Priti Vacant has a plan, a deal with migrants plan.

So, risking your life crossing the channel is not a deterrent but threatening to send you Rwanda is?? How do you figure that?
 
If you want to stop people crossing the channel, by far the quickest and most effective solution would be to let people claim asylum from France, before they risk their lives.

According to the government’s own figures, 61% of people crossing the channel pass are legitimate refugees that are granted asylum.

So if the government actually gave a shit about reducing deaths, they could halve them overnight.

Not only would you reduce the deaths, but each refugee wouldn’t have to pay a trafficker €5000 and instead they could use that money to start their new life in the UK less dependent on the government.
Or in France maybe before risking their lives.
 
It’s appalling to send people who risked there lives crossing the channel in a dingy, back to Rwanda. This country was built on immigration from the Irish crossing the sea to flee famine or .these people seeking a better life, most of the people who object to immigration are probably descended from immigrant’s, do your family history no one is true English exceptI probably the aristocracy

I’m happy Prince Charles has spoken and let it be known he disapproves the government are snapping at decisions (it’s racist to pick on these people making it difficult for them to apply for asylum
 
SPOT ON.....it is the easiest most cost effective, most humanitarian idea out there.
However, it still doesnt account for the biggest problem and one that is never going to go away and that is money and organised crime. The traffickers will continue to spread the word that it is not safe for them to claim in France, that it is a trick and that they are still better to try the boats...and then you will get the 39% that are refused in France who will then go straight back to the traffickers.....but at least you will have taken a large swathe of those ricking their lives out of the loop....and we have to do something.

The traffickers would lose 60 percent of their customers which would do a lot of damage.

If people were getting accepted before crossing the channel the word would spread immediately.
 
If you want to stop people crossing the channel, by far the quickest and most effective solution would be to let people claim asylum from France, before they risk their lives.

According to the government’s own figures, 61% of people crossing the channel pass are legitimate refugees that are granted asylum.

So if the government actually gave a shit about reducing deaths, they could halve them overnight.

Not only would you reduce the deaths, but each refugee wouldn’t have to pay a trafficker €5000 and instead they could use that money to start their new life in the UK less dependent on the government.

Of course it is but then the graphics of “illegal immigrants” crossing the channel would be lost.

It’s all about pandering to those ukip voters to show that they are the party who are doing something about it.

Anyone who has a modicum of intelligence will know why they choose to risk their lives crossing the channel in order to seek asylum in this country; because you can’t claim asylum unless you’re in the UK.

The fact that 61% are legitimate refugees is never reported in the right wing media.

The headlines and the pictures of dinghies crossing the channel is red meat for the racists and it’s just part of the dog whistle politics the right wing thrives on.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.