The Good News Only - thread...

[Deleted member 159]

Passing through other countries is a red herring.

Which of these countries is not safe Montenegro, Bosnia, Croatia, Slovenia, Austria, Italy, Germany France Belgium Lietchenstein, Spain, Portugal, Netherlands?

 

[icowden]

You, me the general population are funding, better served if its spent on UK population
How much do we spend on illegal immigrants UK?

We don't. There are very few illegal immigrants but quite a few asylum seekers who are not illegal.
Repeated studies have found that immigrants and asylum seekers put more into an economy than they take out. They tend to work harder and generate more wealth than those who live in a country as they have determination to set themselves up and do well.

The current broken asylum system costs the UK around £3 billion a year and rising and around £6 million a day on hotel bills. Doing nothing is not a cost-free option as the continued arrival of tens of thousands of illegal migrants each year places new burdens on central and local government and other local services.

Agreed. What we need to do is vastly simplify the paper work and process these people so that they can be generating tax and boosting the economy. It's an absolute nonsense that people with skills are being forced to stay in these makeshift camps and denied the ability to go out and earn money. The entire problem is paperwork processing.

 

[Bromptonaut]

Which of these countries is not safe Montenegro, Bosnia, Croatia, Slovenia, Austria, Italy, Germany France Belgium Lietchenstein, Spain, Portugal, Netherlands?

It doesn't matter. In terms of their legitimacy claiming Asylum in the UK it's utterly irrelevant.

You may wish it was otherwise. To an extent it was while in the EU and subject to the Dublin Conventions. There's authority from UK courts on the subject.

 

[glasgowcyclist]

I seem remember it was Tony Blair who opened the UK borders. Saying 'only a few thousand will come from Europe '. Well actually millions came,

You’re confusing the figures on planned immigration with asylum seeking, and I don’t think it’s by accident.

How many asylum seekers were granted protection in that time?

 

[Deleted member 28]

Why not ask them? I mean we're so overrun with Albanians there must be some living in your street, or drinking in The Swan, or using their benefits to buy a season ticket at Molyneux.

Not in Compton pal, could nip to Heath Town I suppose or Blakenhall or 'the Reans'.

 

[Deleted member 28]

It doesn't matter.

It matters if the stupid f*ckers drown trying to cross the channel having passed safely through all those countries.

 

[Bromptonaut]

It matters if the stupid f*ckers drown trying to cross the channel having passed safely through all those countries.

At risk of sounding like I'm in a Panto 'Oh no it Does NOT!!'

Under the treaties governing this stuff you can go anywhere you like to claim Asylum.

The government would like that to be different. It may even be the Illegal Migration Bill the Lords rolled over for last night will write such a presumption into UK law. Or at least give Ministers the powers to do so later. But it won't change international agreements.

 

[Deleted member 28]

No.

Under the treaties governing this stuff you can go anywhere you like to claim Asylum.

The government would like that to be different. It may even be the Illegal Migration Bill the Lords rolled over for last night will write such a presumption into UK law. Or at least give Ministers the powers to do so later. But it won't change international agreements.

Of course they can and they do and some die in the process so as stated, it matters to the ones who died trying to get here rather than staying somewhere safe.

I'm sure it's going to be different soon when Labour get in and show us all how it should be done.

I imagine it'll be pretty quiet on here when everyone gets a 15% payrise, inflation is down, NHS waiting lists are a matter of weeks and the doors to the country are wide open waiting to welcome all those hard working migrants that are eager to help our economy.

I might even vote for them myself.

 

[glasgowcyclist]

This 👇 really should be a sticky at the top of every thread on asylum. Others have pointed this out repeatedly in the past, as have I.

The UK’s High Court has ruled that it is legitimate for someone seeking asylum to do so in the UK after passing through other ‘safe’ countries, and the UK Court of Appeal has ruled that those who cross the Channel to claim asylum here are not breaking the law by arriving in the UK this way.

 

[newfhouse]

Labour will probably be in soon so let's just see how many 'safe routes ' are opened up then shall we.

Not enough.

 

[matticus]

Why not ask them? I mean we're so overrun with Albanians there must be some living in your street, or drinking in The Swan, or using their benefits to buy a season ticket at Molyneux.

<snort>

Times have moved on - we used to moan about them eating the Queen's Swans ...

 

[Deleted member 28]

Not enough.

There only needs to be 1 doesn't there?

"Everyone's welcome" would surely win the next election for them.

 

[Deleted member 28]

This 👇 really should be a sticky at the top of every thread on asylum. Others have pointed this out repeatedly in the past, as have I.

The UK’s High Court has ruled that it is legitimate for someone seeking asylum to do so in the UK after passing through other ‘safe’ countries, and the UK Court of Appeal has ruled that those who cross the Channel to claim asylum here are not breaking the law by arriving in the UK this way.

And they do, are you asking for transport to be laid on to ferry them across the channel, or perhaps regular flights to any country asylum seekers choose to leave from flying directly into Heathrow perhaps?

What's your definition of a 'safe route '?

 

[Bromptonaut]

And they do, are you asking for transport to be laid on to ferry them across the channel, or perhaps regular flights to any country asylum seekers choose to leave from flying directly into Heathrow perhaps?

What's your definition of a 'safe route '?

One that is safe to use. We've had them for Ukraine and some people - mostly youngsters I think - from Syria.

It's almost laughably straightforward. We set up a system for them, maybe 'in country' but if that's not safe then nearby, where they can present themselves with their story and documentation, undergo any necessary biometric information gathering and, if they meet our criteria we give them leave to enter the UK. We saw it dome in Ukraine and, albeit in massively messy fashion, Afghanistan.

They may then travel here either on commercial flights or, if that's not do able the UK government would charter planes to fly them here or use the RAF. That's what they did for Syrians (charters) and Afghans (mostly the RAF).

Why are we not doing that now in, say, Sudan?

There's nothing to stop HMG establishing an office in France where people with a case can seek a permit to enter the UK. Not a free for all; you need to show (eg) family or similar connections. If approved you're put on a bus, the bus goes on the ferry.

It's not difficult.

 

[glasgowcyclist]

It's almost laughably straightforward. We set up a system for them, maybe 'in country' but if that's not safe then nearby, where they can present themselves with their story and documentation, undergo any necessary biometric information gathering and, if they meet our criteria we give them leave to enter the UK.

Thank you for saving me from typing the same thing! Such a scheme would have the added benefit of pretty much destroying the market for cross-channel traffickers, which is what this government claims to want.

There's nothing to stop HMG establishing an office in France

I believe France offered to help with such facilities but this was rejected by the UK government.

It’s almost as if Home Secretary wants the crossings to grow and the backlog of applications to grow yet further. 🧐