|
Post by omegal on Apr 28, 2023 22:07:03 GMT 1
Fact is a lot more do stay in Europe, the ones who risk their lives in getting to the UK are aware of the benefits of finding a job and a new life, plus they will be helped to settle down if they qualify. moverdb.com/most-immigrants/
|
|
|
Post by tim17 on Apr 29, 2023 6:28:33 GMT 1
This is my take on things.
1. Up until recently the majority of those trying to get to the UK had family ties to the country and could speak some English.
2. Because of the above they didn't want to settle in any of the EU countries they passed through on route to Northern France.
3. Over the last year or so criminal gangs with operations in the UK have trafficked 0000's of young men (mainly from Albania) to work in their networks, this has skewed the percentage of genuine asylum seekers.
4. The UK immigration processing system is fucked and has been for years which is why you've now got the daft ideas of housing people on massive barges or in former military camps rather than spend £6/7 million per day on hotels etc. Fix the system and the cost disappears as most asylum applications are granted anyway.
5. If there were asylum processing facilities in France people wouldn't need to risk their lives crossing the Channel in small boats.
6. Most asylum seekers want to work and there is a worker shortage in the UK thanks to Brexit and Covid, process the 100K outstanding claims and part of the shortage is resolved.
7. The 'small boats issue' is not a priority for most UK voters, paying their electricity or food bills is.
8. Immigration is good for the future prosperity of the UK.
|
|
|
Post by omegal on Apr 29, 2023 9:34:23 GMT 1
Point number 8 is also good to ensure money is put in to help the pension pot, with people living longer it is essential that we have as many in work as possible paying in to that pot, so to speak. With point number 5, what happens when people are turned down, it's back to the boats I guess? You make some fair points tim17
|
|
|
Post by tim17 on Apr 29, 2023 11:04:52 GMT 1
what happens when people are turned down, it's back to the boats I guess? Probably but 75% of asylum claims are now successful so the actual numbers getting in boats would be drastically reduced.
|
|
|
Post by jackie on Apr 29, 2023 12:40:05 GMT 1
This is my take on things. 1. Up until recently the majority of those trying to get to the UK had family ties to the country and could speak some English. 2. Because of the above they didn't want to settle in any of the EU countries they passed through on route to Northern France. 3. Over the last year or so criminal gangs with operations in the UK have trafficked 0000's of young men (mainly from Albania) to work in their networks, this has skewed the percentage of genuine asylum seekers. 4. The UK immigration processing system is fucked and has been for years which is why you've now got the daft ideas of housing people on massive barges or in former military camps rather than spend £6/7 million per day on hotels etc. Fix the system and the cost disappears as most asylum applications are granted anyway. 5. If there were asylum processing facilities in France people wouldn't need to risk their lives crossing the Channel in small boats. 6. Most asylum seekers want to work and there is a worker shortage in the UK thanks to Brexit and Covid, process the 100K outstanding claims and part of the shortage is resolved. 7. The 'small boats issue' is not a priority for most UK voters, paying their electricity or food bills is. 8. Immigration is good for the future prosperity of the UK. Spot on. The French have offered to open a migrant processing centre in Calais which would solve the problem overnight but the Tories have refused. If the problem was solved then what would they use as distraction tactics then?
|
|
|
Post by pcpa on Apr 29, 2023 13:58:48 GMT 1
You keep saying that but do you have anything to back up your assertion? From the Financial times : Paris is clear that it does not want an asylum application centre on its soil. Such a processing centre “would create a huge pull factor to France” France has always done all that it can to facilitate illegal immigrants and sans papiers onwards from its soil, any migrant processing centre would be on UK soil in France just like when you have checked in on Eurotunnel, at that time you or the illegals become the responsability of the UK government and France will wash their hands of the affair. It was France that wanted the closure of the Sangatte centre, the UK were going to take 2/3 of the refugees but clever Sarkozy forced the UK government to issue 4 year work visas to all, France accepted none of them. www.ippr.org/blog/dusting-off-the-sangatte-playbook-a-humane-practical-course-of-action-in-calaisGiven the historical context it's hard to give credence to your claim but if it were done then it would indeed solve the problem, that is the French governments problem of sans papiers on their soil who don't want to be there and not the problems of the UK.
|
|
|
Post by jackie on Apr 29, 2023 14:21:39 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by pcpa on Apr 29, 2023 14:45:42 GMT 1
And from that your regularly stated conclusion is that the French Government have offered to open an asylum centre and the Tories have refused?
|
|
exile
Member
Massif Central
Posts: 2,670
|
Post by exile on Apr 29, 2023 15:09:47 GMT 1
what happens when people are turned down, it's back to the boats I guess? Probably but 75% of asylum claims are now successful so the actual numbers getting in boats would be drastically reduced. That used to be the number for those accepted on first application. Of those that went to appeal (probably most if not all) 60% were accepted on appeal. So that is under 10% that failed after appeal and the government expelled about 1%! I understand those numbers changed with the large influx of Albanian arrivals and the 75% had become more like 66%. I would guess that the level of successful appeals would remain high.
|
|
|
Post by jackie on Apr 29, 2023 15:42:22 GMT 1
And from that your regularly stated conclusion is that the French Government have offered to open an asylum centre and the Tories have refused? So why haven’t they opened one then? The article I quoted is 3 years old, plenty of time to get one up and running. Especially as they claim to be so so concerned about people risking their lives in small boats……
|
|
|
Post by ForumUser2 on Apr 29, 2023 16:01:23 GMT 1
The thing about Gobbo's posts is that they are like reading the sort of bigoted sh¹te you get in the fu©king Daily Mail.
Sorry about the bad language; let me correct that:
... bigoted sh¹te you get in the fu©king D***y M**l.
|
|
|
Post by pcpa on Apr 29, 2023 17:02:26 GMT 1
And from that your regularly stated conclusion is that the French Government have offered to open an asylum centre and the Tories have refused? So why haven’t they opened one then? The article I quoted is 3 years old, plenty of time to get one up and running. Especially as they claim to be so so concerned about people risking their lives in small boats…… I can't answer your question you would have to address it to the French government although the article I linked to regarding the French closing Sangatte and not wanting any of the people there should give you clue as to why they have not offered to open an asylum centre.
If you did not make such statements I would not feel the need to question or debunk them.
|
|
|
Post by jackie on Apr 29, 2023 17:10:34 GMT 1
So why haven’t they opened one then? The article I quoted is 3 years old, plenty of time to get one up and running. Especially as they claim to be so so concerned about people risking their lives in small boats…… I can't answer your question you would have to address it to the French government although the article I linked to regarding the French closing Sangatte and not wanting any of the people there should give you clue as to why they have not offered to open an asylum centre.
If you did not make such statements I would not feel the need to question or debunk them.
But you haven’t debunked anything 🤷♀️🤷♀️🤷♀️ Also we’re not talking about Sangatte style tent cities, (who wants that again?) but proper processing centres staffed by uk immigration officers. I think it’s your statements that need to be questioned tbh.
|
|
|
Post by cernunnos on Apr 29, 2023 17:11:39 GMT 1
You keep saying that but do you have anything to back up your assertion? From the Financial times : Paris is clear that it does not want an asylum application centre on its soil. Such a processing centre “would create a huge pull factor to France” France has always done all that it can to facilitate illegal immigrants and sans papiers onwards from its soil, any migrant processing centre would be on UK soil in France just like when you have checked in on Eurotunnel, at that time you or the illegals become the responsability of the UK government and France will wash their hands of the affair. It was France that wanted the closure of the Sangatte centre, the UK were going to take 2/3 of the refugees but clever Sarkozy forced the UK government to issue 4 year work visas to all, France accepted none of them. www.ippr.org/blog/dusting-off-the-sangatte-playbook-a-humane-practical-course-of-action-in-calaisGiven the historical context it's hard to give credence to your claim but if it were done then it would indeed solve the problem, that is the French governments problem of sans papiers on their soil who don't want to be there and not the problems of the UK. UUUUH , quote from FT December 21st 2021 ?
|
|
|
Post by omegal on Apr 29, 2023 18:12:46 GMT 1
|
|