Brexited | the worst threads live the longest

[Maticmaker]

While there is money to be made out of people trafficking, you are never going to stop it. Just like the drug trade. No amount of legislation or trying to frighten people not to want to try. The people traffickers will always find a way to refine their trade.
And more importantly satisfy the demand.
To them, it is just business. Identify the demand and find a way to satisfy it in a way that keeps the risk to them low.

Yes they will, but for the political leaders of this country 'slaying the particular dragon' of 'stopping the boats' is now essential to a have any chance of getting a proper policy for dealing with the amount of potential immigrants, from all over the world, that will take place over the next fifty years, being accepted by the vast majority in this country.
Its an uncomfortable feeling but its a reality which, like the position on post Brexit Britain, Starmer has to box clever on if he wants to be a PM with real power in office, not just being in office.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

Yes they will, but for the political leaders of this country 'slaying the particular dragon' of 'stopping the boats' is now essential to a have any chance of getting a proper policy for dealing with the amount of potential immigrants, from all over the world, that will take place over the next fifty years, being accepted by the vast majority in this country.
Its an uncomfortable feeling but its a reality which, like the position on post Brexit Britain, Starmer has to box clever on if he wants to be a PM with real power in office, not just being in office.

In Britain you must appeal to racists or you can't succeed?
So what is stopping the Uk setting up legal routes? They did with Ukraine.

 

[Maticmaker]

Starmer and Labour say to Braverman, why haven't you stopped the boats? The boats aren't the problem. The problem is that there's no safe legal route.

Amazingly they pulled out all the stops for Ukranian refugees or for anyone that makes them look good. The propaganda machine who convinced people of Clacton that the Uk are taking all the refugees and other countries should help. Anything to do with Ukraine the the government tells the people they are leading the way. Good publicity. They believe it all.

Refugees and asylum seekers are entitled to make the claim in the country of their choice. The Uk government don't want them. Because they are geographically perched on the edge of Europe they think they should go to other countries.

Understand the immigration figures about to be released will be around 700k (44k of which will be boat people).

Politically they are the problem. Its not just a question of pandering to people, who or most of who, voted for Brexit, its about building something durable, a system that will deal with what is about to take place over the next fifty years and beyond and having a consensus here in the UK as well as probably across the EU. Immigration whether it be asylum seekers or people seeking a new life, or escaping from ravages of earth quakes, water shortages, etc will go through the roof in Europe over the next fifty years if as predicted the climate change targets are not met. People from all over will be flooding towards Europe and other countries around the world who seem to offer a safe haven from the worst of climate changes.

"Stopping the boats" now has a symbolism way above the reality of the numbers arriving in that manner. Its a 'Dragon that as to be seen to be slain', even if in reality it simply slips away and returns in another form. Whoever is PM after the next election will find this a number one problem that won't go away unless they can convince the vast majority of the UK population that they have it under control and now want to look further ahead and build a consensus here in the UK first, then with our European neighbours.

It is a real issue for Britain firstly because after Covid a substantial amount of the population it seems were either unable/unwilling to return to a working life. That added to the problems in the jobs market caused by Brexit, it means we just don't have enough people going forward. Hence either our young people will have to begin breeding like the 'proverbial rabbits', or we will have to entice more people to come and settle here.

However this cannot be done on the back of a 'fag-packet' and above all it needs consensus a true consensus.

 

[Maticmaker]

In Britain you must appeal to racists or you can't succeed?
So what is stopping the Uk setting up legal routes? They did with Ukraine.

Its an 'uncomfortable/inconvenient' truth and is not likely to go away anytime soon, it has to be dealt with

I believe in the Ukraine situation they all arrived with valid passports and papers and hence the processing time took much less.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

Politically they are the problem. Its not just a question of pandering to people, who or most of who, voted for Brexit, its about building something durable, a system that will deal with what is about to take place over the next fifty years and beyond and having a consensus here in the UK as well as probably across the EU. Immigration whether it be asylum seekers or people seeking a new life, or escaping from ravages of earth quakes, water shortages, etc will go through the roof in Europe over the next fifty years if as predicted the climate change targets are not met. People from all over will be flooding towards Europe and other countries around the world who seem to offer a safe haven from the worst of climate changes.

"Stopping the boats" now has a symbolism way above the reality of the numbers arriving in that manner. Its a 'Dragon that as to be seen to be slain', even if in reality it simply slips away and returns in another form. Whoever is PM after the next election will find this a number one problem that won't go away unless they can convince the vast majority of the UK population that they have it under control and now want to look further ahead and build a consensus here in the UK first, then with our European neighbours.

It is a real issue for Britain firstly because after Covid a substantial amount of the population it seems were either unable/unwilling to return to a working life. That added to the problems in the jobs market caused by Brexit, it means we just don't have enough people going forward. Hence either our young people will have to begin breeding like the 'proverbial rabbits', or we will have to entice more people to come and settle here.

However this can not be done on the back of a 'fag-packet' and above all it needs consensus a true consensus.

It's the same government propaganda.
They talk as if only, yes only, the UK was affected by Covid or the war in Ukraine. Brexit hasn't worked because of this, they say. it's complete and utter mindnumbingly pathetic.
All these things affect all countries. But at least the EU countries haven't got Brexit to worry about.

Of course they'll be more people affected by climate change.
The boat people story started because the government were "so worried" that is was dangerous to cross the busiest sea-lane in the world in a dinghy. Yes we know that, the refugees know that but they want to be in the Uk for whatever reason.

Tell you what - we'll open an office in Calais and they can have their application processed.

No, no, no, say the UK government, we can't do that.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

Its an 'comfortable/inconvenient' truth and is not likely to go away anytime soon, it has to be dealt with

I believe in the Ukraine situation they all arrived with valid passports and papers and hence the processing time took much less.

No but surely according to the British government they should stop at the first safe country. Poland etc. none of them would have reached Britain (that wouldn't look good would it? We're leading the way!!). Or those coming across the Med to Italy or Greece; they should all stay there.

 

[Maticmaker]

No


but surely according to the British government they should stop at the first safe country. Poland etc. none of them would have reached Britain (that wouldn't look good would it? We're leading the way!!). Or those coming across the Med to Italy or Greece; they should all stay there.

Sorry missed out your first sentence

Yes that's what has been said , Italy and some other EU countries say the same? Not quite sure of what you are getting at here Paul?
Thought we were talking about people in boats crossing the channel?

Again its not how many, or could they have stayed in France or somewhere else, its about attempts to enter the UK illegally. I don't think anyone disagrees about finding safer routes, but the processing still needs to done to ensure legality, and as I have said previously it is a political reality now that the boats have to be stopped, in order that proper and long lasting routes into and around the UK can and in political terms, need to be found that garners support from a the vast majority of the public. A tidal wave of people wanting to come to many countries, in particular in Northern Europe is likely to occur over the next fifty years and any system to accommodate this development needs the support of the vast majority of the population.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

Sorry missed out your first sentence

Yes that's what has been said , Italy and some other EU countries say the same? Not quite sure of what you are getting at here Paul?
Thought we were talking about people in boats crossing the channel?

Again its not how many, or could they have stayed in France or somewhere else, its about attempts to enter the UK illegally. I don't think anyone disagrees about finding safer routes, but the processing still needs to done to ensure legality, and as I have said previously it is a political reality now that the boats have to be stopped, in order that proper and long lasting routes into and around the UK can and in political terms, need to be found that garners support from a the vast majority of the public. A tidal wave of people wanting to come to many countries, in particular in Northern Europe is likely to occur over the next fifty years and any system to accommodate this development needs the support of the vast majority of the population.

It's not illegal to claim asylum or to be a refugee.

So you're perfectly happy with the 656k legal immigrants but are worried about 44k people who have desperately tried to get to the Uk by any means they can because they have no safe legal route. Provide a safe legal route and they wouldn't be classed as "illegal" by the UK. Just as well other countries accept refugees.

Should be a million in a few years.

It's actually quite funny how Brexit has had the exact opposite effect of what it was about. Really about - foreigners. Greatly denied at the beginning. Less now.

It's not foreigners we're against, they said, it's that we want a fairer system for everyone, not just Europeans. Well the Europeans have stopped coming (all 500m of them) in the main. Now the whole world can come under a fair system for everybody (shouldn't Farage have a poster with 8 billion refugees on it)?

 

[UnrelatedPsuedo]

it is a political reality now that the boats have to be stopped, in order that proper and long lasting routes into and around the UK can and in political terms, need to be found that garners support from a the vast majority of the public.

As always… No. just no. Wrong end of the telescope. The boats will never stop. Never ever. You don’t need to stop them.

Their number will be hugely diminished if these people can apply without getting in a boat. Let’s stop pretending that the boats are the problem. They are the illustrative example of the wider problem.

Open legal routes. Be grown ups.if For no other reason than stopping forcing desperate people to die. Accept applications through proper channels, at greater numbers. Make it easy and lawful and make it work. Just like all the other adults in the room. That’s not giving over to infinite asylum claims. We don’t take many. Hardly anyone gets in a boat. We have turned into a pisspot scabby little country off the back of this ‘We need to stop the boats’ bullshit. It’s bullshit.

Stop drinking the damn Nazi kool-aid.

 

[Buster15]

Starmer and Labour say to Braverman, why haven't you stopped the boats? The boats aren't the problem. The problem is that there's no safe legal route.

Amazingly they pulled out all the stops for Ukranian refugees or for anyone that makes them look good. The propaganda machine who convinced people of Clacton that the Uk are taking all the refugees and other countries should help. Anything to do with Ukraine the the government tells the people they are leading the way. Good publicity. They believe it all.

Refugees and asylum seekers are entitled to make the claim in the country of their choice. The Uk government don't want them. Because they are geographically perched on the edge of Europe they think they should go to other countries.

Understand the immigration figures about to be released will be around 700k (44k of which will be boat people).

And if people think that the levels of immigration, illegal or otherwise is not palletable, you ain't seen nothing yet...
We all know that climate change is already affecting weather systems. And it is predicted that this will affect sub Saharan Africa badly. Causing crop failure and widespread movement of those people.
In the same way, rising sea levels will also result in widespread movement.

Have to confess that I look forward to my grandchildren future with trepidation.

 

[Buster15]

In Britain you must appeal to racists or you can't succeed?
So what is stopping the Uk setting up legal routes? They did with Ukraine.

And Hong Kong and to a degree Nepal.

 

[Jippy]

As always… No. just no. Wrong end of the telescope. The boats will never stop. Never ever. You don’t need to stop them.

Their number will be hugely diminished if these people can apply without getting in a boat. Let’s stop pretending that the boats are the problem. They are the illustrative example of the wider problem.

Open legal routes. Be grown ups.if For no other reason than stopping forcing desperate people to die. Accept applications through proper channels, at greater numbers. Make it easy and lawful and make it work. Just like all the other adults in the room. That’s not giving over to infinite asylum claims. We don’t take many. Hardly anyone gets in a boat. We have turned into a pisspot scabby little country off the back of this ‘We need to stop the boats’ bullshit. It’s bullshit.

Stop drinking the damn Nazi kool-aid.

Yep, horrible little Englanders fully embracing their far right fantasies.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

And if people think that the levels of immigration, illegal or otherwise is not palletable, you ain't seen nothing yet...
We all know that climate change is already affecting weather systems. And it is predicted that this will affect sub Saharan Africa badly. Causing crop failure and widespread movement of those people.
In the same way, rising sea levels will also result in widespread movement.

Have to confess that I look forward to my grandchildren future with trepidation.

Yes, agree. It will also affect Europe and all countries of the world in varying degrees.

And Hong Kong and to a degree Nepal.

They can do it when they want to.

 

[MoskvaRed]

As always… No. just no. Wrong end of the telescope. The boats will never stop. Never ever. You don’t need to stop them.

Their number will be hugely diminished if these people can apply without getting in a boat. Let’s stop pretending that the boats are the problem. They are the illustrative example of the wider problem.

Open legal routes. Be grown ups.if For no other reason than stopping forcing desperate people to die. Accept applications through proper channels, at greater numbers. Make it easy and lawful and make it work. Just like all the other adults in the room. That’s not giving over to infinite asylum claims. We don’t take many. Hardly anyone gets in a boat. We have turned into a pisspot scabby little country off the back of this ‘We need to stop the boats’ bullshit. It’s bullshit.

Stop drinking the damn Nazi kool-aid.

Well said. The boat “problem“ arises from the fact that it is almost impossible to get to the UK legally if you are a refugee. The issue is exacerbated by our horrible media who make it sound like the UK (or England to be more precise) is the only country accepting refugees.

 

[Buster15]

As always… No. just no. Wrong end of the telescope. The boats will never stop. Never ever. You don’t need to stop them.

Their number will be hugely diminished if these people can apply without getting in a boat. Let’s stop pretending that the boats are the problem. They are the illustrative example of the wider problem.

Open legal routes. Be grown ups.if For no other reason than stopping forcing desperate people to die. Accept applications through proper channels, at greater numbers. Make it easy and lawful and make it work. Just like all the other adults in the room. That’s not giving over to infinite asylum claims. We don’t take many. Hardly anyone gets in a boat. We have turned into a pisspot scabby little country off the back of this ‘We need to stop the boats’ bullshit. It’s bullshit.

Stop drinking the damn Nazi kool-aid.

Correct.
It is the UK government, especially the Home Secretary who has made immigration all about 'The Boats'. And pretending that they care about these people who are having 'to make the dangerous crossing'.
Do they really care.... they don't give a F.
It is all about posturing.
Demonise the boat people and then say you are going to stop them. Utter crap.
And now the truth is going to hit the headlines, with immigration numbers that are going to shock a lot of people.
Especially those people who voted for Brexit on the basis of taking back control of our borders.
Brexit was a CON. And you have been well and truly CONNED.

 

[Buster15]

Well said. The boat “problem“ arises from the fact that it is almost impossible to get to the UK legally if you are a refugee. The issue is exacerbated by our horrible media who make it sound like the UK (or England to be more precise) is the only country accepting refugees.

Indeed. These people are completely ignorant about Southern Italy and Greece.

 

[TheGame]

 

[FireballXL5]

Get in!

Brexit food trade barriers have cost UK households £7bn, report finds

LSE researchers estimate that extra barriers on EU food imports have pushed up bills by £250 on average

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...iers-have-cost-uk-households-7bn-report-finds

 

[golden_blunder]

Of course life will go on , but why do you want to be poorer? Brexit was without doubt the most calamitous mistake in our lifetimes. And it's not easy to rectify. There's only one way. Can't think of a more catastrophic mistake in history. Maybe ignoring Hitler in the 30s - Daily Mail liked Hitler too.

I see you've also bought into the 'illegal immigration and trafficking' nonsense from Braverman. Even Labour have joined in. The brainwashing media still works in the UK. The people in boats is a tiny tiny percentage of the immigration figures and was almost non-existent before Brexit. Illegal immigration is from visa overstayers not refugees and asylum seekers. Most of the trafficking could be stopped if the Uk had a proper safe route system; they won't do it because they want to blame the refugees.

PS Braverman now seems to be blaming overseas students instead

Spend more time talking about a handful of people in a rubber dinghy than the miserable lives of millions. Trump style diversionary tactics working

 

[golden_blunder]

 

[Paul the Wolf]

Spend more time talking about a handful of people in a rubber dinghy than the miserable lives of millions. Trump style diversionary tactics working

It's what Braverman's job is, as given to her by the ERG. "Make them look over there. Everything is their fault, not us."

 

[Paul the Wolf]

The funniest part are the Brexiters' replies with all sorts of graphics trying to prove it's not the case.

 

[Maticmaker]

it's not illegal to claim asylum or to be a refugee.

So you're perfectly happy with the 656k legal immigrants but are worried about 44k people who have desperately tried to get to the Uk by any means they can because they have no safe legal route. Provide a safe legal route and they wouldn't be classed as "illegal" by the UK. Just as well other countries accept refugees.

Its not the status of the asylum seeker or the refugee that is illegal', its trying to entry the country via illegal methods that is.

Yes, there may not be many 'safe' routes, direct from where people are coming from, but there are when they have landed in a safe country. There are some safe passageways, though there are for some still the necessity of queuing. I suspect where people arrive properly documented and present themselves to the authorities they will get processed and become one of the 656k legal immigrants to which you have referred, and they may also have to experience that part of British culture that accepts 'queuing'.

Yes, personally I am happy with the arrival of legal immigrants, Britain will desperately need more, yes perhaps up to a million per year will come. However the vast majority of the British public is unlikely to be persuaded of this, unless the illegal entrants are stopped, 'the boat people' are a high profile and visible part of this spectrum of illegal entry, and so the government, any government will have to been seen to get on top of this first, its a 'no brainer'.

The public has to be persuaded, not 'brow-beaten,' into understanding for many reasons immigration into the UK will need to increase, for everyone's benefit, and also because of climate change, in the next fifty years will see increases in migration from certain places, at an almost exponential rate. Therefore it has to be global coordinated and above all operate on legal framework that takes account of the forces that cause these dramatic changes.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

Its not the status of the asylum seeker or the refugee that is illegal', its trying to entry the country via illegal methods that is.

Yes, there may not be many 'safe' routes, direct from where people are coming from, but there are when they have landed in a safe country. There are some safe passageways, though there are for some still the necessity of queuing. I suspect where people arrive properly documented and present themselves to the authorities they will get processed and become one of the 656k legal immigrants to which you have referred, and they may also have to experience that part of British culture that accepts 'queuing'.

Yes, personally I am happy with the arrival of legal immigrants, Britain will desperately need more, yes perhaps up to a million per year will come. However the vast majority of the British public is unlikely to be persuaded of this, unless the illegal entrants are stopped, 'the boat people' are a high profile and visible part of this spectrum of illegal entry, and so the government, any government will have to been seen to get on top of this first, its a 'no brainer'.

The public has to be persuaded, not 'brow-beaten,' into understanding for many reasons immigration into the UK will need to increase, for everyone's benefit, and also because of climate change, in the next fifty years will see increases in migration from certain places, at an almost exponential rate. Therefore it has to be global coordinated and above all operate on legal framework that takes account of the forces that cause these dramatic changes.

As soon as they are picked up they claim asylum, that's what they're entitled to do. I pointed out to you yesterday - say they landed in France first. France won't be the first safe country but anyway; There is no way they can claim asylum in Britain because there is no legal route. What you are saying is that because they have landed in France first they should claim asylum in France.

That's the whole point. the UK make it impossible for them to claim asylum in the UK hoping that they will claim it elsewhere.
The whole purpose of the Uk government is to distract the public's attention towards a few thousand refugees, most of whose claims will be accepted eventually.
You never know they might actually do the jobs that are needed to be done and pay taxes.

Hope you realise that some of the traffickers are based in the UK - any news on the Uk authorities arresting them? French and other EU police have stopped far more than have actually gone across.

 

[Maticmaker]

What you are saying is that because they have landed in France first they should claim asylum in France.

As far as I am aware that is the accepted situation, the first safe country they land in is the one to apply for asylum.

However the issue isn't really asylum its the illegal entry, or as some have taken to calling it, the 'irregular entry,' it sounds better, but it is still about legality. It's true many people attempt many illegal ways, to get into the UK, hidden on vehicles, and on trains etc. not all are asylum candidates, and as you point out the people coming on boats are only a fraction of those attempting to enter illegally, but they are the most visible, and probably attempting the most dangerous non-legal routes, which puts themselves and others sent out to rescue them in the busy shipping lanes of the Channel, at risk.

The public want it stopped and it hands the Tories a massive whip hand to use, for 'spoiling' tactics at the coming GE. I doubt they will stop Labour winning the next election, but they will try to make sure they don't have a sizeable majority. Once more a weakened Labour Government will have to try to turn the tide of years of Tory mismanagement.

For me Starmer, whatever his other faults, is playing the long game on the aftermath of Brexit and of what to do about the Boat people, hinting at things, deriding the Rwanda solution etc.but still keeping his main eggs in the cost of living basket.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

As far as I am aware that is the accepted situation, the first safe country they land in is the one to apply for asylum.

However the issue isn't really asylum its the illegal entry, or as some have taken to calling it, the 'irregular entry,' it sounds better, but it is still about legality. It's true many people attempt many illegal ways, to get into the UK, hidden on vehicles, and on trains etc. not all are asylum candidates, and as you point out the people coming on boats are only a fraction of those attempting to enter illegally, but they are the most visible, and probably attempting the most dangerous non-legal routes, which puts themselves and others sent out to rescue them in the busy shipping lanes of the Channel, at risk.

The public want it stopped and it hands the Tories a massive whip hand to use, for 'spoiling' tactics at the coming GE. I doubt they will stop Labour winning the next election, but they will try to make sure they don't have a sizeable majority. Once more a weakened Labour Government will have to try to turn the tide of years of Tory mismanagement.

For me Starmer, whatever his other faults, is playing the long game on the aftermath of Brexit and of what to do about the Boat people, hinting at things, deriding the Rwanda solution etc.but still keeping his main eggs in the cost of living basket.

But as I said France isn't the first safe country; Probably the eighth or ninth on the trip and France takes far more refugees than the UK as do other countries like Germany. Which country do you think Suella or Keir will persuade to take them as they don't want any.

 

[TheGame]

 

[Maticmaker]

But as I said France isn't the first safe country; Probably the eighth or ninth on the trip and France takes far more refugees than the UK as do other countries like Germany. Which country do you think Suella or Keir will persuade to take them as they don't want any.

Then that is France's problem, seems like everyone is in the 'same boat', excuse the pun. Besides France and Germany have a lot more space and being a part of the EU you would imagine, e.g. freedom to travel, etc. a lot more things to offer, actually its a wonder they all don't want to stay there? You have to ask yourself why would anyone want to come to the racialist, homophobic, misogynist, nationalistic, 'lovers of queuing' etc. UK.

However choice of country is not really the problem, illegal entry is the problem and until it 'headline' grabbers (e.g. Boat people) is solved serious discussions about migration, that is every bit as important as climate change measures, especially over the next fifty years, cannot commence, certainly not in the UK.

The Tory's know this and will 'work the angle' mercilessly over the next few months. The UK needs immigration, as people will eventually see once the illegality of the boat people is put to rest. Starmer has to be very careful and at the moment there is hardly a 'fag packet' thickness between the two main parties. The nonsense about Rwanda will fade.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

Then that is France's problem, seems like everyone is in the 'same boat', excuse the pun. Besides France and Germany have a lot more space and being a part of the EU you would imagine, e.g. freedom to travel, etc. a lot more things to offer, actually its a wonder they all don't want to stay there? You have to ask yourself why would anyone want to come to the racialist, homophobic, misogynist, nationalistic, 'lovers of queuing' etc. UK.

However choice of country is not really the problem, illegal entry is the problem and until it 'headline' grabbers (e.g. Boat people) is solved serious discussions about migration, that is every bit as important as climate change measures, especially over the next fifty years, cannot commence, certainly not in the UK.

The Tory's know this and will 'work the angle' mercilessly over the next few months. The UK needs immigration, as people will eventually see once the illegality of the boat people is put to rest. Starmer has to be very careful and at the moment there is hardly a 'fag packet' thickness between the two main parties. The nonsense about Rwanda will fade.

At what point do they become illegal, as soon as they set foot anywhere outside the country they're fleeing from?

The reasons usually stated are they have relatives in the UK, they speak English or maybe they fell for the adverts saying they would be staying in 5 star hotels, get free money, get houses. Farage is a good salesman.

So why should other countries take the refugees who want to come to the UK on top of the many more they are already taking.
We're not talking about Europeans. We are staying here, more Europeans are leaving the UK than going there, if you look at the latest figures. The Uk told them they're not welcome. They want immigrants from everywhere else. They got what they wanted.

 

[Maticmaker]

At what point do they become illegal, as soon as they set foot anywhere outside the country they're fleeing from?

No, the first safe country they arrive at they should claim asylum, it's not difficult to understand, when they come to the UK from France or another country other than their own, they are leaving a safe country and Its the method of attempted entry that is illegal.
If they have legitimate reasons for coming from a safe country to the UK, relatives, or the simply want to settle in the UK, etc. then the information that is required needs to be presented at the appropriate point, presumable the British Embassy in the country they are in. Yes, they will have to wait, but its in a safe country their lives are not being threatened.
High profile continued illegal entry routes, like the small boats, are doing a dis-service to all legitimate immigrants, including asylum seekers.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

No, the first safe country they arrive at they should claim asylum, its not difficult to understand, when they come to the UK from France or another country other than there own, they are leaving a safe country and Its the method of attempted entry that is illegal.
If they have legitimate reasons for coming from a safe country to the UK, relatives, or the simply want to settle in the UK, etc. then the information that is required needs to be presented at the appropriate point, presumable the British Embassy in the country they are in. Yes they will have to wait, but its in a safe country their lives are not being threatened.
High profile continued illegal entry routes, like the small boats, are doing a dis-service to all legitimate immigrants, including asylum seekers.

Italy or Greece, Turkey you mean, this is where this conversation started. The asylum seekers are those in the small boats, they're not illegal immigrants; Suella is doing a good job on the Uk electorate. There is no legal route. the British embassies or otherwise are not interested. This is where we came in.

 

[Wibble]

At what point do they become illegal

Brown people who arrive by boat = illegal.

Illegal = right wingers demonising refugees.

 

[maniak]

No, the first safe country they arrive at they should claim asylum, it's not difficult to understand, when they come to the UK from France or another country other than their own, they are leaving a safe country and Its the method of attempted entry that is illegal.

Can you show me where does it say this is illegal? Because online I keep seeing the 1951 Refugee Convention being mentioned, which apparently doesn't require anyone to ask for asylum in any specific place.

 

[Jericholyte2]

Its not the status of the asylum seeker or the refugee that is illegal', its trying to entry the country via illegal methods that is.

Yes, there may not be many 'safe' routes, direct from where people are coming from, but there are when they have landed in a safe country. There are some safe passageways, though there are for some still the necessity of queuing. I suspect where people arrive properly documented and present themselves to the authorities they will get processed and become one of the 656k legal immigrants to which you have referred, and they may also have to experience that part of British culture that accepts 'queuing'.

Yes, personally I am happy with the arrival of legal immigrants, Britain will desperately need more, yes perhaps up to a million per year will come. However the vast majority of the British public is unlikely to be persuaded of this, unless the illegal entrants are stopped, 'the boat people' are a high profile and visible part of this spectrum of illegal entry, and so the government, any government will have to been seen to get on top of this first, its a 'no brainer'.

The public has to be persuaded, not 'brow-beaten,' into understanding for many reasons immigration into the UK will need to increase, for everyone's benefit, and also because of climate change, in the next fifty years will see increases in migration from certain places, at an almost exponential rate. Therefore it has to be global coordinated and above all operate on legal framework that takes account of the forces that cause these dramatic changes.

If they’re ‘illegal’ as you claim then why, when picked up, are they sent to an asylum processing centre and not arrested?

There are four ‘peoples’ for whom there is a ‘safe & legal route’, could you name them?

Also, flip this the other way. If you had to flee, only spoke English, how would feel if some Herbert was going on about how you could only go to France and had to settle there? Surely you’d want to settle somewhere that you had the best chance of starting a new life, right?

 

[Paul the Wolf]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...line-of-tory-pms-failing-to-cut-net-migration

This has led to a change in the workforce coming to the UK. Post-Brexit, Indians account for more than a third of those coming to the UK on long-term visas. Many of the Polish workers who arrived in the early 2000s have left.

Because there has been a move towards allowing skilled workers, who tend to be older and less transient, many of those arriving now bring their families.

The Resolution Foundation has pointed out that the net migration rise has been entirely driven by non-EU workers, whose numbers are up by 220,000.

 

[Maticmaker]

The asylum seekers are those in the small boats, they're not illegal immigrants;

If they set sail from their own country and came directly to the UK they may be a case can be made, but this is not what happens, you know it, they know it and the general public in the UK knows it... this method of trying to circumvent the legal routes, is setting the whole issue of a proper immigration debate further and further back.

If they’re ‘illegal’ as you claim then why, when picked up, are they sent to an asylum processing centre and not arrested?

I have tried to point out previously it is not they who are illegal, it's the attempted method of entry operated by people traffickers which is illegal. If the traffickers could be picked up I am sure they would be arrested. The plight of many desperate people is being exploited by people traffickers/criminals and as long as the small boats continue to arrive the real issue of establishing the necessary safe routes is put back, because it remains 'a live' issue in politics, which the Tories will continue to exploit.

This has led to a change in the workforce coming to the UK. Post-Brexit, Indians account for more than a third of those coming to the UK on long-term visas. Many of the Polish workers who arrived in the early 2000s have left.

Because there has been a move towards allowing skilled workers, who tend to be older and less transient, many of those arriving now bring their families.

The Resolution Foundation has pointed out that the net migration rise has been entirely driven by non-EU workers, whose numbers are up by 220,000.

Both these statements are true, well done Paul.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

If they set sail from their own country and came directly to the UK they may be a case can be made, but this is not what happens, you know it, they know it and the general public in the UK knows it... this method of trying to circumvent the legal routes, is setting the whole issue of a proper immigration debate further and further back.



I have tried to point out previously it is not they who are illegal, it's the attempted method of entry operated by people traffickers which is illegal. If the traffickers could be picked up I am sure they would be arrested. The plight of many desperate people is being exploited by people traffickers/criminals and as long as the small boats continue to arrive the real issue of establishing the necessary safe routes is put back, because it remains 'a live' issue in politics, which the Tories will continue to exploit.



Both these statements are true, well done Paul.

How do you circumvent a legal route which does not exist. More than a dozen times this has been said. There is no legal route. They pay some trafficker who is part of a chain of passers , some of whom will be British and they will be passed down the line, dumped on beach in france given a dinghy which has probably been bought somewhere on route, could be any country and told to cross the channel. Either they'll be pciked by by the coastguard or they'll meet the trafficker in the UK.

I didn't write those statements, they are in the article.

So you now have far more older immigrants plus their families from all over the world who will not do the jobs that are needed, the jobs that the British don't want to do, but compete with the British who have been trained by Starmer or Johnson to do those jobs.

But at least you've got rid of all the Europeans who did the jobs that were needed. Net immigration would be much more if the Europeans hadn't left.

Absolutely brilliant strategy.

Should give Farage an award, presented live on the BBC, for being the person who contributed the most for increasing immigration in the UK.

 

[Abizzz]

If they set sail from their own country and came directly to the UK they may be a case can be made, but this is not what happens, you know it, they know it and the general public in the UK knows it... this method of trying to circumvent the legal routes, is setting the whole issue of a proper immigration debate further and further back.

No one gives about what the UK wants anymore. If the UK want it to stop they need to come up with a plan that is beneficial to everyone that gets it to stop. Nobodoy outside the UK cares whether the UK thinks someone is legal or not. If someone is illegal here let them go to the UK... Why would I care? Why help someone in their populist charade who's constantly been a pain for a decade?

The country that used to rule the waves is now scared of an invasion of haphazard dinghys.

 

[caid]

As far as I am aware that is the accepted situation, the first safe country they land in is the one to apply for asylum.

However the issue isn't really asylum its the illegal entry, or as some have taken to calling it, the 'irregular entry,' it sounds better, but it is still about legality. It's true many people attempt many illegal ways, to get into the UK, hidden on vehicles, and on trains etc. not all are asylum candidates, and as you point out the people coming on boats are only a fraction of those attempting to enter illegally, but they are the most visible, and probably attempting the most dangerous non-legal routes, which puts themselves and others sent out to rescue them in the busy shipping lanes of the Channel, at risk.

The public want it stopped and it hands the Tories a massive whip hand to use, for 'spoiling' tactics at the coming GE. I doubt they will stop Labour winning the next election, but they will try to make sure they don't have a sizeable majority. Once more a weakened Labour Government will have to try to turn the tide of years of Tory mismanagement.

For me Starmer, whatever his other faults, is playing the long game on the aftermath of Brexit and of what to do about the Boat people, hinting at things, deriding the Rwanda solution etc.but still keeping his main eggs in the cost of living basket.

Nope. They can seek asylum whereever they wish.
Fundamental misunderstanding there and i think if you thought it through the reasoning behind it is pretty obvious.

 

[Maticmaker]

How do you circumvent a legal route which does not exist. More than a dozen times this has been said. There is no legal route. They pay some trafficker who is part of a chain of passers , some of whom will be British and they will be passed down the line, dumped on beach in france given a dinghy which has probably been bought somewhere on route, could be any country and told to cross the channel. Either they'll be pciked by by the coastguard or they'll meet the trafficker in the UK.

I didn't write those statements, they are in the article.

So you now have far more older immigrants plus their families from all over the world who will not do the jobs that are needed, the jobs that the British don't want to do, but compete with the British who have been trained by Starmer or Johnson to do those jobs.

But at least you've got rid of all the Europeans who did the jobs that were needed. Net immigration would be much more if the Europeans hadn't left.

Absolutely brilliant strategy.

Should give Farage an award, presented live on the BBC, for being the person who contributed the most for increasing immigration in the UK.

Yes, even that is possible, once the issues surrounding immigration are clarified and a proper system in place... the statement presented with the award will read something like .. "In the late 20th and early 21st Century he brought about a popular focus on the subject of immigration in the UK, whilst being misguided in his approach Nigel Farage was nevertheless the man whose involvement became the cataylst for change".