Brexit

Because the legislation doesn't allow for it. You can theoretically be persecuted in any country according to the rules. As I say some of this is European legislation too.

So now we agree that the rules the courts are playing by are crazy do you new see a little more why the government are having to try to do ridiculously complicated and dracanoin things to stop it.

 

It couldn't possibly be the FREE hotel accom, money, health service, mobile phones, food, no energy bills, dentist, clothing etc could it... ?

 

So introduce better legislation that prevents people claiming asylum from countries deemed safe. Not blanket bans on anyone.
Let's be clear - the Tories know full well that this legislation breaks international law and won't work. It's designed to stir up xenophobia and blame foreigners, lefty lawyers, liberals etc etc when it doesn't work. It's a well worn Tory strategy with added nastiness borrowed from the Republican Party. The default Tory position when they see the possibility of being voted out of power is play the race card to distract from their failings.

 

Do 'most of them want to come to the UK'? Last time I looked there were plenty of refugees/asylum seekers in various other safe European countries.

 

We can't overrule it because it's overarching. It's not for them to change currently.

The change that they're trying to make - to make the Home Secretary/Home Office legally obliged to remove anyone who came in a boat - is the only type of legislation that could sit above the courts existing precedence. And guess what.....all the usual people oppose it!

This is a perfect example of why nothing changes in this country though. We've gone through a pretty normal conversation this morning where you've realised the rules are nuts and almost impossible to change but because you view things through the spectrum of your preconceived Pro-Tory vs Anti-Tory spectrum you still can't bring yourself to want to change rules you see as giving laughable outcomes.

 

Which are the rules that prevent us banning asylum from safe countries?

 

I believe its a combination of UK precedent with the appeals process going through the European Courts of Human Rights. I'm not 100% sure though. The UN determined the definition of an asylum seeker and the courts eventually determine whether the individual meet this criteria.

You can claim asylum if you have been trafficked - or claim you've been trafficked- and are therefore in danger of going back to your own country as the "gang" that sent you to the UK in the first place will obviously target you for failing. It's under that criteria that a lot of the Albanians claim asylum.

Whichever way it is, it 100% isn't to do with UK government policy.

 

The ones who are going across in boats obviously do, why would anyone who been persicuted in their home land not claim asylum in any of the many safe countries they have come through.

 

wow

if ever there was a perfect time to say pot kettle black its right now

 

Talk about revisionism

Remind me how many dinghy crossings there were in 2019? This issue is about dinghies, thats what Sunaks pledge is and thats what Braverman uses as her reason for breaking international law. Its very obvious, in your face, hard to deny, unless you choose to revise history and twist the truth like you have.

Brexit caused this mess.

 

Why? Some of the stuff the Conservatives do is right, some is wrong.

Some of the stuff Labour suggest is right, some is wrong.

That's the real world isn't it?

 

If you fell down your bloody steps you'd blame brexit .....

 

I've asked you before but there's been no answer.

If the EU rules reduced the crossing then how many times were they successfully used.

The change looks like am uptick in the efforts of the traffickers rather than a reduction in the legal protections.

 

Half of you plonkers who think they are tough guys without an ounce of snowflake in them. Would be crying to high hell if the shoe was on the other foot. Its not hard to put yourselves in the shoes of one of those people. What would you do if that was you trying to flee either economic hell or persecution? what kind of system would you like the world to have when dealing with people if that was you in need of a decent life?

Personally, I think all migrants who come here should be given classes in understanding UK laws, culture and values. It may be demeaning for some but for those in the UK who suffer criminality or sexual assault at the hands of a migrant its the least we can do.

The idea that we cannot afford them or that there is no jobs or places to go is ridiculous. We can afford to keep them its political will that says the opposite.

The central point here is that we should have a robust system that deals with people on merit. One that we would be happy to be in if it was us who needed asylum. Thats just the decent thing to do. When did we stop being a decent country? i suppose the name of this thread answers that one.

 

What is your problem with facts? You should write a new book 'Alice in Wilkinsonland' - deluded

 

Nah, it's great being on the right side of reality....come and join us ...!!

 

The problem is that you are blinded by your ideology.

We did brexit - do you agree that happened?

This fractured our relationship with France - is it possible in your mind this may have happened?

France then turns a blind eye to the traffickers and does next to nothing to prevent them leaving their shores - does this at all make a modicum of sense to you?

Im sorry to say this but you are deluded. You bend the laws of logic to fit your narrative. We left the EU and then dinghies started to cross the channel. It’s really not hard to see. It’s not as though im taking a mental leap like you are when coming to this conclusion.

 

Seeing as though you havent left these shores in your sheltered life I think I know who is on the right side of reality.

 

Well, what a great response, I'm a broken man.......

 

I know that's not meant for me, but please, take a look at yourself ....