Alan Dugdales Moustache
Well-Known Member
Your problem is that you spout hatred to those who simply disagree with you . As I've said before, you're an utter hypocrite.
Migrants crossing from Europe (17 Viewers)
- Thread starter Alan Dugdales Moustache
- Start date
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
It might be their decision, but the insinuation that they therefore had their deaths coming to them is crass at best, and gives the impression he's an utterly heartless c**t. It also shows no empathy whatsoever about what might motivate people to make such a journey in the first place. It's easy for him to sit in his ivory bedsit and pass judgement, really.
Wyken Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Terrible that people have died whilst crossing the channel
However, there is a legal asylum seeking process in place in the UK. Why isn't this been used? What is attractive about the UK and not France? Are we too soft with handouts, is it an easier language barrier, are there more jobs?
Forgive my ignorance with this but what these people are doing is illegal and needs to be stopped before more deaths and more people in the UK unaccounted for
Sent from my Pixel 6 using Tapatalk
However, there is a legal asylum seeking process in place in the UK. Why isn't this been used? What is attractive about the UK and not France? Are we too soft with handouts, is it an easier language barrier, are there more jobs?
Forgive my ignorance with this but what these people are doing is illegal and needs to be stopped before more deaths and more people in the UK unaccounted for
Sent from my Pixel 6 using Tapatalk
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
That is one thing, but ‘I do not feel sorry for them at all’ is something else. The children had no choice by any measure, not as though that makes the deaths less ‘worthy’ anyway.
Skybluefaz
Well-Known Member
People blaming the migrants, come on. Most or all would’ve been sold the dream by scrumbag traffickers and are just trying to find a better life for themselves
The blame here lies with the traffickers and to some extent the French. As recent as last week we offered to help police the French coast (refused), we also threw cash at them to manage things better on their side and it’s not happened, there’s been plenty of pictures of French police allowing boats/dingies to leave the coast. What did people think would happen, especially as we move into winter ?! If you don’t dissuade people from risking the journey and/or break down their gangs trafficking it will keep happening.
There’s also been plenty of people in the U.K. that have inadvertently encouraged it which has led to this tragedy including border control civil servants and people arguing for the migrants rights to do it and seek asylum here (going via this route). People I’ve heard in the media saying ‘it’s only ‘X’ thousand, what’s the problem’. Well this is the problem ! People die and trafficking gangs are earning millions by putting peoples lives at risk
The blame here lies with the traffickers and to some extent the French. As recent as last week we offered to help police the French coast (refused), we also threw cash at them to manage things better on their side and it’s not happened, there’s been plenty of pictures of French police allowing boats/dingies to leave the coast. What did people think would happen, especially as we move into winter ?! If you don’t dissuade people from risking the journey and/or break down their gangs trafficking it will keep happening.
There’s also been plenty of people in the U.K. that have inadvertently encouraged it which has led to this tragedy including border control civil servants and people arguing for the migrants rights to do it and seek asylum here (going via this route). People I’ve heard in the media saying ‘it’s only ‘X’ thousand, what’s the problem’. Well this is the problem ! People die and trafficking gangs are earning millions by putting peoples lives at risk
Last edited:
Alan Dugdales Moustache
Well-Known Member
Absolutely right and sadly nothing will change in the short term.
Alan Dugdales Moustache
Well-Known Member
Top post. Anyone arguing with this is arguing for the sake of it.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
You mean the people who arm the war torn countries most of these people are coming from. So us then.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
There is a legal asylum system. It involves being in this country in the first place to claim asylum. Our government chooses to not offer safe passage unlike most civilised countries. The organised crime gangs is the only option our government facilitates in most cases.
rob9872
Well-Known Member
We should take our proportionate share of migrants and currently we don't and there should be more legal streams to bring them across. What I fail to understand is why they want to come. I realise leaving places like Syria and why they would, but when they've travelled across many European countries in the free world where they can claim refugee status or asylum, why the desire to continue on to the UK?
We should take or share direct from the countries in crisis but the French border controls need increasing and the trafficking gangs dealt with properly, not always by the UK as we likely don't have the jurisdiction but by by the EU block and it appears everyone (and I include the UK) is only in it for their own interests and not the interests of the people trying to get here and don't seem willing or prepared to work together.
We should take or share direct from the countries in crisis but the French border controls need increasing and the trafficking gangs dealt with properly, not always by the UK as we likely don't have the jurisdiction but by by the EU block and it appears everyone (and I include the UK) is only in it for their own interests and not the interests of the people trying to get here and don't seem willing or prepared to work together.
Ian1779
Well-Known Member
Somehow in all of this is the assumption that we have perfectly running and functioning ‘legal asylum process’ when all the evidence suggests that those responsible have no handle on the ‘illegal’ manoeuvres that are taking place - why would the ‘legal’ process not be inundated rather than people feeling that risking their lives is a better option?
There are so many levels of culpability here, but as a start point, maybe we should reflect on our activities that cause so many ‘innocent’ people to be displaced and feeling they have to turn to traffickers in the first place.
rob9872
Well-Known Member
Some truth in what you say but your consistent rhetoric regarding posting 'the government' in every post just like PVA and Ian is like a broken record and invalidates and detracts away from many of your points. We understand where each of you sit politically but it is possible to have a conversation on a given subject without mentioning it. 'New Labour' had plenty of opportunity and implemented nothing and it seems your boy Keir has no plans to change it as you would like. Will we see the same backlash from you or is that Boris' fault too?
Wyken Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
The question is then why are migrants wanting asylum in the UK and not France or any other country?
Sent from my Pixel 6 using Tapatalk
rob9872
Well-Known Member
Not often I quote the Guardian but here goes: Labour is shifting right on migration. We’ve seen this before, it didn’t end well | Maya Goodfellow
Nothing to the root cause just govt bashing on stopping people making the journey and new deals with France. Makes him look no better than a poundshop Marty.
Nothing to the root cause just govt bashing on stopping people making the journey and new deals with France. Makes him look no better than a poundshop Marty.
I’m guessing it because we’re broadly more tolerant than most, they’ve been sold the dream (and already probably paid their money to traffickers) and we have jobs galore.
Many could benefit our society but we are way past the point of a sensible discussion on asylum seekers and migration in general. It’s been hijacked by the extremes. Either the ‘They’re nicking our jobs and taking our benefits’ lot or the ‘Controlled migration, you’re a racist’ crew
Like most things in life, there’s probably a sensible happy medium which would benefit the vast majority
Last edited:
jimmyhillsfanclub
Well-Known Member
Hopefully now some common sense will prevail & the UK can establish a processing centre for asylum claims on French soil as I suggested earlier in this thread....
....Its just a crying shame that it takes a tragedy to wake the French (in particular) & UK government up to their responsibilites......
....Its just a crying shame that it takes a tragedy to wake the French (in particular) & UK government up to their responsibilites......
Sick Boy
Super Moderator
Id imagine there are those with family?
What a ridiculous post.
Claim people putting some blame on the government are point scoring... Then give a classic 'but but Labour'.
Quite why Labour should face a backlash despite not being in power for over 10 years is beyond me.
Sick Boy
Super Moderator
The UK government has been going on about having one in the Falklands, I’d be shocked if they actually built one in Calais.
jimmyhillsfanclub
Well-Known Member
So would I mate.....and I'd be even more shocked if France allowed it....
Johnson & Macron will blame & bluster for a few days and migrants and asylums seekers will continue to drown in the channel......depressing as fuck.
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
Think you’ve got the cart before the horse here Steve. No one is sat happily in France until an trafficker comes up twirling their moustache with tales of Britain where the streets are paved with gold. Mostly it’s a result of having one of the most spoken languages on the planet and having family ties here.
Traffickers exist because there’s a demand for trafficking. And there’s a demand for trafficking because it’s not easy enough to claim asylum without it. This is the same fallacy as people who blame dealers for drug problems. That’s not how capitalism works.
For me we need to build processing centres in Calais in conjunction with the French and staff them enough to process the level of claims. Short of shooting migrants dead in the channel (and even then people will still try) anything else will just exacerbate the problem IMO.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Can you explain how you can legally claim asylum in the UK without entering the country?
The 'why do they all want to come to the UK' question doesn't stand up to scrutiny when you look at the number trying to claim asylum here compared to other countries. In a lot of reports we're so far down the list we don't even get a mention!
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
In terms of people wanting to claim asylum, then the more who do probably reflects well on the country itself, as it shows itself to be wealthy, tolerant, open-minded, accessible, and a place where people are (generally) happy and not oppressed.
Fair points shmmeee. I’d imagine a lot of the trafficking start in their countries of origin and the channel crossing is the final leg though.
Ian1779
Well-Known Member
Don’t be point scoring about politics he says.
Does exactly the same thing 3 sentences later.
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
Maybe. But the point remains people are looking for the service enough to pay thousands (I’ll be honest if I’ve got $10k and am sat in France I’m putting a deposit down on a flat not getting in a dinghy). Traffickers are just exploiting that market. I find the focus on them a bit of a red herring.
We are always going to be a destination for many because of our language and our history in many of these areas meaning people have ties to the U.K. we can’t change that we can only change how we process the people who want to come here.
People all over the world grow up being taught our language, learning our history, watching our films, following our football, listening to the World Service, absorbing our culture. It’s been an Anglo-centric world since the days of Empire, and since then we’ve built an economy based around being a global hub - our banking system, our legal system, our immigrant communities and traditions. Our footprint around the world is enormous.
Set aside the arguments about British imperialism for another day, and that’s all no bad thing - it works out very well for us here. But we shouldn’t be surprised when desperate people looking to be reunited with their families, or just start a new life entirely, decide they’d rather risk it all to come here, rather than stay in, I don’t know, Belgium instead. If you’ve already seen whole cities back home get blown to shit, then a short ride in a dinghy doesn’t sound too bad if the promised land is waiting on the other side.
We’re a special country, and a lot of that is built on foreigners - both the ones who came here, and the ones that didn’t. Not only is it obvious why people would want to come here, but it makes sense for us to take responsibility for making sure they can do it safely.
Alan Dugdales Moustache
Well-Known Member
People banging on about having family members already in the UK. Give us the evidence. Give us the numbers.
Sky Blue Pete
Well-Known Member
Fuckin hell
Refugees (Family Reunion) Bill [HL] - House of Lords Library
This private member’s bill would seek to improve the provision for leave to enter or remain in the UK granted to family members of refugees and of people granted humanitarian protection; and to provide for legal aid to be made available in such cases. The bill is scheduled to have its second...
Liquid Gold
Well-Known Member
In my opinion it should be enshrined in international law that any sovereign nation taking part in military action within another sovereign nation's borders should be responsible for the people this displaces.
They should be made to either provide safe habitable living conditions within that nation through proper reconstruction, not just refugee camps but proper towns and cities with full infrastructure, or they should set up refugee processing centres within the country and neighbouring countries in order to process and transport the effected people.
As for shrugging off the deaths of children and vulnerable people. Get psychological help.
They should be made to either provide safe habitable living conditions within that nation through proper reconstruction, not just refugee camps but proper towns and cities with full infrastructure, or they should set up refugee processing centres within the country and neighbouring countries in order to process and transport the effected people.
As for shrugging off the deaths of children and vulnerable people. Get psychological help.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
According to the government there were 29,456 asylum applications in 2020. Can't give you any breakdown on unsuccessful applicants but Migration Observatory have some info on successful applications. In 2020 5,400 family reunion visas were issued, a 27% drop from the previous year. There was also 933 unaccompanied children issued visas, down 62% form 2019.
The drop in both instances has been put down to a combination of the impact of covid on travel and the closure of overseas visa application centres.
Asylum statistics - House of Commons Library
This briefing summarises statistics on asylum seekers in the UK and refugees who arrive through resettlement programmes.
Asylum and refugee resettlement in the UK - Migration Observatory
This briefing sets out key facts and figures, as well as information gaps, relating to migration to the UK, specifically refugees and asylum seekers. It looks at overall numbers, characteristics of asylum seekers, and outcomes of asylum applications.
rob9872
Well-Known Member
Absolutely and undoubtedly on purpose missed the point. It's not about Labour, it's not about the government, it's about the migrants (real people not political pawns). I merely pointed out as someone who doesn't respond in every post about the government that there is a much wider issue, that many governments have failed to grasp the nettle, not only this one and that if you're going to have a go then what's the credible alternative since the guy you would vote for has no plans to change it!
@Ian1779 same applies to your quoted response.
Ian1779
Well-Known Member
You are absolutely right about Labours plan - it’s no better than the current government one. And you could roll this back through successive Labour and Tory governments… all failed to address and deal with the real issue of their foreign policy being crap. If we are going to be involved in wars overseas, then we have to accept it creates displaced people which we should have responsibility for.
I sometimes think about things like drug laws as something comparable… if drugs were legalised then it would reduce the illegal drug trade (not eliminate it totally) because there would be appropriate regulations and control. If the refugee/asylum process was clearer, easier and more transparent then that could contribute to reducing the illegal trafficking.