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.