The Barge

[The Baron]

And again, there are reasons why they wouldn't stay in France, of which you've been given a number of reasons.

Yes because they are in danger???
If you listen to many of these migrants they say they are wanting a better way of life (which makes them economic migrants)not they are fleeing from persecution because they are not being persecuted anymore in Turkey/Italy/Jordan etc where they landed in a safe country but have travelled through many safe countries to get to France and now want to get to the UK because they are being painted the land of milk and honey by the people that are providing the boats for them to cross to feed their coffers and make money out of them.
France are complicit with letting this happening as they then become our problem and not theirs

 

[The Baron]

They're not getting 5 star lodgings. Or 4 star. Or probably 3 star. Anyone who says they are, are being willingly deceitful and those who believe them... I've got some snake oil for sale. Roll up, roll up!

Obviously you can not see the humour in the comment but have taken it too serious, sorry I should have put a laughter emoji

 

[welly3]

Obviously you can not see the humour in the comment but have taken it too serious, sorry I should have put a laughter emoji

It's hard to tell at times on such subject matter! I'll take that on board.

 

[Brew_DD2]

I answered that two and a half hours ago.

Yeah, I didn't read through the whole thread before replying. It is important to reiterate though, because the line that "we take our fair share" is aired far too often without any insight as to how few we take relative to other countries.

Given the role we have played in various wars that have led to the displacement of populations, I'd suggest we take nowhere near our fair share.

 

[Brew_DD2]

Yes because they are in danger???
If you listen to many of these migrants they say they are wanting a better way of life (which makes them economic migrants)not they are fleeing from persecution because they are not being persecuted anymore in Turkey/Italy/Jordan etc where they landed in a safe country but have travelled through many safe countries to get to France and now want to get to the UK because they are being painted the land of milk and honey by the people that are providing the boats for them to cross to feed their coffers and make money out of them.
France are complicit with letting this happening as they then become our problem and not theirs

There is no legal requirement to claim asylum in the first safe country.

 

[The Baron]

There is no legal requirement to claim asylum in the first safe country.

I haven't said there is I am pointing out that they are already in a safe country away from persecution and that they then become migrants of choice not for safety

 

[welly3]

I haven't said there is I am pointing out that they are already in a safe country away from persecution and that they then become migrants of choice not for safety

By that logic, Turkey should take every single asylum seeker. I mean, they already take over 3 million if the figures are correct.

This "first safe country" nonsense is exactly that.

 

[Chippy_Tea]

This "first safe country" nonsense is exactly that.

Maybe it should be "The nearest safe country that can take them" one country cannot take them all.

 

[The Baron]

Under the Dublin Regulation, they should apply for asylum in the first EU country they enter, which is normally a Member State on the EU external borders.
We are no longer members of the EU so further than that we are not obliged to take them.
We should take genuine migrants who have fled from persecution who have travelled through the correct channels not the ones who are hiding under that banner and choosing to use non-genuine methods of entering the country by boats arranged by criminal gangs and throwing away their proof of who they really are so they can be checked and assessed quicker. Why do they throw their passports and paperwork away if they are genuine.

 

[Clint]

!

 

[Brew_DD2]

I haven't said there is I am pointing out that they are already in a safe country away from persecution and that they then become migrants of choice not for safety

In your opinion. Not according to the law, which let's face it, carries more weight than any of our opinions.

 

[Brew_DD2]

Under the Dublin Regulation, they should apply for asylum in the first EU country they enter, which is normally a Member State on the EU external borders.
We are no longer members of the EU so further than that we are not obliged to take them.
We should take genuine migrants who have fled from persecution who have travelled through the correct channels not the ones who are hiding under that banner and choosing to use non-genuine methods of entering the country by boats arranged by criminal gangs and throwing away their proof of who they really are so they can be checked and assessed quicker. Why do they throw their passports and paperwork away if they are genuine.

It's actually quite the opposite. We no longer have a legal framework in which to return people to EU countries. As a result, the numbers of people coming to the UK via small boat has massively increased since our withdrawal in 2020.

So much for taking back control of our borders.That worked out well, right.

 

[The Baron]

That is EU law and it is only a directive of what they expect immigrants to do. However if they do not want to follow the directive that is their choice but this no longer applies to the UK so it is down to the UK to do what they want.
Now if the said immigrants want to follow their way they need to prove to us who they are and which persecuted country they actually come from by showing their passports etc as many are not from the countries they say they are. Anybody who can not provide a passport first of all should be immediately deported from the UK unless there is real and I say real mitigating circumstances

 

[Brew_DD2]

That is EU law and it is only a directive of what they expect immigrants to do. However if they do not want to follow the directive that is their choice but this no longer applies to the UK so it is down to the UK to do what they want.
Now if the said immigrants want to follow their way they need to prove to us who they are and which persecuted country they actually come from by showing their passports etc as many are not from the countries they say they are. Anybody who can not provide a passport first of all should be immediately deported from the UK unless there is real and I say real mitigating circumstances

There is no legal obligation to claim asylum in the first country you find yourself in.

Dublin agreement provided a legal framework to enable countries to move asylum seekers back to where they first landed, but as we are no longer members of the EU, and not party to the agreement, we are no longer able to do this. Anyone who voted for Brexit, voted for that.

 

[pilgrimhudd]

Suppose we could leave the European Convention on Human Rights and be in that club with......oh Belarus and Russia.

 

[The Baron]

I am sure I have already said this that they do not have to seek asylum in the first country they land in but they are advised to do this by the EU.
If they want to come to the UK they need to use legal ways to enter the Uk to apply for persecuted asylum and prove this.
{f they arrive through non-Uk approved entry they should be deported to Rwanda etc, if they are genuine they will provide the relevant information/proof of where they are from so that they can be processed for assessment

 

[The Baron]

Suppose we could leave the European Convention on Human Rights and be in that club with......oh Belarus and Russia.

Many EU countries do not fully comply with the ECHR they veto parts that do not suit them

 

[Brew_DD2]

And for all those saying that they take issue with boats landing from a safe country (France), presumably you would be ok if he boats were coming directly from unsafe countries?

We have created this situation by ensuring that there are no safe and legal routes. For all of the political grandstanding over taking a tough stance of trafficking, that market has been created by the government.

 

[The Baron]

What would you do with the immigrants that are not from persecuted countries and how would you qualify them?

 

[Brew_DD2]

I am sure I have already said this that they do not have to seek asylum in the first country they land in but they are advised to do this by the EU.
If they want to come to the UK they need to use legal ways to enter the Uk to apply for persecuted asylum and prove this.
{f they arrive through non-Uk approved entry they should be deported to Rwanda etc, if they are genuine they will provide the relevant information/proof of where they are from so that they can be processed for assessment

You keep saying "should", but there is no legal basis for it.

If they land in the UK (and currently there is no safe and legal route unless you are Ukrainian/Hong Konger/The occasional Afhan) we have no legal framework to return them to the original country where they landed.