International News Immigration

OUFCGav said:
not necessarily about the conviction rate to arrest, more about the entry to arrest rate - 0.3% hardly represents the government's apparently hard stance. Or maybe they actually have to admit many have "good reason"
Click to expand...
Maybe - or maybe when you turn up undocumented after a bit of coaching from your Albanian caseworker on how to play dumb, you make it hard for the Government to build an evidential case against you.
 
Just add it to the queue of 60,000 outstanding cases that the criminal law system can't process because it has been so badly fucked over by 12 years of Tories.

What an utter f*****g shambles this pathetic excuse of a government have created. They and they alone have choked the life out of every single public service you can think of and petty much all of them are on their knees as a result.

Utterly laughable that anyone can still think they are credible or in any way up to the job.
 
OUFCGav said:
not necessarily about the conviction rate to arrest, more about the entry to arrest rate - 0.3% hardly represents the government's apparently hard stance. Or maybe they actually have to admit many have "good reason"
Click to expand...

Say the right thing, in you come.
Its then down to "the system" to check your claim is genuine.
In the meantime you vanish...............

Easy really.
 
Essexyellows said:
Say the right thing, in you come.
Its then down to "the system" to check your claim is genuine.
In the meantime you vanish...............

Easy really.
Click to expand...
Well at least the tories have had 12 years to fix it…. Migrants, who are mostly accepted anyway, should work from day 1 when they get here. We need the tax they get less handouts and if they are working you can keep an eye on them.
 
Marston Road yellow said:
Well at least the tories have had 12 years to fix it…. Migrants, who are mostly accepted anyway, should work from day 1 when they get here. We need the tax they get less handouts and if they are working you can keep an eye on them.
Click to expand...

Can`t disagree with that.
The tricky part is adding the right person to the system if they have ditched all their documents or had them retained by a people smuggler.
If they have ID/documents then process them in France and operate a ferry for safe crossing - reload ferry with any illegal/no paperwork crossers and return.
Don`t let them claim benefits for 5 years and jobs sorted.

YF "solving global problems". :)
 
Essexyellows said:
Can`t disagree with that.
The tricky part is adding the right person to the system if they have ditched all their documents or had them retained by a people smuggler.
If they have ID/documents then process them in France and operate a ferry for safe crossing - reload ferry with any illegal/no paperwork crossers and return.
Don`t let them claim benefits for 5 years and jobs sorted.

YF "solving global problems". :)
Click to expand...
Why would they need to ditch their documents if there were more legal and safe routes to enter 🤷‍♂️

That is at the heart of this issue and why so many are driven to desperate measures. So by closing down or severely restricting most legitimate means to claim asylum, the government have actually created a worse problem. If they'd been at all sensible and measured about this, then it could be a real success story for everyone, including our country and economy.

Instead, they've knee-jerked from one crisis or immigration limit number to the next, whilst pandering to/playing on the unfounded fears of those conditioned to think that migrants are simultaneously taking their jobs & house whilst claiming benefits and to those who still in the 3rd decade of the 21st Century, still just don't want immigrants.

A bit less hysteria, a bit less empty rhetoric and a lot more pragmatism from the powers that be on both sides of the channel would go a long way towards making the situation a whole lot better.
 
They could start monitoring the sales of dinghies as well, and try to catch some of the people smugglers at source, or even planting undercover operatives into the migrant camps - the boat crossings are the last step in the chain, we should be doing something to stamp it out before it even gets that far. What are the UK and French governments doing about actually catching the smugglers?
 
Sheik djibouti said:
Why would they need to ditch their documents if there were more legal and safe routes to enter 🤷‍♂️

That is at the heart of this issue and why so many are driven to desperate measures. So by closing down or severely restricting most legitimate means to claim asylum, the government have actually created a worse problem. If they'd been at all sensible and measured about this, then it could be a real success story for everyone, including our country and economy.

Instead, they've knee-jerked from one crisis or immigration limit number to the next, whilst pandering to/playing on the unfounded fears of those conditioned to think that migrants are simultaneously taking their jobs & house whilst claiming benefits and to those who still in the 3rd decade of the 21st Century, still just don't want immigrants.

A bit less hysteria, a bit less empty rhetoric and a lot more pragmatism from the powers that be on both sides of the channel would go a long way towards making the situation a whole lot better.
Click to expand...

I don`t think the ditching of documents is a choice made by the individual - plenty of cases where the smugglers retain same for leverage on the victims or their families.

Process the people where ever first point of entry is.

Don`t let them travel across "open borders" without documentation. Might be tricky with that FoM though...

Then they can travel on safe routes, could even give them free travel from a collective pot, to whichever country they choose - and the smugglers model is scuppered.
 
Well I never......

"We have concluded that it is lawful for the government to make arrangements to relocate asylum seekers to Rwanda and for their asylum claims to be determined there."

He says evidence has been presented to the court that shows the arrangements between the UK and Rwanda are intended to ensure asylum claims are "properly determined" there.

The judge adds that the scheme does not breach the UN's Refugee Convention or human rights laws."

 
Essexyellows said:
Well I never......

"We have concluded that it is lawful for the government to make arrangements to relocate asylum seekers to Rwanda and for their asylum claims to be determined there."

He says evidence has been presented to the court that shows the arrangements between the UK and Rwanda are intended to ensure asylum claims are "properly determined" there.

The judge adds that the scheme does not breach the UN's Refugee Convention or human rights laws."

Click to expand...

But the individual cases were unlawful and likely they will continue to lose the vast majority of individual cases so an expensive exercise in achieving not much.
 
And in Scotland if someone knocks on your door and ask to use your toilet you are legally bound to let them use it.

Because something is legal it does not make it morally right. It means someone had a better legal , and not moral argument.

Wonder how many white people will be on any of those Rwanda bound planes??
 
Marked Ox said:
But the individual cases were unlawful and likely they will continue to lose the vast majority of individual cases so an expensive exercise in achieving not much.
Click to expand...

  • But judges have also said that eight individuals who were due to be deported on the first Rwanda flight need to have their cases reconsidered

And there is already talk of an appeal against the decision that declared it lawful.
 
Essexyellows said:
Well I never......

"We have concluded that it is lawful for the government to make arrangements to relocate asylum seekers to Rwanda and for their asylum claims to be determined there."

He says evidence has been presented to the court that shows the arrangements between the UK and Rwanda are intended to ensure asylum claims are "properly determined" there.

The judge adds that the scheme does not breach the UN's Refugee Convention or human rights laws."

Click to expand...
20221219_222709.jpg
 
Essexyellows said:
  • But judges have also said that eight individuals who were due to be deported on the first Rwanda flight need to have their cases reconsidered

And there is already talk of an appeal against the decision that declared it lawful.
Click to expand...

davidallengreen.com

The Law and Policy Blog

Independent commentary on law and policy from a liberal constitutionalist and critical perspective
davidallengreen.com

This lawyer's view. He used to be the legal correspondent for the New Statesman and is now writes for the Financial Times on law and policy.

Thinks the appeal will fail if it happens as it is on the policy itself. But the decision means each case has to be looked at individually. On those 8 individuals, the Govt/Home Office was found to have lost with 19 decisions against them.

The cost/resources needed to implement the policy competently and lawfully are going to need to be massive and it doesn't look like the Home Office have them. So in effect the Govt have lost even though they appear to have 'won'.
 
Marked Ox said:
davidallengreen.com

The Law and Policy Blog

Independent commentary on law and policy from a liberal constitutionalist and critical perspective
davidallengreen.com

This lawyer's view. He used to be the legal correspondent for the New Statesman and is now writes for the Financial Times on law and policy.

Thinks the appeal will fail if it happens as it is on the policy itself. But the decision means each case has to be looked at individually. On those 8 individuals, the Govt/Home Office was found to have lost with 19 decisions against them.

The cost/resources needed to implement the policy competently and lawfully are going to need to be massive and it doesn't look like the Home Office have them. So in effect the Govt have lost even though they appear to have 'won'.
Click to expand...
Just looking up the definition of pyrrhic......hang on . . . .
 
QR said:
View attachment 11320
Click to expand...

That`s pathetic even for you.
Still I guess you are happy as long as your car is washed for £10 or your partner gets their nails done for £20?

As previously - establish legal routes for legal people, as we have because we need migration, and the illegal travellers get a plane ticket.
 
Estimated to have cost 140m so far. Numbers of people expected to be sent to Rwanda is down to 200.
yes I know it’s only the same as public sector pay increases ( numbers on a spreadsheet)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom