THis is what The Times described as a series of populist measures to help Boris regain his popularity. Called by others "Operation Red Meat", to bring immigration to the forefront of political debate.
Off Topic Migrant crisis
- Thread starter Ubedizzy
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
Boris and his Government can be said to be many things.
'Subtle' is not among them.
If a policy is popular with the public or ‘populist’ as sections of the media like to portray it, then in my book that’s a good thing.
If that policy is hard to put in place it doesn’t make it wrong it just shows that sections of society don’t care about the wishes of ordinary people and try to thwart their will. The problem is with those that seek to block the will of the majority not those that want the policy put in place.
Trying to stop illegal entry to the UK is the right thing to do. Those that oppose it are not acting in the best interests of the UK.
The governments job is to try to act in the best interests of the UK and yet when they do so they are treated with scorn and attacks and words like ‘populist’ are spun to have a negative meaning when in fact the opposite is true.
There is a simple answer to the problem of channel crossings which would stop almost all of it within a few weeks, but the government are not able to put that in place. Not through fault of their own, but because of a lack of cooperation from those with vested interests.
Faced with that, I don’t want the government to give up and stop trying, I want them to try harder and come up with ways to stop the crossings and if using the Navy is part of that then all well and good.
The way to stop this is very simple. If France would agree to take back immediately anyone attempting to cross the channel and anyone who reaches the mainland via the channel, then you would be right. That takes away the incentive of the people smugglers because if it is known that you would be sent straight back then there’s no point in paying them to bring you over in the first place. No profit, no service.
France would also benefit as it then wouldn’t be the staging post for people to try to get to the UK and you wouldn’t have the migrant camps in the French coastal towns, nor migrants entering France just to get to the UK. For a short while they would have a number of illegal migrants returned to them but the flow would very quickly stop when the illegal migrants realised they were not going to get into the UK by illegal means. I would be happy for the UK to pay towards the cost of this initial period, because it would be very short.
The problem is that France have repeatedly refused to agree to this, which I don’t understand.
I’m hoping that the Navy will be used to detect crossings earlier (while they are still in French waters) and then alert the French authorities and thus put more pressure on them to fulfil their legal obligations to control the boats crossing the channel illegally.
I agree that the Navy cannot engage in physically stopping boats, trying to turn them around, push them back etc and I think that it is accepted that that is impractical by pretty much everyone.
My hope is that the Navy will be used to put the onus on the French and further highlight their lack of cooperation in dealing with this effectively. If that is the case then that would be a perfectly reasonable course of action and thus would stand up to scrutiny and would have the support of the vast majority of ordinary members of the British public. Those that would just allow anyone in and those that have an agenda to criticise the government (whatever party that may be) will never be won over of course, but it’s the will of the majority that should count.
As long as the people who are paying the gangmasters know what would happen this could work. But the people-smugglers aren't going to tell them this, are they?
No, obviously not, but if both nations could agree to this it would be widely publicised on news channels in both nations. Also on social media, by word of mouth in the camps, by communications from those who are returned to France to their families and friends waiting for crossings etc etc. It wouldn’t take long for the revenue to dry up. Obviously not 100%, but that wouldn’t matter. The profit would go and so would the transport to the shores, life vests, inflatables etc.
Agreed. There are far more important issues at the moment than whether Boris knew about his birthday cake or if he stayed in the garden for 20 minutes or 25 minutes, but if you watch or listen to the BBC, C4 or ITV news there is nothing else to worry about apparently. It’s just a witch hunt now, when we should be discussing the more important issues.
Over 1,000 illegal migrants have crossed the channel already this year - in January, can you imagine what it’s going to be like next summer ?
Energy prices may well double or triple once the cap ends in April.
The NHS is losing the staff it can’t afford to lose.The Police have given up enforcing most street level laws. The work lives of millions of Britons has changed forever. The prisons are all full. We might have a new war in Europe. But oh no, let’s make the main headline news all about Boris and his misdemeanours. The bloke’s not a bloody murderer he’s just an out of touch buffoon but how many politicians aren’t ?
It's worse. This literally makes my blood boil.
You must log in or register to see media
We're putting obstacles in the way of refugees fleeing war looking for sanctuary. The only country in Europe to be doing so.
Wanting tighter border controls to limit the number of economic migrants coming to the UK does not automatically make somebody a racist.
But deliberately obstructing the entry of Ukrainian refugees who are obviously genuine asylum seekers fleeing for their lives - smells badly of racism.
And it does raise the serious question among all people (not just those on the left of the political spectrum) that the Home Office and the Government may always have been motivated by something darker and more repugnant than a desire to limit the influx of economic migrants.
I cannot understand why some Tories don't have a problem with the way we are treating Ukrainian refugees.
Those who are not outraged need to have a long hard look at themselves.
But deliberately obstructing the entry of Ukrainian refugees who are obviously genuine asylum seekers fleeing for their lives - smells badly of racism.
And it does raise the serious question among all people (not just those on the left of the political spectrum) that the Home Office and the Government may always have been motivated by something darker and more repugnant than a desire to limit the influx of economic migrants.
I cannot understand why some Tories don't have a problem with the way we are treating Ukrainian refugees.
Those who are not outraged need to have a long hard look at themselves.
For pity's sake 
you could not make this up...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-61097114
Rwanda?
My patience with Home Secretary Priti Patel has finally expired.
Considering forcing migrant boats back into French waters with water cannons was daft and dangerous enough, opening her to accusations that she actually wanted migrants to drown.
The disgraceful and shameful foot dragging over admitting Ukrainian refugees to the UK has only reinforced the perception of Britain as a heartless bureaucracy of jobsworths, when the vast majority of British people want to help these poor people and offer them shelter.
Now we're going to fly illegal immigrants to Rwanda?
A country which may have come a long way since the massacre of a million innocent people, but whose name sadly is still linked with that bloodbath. And even today Rwanda has serious Human Rights problems.
Such a policy is plainly designed simply to spread fear among migrants - including genuine asylum seekers.
Shameful is a word that does not cover it.
A nasty policy from the nasty party.
I'm not saying illegal economic migration should not be clamped down on.
But this is simply inhumane.
Priti Patel should resign.
you could not make this up...https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-61097114
Rwanda?
My patience with Home Secretary Priti Patel has finally expired.
Considering forcing migrant boats back into French waters with water cannons was daft and dangerous enough, opening her to accusations that she actually wanted migrants to drown.
The disgraceful and shameful foot dragging over admitting Ukrainian refugees to the UK has only reinforced the perception of Britain as a heartless bureaucracy of jobsworths, when the vast majority of British people want to help these poor people and offer them shelter.
Now we're going to fly illegal immigrants to Rwanda?
A country which may have come a long way since the massacre of a million innocent people, but whose name sadly is still linked with that bloodbath. And even today Rwanda has serious Human Rights problems.
Such a policy is plainly designed simply to spread fear among migrants - including genuine asylum seekers.
Shameful is a word that does not cover it.
A nasty policy from the nasty party.
I'm not saying illegal economic migration should not be clamped down on.
But this is simply inhumane.
Priti Patel should resign.
The one thing I don’t understand about these “genuine asylum seekers” is why they want to risk their lives jumping in a leisure dingy to get to the UK when surely they’ve already reached the safety of Europe ?
I assume that the traffickers tell them that the UK is a land of milk and honey, in order to get them to part with their money.
Just been looking up the figures on the BBC website. Compared to EU countries we have the 5th largest number of asylum applications. The great majority apply in Germany and France. What we get here may be a lot, but it's only a small fraction of what seems to be a tidal wave of movement north from Africa.
And we’re starting to resemble a rush hour train with standing room only and unable to shut the doors!
Sending migrants to Rwanda is a policy I would expect from the BNP.
It is disgusting.
After a while deporting unaccompanied working age men, will we start flying women and children out there as well?
I voted for this Government in 2019. I did not know I was voting for far-right extremism.
I'm ashamed that my vote helped to make this happen.
It is disgusting.
After a while deporting unaccompanied working age men, will we start flying women and children out there as well?
I voted for this Government in 2019. I did not know I was voting for far-right extremism.
I'm ashamed that my vote helped to make this happen.
Mass migration as a result of climate change has been predicted for decades, and now we have war and famine thrown in. Putin's invasion of Ukraine will increase the problem of famine. It's depressing that Russia will be one of the countries least affected by climate change.