UK Links Asylum Policy to Channel Migrant Issue Amidst Row with Ireland

[Purdey]

Back in the good old days... We were grateful for their help. 

 

[RayC]

7 hours ago, Scouse123 said:

 

 

Europe, especially Germany, allowed this to happen and, in fact, encouraged it to a large degree in the early days until the full ramifications came home to roost.

 

Agreed. Which is all the more reason why an effective Europe-wide solution is necessary. 

[RayC]

3 hours ago, JonnyF said:

 

Nice dodge.

 

The correct answer was "yes it will be much worse under a Labour government".

 

The UK is done. I'm glad I saw the best of it and left at the right time. 

 

Wokeism/Liberals will cause the ruination of the West and common sense will see the rise of the East. Thankfully I predicted this and planned appropriately so i don't have to live through the failure we are currently seeing.

 

I watch it from a distance with a sadness for my extended family and a huge dose of relief that I could forsee it and acted upon my instincts. 

 

My remaining hope is that Liberals stay there and experience what they created. It's only a matter of time before it reaches Islington. 

 

You were warned not to go cheap. Your crystal ball is faulty.

[Scouse123]

7 hours ago, Purdey said:

Back in the good old days... We were grateful for their help. 

 

 

 

Back in the old days, guys like in the top photo above were happy to embrace British culture and blend in.

[Scouse123]

11 hours ago, mrfill said:

So the UK should chuck all the Ukrainian refugees out and send them back to Poland then?

 

And refugees are not 'required' to move to the first safe country and wait. Read the 1951 Refugee Convention of which the UK is a signatory./

 

 

Ukrainians are genuine refugees and fleeing war and would be very happy to return to their home country as soon as the fighting ceases.

[RayC]

2 hours ago, Scouse123 said:

 

 

Ukrainians are genuine refugees and fleeing war and would be very happy to return to their home country as soon as the fighting ceases.

 

66% of applications for asylum in the UK in 2022/23 were granted which suggests that the majority of refugees were genuine.

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/immigration-system-statistics-year-ending-june-2023/how-many-people-do-we-grant-protection-to#:~:text=As at the end of,a grant rate of 63%.

[Scouse123]

3 hours ago, RayC said:

 

66% of applications for asylum in the UK in 2022/23 were granted which suggests that the majority of refugees were genuine.

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/immigration-system-statistics-year-ending-june-2023/how-many-people-do-we-grant-protection-to#:~:text=As at the end of,a grant rate of 63%.

 

These are people who have gone about their applications the right way or manner. The vast majority are Ukrainians and Hong Kong BNO passport holders.

 

And how many ILLEGALS just disappear into the mist without attending appointments or interviews, once they have got into the UK.

 

We are seeing large arrivals now from India, Pakistan, Vietnam, Sri Lanka, and a host of other countries where there is NO CONFLICT.

 

These are just people wanting to move to a ready-made country to improve their economic prospects.

 

Those in boats arrivals have been deemed not to be real asylum seekers, more opportunistic migrants, these practices are fuelling the black marketeers from Albania and other criminal enterprises.

 

They also know every trick in the book to avoid deportation assisted by smart ass immigration lawyers, such as refusing to give country of origin and grinning whilst they throw passports into the sea.

 

 

 

 

Edited May 1 by Scouse123

[Chomper Higgot]

3 hours ago, Scouse123 said:

 

These are people who have gone about their applications the right way or manner. The vast majority are Ukrainians and Hong Kong BNO passport holders.

 

And how many ILLEGALS just disappear into the mist without attending appointments or interviews, once they have got into the UK.

 

We are seeing large arrivals now from India, Pakistan, Vietnam, Sri Lanka, and a host of other countries where there is NO CONFLICT.

 

These are just people wanting to move to a ready-made country to improve their economic prospects.

 

Those in boats arrivals have been deemed not to be real asylum seekers, more opportunistic migrants, these practices are fuelling the black marketeers from Albania and other criminal enterprises.

 

They also know every trick in the book to avoid deportation assisted by smart ass immigration lawyers, such as refusing to give country of origin and grinning whilst they throw passports into the sea.

 

 

 

 

Links to claims made please.

[RayC]

3 hours ago, Scouse123 said:

 

These are people who have gone about their applications the right way or manner. The vast majority are Ukrainians and Hong Kong BNO passport holders.

 

Not the case. Ukrainians and HK BNO passports holders were settled in the UK under the provisions of the Nationality and Borders Act.

 

The figure of 66% which I quoted, referred to those individuals seeking asylum in under the provisions of the Refugee Convention. The link which I previously posted highlights these differences.

 

3 hours ago, Scouse123 said:

And how many ILLEGALS just disappear into the mist without attending appointments or interviews, once they have got into the UK.

 

I don't know but I'd hazard a guess that the majority are those who overstay their visa.

 

3 hours ago, Scouse123 said:

 

We are seeing large arrivals now from India, Pakistan, Vietnam, Sri Lanka, and a host of other countries where there is NO CONFLICT.

 

Refugee status is not just granted to those fleeing war zones, it also applies to those fleeing other forms of persecution e.g. because of their political views, sexual orientation, etc.

 

3 hours ago, Scouse123 said:

 

These are just people wanting to move to a ready-made country to improve their economic prospects.

 

In which case, they would have their application for refugee status rejected. The fact that 66% of applications for refugee status are granted goes a long way to refuting your contention.

 

3 hours ago, Scouse123 said:

Those in boats arrivals have been deemed not to be real asylum seekers, more opportunistic migrants, these practices are fuelling the black marketeers from Albania and other criminal enterprises.

 

Do criminal gangs traffick people? Of course.

 

However, where is the evidence to support your claim that those arriving in boats are opportunists and not genuine refugees? Government data (see previously posted link) suggests otherwise.

 

3 hours ago, Scouse123 said:

 

They also know every trick in the book to avoid deportation assisted by smart ass immigration lawyers, such as refusing to give country of origin and grinning whilst they throw passports into the sea.

 

 

Again, where is the evidence to support your contention? Personally, I find it hard to believe that a refugee has an in-depth understanding of immigration law before they decide to head to the UK.

[thaibeachlovers]

On 4/30/2024 at 2:44 PM, James105 said:

 

A exceptionally rare example of a common sense statement coming from the UK government.  

I'm with the UK on this. Ireland has to accept the EU stance on illegal immigrants if it wants to be in the EU. It's not the UK's problem if the illegals prefer Ireland.

 

BTW I support the Rwanda solution, and IMO eventually the EU will be forced to adopt a similar solution as the tidal wave of illegals in the Med intensifies.

Australia has proven that such a solution stops the boats quick quick. Without the lure of streets of gold and bountiful welfare for the taking, Britain will no longer be an attractive destination, except perhaps for genuine refugees, but not economic migrants.

[Scouse123]

1 hour ago, RayC said:

 

Not the case. Ukrainians and HK BNO passports holders were settled in the UK under the provisions of the Nationality and Borders Act.

 

The figure of 66% which I quoted, referred to those individuals seeking asylum in under the provisions of the Refugee Convention. The link which I previously posted highlights these differences.

 

 

I don't know but I'd hazard a guess that the majority are those who overstay their visa.

 

 

Refugee status is not just granted to those fleeing war zones, it also applies to those fleeing other forms of persecution e.g. because of their political views, sexual orientation, etc.

 

 

In which case, they would have their application for refugee status rejected. The fact that 66% of applications for refugee status are granted goes a long way to refuting your contention.

 

 

Do criminal gangs traffick people? Of course.

 

However, where is the evidence to support your claim that those arriving in boats are opportunists and not genuine refugees? Government data (see previously posted link) suggests otherwise.

 

 

Again, where is the evidence to support your contention? Personally, I find it hard to believe that a refugee has an in-depth understanding of immigration law before they decide to head to the UK.

 

 

Simple as this, they are supposed to settle and seek refuge in the first safe country, you are deliberately ignored this aspect of the rules.

 

They are not doing this, they are making their way to the UK.

 

Therefore, they are not following the rules set down by the EU themselves. They are choosing the countries they wish to reside in.

 

So you can keep your links and whatever, what I am saying is irrefutable under the EU's own rules, which they are then disregarding and refusing, (as in the case of France), to take back these boat people.

 

We then have the case of those saying they are persecuted and playing the system, pretending they are juveniles and exhaustive tests have to be done to prove their ages, pretending they are LGBTQ+ to try to obtain asylum, Muslims, who all of a sudden convert to Christianity, then have gone on to commit terrorist acts and unspeakable crimes once they have reached British shores, (outlined recently on LBC by multi award-winning Nick Ferrari)..........

 

They are up to every trick in the book for the pure benefit of seeking asylum status. And the list goes on and on.

 

Lastly, you go on to say they have little knowledge of Immigration law before they reach British shores.

 

It's been featured in documentaries about sharp practice from immigration lawyers and alleged Asylum charities issuing booklets about ways around the system.

 

What about those already here in the UK, advising their relatives abroad in France of how to circumvent the system and how to answer immigration officials.

 

After all, they are well capable of phone calls and emails, you only have to look at them getting off the boats all armed with the latest cellphones!

 

 

 

 

 

Edited May 2 by Scouse123

[Chomper Higgot]

10 minutes ago, Scouse123 said:

 

 

Simple as this, they are supposed to settle and seek refuge in the first safe country, they are not doing this, they are making their way to the UK.

 

So you can keep your links and whatever, what I am saying is irrefutable under the EU's own rules, which they are then disregarding and refusing, as in the case of France, to take back these boat people..

 

Y

Link to your claim they are supposed to seek refuge in the first safe country?

[Scouse123]

8 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Link to your claim they are supposed to seek refuge in the first safe country?

 

I am not getting into this with you either when you are already supposed to know these rules and guidelines set out by the EU themselves.

 

And it is easy enough for you to research this information online.

 

https://euaa.europa.eu/asylum-report-2023/432-safe-country-concepts

[Scouse123]

2 hours ago, RayC said:

 

Not the case. Ukrainians and HK BNO passports holders were settled in the UK under the provisions of the Nationality and Borders Act.

 

The figure of 66% which I quoted, referred to those individuals seeking asylum in under the provisions of the Refugee Convention. The link which I previously posted highlights these differences.

 

 

I don't know but I'd hazard a guess that the majority are those who overstay their visa.

 

 

Refugee status is not just granted to those fleeing war zones, it also applies to those fleeing other forms of persecution e.g. because of their political views, sexual orientation, etc.

 

 

In which case, they would have their application for refugee status rejected. The fact that 66% of applications for refugee status are granted goes a long way to refuting your contention.

 

 

Do criminal gangs traffick people? Of course.

 

However, where is the evidence to support your claim that those arriving in boats are opportunists and not genuine refugees? Government data (see previously posted link) suggests otherwise.

 

 

Again, where is the evidence to support your contention? Personally, I find it hard to believe that a refugee has an in-depth understanding of immigration law before they decide to head to the UK.

 

https://euaa.europa.eu/asylum-report-2023/432-safe-country-concepts

 

[Scouse123]

2 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Links to claims made please.

 

@RayC

 

https://www.migrationwatchuk.org/news/2022/02/24/98-of-channel-boat-migrants-have-no-passport

 

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1876229/asylum-seekers-lie-religion-stay-UK-exclusive

 

https://anglican.ink/2024/02/08/fake-conversions-and-asylum-seekers/

 

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/revealed-judges-migrants-christianity-escape-deportation-jjn6xrwg0

 

https://euaa.europa.eu/asylum-report-2023/432-safe-country-concepts

 

https://www.migrationwatchuk.org/news/2021/12/27/asylum-abuse-by-adults-claiming-to-be-children

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12506813/Fury-French-police-funded-UK-taxpayers-stop-Channel-crossings-admit-letting-welcome-misery-world-France.html

 

 

There are a few links to keep you two going for a while.

 

 

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

8 minutes ago, Scouse123 said:

 

I am not getting into this with you either when you are already supposed to know these rules and guidelines set out by the EU themselves.

 

And it is easy enough for you to research this information online.

 

https://euaa.europa.eu/asylum-report-2023/432-safe-country-concepts

Probably best you don’t get into this with me or anyone else for that matter.

 

The link you have provided provides zero support to your claim that asylum seekers should seek refuge in the fire safe country.

 

No such requirement exists.

[Chomper Higgot]

2 minutes ago, Scouse123 said:

 

@RayC

 

https://www.migrationwatchuk.org/news/2022/02/24/98-of-channel-boat-migrants-have-no-passport

 

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1876229/asylum-seekers-lie-religion-stay-UK-exclusive

 

https://anglican.ink/2024/02/08/fake-conversions-and-asylum-seekers/

 

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/revealed-judges-migrants-christianity-escape-deportation-jjn6xrwg0

 

https://euaa.europa.eu/asylum-report-2023/432-safe-country-concepts

 

https://www.migrationwatchuk.org/news/2021/12/27/asylum-abuse-by-adults-claiming-to-be-children

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12506813/Fury-French-police-funded-UK-taxpayers-stop-Channel-crossings-admit-letting-welcome-misery-world-France.html

 

 

There are a few links to keep you two going for a while.

 

 

 

 

How about picking a link and telling us what claims of yours you think it is supporting.

[steve187]

On 4/30/2024 at 11:41 AM, Chomper Higgot said:

France doesn’t send migrants to the UK.

 

 

just gives them an escort, then the RNLI take over

[Purdey]

12 hours ago, Scouse123 said:

 

 

Back in the old days, guys like in the top photo above were happy to embrace British culture and blend in.

Trying watching the films Hurricane (2018) and Squadron 303 (2019) where they were castigated for speaking Polish together and we're racially discriminated against by the British. 

In the good old days...

[Scouse123]

11 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

How about picking a link and telling us what claims of yours you think it is supporting.

 

 

You just talk drivel.

 

Complete unsubstantiated drivel.

 

Is it too warm outside that you must stay in and just type nonsense to get a response?

[Chomper Higgot]

1 minute ago, Scouse123 said:

 

 

You just talk drivel.

 

Complete unsubstantiated drivel.

 

Is it too warm outside that you must stay in and just type nonsense to get a response?

At least when I post links they address the point I’m making.

 

You should give that a try.

 

[Scouse123]

16 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Probably best you don’t get into this with me or anyone else for that matter.

 

The link you have provided provides zero support to your claim that asylum seekers should seek refuge in the fire safe country.

 

No such requirement exists.

 

You are just deliberately obtuse.

 

I won't answer any more of your baiting posts.

 

Go make yourself useful somewhere, preferably Rwanda.

[Scouse123]

2 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

At least when I post links they address the point I’m making.

 

You should give that a try.

 

 

Try reading the links and reading my posts, they fit together and back each other up for anybody capable of reading at elementary level.

 

Bye. Have a sunny day.

[Chomper Higgot]

2 minutes ago, Scouse123 said:

 

You are just deliberately obtuse.

 

I won't answer any more of your baiting posts.

 

Go make yourself useful somewhere, preferably Rwanda.

Actually I’ve anything but obtuse, directly challenging your unsubstantiated claims.

 

I understand that’s difficult for you to deal with, but it is how discussions work.

 

[Neeranam]

Send them to Israel.

[scottiejohn]

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Link to your claim they are supposed to seek refuge in the first safe country?

Here is the opposite!

The truth behind claims refugees have to stay in the first 'safe' country they visit - Kent Live

[Scouse123]

26 minutes ago, Purdey said:

Trying watching the films Hurricane (2018) and Squadron 303 (2019) where they were castigated for speaking Polish together and we're racially discriminated against by the British. 

In the good old days...

 

You shouldn't seize on isolated incidents to try and taint the British servicemen in World War ll.

 

There were obviously different attitudes then to now, and you can't put modern twists and values on historical events.

 

I mean, when the Americans came over and were based in the UK, they expected the British to follow through with their ' color segregation bars'  and the like, but were firmly rebuffed.

 

Let's be honest, there are still instances now in 2024, where people are criticized and castigated in foreign countries for not speaking the local language, preferring their own

[Scouse123]

4 minutes ago, scottiejohn said:

Here is the opposite!

The truth behind claims refugees have to stay in the first 'safe' country they visit - Kent Live

 

 

From your link:-

 

Full Fact writes: "A lot depends here on how to interpret which country people are 'coming directly from'.

"It could be argued, for instance, that as the people crossing the channel are coming directly from France - which is not the country they initially fled - they don’t have the right to claim asylum in the UK.

[scottiejohn]

Just now, Scouse123 said:

 

 

From your link:-

 

Full Fact writes: "A lot depends here on how to interpret which country people are 'coming directly from'.

"It could be argued, for instance, that as the people crossing the channel are coming directly from France - which is not the country they initially fled - they don’t have the right to claim asylum in the UK.

Do refugees have to stay in the first safe country they reach? - Full Fact

[scottiejohn]

Just now, Scouse123 said:

 

 

From your link:-

 

Full Fact writes: "A lot depends here on how to interpret which country people are 'coming directly from'.

"It could be argued, for instance, that as the people crossing the channel are coming directly from France - which is not the country they initially fled - they don’t have the right to claim asylum in the UK.

I suggest you provide the full quote in future and do not edit out the last sentence!

The full quote is;

Full Fact writes: "A lot depends here on how to interpret which country people are 'coming directly from'.

"It could be argued, for instance, that as the people crossing the channel are coming directly from France - which is not the country they initially fled - they don’t have the right to claim asylum in the UK.

"However, in 1999 a UK judge ruled that 'some element of choice is indeed open to refugees as to where they may properly claim asylum'.

 

I have highlighted your omission above!