|
Post by landmannnn on Jun 15, 2022 9:43:03 GMT 1
Regarded by the Brexiteers as a reason to leave the EU. No connection to the EU though. Did you know..
Winston Churchill was the driver behind setting it all up.
Johnson's grandfather was not only a member for 20 years, but was the president for 10 years.
|
|
|
Post by ForumUser2 on Jun 15, 2022 10:28:00 GMT 1
Indeed. The ECHR and ECJ are completely different entities.
But to the feeble-minded and Brexiteers (which amount to the same thing) anything with European in the title must be part of the ravening beast of evil.
|
|
|
Post by flober on Jun 15, 2022 14:48:28 GMT 1
European space agency, sending rockets up into the sky to see if god is ther or not😀
|
|
|
Post by jackie on Jun 15, 2022 18:00:51 GMT 1
I suspect most of the anti-ECHR and the Rwandan policy itself is to do with stoking up culture wars with the aid of the Tory press. Divide and Conquer. Doesn’t matter if innocent people end up suffering. As long as Bunter Fascist cabal continue to cling on to power so they can carry on lining their pockets with taxpayer’s cash...
|
|
|
Post by traveller on Jun 15, 2022 18:45:02 GMT 1
Yes I was very disappointed that Keir Starmer didn’t have the guts to say he opposed this policy as about 44%. Of the electorate approve. I agree something had to be done about illegal entry to UK by boat provided by gangsters hopefully a more humane solution can be found.
|
|
exile
Member
Massif Central
Posts: 2,670
|
Post by exile on Jun 15, 2022 20:26:52 GMT 1
The humane solution has been explained to the hard of understanding party. Around 50% of those that applied for asylum (2010 - 2014 the last years of an official declaration) are finally successful - not all at first attempt. [It is suggested that current numbers are significantly higher and 75% has been quoted in some journals.]
Currently there is no effective way to claim asylum in the UK. Being granted asylum in Paris or Brussels takes 5 years or more. Crossing the Channel and claiming is now deemed illegal.
Homing people who have arrived in the UK and whose asylum requests are pending is said to cost millions per week in hotel/secure accommodation costs.
So the solution would be to employ a couple of hundred Home office employees to deal with asylum seekers. These should be based in France and Belgium - not Paris and Brussels but Ostend, Dunkerque, Calais and Boulogne. Applications would be handled there and handled quickly. Successful applicants would be allowed entry though conventional means. Appeals would equally be held quickly.
Those left to the hands of the traffickers would by definition then not be allowed entry.
|
|
|
Post by triumphant on Jun 15, 2022 20:38:44 GMT 1
Yes I was very disappointed that Keir Starmer didn’t have the guts to say he opposed this policy as about 44%. Of the electorate approve. I agree something had to be done about illegal entry to UK by boat provided by gangsters hopefully a more humane solution can be found. Perhaps a more humane solution is to have a few more Linton-on-ouse's, surely that would increase the number of asylum seekers that can be accommodated without breaching their human rights.
|
|
|
Post by jackie on Jun 15, 2022 20:47:50 GMT 1
The humane solution has been explained to the hard of understanding party. Around 50% of those that applied for asylum (2010 - 2014 the last years of an official declaration) are finally successful - not all at first attempt. [It is suggested that current numbers are significantly higher and 75% has been quoted in some journals.] Currently there is no effective way to claim asylum in the UK. Being granted asylum in Paris or Brussels takes 5 years or more. Crossing the Channel and claiming is now deemed illegal. Homing people who have arrived in the UK and whose asylum requests are pending is said to cost millions per week in hotel/secure accommodation costs. So the solution would be to employ a couple of hundred Home office employees to deal with asylum seekers. These should be based in France and Belgium - not Paris and Brussels but Ostend, Dunkerque, Calais and Boulogne. Applications would be handled there and handled quickly. Successful applicants would be allowed entry though conventional means. Appeals would equally be held quickly. Those left to the hands of the traffickers would by definition then not be allowed entry. Not enough of a cruel red meat fix to the slavering anti-immigration brigade in that sensible solution though... That lovely chap Peter Bone reckoned that the plane should have filled up with refugees so that the removal of some winning appeals would still have made it viable to fly...
|
|
exile
Member
Massif Central
Posts: 2,670
|
Post by exile on Jun 15, 2022 20:49:35 GMT 1
But an asylum seeker can no longer enter the country legally.
Do you think a few housing estates for those waiting to be dealt with is a cheaper solution than just dealing with the applications quickly, fairly and effectively before they enter the country?
|
|
|
Post by ForumUser2 on Jun 15, 2022 22:43:38 GMT 1
To be fair, since when has any decision about immigration, asylum seeking or people trafficking been handled logically and humanely?
If I was so anti people coming to UK for a better life I would change my name from Priti Patel to Pauline Atkins or something otherwise I might be accused of hypocrisy.
|
|
|
Post by cernunnos on Jun 16, 2022 7:30:07 GMT 1
The humane solution has been explained to the hard of understanding party. Around 50% of those that applied for asylum (2010 - 2014 the last years of an official declaration) are finally successful - not all at first attempt. [It is suggested that current numbers are significantly higher and 75% has been quoted in some journals.] Currently there is no effective way to claim asylum in the UK. Being granted asylum in Paris or Brussels takes 5 years or more. Crossing the Channel and claiming is now deemed illegal. Homing people who have arrived in the UK and whose asylum requests are pending is said to cost millions per week in hotel/secure accommodation costs. So the solution would be to employ a couple of hundred Home office employees to deal with asylum seekers. These should be based in France and Belgium - not Paris and Brussels but Ostend, Dunkerque, Calais and Boulogne. Applications would be handled there and handled quickly. Successful applicants would be allowed entry though conventional means. Appeals would equally be held quickly.Those left to the hands of the traffickers would by definition then not be allowed entry. This is such an obviously simple and uncomplicated solution to the UK " problem". It makes you think that the governement in the UK is just pandering to the far right and doesn't want to apply international law to anything British ?
|
|
|
Post by landmannnn on Jun 16, 2022 11:41:12 GMT 1
In my opinion there isn't a simple solution to illegal border crossings.
Be it Mexicans into Texas, boats from Africa to Sicily and France to the UK by boat or refrigerated truck.
I wonder if anybody can draw parallels between Trump's wall and Johnson's Rwanda idea?
|
|
|
Post by hal on Jun 18, 2022 8:17:34 GMT 1
I hear this morning that the racist brexitland Home Office Secretary is throwing her hat into the ring to move away from the ECHR. I wondered how long it would take her - I am surprised she waited this long!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 18, 2022 10:29:47 GMT 1
I hear this morning that the racist brexitland Home Office Secretary is throwing her hat into the ring to move away from the ECHR. I wondered how long it would take her - I am surprised she waited this long! If there's any justice, that one will see time behind bars. She should have already done so for her underhand dealings with Israel and not only sacked.
|
|
|
Post by woolybanana on Jun 18, 2022 20:06:40 GMT 1
Surely the answer is to locate the British officials making decisions in Rwanda and making it clear that all applicants must pass through there🙀
|
|