[Politics] More than 40,000 have crossed the channel this year.

[Randy McNob]

It takes a man/woman/non-binary/other? of some character, honesty, and integrity to admit they were incorrect in their accusations of lies and making stuff up when they are proved completely wrong ... your reply speaks volumes. Also, Dublin regulations/agreement still exists but no longer applies to the Uk because of the decision made by the UK government meaning a very small proportion of asylum seekers can't be returned but also means we are no longer obligated to take a larger proportion of asylum seekers from the EU.

who then end up in dingys in the channel

 

[The Clamp]

It takes a man/woman/non-binary/other? of some character, honesty, and integrity to admit they were incorrect in their accusations of lies and making stuff up when they are proved completely wrong ... your reply speaks volumes. Also, Dublin regulations/agreement still exists but no longer applies to the Uk because of the decision made by the UK government meaning a very small proportion of asylum seekers can't be returned but also means we are no longer obligated to take a larger proportion of asylum seekers from the EU.

You’re a moron.

 

[worthingseagull123]

We don't have an immigrant problem, we have a racism problem.

Have people said that certain ethnicities are unwanted in the UK?

Or are you just confused about legitimate concerns about the difference between unsustainable levels of migration and racism?

 

[BadFish]

It takes a man/woman/non-binary/other? of some character, honesty, and integrity to admit they were incorrect in their accusations of lies and making stuff up when they are proved completely wrong ... your reply speaks volumes. Also, Dublin regulations/agreement still exists but no longer applies to the Uk because of the decision made by the UK government meaning a very small proportion of asylum seekers can't be returned but also means we are no longer obligated to take a larger proportion of asylum seekers from the EU.

You have either misunderstood or misrepresented the Dublin Regulations in your first post about it. Your next post shows that you have misunderstood the data that you posted about the Dublin Regulation.

Rather than being " a scheme where we returned a very small number of migrants while getting a greater number sent here from other EU countries." It is a law to try to determine which country should be responsible for processing asylum seekers.

The stats you then posted show that most of the applications that the UK tried to get someone else to process (5,510) were found to be the UK's responsibility (all but 209).

You weren't really clear on the picture that you were trying to paint with these stats but for me I don't think they demonstrate what you think they do.

 

[The Clamp]

Have people said that certain ethnicities are unwanted in the UK?

Or are you just confused about legitimate concerns about the difference between unsustainable levels of migration and racism?

What constitutes an unsustainable level? Figures would help in your answer.

 

[worthingseagull123]

What constitutes an unsustainable level? Figures would help in your answer.

The fact that 30,000 plus people are living in hotel rooms.

And that figure is growing by the day.

What happens when there are no more hotel rooms? What happens when there are no more private landlords offering accommodation?

What is the asylum backlog now? 100,000 people?

 

[A1X]

 

[BadFish]

The fact that 30,000 plus people are living in hotel rooms.

And that figure is growing by the day.

What happens when there are no more hotel rooms? What happens when there are no more private landlords offering accommodation?

What is the asylum backlog now? 100,000 people?

I am sure we would all agree that the idea number of Asylum seekers is 0. This can be said for the asylum seekers themselves. No one wants this problem to be happening but unfortunately, it is. To reduce the number of applications in the UK just means pushing the problem elsewhere.

According to this the UK sits 18th in Europe for applicants per head of population.

In terms of the number of asylum applications per head of population, the UK ranks 18th highest in Europe.

Top facts from the latest statistics on refugees and people seeking asylum - Refugee Council

Supporting and Empowering Refugees

www.refugeecouncil.org.uk

I am not sure what constitutes 'unsustainable' for the world's 5th largest economy but if the numbers are unsustainable for the UK then they must also be for the 17 countries above them?

 

[Wokeworrier]

You have either misunderstood or misrepresented the Dublin Regulations in your first post about it. Your next post shows that you have misunderstood the data that you posted about the Dublin Regulation.

Rather than being " a scheme where we returned a very small number of migrants while getting a greater number sent here from other EU countries." It is a law to try to determine which country should be responsible for processing asylum seekers.

The stats you then posted show that most of the applications that the UK tried to get someone else to process (5,510) were found to be the UK's responsibility (all but 209).

You weren't really clear on the picture that you were trying to paint with these stats but for me I don't think they demonstrate what you think they do.

As both descriptions are factually correct I can't see how there is any misunderstanding or misrepresentation.

The stats show how few migrants were actually being returned which suggests to me that it didn't act as any sort of deterrent for channel crossings and wouldn't make any substantial difference to the numbers crossing now if we were still signatories.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

The fact that 30,000 plus people are living in hotel rooms.

And that figure is growing by the day.

What happens when there are no more hotel rooms? What happens when there are no more private landlords offering accommodation?

What is the asylum backlog now? 100,000 people?

Ask yourself why the Home Office are being so slow processing the claims. The quicker their claims are finalised, the quicker they can get out to work and contribute to the country.
In the last 12 months, only 4% of claims have actually been processed.

Millions of pounds are being paid to hotel owners, who are housing these people two to a room, unable to use the hotel facilities, but raking in a fortune from the government.

 

[BadFish]

As both descriptions are factually correct I can't see how there is any misunderstanding or misrepresentation.

The stats show how few migrants were actually being returned which suggests to me that it didn't act as any sort of deterrent for channel crossings and wouldn't make any substantial difference to the numbers crossing now if we were still signatories.

Your not being able to see it doesn't make it any less true. The stats and info you posted do not show what you suggest they do.

The Dublin Regulation didn't act as a deterrent because its purpose was not to be a deterrent.

Country responsible for asylum application (Dublin Regulation)

Every asylum application lodged within EU territory needs to be examined - each Member State must be able to determine if and when it is responsible for handling an asylum claim.

home-affairs.ec.europa.eu

In the information, you provided the asylum seekers were not being returned to their country of origin, they were being sent to the country deemed responsible for processing them. The stats show that for the vast majority the correct processing place was the UK.

As it was not set up to be a deterrent, I agree that it probably wasn't a very good one. Having said that, something has made a huge difference to the number of people crossing the channel to get to the UK. Could this be (at least partly) because of the fact that now they know there is no chance of them being sent back to the country they just left (most often France as your stats show), making the dangerous journey even more of a gamble.

I would suggest that the reasons why so many more people are now currently crossing the channel to the UK is pretty complex and may not be known for a while. However, as Harry says one thing that cannot be denied is that Brexit has failed to stem the number of asylum seekers entering the UK. In fact, those numbers have grown by a huge amount.

Another Brexit promise broken surely?

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

The 2018 figures, when we were still in the EU and subject to the Dublin agreement are relevant in answer to the accusation I was making stuff up/lying.

My thoughts and observations on why we have seen such a big increase are as follows ...

1.) A Rapid increase was already taking place when we were still in the EU subject to the Dublin agreement (2018/19).

2.) Increased boat crossings while we were still in the EU successfully delivered their desperate human cargo encouraging smuggling gangs to rapidly expand their operations.

3.) Increased security around the channel tunnel over recent years tunnel meant new crossing points were needed/criminal gangs had to change their approach.

4.) Increasingly poor conditions in northern France at the refugee camps and hostile treatment combined with the above points.

5.) There seems to be some evidence that criminal Albanian gangs are trafficking large numbers of people taking advantage of the lax security along the French coast and our inability to process such large numbers.

In conclusion, I don't believe many/any desperate asylum seekers or criminal gang members would give a shit about the vanishingly small chance of being returned via the Dublin agreement and if you toured any of the camps in northern France I doubt anyone has even heard of it. But I am happy to be persuaded otherwise, so if you or anyone else can show conclusive evidence that large numbers (thousands) suddenly decided to risk their lives because we were no longer in the EU and subject to the Dublin agreement then fair play

I think you'll find that the original point in this discussion, before you got your pedant's paws on the narrative, was we left the EU in part (in whole, for some) so we could secure our borders. The f*** up that followed, involving the French no longer bothering to police the boat launches, the gangs, etc., occurred after we left the EU. So rather than securing the borders, the number of unofficial people arriving per annum jumped from 700 to 40,000. Try to get this into your thick head: people voted 'leave' to reduce the number of 'illegal' (and legal) immigrants. And yet the number has gone up. Should have gone down, but it went up. I am not insisting on that meaning cause and effect. But I am insisting there was an action (leaving the EU) and a total and absolute f***ing fail in obtaining the promised outcome. I'm sure that even you can see that.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Small boat Channel crossings: Mayor of Calais says UK is too appealing to asylum seekers

Natacha Bouchart says that it is far too easy for migrants to slip into the 'black economy' in Britain, partly thanks to a lack of identity cards.

news.sky.com

Small boat Channel crossings: Mayor of Calais says UK is too appealing to asylum seekers​

Natacha Bouchart says that it is far too easy for migrants to slip into the 'black economy' in Britain, partly thanks to a lack of identity cards.


She says migration has damaged the image of her town, and castigated British charity groups who, she claims, "disturb public order".

What is your point? If you think that identity cards would be a good thing in the UK, why not say so? Interesting suggestion. I am all in favour. Easier to keep the little flare-chucking scrotes out of football stadia, perhaps.

Or are you suggesting 'British charity groups' are sucking illegal immigrants across Europe and onto little boats?

Why not give us a clue what you think? Do you think anything?

I know you have admitted to not being the sharpest tool in the box (and who am I to argue?) but posting things like this without comment is unhelpful. It is no more useful than the bot that feeds me shite on Facebook. I love your music posts but you are getting on my tits and I'm soon going to have to do what others, judging by the complete lack of reaction to you posts, do: put you on ignore.

ps I see you like wokewankier. That gives me a clue about your agenda

 

[The Clamp]

What is your point? If you think that identity cards would be a good thing in the UK, why not say so? Interesting suggestion. I am all in favour. Easier to keep the little flare-chucking scrotes out of football stadia, perhaps.

Or are you suggesting 'British charity groups' are sucking illegal immigrants across Europe and onto little boats?

Why not give us a clue what you think? Do you think anything?

I know you have admitted to not being the sharpest tool in the box (and who am I to argue?) but posting things like this without comment is unhelpful. It is no more useful than the bot that feeds me shite on Facebook. I love your music posts but you are getting on my tits and I'm soon going to have to do what others, judging by the complete lack of reaction to you posts, do: put you on ignore.

ps I see you like wokewankier. That gives me a clue about your agenda

I don’t have him on ignore but there’s no point responding to someone who is too cowardly to add an opinion to their endless posting of links.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

I don’t have him on ignore but there’s no point responding to someone who is too cowardly to add an opinion to their endless posting of links.

He said once something along the lines of he doesn't understand what this and that means but find this and that interesting. There is no evidence to support that. Au contraire, he posts right wing click bait that, unless he is very unfortunate, he must have been seeking to find. Poor show. Coward? Liar? I no longer care and will block him tomorrow.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Have people said that certain ethnicities are unwanted in the UK?

Or are you just confused about legitimate concerns about the difference between unsustainable levels of migration and racism?

Yes.

Go to the websites where @carlzeiss gets most of his clickbait bollocks and follow the breadcrumbs.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Two more on ignore and the world already smells cleaner and fresher. Pointless arguing with fools and knaves.

 

[BadFish]

The 2018 figures, when we were still in the EU and subject to the Dublin agreement are relevant in answer to the accusation I was making stuff up/lying.

My thoughts and observations on why we have seen such a big increase are as follows ...

1.) A Rapid increase was already taking place when we were still in the EU subject to the Dublin agreement (2018/19).

2.) Increased boat crossings while we were still in the EU successfully delivered their desperate human cargo encouraging smuggling gangs to rapidly expand their operations.

3.) Increased security around the channel tunnel over recent years tunnel meant new crossing points were needed/criminal gangs had to change their approach.

4.) Increasingly poor conditions in northern France at the refugee camps and hostile treatment combined with the above points.

5.) There seems to be some evidence that criminal Albanian gangs are trafficking large numbers of people taking advantage of the lax security along the French coast and our inability to process such large numbers.

In conclusion, I don't believe many/any desperate asylum seekers or criminal gang members would give a shit about the vanishingly small chance of being returned via the Dublin agreement and if you toured any of the camps in northern France I doubt anyone has even heard of it. But I am happy to be persuaded otherwise, so if you or anyone else can show conclusive evidence that large numbers (thousands) suddenly decided to risk their lives because we were no longer in the EU and subject to the Dublin agreement then fair play

So you are asking for evidence showing that thousands more people have decided to risk their lives to get to the UK since the UK left the EU apart from that shows thousands more people that have decided to risk their lives to get to the UK since the UK left the EU?

I jest of course, but without know the reasons all these people made this decison it seems fairly likely that the fact that they are not going to get sent back to another EU country (Dublin Regulation) and that EU countries are not so inclined to work with the UK to find a fair and mutually useful solution (like , erm . . the Dublin Regulation) since the UK leaving the EU. So perhaps Brexit does have something to do with it?

To go back, once again to the main point of the thread. It really is certain that Brexit has not delivered on its promise to lower the number of people risking their lives to get to the UK. Surely we can agree on this?

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

So you are asking for evidence showing that thousands more people have decided to risk their lives to get to the UK since the UK left the EU apart from that shows thousands more people that have decided to risk their lives to get to the UK since the UK left the EU?

I jest of course, but without know the reasons all these people made this decison it seems fairly likely that the fact that they are not going to get sent back to another EU country (Dublin Regulation) and that EU countries are not so inclined to work with the UK to find a fair and mutually useful solution (like , erm . . the Dublin Regulation) since the UK leaving the EU. So perhaps Brexit does have something to do with it?

To go back, once again to the main point of the thread. It really is certain that Brexit has not delivered on its promise to lower the number of people risking their lives to get to the UK. Surely we can agree on this?

Independently you have made exactly the same points I made, in exactly the same way, on this or another thread, using the same available facts and reasoning. And, alas, the fool/knave I now have on ignore will NOT agree with you. He will say this massive change is not massive, and it has nothing to do with Brexit because the likes of you and I cannot prove that this is the case.

If I shoved my John Thomas into a meat grinder and said appendage came out in an unusable state, I can't prove cause and effect. Could 'of' been coincidence. Strictly speaking, I'd need several fully informed volunteers to repeat the experiment, with a parallel group dipping their wicks into, say, a strawberry trifle.

This is the problem with 'real world problems'. There is no control group.

However.... context is everything. Know thy context and the P value becomes immaterial.

 

[BadFish]

Independently you have made exactly the same points I made, in exactly the same way, on this or another thread, using the same available facts and reasoning. And, alas, the fool/knave I now have on ignore will NOT agree with you. He will say this massive change is not massive, and it has nothing to do with Brexit because the likes of you and I cannot prove that this is the case.

If I shoved my John Thomas into a meat grinder and said appendage came out in an unusable state, I can't prove cause and effect. Could 'of' been coincidence. Strictly speaking, I'd need several fully informed volunteers to repeat the experiment, with a parallel group dipping their wicks into, say, a strawberry trifle.

This is the problem with 'real world problems'. There is no control group.

However.... context is everything. Know thy context and the P value becomes immaterial.

Strawberry triffle at the ready