27 people confirmed to have died after boat sinks in the channel
 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/li...latest-updates

Tragic. So unnecessary.

Awful.

Jesus.

RIP all :(

Tragic but also inevitable but most of all very avoidable. Our Government along with the French have blood on their hands.

How so? People in France attempt to enter the UK illegally and die doing so, how is that our fault?

If our govt and the french worked together as opposed to spending the vast amount of time politically posturing we may have been able to put processes in place to at the least reduce people smuggling.

RIP

We know these dangerous attempts to cross the Channel occur almost daily. Home Office even provides the migrants with smartphones for application purposes before they've arrived. We should by now be providing them safe travel.

The UK government is as complicit as the French government.

All of this. But especially the RIP.

How terrible.

What I don't understand is how many boat shops are there in Calais.
They must be making a fortune - why do the governments not clamp down of these people ?

Also, what happens to all the boats the UK Border Forces collect?

You would hope that an incident like this will get the U.K. and French governments to do something to resolve the situation.

You hope……..

Wave machines?

Over 30 people now known to have died.

“My thoughts are with the families of all of those who have tragically lost their lives in French waters today.“

What is the relevance of whose waters these desperate refugees drowned in?

Our Home Secretary thinks it’s important.

Will it help Boris?

Sadly, probably yes

Bombing their homelands back into the stone ages doesn’t help with the numbers of those seeking a better life from the rubble of Kandahar.

And then as others have said, we spend taxpayer money on photo shoots for the Daily Mail rather than workable solutions to suit everybody (well, grown-ups at least).

Sadly you know this terrible human being was pulling that awful smirk when she said this. Whoever votes for her and her ilk also have blood on their hands.

Terribly sad. I thought Angela Raynor's words were right though.

“Human beings. Men, women, children. Mothers, fathers, daughters, sons. They loved and were loved. In other words they were just like us. An unconscionable tragedy.”

I don't think this is a thread to get into a political slanging match but unfortunately this whole situation has a lot to do with politics, global politics.

It shouldn’t be political. It should simply be about humanity.

I deliberately started the thread outside the politics forum. This is a matter for us all whatever our political beliefs. Humanity and human lives are at stake.

Well said by rayner but would be good to hear her leader speak like that....or any leader.

Not attempting to enter the UK illegally. Just trying to reach what they believe to be a fair country where they can apply for asylum/humanitarian protection to live peacefully. And dying attempting to do so. It's wrong. RIP.

The French must be held to account for this

Why?

100% spot on. Terrible tragedy. RIP

Just tragic.

Awful. Can’t imagine the horror.

Does anyone know the reason why the French police sat and watched these poor people board a dinghy and set sail without doing anything about it? Absolutely disgraceful. Imagine if it was the English police that did that.

Here we ate 20 years on with the same issues. The French and English goverments playing power games instead of working together and coming to a resulotion to stop things like this happening.
The most sad thing is that there are people making money out of these people miserery and desperation.

How is it illegal? I understand that the government is planning to make it illegal, but presumably it is not at present.

People smuggling isn’t illegal?

People smuggling is, claiming asylum isn't.

I post this in the hope that some people will be educated by it.

And also because it makes Julia Hartley Brewer look ludicrous.

https://twitter.com/miffythegamer/st...252989442?s=21

Yes I am aware of that.

My question was ‘does anyone know why the French police stood and watched these people get into a dinghy and set sail’. It was quite clear and obvious what these people were doing, why weren’t they stopped?

I don’t think that’s an unreasonable question to ask. There would be plenty asking it if these poor people had boarded a dinghy in Dover under the watchful eye of the English police, would there not?

She is one of the populist hard of thinking.

That was a different dinghy. Channel 4 filmed the incident and that particular dinghy arrived safely.

The uk policy on only allowing asylum victims to claim asylum on uk soil is disgraceful when we refuse to make safe passage for asylum seekers. With a below zero net immigration status it is a policy engineered to appeal to brexiteers and gammons.

Not difficult to do for people with a decent knowledge of the actual facts of the horrific situation. Sadly, due to the general level of knowledge in the population, the like of JHB, Patel etc etc exploit that situation to stoke outrage and political advantage.

Makes you wonder what their take on Kindertransport or the Ugandan refugees would have been? They’d probably have told the Jewish refugee children to have stopped in France…

In that scenario, what powers would the UK OB have to stop a boat leaving Dover?

The point remains though. It seems unlikely to me that a dinghy setting sail from Calais to UK with migrants on board wouldn’t have people smugglers involved. You would expect the French police to intervene on that basis would you not?

The French and UK govts need their heads banging together to sort this out. The fact they can’t sort out who’s allowed to go fishing where, doesn’t give me a lot of hope they will.

If those people were being smuggled out? If they found 30 people in the back of a lorry at Dover, would they simply waive it on to the ferry?

Agreed, and Patel’s needless and shameless addition of “French waters” when describing this tragedy was a blatant attempt to shift the blame for this tragedy away from these shores.

Rather than attempt to find a solution she simply seeks to shift the blame.

And as we can see people are falling for it already.

Interesting stats that the government likes to brush under the carpet in this -

https://www.unhcr.org/uk/asylum-in-the-uk.html

The whole situation is horrendous from every angle and needs a truly international response which sadly will never come. A glance at the stats in the UNHCR piece for example shows that Iraq (which we are to a degree culpable for making relevant) is not the main source of asylum seekers.

The whole government mantra of being overwhelmed etc is provable bullsh*t. Yet their only solution remains criminalisation of the people at peril and a “harsh regime”.

Because the British will not grant safe passage for asylum seekers it won’t be sorted out. See asylum seekers in Calais as we do British passport holders (as if it were British soil) and there would be no need for people smugglers or dinghies.

Surely the answer is for a special joint UK/French unit to be set up in France for those wishing to seek asylum here. These could be staffed to allow asylum claims to be dealt with, and eliminate the people traffickers.

This year overall, there has been fewer applications for asylum here, just a greater proportion coming here in dodgy boats, due to the effects of Brexit.

This sentence entirely sums up the problem and why the government are responsible for the death of these people (among others who are culpable as well).

When it comes to the French government and smugglers, there is nothing we as a people can do to affect that directly. However that is not true when it comes to the actions of our government, which is our responsibility.

RIP poor people

Agree. There needs to be proper collaboration between the French and UK govts. Our asylum process can just as well be carried out in Calais as it can in Dover. This would, more or less, cut out the people smugglers.

If those people are then denied asylum, the French need to deal with them appropriately.

Feel so sad for such a unnecessary loss of life .There only crime was to try and better themselves in a world that seems to be going backwards.

Quite.

This is a humanitarian crisis. We accept significantly fewer refugees and asylum seekers than we should when you bare in mind our prosperity as a nation.

The people smuggling aspect is a diversionary tactic peddled by people who simply don’t want to accept more migrants into our country.

The issue is people seeking asylum, not people smuggling.

Put in place a humane system for dealing with the first and you eliminate the need for the second.

My sentiments exactly ^

Agree with all you say. But dont be naïve in thinking the people smuggling aspect is a diversinary tatic. When I used to run my haulage company we used to travel into Italy, France and Belgium and I was approached on more than one occasion to see if I was interested in earning some extra cash for stopping on the way throught.

I don’t think anyone (on here at least) is using the people smuggling aspect as a diversion at all.

Until the French and UK govts sort this out, do you suggest turning a blind eye to the smuggling aspect and having more scenarios like yesterday?

I think you misunderstand me pallet. There’s no doubting people smuggling exists.

The sadness is that this becomes the focus because it’s convenient for the government and assorted racists to have someone to blame for the tragedy rather than looking at the wider picture and attempting to solve it.

Amen to this

We already turn a bling eye to the smuggling. That much is blatantly obvious.

What’s your point?

No but unfortunately they have been doing similar for years

100% agree with that. The French government dont see it as their problem as the people are trying to cross to England and the British blame the French for not stopping them. It a very sad situation that has these people caught in the middle and the right wing use it t feed their rubbish about these people being dangerous and spongers.

Not quite sure how Brexit has affected the numbers coming, unless you are intimating that the French have less incentive to stop it. Not having a go at you but just interested

I think it a lot worse than people see. If these gangs are able to get migrants to cross without being picked up on the other side by the UK they then end up in modern slavery, it's really horrific.

But should we not establish if they are genuine asylum seekers first? The whole situation seems to be out of control which is leading to unnecessary loss of life

The vast majority are picked up on arrival, thankfully

That might have been a question you asked in a different post, but it wasn't what I was responding to.

I think we need to ensure there are safer viable methods for these people to claim asylum, rather than argue about whose fault it is that they feel forced to attempt a very dangerous crossing.

My point is that we shouldn’t be. I would have thought that was obvious, no?

Indeed, I spent some time at Sangatte, processing applications when it closed in 2002. Those who remained in France were not processed adequately by the French and just moved further along the coast. The situation is now far worse

The answer is for France to actually stop it. They don’t want to though, they are happy to get rid, that’s why we won’t work together, They don’t want it. Didn’t we just give them a load of money because of it, and it’s done nothing, laughing at us

If you had read my posts, you would see that’s what I’ve said. But ignoring the smuggling aspect in the meantime and simply pointing the finger of blame at someone or other, is just going to end in more deaths. The smuggling needs to stop and the French have the ability to do that. Not just stand by and watch people climb into dinghy’s and set sail. In this case, to their deaths.

1: Our ability to return failed asylum seekers has been diminished.

2: There used to be a process when someone abroad would have the right to seek asylum if their family lived in the uk (for example Mr makes the journey alone - gets granted asylum and tells his family to join him thinking they will not have to make a perilous journey like he did). Brexit ended that and they now have to get on a dinghy and cross their fingers.

How are the French meant to stop people getting on a boat? People have been getting on boats for thousands of years and its perfectly legal to do so.

If you believe the French, they already stop hundreds of people a day from attempting the crossing. And to be fair to them, there are hundreds of miles of coastline to patrol. I've no doubt politics are being played here, and the French could almost certainly do more, but the focus has to be on urgently getting a safe route to claim asylum in place, rather than fight a losing battle to completely stop people trafficking.

With regard to number 2, I cannot see how Brexit has stopped people making visa applications abroad, we still have visa issuing posts

Certainly agree with the last bit about focus to sort this out. But I think that’s a long shot and giving up the fight to tackle the traffickers and stop this horrendous ‘trade’, isn’t the right thing to do imo.

If those people are being smuggled across the channel, why wouldn’t they stop them? It’s illegal. I don’t understand the logic here HP.

How can we check if they are genuine without starting the asylum process? Start it in Calais and let the genuine ones in is the sensible solution. The reason we don't do it is because we don't want to. We did it for Hong Kong citizens but its not politically acceptable to do it for brown people in the brexit world we live in.

That’s not clear by your post at all.

I’m not going to get drawn into another Worksop clarifying his posts scenario.

This is a humanitarian crisis and we as a nation need to grow some bollocks and take some responsibility for once. Anybody blaming the French simply doesn’t get it.

Quite.

Unfortunately people smuggling is not just confined to smugglers packing people on dinghies in France. Remember the horrendous case of the Vietnamese in the frozen container.
At present Gatwick are receiving 20-30 asylum applicants a day from Honduras. They all travel the same route via Madrid,have the same version of events in Honduras, are in possession of exactly the same amount of money in the same denominations. All arranged by agents and unfortunately for those concerned, at large expense

You can stop the smugglers organising people to get on a boat as they are doing something illegal. You can't prevent people getting on a boat. Getting on a boat is perfectly legal.

Can you imagine what a pain in the arse it would be to go fishing if there was a legal requirement to check everyone's intentions before they boarded a boat?

I agree with your first 2 sentences but cannot agree with the rest, sorry

Agreed.

Why do you think we don't do it?

We left the Dublin regulation

https://www.freemovement.org.uk/brie...ded-in-greece/

I just do not believe it is a Brexit issue but I am open to persuasion if someone can explain how remaining in the EU would have stopped the people smuggling. These are not EU nationals so would not have had freedom of movement and therefore would have needed to satisfy visa/immigration requirements, as they do today

No but the 1951 UN convention on the status of refugees looks at the issues of where someone should claim asylum.

1. The Contracting States shall not impose penalties, on
account of their illegal entry or presence, on refugees,
who, coming directly from a territory where their life or
freedom was threatened in the sense of Article 1, enter or
are present in their territory without authorization,
provided they present themselves without delay to the
authorities and show good cause for their illegal entry or
presence

So the question is whether their lives or freedom are threatened in France from where they are coming.

In the debates around it, it was the French who argued:

‘The fact that was causing him concern was that there
were large numbers of refugees living in countries
bordering on France. If they crossed the French frontier
without their lives being in danger, the French
Government would be entitled to impose penalties and to
send them back to the frontier.’

So it is illegal to enter the UK for the purpose of Asylum from France.

That's not to say we should not be fully engaged in finding solutions to the problems.

As per usual, you’re just taking what you want to from my posts, to suit your silly agenda. I’ve made it clear we need to do something about this to ensure this scenario doesn’t happen again. I’ve suggested using Calais as our location to start our asylum process. I’m really not sure how you’ve missed that. But turning a blind eye and ignoring the people smuggling is naive at best, negligent at worst.

I think my opinion is pretty clear. Suggest we leave it there.

Nothing that you have posted states that it is illegal to enter the UK from France for the purpose of asylum.

^^^^^^^^^^^^

We’ve always done immigration on the cheap in this country. Put poor people in poor areas and watch them fight over scant resources. You then get a middle class homeowners telling people on a council house waiting list he/she is racist for not wanting 1000s of immigrants.

Immigration done right, costs money (in the short term). We need more social housing/schools/hospitals… we need to accept we probably have to pay a bit more tax… we also need to accept that those at the bottom of the pile (who have already been shit on) can be negatively impacted by immigration and spread the burden more evenly.

In my opinion… if we looked after the poor in this country better… brexit wouldn’t have happened.

You should probably also read these findings by a UK judge in 1999

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/1999/765.html

specifically here:

Has anyone else seen this film by Ai Weiwei? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Flow

It is heartbreaking, and should be compulsory viewing for the politicians responsible for this tragedy.

So why did they accept the £55m?

To help pay for attempting to stop the illegal activity of people smuggling?

. . . which doesn't extend to stopping people getting on a boat?

From their figures, it would appear the French stop lots of people from getting on boats. Not 100% though, which seems unlikely to ever be possible.

Shit like this makes me want to resign from the human race

Put it this way. If you pop down to Poole harbor and attempt to board a boat you will not have committed a crime. You will be doing an everyday legal activity. If however you organise and take payment for putting a group of people on a boat with the intention of smuggling them across a nations border you will have committed a crime.

It’s not illegal to board a boat. It’s also not illegal in international law for an asylum seeker to enter the uk. It’s illegal to smuggle people.

The RNLI get a massive load of abuse for saving lives. I've even seen people complaining that 'this isn't what they are paid for'. Stupid ***** don't even realise they are volunteers.

. . but are any smugglers getting nicked and what becomes of them if they are? They must be there or thereabouts when a boat is launched?

Why do people obsess about the smugglers?

They are only there because governments have utterly failed in their responsibility to humanity.

They are a complete side issue. If one smuggler gets nicked another will pop up.

It’s a systemic issue that can only be solved by government.

I did like the suggestion of sticking a UK immigration centre in Calais and then those who want to identify themselves to UK authorities can do so and their case be reviewed.

Or we could be really grown up and welcoming and have one in …. The U.K.

I think I’m correct in saying that France already accepts more than four times as many asylum seekers as we do.

How is that fair? Is this your post Brexit vision for global Britain? Are we pulling our weight? I’m not surprised the French think we’re taking the piss.

How is it their responsibility to police every km of their vast coastline to ensure that nobody gets in a boat over to the U.K. who have explicitly told the rest of Europe that we want to be responsible for our own borders?

Why would France, or the EU want that?

So fewer people drown? This is already done on other EU borders (to stop people drowning) so it’s entirely reasonable that they would accept it here.

There is a need for people to get away from crap where they live. They don’t give a crap about where the policitical borders are. Western Europe is Western Europe and that’s where people are coming to. It seems entirely logical that Western European countries work together to have a common asylum position and an agreement on how people who meet those criteria are allocated between Western European countries. That’s going to mean common areas in Western Europe where applications are processed before you get to having to cross major shipping channels. But it does mean people need to stop worrying about U.K. and EU and individual member states within the EU.

Fair assessment Mushroom