Channel Migrants

[Vince Green]

1 hour ago, 12gauge82 said:

if we simply dump them straight back on French beaches. What economic migrant is going to want to pay thousands of pounds to get here knowing full well they'll simply get removed and loose their money.

This would work and very quickly when they realise the door really is shut.

It would solve France's problem too because they won't bother making the journey to the French coast if it stops being viable to get across to UK. 

[TIGHTCHOKE]

1 hour ago, Vince Green said:

This would work and very quickly when they realise the door really is shut.

It would solve France's problem too because they won't bother making the journey to the French coast if it stops being viable to get across to UK. 

Don't hold your breath waiting, that will NEVER happen!

Edited August 23, 2023 by TIGHTCHOKE
Spellage!

[Rewulf]

2 hours ago, oowee said:

What truth would that be?

The one some people dont like to hear? 

That uncontrolled immigration isn't working for the UK. 

2 hours ago, oowee said:

Not sure on the number but 330000 would be a good starter for ten.

Is that total or every year? 

Because we take more than that EVERY year. 

Thats one big cities worth of people EVERY year, who need housing, schooling and medical care. 

So how many cities have we built, how many schools, how many hospitals? 

[Penelope]

51 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

Thats one big cities worth of people EVERY year, who need housing, schooling and medical care. 

Or roughly 6 1/2 Brigades 😉

[oowee]

43 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

The one some people dont like to hear? 

That uncontrolled immigration isn't working for the UK. 

Is that total or every year? 

Because we take more than that EVERY year. 

Thats one big cities worth of people EVERY year, who need housing, schooling and medical care. 

So how many cities have we built, how many schools, how many hospitals? 

Ah I see. Then surely we should control it. If its what Mogg and Farrage are saying then they need to face up to the reality that they and other Trumpian luddite's don't want to hear. Controlling immigration has very little to do with stopping it. 

The UK economy relies upon growth. Growth will only come from more work or more efficiency. We have no plans in the UK for greater efficiency, indeed we seem to strive for inefficiency. Therefore we need more workers. More workers on lower pay to pay for the pensions and the standard of living that we think we deserve rather than the standard of living we pay for. All of it trying to postpone the day when the checks have to paid.  

[12gauge82]

1 hour ago, TIGHTCHOKE said:

Don't hold your breath waiting, that will NEVER happen!

Not with the current political parties, hence why we need to vote someone else in.

[Rewulf]

9 minutes ago, oowee said:

Controlling immigration has very little to do with stopping it. 

Who said anything about stopping it? 

10 minutes ago, oowee said:

The UK economy relies upon growth. Growth will only come from more work or more efficiency. We have no plans in the UK for greater efficiency, indeed we seem to strive for inefficiency. Therefore we need more workers. More workers on lower pay to pay for the pensions and the standard of living that we think we deserve rather than the standard of living we pay for. All of it trying to postpone the day when the checks have to paid

There's so many things wrong with those statements, I don't know where to begin.... 

'More workers on lower pay? ' Hardly pay any tax, in fact their net cost to the country outweighs anything they will EVER pay in tax. 

So unless these dinghies really do contain doctors, engineers and other high skilled, high earning, err.. Refugees, then your dream of them paying our pensions lis something of a fallacy. 

Likely many will never work, but will get housed, call for friends and relatives to come over from their 'war torn' countries, and form a nice ghetto somewhere. 

[oowee]

8 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

Who said anything about stopping it? 

There's so many things wrong with those statements, I don't know where to begin.... 

'More workers on lower pay? ' Hardly pay any tax, in fact their net cost to the country outweighs anything they will EVER pay in tax. 

So unless these dinghies really do contain doctors, engineers and other high skilled, high earning, err.. Refugees, then your dream of them paying our pensions lis something of a fallacy. 

Likely many will never work, but will get housed, call for friends and relatives to come over from their 'war torn' countries, and form a nice ghetto somewhere. 

? The vast majority of the population are net takers of services. We need numbers to pay the bills. We are currently increasing the inefficiency (post brexit) and cutting labour supply. Surprised then that we have high inflation and a failing social infrastructure. 

If we don't increase the labour supply then we must increase efficiency and or cut costs. 

[armsid]

We lost our industries through strikes innefficient gov. poor management failure to invest in apprentices after we joined the Common Market our fishing grounds which cost jobs and the East European countries entering the Market where low paid workers came from and Labour pushed for this to happen through Brown to make the country a low wage high price economy Paying low wages topped up with benefits means no NI no tax a loss from both ends and we still have lazy unemployable people drawing vast sums of taxpayers hard earned money paying for them. The French system is jobs for French nationals first and if the company employs a non French national when a Frenchman can do the job the company is fined .The dole in France lasts for 2 years not indeffinately like here but a look over the channell at the way they work (their health system beats ours but is payed for with insurance) bus fares 1Euro 3 hrs travel and regular just an observation

[Rewulf]

7 minutes ago, oowee said:

If we don't increase the labour supply then we must increase efficiency and or cut costs

I can't make this any simpler, you aren't increasing the Labour supply, because they aren't working, and many never will. 

Thousands of dinghy people are in hotels costing £150-500 per DAY. 

They don't speak English, they are illiterate, some have mental health issues, and yes, some are criminals, with no ID, fleeing punishment for crimes in their own country, and all are welcome here. 

So they keep coming, how many is too many? 

[armsid]

Yes and we keep on giving millions away to help countries survive and prosper including some where the dinghy crews come from we must be mad

[Fargo]

1 hour ago, oowee said:

Ah I see. Then surely we should control it. If its what Mogg and Farrage are saying then they need to face up to the reality that they and other Trumpian luddite's don't want to hear. Controlling immigration has very little to do with stopping it. 

The UK economy relies upon growth. Growth will only come from more work or more efficiency. We have no plans in the UK for greater efficiency, indeed we seem to strive for inefficiency. Therefore we need more workers. More workers on lower pay to pay for the pensions and the standard of living that we think we deserve rather than the standard of living we pay for. All of it trying to postpone the day when the checks have to paid.  

These arrivals don’t or won’t work. They just want freebies.

Roll on genuine migrants who come legally and want to contribute to society.

[12gauge82]

1 hour ago, oowee said:

Ah I see. Then surely we should control it. If its what Mogg and Farrage are saying then they need to face up to the reality that they and other Trumpian luddite's don't want to hear. Controlling immigration has very little to do with stopping it. 

The UK economy relies upon growth. Growth will only come from more work or more efficiency. We have no plans in the UK for greater efficiency, indeed we seem to strive for inefficiency. Therefore we need more workers. More workers on lower pay to pay for the pensions and the standard of living that we think we deserve rather than the standard of living we pay for. All of it trying to postpone the day when the checks have to paid.  

You are describing a never ending pyramid scheme relying on ever more unsustainable immigration and higher population numbers, while we're being told that climate change is happening due to unsustainable human use of the planets resources.

Something has to give.

1 hour ago, Rewulf said:

I can't make this any simpler, you aren't increasing the Labour supply, because they aren't working, and many never will. 

Thousands of dinghy people are in hotels costing £150-500 per DAY. 

They don't speak English, they are illiterate, some have mental health issues, and yes, some are criminals, with no ID, fleeing punishment for crimes in their own country, and all are welcome here. 

So they keep coming, how many is too many? 

And this is the reality.

[johnphilip]

This says it all. 

 

[dead eye alan]

17 hours ago, 12gauge82 said:

Agreed, but your proving my point.

One of the non main stream partys, that if elected would do something about all this woke nonsense like our immigration policy.

I'll vote reform or reclaim ect

Agreed reform for me, Richard Tice talks tuff, but I do not think enough votes will come his way or reclaims way to break the 2 party system.

[Newbie to this]

 

10 hours ago, Rewulf said:

So they keep coming, how many is too many?

That's simple, 1 illegal is too many.

[FOXHUNTER1]

Just now, Newbie to this said:

 

That's simple, 1 illegal is too many.

+1 👍

[Rewulf]

3 hours ago, Newbie to this said:

 

That's simple, 1 illegal is too many.

Well according to this https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/illegal-migration-bill theyre all being sent back 😆

The definition lies in the term 'illegal' 
The UN and EU dont see them as illegal, in fact they shun the term, preferring 'undocumented, or irregular' and as we are bound by laws that these two institutions hold, we can do little to send illegals back home.
The US , also bound by UN law , seems to have no issue with SA illegals going back .....

Then we get onto refugee status, and it gets even more difficult to remove them , and if they are undocumented, with country of origin unknown....
So will France take them back , what do you think ?

[12gauge82]

20 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

 

So will France take them back , what do you think ?

Don't give them a choice, dump them straight back on their beaches. There'd be tantrums, the UK would be called all sorts and uk politicians and the woke uk population would have a meltdown that would make the vote to leave the EU mild. But in the end there'd be nothing they could do and illegal migration would virtually stop.

Edited August 24, 2023 by 12gauge82

[johnphilip]

11 minutes ago, 12gauge82 said:

Don't give them a choice, dump them straight back on their beaches. There'd be tantrums, the UK would be called all sorts and uk politicians and the woke uk population would have a meltdown that would make the vote to leave the EU mild. But in the end there'd be nothing they could do and illegal migration would virtually stop.

It should work , they don't seem to see them leaving , so should not see them returned. 

[Good shot?]

There is nothing more I would like to see than the return of the boat people back to their embarkation point as that point would be easy to prove with modern technology.

However how long would it take before we had to have armed personnel carrying this out?

Edited August 24, 2023 by Good shot?
Spelling error.

[GHE]

31 minutes ago, 12gauge82 said:

Don't give them a choice, dump them straight back on their beaches. There'd be tantrums, the UK would be called all sorts and uk politicians and the woke uk population would have a meltdown that would make the vote to leave the EU mild. But in the end there'd be nothing they could do and illegal migration would virtually stop.

That view is based on the mistaken belief that they arrive here illegally. They don't arrive illegally, they set out in small boats, shout for help and are rescued. They arrive as rescued passengers, which gives them the right to land as it's the captain of the rescue ship who decides where to land them (and which is why they refuse to be rescued by French ships).

The Carpathia picked up 705 people in small boats from the Titanic, nobody thought it wrong to take them to the nearest port, and in terms of international law, the Americans couldn't refuse to allow them to land and nothing has changed...

The whole situation is one gigantic mess that can only have a political solution. This government is trying to whip up hysteria by falsely claiming that the taxpayer is spending £6m a day on hotel bills, which is just a lie - it doesn't cost the taxpayer anything at all.

Edited August 24, 2023 by GHE

[johnphilip]

18 minutes ago, GHE said:

That view is based on the mistaken belief that they arrive here illegally. They don't arrive illegally, they set out in small boats, shout for help and are rescued. They arrive as rescued passengers, which gives them the right to land as it's the captain of the rescue ship who decides where to land them (and which is why they refuse to be rescued by French ships).

The Carpathia picked up 705 people in small boats from the Titanic, nobody thought it wrong to take them to the nearest port, and in terms of international law, the Americans couldn't refuse to allow them to land and nothing has changed...

The whole situation is one gigantic mess that can only have a political solution. This government is trying to whip up hysteria by falsely claiming that the taxpayer is spending £6m a day on hotel bills, which is just a lie - it doesn't cost the taxpayer anything at all.

Prey tell were the money is coming from to accommodate these 

Illegal  spongers , who have destroyed  any form of ID . 

[GHE]

1 hour ago, johnphilip said:

Prey tell were the money is coming from to accommodate these 

Illegal  spongers , who have destroyed  any form of ID . 

It all comes from the Overseas Aid Budget.  This used to be .7% of GDP, but the government reduced it to .5% on a "temporary basis"

Every penny that's spent on asylum seekers, refugees and so on (food, accommodation, benefits, sea rescue etc) reduces the amount paid out in overseas aid, so the taxpayer doesn't pay anything.  The government even claims the money spent by charities and not by them, and claims the money paid to the French etc too.

The people who are really paying for this is the starving people in other parts of the world that the money was earmarked to help.

Edited August 24, 2023 by GHE

[Luckyshot]

3 minutes ago, GHE said:

It all comes from the Overseas Aid Budget.  This used to be 1.7% of GDP, but the government reduced it to 1.5% on a "temporary basis"

Every penny that's spent on asylum seekers, refugees and so on (food, accommodation, benefits, sea rescue etc) reduces the amount paid out in overseas aid, so the taxpayer doesn't pay anything.  The government even claims the money spent by charities and not by them, and claims the money paid to the French etc too.

The people who are really paying for this is the starving people in other parts of the world that the money was earmarked to help.

So where does this magic pot of overseas money come from then ? our taxes, thought so.