Off Topic Migrant crisis

[lardiman]

But can someone explain why the survivors are being taken to Dover when this happened about 5 miles from the French coast ?

Last time I looked the channel was still over 20 miles wide at its narrowest point.

The only explanation that comes to mind is that the nationality of the rescue boats determined where survivors were taken.

The report mentions British and French rescue vessels.
Perhaps the only survivors who came to Dover were those rescued by the British lifeboat(s).
Maybe the rescued people became the responsibility of the Nation to which each rescue craft belonged.

There is a kind of logic to that notion, regardless of whether it may be right or wrong (factually or morally).
If the victims had been sailors from a stricken commercial vessel I imagine the same rules might have applied.

 

[The Penguin]

The reality is that it's an international problem

 

[Ken Shabby]

From what I read, the British boat got their first so started rescuing people, hence six dead, not 20. And the French boat took the people itvrescued back to France.

 

[The Pub Landlord]

I think that the elephant in the room here is that these people are being allowed to land and stay in Britain because powerful interests want them here.

I think that personal attacks on individual MPs is simplistic. The policy of refusal to detain and deport illegal immigrants began to accelerate under Blair's government and has gained pace year on year. Only in the last couple of years has it reached a level where the public at large have looked up from their bread and circuses and started to take note.

The Rwanda plan is smoke and mirrors. Forget the human rights nonsense, the deal itself provides for us to take in a Congolese refugee to replace each illegal deported. Many of these Congolese are genuine refugees and have serious injuries sustained in the civil war there. It's not any sort of solution and never was.

The only sensible solution is to put them all into a remote location, teach them plumbing, woodwork and other necessary skills, then ship them back to their own countries.

I have worked in numerous countries, some entirely Islamic and others with sizeable Moslem populations and I can say with certainty that the continued import of vast numbers of Moslems does not bode well.

We need a groundswell of national opinion to fight the interests who want them here and time is running out.

This is necessarily brief but I can expand on any aspect.

 

[lardiman]

Could you name the powerful interests?

If they have no democratic credentials and are serving their own interests at the expense of the good of the Country as a whole then they should be held accountable. If on the other hand they cannot be identified, then calling out their influence may (to some) have the air of a conspiracy theory.
I hope we're not talking about a 'Deep State' scenario.

 

[The Pub Landlord]

I think that's exactly what we have to contemplate.

It is becoming increasingly obvious that the US governments of both parties follow an agenda. Kennedy, Niton and Trump didn't conform.

On this side Truss was elected by the party rank and file against all expectations. She was removed and replaced by the person intended to win the first vote.

Brexit has been undermined since the vote took place.

There are many examples.

It's a bit fatuous to ask me to name names. The people who dictate policy are not household names. But it is easy to see what is happening if you look hard enough.

Politically George Galloway is quite a long way from me, but his analyses of "deep state" affairs have a tendency to be proven accurate. I have seen his analyses of what is going on in this country and agree with much of what he says.

 

[lardiman]

I think it is very tempting to believe that well hidden, sinister forces are behind some of the huge and complex problems faced by societies which are supposed to uphold principles of democracy and freedom for their populations.

But once a person decides that a 'Deep State' conspiracy exists, the primary consequence of that is the destruction of trust which that person has in the democratic process. And once your faith in the democratic values of your society is broken you have nothing left to protect you from the call of extremism.

My faith in Democracy wavered when Parliament was blocking the implementation of the Brexit referendum result between 2016 and the 2019 General Election. I got to thinking the Westminster Parliament was becoming an Enemy of the People. Ironically it was Boris Johnson who saved me from the possible consequences of having that opinion hardened any further.

Now, especially after what happened before and during the US Presidential Elections in 2020, my solid belief is that the Deep State is an invention born of pure paranoia, among some of the tortured souls who inhabit a twilight zone on the internet (witness Q-anon). And that the Deep State concept is used ruthlessly by people like Donald Trump to destroy the belief of normal voters in the democratic foundations of their society, so he can seize power.

Though the term had not been invented in the 1930's, Hitler used the concept of a Jewish Deep State in order to use religious hatred to help him gain power in Germany. Trump is now using the Deep State fear to polarise the people of the USA and build his power base on hatred.

Logically if there was a Deep State in the UK, it should be based on the Victorian values that the Empire and the vast wealth of the British Establishment were built on. It should act to protect itself from the cultural threats (as it would see them) from mass migration. Or liberalisation of laws surrounding equality for minorities and other such changes we have seen in our society since the 1970's.
I can see absolutely no evidence that powerful hidden forces are working against migration of refugees to this country. The far right and some of the right wing Press work against it, but they are pretty up-front about it. The only people who seem to promote the idea of the Deep State are people like George Galloway, who marginalise themselves by promoting their own extremist views.
And regretfully, even Boris Johnson and a few of his closest allies hinted at it as an explanation for his fall from power. That I believe, is alarming evidence of the spreading of Trump's poison into British political culture.

For sure there are powerful States advancing their agendas; Russia and China being the most obvious. And there are terrorist factions. But I don't believe there are any shadowy organisations like Ian Fleming's Spectre pulling the strings of population migration as part of a master plan to bring down Western Civilisation.
If we allow ourselves to believe in such things, I think we take a step closer to making ourselves pawns of firebrand hatemongers like Trump (or Hitler back in his era).

 

[Ken Shabby]

I've felt for years that the Tories are either happy enough to hava an immigration crisis as it wins them some votes, which is about as far as their politics seem to go now, but incompetence is a huge part of the current Tory party (look at Liz Truss's disastrous and mercifully brief reign as PM). They confirmed last week that they have closed any legal route's for asylum seekers, although Sunak tried to claim that legal route's were how asylum seekers should get on with their desire to sek refuge in the UK, although his claims on twiter were dismembered pretty quickly of Twitter by FactChecker.
So Cruela' Braverman's 'thoughts and prayers' ring as hollow as her leaden heart. We now have a barge hired at huge expense as another showy solution to deter the samll boats, but most of those who went onto the barge (and then had to be evacuated because of Legionella) arrived on plane's, not small boats. As The Pub landlord pointed out, the Rwanda scheme is a reciprocal one so hardly a solution, although like everything this government do, it costs the taxpayer plenty.
Blame Brexit by all means. We were part of the Dublin accord, which meant that we could send false asylum claimants back to France but when brexit kicked in, we stepped out of the Dublin accord, something the government have been very slow to broadcast.
The French offered to help to set up a processing centre in Calais which would have taken some of the people arriving on small boats out of the equation. But the government didn't want that either. To be honest it's hardly deep state when they take a whole series of decisions in plain view which at best don't work, and at worst backfire spectacularly. I've seen people on twitter moaning that we don't do anything about illegal immigarnts who commit crime's and are'n't shipped out. That isn't new - we had the power to do that even to EU citizens when we were members of the EU, but failed to do it.

Meanwhile, Thames water were duming untreated sewage into the river Burns which goes straight into the Thames, for at least 15 hours over the weekend, and the government are more concerned about small boats and giving motorists the chance to drive where ever they want, removing slow speed limits around schools and ULEZ anywhere, because they held a 400 margin in a seat that was solid Tory in 2019.
There are no easy solutions, but the Tories are the solution to nothing more than lining their own pockets, and their grifter mates.

 

[The Penguin]

Saudi Arabia simply shoots immigrants from Ethiopia.,,

 

[lardiman]

Rather than plug deportations to the Republic of Genocide and Legionella barges, why doesn't Rishi Sunak update the British People regularly on his Government's efforts to shorten the asylum application backlog by actually increasing the rate at which claims are dealt with?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-66603767

Presumably because claims are not being dealt with.

 

[Ubedizzy2]

Rather than plug deportations to the Republic of Genocide and Legionella barges, why doesn't Rishi Sunak update the British People regularly on his Government's efforts to shorten the asylum application backlog by actually increasing the rate at which claims are dealt with?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-66603767

Presumably because claims are not being dealt with.

I honestly don’t know if they actually want to cut the backlog now. I think maybe they’ve given up and are just happy to leave this to Labour to sort out when they get in, which ironically is much more likely if the Tories DON’T deal with this issue.

BUT I also think that it is now impossible to cut the backlog even if they wanted to. With around 600 new illegal immigrants arriving each day, there is no way that that number of applications can be looked at thoroughly and a decision be made.

So there’s only three options to sort this out.

1) Drastically reduce the numbers arriving (which can only be achieved by an aggressive push-back policy)

2) Just let everyone in (which is what Labour will do when they get in), which will lead to the breakdown of law and order

3) Have a very quick and less thorough decision making process, which would have to be able to decide multiple 1,000’s of cases each day - but this would then create a problem of what you do with the 10’s of thousands of rejected claimants each week

So I’m afraid this still (as always) comes back to just one effective solution. Push the boats back at sea and accept any consequences of doing so.

 

[The Penguin]

I honestly don’t know if they actually want to cut the backlog now. I think maybe they’ve given up and are just happy to leave this to Labour to sort out when they get in, which ironically is much more likely if the Tories DON’T deal with this issue.

BUT I also think that it is now impossible to cut the backlog even if they wanted to. With around 600 new illegal immigrants arriving each day, there is no way that that number of applications can be looked at thoroughly and a decision be made.

So there’s only three options to sort this out.

1) Drastically reduce the numbers arriving (which can only be achieved by an aggressive push-back policy)

2) Just let everyone in (which is what Labour will do when they get in), which will lead to the breakdown of law and order

3) Have a very quick and less thorough decision making process, which would have to be able to decide multiple 1,000’s of cases each day - but this would then create a problem of what you do with the 10’s of thousands of rejected claimants each week

So I’m afraid this still (as always) comes back to just one effective solution. Push the boats back at sea and accept any consequences of doing so.

The push back would surely have to start on the French coast to work. And France has a very long coastline.

 

[Ubedizzy2]

The push back would surely have to start on the French coast to work. And France has a very long coastline.

It would help, but it wouldn’t be critical.

We managed to defend our islands from the Nazis so I’m sure with the will we could patrol our sea border today with all the modern equipment at our disposal. It wouldn’t have to be 100% effective. The greatly reduced numbers arriving would be easier to deal with and process (and then house until we could send them somewhere else) and the majority of boats being turned back at sea would quickly ease the flow even further, as word (and the illegal immigrants) would soon get back to France.

 

[The Penguin]

It would help, but it wouldn’t be critical.

We managed to defend our islands from the Nazis so I’m sure with the will we could patrol our sea border today with all the modern equipment at our disposal. It wouldn’t have to be 100% effective. The greatly reduced numbers arriving would be easier to deal with and process (and then house until we could send them somewhere else) and the majority of boats being turned back at sea would quickly ease the flow even further, as word (and the illegal immigrants) would soon get back to France.

Fine thought, but we both know it ain't gonna happen.

 

[Ubedizzy2]

Fine thought, but we both know it ain't gonna happen.

No chance whatsoever

 

[lardiman]

There's an article about it in this week's Private Eye, which is one of the few publications you can trust. Housing them has risen from £628m in 2020 to £3.7bn last year, and now accounts for 29% of the overseas aid budget.

That's an increase of over 500% in just 24 months.
The 2022 figure is around six times the 2020 figure.
The number of illegal migrants in the UK did not jump to six times its size during that period.
I doubt that it even doubled.

£0.628bn to £3.7bn in two years?
Even allowing for lockdown costs due to the Pandemic, a jump of that magnitude simply doesn't sound right.

Are the people at Private Eye sure that somebody isn't pulling their strings?

 

[The Penguin]

And according to some people it’s not affecting the good people of Great Britain- what a load of tosh

It's also affecting poverty-stricken areas of Africa who would otherwise receive aid.

 

[Ubedizzy2]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66919416

Good, so Suella believes that not all illegal immigrants (you know, all those people that arrive across the channel in boats) are genuine asylum seekers. Wow, thanks for enlightening me dear.

Now - WHAT THE **** ARE YOU GOING TO DO ABOUT IT ?

 

[Ken Shabby]

Maybe employ a few people to process applications? It's not rocket science.

Maybe work with the French to get at the trafficking gangs, or perhaps go after the ones operating in the UK, instead of demonising the refugees?

Sadly, there is no political will to do things properly in a party so bereft of a moral compass that their only reason to exist is to be in power at whatever cost and to make sure the party donors have low taxes and government contracts at the drop of a wink.

 

[Ubedizzy2]

Maybe employ a few people to process applications? It's not rocket science.

Absolutely no point and no need. They have committed a criminal offence by entering the country illegally. Spending our taxes ‘processing’ them is not the answer. They are criminals. And we can’t send them back anyway (apart from a very tiny few).

The only answer is to stop them getting here in the first place. But I feel like a broken record.