Off Topic Migrant crisis

  • 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
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
I can’t believe it’s moored at the dock. What’s the bloody point of that ? They might as well be on land. And apparently they’re free to wander into town when they fancy. What a complete joke and waste of our money.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Smudger603
I can’t believe it’s moored at the dock. What’s the bloody point of that ? They might as well be on land. And apparently they’re free to wander into town when they fancy. What a complete joke and waste of our money.
They’re being seen as doing the right thing - I wouldn’t be happy living too close to there that’s for sure - fill it up and sail it back to Calais and offload !
 
They’re being seen as doing the right thing - I wouldn’t be happy living too close to there that’s for sure - fill it up and sail it back to Calais and offload !
Be reasonable, we can’t do that. It needs to stay in UK waters.

I’d go for;

1) The middle of the English Channel, literally just our side of the border and just adjacent to the biggest ferry routes
2) Somewhere in the outer Hebrides, as far North and as choppy as possible
3) The Falkland Islands
 
Must admit I was surprised to hear that all the occupants are obliged to do is sleep there at nights.
By day they are free to wander through the local area, and by their mere presence cause concern and sometimes fear among the locals - even if they have no intention of doing so.

If this was an attempt by the Government to look strong on this matter, it's a miserable failure.
They had implied that this would be secure accomodation. That it would in effect be a floating detention centre. A prison barge.
Of course they'll deny ever suggesting that, but they plainly did.

Rishi has managed to please no-one.
Not the human rights lobby on the left, their own MPs or those on the far right.
Like the cost of living crisis - he talks like he gets it, but falls flat on his face when it's time to act.
 
So how will this play out? There's been no word of the 180 children who disappeared a few weeks ago. Who k knows if it's even been investigated. So if they drift off into the black economy will there be any attempt to trace them?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ken Shabby
If this was an attempt by the Government to look strong on this matter, it's a miserable failure.
They had implied that this would be secure accomodation. That it would in effect be a floating detention centre. A prison barge.
Of course they'll deny ever suggesting that, but they plainly did.

Rishi has managed to please no-one.
Not the human rights lobby on the left, their own MPs or those on the far right.
Like the cost of living crisis - he talks like he gets it, but falls flat on his face when it's time to act.
You haven’t mentioned the most important group - ordinary working class people, like you and I ?
Or are we now grouped with the ‘far right’.
 
Jesus Bloody Christ !!!

What exactly are we supposed to do with these people. They’ve come here illegally FFS.

Mr Justice Chamberlain said "In ceasing to accept responsibility for some newly-arriving unaccompanied asylum-seeking children, while continuing to accept other children into its care, Kent County Council chose to treat some unaccompanied asylum-seeking children differently from, and less favourably, than other children, because of their status as asylum seekers,"

Too bloody right as well.

Perhaps Mr Justice ‘fuc*ing Chamberlain would like to put them all up at his no doubt spacious gaff.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66325644
 
Any child in need should receive equal priority from a local council, if that child is within the boundary of the council's responsibility.
It's not for the council to prioritise care on the basis of where the child came from, or any other filter except the degree of need in each case.

If a local council has a problem with the number of children it is obliged to look after, it should take that up with the Government.
Not take it out on the children concerned.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ken Shabby
Any child in need should receive equal priority from a local council, if that child is within the boundary of the council's responsibility.
It's not for the council to prioritise care on the basis of where the child came from, or any other filter except the degree of need in each case.

If a local council has a problem with the number of children it is obliged to look after, it should take that up with the Government.
Not take it out on the children concerned.
Are you saying a judge should look the other way when the government break the law?

The government are ultimately to blame. I’m not sure where they have broken the law, but if they have then fine. The law is obviously wrong in that case, because KCC simply don’t have anywhere to house the number of illegal immigrant children that it is being asked to house, primarily because they arrive in Kent and have to remain there for a considerable time afterwards.

There are already children in this county and country who need appropriate care who WILL NOT RECEIVE THAT CARE if illegal immigrant children are allowed to ‘jump the queue’ because they are given priority due to force of numbers and because they have a louder voice in the form of migrant charities and judges.

Apportioning blame for all of this could no doubt lead to differences of opinion, but at the end of the day it is down to us, the British public, because we vote for (or don’t vote for) the people who make these decisions.

As I’ve said over and over again, if we want to change things then we have to change who we elect as our leaders.

Mass immigration is now starting to bite, in the form of over population (in certain areas), cuts to local services to pay for it, and social incohesion as local people start to feel the effects and this will all ultimately lead to the breakdown of the British and Western way of life. Some may think this isn’t a bad thing, but for anyone who doesn’t know what it’s like to live in a lawless cesspit, it is going to come as a very nasty shock.

Anything which doesn’t act to prevent this happening is part of the problem, so I include the comments and actions of the judge in this case, although I accept that he is probably just interpreting the law by the book.

Our system is broken.
 
The government are ultimately to blame. I’m not sure where they have broken the law, but if they have then fine. The law is obviously wrong in that case, because KCC simply don’t have anywhere to house the number of illegal immigrant children that it is being asked to house, primarily because they arrive in Kent and have to remain there for a considerable time afterwards.

There are already children in this county and country who need appropriate care who WILL NOT RECEIVE THAT CARE if illegal immigrant children are allowed to ‘jump the queue’ because they are given priority due to force of numbers and because they have a louder voice in the form of migrant charities and judges.

Apportioning blame for all of this could no doubt lead to differences of opinion, but at the end of the day it is down to us, the British public, because we vote for (or don’t vote for) the people who make these decisions.

As I’ve said over and over again, if we want to change things then we have to change who we elect as our leaders.

Mass immigration is now starting to bite, in the form of over population (in certain areas), cuts to local services to pay for it, and social incohesion as local people start to feel the effects and this will all ultimately lead to the breakdown of the British and Western way of life. Some may think this isn’t a bad thing, but for anyone who doesn’t know what it’s like to live in a lawless cesspit, it is going to come as a very nasty shock.

Anything which doesn’t act to prevent this happening is part of the problem, so I include the comments and actions of the judge in this case, although I accept that he is probably just interpreting the law by the book.

Our system is broken.
I served on a jury which tried a man for manslaughter under the law of joint enterprise. For a day and a half we looked for a way of finding him not guilty, since he wasn't guilty if you apply natural justice. However, it was a court of law, and sadly we applied the law and turned in a guilty verdict. It's a cruel law, but without it no-one would have been convicted of the murder of Stephen Lawrence. And a judge has absolutely no choice but to apply the law as it stands.
 
I served on a jury which tried a man for manslaughter under the law of joint enterprise. For a day and a half we looked for a way of finding him not guilty, since he wasn't guilty if you apply natural justice. However, it was a court of law, and sadly we applied the law and turned in a guilty verdict. It's a cruel law, but without it no-one would have been convicted of the murder of Stephen Lawrence. And a judge has absolutely no choice but to apply the law as it stands.
It’s a difficult one without knowing the details of KCC’s decision and waiting lists for children who were waiting for care before these arrivals.
Maybe I was being hard on the judge. Ultimately, as I said, it comes back to the Government and therefore the British people. If the judge is legally correct and KCC have acted unlawfully, then the law is wrong. These illegal immigrant children should not get priority over British children who will lose out as a result.
It is another thing which will act like a magnet for migrants, which will mean more and more will come and the problems will multiply. That is in no one’s best interests.
 
I hear the Government's tent plan was a last minute alternative.

Some bright spark at the Home Office originally struck on the idea of housing asylum seekers in sheds in the back gardens of private rented houses.
But for some reason that plan couldn't be implemented <whistle>
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ubedizzy2
I hear the Government's tent plan was a last minute alternative.

Some bright spark at the Home Office originally struck on the idea of housing asylum seekers in sheds in the back gardens of private rented houses.
But for some reason that plan couldn't be implemented <whistle>
I don’t think there’s any plan which can be implemented. Everything just gets challenged by someone or other and thrown out. And all the time we are paying for it in cuts to services. Pot holes everywhere, not enough Doctors, not enough nurses, not enough Police, not enough armed services, not enough social care for our elderly, but of course more tax.
 
The Conservatives now have absolute tunnel vision. Gaining every vote they can in the November 2024 General Election is all they can see.
Nothing else matters to them.
But they're wasting their time with their boats policies.
I don't think one wavering voter will decide to vote Tory because of barges or tents or Rwanda. The only votes they'll get from those policies are ones they already had. Indeed I believe they have put off wavering voters.

Now Rishi Sunak pretends he's a friend to motorists, in a hope of replicating the Uxbridge by-election result a few times.
He likes to think he can appeal to white van men and blokes in pubs. But he doesn't have a fraction of the candid charisma of Boris Johnson or Nigel Farage. Sunak is a crisp-shirted accountant with a nasty streak, and less verve than a chat bot.

Meanwhile waiting lists get longer. Drug related deaths double after funding was halved. Police won't even attend when gangs of looters ransack local convenience stores. People who want to buy a home now have to consider a 40 year mortgage. And you can forget renting anywhere.
The UK is broken.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ElfsborgAddick
No. Tory austerity was the point hospital waiting times started going up, and net's been a constant trend of this terrible government. Remember the 40 hospitals Boris promised. None built so far. I believe thay have started a small one somewhere, which has been slammed as too small for purpose by a watch dog. The Tories are utterly enslaved to the fossil fuel lobby, hence their desperation to fight against on shore wind farms, but back franking,veven though geologists say the UK is unsuitable for this.
So they pile on with 'just stop the boats' as if illegal cruelty to migrating children will build hospitals, or pay doctors enough to stay in the profession.
Fair points about austerity under the Tories. But that’s a separate argument to the illegal immigration issue.

Illegal immigrants are costing the country over £3B per year - that’s an awful lot of pot holes that could be filled or Police Officers recruited etc etc.

And numbers are increasing rapidly, up 60% 21-22 and further increasing in 22-23. The costs will rise accordingly and add that to the cost of the war in Ukraine and the mismanagement of the economy during Covid and public finances are in dire straights.

What then should we do about the massive increase in channel crossings and the resultant huge numbers of mainly fit, healthy men who destroy their identity documents as soon as they reach UK waters ?
 
Having kids is bad enough but having grandkids is a game changer - I truly am worried about their future and what kind of world they will inherit from us - we’re like a cancer to the planet and environment :emoticon-0101-sadsm
I do have the same worries, but my fear is of over-population, uncontrolled immigration and the breakdown of law and order in this country as a result. I think that will come long before catastrophic climate change.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Smudger603