mosssideblue
Well-Known Member
Said it previously, no one will stop the boats, short of sinking them mid channel.
The Labour Government
- Thread starter SkyBlueFlux
- Start date
hilts
Well-Known Member
Yeah I guess the only way is to stop people wanting to come but if they are prepared to risk their lives on not sinking only that guarantee would work.
threespires
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 7 Aug 2019
- Messages
- 8,776
- Team supported
- City
Don't worry, the likes of Peter Thiel will happily fill the vacuum left as a result of the systematic undermining of our democracies. He and his kind are convinced they know what's best for everyone, in fact some of them are so sure they're happy to roll their sleeves up and undermine the current systems themselves, very philanthropic of them. I'm coming round to the view that a bit of neo-luddism wouldn't be a bad idea at this point.
mosssideblue
Well-Known Member
We’ll never stop them coming so we need to manage their arrival much better than we have been doing
hilts
Well-Known Member
I'm not sure countries can be seen to just accept they have open borders tbh.
Its why its such a mess not just the UK but Europe in general.
meltonblue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 14 May 2013
- Messages
- 8,722
It’s not an open border if we properly assess and subsequently deport failed asylum seekers though, and do it far quicker than we have been. The approval rate and the time to process has dropped a fair bit.
The boats won’t stop fully unless we put processing centres abroad and say we’ll only accept asylum seekers from that route.
hilts
Well-Known Member
None of this prevents people entering on a boat, if we do processing centres, more will come. Some get approval, some don't, the don'ts can still get on a boat. You also have to have agreements with countries to deport to and are reliant on the courts being 'onside'
Even Europe are at the stage where they are not only concerned but have obvious disagreements.
EU Split Deepens Over Migration Solidarity Plan
The EU misses a key migration report deadline, exposing deep rifts over asylum burden-sharing. Learn how this delay could affect the bloc’s 2026 pact.
etias.com
The elephant in the room is the numbers coming have become uncomfortable and countries if they could would like to step away from their previously agreed responsibilities. This is only gonna get worse unless Europe becomes an unattractive destination.
With the current state of conflicts and fast approaching climate problems that isn't likely.
johnny crossan
Well-Known Member
About to lose bedrock seat Caerphilly for the first time since 1918 - Farage allegedly on his way to the count after complete Labour vote collapse.
So we cannot have any of the relevant experts involved. We cannot have judges because it might stop criminal proceedings or take to long ( they to have let down victims) we cannot have social workers or police or council staff because they have let down victims even if these specific ones have gone above and beyond not
Let’s just not bother
This is why enquiries don’t work in this country aside from politicians not implementing the changes they suggest they are about victims feelings and stories not the data and evidence not coming up with solutions getting things done quickly our enquires last far longer and cost a lot more than other countries
What exactly am I blaming them for ?
meltonblue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 14 May 2013
- Messages
- 8,722
None of this prevents people entering on a boat, if we do processing centres, more will come. Some get approval, some don't, the don'ts can still get on a boat. You also have to have agreements with countries to deport to and are reliant on the courts being 'onside'
Even Europe are at the stage where they are not only concerned but have obvious disagreements.
EU Split Deepens Over Migration Solidarity Plan
The EU misses a key migration report deadline, exposing deep rifts over asylum burden-sharing. Learn how this delay could affect the bloc’s 2026 pact.
The elephant in the room is the numbers coming have become uncomfortable and countries if they could would like to step away from their previously agreed responsibilities. This is only gonna get worse unless Europe becomes an unattractive destination.
With the current state of conflicts and fast approaching climate problems that isn't likely.
It does if you have those returns agreements, which any arrangement is going to need. The only way to fully stop the boats is to process claims abroad, we can do that and still remain signatories of the refugee act. It’s that or remove ourselves from the refugee act and say we will no longer be accepting asylum seekers. To eradicate that route entirely, they’re the only two options.
The numbers being what they are is a lot more complex a conversation tbh! It’s only going to get worse for lots of reasons. I agree that reducing them isn’t likely, not with either the current or future state of the world.
metalblue
Well-Known Member
That’s like protesting that shoplifting is getting media coverage when the vast majority pay for their shopping
meltonblue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 14 May 2013
- Messages
- 8,722
It’s really not. No one has an issue with someone paying for their shopping, obviously. Plenty do with the amounts of legal migration as well as what they consider illegal, the latter getting a lot more coverage. That’s also with them not having an agreed definition nowadays.
That’s not to say it isn’t valid to have an argument about either, there’s valid arguments against and for both.
Last edited:
metalblue
Well-Known Member
Legal migration isn’t really in the news, illegal immigration is the main story.
Hardly worth a question on Question Time last night. It didn't stop someone thinking it was a failure that 46 had gone to France under the scheme but 23 had come from France. "It's not even one for one..."
One Fan Clapping
Well-Known Member
Caerphilly by-election result tells you all you need to know about the shambles of this government. A distant third in a seat they’ve held for 100 years. 11% of the vote.
It’ll be worse when they break their manifesto pledge of not increasing tax.
It’ll be worse when they break their manifesto pledge of not increasing tax.
I think that's just your myopia.
blue for life
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 15 Sep 2009
- Messages
- 2,828
No surprise at all that result last night. Labour have lost the left wing vote too like me. I haven’t changed my beliefs but they now make the Lib Dem’s seem radical. I will vote Green for the foreseeable. Starmer will be gone next year anyway
So you'd have objected to Alexis Jay chairing the IICSA? A social work inspector?
We have been here before:
"The first two chairs appointed to the original panel inquiry were Baroness Butler-Sloss (appointed 8 July 2014, stepped down 14 July 2014). The reasons for their withdrawal in each case were objections related to their perceived closeness to individuals and establishments which would be investigated. There were also objections to the shape of the inquiry itself, concerning testimony, the scope of inquiry, and lack of ability to compel witnesses to testify. In December 2014, it was reported that Theresa May was reconsidering arrangements for the inquiry. On 4 February 2015, May announced that the inquiry would be chaired by Dame Lowell Goddard, a New Zealand High Court judge who had no ties to the UK bodies and persons likely to be investigated. The existing panel was disbanded, and the inquiry was given new powers as a statutory inquiry. Lowell Goddard resigned as chair in August 2016 and was replaced by Professor Alexis Jay."
So Labour's commitment to Telford-style local inquiries was the right one and they should have ignored Baroness Casey's recommendation for another (limited) inquiry. (If it was all a stitch-up Baroness Casey wouldn't have come up with that recommendation....)