National News Boris Johnson - Ousted Former PM

It will do absolutely nothing to stop them coming. They have already risked life and limb to travel the thousands of miles to the French coast and put themselves and their families in huge peril as a result, so it is fanciful to think that not having a nice friendly yatchsperson to fish them out of the drink, will make all the difference to their journey choice! There is a 235% increase in numbers attempting it from last year. Probably because those considering it realise how successful it actually is. And it's quick compared to stowing away on a lorry, where the journey is now measured in months, not weeks, because of additional security measures along the route.

It will be interesting to see the first person tried for assisting a drowning migrant under the new legislation and how that argument pans out if it ever got to court. Legislation that encourages/forces inhumane behaviour towards another human being....? I don't think that's a very good place to be. I'm not sure if you know many people who would simply stand by and watch if they saw someone dying, no matter where they might've come from? Thankfully, I don't.

Whilst we're fixated and getting all het up, trying to address the symptoms, nothing will change. Talk of "rights" and "moral obligation" is utterly pointless. It solves nothing, but gives some on the Katie Hopkins end of the spectrum a reason to get angry about it.

And yet, for all this, we are still well behind the numbers of asylum seekers that our European friends are dealing with. Some 29,450 applications for asylum were lodged in the UK in 2020, according to government figures. That's down from a 2002 peak of 84,132.
More than 416,600 new asylum claims were lodged in European Union member states last year, including 102,500 in Germany, 81,800 in France, 37,900 in Greece and 21,200 in Italy, according to Eurostat.

The UK is also not, comparatively speaking, an especially popular destination for unauthorised boat arrivals. In 2020, Italy received 34,000 people who arrived without authorisation by boat, while Spain received over 40,000.

And you wait until we start trying to stem the flow of/getting angry about climate migrants.....we ain't seen nothing yet!
The ability to exercise the Dublin III legislation ended for the UK on January 1. Which ironically means that we can no longer apply to send anybody back to other EU countries that they had been in on their way through like we used to, which means that if you actually reach British shores you’re pretty much golden. That’s why crossing numbers are through the roof this year, because we now have nowhere to send them to as we aren’t members of the club, so the risk of anybody being deported or transferred out if they make it over is virtually nil. We’ve made the prize of rocking up infinitely more attractive than it ever was previously. This is why we’ve been throwing tens of millions of pounds at the French to try to beef up security on their coastlines, because we’ve scrapped our own ability to move them on once they arrive if we so wish.

But I’m sure everybody knows that, because we knew what we were voting for.
 
It could be inefficiency or it could be unwillingness by the Home Office and it's management (Civil Service and Politicians) considering they were the perpetrators and are yet in control of this process.

And what is your view on Sailors having to sail by somebody drowning and do nothing because they may get prosecuted? What would you do?

Could be either - but the crux is to find a solution, quickly. That's either fixed payment or case by case.

Sailors - they don`t have to - explained that earlier.

Rules of the sea supersede everything at sea, it's what happens next, or before, with the victim that is the issue.

Reports are that at least 5 have drowned and 5 are critical after sinking in French waters.

Follow the legal routes and there isn`t an issue.
 
The ability to exercise the Dublin III legislation ended for the UK on January 1. Which ironically means that we can no longer apply to send anybody back to other EU countries that they had been in on their way through like we used to, which means that if you actually reach British shores you’re pretty much golden. That’s why crossing numbers are through the roof this year, because we now have nowhere to send them to as we aren’t members of the club, so the risk of anybody being deported or transferred out if they make it over is virtually nil. We’ve made the prize of rocking up infinitely more attractive than it ever was previously. This is why we’ve been throwing tens of millions of pounds at the French to try to beef up security on their coastlines, because we’ve scrapped our own ability to move them on once they arrive if we so wish.

But I’m sure everybody knows that, because we knew what we were voting for.

How many did we return as part of Dublin III?


Its always been "golden" therein is the problem........................................................
 
If they know there won't be rescue for them
Will they know this? If they even hear of it how do they distinguish it from the fake news. It will sound fake to those with any sense! Hey, I'm struggling to believe our government will criminalise saving a person's life!!
 
Could be either - but the crux is to find a solution, quickly. That's either fixed payment or case by case.

Sailors - they don`t have to - explained that earlier.

Rules of the sea supersede everything at sea, it's what happens next, or before, with the victim that is the issue.

Reports are that at least 5 have drowned and 5 are critical after sinking in French waters.

Follow the legal routes and there isn`t an issue.

The legal routes that have been shutdown or made considerably harder to use you mean?

Sailors, "they don't have to", don't have to what? Save the drowning person to avoid possible prosecution? If they do save the drowning person, what are they exactly going to do with the saved person other than bring them ashore which then opens them up to prosecution? An incredibly callous piece of legislation.
 
Will they know this? If they even hear of it how do they distinguish it from the fake news. It will sound fake to those with any sense! Hey, I'm struggling to believe our government will criminalise saving a person's life!!
If they even hear of it? They have phones. They've paid thousands to human traffickers to get here - these people aren't destitute. If they don't want to research the deadly channel crossing they're about to attempt then more fool them.
 
Anyway, talking about migrants in boats is a pretty good squirrel to detract from the title of the thread and another abject PMQ's for Bojo today. Tories effectively whipped to turn up and show support for the Dear Leader....

For any legislation to act as a deterrent (which is the whole point of this, surely), then there needs to be a sanction associated with it, which amounts to a bit more than a slapped wrist and a "don't do it again". It literally has to deter people from picking up migrants in trouble mid-channel and plonkig them in the UK. And again, if there are serious people traffickers involved in fishing refugees out of the channel and taking them to the UK (and there is no proof they are, by the way), anything less than a hefty fine/custodial sentence will be seen as an occupational hazard, no more, no less. So yes, what is the actual point in all this, other than to be seen to take some decisive action, which will probably make no difference at all?

And "just trying to draw paralells with fascism to make a point" . . . seriously?

As Ryan points out, we've kind of lost the ability to return them anywhere, since Dublin III went out the window....not (as EY points out) that we ever used it anyway......probably too busy blaming the EU for all our immigration problems....
 
The legal routes that have been shutdown or made considerably harder to use you mean?

Sailors, "they don't have to", don't have to what? Save the drowning person to avoid possible prosecution? If they do save the drowning person, what are they exactly going to do with the saved person other than bring them ashore which then opens them up to prosecution? An incredibly callous piece of legislation.

Yes - much the same as the legal routes for many other countries.

There is no valid argument against knowing who is coming and going from a country because it underpins what needs to be provided on those basic levels - housing, health etc etc.

If "anyone" can rack up and "vanish" where do those people end up? Exploited? The "cash economy" with no protection, no support?

Still, if you can get your car washed for £10 all is well yes?

The legislation you mention has not been passed in the format you linked to so its a moot point really.
 
If they even hear of it? They have phones. They've paid thousands to human traffickers to get here - these people aren't destitute. If they don't want to research the deadly channel crossing they're about to attempt then more fool them.
So they are foolish enough to attempt the crossing but clever enough to realise that a British government will actually stand by and watch them drown. Which one is it?
 
So they are foolish enough to attempt the crossing but clever enough to realise that a British government will actually stand by and watch them drown. Which one is it?
Those two concepts aren't mutually exclusive.
 
Those two concepts aren't mutually exclusive.
Very convenient for you that their levels of understanding and ignorance on the subjects fits your narrative. Does this apply to all people attempting to cross? Asking for a friend.
 
Anyway, there is a separate thread for Migrants in Boats and, based on what is unfolding, a lot of people have fallen victim to criminality that exploits a number of weaknesses in the system.

Boris was back on form at PMQ`s.......................
 
Anyway, there is a separate thread for Migrants in Boats and, based on what is unfolding, a lot of people have fallen victim to criminality that exploits a number of weaknesses in the system.

Boris was back on form at PMQ`s.......................
It very much should be on this thread given what's unfolding and the fact that Johnson's government (see Johnson) is suggesting people attempting to save migrants could be prosecuted for aiding and abetting illegal immigration.

It's incredibly sinister stuff but you keep looking the other way.
 
If Johnson and his cronies died, Satan would kick them out of hell. The devil has better standards than the Conservatives.
 
Yes - much the same as the legal routes for many other countries.

There is no valid argument against knowing who is coming and going from a country because it underpins what needs to be provided on those basic levels - housing, health etc etc.

If "anyone" can rack up and "vanish" where do those people end up? Exploited? The "cash economy" with no protection, no support?

Still, if you can get your car washed for £10 all is well yes?

The legislation you mention has not been passed in the format you linked to so its a moot point really.

So what about what other countries are doing, we are talking about Britain.

A quick leap to Daily Express language there with "vanish", "car wash" etc. So the Govt has encouraged this by shutting down legal routes etc, good to know so I assume you are condemning them for it?

The rates of the people crossing the channel getting refugee status is quite high which suggests the Govt closing/making it harder for people via legal routes is further demonstration that they are forcing genuine refugees to use these dangerous routes.

The legislation hasn't passed yet but it will if Govt want it to as they'll put a whip on it. It hasn't been revised much, if at all, even though the significant amounts of criticism of the various measures and conflating Immigration/people trafficking in the way they have.
 
Last edited:
  • React
Reactions: QR
Reads headline.


Reads article.

"Priti Patel, the Home Secretary, has promised an amendment that will exclude RNLI crew members and other rescue organisations by distinguishing them from smugglers operating for profit."
Surely and vessel in a position to help someone in trouble at sea shouldn’t face consequences in doing so????
 
Reads headline.


Reads article.

"Priti Patel, the Home Secretary, has promised an amendment that will exclude RNLI crew members and other rescue organisations by distinguishing them from smugglers operating for profit."
Exactly. So the fishing crew saving a drowning family would risk being prosecuted. Some people object to this in the way some Germans objected to the treatment of Jewish people.
 
You say it will do nothing to stop them coming but we've had years to deal with this in a diplomatic way and failed at every turn. We've done nothing in a hard-line or authoritarian mould yet, so I'm all for trying something a bit different to stop them. The system isn't working - how would you suggest we stop them?

I'm not sure what the cause of action for the crime you just made up would be, and I'm also not sure it's worth hypothesising over something that hasn't happened. The legislation doesn't force inhumane treatment, you're just trying to draw parallels with fascism to make a point.

Just because we aren't a comparatively overloaded country doesn't mean we just give up or take even more. That argument doesn't work for inactivity on climate change and it shouldn't work for inactivity on stopping migrants.

I'm not particularly angry anymore, since the influx in 2015 i came to understand this is a lost cause. Europe is pretty much heading in one direction and we're not faring any better. The debate is still a fun one to have.
The answer is infrastructure and proper processes.
You build an asylum processing centre somewhere in the UK.
The entry point to the centre is though a British embassy (or dedicated point of contact) anywhere in the world. A potential applicant brings with them prove of their country’s origin and is flown to the UK’s processing centre where their application’s processed. If the application fails, they are then deported back to the country of origin.

This way, there are no traffickers and no dangerous crossings. Plus it puts the Country in control of the situation rather than places like Russia manipulating it!
 
  • React
Reactions: QR
Saw a nice safe solution elsewhere.............

"Once a day run a dedicated ferry to bring them over safely, get them into suitable accommodation, assess their claims, and as part of the same scheme return failed applicants to France. Put the people smugglers out of business."

Yep, too simple to work.
 
Back
Top Bottom