Bibby Stockholm

[Bromptonaut]

It's a criminal offence in UK law, as it is in most countries, to arrive without permission. People on remand haven't been found guilty of anything either. The BS is either a suitable detention centre or it isn't. That doesn't change based on whether you like or dislike the occupants.

Under what law? AIUI the entrant can regularise their position by surrendering themselves to Border Force and making clear they intend to claim Asylum. Are you saying that is not the case?

The current occupants are NOT detained. Bibby Stockholm is used instead of hotel rooms or Asylum accommodation procured through government contractors like Clearsprings.

A place that's suitable to detain prisoners, whether on remand or serving 'time', may not be suitable for vulnerable traumatised and or trafficked people; for one thing it's too much like a prison.

The last word in the phrase 'fit for purpose' allows for variation by purpose.

 

[AndyRM]

Well this little bit of lightheartedness has gotten wildly out of hand...

It was a prison ship for the asylum seekers, it would have been a prison ship for any other detainees.

 

[AuroraSaab]

Section 40 of the Nationality and Borders Act, according to Google, plus I guess the Illegal Migration Act. Until your asylum claim is decided you are here without permission.

Who's to say all the BS residents are vulnerable, trafficked people? I would expect there is some discretion used over placements.

Now he's not joking, Andy's right. If it's not fit for young men who've crossed the channel on a boat, it's not fit for young men who've been charged but not convicted.

 

[Bromptonaut]

Section 40 of the Nationality and Borders Act, according to Google, plus I guess the Illegal Migration Act. Until your asylum claim is decided you are here without permission.

Who's to say all the BS residents are vulnerable, trafficked people? I would expect there is some discretion used over placements.

Now he's not joking, Andy's right. If it's not fit for young men who've crossed the channel on a boat, it's not fit for young men who've been charged but not convicted.

I assume that's S40 of the 2022 act. so those arriving before it was 'commenced' are OK under the previous provision.

Given it intends to allow cases which were previously inadmissible to be considered will the government repeal or modify that section?

It's not, SFAIK, being actively used at present.

 

[BoldonLad]

Son no1 has been accommodated on Bibby Stockholm a couple of times, I believe.

 

[AuroraSaab]

It's likely those who were on the SB are more recent arrivals. I think we'll have to see what Labour plan to do. So far Keir has tweeted that 'Labour will stop the boats', so I'm sure it'll all be sorted out pretty soon.

 

[glasgowcyclist]

It's a criminal offence in UK law, as it is in most countries, to arrive without permission.

It was never an offence to arrive here without permission, until the Tories introduced the IMA 2023, which was in breach of the UK’s human rights obligations. That legislation was a mess, with most of its provisions never coming into force.

However, the act has recently been amended by the Labour government so that the position of asylum seekers is returned to that before the law came into effect.

Irregular arrivals now, and those since the act’s introduction, are once again eligible for consideration of refugee status and even eventual British citizenship.

 

[Fab Foodie]

If Bibby Stockholm teaches us anything, it's that by not processing peoples asylum claims in a timely manner is just storing-up a whole raft of issues.

Nobody will stop the boats - it's about time we put our big pants on and accepted that fact.
Small boat crossings can be reduced/moderated via a number of different methods such as:

• Providing safe routes to the UK for undocumented migrants
• Breaking the smuggling networks as part of a pan-european effort (we'll have to fulfil all our post-Brexit commitments to Europe first)
• Removing/reducing the drivers behind migration (Politics, Economics, War, Famine, Climate change)

There will always be those who will try for a variety of reasons such as failed asylum applications etc.

Removal/deportation is another can of legal worms....

Like it or not, migration is not going away without very secure border walls and machine guns regardless of how many thugs smash their communities.

 

[Bromptonaut]

@Fab Foodie the big pants thing is spot on.

A lovely former colleague of mine used to talk of putting her 'big girl pants on' to deal with managers or difficult clients. I always think of her when I read stuff like that.

 

[BoldonLad]

It was never an offence to arrive here without permission, until the Tories introduced the IMA 2023, which was in breach of the UK’s human rights obligations. That legislation was a mess, with most of its provisions never coming into force.

However, the act has recently been amended by the Labour government so that the position of asylum seekers is returned to that before the law came into effect.

Irregular arrivals now, and those since the act’s introduction, are once again eligible for consideration of refugee status and even eventual British citizenship.

If Bibby Stockholm teaches us anything, it's that by not processing peoples asylum claims in a timely manner is just storing-up a whole raft of issues.

Nobody will stop the boats - it's about time we put our big pants on and accepted that fact.
Small boat crossings can be reduced/moderated via a number of different methods such as:

• Providing safe routes to the UK for undocumented migrants
• Breaking the smuggling networks as part of a pan-european effort (we'll have to fulfil all our post-Brexit commitments to Europe first)
• Removing/reducing the drivers behind migration (Politics, Economics, War, Famine, Climate change)

There will always be those who will try for a variety of reasons such as failed asylum applications etc.

Removal/deportation is another can of legal worms....

Like it or not, migration is not going away without very secure border walls and machine guns regardless of how many thugs smash their communities.

Speaking as someone who's solution to the small boats was to put on a free ferry service, I am somewhat puzzled.

If it is permissible to arrive without permission/documents, why cannot migrants/refugees arrive via existing ferries?

I appreciate that existing ferries charge a fare, but, presumably, so do smugglers, and, a ferry is much safer (not to mention more comfortable)

I appreciate that once they have arrived, they need to be "processed" promptly to determine the validity of their right to remain.

 

[AndyRM]

Speaking as someone who's solution to the small boats was to put on a free ferry service, I am somewhat puzzled.

If it is permissible to arrive without permission/documents, why cannot migrants/refugees arrive via existing ferries?

I appreciate that existing ferries charge a fare, but, presumably, so do smugglers, and, a ferry is much safer (not to mention more comfortable)

I appreciate that once they have arrived, they need to be "processed" promptly to determine the validity of their right to remain.

I get the logic, but I can think of a fair few flaws.

 

[glasgowcyclist]

If it is permissible to arrive without permission/documents, why cannot migrants/refugees arrive via existing ferries?

Carriers face huge fines for transporting people who cannot show appropriate travel douments.

 

[BoldonLad]

Carriers face huge fines for transporting people who cannot show appropriate travel douments.

Why, if it is legal to arrive in that way?

 

[BoldonLad]

I get the logic, but I can think of a fair few flaws.

do share

 

[AndyRM]

do share

Well @glasgowcyclist has nailed pretty much the biggest one to be honest. Everyone on a legal vessel has to be on the manifest.

Then there's stuff like public reaction etc.