving in dingies. The act of claiming asylum is not illegal nor have I seen it claimed to be illegal

If arriving was illegal they'd be in prison not hotels.

They have to arrive by IRREGULAR means because theirs no regular routes from their countries!!!

So arriving isn't illegal so long as they claim asylum!!

Then they enter the process of knowing who they are, why they're here and details are ascertained hence why 70% are granted asylum and become refugees!!

No it doesn't!

You the. Enter the asylum process and a part of that process is to ascertain who you are and what your fleeing!!

So you still have complete control

If they fail then they are returned and by definition of we don't have a returns agreement they aren't a safe country and deserve asylum.

They walk around because they haven't done anything wrong!

They broke into the border of a country without permission. They should not be left to roam around until we have done enough background checks.

Your making stuff up, they aren't left to roam!!

No, they are provided with a roof over their head, a nominal amount on as Aspen card and f* all else until their claim is processed and approved or denied.

But the employment rates and hours of work of people who got the refugee status says otherwise.

And how much of that is due to the qualifications they hold not being recognised in the UK? Solicitors, accountants, doctors, police officers?

How much is due to language?

It's easy to spout statistics for a situation far more complex than available statistics would have you believe.

Are you suggesting "what if" or have you got figures? "

Clue in "available figures".

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ostindreamsMan 38 weeks ago

London

If they fail then they are returned and by definition of we don't have a returns agreement they aren't a safe country and deserve asylum.

They walk around because they haven't done anything wrong!

They broke into the border of a country without permission. They should not be left to roam around until we have done enough background checks.

Your making stuff up, they aren't left to roam!!

No, they are provided with a roof over their head, a nominal amount on as Aspen card and f* all else until their claim is processed and approved or denied.

But the employment rates and hours of work of people who got the refugee status says otherwise.

And how much of that is due to the qualifications they hold not being recognised in the UK? Solicitors, accountants, doctors, police officers?

Should we change our standards just to give them jobs? Or should we also waste more money trying to train them?

How much is due to language?

I was told that they come to UK leaving France behind because they know English. Was that a lie?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 38 weeks ago

Honestly?

Your worrying about tiny figures of desperate people.

Says a lot about your kind decent liberal Christian Britain

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ostindreamsMan 38 weeks ago

London

Are you suggesting "what if" or have you got figures?

Clue in "available figures". "

Actually migration observatory has figures on education levels. Asylum seekers education levels are also lower than British average.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *otMe66Man 38 weeks ago

Terra Firma

[Removed by poster at 14/08/25 20:47:33]

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 38 weeks ago

Are you suggesting "what if" or have you got figures?

Clue in "available figures".

Actually migration observatory has figures on education levels. Asylum seekers education levels are also lower than British average."

Mate, most are adults, we don't pay for the education system, possibly we pay language skills and support in a degree or whatever qualification they may need to convert

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *otMe66Man 38 weeks ago

Terra Firma

"Once again everyone just shouting in echo chambers.

Despite claiming asylum being legal and that's the only route.

Not sure anyone said that claiming asylum wasn't legal

Except every one using the word illegal migrant

My understanding is the illegal act is arriving in dingies. The act of claiming asylum is not illegal nor have I seen it claimed to be illegal

If arriving was illegal they'd be in prison not hotels.

They have to arrive by IRREGULAR means because theirs no regular routes from their countries!!!

So arriving isn't illegal so long as they claim asylum!!

Then they enter the process of knowing who they are, why they're here and details are ascertained hence why 70% are granted asylum and become refugees!!

No it doesn't!

You the. Enter the asylum process and a part of that process is to ascertain who you are and what your fleeing!!

So you still have complete control

If they fail then they are returned and by definition of we don't have a returns agreement they aren't a safe country and deserve asylum.

They walk around because they haven't done anything wrong!

They broke into the border of a country without permission. They should not be left to roam around until we have done enough background checks.

Your making stuff up, they aren't left to roam!!

No, they are provided with a roof over their head, a nominal amount on as Aspen card and f* all else until their claim is processed and approved or denied.

But the employment rates and hours of work of people who got the refugee status says otherwise.

And how much of that is due to the qualifications they hold not being recognised in the UK? Solicitors, accountants, doctors, police officers?

How much is due to language?

It's easy to spout statistics for a situation far more complex than available statistics would have you believe.

Are you suggesting "what if" or have you got figures?

Clue in "available figures". "

I think you are using smoke and mirrors unless you can provide the info and not elude to if's, but's and maybe's.

I can tell you that 51% are employed after 5 years, but it takes 4 years to get to that figure.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 38 weeks ago

"Once again everyone just shouting in echo chambers.

Despite claiming asylum being legal and that's the only route.

Not sure anyone said that claiming asylum wasn't legal

Except every one using the word illegal migrant

My understanding is the illegal act is arriving in dingies. The act of claiming asylum is not illegal nor have I seen it claimed to be illegal

If arriving was illegal they'd be in prison not hotels.

They have to arrive by IRREGULAR means because theirs no regular routes from their countries!!!

So arriving isn't illegal so long as they claim asylum!!

Then they enter the process of knowing who they are, why they're here and details are ascertained hence why 70% are granted asylum and become refugees!!

No it doesn't!

You the. Enter the asylum process and a part of that process is to ascertain who you are and what your fleeing!!

So you still have complete control

If they fail then they are returned and by definition of we don't have a returns agreement they aren't a safe country and deserve asylum.

They walk around because they haven't done anything wrong!

They broke into the border of a country without permission. They should not be left to roam around until we have done enough background checks.

Your making stuff up, they aren't left to roam!!

No, they are provided with a roof over their head, a nominal amount on as Aspen card and f* all else until their claim is processed and approved or denied.

But the employment rates and hours of work of people who got the refugee status says otherwise.

And how much of that is due to the qualifications they hold not being recognised in the UK? Solicitors, accountants, doctors, police officers?

How much is due to language?

It's easy to spout statistics for a situation far more complex than available statistics would have you believe.

Are you suggesting "what if" or have you got figures?

Clue in "available figures".

I think you are using smoke and mirrors unless you can provide the info and not elude to if's, but's and maybe's.

I can tell you that 51% are unemployed after 5 years, but it takes 4 years to get to that figure. "

Absolutely incorrect!!

Stop imbibing right wing rhetoric!!

Twitter is not your friend.

The grass is green, touch it

Smell the flowers

Chat to your brown neighbour

They are people

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ostindreamsMan 38 weeks ago

London

Are you suggesting "what if" or have you got figures?

Clue in "available figures".

Actually migration observatory has figures on education levels. Asylum seekers education levels are also lower than British average.

Mate, most are adults, we don't pay for the education system, possibly we pay language skills and support in a degree or whatever qualification they may need to convert "

But didn't they skip France and come to UK because they already knew English well?

And will you pay to skill them up from your own pockets? Because you genuinely seem to love them and believe that they are desperate people

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ostindreamsMan 38 weeks ago

London

Absolutely incorrect!!

Stop imbibing right wing rhetoric!!

Twitter is not your friend.

The grass is green, touch it

Smell the flowers

Chat to your brown neighbour

They are people "

The data comes from migrant Observatory. Not a right wing institution. Sorry to wake you up from the dream you created for yourself

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *eroy1000Man 38 weeks ago

milton keynes

"Once again everyone just shouting in echo chambers.

Despite claiming asylum being legal and that's the only route.

Not sure anyone said that claiming asylum wasn't legal

Except every one using the word illegal migrant

My understanding is the illegal act is arriving in dingies. The act of claiming asylum is not illegal nor have I seen it claimed to be illegal

If arriving was illegal they'd be in prison not hotels.

They have to arrive by IRREGULAR means because theirs no regular routes from their countries!!!

So arriving isn't illegal so long as they claim asylum!!

Then they enter the process of knowing who they are, why they're here and details are ascertained hence why 70% are granted asylum and become refugees!!

That's kind of what I was saying that the act of the asylum claim protects from arrest but doesn't change the fact the law had been broken.

Because like I said that fits your bias.

The truth is they've done nothing wrong.

They enter an asylum process, that process ascertains who they are what their fleeing.

Either they're granted or returned.

It's all being blown out of all propertion to feed this racist agenda

What bias am I having?

You clearly disagree with them entering via small boats.

But aren't willing to recognise that it's completely legal under the refugee convention, so you cling to a domestic law stating irregular entry is illegal. Which is true, if they don't claim asylum.

That domestic law was introduced to tighten a loop hole that existed, NOT to contradict the refugee convention.

Which is incorrect!!

Claiming asylum is legal.

You can only claim asylum by reaching our shores because the conservatives closed every legal route apart from Hong Kong, Ukraine and Afghanistan.

Labour have now closed the Afghanistan route.

Expect more refugees from Afghanistan.

Non of this illegal despite what people want you to believe.

The disconnect between rhetoric and what's legal and possible is unbelievable!!

Where did I say I disagreed with them entering via small boats? Where did I say claiming asylum wasn't legal?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) 38 weeks ago

Are you suggesting "what if" or have you got figures?

Clue in "available figures".

Actually migration observatory has figures on education levels. Asylum seekers education levels are also lower than British average.

Mate, most are adults, we don't pay for the education system, possibly we pay language skills and support in a degree or whatever qualification they may need to convert

But didn't they skip France and come to UK because they already knew English well?

And will you pay to skill them up from your own pockets? Because you genuinely seem to love them and believe that they are desperate people "

English is a factor, but not the only factor and some who already speak English want to better their language skills.

I'm a Welsh speaker fluently but still go on Welsh language courses to brush up!

It isn't my sole responsibility, we are a community in Britain as Britain is part of the global community.

Being, selfish and inward looking isn't a choice when you're a middle sized country, with a history like ours and like a lot of European states.