CPFC BBS

CPFC BBS (https://www.cpfc.org/forums/index.php)
-   General Chit Chat (https://www.cpfc.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=18)
-   -   27 people confirmed to have died after boat sinks in the channel (https://www.cpfc.org/forums/showthread.php?t=285230)

Wolfnipplechips 24-11-2021 05:35 PM

27 people confirmed to have died after boat sinks in the channel
 
https://www.theguardian.com/world/li...latest-updates

Tragic. So unnecessary.

Marksf 24-11-2021 05:55 PM

Awful.

Malarkey 24-11-2021 06:00 PM

Jesus.

RIP all :(

greybot 24-11-2021 06:07 PM

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

Kinzman 24-11-2021 06:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by greybot (Post 16117936)
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?

weltklasse 24-11-2021 06:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kinzman (Post 16117937)
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

greybot 24-11-2021 06:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kinzman (Post 16117937)
How so? People in France attempt to enter the UK illegally and die doing so, how is that our fault?

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.

Baffled Bob 2 24-11-2021 06:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by weltklasse (Post 16117940)
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

All of this. But especially the RIP.

How terrible.

strawberry mivi 24-11-2021 06:27 PM

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?

Adlerhorst 24-11-2021 06:41 PM

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……..

Wolfnipplechips 24-11-2021 06:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adlerhorst (Post 16117954)
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.

Wolfnipplechips 24-11-2021 06:53 PM

“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.

PeterH 24-11-2021 06:53 PM

Will it help Boris?

Adlerhorst 24-11-2021 07:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PeterH (Post 16117964)
Will it help Boris?

Sadly, probably yes

0.bj 24-11-2021 09:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kinzman (Post 16117937)
How so? People in France attempt to enter the UK illegally and die doing so, how is that our fault?

Bombing their homelands back into the stone ages doesnít 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).

0.bj 24-11-2021 09:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wolfnipplechips (Post 16117963)
ďMy thoughts are with the families of all of those who have tragically lost their lives in French waters today.ď

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

Our Home Secretary thinks itís important.

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.

Sick Bucket 24-11-2021 09:29 PM

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.

Wolfnipplechips 24-11-2021 09:34 PM

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.

Smithers-Jones 24-11-2021 09:48 PM

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

Paulinmorden 24-11-2021 09:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kinzman (Post 16117937)
How so? People in France attempt to enter the UK illegally and die doing so, how is that our fault?

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.

rhiannapaul 24-11-2021 09:58 PM

The French must be held to account for this

Wolfnipplechips 24-11-2021 11:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rhiannapaul (Post 16118086)
The French must be held to account for this

Why?

Nigel_Scarfer 24-11-2021 11:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wolfnipplechips (Post 16118064)
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.

100% spot on. Terrible tragedy. RIP

Maidstoned Eagle 25-11-2021 07:19 AM

Just tragic.

Worksop Palace 25-11-2021 07:50 AM

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.

pallet 25-11-2021 07:50 AM

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.

Del Fenner 25-11-2021 07:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kinzman (Post 16117937)
How so? People in France attempt to enter the UK illegally and die doing so, how is that our fault?

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

Worksop Palace 25-11-2021 08:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Del Fenner (Post 16118720)
How is it illegal? I understand that the government is planning to make it illegal, but presumably it is not at present.

People smuggling isnít illegal?

brighton_eagle 25-11-2021 08:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Worksop Palace (Post 16118725)
People smuggling isnít illegal?

People smuggling is, claiming asylum isn't.

Wolfnipplechips 25-11-2021 08:07 AM

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

Worksop Palace 25-11-2021 08:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by brighton_eagle (Post 16118727)
People smuggling is, claiming asylum isn't.

Yes I am aware of that.

My question was Ďdoes anyone know why the French police stood and watched these people get into a dinghy and set sailí. It was quite clear and obvious what these people were doing, why werenít they stopped?

I donít think thatís 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?

SE25 exile 25-11-2021 08:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wolfnipplechips (Post 16118728)
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

She is one of the populist hard of thinking.

Hpalace 25-11-2021 08:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Worksop Palace (Post 16118717)
Awful. Canít 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.

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.

Big Blue Eagle 25-11-2021 08:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wolfnipplechips (Post 16118728)
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

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? Theyíd probably have told the Jewish refugee children to have stopped in FranceÖ

Selhurst300 25-11-2021 08:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Worksop Palace (Post 16118772)
Yes I am aware of that.

My question was Ďdoes anyone know why the French police stood and watched these people get into a dinghy and set sailí. It was quite clear and obvious what these people were doing, why werenít they stopped?

I donít think thatís 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?

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

Worksop Palace 25-11-2021 08:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hpalace (Post 16118816)
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.

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.

Worksop Palace 25-11-2021 08:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Selhurst300 (Post 16118849)
In that scenario, what powers would the UK OB have to stop a boat leaving Dover?

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?

Wolfnipplechips 25-11-2021 08:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big Blue Eagle (Post 16118823)
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? Theyíd probably have told the Jewish refugee children to have stopped in FranceÖ

Agreed, and Patelís needless and shameless addition of ďFrench watersĒ 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.

Big Blue Eagle 25-11-2021 08:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wolfnipplechips (Post 16118891)
Agreed, and Patelís needless and shameless addition of ďFrench watersĒ 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 ďharsh regimeĒ.

Hpalace 25-11-2021 08:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Worksop Palace (Post 16118863)
The point remains though. It seems unlikely to me that a dinghy setting sail from Calais to UK with migrants on board wouldnít 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 canít sort out whoís allowed to go fishing where, doesnít give me a lot of hope they will.

Because the British will not grant safe passage for asylum seekers it wonít 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.

SE25 exile 25-11-2021 08:41 AM

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.

dogstar721 25-11-2021 08:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hpalace (Post 16118816)
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.

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.

cantspell 25-11-2021 08:44 AM

RIP poor people

Worksop Palace 25-11-2021 08:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hpalace (Post 16118946)
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.

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.

CPFC Since 68 25-11-2021 09:07 AM

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.

Wolfnipplechips 25-11-2021 09:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CPFC Since 68 (Post 16118962)
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 donít 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.

CPFC Since 68 25-11-2021 09:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wolfnipplechips (Post 16118964)
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 donít 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 ^

pallet 25-11-2021 09:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wolfnipplechips (Post 16118964)
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 donít 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.

Agree with all you say. But dont be naÔve 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.

Worksop Palace 25-11-2021 09:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wolfnipplechips (Post 16118964)
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.

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?

Wolfnipplechips 25-11-2021 09:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pallet (Post 16118970)
Agree with all you say. But dont be naÔve 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 think you misunderstand me pallet. Thereís no doubting people smuggling exists.

The sadness is that this becomes the focus because itís 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.

Spiderman 25-11-2021 09:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adlerhorst (Post 16117954)
You would hope that an incident like this will get the U.K. and French governments to do something to resolve the situation.

You hopeÖÖ..

Amen to this

Wolfnipplechips 25-11-2021 09:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Worksop Palace (Post 16118971)
I donít 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?

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

Whatís your point?

Spiderman 25-11-2021 09:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Worksop Palace (Post 16118717)
Awful. Canít 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.

No but unfortunately they have been doing similar for years

pallet 25-11-2021 09:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wolfnipplechips (Post 16118975)
I think you misunderstand me pallet. Thereís no doubting people smuggling exists.

The sadness is that this becomes the focus because itís 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.

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.

Spiderman 25-11-2021 09:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SE25 exile (Post 16118947)
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.

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

daverambo2 25-11-2021 09:40 AM

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.

Spiderman 25-11-2021 09:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hpalace (Post 16118946)
Because the British will not grant safe passage for asylum seekers it wonít 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.

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

Spiderman 25-11-2021 09:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by daverambo2 (Post 16118985)
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.

The vast majority are picked up on arrival, thankfully

brighton_eagle 25-11-2021 09:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Worksop Palace (Post 16118772)
Yes I am aware of that.

My question was Ďdoes anyone know why the French police stood and watched these people get into a dinghy and set sailí. It was quite clear and obvious what these people were doing, why werenít they stopped?

I donít think thatís 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?

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.

Worksop Palace 25-11-2021 09:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wolfnipplechips (Post 16118979)
We already turn a bling eye to the smuggling. That much is blatantly obvious.

What’s your point?

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

Spiderman 25-11-2021 09:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pallet (Post 16118718)
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.

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

averity 25-11-2021 09:46 AM

The answer is for France to actually stop it. They donít want to though, they are happy to get rid, thatís why we wonít work together, They donít want it. Didnít we just give them a load of money because of it, and itís done nothing, laughing at us

Worksop Palace 25-11-2021 09:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by brighton_eagle (Post 16118991)
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.

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.

Hpalace 25-11-2021 09:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spiderman (Post 16118984)
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

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.

Hpalace 25-11-2021 09:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by averity (Post 16118994)
The answer is for France to actually stop it. They donít want to though, they are happy to get rid, thatís why we wonít work together, They donít want it. Didnít we just give them a load of money because of it, and itís done nothing, laughing at us

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.

brighton_eagle 25-11-2021 10:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Worksop Palace (Post 16118996)
If you had read my posts, you would see thatís what Iíve 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 dinghyís and set sail. In this case, to their deaths.

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.

Spiderman 25-11-2021 10:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hpalace (Post 16119002)
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.

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

Worksop Palace 25-11-2021 10:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by brighton_eagle (Post 16119006)
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.

Certainly agree with the last bit about focus to sort this out. But I think thatís a long shot and giving up the fight to tackle the traffickers and stop this horrendous Ďtradeí, isnít the right thing to do imo.

Worksop Palace 25-11-2021 10:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hpalace (Post 16119005)
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 those people are being smuggled across the channel, why wouldnít they stop them? Itís illegal. I donít understand the logic here HP.

Hpalace 25-11-2021 10:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spiderman (Post 16118986)
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

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.

Wolfnipplechips 25-11-2021 10:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Worksop Palace (Post 16118992)
My point is that we shouldnít be. I would have thought that was obvious, no?

Thatís not clear by your post at all.

Iím 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 doesnít get it.

Wolfnipplechips 25-11-2021 10:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hpalace (Post 16119016)
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.

Quite.

Spiderman 25-11-2021 10:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wolfnipplechips (Post 16118979)
We already turn a bling eye to the smuggling. That much is blatantly obvious.

Whatís your point?

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

Hpalace 25-11-2021 10:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Worksop Palace (Post 16119012)
If those people are being smuggled across the channel, why wouldnít they stop them? Itís illegal. I donít understand the logic here HP.

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?

Spiderman 25-11-2021 10:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hpalace (Post 16119016)
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.

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

Wolfnipplechips 25-11-2021 10:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spiderman (Post 16119022)
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, 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

Agreed.

brighton_eagle 25-11-2021 10:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spiderman (Post 16119025)
I agree with your first 2 sentences but cannot agree with the rest, sorry

Why do you think we don't do it?

Hpalace 25-11-2021 10:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spiderman (Post 16119007)
With regard to number 2, I cannot see how Brexit has stopped people making visa applications abroad, we still have visa issuing posts

We left the Dublin regulation

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

Spiderman 25-11-2021 10:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by brighton_eagle (Post 16119028)
Why do you think we don't do it?

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

GreatGonzo 25-11-2021 10:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by brighton_eagle (Post 16118727)
People smuggling is, claiming asylum isn't.

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.

Worksop Palace 25-11-2021 10:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wolfnipplechips (Post 16119019)
Thatís not clear by your post at all.

Iím 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 doesnít get it.

As per usual, youíre just taking what you want to from my posts, to suit your silly agenda. Iíve made it clear we need to do something about this to ensure this scenario doesnít happen again. Iíve suggested using Calais as our location to start our asylum process. Iím really not sure how youíve 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.

brighton_eagle 25-11-2021 10:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GreatGonzo (Post 16119039)
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:

ĎThe 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.í


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.

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

Hpalace 25-11-2021 10:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by brighton_eagle (Post 16119048)
Nothing that you have posted states that it is illegal to enter the UK from France for the purpose of asylum.

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

mushroom 25-11-2021 10:32 AM

Weíve 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/hospitalsÖ we need to accept we probably have to pay a bit more taxÖ 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 opinionÖ if we looked after the poor in this country betterÖ brexit wouldnít have happened.

brighton_eagle 25-11-2021 10:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GreatGonzo (Post 16119039)
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.

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:

Quote:

(a) “Coming directly ”
17. The respondents accept that a literal construction of “directly” would contravene the clear purpose of the Article and they accordingly accept that this condition can be satisfied even if the refugee passes through intermediate countries on his way to the United Kingdom. But that is only so, they argue, provided that he could not reasonably have been expected to seek protection in any such intermediate country and this will not be the case unless he has actually needed, rather than merely desired, to come to the United Kingdom. In short it is the respondents’ contention that Article 31 allows the refugee no element of choice as to where he should claim asylum. He must claim it where first he may: only considerations of continuing safety would justify impunity for further travel.


18. For my part I would reject this argument. Rather I am persuaded by the applicants’ contrary submission, drawing as it does on the travaux prťparatoires, various Conclusions adopted by UNHCR’s executive committee (ExCom), and the writings of well respected academics and commentators (most notably Professor Guy Goodwin-Gill, Atle Grahl-Madsen, Professor James Hathaway and Dr Paul Weis), that some element of choice is indeed open to refugees as to where they may properly claim asylum. I conclude that any merely short term stopover en route to such intended sanctuary cannot forfeit the protection of the Article, and that the main touchstones by which exclusion from protection should be judged are the length of stay in the intermediate country, the reasons for delaying there (even a substantial delay in an unsafe third country would be reasonable were the time spent trying to acquire the means of travelling on), and whether or not the refugee sought or found there protection de jure or de facto from the persecution they were fleeing.


19. It is worth quoting in this regard the UNHCR‘s own Guidelines with regard to the Detention of Asylum Seekers:

"The expression ‘coming directly’ in Article 31(1) covers the situation of a person who enters the country in which asylum is sought directly from the country of origin, or from another country where his protection, safety and security could not be assured. It is understood that this term also covers a person who transits an intermediate country for a short period of time without having applied for, or received, asylum there. No strict time limit can be applied to the concept ‘coming directly’ and each case must be judged on its merits."

Lazarus 25-11-2021 10:44 AM

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.

Herr Colonpharter 25-11-2021 10:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hpalace (Post 16119005)
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.

So why did they accept the £55m?

Hpalace 25-11-2021 11:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Herr Colonpharter (Post 16119059)
So why did they accept the £55m?

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

Herr Colonpharter 25-11-2021 11:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hpalace (Post 16119071)
To help pay for attempting to stop the illegal activity of people smuggling?

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

brighton_eagle 25-11-2021 11:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Herr Colonpharter (Post 16119077)
. . . 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.

Maidstoned Eagle 25-11-2021 11:26 AM

1 Attachment(s)
Shit like this makes me want to resign from the human race

Hpalace 25-11-2021 11:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Herr Colonpharter (Post 16119077)
. . . which doesn't extend to stopping people getting on a boat?

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.

brighton_eagle 25-11-2021 11:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maidstoned Eagle (Post 16119082)
Shit like this makes me want to resign from the human race

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.

Herr Colonpharter 25-11-2021 11:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hpalace (Post 16119084)
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.

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

. . 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?

Wolfnipplechips 25-11-2021 11:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Herr Colonpharter (Post 16119106)
. . 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.

Itís a systemic issue that can only be solved by government.

GreatGonzo 25-11-2021 11:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wolfnipplechips (Post 16119113)
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.

Itís 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.

Wolfnipplechips 25-11-2021 12:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GreatGonzo (Post 16119119)
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 Ö. The U.K.

I think Iím 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? Iím not surprised the French think weíre 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?

Golf Boy 25-11-2021 12:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GreatGonzo (Post 16119119)
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.

Why would France, or the EU want that?

Adlerhorst 25-11-2021 12:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Golf Boy (Post 16119127)
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.

spiny norman 25-11-2021 12:16 PM

Fair assessment Mushroom


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:44 PM.

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.