Detention and deportation to their homeland or a third country like Rwanda is the only policy that has ever worked.
The Aussies stopped their boat people from arriving with permanent offshore detention. When the Rudd/Gillard Labour Party stopped the policy, the arrivals began again by the tens of thousands. When Tony Abbott reintroduced it, they fell back to zero.
Rwanda will take a dribble at best MM and cost a fortune. So which British island you proposing to mirror Australian approach? Isle of Wight perhaps? Lundy? Shetlands perhaps? Maybe South Georgia? How long to agreed, constructed and ready including living quarters for employees and their families?
It might have some utility as an option in theory but practically not quick. Hence coming to an old Airfield near you/us soon.
What do you mean by a dribble J? As I understand the plan, if you cannot be deported home because you come from a dangerous country or one that refuses to issue returns documents, you will be deported to Rwanda.
See my comments below on the PM and Home Sec re-stating a month ago that the Rwanda scheme was uncapped and could take many thousands of asylum seekers.
150k in the backlog already MM. Rubber dinghies bringing c40k a year.
Let’s be optimistic and say Rwanda takes 20k (and they won’t get anywhere near that). What you doing with the rest?
And I’m not even asking you why you’ve suddenly so much faith in Ministerial announcements.
I don’t think you need to deport the backlog (not yet anyway). The priority is to make it clear to any new would-be dinghy sailors that they will be deported. I suspect a few thousand deportations would be enough to get the message across. Or at least that was the Aussie experience. Don’t forget, the people making the crossing are choosing the best option for them and paying the smugglers accordingly. If Britain becomes the hardest option in Europe, they will choose something easier.
As to my faith in minister’s pronouncements – eventually they will be judged on results, but until then what else have we got to go on? There is no alternative plan from the opposition or an example of an effective deterrent from any other European country. All we have got is Rishi Sunak’s plan (God help us!)
I ‘get’ the potential deterrent effect for economic migrants. But what percentage would it need to be to stop you trying if desperate? Not convinced 10% to Rwanda (a bigger% than likely) going to be that off-putting. Traffickers will ‘market’ better than Govt one suspects too.
The Aussies also only have c4k on Nauru/PNG I think. And accessing Aus through the typical migration routes much harder. So think their offshoring model only of so much transferability.
Now regular visible returnees of economic migrants to country of origin might have bigger deterrent effect but means we have to be much better at realpolitik deals and better processing.
And v high likelihood as a Trafficker you get caught and imprisoned should be something we engage with partners and make happen. But for partners to help us we need to help them and that involves collective approach to European borders and the Med. We walked away from sharing elements of that.
As an Aussie, I can say that it was not enjoyable to see footage of dead people washing up on Christmas Island. The whole concept of the refugee system is an outdated joke. The whole “Stop the Boats!” has been turned into a conservatives are evil narrative over here. We have “The Voice” to deal with at the moment and this is currently splitting us three ways. Yes = a good and decent person, no = horrible racist, and the rest who are waiting to be bullied. All civility has gone and as an Anglo Aussie, we are the lowest of the low and our culture is deeply racist. My daughter comes home from school feeling bad about what was done to the Aboriginals. While some aspects were not pleasant from a 21st Century perspective, the truth is that the Aboriginals were not peace loving individuals living in a Wikandaesque utopia. Most tribes tended to be very violent and usually started the violence first. The problem is that stonage weapons are no match for 18th or 19th Century weapons.
In modern day Australia, a lot of the children of migrants are deeply racist toward white people and extremely intolerant of any white person who does not prostrate themselves before them. Our ABC has become the chief mouthpiece for Anglophobia here and our current PM has been known to make the odd snide remarks against Anglo Aussies.
Refugees might assuage pointless guilt. Migrants will boost the economy. The the long term effects are devastating. The West is the most diverse of any part of the world and the most divided. Look at the film and TV awards of any part of the world and they have little to no diversity, and this is ok. It is time to stop being bullied and to grow a spine. Europeans (Brits included) have done amazing things for the planet and should be celebrated rather than berated.
I think you are seeing the ability to broaden an understanding of our history as a weakness rather than a strength. I’m much more in the latter. I actually think the whole debate helps further crystallise the really important core values of the West, which the vast majority of immigrants have come to our parts of the world exactly for. I think we should be calmly inquisitive but self confident and not histrionic about historical debates.
We’ve a Hindu PM too. No big deal. What a tremendous example of the power of the West.
I do suspect those of us a bit older are following the usual pattern and becoming more like our fathers/mothers were – always grumpy about the youth of today and change more generally.
“Stop the boats” might have become an “evil narrative” but I can’t see Albanese changing the system after the Rudd debacle. Given the choice between a tough deterrent and unlimited numbers of illegal immigrants, people know which side their bread is buttered.
As to your broader point, completely agree. We should not allow leftwing people in the institutions that we pay for to browbeat us.
The Anglo Aussies and Anglo Americans stopped Napoleon, the Kaiser, the little corporal and the commies. They stopped slavery, civilised the world and invented 3/4s of the things that make life bearable. We are the most tolerant countries on earth and should limit newcomers to those who share our values and will contribute to our countries.
I’ll not get upvotes for this but this has to be said. There’s no way a culture goes into a continent and does large scale ethnic cleansing, or does industrial scale racially targeted slave trade in hundreds of thousands, and then faces no eventual backlash for it, but only celebration. More nuanced and more balanced recognition of the West – yes. West has done only great things to be celebrated, Wokies are exaggerating everything to erase it, no sorry but no.
So Emre, you have drunk the Colonialism is bad koolaid. You cannot put the actions of private firms into the same pot as State-run Colonialism.
Objectively State-run Colonialism was a humanitarian project.It brought infrastructure, medical help for humans and livestock, security in the form of protection of smaller tribes from larger tribes and non-European empires which actually performed raids to capture slaves, actually ended slavery, improved education, improved agriculture, increased trade, recorded languages and cultures, and best of all were actually invited in by tribes who wanted to join the colony because of all the benefits that they received.The locals were heavily involved in working out boundaries because ethnicity was not the most important factor back then which is why we struggle to make sense of it now and assume the worst.
Our greatest failure at the moment is that we cannot see beyond our own noses. You cannot judge 1993 with 2023 lenses, and that was only 30 years ago. In a hundred years time, the wokies will be condemned for the hate mongers they are. The truth is that the modern world began when civilisation began and it will continue on forever or until we destroy ourselves.
So Emre, you have drunk the Colonialism is bad koolaid. You cannot put the actions of private firms into the same pot as State-run Colonialism.
Objectively State-run Colonialism was a humanitarian project.It brought infrastructure, medical help for humans and livestock, security in the form of protection of smaller tribes from larger tribes and non-European empires which actually performed raids to capture slaves, actually ended slavery, improved education, improved agriculture, increased trade, recorded languages and cultures, and best of all were actually invited in by tribes who wanted to join the colony because of all the benefits that they received.The locals were heavily involved in working out boundaries because ethnicity was not the most important factor back then which is why we struggle to make sense of it now and assume the worst.
Our greatest failure at the moment is that we cannot see beyond our own noses. You cannot judge 1993 with 2023 lenses, and that was only 30 years ago. In a hundred years time, the wokies will be condemned for the hate mongers they are. The truth is that the modern world began when civilisation began and it will continue on forever or until we destroy ourselves.
I think you are seeing the ability to broaden an understanding of our history as a weakness rather than a strength. I’m much more in the latter. I actually think the whole debate helps further crystallise the really important core values of the West, which the vast majority of immigrants have come to our parts of the world exactly for. I think we should be calmly inquisitive but self confident and not histrionic about historical debates.
We’ve a Hindu PM too. No big deal. What a tremendous example of the power of the West.
I do suspect those of us a bit older are following the usual pattern and becoming more like our fathers/mothers were – always grumpy about the youth of today and change more generally.
“Stop the boats” might have become an “evil narrative” but I can’t see Albanese changing the system after the Rudd debacle. Given the choice between a tough deterrent and unlimited numbers of illegal immigrants, people know which side their bread is buttered.
As to your broader point, completely agree. We should not allow leftwing people in the institutions that we pay for to browbeat us.
The Anglo Aussies and Anglo Americans stopped Napoleon, the Kaiser, the little corporal and the commies. They stopped slavery, civilised the world and invented 3/4s of the things that make life bearable. We are the most tolerant countries on earth and should limit newcomers to those who share our values and will contribute to our countries.
I’ll not get upvotes for this but this has to be said. There’s no way a culture goes into a continent and does large scale ethnic cleansing, or does industrial scale racially targeted slave trade in hundreds of thousands, and then faces no eventual backlash for it, but only celebration. More nuanced and more balanced recognition of the West – yes. West has done only great things to be celebrated, Wokies are exaggerating everything to erase it, no sorry but no.
As an Aussie, I can say that it was not enjoyable to see footage of dead people washing up on Christmas Island. The whole concept of the refugee system is an outdated joke. The whole “Stop the Boats!” has been turned into a conservatives are evil narrative over here. We have “The Voice” to deal with at the moment and this is currently splitting us three ways. Yes = a good and decent person, no = horrible racist, and the rest who are waiting to be bullied. All civility has gone and as an Anglo Aussie, we are the lowest of the low and our culture is deeply racist. My daughter comes home from school feeling bad about what was done to the Aboriginals. While some aspects were not pleasant from a 21st Century perspective, the truth is that the Aboriginals were not peace loving individuals living in a Wikandaesque utopia. Most tribes tended to be very violent and usually started the violence first. The problem is that stonage weapons are no match for 18th or 19th Century weapons.
In modern day Australia, a lot of the children of migrants are deeply racist toward white people and extremely intolerant of any white person who does not prostrate themselves before them. Our ABC has become the chief mouthpiece for Anglophobia here and our current PM has been known to make the odd snide remarks against Anglo Aussies.
Refugees might assuage pointless guilt. Migrants will boost the economy. The the long term effects are devastating. The West is the most diverse of any part of the world and the most divided. Look at the film and TV awards of any part of the world and they have little to no diversity, and this is ok. It is time to stop being bullied and to grow a spine. Europeans (Brits included) have done amazing things for the planet and should be celebrated rather than berated.
I ‘get’ the potential deterrent effect for economic migrants. But what percentage would it need to be to stop you trying if desperate? Not convinced 10% to Rwanda (a bigger% than likely) going to be that off-putting. Traffickers will ‘market’ better than Govt one suspects too.
The Aussies also only have c4k on Nauru/PNG I think. And accessing Aus through the typical migration routes much harder. So think their offshoring model only of so much transferability.
Now regular visible returnees of economic migrants to country of origin might have bigger deterrent effect but means we have to be much better at realpolitik deals and better processing.
And v high likelihood as a Trafficker you get caught and imprisoned should be something we engage with partners and make happen. But for partners to help us we need to help them and that involves collective approach to European borders and the Med. We walked away from sharing elements of that.
I don’t think you need to deport the backlog (not yet anyway). The priority is to make it clear to any new would-be dinghy sailors that they will be deported. I suspect a few thousand deportations would be enough to get the message across. Or at least that was the Aussie experience. Don’t forget, the people making the crossing are choosing the best option for them and paying the smugglers accordingly. If Britain becomes the hardest option in Europe, they will choose something easier.
As to my faith in minister’s pronouncements – eventually they will be judged on results, but until then what else have we got to go on? There is no alternative plan from the opposition or an example of an effective deterrent from any other European country. All we have got is Rishi Sunak’s plan (God help us!)
150k in the backlog already MM. Rubber dinghies bringing c40k a year.
Let’s be optimistic and say Rwanda takes 20k (and they won’t get anywhere near that). What you doing with the rest?
And I’m not even asking you why you’ve suddenly so much faith in Ministerial announcements.
What do you mean by a dribble J? As I understand the plan, if you cannot be deported home because you come from a dangerous country or one that refuses to issue returns documents, you will be deported to Rwanda.
See my comments below on the PM and Home Sec re-stating a month ago that the Rwanda scheme was uncapped and could take many thousands of asylum seekers.
It’s probably a non-starter politically but why not relocate these boat people (all of them, not some of them) to camps in Northern Ireland?
They could be allowed to live and work there but banned from access to GB and the public purse.
Of course, if they wanted to move south and enter the EU they would be able to do so.
Rwanda will take a dribble at best MM and cost a fortune. So which British island you proposing to mirror Australian approach? Isle of Wight perhaps? Lundy? Shetlands perhaps? Maybe South Georgia? How long to agreed, constructed and ready including living quarters for employees and their families?
It might have some utility as an option in theory but practically not quick. Hence coming to an old Airfield near you/us soon.
It’s probably a non-starter politically but why not relocate these boat people (all of them, not some of them) to camps in Northern Ireland?
They could be allowed to live and work there but banned from access to GB and the public purse.
Of course, if they wanted to move south and enter the EU they would be able to do so.
Last edited 1 year ago by William Shaw
Matt M
1 year ago
Detention and deportation to their homeland or a third country like Rwanda is the only policy that has ever worked.
The Aussies stopped their boat people from arriving with permanent offshore detention. When the Rudd/Gillard Labour Party stopped the policy, the arrivals began again by the tens of thousands. When Tony Abbott reintroduced it, they fell back to zero.
Peter B
1 year ago
I think we need to face up to the unwelcome fact that there is now a large and global “refugee industry”, supported by a rather strange coalition of interest groups promoting increased global migration as variously “inevitable”, “necessary”, “fair”, “desirable”, “just for the past ‘sins’ of rich countries” … and so on. It is an industry as much as the race discrimination, feminist and LGBTQ/whatever ones. Whatever we do to address the real and deserving cases and correct laws to remove discrimination, it is never enough. Because, in truth, the “campaigners” for these causes are more interested in perpetuating the cause than solving the actual problems and then moving on to something else.
The demand here is cleary infinite and our resources and ability to help finite. We also have people already in our country who have contributed to this country and who – in my view at least – therefore should have first call on any spare resources we do have.
So we need to take a far more realistic view on what we can actually do here and stop placing unrealistic burdens on UK citizens and taxpayers.
Peter B
1 year ago
I think we need to face up to the unwelcome fact that there is now a large and global “refugee industry”, supported by a rather strange coalition of interest groups promoting increased global migration as variously “inevitable”, “necessary”, “fair”, “desirable”, “just for the past ‘sins’ of rich countries” … and so on. It is an industry as much as the race discrimination, feminist and LGBTQ/whatever ones. Whatever we do to address the real and deserving cases and correct laws to remove discrimination, it is never enough. Because, in truth, the “campaigners” for these causes are more interested in perpetuating the cause than solving the actual problems and then moving on to something else.
The demand here is cleary infinite and our resources and ability to help finite. We also have people already in our country who have contributed to this country and who – in my view at least – therefore should have first call on any spare resources we do have.
So we need to take a far more realistic view on what we can actually do here and stop placing unrealistic burdens on UK citizens and taxpayers.
Jeremy Bray
1 year ago
While I have complained frequently of the incompetence of our government on multiple fronts the fact is that relatively speaking the governance of this country and other European countries is markedly better than that obtaining in vast swathes of the world and the conditions for building a better life, particularly given the welfare provisions, are bound to be a draw for many whose native lands are severely dysfunctional.
The conventions on refugees were drawn up after WW2 in the wake of a genocidal regime where escape to another neighbouring country was needed to preserve life. However, while undoubtedly the risks of living in many countries is higher than here there are no neighbouring countries where your ethnicity is in effect a death sentence. In virtually all cases “refugees” are simply seeking a better and less risky life than is obtainable in their native land. Unfortunately, we do not have the capacity to absorb all who wish to come and can show our country is safer than theirs. We certainly shouldn’t wish to encourage those who pay sums to people smugglers to jump the queue.
Those who arrive illegally by boat should be immediately flown to Ruanda or any other destination willing to accept them. They certainly should not be housed for lengthy periods in hotels or on board ships.
The problem is at best Rwanda will take a dribble and we don’t have return deals with most of the Countries from which the Asylum seekers have traveled. Thus where are we proposing they be sent?
Perhaps they’ll be other Rwanda’s but one suspects always some limitations in the policy response.
We need return deals and that is v complex. Who’s returning someone to the Taliban or Republican Guard? Doesn’t mean many aren’t economic migrants but we need to filter and we’ve totally messed up Processing. We process fewer per annum than we did before this13yr Govt.
“On Rwanda I would like to correct a misconception. It is an uncapped scheme, everyone keeps saying you only have 200 places, no its an uncapped scheme. Everyone should know that and have confidence in that.”
On the 20th March 2023, the Home Secretary, while touring the housing we have paid to be built in Rwanda to house the new asylum seekers deported from Britain, said.
“I need to categorically and emphatically correct those who believe this partnership is limited at 200. As we have heard from the Rwandan government today…this scheme is unlimited and there are many thousands who could be accommodated here pursuant to our legislation.”
I think if you have to borrow £5k from your relatives to get a place on a dinghy and you see that all new arrivals are quickly being deported to Africa or back to their homelands, you will pretty quickly decide to do something else rather than try your luck in England..
… and unlike on saga, no chance of seducing a 90 year old on her last legs, and altering her will in ones favour?… Oh well, back to reading Miss Marple and Poirot….
… and unlike on saga, no chance of seducing a 90 year old on her last legs, and altering her will in ones favour?… Oh well, back to reading Miss Marple and Poirot….
Yes if the chance of being deported is high and you aren’t actually fearing for your life if you stay where you are. But on the first issue the chance currently is low, and until that hugely changes they’ll take the risk. Whether Rwanda changes that remains to be seen, but sense is the volume they’ll take still gives the Traffickers a business model they can sell.
Yes if the chance of being deported is high and you aren’t actually fearing for your life if you stay where you are. But on the first issue the chance currently is low, and until that hugely changes they’ll take the risk. Whether Rwanda changes that remains to be seen, but sense is the volume they’ll take still gives the Traffickers a business model they can sell.
I think if you have to borrow £5k from your relatives to get a place on a dinghy and you see that all new arrivals are quickly being deported to Africa or back to their homelands, you will pretty quickly decide to do something else rather than try your luck in England..
It is always claimed by those in favour of maintaining the present flow of immigrants that they are an asset to the UK. Why, therefore should it be difficult to persuade the countries of their origin that they could recover these assets or some other country eager for their skills?
The Taliban and Republican Guard may have religious and social practices that we don’t observe here in the UK but they are not genocidal organisations and we have no reason to think returnees would not be able to resettle provided they abided by the laws of their native countries – apart perhaps from those few in Afghanistan that had provided active support to our army.
The whole process has become over-bureaucratic, legalistic and prolonged and should have been streamlined years ago. Lawyers should be strictly kept out of the picture and refugee status should be granted only to those who have been unable to settle elsewhere. Denmark has been able to reduce asylum applications to about 1,500 last year and they aim to reduce this yet further. In terms of population this would translate to about 15,000 asylum applications to the UK. All illegal arrivals should be immediately flown to Ruanda and the flood would soon become a dribble.
Denmark is an interesting case. It doesn’t have the application volume of the UK but that may of course be part because it takes a harder line – ID cards and language probably others. It sent back a number to Syria I think last year, but we’re talking a hundred of so, not thousands from recollection. It’s not got a backlog so it’s in a better position of course.
As regards why persuading countries of their origin to take them back – you tell me why our Govt hasn’t struck those deals? One assumes not quite as easy for the UK for whatever reason.
And 15k to Rwanda? Let’s see us get 200 there first. I think your ‘hope’ is a well ahead of the current plan. And this is the problem – statements of intent and then non delivery (not you but the chumps who’ve been running the show)
Denmark has slowly woken up to the fact that Muslim migrants have no interest in integration and have become a threat to their own people whereby gangs roam the streets causing trouble. Of course in Britain they don’t do that do they?
The problem with a statement like that AM is you are lumping every Muslim together. We’ve a Muslim First Minister in Scotland. So it’s unintelligent. It’s also pretty close to something else but I can’t say that without being censored I think. You are right there will be some that are ‘wrong-uns’ and need to weed them out, but you do yourself a disservice showing you aren’t prepared to distinguish.
The problem with a statement like that AM is you are lumping every Muslim together. We’ve a Muslim First Minister in Scotland. So it’s unintelligent. It’s also pretty close to something else but I can’t say that without being censored I think. You are right there will be some that are ‘wrong-uns’ and need to weed them out, but you do yourself a disservice showing you aren’t prepared to distinguish.
Denmark has slowly woken up to the fact that Muslim migrants have no interest in integration and have become a threat to their own people whereby gangs roam the streets causing trouble. Of course in Britain they don’t do that do they?
Denmark is an interesting case. It doesn’t have the application volume of the UK but that may of course be part because it takes a harder line – ID cards and language probably others. It sent back a number to Syria I think last year, but we’re talking a hundred of so, not thousands from recollection. It’s not got a backlog so it’s in a better position of course.
As regards why persuading countries of their origin to take them back – you tell me why our Govt hasn’t struck those deals? One assumes not quite as easy for the UK for whatever reason.
And 15k to Rwanda? Let’s see us get 200 there first. I think your ‘hope’ is a well ahead of the current plan. And this is the problem – statements of intent and then non delivery (not you but the chumps who’ve been running the show)
“On Rwanda I would like to correct a misconception. It is an uncapped scheme, everyone keeps saying you only have 200 places, no its an uncapped scheme. Everyone should know that and have confidence in that.”
On the 20th March 2023, the Home Secretary, while touring the housing we have paid to be built in Rwanda to house the new asylum seekers deported from Britain, said.
“I need to categorically and emphatically correct those who believe this partnership is limited at 200. As we have heard from the Rwandan government today…this scheme is unlimited and there are many thousands who could be accommodated here pursuant to our legislation.”
It is always claimed by those in favour of maintaining the present flow of immigrants that they are an asset to the UK. Why, therefore should it be difficult to persuade the countries of their origin that they could recover these assets or some other country eager for their skills?
The Taliban and Republican Guard may have religious and social practices that we don’t observe here in the UK but they are not genocidal organisations and we have no reason to think returnees would not be able to resettle provided they abided by the laws of their native countries – apart perhaps from those few in Afghanistan that had provided active support to our army.
The whole process has become over-bureaucratic, legalistic and prolonged and should have been streamlined years ago. Lawyers should be strictly kept out of the picture and refugee status should be granted only to those who have been unable to settle elsewhere. Denmark has been able to reduce asylum applications to about 1,500 last year and they aim to reduce this yet further. In terms of population this would translate to about 15,000 asylum applications to the UK. All illegal arrivals should be immediately flown to Ruanda and the flood would soon become a dribble.
These refugee conventions seem to be treated like immutable laws or scared texts that can never be revised or improved. Nonsense. They are clearly well past their sell by date and need updating for the modern world.
According to Russian sources we are due a visit from Putin’s Satan2 missiles “that will erase the UK from the Map” Asylum seekers should be warned that they are faced with being barbequed and that France is actually a good choice to remain in.
The problem is at best Rwanda will take a dribble and we don’t have return deals with most of the Countries from which the Asylum seekers have traveled. Thus where are we proposing they be sent?
Perhaps they’ll be other Rwanda’s but one suspects always some limitations in the policy response.
We need return deals and that is v complex. Who’s returning someone to the Taliban or Republican Guard? Doesn’t mean many aren’t economic migrants but we need to filter and we’ve totally messed up Processing. We process fewer per annum than we did before this13yr Govt.
These refugee conventions seem to be treated like immutable laws or scared texts that can never be revised or improved. Nonsense. They are clearly well past their sell by date and need updating for the modern world.
According to Russian sources we are due a visit from Putin’s Satan2 missiles “that will erase the UK from the Map” Asylum seekers should be warned that they are faced with being barbequed and that France is actually a good choice to remain in.
Jeremy Bray
1 year ago
While I have complained frequently of the incompetence of our government on multiple fronts the fact is that relatively speaking the governance of this country and other European countries is markedly better than that obtaining in vast swathes of the world and the conditions for building a better life, particularly given the welfare provisions, are bound to be a draw for many whose native lands are severely dysfunctional.
The conventions on refugees were drawn up after WW2 in the wake of a genocidal regime where escape to another neighbouring country was needed to preserve life. However, while undoubtedly the risks of living in many countries is higher than here there are no neighbouring countries where your ethnicity is in effect a death sentence. In virtually all cases “refugees” are simply seeking a better and less risky life than is obtainable in their native land. Unfortunately, we do not have the capacity to absorb all who wish to come and can show our country is safer than theirs. We certainly shouldn’t wish to encourage those who pay sums to people smugglers to jump the queue.
Those who arrive illegally by boat should be immediately flown to Ruanda or any other destination willing to accept them. They certainly should not be housed for lengthy periods in hotels or on board ships.
Charles Stanhope
1 year ago
Scapa Flow*, once the home of the Grand Fleet, then the graveyard of the High Seas Fleet, would be an ideal location for a huge floating Detention Centre.
At 324 square kilometres it could potentially accommodate upwards of 10 million illegal migrants, packed into ships/hulks each holding about 5,000 souls.
Building or refurbishing those ships/hulks would provide much needed work Britain’s moribund shipyards, whilst servicing’ those offshore ‘guests’ would mean ample employment for the Orkney islanders.
The whole project could be named Operation MAGWITCH**to give it some historical perspective.
No doubt we could ‘rent out’ some of the potential accommodation to our needy European friends.
Obviously due care and attention would be paid to observing various religious, and gender rights, including absurd culinary, and mutilation traditions.
It would also be axiomatic that superb internet access was available, so that the ‘guests’ could send photos of the joys of living in Scapa Flow back to the Middle East, Africa or wherever they originally escaped from.
(* The Orkney Islands, ‘anchored’ just to the north of the British
mainland.)
(** Other options might be Jellicoe, Beatty or perhaps even Günther Prien.)
The location needs living accommodation for the workforce CH. The idea of some remote location attractive until one has to think about the infrastructure needed.
Border Force got a recruitment challenge already without telling employees they rotate through tours of duty in the Orkneys.
We managed to maintain the Grand Fleet there a century ago. Today the infrastructure for the Oil Industry seems to work quite efficiently Even the railway stretches as far as Wick and Thurso.
The ‘workforce’ could be accommodated very comfortably, and rotated on say a 7 month basis*, and that includes the feckless Home Office personnel charged with processing applications!
The great advantages are one: it is ‘out of sight’ and thus ‘out of mind’, two: It is NOT an attractive location for someone coming from the Middle East or Africa**.
Off course it won’t be cheap, but no more expensive than other current (feeble) proposals .
(*The length of tour an Infantry Battalion served in Afghanistan.)
(** Even if they happen to be an ornithologist.)
I stand corrected! You are indeed correct…I shall have to discipline my ‘predicted text gremlin, who, I am reliably informed lives somewhere inside my I-pad!
However I think you maybe slightly overreacting as, rather surprisingly, I have never been accused of WOKESPEAK in my life.
I stand corrected! You are indeed correct…I shall have to discipline my ‘predicted text gremlin, who, I am reliably informed lives somewhere inside my I-pad!
However I think you maybe slightly overreacting as, rather surprisingly, I have never been accused of WOKESPEAK in my life.
We managed to maintain the Grand Fleet there a century ago. Today the infrastructure for the Oil Industry seems to work quite efficiently Even the railway stretches as far as Wick and Thurso.
The ‘workforce’ could be accommodated very comfortably, and rotated on say a 7 month basis*, and that includes the feckless Home Office personnel charged with processing applications!
The great advantages are one: it is ‘out of sight’ and thus ‘out of mind’, two: It is NOT an attractive location for someone coming from the Middle East or Africa**.
Off course it won’t be cheap, but no more expensive than other current (feeble) proposals .
(*The length of tour an Infantry Battalion served in Afghanistan.)
(** Even if they happen to be an ornithologist.)
I met some of the crew of U-47 in the late 1960s, when they attended a memorial event at the Southsea War Memorial organised by Royal Oak survivors. I was a Sea Cadet in TS Royal Oak and was invited with fellow members to form a guard so that the cap tally would be seen.
They seemed very decent men but my German and their English rather limited our conversation.
A disproportionate number of ‘boy sailors’ were lost on H.M.S. Royal Oak as I recall.
I’ve forgotten why she was still in Scapa when the rest of the Fleet had scarpered ( forgive the pun) to Lough Swilly.
.
A disproportionate number of ‘boy sailors’ were lost on H.M.S. Royal Oak as I recall.
I’ve forgotten why she was still in Scapa when the rest of the Fleet had scarpered ( forgive the pun) to Lough Swilly.
.
The location needs living accommodation for the workforce CH. The idea of some remote location attractive until one has to think about the infrastructure needed.
Border Force got a recruitment challenge already without telling employees they rotate through tours of duty in the Orkneys.
I met some of the crew of U-47 in the late 1960s, when they attended a memorial event at the Southsea War Memorial organised by Royal Oak survivors. I was a Sea Cadet in TS Royal Oak and was invited with fellow members to form a guard so that the cap tally would be seen.
They seemed very decent men but my German and their English rather limited our conversation.
Scapa Flow*, once the home of the Grand Fleet, then the graveyard of the High Seas Fleet, would be an ideal location for a huge floating Detention Centre.
At 324 square kilometres it could potentially accommodate upwards of 10 million illegal migrants, packed into ships/hulks each holding about 5,000 souls.
Building or refurbishing those ships/hulks would provide much needed work Britain’s moribund shipyards, whilst servicing’ those offshore ‘guests’ would mean ample employment for the Orkney islanders.
The whole project could be named Operation MAGWITCH**to give it some historical perspective.
No doubt we could ‘rent out’ some of the potential accommodation to our needy European friends.
Obviously due care and attention would be paid to observing various religious, and gender rights, including absurd culinary, and mutilation traditions.
It would also be axiomatic that superb internet access was available, so that the ‘guests’ could send photos of the joys of living in Scapa Flow back to the Middle East, Africa or wherever they originally escaped from.
(* The Orkney Islands, ‘anchored’ just to the north of the British
mainland.)
(** Other options might be Jellicoe, Beatty or perhaps even Günther Prien.)
Last edited 1 year ago by Charles Stanhope
Dougie Undersub
1 year ago
Except most of them aren’t refugees, are they Senay?
Dougie Undersub
1 year ago
Except most of them aren’t refugees, are they Senay?
Simon Neale
1 year ago
The Netherlands’s Doctors Without Borders was deployed for the first time within the country itself.
They are aptly named, then. You – we – won’t stop this destruction of our countries until borders are closed and properly maintained.
Simon Neale
1 year ago
The Netherlands’s Doctors Without Borders was deployed for the first time within the country itself.
They are aptly named, then. You – we – won’t stop this destruction of our countries until borders are closed and properly maintained.
Daniel Lee
1 year ago
We cannot solve world poverty and violence by evacuating the Third World to the First World.
Daniel Lee
1 year ago
We cannot solve world poverty and violence by evacuating the Third World to the First World.
Steven Carr
1 year ago
Of course, with the climate emergency , people in low-lying countries like the Netherlands will be forced to migrate because of rising sea-levels.
It just is not safe for people to seek refuge in countries like the Netherlands.
Of course, with the climate emergency , people in low-lying countries like the Netherlands will be forced to migrate because of rising sea-levels.
It just is not safe for people to seek refuge in countries like the Netherlands.
Emmanuel MARTIN
1 year ago
Ukraine is allowed to defend its border by shooting at invaders. Why aren’t other western countries allowed to do the same ?
Emmanuel MARTIN
1 year ago
Ukraine is allowed to defend its border by shooting at invaders. Why aren’t other western countries allowed to do the same ?
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
What? no vying for the captain’s table dinner invitation? No old biddy square dancing? No cabaret from a long forgotten 1960s failed popstar? I hope that saga give cut price for one of these cruises?
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
What? no vying for the captain’s table dinner invitation? No old biddy square dancing? No cabaret from a long forgotten 1960s failed popstar? I hope that saga give cut price for one of these cruises?
Mike Michaels
1 year ago
Build the wall. Cadiz to Crimea.
Mike Michaels
1 year ago
Build the wall. Cadiz to Crimea.
j watson
1 year ago
The problem in the Netherlands as in the UK is we want the problem to just go away and thus avoid confronting realities that require less ‘red meat’ sloganeering and instead require honesty and multilateral detailed policy responses that recognise this is going to be a long term issue however indignant we want to be.
In the UK so much media space is taken up with leaving the ECHR and the Rwandan option despite the clear fact that even if both happen the numbers will not abate and neither policy response will make much difference. As a result we’ve failed to prepare sufficient temporary accommodation and invest in faster, effective (but humane) processing. We’ve failed to strike ‘return’ deals with other Countries from which many have travelled. We’ve failed to initiate a proper conversation about national ID cards. And we’ve failed to work collectively with European partners and other non European countries dealing with far greater numbers especially on taking out the traffickers.
In part one suspects these multiple failures are because it suits some to always have the ‘red meat’ political option and a ‘demon’ to blame to help corral a certain section of voters. And also allows the current political leaders responsible for this to blame someone else rather than 13 years of head in the sand Policy formulation and implementation.
I’d suggest that the chances of “European partners” agreeing deals is next to zero, especially when they see many refugees passing though their country to get to the U.K.
Neither are our “European partners” helping to reform ECHR outcomes – presumably for exactly the same reason.
ID cards and faster processing would provide marginal help, but neither are real solutions while the U.K. have nowhere to return/relocate people to.
Deals on tackling trafficking and how collectively Europe might handle the issue at it’s border and internationally are of course more difficult given our behaviour in recent years but a solution without multilateral collaboration v optimistic.
ID cards could prevent some because the absence in the UK means we are a more attractive destination. It’s why many prefer the Channel risk as France has ID system.
I note you don’t propose much, although imply ECHR change some solution. You know it’s not though and people and trafficking won’t be put off by legal changes esp when they can’t be easily sent elsewhere through lack of options. (Rwanda will take a dribble at best as we know). It is a v difficult problem and gradually, inevitably we’ll awake that the ‘red meat’ slogans a chimera. Then hopefully we can refocus properly
Deals on tackling trafficking and how collectively Europe might handle the issue at it’s border and internationally are of course more difficult given our behaviour in recent years but a solution without multilateral collaboration v optimistic.
ID cards could prevent some because the absence in the UK means we are a more attractive destination. It’s why many prefer the Channel risk as France has ID system.
I note you don’t propose much, although imply ECHR change some solution. You know it’s not though and people and trafficking won’t be put off by legal changes esp when they can’t be easily sent elsewhere through lack of options. (Rwanda will take a dribble at best as we know). It is a v difficult problem and gradually, inevitably we’ll awake that the ‘red meat’ slogans a chimera. Then hopefully we can refocus properly
This appalling fiasco can firmly be laid at the feet of the wretched, supine and utterly worthless so called TORY Party who have behaved like terrified rabbits trapped in the headlights of the immigration Juggernaut for the past 13 years.
Future generations will quiet correctly curse them to eternity.
I suspect that with proper leadership and correct encouragement the forces of The Forces of the fabled ‘Red Wall’ would make mincemeat of Allah & his chums in minutes.
Just as they did so many times before at Plassey, Buxar, Assaye, Delhi, Omdurman and so on and on.
I suspect that with proper leadership and correct encouragement the forces of The Forces of the fabled ‘Red Wall’ would make mincemeat of Allah & his chums in minutes.
Just as they did so many times before at Plassey, Buxar, Assaye, Delhi, Omdurman and so on and on.
Given that the Tory party seems to be run by and from suburban Kent, and that is where the immigrants land, why not just make them all stay in somewhere like Sevenoaks… then we might see some reaction?
Given that the Tory party seems to be run by and from suburban Kent, and that is where the immigrants land, why not just make them all stay in somewhere like Sevenoaks… then we might see some reaction?
I’d suggest that the chances of “European partners” agreeing deals is next to zero, especially when they see many refugees passing though their country to get to the U.K.
Neither are our “European partners” helping to reform ECHR outcomes – presumably for exactly the same reason.
ID cards and faster processing would provide marginal help, but neither are real solutions while the U.K. have nowhere to return/relocate people to.
This appalling fiasco can firmly be laid at the feet of the wretched, supine and utterly worthless so called TORY Party who have behaved like terrified rabbits trapped in the headlights of the immigration Juggernaut for the past 13 years.
Future generations will quiet correctly curse them to eternity.
I’d rather be on an immigrants prison ship than have to go to Holland.
j watson
1 year ago
The problem in the Netherlands as in the UK is we want the problem to just go away and thus avoid confronting realities that require less ‘red meat’ sloganeering and instead require honesty and multilateral detailed policy responses that recognise this is going to be a long term issue however indignant we want to be.
In the UK so much media space is taken up with leaving the ECHR and the Rwandan option despite the clear fact that even if both happen the numbers will not abate and neither policy response will make much difference. As a result we’ve failed to prepare sufficient temporary accommodation and invest in faster, effective (but humane) processing. We’ve failed to strike ‘return’ deals with other Countries from which many have travelled. We’ve failed to initiate a proper conversation about national ID cards. And we’ve failed to work collectively with European partners and other non European countries dealing with far greater numbers especially on taking out the traffickers.
In part one suspects these multiple failures are because it suits some to always have the ‘red meat’ political option and a ‘demon’ to blame to help corral a certain section of voters. And also allows the current political leaders responsible for this to blame someone else rather than 13 years of head in the sand Policy formulation and implementation.
Detention and deportation to their homeland or a third country like Rwanda is the only policy that has ever worked.
The Aussies stopped their boat people from arriving with permanent offshore detention. When the Rudd/Gillard Labour Party stopped the policy, the arrivals began again by the tens of thousands. When Tony Abbott reintroduced it, they fell back to zero.
Rwanda will take a dribble at best MM and cost a fortune. So which British island you proposing to mirror Australian approach? Isle of Wight perhaps? Lundy? Shetlands perhaps? Maybe South Georgia? How long to agreed, constructed and ready including living quarters for employees and their families?
It might have some utility as an option in theory but practically not quick. Hence coming to an old Airfield near you/us soon.
What do you mean by a dribble J? As I understand the plan, if you cannot be deported home because you come from a dangerous country or one that refuses to issue returns documents, you will be deported to Rwanda.
See my comments below on the PM and Home Sec re-stating a month ago that the Rwanda scheme was uncapped and could take many thousands of asylum seekers.
150k in the backlog already MM. Rubber dinghies bringing c40k a year.
Let’s be optimistic and say Rwanda takes 20k (and they won’t get anywhere near that). What you doing with the rest?
And I’m not even asking you why you’ve suddenly so much faith in Ministerial announcements.
I don’t think you need to deport the backlog (not yet anyway). The priority is to make it clear to any new would-be dinghy sailors that they will be deported. I suspect a few thousand deportations would be enough to get the message across. Or at least that was the Aussie experience. Don’t forget, the people making the crossing are choosing the best option for them and paying the smugglers accordingly. If Britain becomes the hardest option in Europe, they will choose something easier.
As to my faith in minister’s pronouncements – eventually they will be judged on results, but until then what else have we got to go on? There is no alternative plan from the opposition or an example of an effective deterrent from any other European country. All we have got is Rishi Sunak’s plan (God help us!)
I ‘get’ the potential deterrent effect for economic migrants. But what percentage would it need to be to stop you trying if desperate? Not convinced 10% to Rwanda (a bigger% than likely) going to be that off-putting. Traffickers will ‘market’ better than Govt one suspects too.
The Aussies also only have c4k on Nauru/PNG I think. And accessing Aus through the typical migration routes much harder. So think their offshoring model only of so much transferability.
Now regular visible returnees of economic migrants to country of origin might have bigger deterrent effect but means we have to be much better at realpolitik deals and better processing.
And v high likelihood as a Trafficker you get caught and imprisoned should be something we engage with partners and make happen. But for partners to help us we need to help them and that involves collective approach to European borders and the Med. We walked away from sharing elements of that.
As an Aussie, I can say that it was not enjoyable to see footage of dead people washing up on Christmas Island. The whole concept of the refugee system is an outdated joke. The whole “Stop the Boats!” has been turned into a conservatives are evil narrative over here. We have “The Voice” to deal with at the moment and this is currently splitting us three ways. Yes = a good and decent person, no = horrible racist, and the rest who are waiting to be bullied. All civility has gone and as an Anglo Aussie, we are the lowest of the low and our culture is deeply racist. My daughter comes home from school feeling bad about what was done to the Aboriginals. While some aspects were not pleasant from a 21st Century perspective, the truth is that the Aboriginals were not peace loving individuals living in a Wikandaesque utopia. Most tribes tended to be very violent and usually started the violence first. The problem is that stonage weapons are no match for 18th or 19th Century weapons.
In modern day Australia, a lot of the children of migrants are deeply racist toward white people and extremely intolerant of any white person who does not prostrate themselves before them. Our ABC has become the chief mouthpiece for Anglophobia here and our current PM has been known to make the odd snide remarks against Anglo Aussies.
Refugees might assuage pointless guilt. Migrants will boost the economy. The the long term effects are devastating. The West is the most diverse of any part of the world and the most divided. Look at the film and TV awards of any part of the world and they have little to no diversity, and this is ok. It is time to stop being bullied and to grow a spine. Europeans (Brits included) have done amazing things for the planet and should be celebrated rather than berated.
I think you are seeing the ability to broaden an understanding of our history as a weakness rather than a strength. I’m much more in the latter. I actually think the whole debate helps further crystallise the really important core values of the West, which the vast majority of immigrants have come to our parts of the world exactly for. I think we should be calmly inquisitive but self confident and not histrionic about historical debates.
We’ve a Hindu PM too. No big deal. What a tremendous example of the power of the West.
I do suspect those of us a bit older are following the usual pattern and becoming more like our fathers/mothers were – always grumpy about the youth of today and change more generally.
“Stop the boats” might have become an “evil narrative” but I can’t see Albanese changing the system after the Rudd debacle. Given the choice between a tough deterrent and unlimited numbers of illegal immigrants, people know which side their bread is buttered.
As to your broader point, completely agree. We should not allow leftwing people in the institutions that we pay for to browbeat us.
The Anglo Aussies and Anglo Americans stopped Napoleon, the Kaiser, the little corporal and the commies. They stopped slavery, civilised the world and invented 3/4s of the things that make life bearable. We are the most tolerant countries on earth and should limit newcomers to those who share our values and will contribute to our countries.
I’ll not get upvotes for this but this has to be said. There’s no way a culture goes into a continent and does large scale ethnic cleansing, or does industrial scale racially targeted slave trade in hundreds of thousands, and then faces no eventual backlash for it, but only celebration. More nuanced and more balanced recognition of the West – yes. West has done only great things to be celebrated, Wokies are exaggerating everything to erase it, no sorry but no.
So Emre, you have drunk the Colonialism is bad koolaid. You cannot put the actions of private firms into the same pot as State-run Colonialism.
Objectively State-run Colonialism was a humanitarian project.It brought infrastructure, medical help for humans and livestock, security in the form of protection of smaller tribes from larger tribes and non-European empires which actually performed raids to capture slaves, actually ended slavery, improved education, improved agriculture, increased trade, recorded languages and cultures, and best of all were actually invited in by tribes who wanted to join the colony because of all the benefits that they received.The locals were heavily involved in working out boundaries because ethnicity was not the most important factor back then which is why we struggle to make sense of it now and assume the worst.
Our greatest failure at the moment is that we cannot see beyond our own noses. You cannot judge 1993 with 2023 lenses, and that was only 30 years ago. In a hundred years time, the wokies will be condemned for the hate mongers they are. The truth is that the modern world began when civilisation began and it will continue on forever or until we destroy ourselves.
So Emre, you have drunk the Colonialism is bad koolaid. You cannot put the actions of private firms into the same pot as State-run Colonialism.
Objectively State-run Colonialism was a humanitarian project.It brought infrastructure, medical help for humans and livestock, security in the form of protection of smaller tribes from larger tribes and non-European empires which actually performed raids to capture slaves, actually ended slavery, improved education, improved agriculture, increased trade, recorded languages and cultures, and best of all were actually invited in by tribes who wanted to join the colony because of all the benefits that they received.The locals were heavily involved in working out boundaries because ethnicity was not the most important factor back then which is why we struggle to make sense of it now and assume the worst.
Our greatest failure at the moment is that we cannot see beyond our own noses. You cannot judge 1993 with 2023 lenses, and that was only 30 years ago. In a hundred years time, the wokies will be condemned for the hate mongers they are. The truth is that the modern world began when civilisation began and it will continue on forever or until we destroy ourselves.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ESlS2jrhXY Thomas Sowell on multiculturalism
I think you are seeing the ability to broaden an understanding of our history as a weakness rather than a strength. I’m much more in the latter. I actually think the whole debate helps further crystallise the really important core values of the West, which the vast majority of immigrants have come to our parts of the world exactly for. I think we should be calmly inquisitive but self confident and not histrionic about historical debates.
We’ve a Hindu PM too. No big deal. What a tremendous example of the power of the West.
I do suspect those of us a bit older are following the usual pattern and becoming more like our fathers/mothers were – always grumpy about the youth of today and change more generally.
“Stop the boats” might have become an “evil narrative” but I can’t see Albanese changing the system after the Rudd debacle. Given the choice between a tough deterrent and unlimited numbers of illegal immigrants, people know which side their bread is buttered.
As to your broader point, completely agree. We should not allow leftwing people in the institutions that we pay for to browbeat us.
The Anglo Aussies and Anglo Americans stopped Napoleon, the Kaiser, the little corporal and the commies. They stopped slavery, civilised the world and invented 3/4s of the things that make life bearable. We are the most tolerant countries on earth and should limit newcomers to those who share our values and will contribute to our countries.
I’ll not get upvotes for this but this has to be said. There’s no way a culture goes into a continent and does large scale ethnic cleansing, or does industrial scale racially targeted slave trade in hundreds of thousands, and then faces no eventual backlash for it, but only celebration. More nuanced and more balanced recognition of the West – yes. West has done only great things to be celebrated, Wokies are exaggerating everything to erase it, no sorry but no.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ESlS2jrhXY Thomas Sowell on multiculturalism
Who is desperate…. in France?
As an Aussie, I can say that it was not enjoyable to see footage of dead people washing up on Christmas Island. The whole concept of the refugee system is an outdated joke. The whole “Stop the Boats!” has been turned into a conservatives are evil narrative over here. We have “The Voice” to deal with at the moment and this is currently splitting us three ways. Yes = a good and decent person, no = horrible racist, and the rest who are waiting to be bullied. All civility has gone and as an Anglo Aussie, we are the lowest of the low and our culture is deeply racist. My daughter comes home from school feeling bad about what was done to the Aboriginals. While some aspects were not pleasant from a 21st Century perspective, the truth is that the Aboriginals were not peace loving individuals living in a Wikandaesque utopia. Most tribes tended to be very violent and usually started the violence first. The problem is that stonage weapons are no match for 18th or 19th Century weapons.
In modern day Australia, a lot of the children of migrants are deeply racist toward white people and extremely intolerant of any white person who does not prostrate themselves before them. Our ABC has become the chief mouthpiece for Anglophobia here and our current PM has been known to make the odd snide remarks against Anglo Aussies.
Refugees might assuage pointless guilt. Migrants will boost the economy. The the long term effects are devastating. The West is the most diverse of any part of the world and the most divided. Look at the film and TV awards of any part of the world and they have little to no diversity, and this is ok. It is time to stop being bullied and to grow a spine. Europeans (Brits included) have done amazing things for the planet and should be celebrated rather than berated.
Who is desperate…. in France?
I ‘get’ the potential deterrent effect for economic migrants. But what percentage would it need to be to stop you trying if desperate? Not convinced 10% to Rwanda (a bigger% than likely) going to be that off-putting. Traffickers will ‘market’ better than Govt one suspects too.
The Aussies also only have c4k on Nauru/PNG I think. And accessing Aus through the typical migration routes much harder. So think their offshoring model only of so much transferability.
Now regular visible returnees of economic migrants to country of origin might have bigger deterrent effect but means we have to be much better at realpolitik deals and better processing.
And v high likelihood as a Trafficker you get caught and imprisoned should be something we engage with partners and make happen. But for partners to help us we need to help them and that involves collective approach to European borders and the Med. We walked away from sharing elements of that.
I don’t think you need to deport the backlog (not yet anyway). The priority is to make it clear to any new would-be dinghy sailors that they will be deported. I suspect a few thousand deportations would be enough to get the message across. Or at least that was the Aussie experience. Don’t forget, the people making the crossing are choosing the best option for them and paying the smugglers accordingly. If Britain becomes the hardest option in Europe, they will choose something easier.
As to my faith in minister’s pronouncements – eventually they will be judged on results, but until then what else have we got to go on? There is no alternative plan from the opposition or an example of an effective deterrent from any other European country. All we have got is Rishi Sunak’s plan (God help us!)
150k in the backlog already MM. Rubber dinghies bringing c40k a year.
Let’s be optimistic and say Rwanda takes 20k (and they won’t get anywhere near that). What you doing with the rest?
And I’m not even asking you why you’ve suddenly so much faith in Ministerial announcements.
What do you mean by a dribble J? As I understand the plan, if you cannot be deported home because you come from a dangerous country or one that refuses to issue returns documents, you will be deported to Rwanda.
See my comments below on the PM and Home Sec re-stating a month ago that the Rwanda scheme was uncapped and could take many thousands of asylum seekers.
It’s probably a non-starter politically but why not relocate these boat people (all of them, not some of them) to camps in Northern Ireland?
They could be allowed to live and work there but banned from access to GB and the public purse.
Of course, if they wanted to move south and enter the EU they would be able to do so.
Rwanda will take a dribble at best MM and cost a fortune. So which British island you proposing to mirror Australian approach? Isle of Wight perhaps? Lundy? Shetlands perhaps? Maybe South Georgia? How long to agreed, constructed and ready including living quarters for employees and their families?
It might have some utility as an option in theory but practically not quick. Hence coming to an old Airfield near you/us soon.
It’s probably a non-starter politically but why not relocate these boat people (all of them, not some of them) to camps in Northern Ireland?
They could be allowed to live and work there but banned from access to GB and the public purse.
Of course, if they wanted to move south and enter the EU they would be able to do so.
Detention and deportation to their homeland or a third country like Rwanda is the only policy that has ever worked.
The Aussies stopped their boat people from arriving with permanent offshore detention. When the Rudd/Gillard Labour Party stopped the policy, the arrivals began again by the tens of thousands. When Tony Abbott reintroduced it, they fell back to zero.
I think we need to face up to the unwelcome fact that there is now a large and global “refugee industry”, supported by a rather strange coalition of interest groups promoting increased global migration as variously “inevitable”, “necessary”, “fair”, “desirable”, “just for the past ‘sins’ of rich countries” … and so on. It is an industry as much as the race discrimination, feminist and LGBTQ/whatever ones. Whatever we do to address the real and deserving cases and correct laws to remove discrimination, it is never enough. Because, in truth, the “campaigners” for these causes are more interested in perpetuating the cause than solving the actual problems and then moving on to something else.
The demand here is cleary infinite and our resources and ability to help finite. We also have people already in our country who have contributed to this country and who – in my view at least – therefore should have first call on any spare resources we do have.
So we need to take a far more realistic view on what we can actually do here and stop placing unrealistic burdens on UK citizens and taxpayers.
I think we need to face up to the unwelcome fact that there is now a large and global “refugee industry”, supported by a rather strange coalition of interest groups promoting increased global migration as variously “inevitable”, “necessary”, “fair”, “desirable”, “just for the past ‘sins’ of rich countries” … and so on. It is an industry as much as the race discrimination, feminist and LGBTQ/whatever ones. Whatever we do to address the real and deserving cases and correct laws to remove discrimination, it is never enough. Because, in truth, the “campaigners” for these causes are more interested in perpetuating the cause than solving the actual problems and then moving on to something else.
The demand here is cleary infinite and our resources and ability to help finite. We also have people already in our country who have contributed to this country and who – in my view at least – therefore should have first call on any spare resources we do have.
So we need to take a far more realistic view on what we can actually do here and stop placing unrealistic burdens on UK citizens and taxpayers.
While I have complained frequently of the incompetence of our government on multiple fronts the fact is that relatively speaking the governance of this country and other European countries is markedly better than that obtaining in vast swathes of the world and the conditions for building a better life, particularly given the welfare provisions, are bound to be a draw for many whose native lands are severely dysfunctional.
The conventions on refugees were drawn up after WW2 in the wake of a genocidal regime where escape to another neighbouring country was needed to preserve life. However, while undoubtedly the risks of living in many countries is higher than here there are no neighbouring countries where your ethnicity is in effect a death sentence. In virtually all cases “refugees” are simply seeking a better and less risky life than is obtainable in their native land. Unfortunately, we do not have the capacity to absorb all who wish to come and can show our country is safer than theirs. We certainly shouldn’t wish to encourage those who pay sums to people smugglers to jump the queue.
Those who arrive illegally by boat should be immediately flown to Ruanda or any other destination willing to accept them. They certainly should not be housed for lengthy periods in hotels or on board ships.
The problem is at best Rwanda will take a dribble and we don’t have return deals with most of the Countries from which the Asylum seekers have traveled. Thus where are we proposing they be sent?
Perhaps they’ll be other Rwanda’s but one suspects always some limitations in the policy response.
We need return deals and that is v complex. Who’s returning someone to the Taliban or Republican Guard? Doesn’t mean many aren’t economic migrants but we need to filter and we’ve totally messed up Processing. We process fewer per annum than we did before this13yr Govt.
The PM said in response to a question in a press conference on the 7th March 2023:
On the 20th March 2023, the Home Secretary, while touring the housing we have paid to be built in Rwanda to house the new asylum seekers deported from Britain, said.
Even if it’s 10 times that MM it’s still a dribble.
You’ll note they aren’t saying what they think it will be.
Too many eggs in this basket IMO.
I think if you have to borrow £5k from your relatives to get a place on a dinghy and you see that all new arrivals are quickly being deported to Africa or back to their homelands, you will pretty quickly decide to do something else rather than try your luck in England..
£5,000 for a four month ‘holiday’ on PS Magwitch in Scapa Flow wouldn’t be very appealing.
… and unlike on saga, no chance of seducing a 90 year old on her last legs, and altering her will in ones favour?… Oh well, back to reading Miss Marple and Poirot….
… and unlike on saga, no chance of seducing a 90 year old on her last legs, and altering her will in ones favour?… Oh well, back to reading Miss Marple and Poirot….
Yes if the chance of being deported is high and you aren’t actually fearing for your life if you stay where you are. But on the first issue the chance currently is low, and until that hugely changes they’ll take the risk. Whether Rwanda changes that remains to be seen, but sense is the volume they’ll take still gives the Traffickers a business model they can sell.
£5,000 for a four month ‘holiday’ on PS Magwitch in Scapa Flow wouldn’t be very appealing.
Yes if the chance of being deported is high and you aren’t actually fearing for your life if you stay where you are. But on the first issue the chance currently is low, and until that hugely changes they’ll take the risk. Whether Rwanda changes that remains to be seen, but sense is the volume they’ll take still gives the Traffickers a business model they can sell.
I think if you have to borrow £5k from your relatives to get a place on a dinghy and you see that all new arrivals are quickly being deported to Africa or back to their homelands, you will pretty quickly decide to do something else rather than try your luck in England..
Yes, yes, yes Matt but the ruling Blob in the house of Lords will do another Brexit like manoeuvre.
Even if it’s 10 times that MM it’s still a dribble.
You’ll note they aren’t saying what they think it will be.
Too many eggs in this basket IMO.
Yes, yes, yes Matt but the ruling Blob in the house of Lords will do another Brexit like manoeuvre.
It is always claimed by those in favour of maintaining the present flow of immigrants that they are an asset to the UK. Why, therefore should it be difficult to persuade the countries of their origin that they could recover these assets or some other country eager for their skills?
The Taliban and Republican Guard may have religious and social practices that we don’t observe here in the UK but they are not genocidal organisations and we have no reason to think returnees would not be able to resettle provided they abided by the laws of their native countries – apart perhaps from those few in Afghanistan that had provided active support to our army.
The whole process has become over-bureaucratic, legalistic and prolonged and should have been streamlined years ago. Lawyers should be strictly kept out of the picture and refugee status should be granted only to those who have been unable to settle elsewhere. Denmark has been able to reduce asylum applications to about 1,500 last year and they aim to reduce this yet further. In terms of population this would translate to about 15,000 asylum applications to the UK. All illegal arrivals should be immediately flown to Ruanda and the flood would soon become a dribble.
“Lawyers should be strictly kept out of the picture.”
Agreed, but how do you achieve that?
Without following the advice of ‘D**k the butcher’.*
(*Henry VI, part 2, scene: IV.)
Polite duplication!
Denmark is an interesting case. It doesn’t have the application volume of the UK but that may of course be part because it takes a harder line – ID cards and language probably others. It sent back a number to Syria I think last year, but we’re talking a hundred of so, not thousands from recollection. It’s not got a backlog so it’s in a better position of course.
As regards why persuading countries of their origin to take them back – you tell me why our Govt hasn’t struck those deals? One assumes not quite as easy for the UK for whatever reason.
And 15k to Rwanda? Let’s see us get 200 there first. I think your ‘hope’ is a well ahead of the current plan. And this is the problem – statements of intent and then non delivery (not you but the chumps who’ve been running the show)
Denmark has slowly woken up to the fact that Muslim migrants have no interest in integration and have become a threat to their own people whereby gangs roam the streets causing trouble. Of course in Britain they don’t do that do they?
The problem with a statement like that AM is you are lumping every Muslim together. We’ve a Muslim First Minister in Scotland. So it’s unintelligent. It’s also pretty close to something else but I can’t say that without being censored I think. You are right there will be some that are ‘wrong-uns’ and need to weed them out, but you do yourself a disservice showing you aren’t prepared to distinguish.
The problem with a statement like that AM is you are lumping every Muslim together. We’ve a Muslim First Minister in Scotland. So it’s unintelligent. It’s also pretty close to something else but I can’t say that without being censored I think. You are right there will be some that are ‘wrong-uns’ and need to weed them out, but you do yourself a disservice showing you aren’t prepared to distinguish.
Denmark has slowly woken up to the fact that Muslim migrants have no interest in integration and have become a threat to their own people whereby gangs roam the streets causing trouble. Of course in Britain they don’t do that do they?
“Lawyers should be strictly kept out of the picture.”
Agreed, but how do you achieve that?
Without following the advice of ‘D**k the butcher’.*
(*Henry VI, part 2, scene: IV.)
Polite duplication!
Denmark is an interesting case. It doesn’t have the application volume of the UK but that may of course be part because it takes a harder line – ID cards and language probably others. It sent back a number to Syria I think last year, but we’re talking a hundred of so, not thousands from recollection. It’s not got a backlog so it’s in a better position of course.
As regards why persuading countries of their origin to take them back – you tell me why our Govt hasn’t struck those deals? One assumes not quite as easy for the UK for whatever reason.
And 15k to Rwanda? Let’s see us get 200 there first. I think your ‘hope’ is a well ahead of the current plan. And this is the problem – statements of intent and then non delivery (not you but the chumps who’ve been running the show)
The PM said in response to a question in a press conference on the 7th March 2023:
On the 20th March 2023, the Home Secretary, while touring the housing we have paid to be built in Rwanda to house the new asylum seekers deported from Britain, said.
It is always claimed by those in favour of maintaining the present flow of immigrants that they are an asset to the UK. Why, therefore should it be difficult to persuade the countries of their origin that they could recover these assets or some other country eager for their skills?
The Taliban and Republican Guard may have religious and social practices that we don’t observe here in the UK but they are not genocidal organisations and we have no reason to think returnees would not be able to resettle provided they abided by the laws of their native countries – apart perhaps from those few in Afghanistan that had provided active support to our army.
The whole process has become over-bureaucratic, legalistic and prolonged and should have been streamlined years ago. Lawyers should be strictly kept out of the picture and refugee status should be granted only to those who have been unable to settle elsewhere. Denmark has been able to reduce asylum applications to about 1,500 last year and they aim to reduce this yet further. In terms of population this would translate to about 15,000 asylum applications to the UK. All illegal arrivals should be immediately flown to Ruanda and the flood would soon become a dribble.
These refugee conventions seem to be treated like immutable laws or scared texts that can never be revised or improved. Nonsense. They are clearly well past their sell by date and need updating for the modern world.
According to Russian sources we are due a visit from Putin’s Satan2 missiles “that will erase the UK from the Map” Asylum seekers should be warned that they are faced with being barbequed and that France is actually a good choice to remain in.
The problem is at best Rwanda will take a dribble and we don’t have return deals with most of the Countries from which the Asylum seekers have traveled. Thus where are we proposing they be sent?
Perhaps they’ll be other Rwanda’s but one suspects always some limitations in the policy response.
We need return deals and that is v complex. Who’s returning someone to the Taliban or Republican Guard? Doesn’t mean many aren’t economic migrants but we need to filter and we’ve totally messed up Processing. We process fewer per annum than we did before this13yr Govt.
These refugee conventions seem to be treated like immutable laws or scared texts that can never be revised or improved. Nonsense. They are clearly well past their sell by date and need updating for the modern world.
According to Russian sources we are due a visit from Putin’s Satan2 missiles “that will erase the UK from the Map” Asylum seekers should be warned that they are faced with being barbequed and that France is actually a good choice to remain in.
While I have complained frequently of the incompetence of our government on multiple fronts the fact is that relatively speaking the governance of this country and other European countries is markedly better than that obtaining in vast swathes of the world and the conditions for building a better life, particularly given the welfare provisions, are bound to be a draw for many whose native lands are severely dysfunctional.
The conventions on refugees were drawn up after WW2 in the wake of a genocidal regime where escape to another neighbouring country was needed to preserve life. However, while undoubtedly the risks of living in many countries is higher than here there are no neighbouring countries where your ethnicity is in effect a death sentence. In virtually all cases “refugees” are simply seeking a better and less risky life than is obtainable in their native land. Unfortunately, we do not have the capacity to absorb all who wish to come and can show our country is safer than theirs. We certainly shouldn’t wish to encourage those who pay sums to people smugglers to jump the queue.
Those who arrive illegally by boat should be immediately flown to Ruanda or any other destination willing to accept them. They certainly should not be housed for lengthy periods in hotels or on board ships.
Scapa Flow*, once the home of the Grand Fleet, then the graveyard of the High Seas Fleet, would be an ideal location for a huge floating Detention Centre.
At 324 square kilometres it could potentially accommodate upwards of 10 million illegal migrants, packed into ships/hulks each holding about 5,000 souls.
Building or refurbishing those ships/hulks would provide much needed work Britain’s moribund shipyards, whilst servicing’ those offshore ‘guests’ would mean ample employment for the Orkney islanders.
The whole project could be named Operation MAGWITCH**to give it some historical perspective.
No doubt we could ‘rent out’ some of the potential accommodation to our needy European friends.
Obviously due care and attention would be paid to observing various religious, and gender rights, including absurd culinary, and mutilation traditions.
It would also be axiomatic that superb internet access was available, so that the ‘guests’ could send photos of the joys of living in Scapa Flow back to the Middle East, Africa or wherever they originally escaped from.
(* The Orkney Islands, ‘anchored’ just to the north of the British
mainland.)
(** Other options might be Jellicoe, Beatty or perhaps even Günther Prien.)
The location needs living accommodation for the workforce CH. The idea of some remote location attractive until one has to think about the infrastructure needed.
Border Force got a recruitment challenge already without telling employees they rotate through tours of duty in the Orkneys.
We managed to maintain the Grand Fleet there a century ago. Today the infrastructure for the Oil Industry seems to work quite efficiently Even the railway stretches as far as Wick and Thurso.
The ‘workforce’ could be accommodated very comfortably, and rotated on say a 7 month basis*, and that includes the feckless Home Office personnel charged with processing applications!
The great advantages are one: it is ‘out of sight’ and thus ‘out of mind’, two: It is NOT an attractive location for someone coming from the Middle East or Africa**.
Off course it won’t be cheap, but no more expensive than other current (feeble) proposals .
(*The length of tour an Infantry Battalion served in Afghanistan.)
(** Even if they happen to be an ornithologist.)
Even if THEY are an ornithologist? The noun is singular…why the Wokespeak? One expects better…
I stand corrected! You are indeed correct…I shall have to discipline my ‘predicted text gremlin, who, I am reliably informed lives somewhere inside my I-pad!
However I think you maybe slightly overreacting as, rather surprisingly, I have never been accused of WOKESPEAK in my life.
Nor you I trust?
I stand corrected! You are indeed correct…I shall have to discipline my ‘predicted text gremlin, who, I am reliably informed lives somewhere inside my I-pad!
However I think you maybe slightly overreacting as, rather surprisingly, I have never been accused of WOKESPEAK in my life.
Nor you I trust?
Even if THEY are an ornithologist? The noun is singular…why the Wokespeak? One expects better…
As at 10.13 BST. Reply censored!
Eureka! Restored at 12.13 BST.
We managed to maintain the Grand Fleet there a century ago. Today the infrastructure for the Oil Industry seems to work quite efficiently Even the railway stretches as far as Wick and Thurso.
The ‘workforce’ could be accommodated very comfortably, and rotated on say a 7 month basis*, and that includes the feckless Home Office personnel charged with processing applications!
The great advantages are one: it is ‘out of sight’ and thus ‘out of mind’, two: It is NOT an attractive location for someone coming from the Middle East or Africa**.
Off course it won’t be cheap, but no more expensive than other current (feeble) proposals .
(*The length of tour an Infantry Battalion served in Afghanistan.)
(** Even if they happen to be an ornithologist.)
As at 10.13 BST. Reply censored!
Eureka! Restored at 12.13 BST.
I met some of the crew of U-47 in the late 1960s, when they attended a memorial event at the Southsea War Memorial organised by Royal Oak survivors. I was a Sea Cadet in TS Royal Oak and was invited with fellow members to form a guard so that the cap tally would be seen.
They seemed very decent men but my German and their English rather limited our conversation.
A disproportionate number of ‘boy sailors’ were lost on H.M.S. Royal Oak as I recall.
I’ve forgotten why she was still in Scapa when the rest of the Fleet had scarpered ( forgive the pun) to Lough Swilly.
.
A disproportionate number of ‘boy sailors’ were lost on H.M.S. Royal Oak as I recall.
I’ve forgotten why she was still in Scapa when the rest of the Fleet had scarpered ( forgive the pun) to Lough Swilly.
.
Nice one.
The location needs living accommodation for the workforce CH. The idea of some remote location attractive until one has to think about the infrastructure needed.
Border Force got a recruitment challenge already without telling employees they rotate through tours of duty in the Orkneys.
I met some of the crew of U-47 in the late 1960s, when they attended a memorial event at the Southsea War Memorial organised by Royal Oak survivors. I was a Sea Cadet in TS Royal Oak and was invited with fellow members to form a guard so that the cap tally would be seen.
They seemed very decent men but my German and their English rather limited our conversation.
Nice one.
Scapa Flow*, once the home of the Grand Fleet, then the graveyard of the High Seas Fleet, would be an ideal location for a huge floating Detention Centre.
At 324 square kilometres it could potentially accommodate upwards of 10 million illegal migrants, packed into ships/hulks each holding about 5,000 souls.
Building or refurbishing those ships/hulks would provide much needed work Britain’s moribund shipyards, whilst servicing’ those offshore ‘guests’ would mean ample employment for the Orkney islanders.
The whole project could be named Operation MAGWITCH**to give it some historical perspective.
No doubt we could ‘rent out’ some of the potential accommodation to our needy European friends.
Obviously due care and attention would be paid to observing various religious, and gender rights, including absurd culinary, and mutilation traditions.
It would also be axiomatic that superb internet access was available, so that the ‘guests’ could send photos of the joys of living in Scapa Flow back to the Middle East, Africa or wherever they originally escaped from.
(* The Orkney Islands, ‘anchored’ just to the north of the British
mainland.)
(** Other options might be Jellicoe, Beatty or perhaps even Günther Prien.)
Except most of them aren’t refugees, are they Senay?
Except most of them aren’t refugees, are they Senay?
They are aptly named, then. You – we – won’t stop this destruction of our countries until borders are closed and properly maintained.
They are aptly named, then. You – we – won’t stop this destruction of our countries until borders are closed and properly maintained.
We cannot solve world poverty and violence by evacuating the Third World to the First World.
We cannot solve world poverty and violence by evacuating the Third World to the First World.
Of course, with the climate emergency , people in low-lying countries like the Netherlands will be forced to migrate because of rising sea-levels.
It just is not safe for people to seek refuge in countries like the Netherlands.
At last! A sense of humour!
At last! A sense of humour!
Of course, with the climate emergency , people in low-lying countries like the Netherlands will be forced to migrate because of rising sea-levels.
It just is not safe for people to seek refuge in countries like the Netherlands.
Ukraine is allowed to defend its border by shooting at invaders. Why aren’t other western countries allowed to do the same ?
Ukraine is allowed to defend its border by shooting at invaders. Why aren’t other western countries allowed to do the same ?
What? no vying for the captain’s table dinner invitation? No old biddy square dancing? No cabaret from a long forgotten 1960s failed popstar? I hope that saga give cut price for one of these cruises?
What? no vying for the captain’s table dinner invitation? No old biddy square dancing? No cabaret from a long forgotten 1960s failed popstar? I hope that saga give cut price for one of these cruises?
Build the wall. Cadiz to Crimea.
Build the wall. Cadiz to Crimea.
The problem in the Netherlands as in the UK is we want the problem to just go away and thus avoid confronting realities that require less ‘red meat’ sloganeering and instead require honesty and multilateral detailed policy responses that recognise this is going to be a long term issue however indignant we want to be.
In the UK so much media space is taken up with leaving the ECHR and the Rwandan option despite the clear fact that even if both happen the numbers will not abate and neither policy response will make much difference. As a result we’ve failed to prepare sufficient temporary accommodation and invest in faster, effective (but humane) processing. We’ve failed to strike ‘return’ deals with other Countries from which many have travelled. We’ve failed to initiate a proper conversation about national ID cards. And we’ve failed to work collectively with European partners and other non European countries dealing with far greater numbers especially on taking out the traffickers.
In part one suspects these multiple failures are because it suits some to always have the ‘red meat’ political option and a ‘demon’ to blame to help corral a certain section of voters. And also allows the current political leaders responsible for this to blame someone else rather than 13 years of head in the sand Policy formulation and implementation.
I’d suggest that the chances of “European partners” agreeing deals is next to zero, especially when they see many refugees passing though their country to get to the U.K.
Neither are our “European partners” helping to reform ECHR outcomes – presumably for exactly the same reason.
ID cards and faster processing would provide marginal help, but neither are real solutions while the U.K. have nowhere to return/relocate people to.
Deals on tackling trafficking and how collectively Europe might handle the issue at it’s border and internationally are of course more difficult given our behaviour in recent years but a solution without multilateral collaboration v optimistic.
ID cards could prevent some because the absence in the UK means we are a more attractive destination. It’s why many prefer the Channel risk as France has ID system.
I note you don’t propose much, although imply ECHR change some solution. You know it’s not though and people and trafficking won’t be put off by legal changes esp when they can’t be easily sent elsewhere through lack of options. (Rwanda will take a dribble at best as we know). It is a v difficult problem and gradually, inevitably we’ll awake that the ‘red meat’ slogans a chimera. Then hopefully we can refocus properly
My best guess is that if/when Rwanda flights become effectively legal, then Agreements with other countries will follow.
Only when economic migrants see that the UK has the capability to move anyone to a holding country will they then realise it’s not worth the risk
My best guess is that if/when Rwanda flights become effectively legal, then Agreements with other countries will follow.
Only when economic migrants see that the UK has the capability to move anyone to a holding country will they then realise it’s not worth the risk
Deals on tackling trafficking and how collectively Europe might handle the issue at it’s border and internationally are of course more difficult given our behaviour in recent years but a solution without multilateral collaboration v optimistic.
ID cards could prevent some because the absence in the UK means we are a more attractive destination. It’s why many prefer the Channel risk as France has ID system.
I note you don’t propose much, although imply ECHR change some solution. You know it’s not though and people and trafficking won’t be put off by legal changes esp when they can’t be easily sent elsewhere through lack of options. (Rwanda will take a dribble at best as we know). It is a v difficult problem and gradually, inevitably we’ll awake that the ‘red meat’ slogans a chimera. Then hopefully we can refocus properly
Absolutely correct, well said Sir.
This appalling fiasco can firmly be laid at the feet of the wretched, supine and utterly worthless so called TORY Party who have behaved like terrified rabbits trapped in the headlights of the immigration Juggernaut for the past 13 years.
Future generations will quiet correctly curse them to eternity.
No, future generations will praise Allah that the kaffirs gave up their lands so easily.
I’m not quite so pessimistic.
I suspect that with proper leadership and correct encouragement the forces of The Forces of the fabled ‘Red Wall’ would make mincemeat of Allah & his chums in minutes.
Just as they did so many times before at Plassey, Buxar, Assaye, Delhi, Omdurman and so on and on.
” Up, Guards and at’em” Waterloo…
Wasn’t that the Frogs?
Yes.. Hougemont Farm? I think?!
Yes.. Hougemont Farm? I think?!
Wasn’t that the Frogs?
” Up, Guards and at’em” Waterloo…
They are taking over ours… as I said, just look at the list of those passing Bar finals, published in The Telegraph… Our judiciary in 25 years..
I’m not quite so pessimistic.
I suspect that with proper leadership and correct encouragement the forces of The Forces of the fabled ‘Red Wall’ would make mincemeat of Allah & his chums in minutes.
Just as they did so many times before at Plassey, Buxar, Assaye, Delhi, Omdurman and so on and on.
They are taking over ours… as I said, just look at the list of those passing Bar finals, published in The Telegraph… Our judiciary in 25 years..
Given that the Tory party seems to be run by and from suburban Kent, and that is where the immigrants land, why not just make them all stay in somewhere like Sevenoaks… then we might see some reaction?
Or Royal Tunbridge Wells perhaps?
Plenty of space in Royal Buckingham Palace.
Plenty of space in Royal Buckingham Palace.
Or Royal Tunbridge Wells perhaps?
No, future generations will praise Allah that the kaffirs gave up their lands so easily.
Given that the Tory party seems to be run by and from suburban Kent, and that is where the immigrants land, why not just make them all stay in somewhere like Sevenoaks… then we might see some reaction?
I’d rather be on an immigrants prison ship than have to go to Holland.
I’d suggest that the chances of “European partners” agreeing deals is next to zero, especially when they see many refugees passing though their country to get to the U.K.
Neither are our “European partners” helping to reform ECHR outcomes – presumably for exactly the same reason.
ID cards and faster processing would provide marginal help, but neither are real solutions while the U.K. have nowhere to return/relocate people to.
Absolutely correct, well said Sir.
This appalling fiasco can firmly be laid at the feet of the wretched, supine and utterly worthless so called TORY Party who have behaved like terrified rabbits trapped in the headlights of the immigration Juggernaut for the past 13 years.
Future generations will quiet correctly curse them to eternity.
I’d rather be on an immigrants prison ship than have to go to Holland.
The problem in the Netherlands as in the UK is we want the problem to just go away and thus avoid confronting realities that require less ‘red meat’ sloganeering and instead require honesty and multilateral detailed policy responses that recognise this is going to be a long term issue however indignant we want to be.
In the UK so much media space is taken up with leaving the ECHR and the Rwandan option despite the clear fact that even if both happen the numbers will not abate and neither policy response will make much difference. As a result we’ve failed to prepare sufficient temporary accommodation and invest in faster, effective (but humane) processing. We’ve failed to strike ‘return’ deals with other Countries from which many have travelled. We’ve failed to initiate a proper conversation about national ID cards. And we’ve failed to work collectively with European partners and other non European countries dealing with far greater numbers especially on taking out the traffickers.
In part one suspects these multiple failures are because it suits some to always have the ‘red meat’ political option and a ‘demon’ to blame to help corral a certain section of voters. And also allows the current political leaders responsible for this to blame someone else rather than 13 years of head in the sand Policy formulation and implementation.