Is this what taking back control looks like?

[Pavilionaire]

Record 430 migrants cross English Channel in single day

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-57897601

"Under international law, people have the right to seek asylum in any country they arrive in. There's nothing to say they must seek asylum in the first safe country reached.

An EU law called Dublin III allows asylum seekers to be transferred back to the first member state they were proven to have entered.

However, the UK is no longer part of this arrangement as it has now left the European Union. "

Well done Boris and chums! Now you have taken back control, when are you going to get of your fat arses and actually be in control?

This gives the French every incentive to turn a blind eye to migrants crossing from France to the UK. At a stroke they have solved their 'Sangatte' problem.

The Channel now resembles a Wembley perimeter fence before the Euro 2020 Final, only every day is Finals Day now.

 

[DavidinSouthampton]

It’s not my phrase but taking back control refers to the ability to determine our own laws by democratic ballot. It has nothing to do with outcomes as these are dependent upon the abilities of those elected.

....... agreed, but plenty of people apply it unfailingly to questions of immigration and borders - Priti Patel, for example.

 

[Audax]

To answer the thread title: of course not. It may have been about taking back control for some in the Brexit movement, but from a political view it's had far more to do with 'dog whistle' politics for an awfully long time. They don't care about "control" from a UK in or out of EU viewpoint, what they care about is control from a "we've got the power" viewpoint.

 

[Springal]

My first thought is how many are going to rape , steal and con their way through this country with impunity . Refugees are happy to be free in the first country they cross into , not spend , in some cases years working their way across Europe to illegally enter the UK and collect their winning lottery ticket which is the taxpayers hard earnt .

Not sure living on benefits is 'winning a lottery ticket' either way I'd be more concerned about the amount of money the UK Govt has spunked away in the last 18 months in dodgy deals, contracts that didn't deliver, broken PPE etc than what we are paying in benefits to immigrants.

 

[DavidinSouthampton]

This gives the French every incentive to turn a blind eye to migrants crossing from France to the UK. At a stroke they have solved their 'Sangatte' problem.

The Channel now resembles a Wembley perimeter fence before the Euro 2020 Final, only every day is Finals Day now.

Firstly, I don't think the French are actively helping and supporting people at Sangatte to cross the Channel.

Secondly, and somewhat mischievously, I wouldn't blame them if they did.

In my experience the French are far more tolerant and sympathetic to immigrants, asylum seekers and the like, than we are - "les sans-papiers"

 

[Pavilionaire]

There are also a lot of Jelly fish in the seperation zone and they hurt when they sting you.

It says a lot about the state of security in The Channel when the best deterrent we have to illegal migration is a jellyfish.

Maybe Priti Patel will start a mass breeding jellyfish programme as a cheaper alternative to a properly staffed Border Fleet?

 

[Clive Walker]

You don`t want proof or facts that don`t fit with your beliefs , if you did you would turn of that filter in your head that says all illegal immigrants are poor hard by lost souls . Then you would check the internet and find out for yourself , there is plenty to back both sides but you are only interested in one side so i will leave it up to you and whatever universe you are from , this is not going to end well so i will be leaving it there .

Thank God that you are in the distinct minority on this issue and therefore your generalised and xenophobic attitude will do very little.

 

[lost in london]

I took the quote from a page linked to the page, It is still there:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/explainers-53734793

Interesting link, thanks.

Surprised to see that between 2015 and 2019 the number of cases processed decreased, but the number of asylum seekers granted protection increased. I guess the latter is what Priti has set about addressing.

I was happy to read that asylum seekers' children have to go to school, the least we can do for them.

For anyone thinking we're a soft touch, in Germany in 2019 they had 165,938 applicants and gave refugee status to 45,000 of them. We had 36,000 and gave refugee status to 7,500, a much lower number but an almost identical approval rate (c36%). Interestingly, France's approval rate is 11.6% and Italy's is 10%. https://asylumineurope.org/

 

[midnight_rendezvous]

You don`t want proof or facts that don`t fit with your beliefs , if you did you would turn of that filter in your head that says all illegal immigrants are poor hard by lost souls . Then you would check the internet and find out for yourself , there is plenty to back both sides but you are only interested in one side so i will leave it up to you and whatever universe you are from , this is not going to end well so i will be leaving it there .

Well, you haven't provided any yet

 

[Gwylan]

If you have the capacity to be genuinely honest with yourself , then ask yourself why you would drag your family across Europe and a channel crossing when you are already SAFE unless you have a monetary reason .

That doesn't make any sense whatsoever. Asylum seekers get considerably more benefits in Spain, Germany and Austria. They also get slightly more benefits in France. If their reason was monetary, as you suggest, then surely they'd stay in those countries.

 

[beorhthelm]

That doesn't make any sense whatsoever. Asylum seekers get considerably more benefits in Spain, Germany and Austria. They also get slightly more benefits in France. If their reason was monetary, as you suggest, then surely they'd stay in those countries.

accepting that, what is the draw to make so many make the additional, dangerous crossing?

 

[Bakero]

That doesn't make any sense whatsoever. Asylum seekers get considerably more benefits in Spain, Germany and Austria. They also get slightly more benefits in France. If their reason was monetary, as you suggest, then surely they'd stay in those countries.

Who needs sense when you've got Dave in the King's Head, right wing blogs, and spurious YouTube content?

 

[studio150]

Hasn't Priti Vacant got her asylum prison camp up and running in the centre of Africa or wherever it is going to be.

Next up Priti Vacant describing these people as illegal immigrants rather than asylum seekers so that she can ignore international law and (illegally) put pressure on the Courts deport at the first opportunity.

 

[Clive Walker]

accepting that, what is the draw to make so many make the additional, dangerous crossing?

Language and also the fact that friends and family reside in the uk.

 

[Sid in the Sharknado]

Firstly, I don't think the French are actively helping and supporting people at Sangatte to cross the Channel.

Secondly, and somewhat mischievously, I wouldn't blame them if they did.

In my experience the French are far more tolerant and sympathetic to immigrants, asylum seekers and the like, than we are - "les sans-papiers"

I've always been under the impression that the French don't view it as being in their interest to encourage migration to the UK, as it would also encourage people to try and make the journey in the first place, which means more people travelling across the Mediterranean and more people travelling across France (who may then choose to stop there for an unknown amount of time).

In my experience the French are far more tolerant and sympathetic to immigrants, asylum seekers and the like, than we are - "les sans-papiers"

Not to say you're wrong, but it's interesting that the statistic quoted in another post (which I take no responsibility for) for the % of asylum claims accepted in the UK is so much higher than in France. Both the self-image and outside perception of a country's attitudes are often not at all borne out in surveys of people's attitudes, or actual government policy.

A slight aside, but I once met 3 French PhD students (in the UK) who were all completely unaware that Algeria was part of France until the 60s. This raised all sorts of questions that I decided were best not to ask, as they all featured some variation on the word "idiot".

 

[birthofanorange]

Many different reasons (surprisingly to many asylum seekers/refugees/immigrants are not a single homogenous mass but individual people with individual stories, individual circmstances and unique characters...you know, like actual 'people')

But my understanding is that language will play a part (we didn't colonize half the world and estabish english as the global lingua franca for nothing you know) and having contacts and communities already in the UK will be a primary factor in many cases.

Anyway, I am agnostic on Brexit.

But the bottom line for me is that people have ALWAYS moved around, for many different reasons, whether security reasons, economic reasons or just purely a desire to experience a different place and different culture.

On the whole this movement has been hugely and overwhelmingly beneficial to us all. And of course, as infrastructure and modern communications have improved, so it becomes easier for people to move and so the number of people moving increases. There is no reversing this, and we probably shouldn't want to.

But, of course, as well as the benefits it also causes problems. And worth saying that those problems are far far greater in many other countries, such as Lebanon, a country of just under 7 million people with over 850,000 registered refugees from Syria alone. Also worth saying that the majority of displaced people are still living within their countries - and consequently have far fewer rights than those that are able to seek refuge or opportunity elsewhere.

But NO government can stop the ongoing and increasing movement of people within and between countres. At least not without the kind of draconian measures that would horrify any decent person, whatever their political pursuasion.

So the task is to manage the movement of people better. Not to stop it.

And anyone (especially anyone seeking power) that tells you otherwise is a flat out liar. Or just very stupid.

Excellent post, that.

 

[nicko31]

The irony of the taking back control mantra is when the Vote Leave regime have been confronted with a real threat to the isles rather than an imaginary one they've been an utter failure

 

[Thunder Bolt]

accepting that, what is the draw to make so many make the additional, dangerous crossing?

They can already speak English, because it is taught all over the world.

It's difficult enough adapting to a new country but then having to learn the language so you can work is a big disadvantage.

 

[zefarelly]

That doesn't make any sense whatsoever. Asylum seekers get considerably more benefits in Spain, Germany and Austria. They also get slightly more benefits in France. If their reason was monetary, as you suggest, then surely they'd stay in those countries.

It would make a lot more financial sense to stay at home . . . . unless its been set on fire or you have some other life threatening reason to flee.

What I find most disturbing is English people ignorant and stupid enough to think people jump in dinghies because its a 'life style choice'

 

[Thunder Bolt]

You don`t want proof or facts that don`t fit with your beliefs , if you did you would turn of that filter in your head that says all illegal immigrants are poor hard by lost souls . Then you would check the internet and find out for yourself , there is plenty to back both sides but you are only interested in one side so i will leave it up to you and whatever universe you are from , this is not going to end well so i will be leaving it there .

Interestingly, you have exactly the same style of posting as pretty pink fairy, and Live by the sea.
The same grammatical error of leaving a space between the word and punctuation marks (commas and full stops)