In todays news...

[Dodgy69]

I blame the do-gooders, telling the world what a welcoming nation we are. Perhaps the DGs should be the ones who put them up.

I have seriously considered the idea. I have enough room and I would put up a couple or a small family but the restrictions and heavy handed authoritarian council jobsworths made that a complete no-go.

If it were possible to go "under the radar" and just put them up unofficially, I would do it. They are a cross section of humanity, there are good and bad and more importantly some of these immigrants will be engineers, scientists, doctors etc. who have simply had everything taken away from them.

A British reporter asked one of them whilst heading for his dingy, about his journey through Europe the other day. He said he had been in Germany for 7 years, 5 on them in prison.

[Horse]

If he has us both on 'ignore' he'll prolly say it again.

And unlikely to see me agreeing with you

[Saga Lout]

Why? As I understand our obligations under International law, asylum should be sought from the FIRST safe country.

Not quite. As I understand it, refugees have a right to asylum in the first safe country they get to. They don't HAVE to apply for asylum there but that is the place they are entitled to asylum as a right. They can apply to any country they think will have them.

[Screwdriver]

A British reporter asked one of them whilst heading for his dingy, about his journey through Europe the other day. He said he had been in Germany for 7 years, 5 on them in prison.

Ok, that's one that I can strike off my guest list.

Are they all tarred with the same brush?

[Dodgy69]

A British reporter asked one of them whilst heading for his dingy, about his journey through Europe the other day. He said he had been in Germany for 7 years, 5 on them in prison.

Ok, that's one that I can strike off my guest list.

Are they all tarred with the same brush?

A good percentage I should think.

[Hoonercat]

Strange that it seems that nobody so far has mentioned the EU's Dublin Regulation, so here it is:

https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/polic ... ication_en

Member State responsible for an asylum application - Dublin Regulation

Every single asylum application lodged within EU territory needs to be examined - each Member State must be able to determine if and when it is responsible for handling an asylum claim.

The objective of the Dublin III Regulation is to ensure quick access to the asylum procedures and the examination of an application on the merits by a single, clearly determined EU country. The Regulation establishes the Member State responsible for the examination of the asylum application.

The criteria for establishing responsibility are, in hierarchical order:

family considerations,
recent possession of visa or residence permit in a Member State and
whether the applicant has entered EU irregularly, or regularly.

^^^ my highlight

Pre-brexit, the Dublin Regulation made it more attractive for those with family in the UK to apply within the EU for UK asylum, as it was more generous than the UK's own refugee family reunion rules and prioritised family reunion over first country of arrival. Campaigners urged the UK Govt to bring UK legislation in line with the Dublin Regulation in order to leave people with a 'safe and legal' route to the UK, but this was refused.
Last year 8.469 people made the crossing, this year (to date) 25,700 along with (according to France) another 47,000 attempted crossings, despite the arrest of 1,552 smugglers and the dismantling of 44 smuggling networks in northern France. But yeah, let's insinuate that it's the Dublin Regulation at fault

[irie]

Why? As I understand our obligations under International law, asylum should be sought from the FIRST safe country.

Not quite. As I understand it, refugees have a right to asylum in the first safe country they get to. They don't HAVE to apply for asylum there but that is the place they are entitled to asylum as a right. They can apply to any country they think will have them.

To avoid abuses, European law, the Dublin Regulation, requires that asylum seekers have their asylum claim registered in the first country they arrive in, and that the decision of the first EU country they apply in is the final decision in all EU countries.

So are they applying for asylum as required by the Dublin Regulation?

[slowsider]

Why? As I understand our obligations under International law, asylum should be sought from the FIRST safe country.

Not quite. As I understand it, refugees have a right to asylum in the first safe country they get to. They don't HAVE to apply for asylum there but that is the place they are entitled to asylum as a right. They can apply to any country they think will have them.

To avoid abuses, European law, the Dublin Regulation, requires that asylum seekers have their asylum claim registered in the first country they arrive in, and that the decision of the first EU country they apply in is the final decision in all EU countries.

So are they applying for asylum as required by the Dublin Regulation?

I'll type this slowly for you: the UK is no longer part of the EU.

[Horse]

To be fair, CJ was talking about international law.

[Saga Lout]

Why? As I understand our obligations under International law, asylum should be sought from the FIRST safe country.

Not quite. As I understand it, refugees have a right to asylum in the first safe country they get to. They don't HAVE to apply for asylum there but that is the place they are entitled to asylum as a right. They can apply to any country they think will have them.

To avoid abuses, European law, the Dublin Regulation, requires that asylum seekers have their asylum claim registered in the first country they arrive in, and that the decision of the first EU country they apply in is the final decision in all EU countries.

So are they applying for asylum as required by the Dublin Regulation?

Are they? I don't know.

I didn't know about the Dublin Regulations until you mentioned them. I don't know which rules take precedence, the EU rules or the United Nations rules or even if they are in conflict.

Under United Nations rules, refugees have a right to asylum. But that right only applies to the first safe country they get to. That country must provide asylum if the refugee applies for it but the refugee is under no obligation to apply. The refugee can apply to any other country for asylum. Those countries are under no obligation to provide it.

That's all.

[slowsider]

The Dublin regulations place the onus on peripheral EU countries, but those further from the edges like Germany undertook to absorb a large number of asylum seekers.

"[Priti Patel] has claimed that 70% of people who come to the UK via small boats are “single men who are effectively economic migrants” and “not genuine asylum seekers”.

The Refugee Council pointed out that in fact the opposite is true: nearly two-thirds of the arrivals are deemed to be genuine refugees. Analysis using Home Office data and requests under freedom of information laws shows 61% are likely to be allowed to stay after claiming asylum."

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... ants-label

[Hoonercat]

The Dublin regulations place the onus on peripheral EU countries, but those further from the edges like Germany undertook to absorb a large number of asylum seekers.

"[Priti Patel] has claimed that 70% of people who come to the UK via small boats are “single men who are effectively economic migrants” and “not genuine asylum seekers”.

The Refugee Council pointed out that in fact the opposite is true: nearly two-thirds of the arrivals are deemed to be genuine refugees. Analysis using Home Office data and requests under freedom of information laws shows 61% are likely to be allowed to stay after claiming asylum."

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... ants-label

32,423 applications in 2020, of which 16,952 were granted, in addition, another 6,320 granted asylum under family reunion rules. Combined with the below quote, it's safe to say she's talking shite. All figures taken from Gov.uk year ending June 2020 before the full impact of Covid.

Grants at initial decision. Actual number of grants at final decision (following appeal) will be higher.
Data from the Home Office ‘cohort’ analysis, published annually in Asy_D04, show that the final grant rate typically increases by 10 to 20 percentage points once the appeal stages are taken into account.

And the Boris solution is to send them all back to France. A day after France asked him not to make a political circus out of the deaths, he posts this on his twitter feed
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-59428311

[slowsider]

Perhaps Boris could have a word with Peppa Pig World and get some of the new arrivals accommodated there.

[Screwdriver]

Perhaps Boris could have a word with Peppa Pig World and get some of the new arrivals accommodated there.

I get the Peppa Pig thing having recently experienced a similar situation. My ex. partner has had a child and I often visit. At the time Peppa Pig was the obsession and you have to sit there and watch it with them.

I wouldn't watch it out of choice and certainly not for my own entertainment but it is strangely compelling! It is actually pretty damned good. Very well written, simple messages presented in humorous situations, great storytelling.

I think Boris was trying to appeal to "the family factor" or to reveal his human side. I can see why he did it, he was assuming his audience would also have been mesmerised by Peppa Pig. But that hypnotic charm soon wears off if you are not constantly immersed in it.

So I can see why he did it but that does not forgive him for making a big mistake in assuming it would appeal to a wider audience.

[DefTrap]

Where do you even start with the Peppa Pig thing? If you're not an adult with kids / grandkids of a certain age it will have passed you by (I dunno what Screwd was doing. ) - I dunno why you would sieze on it as a component of your speech to the CBI ffs, especially when your muppet joke worked so well the week before. Who TF is advising him and writing this stuff? His missus? Somebody on Fiver?

It's sort of boring now that Boris is always foolish / ill-prepared / boorish / apathetic and it's dismissed because "that's the way he is".

He's undeniably super embarrassing as World leader's go - with Trump out the way. firmly staking his claim as #1 pillock.

And no - Macron is worse or Starmer is worse or <whatevers> isn't an excuse or even necessarily correct. (both of them know how to dress themselves for starters )

[Felix]

Waiting on an Amazon delivery?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-b ... s-59429844

[Pirahna]

Waiting on an Amazon delivery?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-b ... s-59429844

Just had an email to say my order is out for delivery.

[Mussels]

Waiting on an Amazon delivery?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-b ... s-59429844

It said it was to draw attention to alleged exploitation of Amazon workers and wasteful business practices.

Nothing to do with the environment then, has Greta joined them?

[Horse]

Waiting on an Amazon delivery?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-b ... s-59429844

www.mirror.co.uk/money/amazon-workers-s ... 550844.amp

[Cousin Jack]

Where do you even start with the Peppa Pig thing? If you're not an adult with kids / grandkids of a certain age it will have passed you by (I dunno what Screwd was doing. ) - I dunno why you would sieze on it as a component of your speech to the CBI ffs, especially when your muppet joke worked so well the week before. Who TF is advising him and writing this stuff? His missus? Somebody on Fiver?

I have so far managed to avoid Peppa Pig, M&S keep banging on about it, but I thought it was some sort of chocolate pig