Sooner or later, and, now it has happened

[Fab Foodie]

Just a small detail, France is 2.3 times bigger than UK.

Can’t find figures for immigrants to support the 4 times claim? There was a graph posted on another thread, but, I don’t think it claimed such a large discrepancy? Can’t find it at moment.

It’s a moot point but all the info I have heard/seen shows the UK as being well down the list by whatever metric is employed. That includes a chap on the Toady prog this morning.

 

[Pale Rider]

Then how should they seek asylum in the UK?

Travel legitimately with documents.

The 'problem' with that is it's too easy for the UK authorities to say 'get lost, you are clearly not facing persecution in your home country'.

If you've got (say) a Yemeni passport you can't just rock up at Calais ferry terminal or Charles de Gaulle airport and board a ferry or plane to the UK.

Do we ban Yemenis from coming here on holiday?

I don't know, but I doubt it.

If not, it would make sense for our notional Yemeni to book a holiday here and claim asylum before going home.

Except it doesn't make sense because it comes down to 'I need to deceive the UK authorities, and I cannot do that travelling legitimately under my own name'.

 

[Bromptonaut]

Do we ban Yemenis from coming here on holiday?

I don't know, but I doubt it.

If not, it would make sense for our notional Yemeni to book a holiday here and claim asylum before going home.

Except it doesn't make sense because it comes down to 'I need to deceive the UK authorities, and I cannot do that travelling legitimately under my own name'.

Yemen, which I used as an example, is in the midst of a civil war between Saudi and Iranian proxies. They cannot feed themselves never mind take holidays but if they could I strongly suspect they'd need a tourist visa. Even that's not an easy gig.

If you've evidence of large scale deception then put it on the table.

The numbers accepted as having legitimate claims suggests otherwise.

 

[Pale Rider]

The numbers accepted as having legitimate claims suggests otherwise.

Or it suggests our processes are not half as hostile as posters on this board claim.

I don't know how much money our notional Yemeni has, but a legitimate return trip would be a lot cheaper than the tens of thousands paid to the criminal gangs.

There has to be a reason why the notional Yemeni chooses to pay much more for a much more hazardous and chancy journey.

It can only be they don't want to arrive in the UK under their own name.

The majority of boat people arrive with literally no documentation.

Why would you deliberately chuck your documents into the channel?

The only rational explanation is you know those documents would disclose information which would torpedo your claim.

 

[BoldonLad]

Yemen, which I used as an example, is in the midst of a civil war between Saudi and Iranian proxies. They cannot feed themselves never mind take holidays but if they could I strongly suspect they'd need a tourist visa. Even that's not an easy gig.

If you've evidence of large scale deception then put it on the table.

The numbers accepted as having legitimate claims suggests otherwise.

Leaving Yemen out of it, for now…

The numbers actually accepted as having legitimate claims, is surely, not linked to their mode of travel?

For example, a few days ago, I watched an interview (BBC) with a family waiting to board a rubber boat to brave the Channel. They claimed to have travelled overland for 2 or 3 years, via Hungary, Romania, Germany, France. The woman had allegedly given birth, en-route. I don’t recall where they came from (Iraq I think). Having traversed so many countries and borders, I struggled to understand why risk crossing channel in an inflatable?

Only one example, I know.

As I have already said, I don’t particularly object to them coming, it is the mode of transport which puzzles me.

 

[PaulB]

It’s a moot point but all the info I have heard/seen shows the UK as being well down the list by whatever metric is employed. That includes a chap on the Toady prog this morning.

Don't beset him with pesky facts. The Heil have no time for that sort of thing when shouting slogans always gets results.

 

[BoldonLad]

Don't beset him with pesky facts. The Heil have no time for that sort of thing when shouting slogans always gets results.

You clearly have not read my comments on my views on immigrants/asylum seekers, but, don’t let that spoil your indignation. I don’t read the Daily Mail

 

[winjim]

It takes a startling lack of imagination not to consider that when forced to flee a country or regime, it might be considered for various reasons, preferable to travel incognito. Or that if having to make a quick getaway you might not have the time to get all your stuff together. Or during a however many thousand mile journey, documents may be lost or stolen.

I mean, how many Brits on holiday get their visa requirements wrong or lose their passport and require consular assistance? It's not zero.

 

[icowden]

It can only be they don't want to arrive in the UK under their own name.
The majority of boat people arrive with literally no documentation.

Here is some light reading for you:-

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2001/may/21/election2001.immigration

In a nutshell, it turns out that when the Taliban imprison your father, rather than jumping on Expedia to book a holiday, you gather your possessions (those that you can carry) and flee to Pakistan, where you end up in a refugee camp. To escape the camp you give what you have (in this case £6500 for their land) to the people traffickers. Then you get a fun safari through Iran to Turkey, dodge the wolves and the soldiers and head for Istanbul. Once there, instead of taking in the sights you end up in a slave colony. Once again you escape via a people trafficker and get on a fishing boat for a lovely cruise where your boat sinks. Having been rescued by the Greek Military your holiday isn't over. This chap managed to get a train to Rome to meet with another people trafficker and snuck onto a lorry.

Now, instead of training as a Paediatrician he is being spat on in supermarkets and waiting for Priti Nazi Patel's department to bother to process his asylum claim.

 

[Deleted member 28]

It’s a moot point but all the info I have heard/seen shows the UK as being well down the list by whatever metric is employed. That includes a chap on the Toady prog this morning.

C'mon then flabfoodie, answer my question regarding when asylum seekers should be allowed to apply?

Conveniently dodged that one.

 

[dutchguylivingintheuk]

When the reality is more like a £8 a week allowance. Once in housing, they get £35 a week and are often reliant on charity....
There's me thinking they got given I phones and feck off big tv,s
Somehow doesn't have the same click value as the pizza story.

Well the ''news''papes covering the pizza story (which in all fairness was a column not a news article) would have made a problem out of £35 a week too. Btw assuming that housing is covered i don't get how you need charity for £35 a week.

Human trafficking is a crime. We agree on that.

So my point is the general direction of this topic ''it's the uk/torys fault it wrong. France is responsible for upholding rule of law in their country.

It exists because there are no routes to seek asylum in the UK without being on British soil. This very simple point that constantly seems to escape the hard of understanding. The other being that Asylum seekers are not illegal migrants.

If France arrest/deports/jails people traffickers their would be much less dinghies making an dangerous crossing either, the uk has as an independent country an own border policy which includes, the rule that they don't want asylum seekers who have safe asylum elsewhere, France is one of those countries. While you correctly point out an asylum seeker does not have to seek asylum in the first country he arrives in, the uk also has the right to put restrictions in on who to accept or not to accept as asylum seeker.
So there are safe routes it's just hard to get in via those routes.

So trafficking to the UK via France exists PRECISELY because of UK rules. Just like any other form of smuggling.
To prevent trafficking needs a multinational approach for which there sadly seems little appetite.

Frist sentence UK's fault, second sentence ''we need an multinational approach'' Which one is it? The multinational approach failed to find an agreement(when the uk was still in the EU) but if we look at the us we can actually see they tried both recently, so durring Trump is was the border is border, don't cross without permission principle, under Biden it seems to be more like everyone's welcome. In both cases it turned out to be a mess, now i know that are other issues in the Us and here but still, what makes you think that even if the uk would change it's border policy, it would change anything?

Let’s face it, having shat on our neighbours it’s no surprise they are not rushing to help.
By any measure, the UK takes less than its fair share of asylum seekers in Europe, so in terms of returning them to the mainland (especially France) there’s not a cat in hells chance.

Sure, but this is not an new issue, it might have been bigger or more in the news recently but the issue exist much longer just as the position of France and how they don't seem to control their beaches.
Returning them is indeed difficult, the EU never managed to get a joint response done, there where calls for a quota system but surprise surprise France resisted. And if you look a little bit deeper over the longer run, on France politically then you see there just not that welcoming to migrants/asylum seekers so the issue is not that they can't the issue is that they don't really want to do something about it.

Desperate people drowning in the channel is a direct result of Brexit and Tory policy.

They will keep coming.

Youtube, bbc player archive etc. is full of documentaries made long before brexit that show lots of asylum seekers trying to get into the uk. from climbing under/in/on top of trucks to many other ways, if you seriously think this all started after Brexit then you're wrong.

Asylum seekers are as legal as you, let that sink in.

I once again did not say anything about their legality, again you trying to claim something that isn't discussed.

 

[Deleted member 49]

Well the ''news''papes covering the pizza story (which in all fairness was a column not a news article) would have made a problem out of £35 a week too. Btw assuming that housing is covered i don't get how you need charity for £35 a week

Might aswell get the facts straight if we're thinking these people are "living the dream" If a person seeking asylum is held in temp accommodation (hotel) they receive an £8 per week allowance.
If they are housed in the community, they receive £39.63 on a payment card.
Feck whether they get pizza or not...when does a column in a newspaper not become news ? But it's not the point I guess is it ?

 

[BoldonLad]

It takes a startling lack of imagination not to consider that when forced to flee a country or regime, it might be considered for various reasons, preferable to travel incognito. Or that if having to make a quick getaway you might not have the time to get all your stuff together. Or during a however many thousand mile journey, documents may be lost or stolen.

I mean, how many Brits on holiday get their visa requirements wrong or lose their passport and require consular assistance? It's not zero.

Very true, for some, even many, but... all of them?

 

[winjim]

Very true, for some, even many, but... all of them?

I don't know if I even have a valid passport any more. I know for a fact that one of my children does not. I don't even know how to make a visa application or whatever, even for France because I've never had to do it.

 

[glasgowcyclist]

Can’t find figures for immigrants to support the 4 times claim? There was a graph posted on another thread, but, I don’t think it claimed such a large discrepancy? Can’t find it at moment.

See graph in the second tweet of this thread…

View: https://twitter.com/UNHCRUK/status/1293519095841816578?