Channel Migrants

[12gauge82]

3 hours ago, oowee said:

The UNHCR treaty on refugees was signed in 1951 well before the treaty of Rome in 1957 forming the ECC). So nothing at all to do with EU laws. The subsequent status protocols which is a UN charter was agreed in 1967 so also nothing to do with EU laws. 

If they were considered illegal on arrival the govt could and no doubt would lock them up. We cannot because of our agreement. You might not like it i might not like it but that is what we agreed. If you don't like the law what would you do? Break it or seek to change it?

It's so much easier to blame everyone else.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3163157/Soft-EU-rules-let-265-000-Foreign-nationals-outside-Europe-getting-citizenship-using-laws-travel-UK.html

One in ten in England and Wales were not born here, I think to say the impact has been substantial is a vast understment. I'm in no way against migration but it needs to be controlled, the EU has an awful lot to answer for, as do our own successive governments. 

[Newbie to this]

1 hour ago, johnphilip said:

Nice to see  someone talking sence for once 

 

 

Unfortunately his voice is in the minority in Parliament, although I'd suggest he is just saying what the majority of the population are thinking.

9 minutes ago, 12gauge82 said:

One in ten in England and Wales were not born here

One in six

[Rewulf]

14 minutes ago, Newbie to this said:

Unfortunately his voice is in the minority in Parliament, although I'd suggest he is just saying what the majority of the population are thinking.

Mr Anderson who is very local to me , is that rare politician , who has decided not to throw his principles on the bonfire of vanities, so he can pursue and further his political career.
Believe it or not, the area he represents respects this kind of attitude, and wokism in this area is still a relatively rare thing.

Local political career[edit]

Anderson was a longtime member of the Labour Party and was elected as a councillor in the 2015 Ashfield District Council election, representing Huthwaite and Brierley ward.[4] He was suspended in February 2018 by the local branch of the Labour Party after receiving a community protection warning by the council for using boulders to block members of the Traveller community from "setting up camp at a site in the area".[5] The following month, Anderson defected to the Conservative Party which he stated was a response to the "takeover" of the Labour Party by the "hard-left" particularly through the left-wing political organisation Momentum.[6] He was elected as a Conservative councillor on the Mansfield District Council representing the Oakham ward between 2019 and 2021.[7]

I would imagine the opposition are feverishly trying to dig up some dirt , misdemeanor , or evidence of fascism , to counter this rather refreshing popularity, so far in vain.

4 hours ago, oowee said:

The UNHCR treaty on refugees was signed in 1951 well before the treaty of Rome in 1957 forming the ECC). So nothing at all to do with EU laws. The subsequent status protocols which is a UN charter was agreed in 1967 so also nothing to do with EU laws. 

Those treaties and protocols came from another age , where there were genuine refugees , trying often in vain to link up with disjointed families and loved ones after WW2.
Even going into the 80s and 90s there were many genuine refugees fleeing SE Asia, Africa and the ME, as well as soviet states, all were welcomed , there was very little racism or bigotry, and the vast majority integrated well, I still have a friend from Vietnam who was sent into my school in the early 80s , who spoke virtually no English, and went on to become a doctor.
The problem is not that the British people are xenophobic , they are just good at spotting chancers and shirkers , that have no intention of integration or contribution, they are on the take.

 

4 hours ago, oowee said:

If they were considered illegal on arrival the govt could and no doubt would lock them up. We cannot because of our agreement. You might not like it i might not like it but that is what we agreed. If you don't like the law what would you do? Break it or seek to change it?

The statement is a nonsense , and is part of the problem, the UN charter on asylum doesnt recognise the term 'illegal immigrant'
As above , the charters , protocols , and EU embellishments were NOT designed for the quantity and aims of mass fraudulent asylum claims.
The process, enshrined in international law, does NOT cater for anything but genuine refugees, it is horrifically outdated !

How else could an Albanian dinghy rider claim asylum ?
Its a safe country, a holiday destination, not on any foreign office danger lists , it has corruption and crime equivalent to say Italy.
To believe that you are entitled to asylum because you have debts and problems, absolutely beggars belief.
Half this country has debts and problems, shall we all jump in a pedalo and land at Calais, claim asylum and expect the French to look after us ?
What do you think would happen ?

One example would be the French coasties or navy , towing said pedalo back to the half way point and leaving you there, with the excuse that 'The stupid ros bifs are lost' 

We on the other hand , believe everything they say and take them to a nice hotel.
Its pathetic.

[oowee]

13 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

 

Those treaties and protocols came from another age , where there were genuine refugees , trying often in vain to link up with disjointed families and loved ones after WW2.
Even going into the 80s and 90s there were many genuine refugees fleeing SE Asia, Africa and the ME, as well as soviet states, all were welcomed , there was very little racism or bigotry, and the vast majority integrated well, I still have a friend from Vietnam who was sent into my school in the early 80s , who spoke virtually no English, and went on to become a doctor.
The problem is not that the British people are xenophobic , they are just good at spotting chancers and shirkers , that have no intention of integration or contribution, they are on the take.

 

The statement is a nonsense , and is part of the problem, the UN charter on asylum doesnt recognise the term 'illegal immigrant'
As above , the charters , protocols , and EU embellishments were NOT designed for the quantity and aims of mass fraudulent asylum claims.
The process, enshrined in international law, does NOT cater for anything but genuine refugees, it is horrifically outdated !

How else could an Albanian dinghy rider claim asylum ?

Exactly my point. 

 

1 hour ago, 12gauge82 said:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3163157/Soft-EU-rules-let-265-000-Foreign-nationals-outside-Europe-getting-citizenship-using-laws-travel-UK.html

One in ten in England and Wales were not born here, I think to say the impact has been substantial is a vast understment. I'm in no way against migration but it needs to be controlled, the EU has an awful lot to answer for, as do our own successive governments. 

Nowt to do with the EU we left. It's all down to the UK acting within a world where it has reduced much of it's influence. 

[Rewulf]

3 minutes ago, oowee said:

Exactly my point. 

Yet you scoff at the mention of changing the law ?
 

4 minutes ago, oowee said:

Nowt to do with the EU we left. It's all down to the UK acting within a world where it has reduced much of it's influence. 

Whoa ! We left in principle , we havent had your 'bonfire' of EU legislation yet , we are still operating under most of it ?
Yet you say this chucking out of EU leg , will have a disasterous effect ?

You cant have it both ways .

[oowee]

22 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

Yet you scoff at the mention of changing the law ?
 

Whoa ! We left in principle , we havent had your 'bonfire' of EU legislation yet , we are still operating under most of it ?
Yet you say this chucking out of EU leg , will have a disasterous effect ?

You cant have it both ways .

No I dont scoff at change in the law if you can come up with a sensible alternative that does not place the UK as a leper colony in the eyes of the world. I doubt this Govt can do it. The migrant crisis is a handy diversion for the Tories to deflect from the wider problems facing the UK. The party split does not allow a working solution to be developed. 

The coming EU bonfire of legislation is nothing to do with the treaties we agreed in respect of refugees. We have clearly lost the majority of our leverage within Europe as a result of leaving in principle or otherwise. 

Edited November 10, 2022 by oowee

[Rewulf]

3 minutes ago, oowee said:

No I dont scoff at change in the law if you can come up with a sensible alternative that does not place the UK as a leper colony in the eyes of the world. I doubt this Govt can do it. The migrant crisis is a handy diversion for the Tories to deflect from the wider problems facing the UK. The party split does not allow a working solution to be developed. 

A sensible alternative like Australia , where they ship them off to camps in the jungles of PNG ?
Hows that leper colony doing these days ?

Or the US where they seem to completely ignore the UN charter ad lib , where they deport S American 'refugees' as they see fit ?
They dont seem to have any issue with defining an economic migrant ?
Its a strange one really , the country thats caused more refugees than perhaps any other , seems far from happy to recieve them, and yet no lepers reside there ?

To say this is a handy diversion is a bit lame , the problem of illegal immigration began under Blairs watch , and was actively encouraged in my opinion, but its STILL the tories fault ?

10 minutes ago, oowee said:

The coming EU bonfire of legislation is nothing to do with the treaties we agreed in respect of refugees. We have clearly lost the majority of our leverage within Europe as a result of leaving in principle or otherwise. 

Grant seriously ?
When we were in the EU , we had NO leverage, we had whatever crumbs they gave us , and when it came to illegals sat in jungle camps , the EU , in their magnanimity , did NOTHING to stop them, they in fact , encouraged them to ship out for the promised land.

[12gauge82]

53 minutes ago, oowee said:

No I dont scoff at change in the law if you can come up with a sensible alternative that does not place the UK as a leper colony in the eyes of the world. I doubt this Govt can do it. The migrant crisis is a handy diversion for the Tories to deflect from the wider problems facing the UK. The party split does not allow a working solution to be developed. 

The coming EU bonfire of legislation is nothing to do with the treaties we agreed in respect of refugees. We have clearly lost the majority of our leverage within Europe as a result of leaving in principle or otherwise. 

We never had any leverage in the EU, the whole reason we left was because they treated the UKs concerns with contempt and ignored our reasonable requests for change, (rember Camerons renegotiation?). Thank god we're out of that gangster organisation. 

[12gauge82]

2 hours ago, Newbie to this said:

 

One in six

I stand corrected 👍

[old man]

3 hours ago, 12gauge82 said:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3163157/Soft-EU-rules-let-265-000-Foreign-nationals-outside-Europe-getting-citizenship-using-laws-travel-UK.html

One in ten in England and Wales were not born here, I think to say the impact has been substantial is a vast understment. I'm in no way against migration but it needs to be controlled, the EU has an awful lot to answer for, as do our own successive governments. 

And sadly none will answer?

[old man]

1 hour ago, 12gauge82 said:

We never had any leverage in the EU, the whole reason we left was because they treated the UKs concerns with contempt and ignored our reasonable requests for change, (rember Camerons renegotiation?). Thank god we're out of that gangster organisation. 

Where is the leverage now, we seem to have fostered our own home grown gangsta government

[JohnfromUK]

Just now, old man said:

remember Camerons renegotiation?

If Commissioner Jean-Claude Juncker had actually listened to Cameron and given him a bit of concession to come back with, the leave/remain vote might well have come out with remain the winner.

I genuinely think that the arrogant attitude ignoring Cameron's concerns from Juncker and President Donald Tusk, coupled with continual 'sniping, griping and bitching' by the likes of Guy Verhofstadt put enough British peoples backs up to significantly affect the outcome.

[Dave-G]

6 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

If Commissioner Jean-Claude Juncker had actually listened to Cameron and given him a bit of concession to come back with, the leave/remain vote might well have come out with remain the winner.

I genuinely think that the arrogant attitude ignoring Cameron's concerns from Juncker and President Donald Tusk, coupled with continual 'sniping, griping and bitching' by the likes of Guy Verhofstadt put enough British peoples backs up to significantly affect the outcome.

100% right: Guy Rantinggob mainly did it for me, his contempt was completely obvious and he did the EU massive harm IMO.

Edited November 10, 2022 by Dave-G

[Vince Green]

On 09/11/2022 at 14:20, oowee said:

? Not sure i follow this. We are short of labour in every industry. 

Yes but we need the right sort of people not just headcount for the sake of it. That solves nothing

Apart from delivering pizzas what are these boat people realistically going to do?

[Aled]

56 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

If Commissioner Jean-Claude Juncker had actually listened to Cameron and given him a bit of concession to come back with, the leave/remain vote might well have come out with remain the winner.

I genuinely think that the arrogant attitude ignoring Cameron's concerns from Juncker and President Donald Tusk, coupled with continual 'sniping, griping and bitching' by the likes of Guy Verhofstadt put enough British peoples backs up to significantly affect the outcome.

Here i totally agree with you. 

[12gauge82]

58 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

If Commissioner Jean-Claude Juncker had actually listened to Cameron and given him a bit of concession to come back with, the leave/remain vote might well have come out with remain the winner.

I genuinely think that the arrogant attitude ignoring Cameron's concerns from Juncker and President Donald Tusk, coupled with continual 'sniping, griping and bitching' by the likes of Guy Verhofstadt put enough British peoples backs up to significantly affect the outcome.

Absolutely agreed, I was probably one of them, thinking very little at the time about our membership and how it affected the country, if they'd been more reasonable, my vote could have been different. 

[henry d]

53 minutes ago, old man said:

And sadly none will answer?

We've already done this. It isn't that 1 in 10 have just arrived here in the past few years, it's been going on for over 60 years. 

Let's look at our demographics,   8.3M in England way back in 1801 and by 1901 30.5M, some of which is Irish migrants dodging the famine, but there was also lots of English leaving for greener pastures. Then WW1 tipped the scales by removing lots of men from the equation and then Spanish flu! Now there are 56M of us in England but have a look back at the 19th C more than triple the amount of people, and the next 120 years and we don't even double the population! There are so many variables when it comes to demographics to point the finger at migrants as being responsible for the present population is ridiculous. 

[12gauge82]

2 minutes ago, henry d said:

We've already done this. It isn't that 1 in 10 have just arrived here in the past few years, it's been going on for over 60 years. 

Let's look at our demographics,   8.3M in England way back in 1801 and by 1901 30.5M, some of which is Irish migrants dodging the famine, but there was also lots of English leaving for greener pastures. Then WW1 tipped the scales by removing lots of men from the equation and then Spanish flu! Now there are 56M of us in England but have a look back at the 19th C more than triple the amount of people, and the next 120 years and we don't even double the population! There are so many variables when it comes to demographics to point the finger at migrants as being responsible for the present population is ridiculous. 

I point the finger at our successive governments, but particularly Labour under Blair for allowing and encouraging it, not the migrants themselves. There has been positives to migration, but to claim there has been no serious negatives either is ridiculous. 

[henry d]

4 minutes ago, Vince Green said:

Apart from delivering pizzas what are these boat people realistically going to do?

My cousin's husband has been working with universities and colleges, he was in charge of a University in Iraq, was educated by Newcastle University and they arrived here with just clothes and money after Iraq fell via Syria and Jordan. I know for a fact none of the family have delivered pizzas apart from the ones they bought and took home. 

[Rewulf]

6 minutes ago, henry d said:

Let's look at our demographics,   8.3M in England way back in 1801 and by 1901 30.5M, some of which is Irish migrants dodging the famine, but there was also lots of English leaving for greener pastures. Then WW1 tipped the scales by removing lots of men from the equation and then Spanish flu! Now there are 56M of us in England but have a look back at the 19th C more than triple the amount of people, and the next 120 years and we don't even double the population! There are so many variables when it comes to demographics to point the finger at migrants as being responsible for the present population is ridiculous. 

[oowee]

14 minutes ago, Vince Green said:

Yes but we need the right sort of people not just headcount for the sake of it. That solves nothing

Apart from delivering pizzas what are these boat people realistically going to do?

Pizzas still need delivering. Heads displace others and the food chain moves on. Look at those with skills delivering for amazon. 

[Rem260]

42 minutes ago, Vince Green said:

Yes but we need the right sort of people not just headcount for the sake of it. That solves nothing

Apart from delivering pizzas what are these boat people realistically going to do?

Vote Labour.

[old man]

1 hour ago, henry d said:

We've already done this. It isn't that 1 in 10 have just arrived here in the past few years, it's been going on for over 60 years. 

Let's look at our demographics,   8.3M in England way back in 1801 and by 1901 30.5M, some of which is Irish migrants dodging the famine, but there was also lots of English leaving for greener pastures. Then WW1 tipped the scales by removing lots of men from the equation and then Spanish flu! Now there are 56M of us in England but have a look back at the 19th C more than triple the amount of people, and the next 120 years and we don't even double the population! There are so many variables when it comes to demographics to point the finger at migrants as being responsible for the present population is ridiculous. 

Again Henri, you misunderstood me. It's not the common people, it's the dummkopf politicos on both sides who enable this appalling situation?

1 hour ago, oowee said:

Pizzas still need delivering. Heads displace others and the food chain moves on. Look at those with skills delivering for amazon. 

Mm, as that extremely disagreeable thing called Tebbit said " get on yer bike?"

[oldypigeonpopper]

Hello, I read there taking over a 2nd hotel in sunny Devon 🤔 

[Rewulf]

For those that believe there is any possibility of ever sending any boat people back to France, you need to forget it.
The Italians are in legal trouble for simply not letting them get off a ship in Sicily.
A ship run by NGO s linked to globalist 'benefactors' like soros, who wait off the coast of Libya and Turkey, and are in direct contact with migrant traffickers, the Italians are wise to this , so do their utmost to prevent them landing.
But there seems there is little they can do to stop them.
Ultimately , many of these people will end up in dinghies crossing the channel, my only surprise is that we have had no ship loads pulling up yet.
Give it time.