Migrants - Will the new law work?

[dern]

[Docca]

Alastair Campbell, Blair's Chief henchman, that bastion of honesty and truth. Lets not forget his murky dealings with a certain 2002 Dossier, the death of David Kelly and countless Iraqi's and soldiers.

As has been pointed out above, even the strangest of places might still be able to make capable views. ( the Nazi party might be pushing it )

It’s whether you blank the entirety of a person’s view based on their past, or do what makes us reasonable and take it on a view by view basis

[Docca]

I’ll say this- if anyone doesn’t recognise this latest Tory arm-flailing as anything but a populist lever to win votes with the racists in Essex and Kent, well, derr.

I'm still waiting for someone to come up with an alternative. We've tried improving security on the French side, that didn't work and I haven't heard a single suggestion from Labour, not even 'we welcome them'.

LOL

It was Blair's policy of allowing uncontrolled immigration that got us into this mess in the first place and you know why he encouraged it?

Migrants were more likely to vote Labour.

You’re a migrant. Did you vote labour?

[Cousin Jack]

Quote from the Immigration Services Union spokesperson. Someone near the sharp end, who may actually know something.

It's full of aspiration. I can't object to wanting to end illegal migration. I'm not certain that this bill is the right way, or the best way, or the most cost-effective way, but it might work.

We've had successive home secretary after home secretary, prime minister after prime minister, say: "We are going to break this model. We are going to stop the small boats." But we haven't.

The pressure is ever increasing. The way in which the government has chosen to respond to this up until now has been very reactionary. The presumption has been: "They're not coming. We're not going to get any more small boats. So we don't need to resource the systems properly to be able to cope with them."

That's what happened with Manston last year, for example, when we filled up. We had people that we were detaining for over a month in conditions that weren't safe for more than 24 hours, thousands more people than the site was for because... government had not planned where we were going to put the numbers of people.

It's really wearing on the staff, because there's no planning, there's no resourcing. No one thinks about leave, or work-life balance, or stress, the vicarious stress of the human stories.

You've had a child in your arms that's got fuel burns. You're helping a pregnant woman shivering in the lightest of clothing. You're being threatened by young men who are grouped together that can communicate with themselves, but you can't understand what they're saying. That's all horrific for both sides, for the migrants and for the staff.

It's really frightening, and there's been no planning. There still is no planning to deal with this.

As with the Migration And Borders Bill before it, there's so many gaps [in the Illegal Migration Bill]. Yes, we can detain [people] for 28 days... but where else are we going to put them? Where do we send them to? Rwanda... will only take a few hundred. 45,000 [people in small boats came over the Channel] last year. We're expecting the same sort of number this year. Where do we put that many people?

Sums it up for me. The problem is very real, and continuing to accept those numbers is just not on, BUT this plan, with current resources, is just not going to work. It needs a great deal of thought, a lot of hard work, and significant extra resources. Not much evidence of that so far, just a knee jerk and some sound bites

[MingtheMerciless]

Alastair Campbell, Blair's Chief henchman, that bastion of honesty and truth. Lets not forget his murky dealings with a certain 2002 Dossier, the death of David Kelly and countless Iraqi's and soldiers.

As has been pointed out above, even the strangest of places might still be able to make capable views. ( the Nazi party might be pushing it )

It’s whether you blank the entirety of a person’s view based on their past, or do what makes us reasonable and take it on a view by view basis

Campbell, is so tainted with "spin" IMO he is just using the situation to stick one to the Govt and the Beeb (and whoever else has has crossed him in the past). If that makes me unreasonable, so be it.

[irie]

I'm still waiting for someone to come up with an alternative. We've tried improving security on the French side, that didn't work and I haven't heard a single suggestion from Labour, not even 'we welcome them'.
Nobody knows if this will work as it hasn't been tried.

I didn't even start history GCSE but even I know not every Nazi policy would have been evil as everyone needs some normal stuff. I don't know about the policy mentioned and I suspect many people posting it don't, they just want people to associate Tories with Nazis without worrying about those unimportant details. Agreeing with vague political soundbites (both sides) doesn't make you clever.

I had to mute Alastair Campbell, all he tweets are vague soundbites that don't mean anything.

Set up asylum centres in France and anywhere else people are coming from where people can apply for asylum and process their applications quickly. Employ teams of government officials to travel around all the migrant camps and areas where they congregate in France and elsewhere to educate the people of the rules and the correct and safe way to claim asylum set up above. Put real effort into catching the traffickers and smugglers rather than just catching the passengers. Once that is in place it is much easier to argue that anyone else who gets her by small boat shouldn't be helped and should be deported.

You mean like this?

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

Main elements of the current Dublin Regulation

The Dublin III RegulationEN••• entered into force in July 2013. It contains sound procedures for the protection of asylum applicants and improves the system’s efficiency through:

an early warning, preparedness and crisis management mechanism, geared to addressing the root dysfunctional causes of national asylum systems or problems stemming from particular pressures,

a series of provisions on protection of applicants, such as compulsory personal interview, guarantees for minors (including a detailed description of the factors that should lay at the basis of assessing a child's best interests) and extended possibilities of reunifying them with their relatives,

the possibility for appeals to suspend the execution of the transfer for the period when the appeal is pending, together with the guarantee of the right for a person to remain on the territory pending the decision of a court on the suspension of the transfer pending the appeal,

an obligation to ensure legal assistance free of charge upon request,

a single ground for detention in case of risk of absconding; strict limitation of the duration of detention,

the possibility for asylum seekers that could in some cases be considered irregular migrants and returned under the Return Directive, to be treated under the Dublin procedure - thus giving these persons more protection than the Return Directive,

an obligation to guarantee the right to appeal a transfer decision before a court or tribunal and
greater legal clarity of procedures between Member States - e.g. exhaustive and clearer deadlines.

The entire Dublin procedure cannot last longer than 11 months to take charge of a person, or 9 months to take him/her back (except for absconding, or where the person is imprisoned).

[JamJar]

I'm still waiting for someone to come up with an alternative. We've tried improving security on the French side, that didn't work and I haven't heard a single suggestion from Labour, not even 'we welcome them'.
Nobody knows if this will work as it hasn't been tried.

I didn't even start history GCSE but even I know not every Nazi policy would have been evil as everyone needs some normal stuff. I don't know about the policy mentioned and I suspect many people posting it don't, they just want people to associate Tories with Nazis without worrying about those unimportant details. Agreeing with vague political soundbites (both sides) doesn't make you clever.

I had to mute Alastair Campbell, all he tweets are vague soundbites that don't mean anything.

Set up asylum centres in France and anywhere else people are coming from where people can apply for asylum and process their applications quickly. Employ teams of government officials to travel around all the migrant camps and areas where they congregate in France and elsewhere to educate the people of the rules and the correct and safe way to claim asylum set up above. Put real effort into catching the traffickers and smugglers rather than just catching the passengers. Once that is in place it is much easier to argue that anyone else who gets her by small boat shouldn't be helped and should be deported.

You mean like this?

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

Main elements of the current Dublin Regulation

The Dublin III RegulationEN••• entered into force in July 2013. It contains sound procedures for the protection of asylum applicants and improves the system’s efficiency through:

an early warning, preparedness and crisis management mechanism, geared to addressing the root dysfunctional causes of national asylum systems or problems stemming from particular pressures,

a series of provisions on protection of applicants, such as compulsory personal interview, guarantees for minors (including a detailed description of the factors that should lay at the basis of assessing a child's best interests) and extended possibilities of reunifying them with their relatives,

the possibility for appeals to suspend the execution of the transfer for the period when the appeal is pending, together with the guarantee of the right for a person to remain on the territory pending the decision of a court on the suspension of the transfer pending the appeal,

an obligation to ensure legal assistance free of charge upon request,

a single ground for detention in case of risk of absconding; strict limitation of the duration of detention,

the possibility for asylum seekers that could in some cases be considered irregular migrants and returned under the Return Directive, to be treated under the Dublin procedure - thus giving these persons more protection than the Return Directive,

an obligation to guarantee the right to appeal a transfer decision before a court or tribunal and
greater legal clarity of procedures between Member States - e.g. exhaustive and clearer deadlines.

The entire Dublin procedure cannot last longer than 11 months to take charge of a person, or 9 months to take him/her back (except for absconding, or where the person is imprisoned).

Brexit saw that end:

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/re ... ary%202021.

[MrLongbeard]

Brexit saw that end:

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/re ... ary%202021.

Did it?

The volume and concentration of arrivals exposed in particular the weaknesses of the Dublin System,

For these reasons, in 2016, the Commission proposed to revise and replace the current asylum instruments

the European Parliament adopted its negotiation mandate on 16 November 201

Based on the outcome of the discussions, as well as taking into consideration the new migratory situation in 2020, the Commission is proposing to replace the Dublin III Regulation with a new Regulation on Asylum and Migration Management.

Seems the EU considered it a dead duck long before Brexit

[JamJar]

Brexit saw that end:

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/re ... ary%202021.

Did it?

The volume and concentration of arrivals exposed in particular the weaknesses of the Dublin System,

For these reasons, in 2016, the Commission proposed to revise and replace the current asylum instruments

the European Parliament adopted its negotiation mandate on 16 November 201

Based on the outcome of the discussions, as well as taking into consideration the new migratory situation in 2020, the Commission is proposing to replace the Dublin III Regulation with a new Regulation on Asylum and Migration Management.

Seems the EU considered it a dead duck long before Brexit

Yep we left Dublin III as a result of Brexit ... the regulation still exists and is still in practice until replaced.

[MrLongbeard]

Yep we left Dublin III as a result of Brexit ... the regulation still exists and is still in practice until replaced.

That we left Dublin III earlier than the rest of the EU is down to Brexit, is that a bad thing, leaving something that everyone agrees didn't / doesn't work?

The EU saw in 2016, long before Brexit that Dublin III was not up to purpose and decided to can it, the only reason it's still in place is because after 6 years later they're still bickering / negotiating over it's replacement, the Asylum and Migration Management Regulation.

[Count Steer]

Has anyone suggested addressing the reasons that people are migrating from their homelands? (Other than it's so nice here). No? Thought not. It's just that this is a land of milk and honey so obvs people want to risk their lives and spend everything to leave their home and come here.

Well, if global warming really kicks in, us and the rest of Europe will find out what mass migration looks like so maybe that's something else to address before it is too late too. If that happens, some of the people on the move will have AK-47s rather than carrier bags full of nappies.

[Cousin Jack]

Once upon a time, in an earlier forum, we were discussing this same issue. Small boats were just becoming a thing, and IIRC one had just sunk with several people dead.

I suggested (slightly tongue in cheek) that we should sink the next few boats to discourage the smugglers. I got flamed, but I suspect the loss of life so far is rather higher than sinking those boats would have caused. And it is still rising, despite the coastguard rescuing them rather than guarding the coast.

[Cousin Jack]

Has anyone suggested addressing the reasons that people are migrating from their homelands? (Other than it's so nice here). No? Thought not. It's just that this is a land of milk and honey so obvs people want to risk their lives and spend everything to leave their home and come here.

Well, if global warming really kicks in, us and the rest of Europe will find out what mass migration looks like so maybe that's something else to address before it is too late too. If that happens, some of the people on the move will have AK-47s rather than carrier bags full of nappies.

Nice sentiments, but the amount of money pumped into Africa in aid over the last few decades should have fixed any problems. It hasnt, and nothing short of re-colonising is going to help. More help just means more rich despots, and more civil wars.

[irie]

Set up asylum centres in France and anywhere else people are coming from where people can apply for asylum and process their applications quickly. Employ teams of government officials to travel around all the migrant camps and areas where they congregate in France and elsewhere to educate the people of the rules and the correct and safe way to claim asylum set up above. Put real effort into catching the traffickers and smugglers rather than just catching the passengers. Once that is in place it is much easier to argue that anyone else who gets her by small boat shouldn't be helped and should be deported.

You mean like this?

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

Main elements of the current Dublin Regulation

The Dublin III RegulationEN••• entered into force in July 2013. It contains sound procedures for the protection of asylum applicants and improves the system’s efficiency through:

an early warning, preparedness and crisis management mechanism, geared to addressing the root dysfunctional causes of national asylum systems or problems stemming from particular pressures,

a series of provisions on protection of applicants, such as compulsory personal interview, guarantees for minors (including a detailed description of the factors that should lay at the basis of assessing a child's best interests) and extended possibilities of reunifying them with their relatives,

the possibility for appeals to suspend the execution of the transfer for the period when the appeal is pending, together with the guarantee of the right for a person to remain on the territory pending the decision of a court on the suspension of the transfer pending the appeal,

an obligation to ensure legal assistance free of charge upon request,

a single ground for detention in case of risk of absconding; strict limitation of the duration of detention,

the possibility for asylum seekers that could in some cases be considered irregular migrants and returned under the Return Directive, to be treated under the Dublin procedure - thus giving these persons more protection than the Return Directive,

an obligation to guarantee the right to appeal a transfer decision before a court or tribunal and
greater legal clarity of procedures between Member States - e.g. exhaustive and clearer deadlines.

The entire Dublin procedure cannot last longer than 11 months to take charge of a person, or 9 months to take him/her back (except for absconding, or where the person is imprisoned).

Brexit saw that end:

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/re ... ary%202021.

I stand to be corrected, but my understanding is that the above regulation is still incumbent on EU member states. Had it been complied with by EU member states the current streams of migrants who in the main have travelled across multiple EU states would not be ending up on the French channel coast!

[Hoonercat]

Yep we left Dublin III as a result of Brexit ... the regulation still exists and is still in practice until replaced.

That we left Dublin III earlier than the rest of the EU is down to Brexit, is that a bad thing, leaving something that everyone agrees didn't / doesn't work?

It worked for the UK, as migrants could put in their asylum claim for the UK in any EU country. They can no longer do that, they now have to be on UK soil before they can make a claim, which is why the numbers attempting to cross have rocketed since Brexit.

[Count Steer]

Has anyone suggested addressing the reasons that people are migrating from their homelands? (Other than it's so nice here). No? Thought not. It's just that this is a land of milk and honey so obvs people want to risk their lives and spend everything to leave their home and come here.

Well, if global warming really kicks in, us and the rest of Europe will find out what mass migration looks like so maybe that's something else to address before it is too late too. If that happens, some of the people on the move will have AK-47s rather than carrier bags full of nappies.

Nice sentiments, but the amount of money pumped into Africa in aid over the last few decades should have fixed any problems. It hasnt, and nothing short of re-colonising is going to help. More help just means more rich despots, and more civil wars.

They're not sentiments exactly Jack, more like predictions. We're not going to re-colonise Africa, Russia and China are doing that. You and I won't live to see it so I won't be able to tell you 'I told you so', so I'll say it now. Famine and flood moves people in numbers that we haven't had to deal with, others have. Europe is up next.

[DefTrap]

They're not sentiments exactly Jack, more like predictions. We're not going to re-colonise Africa, Russia and China are doing that. You and I won't live to see it so I won't be able to tell you 'I told you so', so I'll say it now. Famine and flood moves people in numbers that we haven't had to deal with, others have. Europe is up next.

It'll be interesting when forced migration due to unstoppable environmental changes starts to impact the haves in the first world economies - whether there will start to be some sympathy for the displaced, initially by the environment, probably also by disease, famine, poverty.

If England was devastated by Tsunami or rising temperatures, what a terrible decision for the Scots to have to make - whether to repel them at the border or round them up and fly them off to a shanty-town in Africa.

[gremlin]

By the sound this thread I reckon my second hand dinghy business down in Dover is still a good punt. Who's in?

[gremlin]

If England was devastated by Tsunami or rising temperatures, what a terrible decision for the Scots to have to make - whether to repel them at the border or round them up and fly them off to a shanty-town in Africa.

I've been to Scotland. I'll take down town Mogadishu any day.

[cheb]

By the sound this thread I reckon my second hand dinghy business down in Dover is still a good punt. Who's in?

It's not as successful as mine in Calais