Terrorist attack on asylum centre

Could we not just build a wall a few miles north of London and call it Southern England?
We will be Northern England and it’s their problem then.
Bit like Korea!

We can then concentrate on more serious issues like what to do with the Republic of Liverpool
 
Man-chester copperpot said:
Could we not just build a wall a few miles north of London and call it Southern England?
We will be Northern England and it’s their problem then.
Bit like Korea!

We can then concentrate on more serious issues like what to do with the Republic of Liverpool
Click to expand...

Build a wall around your house and let the world's problems be of no concern to you.
 
Bill said:
a bit of a walk, no problem , better than being persecuted ish.
Click to expand...

Marching prisoners through at least two countries and for over a thousand miles, in a countries where the UK has no authority or jurisdiction. What could possibly go wrong?

Are you a red top's columnist?
 
inbetween said:
Most claims are accepted because of the shear fact that they're here after crossing. If we put up a border post in France then it'll become different as those people are not here and so their case weakens.... So either way as it stands they'd still attempt the crossing regardless.

Other countries in Europe take people according to arrivals and that's dominated completely by Germany. The reason for that though is anyone can literally walk into Germany and claim asylum. The issue here is unlike elsewhere there are 30 miles of water between the UK and continental Europe.

We could make it easier for cases to be accepted if you're not in the country, for example in Calais but what criteria do you attach to that and who is going to pay for and control everything for processing because the French certainly won't?

If someone turns up to a UK border post in Calais with no passport, no background and we have no idea who they are then do you just accept their word and provide housing, food, healthcare and transport to the UK? The fact you cannot reject or send these type of people back once here is why they make the crossing.
Click to expand...

I doubt if the criteria for asylum hinges on whether the applicant was willing to risk life and limb by crossing the channel in a dingy. Next it will be ‘trial by combat’ to decide matters.

I also doubt that fleeing war or persecution was a breeze up and until they faced crossing 20 odd miles of water. If we can’t judge a case on its merits, irrespective of whether that judgement is made in the UK or France, then I would suggest we review the system.

The applicants will have passed through other countries systems so I imagine some data will have been collated prior to pitching up in Calais. They are not trekking halfway across Europe and turning up in Calais unannounced. And refugees may not have official documents, they may have been seized or destroyed, so other means will be used to determine identity and background.

The system can work if countries and authorities endeavour to make it work, rather than trying to make it deliberately unworkable - which is the impression the UK gives.

The impression I get from the UK position and the media, is that we would happily see them all drown at sea rather than have them bother us or, god forbid, establish a life here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

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.