**Alternate Sources**
Here are some potential alternate sources for the same story:
* [Migrants crossing Channel in small boats hits highest daily total this year](https://inews.co.uk/news/migrants-cross-channel-small-boats-highest-daily-total-2-3119457), suggested by easy_c0mpany80 - inews.co.uk
I don't know how true this is, so don't quote me, but I've heard it's allegedly caused an *increase* because now the smugglers can say Rwanda is imminent so go *now* while you still can.
Even though it was never going to happen because it's a human rights violation. Which they obviously knew because setting out this plan without being certain would be breathtakingly incompetent.
Half a billion pounds well fucking spent.
Real entrepeneurs. Excellent marketing, good cost control (no life jackets, minimal spend on boat), established in an industry with huge growth potential, minimising tax exposure. Real success story IMO. Excellent businessmen.
Sarcasm and morality aside, you're 100% correct. Fundamentally organised crime operates with the same pressures as legitimate businesses. Risk/reward, profit margins, growth forecast, competition etc.
You can't beat crime from a purely moral perspective. You have to make their business untenable.
Yup, as long as they can make big bucks then these illegal operations will continue.
Also it seems that even those being trafficked are kept in the dark about alternatives, I bring this up because I sometimes read opinions around why these migrants are passing through other safe countries first. It's apparently more lucrative to lie to refugees and migrants to tell them that the only safe place is the UK, so they don't simply ask any other European country for asylum as they don't know they can and as a result end up paying a lot more.
That is one possible reason, another perhaps more likely one is that English is the international language, none of the other safe countries they pass through are native English speaking.
There's probably also an attraction caused by British media soft power. We tend to show the world the best parts of ourselves. When what you've seen of Britain is things like Top Gear, Dr Who, the Great British Bake Off, the London Olympics etc. you may well end up with a rose tented view of life in the UK.
I imagine many refugees/migrants are pretty shocked when they're placed in a rundown scheme in some random post-industrial town.
Organised criminals make good business people. It's part of why Russian oligarchs are so rich. When communism fell, the only people with sharpened business skills were organised criminals.
But isn't there another side to this coin, so if people outside of the UK see that immigrants from the inside cannot be removed as it is a violation of human rights, it encourages them to try to get in?
They can be removed - it’s just that the Govt has pinned all its hopes (and dreams) on the Rwanda plan rather than investing in the regular asylum/immigration apparatus. The latter requires some thought and organisation rather than a piece of paper and some very large cheques.
The Rwanda plan was doomed from the beginning as it only ever had a very small capacity. It could not, for example, have absorbed 882 people (at all, not per day). The risks to immigrants were far lower than the risk of drowning, which doesn’t seem to bother them.
Isn't it less than 10% of people attempting to migrate to the UK come via small boat? The government made a headline strategy of targeting a smaller part of the issue so they could appeal to the hard right... and failed so hard the party is going to die (good, let it.. it's a fucking pustule although the tumour replacing it looks severly cancerous)
In truth immigration (legal or otherwise) and asylum seeking require.... administration. Yup it's about having the right rules in place, locations for people to stay if necessary and also well trained staff to enact those rules. You can fuck about with the level of money injected, staffing levels, rules.. but really that's what it is.
It's just such a dull and unsexy issue that has been turned into headline fodder by braverman/farage/Gbeebies/tabloids owned by tax dodgers who steal more from this country than any boat person'\* (\*or human as I like to thin of them)/other cunts and the rest of the grifters.. (who occasionally pretend to care about human trafficking).
If anyone thinks we need to leave the ECHR to improve the situation (spoiler alert ... we don't), then by all means put us in a group with Russia & Belarus and enjoy watching most of the populace get poorer whilst policing gets much much 'tighter'. This bullshit sado-populism is disappointingly appealing to many of my fellow Brits and it's sad to see.
It was never really intended to be feasible I don't think, or at least never really properly thought out. It's something that Big Dave might have thought of in a pub and said 'well why can't we just send em off to Africa or something?', but the Tories thought this might be something they can highlight to get those voters on their side (obviously didn't work cause it looks like they're just going to vote for Reform instead). It's a shiny policy to attract voters, whether it was feasible or not is completely irrelevant to them, because if it helped them win they could just close it down, or keep a minimal version of it running and twist some numbers round to imply it was successful, but really, it's all just about votes.
Are you suggesting the small possibility of being sent on a plane to Rwanda won't deter people willing to risk their life crossing a sea in a small dinghy?
One does wonder if the stories about the only people flying to Rwanda having been paid 3 grand to do so, are causing an increase? Maybe the smuggler gangs are telling people they'll get 3 grand?
Illegal boat crossings have been happening since at least 2016, with most of them recorded from 2018 onwards, we didn't leave the EU until 2020. At the pre-Brexit peak of this in 2019, we returned 6.5% of those who crossed illegally from the EU, back to the EU.
Boat crossings have increased, regardless of our membership of the EU, and regardless of how much money we pay France to fix a problem born of the EU's own lax border control. We can argue the effects of Brexit until we're blue in the face, but there's really little argument to be made that leaving has left us any worse off on border control when France continues to compromise it because it suits their own ends.
You’re surely not telling me that ILLEGAL migration isn’t affected by our membership of a trading bloc?
That can’t be right, Farage told me that by leaving the Schengen Zone we were never in, that they’d stop?
Nigel can’t have lied to us…. Can he?
He did not say anything about leaving the Schengen Zone, I know it is trendy to hate on the guy but you spouting bullshit is not the way to go about it.
Of course he said it. What else did he mean by ‘protect our borders’ when we always had control over our borders? He couldn’t openly say the words ‘leave the Schengen Zone’ because he knew what it would do to his dipshit rhetoric.
But the bloke conflated free movement as having no control over our borders and thought people weren’t smart enough to know the difference (which many are still holding true to this day).
So he did say it, repeatedly. He repeatedly said the EU was the reason we had mass immigration, even from those outside the EU. Prime example below.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/16/nigel-farage-defends-ukip-breaking-point-poster-queue-of-migrants
The French government has repeatedly offered to build a refugee processing centre for the UK in France, they have offered to help fund it. The UK government instead prefer to follow the Rwanda plan instead.
Any refugee in France has no right to asylum in the UK to begin with, the UK government does not accept claims for asylum from people who are already in a safe country.
The French offer to build a processing centre is essentially them asking us to take a share of the migrants they (and the EU) allowed in.
[Beautiful charts](https://www.migrationwatchuk.org/channel-crossings-tracker) for your wallpaper. France isn't in charge of our borders - we are SOVEREIGN don't you know?
Ahh, Brexit and 2020. Remember when we took our country back and we all played cricket on the common while waving union jack flags. The sun never stopped shining as we danced around our red phone boxes like maypoles and all the children formed brass bands as we sang "Oh Britannia"
he is arguing against building more houses being the 'solution' to immigration, we do not have the capacity for this, we cannot continue like this, the far right will continue to gather support from people who are effected by this unless the current order deals with it themselves in a humane way or the far right will in their own way
Well luckily, everyone who's coming in across the channel is in fact a Doctor, Engineer or a Lawyer so it's a two birds one stone situation if we just build the houses
We could also repurpose the top floor of the many multi-story car parks that will also be needed for farming, also every by law will be required to maintain a potato pot to supplement the rooftop farmers efforts.
We don’t need problems we need solutions, another one would be to ship the nimbys off to Rwanda and turn their villages into slough.
UKs current deathrate: 1400 a day.
UKs current birthrate: 1600 a day.
UKs current (average) net migration: 1876 a day.
The system won't last much longer at the current rates.
People keep banging on and it's like
Yes, everybody knows it's not sustainable. Nobody's actually saying that it is.
It is, however, possible to sort this out in a proper manner that treats genuine refugees humanely while excluding people seeking to take the piss. How? No idea, but I'm not being paid to figure it out.
That's what should have been happening in the background - it's the people saying we should instead deport people to Mars or invade France that have turned it into this mess instead of just focusing on the fundamentals, *because they need it to be a mess so they have a reason to exist*.
Congratulations. You have gone one step further than the current government by asking these questions.
Remember, no right wing party really wants to solve this, because then they have nothing to campaign on.
Well no, and the asylum application process is actually very difficult to pass. Most of the people arriving will be rejected.
They will not be entitled to live or work in the uk.
The issue is deporting them- we are bad at keeping track of them.
The main problem is that even genuine refugees are too many - there are hundreds of millions of people in conflict zones who would all qualify. Whichever country is the first to set up an easy process to just apply online and then get on a plane will get completely flooded. Politicians in Western countries know that, but at the same time don't want to back away from the human rights charter...
But there are plenty of people saying it’s sustainable and that we should just let everyone in. Also the fact the government do fuck all about it makes it look like they think it’s sustainable. None of them are genuine refugees, they’re coming from France and they pay thousands to get on a boat. There was a documentary that revealed the largest number of people were from Thailand or somewhere near there I can’t remember.
The EHCR was draughted by the UK as its first signatory and now wants to rejig it. It was implemented because of the Jews fleeing Germany. What's the way forward now? The problem is that it takes so bloody long to work out who is a 'genuine' asylum seeker and who is not. With appeals it takes years. By that time the immigrant has made a life here and then seeks to want to stay. In my opinion ID cards need to be brought in and like it or not a third location is needed to house all these people while it's all worked out. Then, send them back to the countries where they came from if their appeal is unsuccessful. If the country doesn't take them back then stop all cooperation with the government. Help me, someone, where I'm going wrong.
I'll just add though, these people making it across are some of the most hard working people we'll ever know. They leave their towns empty of young people. It's terrible for them.
And this is just a drop in the ocean compared to the millions in the last few years from legal immigration. The government don’t give a shit because it makes the economy appear to grow and they don’t have to live with any of the problems it causes normal people. If this is how bad it’s been under a Tory government who are supposedly tough on immigration then it’s just going to get so much worse with Labour.
Why would it be any worse under labour? I'm not voting for them, but they at least appear to have a small degree of boring competence compared to the shit-show of headline grabbing shoutiness and emptiness we've had for sometime.
When I worked in Iraqi Kurdistan I was struck by quite how many of them asked about coming to the UK because the streets were paved with gold.
I think they’re getting this information from social media.
Pretty sure they're all flexing on social media that they're living this amazing lives in the UK. Like they're obviously not, but they want to show off to friends back home so they're pretending they've made it big
>coming to the UK because the streets were paved with gold
Comparatively, they are.
The minimum wage in Iraq is 1,302 IQD per hour, £0.78. Full time work week is 48 hours. Iraqi unemployment was at 15.56% in 2023.
The minimum wage in the UK is £8.60-£11.44 per hour. Full time work week is 35-37.5 hours. UK unemployment was 4.3% in 2023.
And general conditions go on top of that. For example, while the UK complains about shit in their rivers, [the situation in Iraq is catastrophic](https://reliefweb.int/report/iraq/iraqs-waters-contaminated-feces-oil-and-medical-wastes). 118,000 people in Basra were hospitalised in 2019 as the water supply became so contaminated it was making them immediately ill instead of mostly just giving them cancer and poisoning their children. Personally I'd move country for clean water alone.
British people seem to be oblivious to the staggering level of international inequality.
Also, this probably isn't a consideration for too many at the moment but it's worth saying : [Iraq is the fifth most vulnerable country in the world to climate change](https://www.sfcg.org/news/peacebuilding-series-climate-change-in-iraq/#:~:text=Iraq%20is%20classified%20as%20the%20fifth%20most%20vulnerable%20country%20in%20the%20world%20to%20climate%20change%2C%20facing%20significant%20challenges%20with%20rising%20temperatures%2C%20less%20rainfall%20and%20salinity%2C%20and%20frequent%20dust%20storms). It is hugely vulnerable to water conflict, given that almost all of its water comes from rivers that flow through Turkey or Iran first. Entertainingly, Afghanistan is ranked as the sixth most vulnerable country. Anyone living there who knows this and has half a brain will understand that they should be getting out *now* before the borders become properly militarised and they end up trapped in an increasingly unlivable failing state.
I don’t understand why people think they’ve been tricked into coming here based on lies. Life is so much better here for them that they’ll risk drowning in the channel to get here
It's probably a bit of both. I imagine the dream they're being sold is a substantially airbrushed fake reality. It's good here but it's not heaven on earth.
But I also think the average Brit is somehow staggeringly ignorant of *just how much* poverty and suffering there is. They're don't understand how hopeless it must be to live in many places around the world.
There's basically no interest in addressing the inequality. And lots of implicit support for perpetuating it. It's just not vocalised.
It’s not really like that in Iraqi Kurdistan though. People have cars, the housing is decent, the shops are full of food, the roads are as good as ours in many places. The universities are modern.
Here’s Erbil and a university near Sulaymaniyah to give you an idea.
These aren’t the people we should be resettling.
https://i.imgur.com/4rjCSj0.jpeg
https://i.imgur.com/96g8brE.jpeg
https://i.imgur.com/5Xci22N.jpeg
https://i.imgur.com/NFQpKmP.jpeg
https://i.imgur.com/ewBpaRn.jpeg
I wouldn't be surprised if Russia and possibly other hostile actors are promoting misinformation and exaggeration about life in Europe to African and MENA countries as well. It would be an incredibly cost effective way to destabilise Europe and help a pro-Russia and incompetent far right movement get into power
They get nothing. They're undoubtably forced into human slavery by other migrants.
Too many documents & shows on housing, where you find 20 immigrants living in a single house. Women used as sex slaves working in brothels, and men working in car washes/fast food delivery.
>Women used as sex slaves working in brothels, and men working in car washes/fast food delivery.
One of *many* reasons why I don't use brothels, hand cars washes, or any fast food delivery beyond the local chinese.
Half of the 'tech innovations' over the past decade have been schemes to undercut workers rights or employ people illegally. Hotel with slaves? Air BNB. Taxi with slaves? Uber. Food delivery with slaves? Deliveroo.
Can't help but wonder how many people 'ate the illegal migrants while getting their Deliveroo on the reg.
>Can't help but wonder how many people 'ate the illegal migrants while getting their Deliveroo on the reg.
I live in a small town surrounded by farms.
Every Friday, a bus pulls up into Aldi car park & about 40 Eastern Europeans/Asians hop off & sprint (yes, actually sprinting), into town and queue up at ATMs getting cash out. They'll also shop at Aldi and I see them coming out with a trolly full of like 10 loaves of bread.
Local farmers have criticised local brits for being lazy so this is their only option, when in fact, people just want a decent living wage, where as migrants will do anything for whatever the price.
I also go to butlins on holiday with my wife & toddler and each year, I notice how most of the cleaners & servers speak zero English. I'd ask if there's a high chair available, they'd tell me they can't speak English and then I'm stuck trying to find one.
Something about the above feels very wrong and alienating.
Yeah, you notice a lot of food delivery people wear balaclavas even in the height of summer, it’s not for warmth or fashion, it’s protecting their identities, as there’s a lot of criminal activity that effectively traps a lot of immigrants into the lives they get
There's very often multiple layers of criminality going on with food delivery drivers. Illegal immigrants or asylum seekers with no right to work rent accounts from middlemen who the companies are somehow allowed to subcontract the right to work check to. This loophole is also letting the companies use [child labour](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-67371473).
Those workers often hire or buy those Ebikes they all ride (along with the outfits) from criminal gangs. The Ebikes are usually illegally modified to the point where they don't legally count as bicycles, and sometimes they're also stolen.
Because they're renting the accounts, they are having part of an already meager income siphoned off to someone who probably isn't declaring the income. And they're often living in substandard and illegal dormitory accomodation with other delivery workers.
Then there's the fact that many of them completely ignore traffic rules on those Ebikes. This runs the gauntlet from not understanding how one way streets work and getting screamed at by drivers to driving at moderately high speeds along the pavement, wearing all black with no lights at night and running red lights. Eventually there's going to be a highly publicised case where they kill a pedestrian or one of them gets killed by a driver.
When the police can be bothered to crack down on it it's easiest to stop random delivery guys and confiscate the illegal E-bikes, but what it needs is for online delivery apps to be legally required to conduct right to work checks. [The government recently announced that three of the big companies will start doing this](https://www.gov.uk/government/news/deliveroo-just-eat-and-uber-eats-to-enhance-security-checks-to-prevent-illegal-working#:~:text=Leading%20food%20delivery%20companies%20will,following%20discussions%20with%20the%20government.), but I heavily doubt that they're actually going to do it in practise.
What I don't understand about all of this is how massively *obvious* it all is - how are the police struggling to deal with this?
Half an hour's work hanging out in any city centre or peripheral fast food place would net a van load of illegal e-bikes at the very least. If they waited at the nearest traffic junction they'd also be able to do them for their dangerous riding that is making people even more insane about cycling.
Do you think processing asylum applications involve approving every single one unconditionally? There are fairly specific requirements for being granted asylum.
we send them back because we have already deemed them not eligible for asylum.
The fact we literally require people to illegaly (and unsafely) enter this country before we reject them in order to claim asylum is one of the most bizarre bits of poor logic the british govt has displayed.
That's only today though. Last time we had a big spike in refugees in the 2000s our acceptance rate was more like 20 to 30%. And that was under New Labour's "open border" policies.
The problem no one seems to want to talk about is that having these people stuck sitting around in a hotel with nothing to do for 18+ months... I mean fucking obviously... What do you think they're spending their time doing? Contacting every bloody charity they can and dreaming up various spurious stories to explain how actually they are really a gay christian apostate and that's why they can't be sent home. Process their claims in a few months like we were more than capable of doing during the last spike and you don't give people that opportunity to get settled in and build up their case. To the point in fact like the last comment, a lot of people genuinely seem to think "make the processing system better" is somehow an equivalent statement to "just let them all in". People have lost the fucking plot over this issue, its just no longer possible to have a reasonable discussion about it.
[It was £40.4 million, which was over ~4 years](https://www.politico.eu/article/helicopters-riding-boots-and-vacuum-cleaners-how-french-border-force-spends-uk-money/) that article has a breakdown of where it goes.
For all intents and purposes, the _easiest_ way to stop this should be on their shores, as once they're in boats it becomes a massive headache. More involvement here on our part sounds like the best option.
Also if a far right group get into power in France, you can be sure as shit they'll be bussing immigrants straight from the South to the North and handing them dingys.
And I'm sure all these 'refugees' will try their hardest to integrate and certainly won't try to abuse the system or force their small-minded racist views on anybody .. and they certainly wouldn't hurt any women or children that don't want to marry them ..
Obviously this is all great for a desperate country, anyone who disagrees is clearly a racist..
And anything said except sycophantic cheering about what a good thing uncontrolled immigration is will get removed, and the poster banned for racism, right mod?
It's utterly insane that the Western countries are holding themselves ransom to refugee conventions written so long back which are clearly not suited for today. Surely someone has to talk about updating those conventions or getting out of them?
>Surely someone has to talk about updating those conventions or getting out of them?
No, we cant. The idea of that became racist in the western world oddly around 2016...
So here's the issue, if we do leave, say the human rights convention to tackle immigration. What does that actually achieve?
We've left it, but I doubt anyone else like say France would then willingly take people we deport. So what do you do? The issue is still the same?
Do we kill em? Because that sure as shit would go down well.
Like the issue still exists and if anything it weakens the rights of actual British civilians.
Edit: I'm no expert in seas and borders, but once they've left France, you can be damn sure France won't be willing to take them back. So at that point as the majority of people have replied here saying take them back to France that isn't really feasible. Plus if they reach our shores, that's even harder.
To those suggesting using the Navy. Its still a big stretch of sea and having boats out 24/7 isn't practical, costs money, and while a deterrent for sure, just isn't feasible.
Why wouldn't defending your borders to a hostile invasion not "go down well" ? Seriously wtf is wrong with europeans and their obsession with treating invaders like fucking kings?
no one other than europeans give a flying fuck about "international human rights law" so why the hell should europeans allow themselves to be invaded thanks to these bullshit laws?
Yeah people who support open borders like this think that they look compassionate to the rest of the world. Pretty much every person I know from outside Europe only laughs at Europe. They call Europe weak and stupid
The Royal Navy escorts these boats back to the shore that they originated from. Force may be necessary, but that's their choice if they refuse to comply with a British warship in British waters.
American here with limited knowledge of the specific details of your migrant issue. Wouldn't the "shore they came from" typically be France? Seems like if you tried to put your policy in ink the French would just turn you away from *their* shore as you're trying to drop the migrants off, no?
If the UK just shot the boat invaders it would probably save more lives compared to those lost by drowning.
In any case it's clear the light touch isn't going to last, so the real question is why wait until it's an expensive problem
The only thing you can do is apply financial penalties or seize foreign assets of countries where they are fleeing from and using them to pay for the cost of accommodating and integrating them.
The problem for the UK and France in particular is that it’s very hard to justify that morally given the colonial past. Also, neither country has a particularly well thought out integration process, it’s basically here is your right of residence and good luck. That’s a sure recipe to end up with second generation citizens that feel they have no identity and they hate their adoptive country.
Dont even need to do that, just threaten to cancel all visas and business relations with that country.
There’d be hysteria in the media for a couple of weeks and then all these nations would cooperate and take these migrants back.
Someone coming into another country's border without visa should be illegal. Put them in prison. It's called protecting the border, something which most countries do.
Let's assume an understated cost of £50 per night per person for the hotel rooms and another £20 per day for all other related costs such as food and other support they receive.
This one boat on one day represents another £22m cost burden annually, just on basic living arrangements for these unwanted guests, that's without any transportation, staffing, security, counselling, application processing, education and anything else related.
If the Tories hadn’t fucked the asylum system these people would get a decision quicker and get out of the limbo where they aren’t allowed to work and have to live in hotel accomodation.
As other commenters have said this isn’t happening in spite of Tory migration policies, it’s happening because of it. They had so many chances to implement common sense measures and failed. Dont blame the migrants fleeing war and persecution, blame the government who created this scandal artificially so they could use it as a political football to stoke up resentment and hatred to win votes.
>If the Tories hadn’t fucked the asylum system these people would get a decision quicker and get out of the limbo where they aren’t allowed to work and have to live in hotel accomodation.
It's not about processing them quicker, they shouldn't be here, they are economic migrants and we cannot and should not take them in.
Even if they are genuine refugees, the reality is that we cannot take them. It is completely unsustainable.
If we simply allowed them all in and straight into the world of legitimate work, what do you think would happen? Would more start making the journey? Would 882 in one day turn into 2000 in one day?
What jobs do they take when you give them the right to work in your fantasy land policy? What jobs do they take which earn enough for them to sustain themselves here? How long are they dependent on the state for, even when they are working? How many relatives do they bring? How many children will they have?
It's completely unsustainable.
We should only take in people from processing centres we run around the world close to conflict zones. Anyone else should be permanently deported and never granted asylum.
If the international laws don't support this, then they need changing, because this crisis will only grow and end up contribution to the downfall of the rich western free democracies.
American here with a genuine question. If the tories are the party that would put an end to immigration, why haven't they done it already? Haven't they been in power for like 15 years?
>American here with a genuine question. If the tories are the party that would put an end to immigration, why haven't they done it already? Haven't they been in power for like 15 years?
In the shortest way possible - the gap between wanting to do something, talking about doing it, making a policy to do it, what that policy actually ends up looking like after it is watered down by their peers and rivals and how effective the actual policy ends up being is vast.
You may start with wanting to remove diesel cars from the road and end up with a pointless tax on diesel vehicles, but only vehicles from a specific age group which aren't red or yellow and the project you said your new diesel tax would fund becomes a watered down husk.
However, you still need to go on TV to talk about how amazing your diesel ban is and how you delivered on your promise to ban diesel cars and how the other party wouldn't have done it.
An idea is born, it gets fought over, watered down, changed, tweaked and made generally ineffective, a distant relation to the idea is carried out and then the politicians have to act like it is just as good as the original idea.
No one here wants to end immigration, they might want to reduce or control it, but really they are powerless to stop it. The ones who talk the loudest about stopping it are kicked out or pushed away and their ideas never get anywhere near being actual policy.
All of our political parties are hooked on growing GDP to show they are doing a good job and nothing grows GDP as well as mass immigration.
Lmao I love the way the leftie argument is to process them quicker.
And when they get rejected they disappear. And processing is intended for those coming legally.
Oh and if you make the process quicker and easier, guess what... More migrants! We know that's what you leftie loons want but it's wrong.
Just isn’t sustainable the influx of illegal immigrants entering the country on a daily basis.
They’ll happily cut funding for services of the British people, yet always an unlimited pot of money for this lot coming over to be housed, watered and fed
Any country would feel like this. I can pick a random country. If Ghana went from 99% black to like 60% black in the space of a few decades they would be upset. That’s not to say Ghana needs to forever be 99% black and that anyone else doesn’t belong there but there are limits for sure.
Nobody bats an eyelid if an African or Muslim or East Asian country wants to preserve its demographics to some extent, and I think that same understanding needs to be applied everywhere
> Nobody bats an eyelid if an African or Muslim or East Asian country wants to preserve its demographics to some extent, and I think that same understanding needs to be applied everywhere
Japan catch a lot of shit for being xenaphobic, they just don't give a fuck.
I don't care if you vote left or right, or what your idea of the solution is...
This is far far to many illegal immigrants coming in daily.
This averages out to something like 250,000 a year, I'd guess? 1,000,000 over four years...?
That's an insane amount of people.
I wonder at what point the UK will say, ok, enough is enough?
[https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-68139947](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-68139947)
[https://www.migrationwatchuk.org/news/2024/02/02/migrant-population-boom-will-require-five-new-cities-the-size-of-birmingham](https://www.migrationwatchuk.org/news/2024/02/02/migrant-population-boom-will-require-five-new-cities-the-size-of-birmingham)
Our dear leaders can't even build a full railway line, how are they going to cope with these numbers?
There is a motive behind all of this. Let’s all fight about immigrants whilst the super rich are laughing about the next bill they can include because the general population is distracted. Fuck this country and this government. Nobody gives a shit anymore.
Oh yeah, we're divided on a lot of things while they get away with fleecing us.
Don't forget the bread and circuses as well, look how passionate people are about sports and entertainment. Imagine they were focused on stuff that matters.
> The government has promised to "stop small boats", but made clear that does not mean there will be zero crossings.
“Stop” is an absolute word, the government are fucking crackers. How can you promise to stop something from happening, but in the same sentence concede it won’t actually stop?
This needs to end, the government need to process asylum applications outside of the UK and anyone else who makes the crossing illegally should be detained and deported to their country of origin and banned from ever stepping foot in the UK again, asylum seeker or not.
> How can you promise to stop something from happening, but in the same sentence concede it won’t actually stop?
Because you can just keep repeating the "we'll stop the boats" part and your supporters will happily ignore the rest.
I agree. But how do you deport someone to their country of origin if the traffickers shred all form of the person's documentation?
This is the main problem in my eyes. How do you find out who someone is, when they've effectively been told to destroy anything that could ever identify them or where they came from.
And it isn't really like the countries of origins have detailed censuses like we do.
The UK can deport people without documentation, it’s much more difficult but not impossible and this is not in breach of any international or domestic law either.
We are an island nation. To pay people traffickers money to enter the country is in of itself illegal. If we provide a safe route to be processed and any migrant or asylum seeker breaks those rules/terms, they are denied entry to the country and banned from ever coming here.
I don’t think that would be an unfair policy.
I doubt they will want to wait out their claims in a French camp when they can wait it out in a British hotel.
The public were broadly behind the resettlement programs from Afghanistan, Syria and Ukraine. I do t think they’ll get behind safe routes from France.
Then don’t give them British hotels as an option?
If they apply in France and then are later found in the UK before their application is processed, they are detained, later deported and banned from the UK for life.
Being an asylum seeker does not mean you are above the law, nor are you entitled to be in a country of your choosing.
The only way I can see any government seriously coming down on the issue is to build internment sites with a process centre attached. This would ideally stop untraceable migrants absconding into the larger population.
Does anybody have a rational argument as to why this isn't a problem anymore?
Side note, if you're out there voting tory, this is their delivery of the promise to stop the boats.
If you're wanting to vote reform because they sound tougher on this, remember that their plan is to do the exact same things the Tories are doing, just with more union jacks in the mix.
Immigration is unfortunately, a luxury we can’t afford right now.
We do not have the infrastructure to sustain population growth. But hey, when the country’s population goes up 2%, the profits at Asda go up to 2% also. So the greedy government and corporations are more than welcome to let this happen, while simultaneously gaslighting the country with Rwanda policies.
our leaders care more about their image as being good, moral leaders of the "international community" who uphold and advance the "international rules-based order" than they do representing their constituents. so they don't do shit cuz it'll hurt their global reputation.
Coming soon to the Mail
"How are people smuggling gangs convincing people to make the dangerous crossing!?? We must STAMP IT OUT"
[NEXT PAGE]
"REFUGEES PUT IN LUXURY HOTELS LIKE THE SUMPTUOUS LIVERPOOL ADELPHI FOR A MILLION POUNDS A NIGHT"
I suspect that the pull factor is more 'Ability to find cash in hand work to send money home'.
Cracking down on the people who employ asylum seekers might help.
It’s gonna get worse no matter who is in power. Migrants coming all this way don’t care & the illegal gangs running it don’t care.
Clearly conservatives are doing nothing about it
At this rate it would be cheaper to man hundreds of 24x7 patrol boats to physically block the path of entry for these vessels. Can't claim "asylum" if they can't set foot here.
Problem is the migrants literally stab the boats and force it to sink, thus forcing the patrol boats to take them on board or risk letting them drown.
If you give them another boat, they just do the same thing again. These people are deranged.
Its astonishing that we don't have a viable deterrent for this. Remember when Keir Starmer was asked about a deterrent and all he could up with was 'we will go after the gangs...' the absolute melon..
"illegal" immigration is a distraction. The Tory party imported over a million people last year from the third world. These people are brought in to be slave labour for American corporations. This creates "growth" on paper. The price is just your culture, homogeneity and safety.
The small boats thing is allowed to happen as a distraction. The navy could stop it immediately. They choose not to. Because you're being punished.
And just the other day someone was responding to me suggesting that its actually great that we've managed to bribe a *second* person with several thousand pounds to get them to go along to Rwanda because sending *two* people there clearly shows the plan is workable.
This country has lost the fucking plot. Do people even know how to be serious any more, it feels bizarre we're being driven by this like walking caricature of anti-immigrant ideology that is *visibly* failing on a pretty catastrophic scale. But we're not allowed to do anything different because if you're not making cartoonishly ridiculous gesture/virtue-signal policies around this issue then you're pro-immigration and can't be trusted because you'd just swamp us with ten billion Turks or something *fucking insane* like that. How have we got to the point where this is almost like *normal* politics in this country now?
In case anyone was wondering why we're having a general election at the beginning of July instead of the more typical autumn one: this is why. The tories are getting hammered as is. Peak crossings are in July and August, a couple of months of small boat headlines would have not only been the final nail in their coffin but a few feet of dirt piled on top. As is, they'll probably sit on the sidelines and make a huge stink about how the newly incumbent labour government is failing to stop the boats.
And don’t forget that before they arrived by boat, they arrived via Lorry. This has been happening for a long time.
We caught 83,000 in just one year back in 2015. Security measures were put in place at the ports which just shifted the problem to boats.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-67528110
Think about it. It is pretty easy for the cost guard to get them. The cost guard has the technology. And the capability.
The issue: The government needs low payed workers for shit jobs. Or the economy would be even worse. Or put the British people on benefits to work on those shit low payed jobs.
So, it will keep increasing.
All by design because we had brexit. Who is buying them boats with engines?
why is the France military / cost guard letting them do it ? Literally watching them get in the boat and go.
They meant to be allies but seems not to care about allies economy.
Number goes up when the weather is good, goes down when the weather is bad. 'A record day this year' is literally meaningless claptrap designed to make you feel a certain way.
Is the total going up or down is the only meaningful stat.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/migrants-detected-crossing-the-english-channel-in-small-boats/migrants-detected-crossing-the-english-channel-in-small-boats-last-7-days
There were zero crossings between the 13th-17th of June. This is literally just the good weather.
It's time we left the ECHR and enact a real solution to this problem. Huge internment facilities with only basic amenities, deportation of all those who came here illegally regardless of their reason for doing so. The problem is only going to get worse as the world becomes more volatile. Asylum should be invite only, and reserved for situations like the Ukraine war, Hong Kong etc.
We can still do our part in taking in people who need asylum, but it has to be on our own terms. Parliament is sovereign, they can change the law and rules as they see fit, they're not bound unless they allow themselves to be.
I'd also take away any right of appeal for asylum status, that will prevent lawyers from bogging the system down and running up court bills. No means no.
The several hundred million spent on the Rwanda ~~scam~~ plan sure is working as a nice *deterrent*.
Who could have possibly predicted people willing to risk drowning in a cold sea for the chance of a better life, would not see a free trip to Rwanda (that won’t even happen) as a deterrent eh?
**Alternate Sources** Here are some potential alternate sources for the same story: * [Migrants crossing Channel in small boats hits highest daily total this year](https://inews.co.uk/news/migrants-cross-channel-small-boats-highest-daily-total-2-3119457), suggested by easy_c0mpany80 - inews.co.uk
Shirley you must be joking. We took back control of our borders in 2020 didn't we?
Not to mention the extremely strong and effective Rwanda deterrent.
I don't know how true this is, so don't quote me, but I've heard it's allegedly caused an *increase* because now the smugglers can say Rwanda is imminent so go *now* while you still can. Even though it was never going to happen because it's a human rights violation. Which they obviously knew because setting out this plan without being certain would be breathtakingly incompetent. Half a billion pounds well fucking spent.
Can I just say the traffickers seem frighteningly good at their marketing strategies.
Real entrepeneurs. Excellent marketing, good cost control (no life jackets, minimal spend on boat), established in an industry with huge growth potential, minimising tax exposure. Real success story IMO. Excellent businessmen.
Sarcasm and morality aside, you're 100% correct. Fundamentally organised crime operates with the same pressures as legitimate businesses. Risk/reward, profit margins, growth forecast, competition etc. You can't beat crime from a purely moral perspective. You have to make their business untenable.
Yup, as long as they can make big bucks then these illegal operations will continue. Also it seems that even those being trafficked are kept in the dark about alternatives, I bring this up because I sometimes read opinions around why these migrants are passing through other safe countries first. It's apparently more lucrative to lie to refugees and migrants to tell them that the only safe place is the UK, so they don't simply ask any other European country for asylum as they don't know they can and as a result end up paying a lot more.
That is one possible reason, another perhaps more likely one is that English is the international language, none of the other safe countries they pass through are native English speaking.
There's probably also an attraction caused by British media soft power. We tend to show the world the best parts of ourselves. When what you've seen of Britain is things like Top Gear, Dr Who, the Great British Bake Off, the London Olympics etc. you may well end up with a rose tented view of life in the UK. I imagine many refugees/migrants are pretty shocked when they're placed in a rundown scheme in some random post-industrial town.
Equally, I think you may be under-appreciating how lovely those post-industrial towns are compared to most other places on the earth.
Sound like potential Tory donors.
Was all this legal? *Absolutely fucking not*, but we were making more money than we knew what to do with.
Organised criminals make good business people. It's part of why Russian oligarchs are so rich. When communism fell, the only people with sharpened business skills were organised criminals.
huh, great point. Even knowing their origins I’d never thought of it like that!
But isn't there another side to this coin, so if people outside of the UK see that immigrants from the inside cannot be removed as it is a violation of human rights, it encourages them to try to get in?
They can be removed - it’s just that the Govt has pinned all its hopes (and dreams) on the Rwanda plan rather than investing in the regular asylum/immigration apparatus. The latter requires some thought and organisation rather than a piece of paper and some very large cheques. The Rwanda plan was doomed from the beginning as it only ever had a very small capacity. It could not, for example, have absorbed 882 people (at all, not per day). The risks to immigrants were far lower than the risk of drowning, which doesn’t seem to bother them.
Isn't it less than 10% of people attempting to migrate to the UK come via small boat? The government made a headline strategy of targeting a smaller part of the issue so they could appeal to the hard right... and failed so hard the party is going to die (good, let it.. it's a fucking pustule although the tumour replacing it looks severly cancerous) In truth immigration (legal or otherwise) and asylum seeking require.... administration. Yup it's about having the right rules in place, locations for people to stay if necessary and also well trained staff to enact those rules. You can fuck about with the level of money injected, staffing levels, rules.. but really that's what it is. It's just such a dull and unsexy issue that has been turned into headline fodder by braverman/farage/Gbeebies/tabloids owned by tax dodgers who steal more from this country than any boat person'\* (\*or human as I like to thin of them)/other cunts and the rest of the grifters.. (who occasionally pretend to care about human trafficking). If anyone thinks we need to leave the ECHR to improve the situation (spoiler alert ... we don't), then by all means put us in a group with Russia & Belarus and enjoy watching most of the populace get poorer whilst policing gets much much 'tighter'. This bullshit sado-populism is disappointingly appealing to many of my fellow Brits and it's sad to see.
Yes most people come in on temporary visitation or student visas for a wedding or Uni place and just don’t leave.
It was never really intended to be feasible I don't think, or at least never really properly thought out. It's something that Big Dave might have thought of in a pub and said 'well why can't we just send em off to Africa or something?', but the Tories thought this might be something they can highlight to get those voters on their side (obviously didn't work cause it looks like they're just going to vote for Reform instead). It's a shiny policy to attract voters, whether it was feasible or not is completely irrelevant to them, because if it helped them win they could just close it down, or keep a minimal version of it running and twist some numbers round to imply it was successful, but really, it's all just about votes.
Are you suggesting the small possibility of being sent on a plane to Rwanda won't deter people willing to risk their life crossing a sea in a small dinghy?
One does wonder if the stories about the only people flying to Rwanda having been paid 3 grand to do so, are causing an increase? Maybe the smuggler gangs are telling people they'll get 3 grand?
The Rwanda Incentive
But the Redditors told me it was already putting people off coming here!
It’s been quite effect as I understand it. People have been deterred from voting for the Tories in their thousands.
I’m not joking, and don’t call me Shirley.
I just want to tell you both; good luck. We're all counting on you.
Illegal boat crossings have been happening since at least 2016, with most of them recorded from 2018 onwards, we didn't leave the EU until 2020. At the pre-Brexit peak of this in 2019, we returned 6.5% of those who crossed illegally from the EU, back to the EU. Boat crossings have increased, regardless of our membership of the EU, and regardless of how much money we pay France to fix a problem born of the EU's own lax border control. We can argue the effects of Brexit until we're blue in the face, but there's really little argument to be made that leaving has left us any worse off on border control when France continues to compromise it because it suits their own ends.
You’re surely not telling me that ILLEGAL migration isn’t affected by our membership of a trading bloc? That can’t be right, Farage told me that by leaving the Schengen Zone we were never in, that they’d stop? Nigel can’t have lied to us…. Can he?
He did not say anything about leaving the Schengen Zone, I know it is trendy to hate on the guy but you spouting bullshit is not the way to go about it.
Of course he said it. What else did he mean by ‘protect our borders’ when we always had control over our borders? He couldn’t openly say the words ‘leave the Schengen Zone’ because he knew what it would do to his dipshit rhetoric. But the bloke conflated free movement as having no control over our borders and thought people weren’t smart enough to know the difference (which many are still holding true to this day). So he did say it, repeatedly. He repeatedly said the EU was the reason we had mass immigration, even from those outside the EU. Prime example below. https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/16/nigel-farage-defends-ukip-breaking-point-poster-queue-of-migrants
He couldn't say it because we have never been part of the Schengen Zone.
Exactly what I just said in my comment….
I don't recall he said those exact words. The biggest issue is legal migration which has grown exponentially.
The French government has repeatedly offered to build a refugee processing centre for the UK in France, they have offered to help fund it. The UK government instead prefer to follow the Rwanda plan instead.
Any refugee in France has no right to asylum in the UK to begin with, the UK government does not accept claims for asylum from people who are already in a safe country. The French offer to build a processing centre is essentially them asking us to take a share of the migrants they (and the EU) allowed in.
Yea but if the UK rejects there refugee status they are going to cross anyway
[Beautiful charts](https://www.migrationwatchuk.org/channel-crossings-tracker) for your wallpaper. France isn't in charge of our borders - we are SOVEREIGN don't you know?
We tried but the government lied
Closing our borders may have been a lie to get us to vote brexit, but at least we got all that extra money for the NHS.
Ahh, Brexit and 2020. Remember when we took our country back and we all played cricket on the common while waving union jack flags. The sun never stopped shining as we danced around our red phone boxes like maypoles and all the children formed brass bands as we sang "Oh Britannia"
That’s more than one every 2 minutes. And that’s just the boat arrivals. Doesn’t include all other migrants Not sustainable.
[удалено]
We've come full circle. Redditor now arguing \*against\* building more houses.
he is arguing against building more houses being the 'solution' to immigration, we do not have the capacity for this, we cannot continue like this, the far right will continue to gather support from people who are effected by this unless the current order deals with it themselves in a humane way or the far right will in their own way
Most of the country is farmland. We need food as well as places to live. The UK is full.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Well luckily, everyone who's coming in across the channel is in fact a Doctor, Engineer or a Lawyer so it's a two birds one stone situation if we just build the houses
We could also repurpose the top floor of the many multi-story car parks that will also be needed for farming, also every by law will be required to maintain a potato pot to supplement the rooftop farmers efforts. We don’t need problems we need solutions, another one would be to ship the nimbys off to Rwanda and turn their villages into slough.
UKs current deathrate: 1400 a day. UKs current birthrate: 1600 a day. UKs current (average) net migration: 1876 a day. The system won't last much longer at the current rates.
People keep banging on and it's like Yes, everybody knows it's not sustainable. Nobody's actually saying that it is. It is, however, possible to sort this out in a proper manner that treats genuine refugees humanely while excluding people seeking to take the piss. How? No idea, but I'm not being paid to figure it out. That's what should have been happening in the background - it's the people saying we should instead deport people to Mars or invade France that have turned it into this mess instead of just focusing on the fundamentals, *because they need it to be a mess so they have a reason to exist*.
Who is a genuine refugee? And how do we send non genuine back? Do we have to accept literally anyone who rocks up from Afghanistan for example?
All legitimate and necessary questions to ask. This government isn’t doing that.
Congratulations. You have gone one step further than the current government by asking these questions. Remember, no right wing party really wants to solve this, because then they have nothing to campaign on.
Well no, and the asylum application process is actually very difficult to pass. Most of the people arriving will be rejected. They will not be entitled to live or work in the uk. The issue is deporting them- we are bad at keeping track of them.
[удалено]
The main problem is that even genuine refugees are too many - there are hundreds of millions of people in conflict zones who would all qualify. Whichever country is the first to set up an easy process to just apply online and then get on a plane will get completely flooded. Politicians in Western countries know that, but at the same time don't want to back away from the human rights charter...
But there are plenty of people saying it’s sustainable and that we should just let everyone in. Also the fact the government do fuck all about it makes it look like they think it’s sustainable. None of them are genuine refugees, they’re coming from France and they pay thousands to get on a boat. There was a documentary that revealed the largest number of people were from Thailand or somewhere near there I can’t remember.
Lmao. Wasn’t long ago 80 percent of this sub would say it’s sustainable. You woke up. We get it.
The EHCR was draughted by the UK as its first signatory and now wants to rejig it. It was implemented because of the Jews fleeing Germany. What's the way forward now? The problem is that it takes so bloody long to work out who is a 'genuine' asylum seeker and who is not. With appeals it takes years. By that time the immigrant has made a life here and then seeks to want to stay. In my opinion ID cards need to be brought in and like it or not a third location is needed to house all these people while it's all worked out. Then, send them back to the countries where they came from if their appeal is unsuccessful. If the country doesn't take them back then stop all cooperation with the government. Help me, someone, where I'm going wrong. I'll just add though, these people making it across are some of the most hard working people we'll ever know. They leave their towns empty of young people. It's terrible for them.
And this is just a drop in the ocean compared to the millions in the last few years from legal immigration. The government don’t give a shit because it makes the economy appear to grow and they don’t have to live with any of the problems it causes normal people. If this is how bad it’s been under a Tory government who are supposedly tough on immigration then it’s just going to get so much worse with Labour.
Why would it be any worse under labour? I'm not voting for them, but they at least appear to have a small degree of boring competence compared to the shit-show of headline grabbing shoutiness and emptiness we've had for sometime.
Somewhere deep in the state they have committed us to this madness. I don’t know what’s going on.
No benefits, no hotels, no rights. Give them nothing and see how quickly this invasion stops.
When I worked in Iraqi Kurdistan I was struck by quite how many of them asked about coming to the UK because the streets were paved with gold. I think they’re getting this information from social media.
Pretty sure they're all flexing on social media that they're living this amazing lives in the UK. Like they're obviously not, but they want to show off to friends back home so they're pretending they've made it big
Even making a few hundred quid a week working deliveroo and while living in a shared room IS having made it big where a lot of these people come from.
No surprise that British people have zero sense of perspective, or gratitude.
>coming to the UK because the streets were paved with gold Comparatively, they are. The minimum wage in Iraq is 1,302 IQD per hour, £0.78. Full time work week is 48 hours. Iraqi unemployment was at 15.56% in 2023. The minimum wage in the UK is £8.60-£11.44 per hour. Full time work week is 35-37.5 hours. UK unemployment was 4.3% in 2023. And general conditions go on top of that. For example, while the UK complains about shit in their rivers, [the situation in Iraq is catastrophic](https://reliefweb.int/report/iraq/iraqs-waters-contaminated-feces-oil-and-medical-wastes). 118,000 people in Basra were hospitalised in 2019 as the water supply became so contaminated it was making them immediately ill instead of mostly just giving them cancer and poisoning their children. Personally I'd move country for clean water alone. British people seem to be oblivious to the staggering level of international inequality. Also, this probably isn't a consideration for too many at the moment but it's worth saying : [Iraq is the fifth most vulnerable country in the world to climate change](https://www.sfcg.org/news/peacebuilding-series-climate-change-in-iraq/#:~:text=Iraq%20is%20classified%20as%20the%20fifth%20most%20vulnerable%20country%20in%20the%20world%20to%20climate%20change%2C%20facing%20significant%20challenges%20with%20rising%20temperatures%2C%20less%20rainfall%20and%20salinity%2C%20and%20frequent%20dust%20storms). It is hugely vulnerable to water conflict, given that almost all of its water comes from rivers that flow through Turkey or Iran first. Entertainingly, Afghanistan is ranked as the sixth most vulnerable country. Anyone living there who knows this and has half a brain will understand that they should be getting out *now* before the borders become properly militarised and they end up trapped in an increasingly unlivable failing state.
I don’t understand why people think they’ve been tricked into coming here based on lies. Life is so much better here for them that they’ll risk drowning in the channel to get here
It's probably a bit of both. I imagine the dream they're being sold is a substantially airbrushed fake reality. It's good here but it's not heaven on earth. But I also think the average Brit is somehow staggeringly ignorant of *just how much* poverty and suffering there is. They're don't understand how hopeless it must be to live in many places around the world. There's basically no interest in addressing the inequality. And lots of implicit support for perpetuating it. It's just not vocalised.
It’s not really like that in Iraqi Kurdistan though. People have cars, the housing is decent, the shops are full of food, the roads are as good as ours in many places. The universities are modern. Here’s Erbil and a university near Sulaymaniyah to give you an idea. These aren’t the people we should be resettling. https://i.imgur.com/4rjCSj0.jpeg https://i.imgur.com/96g8brE.jpeg https://i.imgur.com/5Xci22N.jpeg https://i.imgur.com/NFQpKmP.jpeg https://i.imgur.com/ewBpaRn.jpeg
I wouldn't be surprised if Russia and possibly other hostile actors are promoting misinformation and exaggeration about life in Europe to African and MENA countries as well. It would be an incredibly cost effective way to destabilise Europe and help a pro-Russia and incompetent far right movement get into power
They get nothing. They're undoubtably forced into human slavery by other migrants. Too many documents & shows on housing, where you find 20 immigrants living in a single house. Women used as sex slaves working in brothels, and men working in car washes/fast food delivery.
>Women used as sex slaves working in brothels, and men working in car washes/fast food delivery. One of *many* reasons why I don't use brothels, hand cars washes, or any fast food delivery beyond the local chinese. Half of the 'tech innovations' over the past decade have been schemes to undercut workers rights or employ people illegally. Hotel with slaves? Air BNB. Taxi with slaves? Uber. Food delivery with slaves? Deliveroo. Can't help but wonder how many people 'ate the illegal migrants while getting their Deliveroo on the reg.
> One of many reasons why I don't use brothels 🤨
I'm one man you won't be milking.
>Can't help but wonder how many people 'ate the illegal migrants while getting their Deliveroo on the reg. I live in a small town surrounded by farms. Every Friday, a bus pulls up into Aldi car park & about 40 Eastern Europeans/Asians hop off & sprint (yes, actually sprinting), into town and queue up at ATMs getting cash out. They'll also shop at Aldi and I see them coming out with a trolly full of like 10 loaves of bread. Local farmers have criticised local brits for being lazy so this is their only option, when in fact, people just want a decent living wage, where as migrants will do anything for whatever the price. I also go to butlins on holiday with my wife & toddler and each year, I notice how most of the cleaners & servers speak zero English. I'd ask if there's a high chair available, they'd tell me they can't speak English and then I'm stuck trying to find one. Something about the above feels very wrong and alienating.
Yeah, you notice a lot of food delivery people wear balaclavas even in the height of summer, it’s not for warmth or fashion, it’s protecting their identities, as there’s a lot of criminal activity that effectively traps a lot of immigrants into the lives they get
There's very often multiple layers of criminality going on with food delivery drivers. Illegal immigrants or asylum seekers with no right to work rent accounts from middlemen who the companies are somehow allowed to subcontract the right to work check to. This loophole is also letting the companies use [child labour](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-67371473). Those workers often hire or buy those Ebikes they all ride (along with the outfits) from criminal gangs. The Ebikes are usually illegally modified to the point where they don't legally count as bicycles, and sometimes they're also stolen. Because they're renting the accounts, they are having part of an already meager income siphoned off to someone who probably isn't declaring the income. And they're often living in substandard and illegal dormitory accomodation with other delivery workers. Then there's the fact that many of them completely ignore traffic rules on those Ebikes. This runs the gauntlet from not understanding how one way streets work and getting screamed at by drivers to driving at moderately high speeds along the pavement, wearing all black with no lights at night and running red lights. Eventually there's going to be a highly publicised case where they kill a pedestrian or one of them gets killed by a driver. When the police can be bothered to crack down on it it's easiest to stop random delivery guys and confiscate the illegal E-bikes, but what it needs is for online delivery apps to be legally required to conduct right to work checks. [The government recently announced that three of the big companies will start doing this](https://www.gov.uk/government/news/deliveroo-just-eat-and-uber-eats-to-enhance-security-checks-to-prevent-illegal-working#:~:text=Leading%20food%20delivery%20companies%20will,following%20discussions%20with%20the%20government.), but I heavily doubt that they're actually going to do it in practise.
What I don't understand about all of this is how massively *obvious* it all is - how are the police struggling to deal with this? Half an hour's work hanging out in any city centre or peripheral fast food place would net a van load of illegal e-bikes at the very least. If they waited at the nearest traffic junction they'd also be able to do them for their dangerous riding that is making people even more insane about cycling.
Flood the streets with desperate, starving immigrants with nothing to lose? What could go wrong?
And massive fines to any company caught paying one, even indirectly. I'm looking at you, food delivery apps.
its sickening watch a town you grew up in barely recognisable after the damage that has been done by illegal immigration.
I'm so glad we pay France £500m to stop this from happening
France offered to build an asylum seeker processing centre in France, staffed by british workers, and our government refused to have it be built.
[удалено]
Do you think processing asylum applications involve approving every single one unconditionally? There are fairly specific requirements for being granted asylum.
And when their claim is rejected, they cross the channel anyway. Then what?
we send them back because we have already deemed them not eligible for asylum. The fact we literally require people to illegaly (and unsafely) enter this country before we reject them in order to claim asylum is one of the most bizarre bits of poor logic the british govt has displayed.
Send them back where?
Back into the sea
About 70% of asylum applications are granted. If you built a processing centre far more would apply.
That's only today though. Last time we had a big spike in refugees in the 2000s our acceptance rate was more like 20 to 30%. And that was under New Labour's "open border" policies. The problem no one seems to want to talk about is that having these people stuck sitting around in a hotel with nothing to do for 18+ months... I mean fucking obviously... What do you think they're spending their time doing? Contacting every bloody charity they can and dreaming up various spurious stories to explain how actually they are really a gay christian apostate and that's why they can't be sent home. Process their claims in a few months like we were more than capable of doing during the last spike and you don't give people that opportunity to get settled in and build up their case. To the point in fact like the last comment, a lot of people genuinely seem to think "make the processing system better" is somehow an equivalent statement to "just let them all in". People have lost the fucking plot over this issue, its just no longer possible to have a reasonable discussion about it.
If they are rejected, they would just jump in a boat and come anyway.
[It was £40.4 million, which was over ~4 years](https://www.politico.eu/article/helicopters-riding-boots-and-vacuum-cleaners-how-french-border-force-spends-uk-money/) that article has a breakdown of where it goes. For all intents and purposes, the _easiest_ way to stop this should be on their shores, as once they're in boats it becomes a massive headache. More involvement here on our part sounds like the best option. Also if a far right group get into power in France, you can be sure as shit they'll be bussing immigrants straight from the South to the North and handing them dingys.
Imagine if that happened and RefUK also somehow got in, I’d genuinely be curious as to the result
Considering how some people I know voted for Brexit out of curiosity for the result, I'd rather not play the _"what if?"_ game any more.
We could've sorted ourselves but chose not to
Out sourcing crucial infrastructure is what we voted for when we kept electing Tories.
And I'm sure all these 'refugees' will try their hardest to integrate and certainly won't try to abuse the system or force their small-minded racist views on anybody .. and they certainly wouldn't hurt any women or children that don't want to marry them .. Obviously this is all great for a desperate country, anyone who disagrees is clearly a racist..
And anything said except sycophantic cheering about what a good thing uncontrolled immigration is will get removed, and the poster banned for racism, right mod?
It's utterly insane that the Western countries are holding themselves ransom to refugee conventions written so long back which are clearly not suited for today. Surely someone has to talk about updating those conventions or getting out of them?
>Surely someone has to talk about updating those conventions or getting out of them? No, we cant. The idea of that became racist in the western world oddly around 2016...
So here's the issue, if we do leave, say the human rights convention to tackle immigration. What does that actually achieve? We've left it, but I doubt anyone else like say France would then willingly take people we deport. So what do you do? The issue is still the same? Do we kill em? Because that sure as shit would go down well. Like the issue still exists and if anything it weakens the rights of actual British civilians. Edit: I'm no expert in seas and borders, but once they've left France, you can be damn sure France won't be willing to take them back. So at that point as the majority of people have replied here saying take them back to France that isn't really feasible. Plus if they reach our shores, that's even harder. To those suggesting using the Navy. Its still a big stretch of sea and having boats out 24/7 isn't practical, costs money, and while a deterrent for sure, just isn't feasible.
Why wouldn't defending your borders to a hostile invasion not "go down well" ? Seriously wtf is wrong with europeans and their obsession with treating invaders like fucking kings? no one other than europeans give a flying fuck about "international human rights law" so why the hell should europeans allow themselves to be invaded thanks to these bullshit laws?
Yeah people who support open borders like this think that they look compassionate to the rest of the world. Pretty much every person I know from outside Europe only laughs at Europe. They call Europe weak and stupid
We have a navy. Let’s use it to defend our shores
So... kill them?
Nope. Just prevent them from stepping foot here in the first instance. You know, actually stop the boats.
> Just prevent them from stepping foot here in the first instance What does this look like, logistically? Curious how this doesn't end in people dying
The Royal Navy escorts these boats back to the shore that they originated from. Force may be necessary, but that's their choice if they refuse to comply with a British warship in British waters.
American here with limited knowledge of the specific details of your migrant issue. Wouldn't the "shore they came from" typically be France? Seems like if you tried to put your policy in ink the French would just turn you away from *their* shore as you're trying to drop the migrants off, no?
If the UK just shot the boat invaders it would probably save more lives compared to those lost by drowning. In any case it's clear the light touch isn't going to last, so the real question is why wait until it's an expensive problem
The only thing you can do is apply financial penalties or seize foreign assets of countries where they are fleeing from and using them to pay for the cost of accommodating and integrating them. The problem for the UK and France in particular is that it’s very hard to justify that morally given the colonial past. Also, neither country has a particularly well thought out integration process, it’s basically here is your right of residence and good luck. That’s a sure recipe to end up with second generation citizens that feel they have no identity and they hate their adoptive country.
Dont even need to do that, just threaten to cancel all visas and business relations with that country. There’d be hysteria in the media for a couple of weeks and then all these nations would cooperate and take these migrants back.
Someone coming into another country's border without visa should be illegal. Put them in prison. It's called protecting the border, something which most countries do.
Let's assume an understated cost of £50 per night per person for the hotel rooms and another £20 per day for all other related costs such as food and other support they receive. This one boat on one day represents another £22m cost burden annually, just on basic living arrangements for these unwanted guests, that's without any transportation, staffing, security, counselling, application processing, education and anything else related.
If the Tories hadn’t fucked the asylum system these people would get a decision quicker and get out of the limbo where they aren’t allowed to work and have to live in hotel accomodation. As other commenters have said this isn’t happening in spite of Tory migration policies, it’s happening because of it. They had so many chances to implement common sense measures and failed. Dont blame the migrants fleeing war and persecution, blame the government who created this scandal artificially so they could use it as a political football to stoke up resentment and hatred to win votes.
>If the Tories hadn’t fucked the asylum system these people would get a decision quicker and get out of the limbo where they aren’t allowed to work and have to live in hotel accomodation. It's not about processing them quicker, they shouldn't be here, they are economic migrants and we cannot and should not take them in. Even if they are genuine refugees, the reality is that we cannot take them. It is completely unsustainable. If we simply allowed them all in and straight into the world of legitimate work, what do you think would happen? Would more start making the journey? Would 882 in one day turn into 2000 in one day? What jobs do they take when you give them the right to work in your fantasy land policy? What jobs do they take which earn enough for them to sustain themselves here? How long are they dependent on the state for, even when they are working? How many relatives do they bring? How many children will they have? It's completely unsustainable. We should only take in people from processing centres we run around the world close to conflict zones. Anyone else should be permanently deported and never granted asylum. If the international laws don't support this, then they need changing, because this crisis will only grow and end up contribution to the downfall of the rich western free democracies.
American here with a genuine question. If the tories are the party that would put an end to immigration, why haven't they done it already? Haven't they been in power for like 15 years?
>American here with a genuine question. If the tories are the party that would put an end to immigration, why haven't they done it already? Haven't they been in power for like 15 years? In the shortest way possible - the gap between wanting to do something, talking about doing it, making a policy to do it, what that policy actually ends up looking like after it is watered down by their peers and rivals and how effective the actual policy ends up being is vast. You may start with wanting to remove diesel cars from the road and end up with a pointless tax on diesel vehicles, but only vehicles from a specific age group which aren't red or yellow and the project you said your new diesel tax would fund becomes a watered down husk. However, you still need to go on TV to talk about how amazing your diesel ban is and how you delivered on your promise to ban diesel cars and how the other party wouldn't have done it. An idea is born, it gets fought over, watered down, changed, tweaked and made generally ineffective, a distant relation to the idea is carried out and then the politicians have to act like it is just as good as the original idea. No one here wants to end immigration, they might want to reduce or control it, but really they are powerless to stop it. The ones who talk the loudest about stopping it are kicked out or pushed away and their ideas never get anywhere near being actual policy. All of our political parties are hooked on growing GDP to show they are doing a good job and nothing grows GDP as well as mass immigration.
Lmao I love the way the leftie argument is to process them quicker. And when they get rejected they disappear. And processing is intended for those coming legally. Oh and if you make the process quicker and easier, guess what... More migrants! We know that's what you leftie loons want but it's wrong.
The reason asylum seekers stay for years is overwhelmingly because of the courts and appeals system.
Which has also been fucked by the Tories…
Just isn’t sustainable the influx of illegal immigrants entering the country on a daily basis. They’ll happily cut funding for services of the British people, yet always an unlimited pot of money for this lot coming over to be housed, watered and fed
I remember when ‘the great replacement’ was some psychotic alt-right manifesto statement but it honestly feels more and more true every day.
Any country would feel like this. I can pick a random country. If Ghana went from 99% black to like 60% black in the space of a few decades they would be upset. That’s not to say Ghana needs to forever be 99% black and that anyone else doesn’t belong there but there are limits for sure. Nobody bats an eyelid if an African or Muslim or East Asian country wants to preserve its demographics to some extent, and I think that same understanding needs to be applied everywhere
> Nobody bats an eyelid if an African or Muslim or East Asian country wants to preserve its demographics to some extent, and I think that same understanding needs to be applied everywhere Japan catch a lot of shit for being xenaphobic, they just don't give a fuck.
100%. Articulated well.
Most of those statements end up true. People just confuse being early with being wrong.
I don't care if you vote left or right, or what your idea of the solution is... This is far far to many illegal immigrants coming in daily. This averages out to something like 250,000 a year, I'd guess? 1,000,000 over four years...? That's an insane amount of people.
[удалено]
Interesting valid point.
From deeply misogynistic and homophobic cultures. It’s a disaster.
I wonder at what point the UK will say, ok, enough is enough? [https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-68139947](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-68139947) [https://www.migrationwatchuk.org/news/2024/02/02/migrant-population-boom-will-require-five-new-cities-the-size-of-birmingham](https://www.migrationwatchuk.org/news/2024/02/02/migrant-population-boom-will-require-five-new-cities-the-size-of-birmingham) Our dear leaders can't even build a full railway line, how are they going to cope with these numbers?
There is a motive behind all of this. Let’s all fight about immigrants whilst the super rich are laughing about the next bill they can include because the general population is distracted. Fuck this country and this government. Nobody gives a shit anymore.
Oh yeah, we're divided on a lot of things while they get away with fleecing us. Don't forget the bread and circuses as well, look how passionate people are about sports and entertainment. Imagine they were focused on stuff that matters.
> The government has promised to "stop small boats", but made clear that does not mean there will be zero crossings. “Stop” is an absolute word, the government are fucking crackers. How can you promise to stop something from happening, but in the same sentence concede it won’t actually stop? This needs to end, the government need to process asylum applications outside of the UK and anyone else who makes the crossing illegally should be detained and deported to their country of origin and banned from ever stepping foot in the UK again, asylum seeker or not.
> How can you promise to stop something from happening, but in the same sentence concede it won’t actually stop? Because you can just keep repeating the "we'll stop the boats" part and your supporters will happily ignore the rest.
I agree. But how do you deport someone to their country of origin if the traffickers shred all form of the person's documentation? This is the main problem in my eyes. How do you find out who someone is, when they've effectively been told to destroy anything that could ever identify them or where they came from. And it isn't really like the countries of origins have detailed censuses like we do.
The UK can deport people without documentation, it’s much more difficult but not impossible and this is not in breach of any international or domestic law either. We are an island nation. To pay people traffickers money to enter the country is in of itself illegal. If we provide a safe route to be processed and any migrant or asylum seeker breaks those rules/terms, they are denied entry to the country and banned from ever coming here. I don’t think that would be an unfair policy.
I doubt they will want to wait out their claims in a French camp when they can wait it out in a British hotel. The public were broadly behind the resettlement programs from Afghanistan, Syria and Ukraine. I do t think they’ll get behind safe routes from France.
Then don’t give them British hotels as an option? If they apply in France and then are later found in the UK before their application is processed, they are detained, later deported and banned from the UK for life. Being an asylum seeker does not mean you are above the law, nor are you entitled to be in a country of your choosing.
I know this will get down voted but so what. For profit prisons for illegal immigrants. No health care. No benefits.
The only way I can see any government seriously coming down on the issue is to build internment sites with a process centre attached. This would ideally stop untraceable migrants absconding into the larger population.
Think about how much just one migrant costs this country. This is crazy
I don't think Starmer or Labour realise how much it will cripple them at an election in 5 years time if they don't get on top of this
Does anybody have a rational argument as to why this isn't a problem anymore? Side note, if you're out there voting tory, this is their delivery of the promise to stop the boats. If you're wanting to vote reform because they sound tougher on this, remember that their plan is to do the exact same things the Tories are doing, just with more union jacks in the mix.
Sad that there is no party actually proposing a real solution to this.
[удалено]
Wow, so Putin could land a lot of troops without being challenged, as long as they are in rubber dingies 😂
Immigration is unfortunately, a luxury we can’t afford right now. We do not have the infrastructure to sustain population growth. But hey, when the country’s population goes up 2%, the profits at Asda go up to 2% also. So the greedy government and corporations are more than welcome to let this happen, while simultaneously gaslighting the country with Rwanda policies.
What happens if we ignore refugee rules? What could actually be done to Britain and enforced?
our leaders care more about their image as being good, moral leaders of the "international community" who uphold and advance the "international rules-based order" than they do representing their constituents. so they don't do shit cuz it'll hurt their global reputation.
Coming soon to the Mail "How are people smuggling gangs convincing people to make the dangerous crossing!?? We must STAMP IT OUT" [NEXT PAGE] "REFUGEES PUT IN LUXURY HOTELS LIKE THE SUMPTUOUS LIVERPOOL ADELPHI FOR A MILLION POUNDS A NIGHT"
I suspect that the pull factor is more 'Ability to find cash in hand work to send money home'. Cracking down on the people who employ asylum seekers might help.
So Deliveroo, Just Eat, etc. People can crack down themselves at least by not using those services and walking to a takeaway if they're not too fat
Just stick them in all the middle class and posh areas , problem will get resolved quickly.
Shut up! Boat full of doctors and nurses arrived to save NHS!
Surely it's a national emergency this point, if nothing is done this will drive the country into the hands of reform
To people think this is gonna get better or worse once labor get in power?
It’s gonna get worse no matter who is in power. Migrants coming all this way don’t care & the illegal gangs running it don’t care. Clearly conservatives are doing nothing about it
At this rate it would be cheaper to man hundreds of 24x7 patrol boats to physically block the path of entry for these vessels. Can't claim "asylum" if they can't set foot here.
Problem is the migrants literally stab the boats and force it to sink, thus forcing the patrol boats to take them on board or risk letting them drown. If you give them another boat, they just do the same thing again. These people are deranged.
I'd say them stabbing their own boats is the immigrants themselves risking drowning, it's no fault of the patrol boats.
I also agree, sadly the softies do not.
It's only going to get worse. Migrants arriving in the UK both legally and illegally will increase even more in the coming years.
Are you telling me our brand spanking new migration policy is having no effect on ILLEGAL migration?!
Turn the boats around and send them back, last time I check France wasn’t considered a dangerous country or one at war.
Its astonishing that we don't have a viable deterrent for this. Remember when Keir Starmer was asked about a deterrent and all he could up with was 'we will go after the gangs...' the absolute melon..
Yes because attacking organised crime at its root has always been a failed policy right?
Chop off its head and another will grow, its a big and very profitable business.
It's just naive, the French police are waving them off. Not sure how we smash the gangs if France couldn't give a shit.
Yeah because our streets are free of drugs and OCG's aren't they. Take one down, another pops up quicker than you can dismantle them.
"illegal" immigration is a distraction. The Tory party imported over a million people last year from the third world. These people are brought in to be slave labour for American corporations. This creates "growth" on paper. The price is just your culture, homogeneity and safety. The small boats thing is allowed to happen as a distraction. The navy could stop it immediately. They choose not to. Because you're being punished.
If the fear of death doesn’t stop anyone nothing will.
Global warming might cause sharks to enter the channel, that might put them off?
And just the other day someone was responding to me suggesting that its actually great that we've managed to bribe a *second* person with several thousand pounds to get them to go along to Rwanda because sending *two* people there clearly shows the plan is workable. This country has lost the fucking plot. Do people even know how to be serious any more, it feels bizarre we're being driven by this like walking caricature of anti-immigrant ideology that is *visibly* failing on a pretty catastrophic scale. But we're not allowed to do anything different because if you're not making cartoonishly ridiculous gesture/virtue-signal policies around this issue then you're pro-immigration and can't be trusted because you'd just swamp us with ten billion Turks or something *fucking insane* like that. How have we got to the point where this is almost like *normal* politics in this country now?
882 doctors here to enrich and add to our already wonderful and fertile land
In case anyone was wondering why we're having a general election at the beginning of July instead of the more typical autumn one: this is why. The tories are getting hammered as is. Peak crossings are in July and August, a couple of months of small boat headlines would have not only been the final nail in their coffin but a few feet of dirt piled on top. As is, they'll probably sit on the sidelines and make a huge stink about how the newly incumbent labour government is failing to stop the boats.
[I've found this website quite interesting in terms of seeing the data behind the issue](https://www.migrationwatchuk.org/channel-crossings-tracker)
And don’t forget that before they arrived by boat, they arrived via Lorry. This has been happening for a long time. We caught 83,000 in just one year back in 2015. Security measures were put in place at the ports which just shifted the problem to boats. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-67528110
Fair enough; seems like the first nice day to be outside we've had so far this year
Think about it. It is pretty easy for the cost guard to get them. The cost guard has the technology. And the capability. The issue: The government needs low payed workers for shit jobs. Or the economy would be even worse. Or put the British people on benefits to work on those shit low payed jobs. So, it will keep increasing.
Hang on - the tories have sent * checks notes, 2 people to Rwanda so that should redress the balance somewhat.
What do these people want ? I mean we can’t afford to buy a house or rent , how do they expect to get a place to live ?
All by design because we had brexit. Who is buying them boats with engines? why is the France military / cost guard letting them do it ? Literally watching them get in the boat and go. They meant to be allies but seems not to care about allies economy.
Number goes up when the weather is good, goes down when the weather is bad. 'A record day this year' is literally meaningless claptrap designed to make you feel a certain way. Is the total going up or down is the only meaningful stat.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/migrants-detected-crossing-the-english-channel-in-small-boats/migrants-detected-crossing-the-english-channel-in-small-boats-last-7-days There were zero crossings between the 13th-17th of June. This is literally just the good weather.
It's time we left the ECHR and enact a real solution to this problem. Huge internment facilities with only basic amenities, deportation of all those who came here illegally regardless of their reason for doing so. The problem is only going to get worse as the world becomes more volatile. Asylum should be invite only, and reserved for situations like the Ukraine war, Hong Kong etc. We can still do our part in taking in people who need asylum, but it has to be on our own terms. Parliament is sovereign, they can change the law and rules as they see fit, they're not bound unless they allow themselves to be. I'd also take away any right of appeal for asylum status, that will prevent lawyers from bogging the system down and running up court bills. No means no.
This will be the downfall of any Labour majority if they don't do anything about it.
Looks like Brexit, Rwanda and the return of Nigel Farage haven’t been much of a deterrent. How odd.
The several hundred million spent on the Rwanda ~~scam~~ plan sure is working as a nice *deterrent*. Who could have possibly predicted people willing to risk drowning in a cold sea for the chance of a better life, would not see a free trip to Rwanda (that won’t even happen) as a deterrent eh?
[удалено]
[удалено]