Multiple deaths in Channel dinghy accident

Tom_Boro

Well-known member
Not if we settled them in Cyprus on our air bases which is the alternative.

That’s not true the French have no right detaining people in transit and no legal reason for doing so, to reach France you have to cross other sovereign states unless you’re seeking asylum from Monaco, Luxembourg, Germany, Belgium, Switzerland, Italy, Spain or Andorra, the situation isn’t one of payment it’s one of the right of every individual has to chose where they claim asylum.
No way they will settle them in the Cypriot airbases unless they have abandoned some. They are literally the hub for all operations in the middle East.

Abandoned barracks in Germany would be better but its getting them there.
 

coluka

Well-known member
I am exasperated at the comments on here. Firstly, i support the need for our country to take its fair share of asylum seekers.

Here is where people will gasp.

If we have an open door policy as many on here push, who is going to pay for housing, education and health. It is hard enough for local people to cope and access social affordable housing. Who will balance need and at what cost to taxation. Are you happy that countrywide we pay 3p extra to cover the cost? Will those on low wages be willing?

If we help those keen to come to the UK will it just encourage more to exacerbate the problem. Why do the asylum seekers target the UK over France, Germany, Belgium, Netherlands et al?

The elephant in the room is ignored by most on this board, fairness, affordability, social need of our own society, taxation, service provision, access to dentistry, GP’s, Schools, housing.

We struggle to support indigenous population how do we agree to cover our own needs and take responsibility for those that pass through safe countries?

I come in peace and hope i do not receive a one sided argument that fails to address the issues raised.

Personally, we are a basket case that has caused our issues. We need to support more acceptance of genuine migrants especially from nations we have bombed and caused to flee
 

MolteniArcore

Well-known member
I am exasperated at the comments on here. Firstly, i support the need for our country to take its fair share of asylum seekers.

Here is where people will gasp.

If we have an open door policy as many on here push, who is going to pay for housing, education and health. It is hard enough for local people to cope and access social affordable housing. Who will balance need and at what cost to taxation. Are you happy that countrywide we pay 3p extra to cover the cost? Will those on low wages be willing?

If we help those keen to come to the UK will it just encourage more to exacerbate the problem. Why do the asylum seekers target the UK over France, Germany, Belgium, Netherlands et al?

The elephant in the room is ignored by most on this board, fairness, affordability, social need of our own society, taxation, service provision, access to dentistry, GP’s, Schools, housing.

We struggle to support indigenous population how do we agree to cover our own needs and take responsibility for those that pass through safe countries?

I come in peace and hope i do not receive a one sided argument that fails to address the issues raised.

Personally, we are a basket case that has caused our issues. We need to support more acceptance of genuine migrants especially from nations we have bombed and caused to flee

I haven’t read any post on here that advocates an open door policy.

And the UK isn’t that attractive - it’s a tiny number of people who are trying to c9me here compared to all the refugees in the world.

Your last point is interesting. ‘Genuine Migrants’ you say. Well many of them died yesterday on a boat. The Government doesn’t allow any migrants in, never mind genuine ones.

Migrants come over here and contribute. Their taxes would pay for the doctors and schools if the Government properly managed the system.
 

JM14

Well-known member
I am exasperated at the comments on here. Firstly, i support the need for our country to take its fair share of asylum seekers.

Here is where people will gasp.

If we have an open door policy as many on here push, who is going to pay for housing, education and health. It is hard enough for local people to cope and access social affordable housing. Who will balance need and at what cost to taxation. Are you happy that countrywide we pay 3p extra to cover the cost? Will those on low wages be willing?

If we help those keen to come to the UK will it just encourage more to exacerbate the problem. Why do the asylum seekers target the UK over France, Germany, Belgium, Netherlands et al?

The elephant in the room is ignored by most on this board, fairness, affordability, social need of our own society, taxation, service provision, access to dentistry, GP’s, Schools, housing.

We struggle to support indigenous population how do we agree to cover our own needs and take responsibility for those that pass through safe countries?

I come in peace and hope i do not receive a one sided argument that fails to address the issues raised.

Personally, we are a basket case that has caused our issues. We need to support more acceptance of genuine migrants especially from nations we have bombed and caused to flee
Worth remembering we absolutely could fund significantly further social housing, education, healthcare etc. Its just clearly not a priority of this government

Personally I would be happy to significantly increase my contributions to cover this
 

viv_andersons_nana

Well-known member
Have any of the gangs arranging these crossings ever been caught, imprisoned. Surely the authorities must know who they are or could find out with a bit of effort. Undoubtedly if caught there would only be some other unscrupulous criminal filling their shoes but it just feels like no one is attempting to close down these gangs. I appreciate this is only one part of an undoubtedly complex problem.
The gangs arranging these crossings are in government.
 

Unravel_Morrison

Well-known member
I am exasperated at the comments on here. Firstly, i support the need for our country to take its fair share of asylum seekers.

Here is where people will gasp.

If we have an open door policy as many on here push, who is going to pay for housing, education and health. It is hard enough for local people to cope and access social affordable housing. Who will balance need and at what cost to taxation. Are you happy that countrywide we pay 3p extra to cover the cost? Will those on low wages be willing?

If we help those keen to come to the UK will it just encourage more to exacerbate the problem. Why do the asylum seekers target the UK over France, Germany, Belgium, Netherlands et al?

The elephant in the room is ignored by most on this board, fairness, affordability, social need of our own society, taxation, service provision, access to dentistry, GP’s, Schools, housing.

We struggle to support indigenous population how do we agree to cover our own needs and take responsibility for those that pass through safe countries?

I come in peace and hope i do not receive a one sided argument that fails to address the issues raised.

Personally, we are a basket case that has caused our issues. We need to support more acceptance of genuine migrants especially from nations we have bombed and caused to flee
All this has done is show you've fallen for a con. If we were taking our share, the numbers would be more.

We don't struggle to do any of the domestic things that we should do because of a lack of resources. That we don't is a politically ideological choice. We can help the homeless, we can do school dinners, have Sure Start centres. We can do all of it.

Problem is that there's little profit to be made from it. So, they fall down the priority order.

As for the refugees, I don't understand why people (not you Col but plenty of others) don't just admit they're racist; they don't want any foreigners here.

We take fewer people, people than anywhere else.

Let's have a debate and see how we 'allocate' these people and see how those people and their families.

Any fair system will see us bring in far more people than the current system, so it suits the government to argue about it. The current opposition are complicit with this narrative and need to grow up.
 

Paintolerance

Active member
Some boring numbers on Asylum Seekers

Year to March 21...we took 37k, France 93k, Germany 122k. Per head of population, we are 17th in UK/EU

4 out of 5 stay in country of displacement. Hence why Turkey have 3.7m!

Asylum seekers cannot work in the UK. They do receive housing (not 5 star hotels, but 'difficult to let' properties) and are due a whopping £5.64 a day for food/sanitisation/clothing

That's from the U.N. and took me 5 minutes to find this morning. Now Farage and his merry men may disagree but to me:

We don't take our fair share
We don't make the UK an easy touch once they are here
The vast majority have no interest in getting here

That would appear to be the facts, versus right wing anti foreigner rhetoric
 

The_Tiler

Active member
Some boring numbers on Asylum Seekers

Year to March 21...we took 37k, France 93k, Germany 122k. Per head of population, we are 17th in UK/EU

4 out of 5 stay in country of displacement. Hence why Turkey have 3.7m!

Asylum seekers cannot work in the UK. They do receive housing (not 5 star hotels, but 'difficult to let' properties) and are due a whopping £5.64 a day for food/sanitisation/clothing

That's from the U.N. and took me 5 minutes to find this morning. Now Farage and his merry men may disagree but to me:

We don't take our fair share
We don't make the UK an easy touch once they are here
The vast majority have no interest in getting here

That would appear to be the facts, versus right wing anti foreigner rhetoric
I have to disagree about the housing part.
Two hotels where I live, one 4 star and one three star, is full of migrants, and have been foe two years.
 

MolteniArcore

Well-known member
Some boring numbers on Asylum Seekers

Year to March 21...we took 37k, France 93k, Germany 122k. Per head of population, we are 17th in UK/EU

4 out of 5 stay in country of displacement. Hence why Turkey have 3.7m!

Asylum seekers cannot work in the UK. They do receive housing (not 5 star hotels, but 'difficult to let' properties) and are due a whopping £5.64 a day for food/sanitisation/clothing

That's from the U.N. and took me 5 minutes to find this morning. Now Farage and his merry men may disagree but to me:

We don't take our fair share
We don't make the UK an easy touch once they are here
The vast majority have no interest in getting here

That would appear to be the facts, versus right wing anti foreigner rhetoric

This is the truth - the truth that many forget when they can express their destain with how their lives are going so blame the poor and the foreigners.

People need to wake up and find the humanity inside of them. I'm sure it's there somewhere.
 

MolteniArcore

Well-known member
I have to disagree about the housing part.
Two hotels where I live, one 4 star and one three star, is full of migrants, and have been foe two years.

And I bet they get a free bar, room service, sheets replaced daily, Sky TV, use of the pool and all Spa facilities... well worth risking a channel crossing for... :rolleyes:

(He did say 5 star hotels... not 3 and 4 star ones, so how can you disagree btw unless you are making some kind of backhanded anti-migrant comment?)
 

The_Tiler

Active member
And I bet they get a free bar, room service, sheets replaced daily, Sky TV, use of the pool and all Spa facilities... well worth risking a channel crossing for... :rolleyes:

(He did say 5 star hotels... not 3 and 4 star ones, so how can you disagree btw unless you are making some kind of backhanded anti-migrant comment?)
Erm, I think you are trying to imply that I am making an anti-migrant comment. I'd like you to take that back please, with an apology.

I merely pointed out that hotels are used to house migrants, difficult to let properties may be used in the long run, but short term, hotels are used.
 

American_Mary

Well-known member
Great idea but we have no agreement with other countries to ‘send the buggers back’. And from the tone of Johnson’s letter tonight I can’t see France agreeing to one!
You wouldn't have asylum seekers in France if the embassy model was adopted they would be in neighbouring or nearby countries from where they were displaced and if their application was refused they would return to the country where the embassy they applied for is based, there is no perfect solution I just feel allowing embassies the status to start the asylum process gets rid of the need for the vast majority of people to travel, if you look at the nationalities of those on these boats you can probably narrow it down even further to areas that need special attention.

Here is a list of the numbers from each country where we have more than a thousand applications per year and the percentage we accept as you can see the numbers are a lot smaller than the press would have you believe.

Iran, 4,199, granted asylum 73%, total 3,065
Iraq, 3,281, granted asylum 49%, total 1,607
Albania, 3,071, granted asylum, 38%, total 1,167
Eritrea, 2,604, granted asylum, 80%, total 2,083
Sudan, 2,153, granted asylum, 76% total 1,636
Syria, 1,746, granted asylum, 88%, total 1,536
Afghanistan, 1,546, granted asylum 68%, total 1,051
Pakistan, 1,525, granted asylum 36%, total 549
India, 1,046, granted asylum 6%, total 63
El Salvador, 1,043, granted asylum 67%, total 699
Nigeria, 1,015, granted asylum 31%, total 315

(Source Home Office Immigration Stats)

In terms of refugees who are being resettled then we the following stats.

Syria, 19,964
Somalia, 1,957
Iraq, 1,950
Democratic Republic of Congo, 1,774
Sudan, 1,133
Ethiopia, 1,055
Bhutan, 359
Eritrea, 298
Afghanistan 289
Occupied Palestinian Territories 225

With exception of resettled Syrian refugees, there are 11 million displaced Syrians due to the war worldwide, the numbers represent that the issue is disproportionate to the coverage it receives, it's an agenda created for a reason that is simply political, we have 400k Brits resettling abroad each year but you never see any coverage of that.
 

changingman

Well-known member
The short-termist reaction in almost all of this morning's dailies is abhorrent.
I am exasperated at the comments on here. Firstly, i support the need for our country to take its fair share of asylum seekers.

Here is where people will gasp.

If we have an open door policy as many on here push, who is going to pay for housing, education and health. It is hard enough for local people to cope and access social affordable housing. Who will balance need and at what cost to taxation. Are you happy that countrywide we pay 3p extra to cover the cost? Will those on low wages be willing?

If we help those keen to come to the UK will it just encourage more to exacerbate the problem. Why do the asylum seekers target the UK over France, Germany, Belgium, Netherlands et al?

The elephant in the room is ignored by most on this board, fairness, affordability, social need of our own society, taxation, service provision, access to dentistry, GP’s, Schools, housing.

We struggle to support indigenous population how do we agree to cover our own needs and take responsibility for those that pass through safe countries?

I come in peace and hope i do not receive a one sided argument that fails to address the issues raised.

Personally, we are a basket case that has caused our issues. We need to support more acceptance of genuine migrants especially from nations we have bombed and caused to flee
I would argue that we struggle to support our indigenous population *by choice*

If society were structured correctly it wouldn't be an issue. The imposition of an unequal society by consecutive Conservative governments is one of the best ways to force the "immigrant issue" onto people.
 

MolteniArcore

Well-known member
Erm, I think you are trying to imply that I am making an anti-migrant comment. I'd like you to take that back please, with an apology.

I merely pointed out that hotels are used to house migrants, difficult to let properties may be used in the long run, but short term, hotels are used.

I'm not trying to be incendiary here but if you don't want your post to appear that way maybe edit it, rather than disagreeing you could have just commented that local to you migrants are staying in hotels (and maybe that's fine, maybe you don't agree with it, neither of these views are anti).

You have explained why it isn't one in your response and everyone will take that on board. I didn't imply you made one, I asked if it was, and you have said no. I accept that and I hope you accept my acknowledgement that it is not.

It's nice that we are both on the same page with regards to the dreadful plight that faces these migrants and the disgusting way that the Government is handling it.
 

MolteniArcore

Well-known member
I merely pointed out that hotels are used to house migrants, difficult to let properties may be used in the long run, but short term, hotels are used.

I tell you what though, I really wished that we put homeless people in hotels like we did during the first lockdown, but that's another topic!

I have had a bit to do with temp accommodation through work and it is easy to do, it's all about funding.
 

SmallTown

Well-known member
I have to disagree about the housing part.
Two hotels where I live, one 4 star and one three star, is full of migrants, and have been foe two years.
The country is full of migrants though. Or do you mean illegal immigrants? Or asylum seekers? Or just "people" well do.

That's the problem with this hate filled rhetoric that a lot of you same to be so swayed by. You interchange words with different meanings hoping to make them all sound pejorative. Creating this false bogeyman so the real people destroying this country can get away with it.

Try what I said earlier: Try changing the "migrant" and all the other emotive words you use to the word "humans" or, at worst, "ex-pats" (because that's what they are) and so if it changes your view.

If you try and alter your mind from the right wing narrative the media has given you and think for yourself you might think differently. Just try it, use the word "human" next time you complain about migrants and see how it makes you look.
 

Norman_Conquest

Well-known member
I haven’t read any post on here that advocates an open door policy.

And the UK isn’t that attractive - it’s a tiny number of people who are trying to c9me here compared to all the refugees in the world.

Your last point is interesting. ‘Genuine Migrants’ you say. Well many of them died yesterday on a boat. The Government doesn’t allow any migrants in, never mind genuine ones.

Migrants come over here and contribute. Their taxes would pay for the doctors and schools if the Government properly managed the system.
Unfortunately, people seeking asylum don't pay taxes because our governments, past and present, prevent them from working until they have been fully accepted into the country. This can be a lengthy process and takes away the dignity of these people.

We have over a million vacancies that some of the people housed in detention centres, etc could fill and many would be happy to do so. This would allow them to contribute and integrate into our society and as SmallTown says, it might also remove some of the prejudice barriers we put up.
 

Norman_Conquest

Well-known member
And there you have it. Johnson writes an incendiary letter to Macron, makes it public and as a result we are no longer invited to joint talks on the issue.

That wasn't an attempt at a fix. It was a deliberate play to his, let's say, Nationalistic base.

Political gain over human life. Disgusting
Johnson is so use to riding rough shot over people and getting his own way, he is publishing his thoughts before he’s even discussed them with his French counterparts.

He is making us a laughing stock of the world.
 
Top
X