Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

UK will finally off shore illegal asylum seekers crossing the channel

Options
1202123252632

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 3,574 ✭✭✭Montage of Feck


    Why exactly do we need refugees here? When I say refugees of course I mean asylum seekers, but the crowd that want them here seem to hold placards that state "refugees welcome".

    I'd rather have public services that aren't stretched to the limit, a decent housing supply and a functioning tourism industry. They also seem inconceivably to be putting pressure on the accommodation for refugees, woman and children fleeing war in Ukraine.

    🙈🙉🙊



  • Registered Users Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling




  • Registered Users Posts: 29,037 ✭✭✭✭end of the road



    they can only apply through the UK'S immigration authorities when they get to the UK.

    because the UK government again threw their toys out of the pram because they are big babies and closed down the option to apply outside the UK.

    there isn't a shred of evidence that it's cheaper to rehome immigrants in similar cultures because similar cultures exist right across the world.

    nope just migrants/refugees.

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Registered Users Posts: 29,037 ✭✭✭✭end of the road



    no they have sufficient border staff to gather the required evidence, find out who these people are and then process their claim.

    if britain are just excepting people without processing them then that's down to their own lazyness/unwillingness to pay for the required resources.

    resources which would be a quarter of the cost of the racist rwanda policy.

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,057 ✭✭✭Sudden Valley


    We dont need refugees. It is an act of charity. It is as moronic as saying why did we give charity to ethiopa in the eighties or why did countries take in jews fleeing Germany in WW2 Genuine asylum seekers could be killed in the countries they are fleeing from. There is no net monetary benefit from giving charity or taking in asylum seekers , it is just sometimes the right thing to do.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    But the absolute majority are not fleeing war , famine or persocution,they are migrating to Europe for financial reasons nothing more ,

    Ukraine is an exception this year, but explain the 20,000+pa from various parts of Africa that were arriving here from countries where it was relatively safe in the late 90s ,



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,057 ✭✭✭Sudden Valley


    I would say there is quite a number of countries where minorites in either religous or factional terms are being killed that may not be officially at war like in libya, syria, afghanistan, burma. I would even take in those political asylum seekers from russia who are against putin. My only argument is that not all asylum seekers are fake and it is not abad thing to be charitable even we only do it to make ourselves feel better.



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,327 ✭✭✭✭Igotadose


    Problem solved if they in fact were processed by the UK where it makes sense - airports, Calais, ... It's HMG forcing them into dinghies is the cruelty here. Rwanda's just performative cruelty for the Tory base.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,588 ✭✭✭uptherebels


    Well at least you acknowledge that you are talking nonsense.

    That's a start I suppose



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,057 ✭✭✭Sudden Valley


    The line of questioning form a Tory MP to Suella revealed that there is no legal route for a lot of asylum seekers to seek asylum unless they risk getting to the uk on a dinghy. Perhaps if there was a legal route for genuine asylum seekers then only illegal immigrants who were not genuine asylum seekers would risk their lives on dinghies - and that would make them easier to process and send back.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,609 ✭✭✭Tonesjones


    In Australia they send the Navy to meet these boats. They are turned around or the people are sent to Christmas Island or Nauru for a few years.

    The UKs Rwanda policy if enacted properly could be quite the deterrent.

    In Ireland the minister ( from a party who 93% didn't vote for) proclaimed in many different languages that anyone who arrived to Ireland would be given healthcare, education, welfare and after a short period their own accommodation.

    Amazing



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,057 ✭✭✭Sudden Valley


    The Australia policy should not be used as a guide. The UK is in a total different situation geographically as it is so close to mainland Europe, about 20 miles, compared to the distance the illegal immigrants to Australia had to cover and so making it easier for them to be intercepted. It would make more sense to send them to a closer second country then the £30k it will cost for each immigrant to be sent to Rwanda.

    Like in the border between Mexico and America the immigrants factor in the risk of getting caught in their attempt and it doesnt take a genius to realise only a small percent of the dinghy people will ever be sent to Rwanda.



  • Registered Users Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    Nothing stopping them claiming asylum in Italy, Greece, Spain's,and when they have a decision they can travel to the UK freely,

    Look at the numbers turning up here who already have been granted asylum in other countries,

    But it does proof one thing,the majority of these people aren't refugees but economic migrants wanting to make consumer choice of where they want to live vs those genuinely fleeing for their lives



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,057 ✭✭✭Sudden Valley


    I dont believe that is true. If you seek and receive asylum in an EU country you become an EU citizen then and thus are not able to seek asylum in the UK on the grounds of persecution as no EU country persecutes anyone.

    To get to live in the UK as an EU citizen is not an easy process anymore.



  • Registered Users Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    It's happening here people arriving to claim asylum despite having been already granted asylum in other EU countries



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,057 ✭✭✭Sudden Valley


    The EU citizens can do that in other EU countries but UK doesnt do that for EU citizens.



  • Registered Users Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    But it shouldn't be happening at all ,if your granted asylum in a eu State, then that person or persons has no right travelling to another EU state or the UK to claim asylum again, asylum shouldn't be a consumer choice



  • Registered Users Posts: 29,037 ✭✭✭✭end of the road



    and dispite all that australia didn't stop the boats in the end.

    rwanda will deter nothing, just pissing away money to appease a few thick racists.

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Registered Users Posts: 29,037 ✭✭✭✭end of the road



    european countries already know if someone has claimed asylum in another european country so their claim will be rejected by the second country.

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,609 ✭✭✭Tonesjones



    According to refugeecouncil. Org.au the vast majority of boats are either turned around or are intercepted.

    They could sail feely up the shannon if left to yourself.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling




  • Registered Users Posts: 29,037 ✭✭✭✭end of the road



    not the case.

    some are got of course but the majority no as that would be impossible given the amount.

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Registered Users Posts: 29,037 ✭✭✭✭end of the road



    definitely yes.

    the information will be accessable to the relevant authorities in all likely hood.

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Registered Users Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    But is there any law that says it's illegal,if I remember correctly there's nothing stopping someone claiming asylum multiple times



  • Registered Users Posts: 18,386 ✭✭✭✭Strazdas


    I believe under the Dublin Agreement, you can only claim asylum in one country (and your asylum claim goes onto a centralised database which is shared across Europe). But under international law and contrary to what the English Brexity guys say, there is no onus whatsoever to claim asylum in the first safe country you arrive in to - you can literally make the claim anywhere in Europe, including the UK.



  • Registered Users Posts: 728 ✭✭✭20Wheel


    Putin is a dictator. Putin should face justice at the Hague. All good Russians should work to depose Putin. Russias war in Ukraine is illegal and morally wrong.



  • Registered Users Posts: 728 ✭✭✭20Wheel


    I too have sympathy for Italy. In fact I have sympathy for all of Europe, suffering this wave of welfare shoppers.

    Some people get all uppity about the word 'invasion' but thats whats happening. Illegal migrants know that the system is broken, and that they can get away with milking European countries for all theyre worth.

    In restricted numbers thats bad.

    In unrestricted numbers its fatal. And the word is out a long time now. Dont like your deal in life? Want to escape your past? Just rock up in Europe. Burn your id, stick your hand out. Anybody objects say the magic word, racist.

    Putin is a dictator. Putin should face justice at the Hague. All good Russians should work to depose Putin. Russias war in Ukraine is illegal and morally wrong.



  • Registered Users Posts: 18,386 ✭✭✭✭Strazdas


    You're speaking as if people seeking asylum is an aberration, something totally unnatural. It's nothing of the sort - people have been seeking asylum for hundreds of years. The 1m Irish people who fled to the US during and after the Famine were almost certainly refugees, even if the term wasn't used at the time.



  • Registered Users Posts: 784 ✭✭✭Juran


    But the 1 million + Irish people didnt recieve welfare, housing, healthcare, etc. When they arrived in the US. They worked and contributed to the american econmy and society.

    What we are seeing now is totally different. 99% are unskilled, welfare is more lucrative that a 40 hr min wage factory job or farm labour, some will work for cash on the side. Ireland, UK and europe need skilled migrants -- nurses, IT, engineers, etc. Yes, we still all need cleaners, factory & farm workers, but we dont need the amount that are coming in right now.

    Fruit & veg farmers in the UK still cant find workers .. with all the econmic migrants that have arrived since Brexit and more arriving every day. Thousands have gone missing from the UK refugee system, yet they are not showing up at farms looking for work, which tend to be mainly cash in hand work.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,002 ✭✭✭Dufflecoat Fanny


    Countries accept asylum seekers to get brownie points and cheap labour. It keeps the nutty empathetic fringe groups busy letting and keeping them in. It suits the landlords happy by keeping their assets spooging. It keeps the nutty angry fringe groups busy cos they need something to punch down on. Everyone else won't add up to a meaningless percentage against them so it will continue. That goes for Ireland and the UK



Advertisement