I've got a better one. Theresa can do her usual and set up a 5 year £330m inquiry into the whole thing.
I have an alternative and cunning plan, which is to ignore it and say it's somebody else's problem. Anybody seen Imaz? would it really cost 350 million to find imaz surely by now he must know swords is no longer here
How do you verify the age of child asylum seekers? 19 October 2016 From the section UK Share Share this with Facebook Share this with Facebook Messenger Read more about sharing.Close share panel × please log in to view this image Image copyright Getty Images An MP has suggested adults could be posing as teenage asylum seekers to gain entry to the UK. Conservative MP for Monmouth David Davies believes dental tests could be carried out to confirm their age - despite professionals saying they would prove inconclusive. But how do officials go about verifying the age of child migrants at the moment? We look at the process of making sure the children who come to the UK are under 18. please log in to view this image What are EU rules on child migrants? "These don't look like 'children' to me. I hope British hospitality is not being abused," wrote Mr Davies on Twitter after seeing photographs in the media of 14 male migrants, mainly from Syria and Afghanistan, who have been allowed into the UK to join their families. He was backed up by UKIP MEP Jane Collins, who also tweeted to say those arriving from the Jungle camp in Calais - said by the Home Office to be aged between 14 and 17 - "look very mature for their age". But the Home Office says it works closely with the French authorities to establish whether any children are eligible to come to the UK before they arrive. Under the EU-wide Dublin regulation, unaccompanied child asylum seekers can ask for their claims to be heard in the UK if they have close relatives in the country. please log in to view this image Does the dental test work? Mr Davies, MP for Monmouth, has said a dental test could be one way of making sure anyone looking to come to the UK as a child refugee has a more accurate age estimation. But dental evidence is said not to be totally reliable, with experts pointing out it is possible to wrongly estimate someone's age by up to three years when making an estimate based on such criteria. please log in to view this image Image copyright PA Image caption Different rates of puberty can lead to different results, according to Professor Tim Cole Professor of medical statistics at the Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, Tim Cole, said these tests were "very inaccurate." He said: "If you test children around the age of 18, or three years either side, in this way, the results get one third of the ages wrong." "When people are much older, say 30 or 40, it can be a lot more accurate. But if you think of puberty and what different rates children develop at, you can see how wrong the tests can be." The Royal College of Paediatricians said the margin of error can sometimes be as much as five years either side with medical tests. However, it also cautions against accepting medical evidence in support of a claim by child asylum seekers themselves. please log in to view this image So how do they check their ages? "All available sources of relevant information and evidence should be considered, since no single assessment technique, or combination of techniques, is likely to determine the applicant's age with precision," states government guidance. "On age we use a number of determining factors," explains a Home Office spokesman. please log in to view this image Image copyright PA Image caption The 14 boys were taken to the Home Office in Croydon after arriving in the UK on Monday These include whether the asylum seekers have provided credible and clear documentary evidence proving their claimed age and that they have a "physical appearance or demeanour which does not strongly suggest they are significantly over 18 years of age". He added: "We also ensure that we meet our safeguarding obligations as first responders who identify potential child trafficking and child slavery victims in the UK. "We are trying to assess they are definitely not an adult." please log in to view this image What if the checks aren't conclusive? Advice from the Home Office says anyone considered to be "borderline" should be subject to the Merton test. This is used by local authorities to assess the age of unaccompanied asylum-seeking children before providing accommodation or support, and needs to be signed off by two trained social workers. please log in to view this image Image copyright Reuters "In general, the decision maker must seek to elicit the general background of the applicant, including the applicant's family circumstances and history, educational background, and the applicant's activities during the previous few years," it says. "Ethnic and cultural information may also be important. If there is reason to doubt the applicant's statement as to their age, the decision maker will have to make an assessment of the applicant's credibility, and he will have to ask questions designed to test the applicant's credibility." On Wednesday, the Home Office also tried to allay fears by promising additional age checks, such as undergoing further interviews about their background and taking their finger prints to cross check with other records which may contain their age details. Their relatives in the UK may also be interviewed to assess their age. But sources told the BBC that it is extremely unlikely any would then be returned to Calais as they would be able to claim asylum in the UK regardless of the age. please log in to view this image What has the reaction been? The Refugee Council has said it is concerned by media coverage questioning the appearance of those admitted to the UK on Monday. Judith Dennis, policy manager at the charity, said: "It is not possible to judge how old someone is by looking at them, and most people understand that teenagers' appearances vary widely. "The agencies involved in this exercise will have the safety of all children in mind and we would ask that the privacy of these vulnerable young people is respected." But speaking on BBC Radio 4's Today programme, Mr Davies stood by his opinion and said the public had been given the wrong impression that we would be welcoming "very young children." He added: "What we seem to have here is young men who may be under 18 or may be over 18, it's very hard to say. "That's why I've suggested that perhaps we should use age checks, dental checks, to just verify that. At the end of the day, we do need to make sure the public have confidence in the system."
I fly every two weeks old kiddy but today was a bastardo as my train stopped at blackfriars and terminated on route to Luton Had to leg it to Farringdon and just got the old conker to Luton where i made it and that after the gate was technically closed ... good old Ryanair let me on and i had a private escort to plane where i was greeted by stark faces who i was holding up with my name again on the airport announcements ... My midfield engine still works at my age. The railways are ****e and the gulf between the honest workers and those who consider themselves manager is as wide as ever. The main supervisor at Blackfriars acted like a 1970's P.E. teacher and deserved the abuse he got ... ****ing ****brake Public Transport! it run by ****ing idiot quangos Two weeks in the UK and i have seen the NHS in fine form ... six people to clean out a cupboard! i **** you not 13 Police to arrest a stray dog at the council offices in Horsham West Sussex ... closing off the area like a major incident and then they forget the bloody cage ... 13 overweight coppers, 3 vets and countless security staff all holding hands to try and catch a dog that slipped its lead from it's owner Things work in France because simply they must, no dramas it all works I have the tunnel next month to look forward to as i am driving back to fill up motor on black ****ing Tuesday or whatever it's called Anyone on here travelled TGV? then they will know and they don't stop there they are already getting ready for the upgrade ... what a mess the UK is in
25% turnout in the by election for the murdered Jo Cox's seat, Batley. 70% of them turned out for the referendum, with 55% voting to leave. So much for the theory that they were interested in democracy and sovereignty, even if the other main parties did not contest the seat. 47% of the Remainers in Cameron's leafy Oxfordshire seat turned out to give the Tories a bit of a kicking. In a friendly way Theresa May tells her mates in Brussels that Britain while we are still in will continue to use its right to exercise a veto on long term EU decisions that will take effect after the UK has left. How to make friends and influence people.
Bloody hell!! The moaning and complaining on this thread from remainers shows no sign of letting up. The Greek bloke on QT is a sneering twat who thinks he knows everything. Ken Clarke is and always has been totally delusional over the EU. Plus he hates referendums because the plebs get a chance to have a say. Conrad Black talked a lot of sense, especially about Hillary Clinton and how Great Britain really is. Thank Christ I'm off on my hols!
Enjoy your Spanish trip Col. I will exercise my freedom to comment on the **** we are in of course. I'm not moaning, I'm making points, from my perspective. Anyway, moaning about people moaning is hardly a response. Inflation up, unemployment up, even before the real impact of Brexit has hit, way before we have actually left. It's all very well for you to bravely offer to take any negative economic impact on you and your family as a price worth paying for a principle, but as Ellers eloquently pointed out above, it's the price other people may pay which we should be concerned about. Tell someone who has lost his or her job as a company closes or relocates that it's worth it because of some notion about 'sovereignty'. I didn't see QT last night, but I know Conrad Black is a convicted fraudster and jailbird and Trump supporter. Why the **** he hasn't been stripped of his peerage is beyond me, the taxpayer is still giving him money.
I think it may bounce back a little against the dollar, given the US election. If Trump wins with a democratic congress or Clinton with a Republican congress the same old stand off between executive and legislature will continue. A Clinton win with democratic congress could prove tricky for US stocks and the dollar, because then she will be able to actually do some of the stuff that Bernie made her sign up to. I rather hope this happens, though it would not be great for me personally.
Can't see your point on the Batley bi-election, Stan. It was a shoe-in, so why would Labour voters turn out, let alone those supporting other parties that, in this election, weren't even on the ballot paper? I'm just surprised turnout was as high as 25% I can understand the EU being a little aggrieved at Theresa's determination to remain involved until Brexit. The sooner it happens the better, and it's frustrating we have to wait until March to trigger Article 50. Nothing's going to happen until then, and probably not immediately afterwards either, so I can see we're entering a period of flat politics. We can perhaps expect the Soubry supporters and Corbyn and Co to do something dramatic which may help pass the time.
I'm not knocking the contribution some migrants can make to a country's economy - but I believe the comment by Varoufakis, who boasted the millions of immigrants who came to Greece on the collapse of the Soviet block had made Greece the great country it is today, was not intending to be ironic. Hope you and your family have great hols
To be honest I only realised that after I posted......wasn't quite a shoe in, a plethora of far right candidates stood, dividing their own vote. Lot of stuff in the paper today about an early election, not to capitalise on an advantage for the Brexit Tories, as would have been the case a couple of months ago, but to get in before what's to come hits Tory marginals. Plus the final deal may include several more years of free movement of people in a transition phase after 2019, not good news for a 2020 vote. Civil servants saying they think the court case to ensure Parliament votes on Article 50 will be won, up to 50 Tory MPs will vote against it, then May would have to call a vote of no confidence in her own government to go to the country, in what in effect would be a second referendum, presumably with the Tories officially pro Brexit this time, everyone else campaigning on 'this is your chance to change your mind'. Probably horribly hung Parliament the result, which could not proceed with Brexit. All speculation, but good fun. Bring it on.
People were always going to criticise the result Col - Farage even said a less than 60% win for Remain was no mandate. If it had gone the other way would UKIP have disbanded; would Bill Cash, IDS and John Redwood have started toeing the line the Governments line? Would all the people who took pens into the polling stations - because obviously MI5 were going to change their choices - moaned about the result? But I think it's been taken in a gracious manner - possibly because the extreme right and left are pro-brexit - and people haven't been rioting on the streets. People are also talking about the conditions of the exit - not the result itself which is something different. There's a good chance of me losing my job or having to relocate my family abroad in the event of a hard brexit; so people who will be directly affected by the exit will always want a say in what it entails. Anyway - enjoy your break mate. Let's hope Liam Fox keeps quiet in the days before you change up your Euros!
There will be complexities ahead, and it seems to be in the current contemplation of the EU leaders that Brexit may not go ahead. Not sure what they base that on, but if Parliament is seen to bar Brexit, there will be major civil discontent in this country that would be hard if not impossible to repair
That's why we'd need an election, with one of the major parties standing as clearly pro Brexit, to draw a line under it. While I fully expect us to leave, and wish we would get a move on with it so we can get on with the rest of our lives, the Government, which was pro Remain until June 24, has no mandate to define the nature of Brexit, and it seems pretty confused about what it wants. An election is much safer than a second referendum for Brexiters, only takes a 2% swing for the result to change, less if more people get out to vote. And it's got to happen some time, let's get it over with. Do you not see the irony of Parliament wishing to exercise its sovereignty on a matter of critical national importance, one of the things Brexit was about for the more principled end of the Brexit voter spectrum, and then being denied the chance? Although I don't think a majority of Brexit voters in Hartlepool give a toss about stuff like that, from what I saw of 3 minutes of QT.
