Embarrassing (6 Viewers)

[SkyBlueDom26]

That would be good if it happens, as you’ve been getting quite worked up on here lately. Your mother must be worried.

Wow a ‘your mother’ diss, hope that gets you a few likes on here as we know that’s the only thing good in your life Mr I name myself after a football forum

 

---

[SkyBlueDom26]

To be fair yes you have, I just thought you were getting bored of nobody biting

Just been sitting back and watching, an all time classic earlier was of shmmeee telling people to get outside! Thought that was highly ironic considering he’s posted on here 746 times today. Absolute saddo

 

[skybluetony176]

I don’t disagree with issues since Brexit but I’m not accepting something that is not backed up. Did you read my posts ? I’ve explained that using DR would not have made a significant difference and provided data to back that up . I also stated that France has made little effort post Brexit. We all know in recent years there is now a network of gangs and people traffickers that have ramped up. There is very little deterrent, we treat asylum seekers pretty well, find it difficult to remove failed attempts etc etc. these are the reasons.

Here’s some more post Brexit data, asylum applications in EU went up from 421k in 2020 to around 1m excluding Ukraine in 2024.

EU+ asylum applications decrease by 11% in 2024, and some changing trends established

The EU cannot physically control their borders and I guess want us to take our fair share of applicants. Would DR make a difference, probably a minor one. You believe what you want though

It was the single biggest deterrent we had. To put it into context using the 8% figure you highlight that would have returned about 3000 of the arrivals in 2024 alone. Compare that to the big idea of the government that brought us Brexit as a replacement. The Rwanda scheme. The scheme many believe (not you) wasn’t given a chance to work. The Rwanda scheme aimed to remove 1000 over 5 years. 200 a year. 15 times less effective than the Dublin agreement.

 

[Briles]

Comes to something when councils make more sense than the government. Fair play epping

 

[shmmeee]

I don’t disagree with issues since Brexit but I’m not accepting something that is not backed up. Did you read my posts ? I’ve explained that using DR would not have made a significant difference and provided data to back that up . I also stated that France has made little effort post Brexit. We all know in recent years there is now a network of gangs and people traffickers that have ramped up. There is very little deterrent, we treat asylum seekers pretty well, find it difficult to remove failed attempts etc etc. these are the reasons.

Here’s some more post Brexit data, asylum applications in EU went up from 421k in 2020 to around 1m excluding Ukraine in 2024.

EU+ asylum applications decrease by 11% in 2024, and some changing trends established

The EU cannot physically control their borders and I guess want us to take our fair share of applicants. Would DR make a difference, probably a minor one. You believe what you want though

Yeah I’ve read your posts. So I’m asking what’s your alternate hypothesis ?

 

[CCFCSteve]

It was the single biggest deterrent we had. To put it into context using the 8% figure you highlight that would have returned about 3000 of the arrivals in 2024 alone. Compare that to the big idea of the government that brought us Brexit as a replacement. The Rwanda scheme. The scheme many believe (not you) wasn’t given a chance to work. The Rwanda scheme aimed to remove 1000 over 5 years. 200 a year. 15 times less effective than the Dublin agreement.

Again a 1 in 12 chance of maybe being returned to another European country. Is that really going to deter people from trying ? My point was Brexit (other than France not being willing to patrol their borders/coast properly) was not the reason for the influx. Asylum applications spiked across Europe and I’ve stated the various reasons why I believe we’ve ended up with our fair share

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Just been sitting back and watching, an all time classic earlier was of shmmeee telling people to get outside! Thought that was highly ironic considering he’s posted on here 746 times today. Absolute saddo

Sat back for a fair bit of this thread, refreshing change of pace

 

[mmttww]

Hahaha!

Dom: I'm learning to be more measured.
Dom: throws virtual sh*t around two mins later.

 

[SkyBlueDom26]

Hahaha!

Dom: I'm learning to be more measured.
Dom: throws virtual sh*t around two mins later.

But what I’m saying is true, tries to come at people then puts people on ignore or cries to the admins when they give it back. Ironic how the person that needs to go outside most tells others too, absolute cinema

 

[skybluetony176]

It was 8% of incoming applications granted. Under DR there will always be outgoing applications to offset. As I say, Germany offset meant net 1.5k. France net 400. Hardly worth it. Would it make a difference as a small deterrent maybe. Like the governments current agreement with France if ramped up. All helps but it’s not the main reason. A bigger one would be processing claims/rejections and appeals far quicker

edit - biggest deterrent would obviously be France stopping boats on their side

As final destination in Europe 8% would have been 8% for us. There would be no offsetting. The pretext you’re presenting doesn’t reflect on the reality of what the DR would mean to the UK.

Clearly Brexit also took the pressure off France to stop the boats. We did that ourselves.

 

[shmmeee]

Again a 1 in 12 chance of maybe being returned to another European country. Is that really going to deter people from trying ? My point was Brexit (other than France not being willing to patrol their borders/coast properly) was not the reason for the influx. Asylum applications spiked across Europe and I’ve stated the various reasons why I believe we’ve ended up with our fair share

OK I’ve done more research and I think you’re right but not for the reasons you say. From what I can gather the tipping point was 2018 not 2020 and that’s when we tightened border security at ports around trucks. I’ve found a report from 2015, so height of the migrant crisis, but that says 39k truck crossings stopped that year. I don’t know how common it was to get through but I’d assume at least 50:50 so let’s say about 40K+ truck arrivals at peak migrant in 2015. That’s probably swapped almost entirely to boats taking into account start up time for routes and Covid.

The returns agreement is a thing if you believe any return agreement is a thing. Even the most draconian have only promised a tiny percentage so I’m not convinced either way.

So the question is are we happier when the migrants are in trucks or in boats?

And if we find a way to stop the boats should we expect 40k migrants a year in hot air balloons?

 

[bigfatronssba]

Are we doing “there’s no room”? Got to love the classics.


I mean I just spent a week in Europe and everything seemed to work pretty good. The US is an absolute economic powerhouse. It’s a great time to be whatever sort of person you are.

I’m just not seeing this “fall of Rome” stuff you guys keep going on about.

You seem to live in a different world to the rest of us mate.

Every public service is failing

Literally nothing the government provides (apart from a Gestapo style police force) works anymore.

EVERY SINGLE PUBLIC SERVICE IS FUCKING SHIT

 

[skybluetony176]

Again a 1 in 12 chance of maybe being returned to another European country. Is that really going to deter people from trying ? My point was Brexit (other than France not being willing to patrol their borders/coast properly) was not the reason for the influx. Asylum applications spiked across Europe and I’ve stated the various reasons why I believe we’ve ended up with our fair share

As opposed to no chance whatsoever of being returned to another EU country. A deterrent to no deterrent.

As already pointed out. While irregular crossings dropped into the EU they rose into the UK from the the EU. Take 2024 alone. Crossings into Europe fell almost 40% while into the UK from the EU they rose almost 25% year on year. Why is the UK bucking the trend compared to the EU as a whole?

 

[shmmeee]

You seem to live in a different world to the rest of us mate.

Every public service is failing

Literally nothing the government provides (apart from a Gestapo style police force) works anymore.

EVERY SINGLE PUBLIC SERVICE IS FUCKING SHIT

Across the entirety of western civilisation?

And surely if the police force works then migrant crime isn’t an issue?

Im sorry but even on a UK only level this is nonsense. Have you left your house? Yes services aren’t as good after 14 years of cuts as they were after a decade of Labour investment but fuck me do you remember the 80s?

 

[Sick Boy]

@Nick @Sick Boy why did the @Ashdown @Chicken Mcgraw and my reply get deleted? Weird how the admins are deleting stuff, are we always at risk of you lot randomly deleting stuff we post from now on?

No idea, sorry.

 

[SkyBlueDom26]

No idea, sorry.

It’s weird, it was about @shmmeee saying he’d pulled a super model….to which we all (rightfully) called out bullshit! Then all our posts vanished? It must have been @Nick then!

 

[skybluetony176]

OK I’ve done more research and I think you’re right but not for the reasons you say. From what I can gather the tipping point was 2018 not 2020 and that’s when we tightened border security at ports around trucks. I’ve found a report from 2015, so height of the migrant crisis, but that says 39k truck crossings stopped that year. I don’t know how common it was to get through but I’d assume at least 50:50 so let’s say about 40K+ truck arrivals at peak migrant in 2015. That’s probably swapped almost entirely to boats taking into account start up time for routes and Covid.

The returns agreement is a thing if you believe any return agreement is a thing. Even the most draconian have only promised a tiny percentage so I’m not convinced either way.

So the question is are we happier when the migrants are in trucks or in boats?

And if we find a way to stop the boats should we expect 40k migrants a year in hot air balloons?

2018 is actually quite significant when you look at the asylum claiming process. Prior to 2018 the government had a target of an initial decision on a claim of 6 months, that target was quickly dropped in 2018 when it became clear that they couldn’t meet it, not that they were in most cases anyway. If you failed in that initial decision the appeals process was a minimum of 12 months. People aren’t stupid. People understood that that if they arrived in 2018 there was a very good chance that by the time we left the EU they still wouldn’t have a final decision and the UK would be stuck with them. We actually left the DR during the transition process a couple of months before we left the EU proper.

 

[bigfatronssba]

Across the entirety of western civilisation?

And surely if the police force works then migrant crime isn’t an issue?

Im sorry but even on a UK only level this is nonsense. Have you left your house? Yes services aren’t as good after 14 years of cuts as they were after a decade of Labour investment but fuck me do you remember the 80s?

Sorry but I think you’re deluded. The problematic attitude is across all western civilisation, but I only concern myself with my country.

I don’t remember the 80s, as I was 4 in 1989, but I remember the 90s. It was bliss compared to now. My Irish Grandma used to live in Hillfields. She had neighbours that could actually speak English. Imagine that. Far right presumably?

The 90s was idilic. It was the classic “fit in, or fuck off”

 

[shmmeee]

2018 is actually quite significant when you look at the asylum claiming process. Prior to 2018 the government had a target of an initial decision on a claim of 6 months, that target was quickly dropped in 2018 when it became clear that they couldn’t meet it, not that they were in most cases anyway. If you failed in that initial decision the appeals process was a minimum of 12 months. People aren’t stupid. People understood that that if they arrived in 2018 there was a very good chance that by the time we left the EU they still wouldn’t have a final decision and the UK would be stuck with them. We actually left the DR during the transition process a couple of months before we left the EU proper.

Its just a lot of factors together but I think you’re going to have to accept that the channel puts us in a legal bind.

The tricky bit of international law isn’t the convention of rights of refugees or even the EHCR, it’s the laws of the sea. If you find a dingy at sea and it’s not seaworthy or the people are in distress you have to pick them up and take them to the nearest safety. That’s always going to be the UK for anything in our waters. And any dingy is going to get that. This isn’t australia where you can just turn them back in international waters because the migrants coming to Australia look like this:




So you can make a legal case that they’re seaworthy and you’re just telling them to piss off. If you find someone floating in the channel on a rubber dingy there’s no way around picking them up and bringing them back. At which point the can claim asylum.

Let’s say “fuck the refugees” and that we are going to send them back. Well you’re either now invading somewhere you don’t have an agreement with to parachute a bunch of migrants back home, meaning you’ll get shot at and probably start an international incident at worst or at best look like an even bigger c**t than Israel on the international stage. India tried this in international waters unofficially and it didn’t go down well

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/05/17/world/asia/india-rohingya-sea-deport.html

So then you’ve got a bunch of people that you’re either paying £45k per prisoner per year to put them in prison, or you may as well process them as asylum seekers and have them working and paying tax.

People who say they want to shoot them or whatever forget we exist in a cramped bit of the world and rely heavily (like all countries) on those around us not thinking we’re complete shit heads. You’re trying to align with countries like China, India, Russia over western nations. Poorer, with less cultural similarity and frankly a bit of a chip on their shoulder about us after that whole empire thing.

If you’d rather your country was like Russia and India than America and Germany then fair enough. But I think you’re in a massive minority.

I can only assume the suggestions about giving them an island are in jest because why on earth would we hand over sovereign land to a bunch of randoms. Because make no mistake if you leave them out there then you either end up providing them services or they end up declaring independence probably backed by someone who would quite like it. Then what? We invade ourselves?

 

[chiefdave]

Comes to something when councils make more sense than the government. Fair play epping

This may end up being a case of be careful what you wish for.

First and foremost the decision seems to have been made on the basis that planning permission is required to place asylum seekers in hotels. Going to ignore the legal side of that as I have no idea on what the basis is in law for saying if certain groups of people are staying in hotels it requires a change of use planning application but if that is valid it will apply across the country now. Councils will be racing to get cases into court citing this as relevant case law.

But they're not going to be putting the asylum seekers out on the streets, they're going to have to go somewhere and that will be dispersal accommodation. What that means is that they will be moved into private accommodation in the wider community.

I will leave it to others to decide if they believe that is a better option or not. I suspect that may well depend on if they end up living next door to them.

 

[Nick]

It’s weird, it was about @shmmeee saying he’d pulled a super model….to which we all (rightfully) called out bullshit! Then all our posts vanished? It must have been @Nick then!

I haven't deleted anything and can't be arsed to check.

I assume it's started with the stuff about his wife and then posts quoting it or with that in were removed. Bit far.

Don't actually think he was crying about it or running to anybody either.

 

[SkyBlueDom26]

I haven't deleted anything and can't be arsed to check.

I assume it's started with the stuff about his wife and then posts quoting it were removed.

Wasn’t arsed about the wife stuff, it was more replying to him now having a super model

 

[skybluetony176]

Its just a lot of factors together but I think you’re going to have to accept that the channel puts us in a legal bind.

The tricky bit of international law isn’t the convention of rights of refugees or even the EHCR, it’s the laws of the sea. If you find a dingy at sea and it’s not seaworthy or the people are in distress you have to pick them up and take them to the nearest safety. That’s always going to be the UK for anything in our waters. And any dingy is going to get that. This isn’t australia where you can just turn them back in international waters because the migrants coming to Australia look like this:


View attachment 45289

So you can make a legal case that they’re seaworthy and you’re just telling them to piss off. If you find someone floating in the channel on a rubber dingy there’s no way around picking them up and bringing them back. At which point the can claim asylum.

Let’s say “fuck the refugees” and that we are going to send them back. Well you’re either now invading somewhere you don’t have an agreement with to parachute a bunch of migrants back home, meaning you’ll get shot at and probably start an international incident at worst or at best look like an even bigger c**t than Israel on the international stage. India tried this in international waters unofficially and it didn’t go down well

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/05/17/world/asia/india-rohingya-sea-deport.html

So then you’ve got a bunch of people that you’re either paying £45k per prisoner per year to put them in prison, or you may as well process them as asylum seekers and have them working and paying tax.

People who say they want to shoot them or whatever forget we exist in a cramped bit of the world and rely heavily (like all countries) on those around us not thinking we’re complete shit heads. You’re trying to align with countries like China, India, Russia over western nations. Poorer, with less cultural similarity and frankly a bit of a chip on their shoulder about us after that whole empire thing.

If you’d rather your country was like Russia and India than America and Germany then fair enough. But I think you’re in a massive minority.

I can only assume the suggestions about giving them an island are in jest because why on earth would we hand over sovereign land to a bunch of randoms. Because make no mistake if you leave them out there then you either end up providing them services or they end up declaring independence probably backed by someone who would quite like it. Then what? We invade ourselves?

We also have obligations as UN members and even as NATO members. The WTO is having discussions on how its members support asylum seekers.

Which begs the question. How many organisations do we have to leave before the Right has no one else to blame for a migrant crisis that they don’t really have any interest in dealing with?

What point of isolation from the rest of the world will be enough? North Korea?

We left the EU partly because that was the problem. We now have to leave Churchills legacy. The direction of travel from the UK right is clear.

 

[Nick]

Wasn’t arsed about the wife stuff, it was more replying to him now having a super model

I think it was just the posts related to that side conversation and that were quoting it.

Feel free to pm him for pics, he hasn't responded to mine.

 

[Gynnsthetonic]

 

[SkyBlueDom26]

I think it was just the posts related to that side conversation and that were quoting it.

Feel free to pm him for pics, he hasn't responded to mine.

Tbh I can see why your backing him up, his 6200 posts a day must be paying for the Ferrari and 6 bedroom mansion in clicks

 

[Briles]

Im not saying that. Take it up with someone who is. I think the people supporting Reform are racists. I don’t think all Reform supporters are racist. I do think they’re far right and fascist.

 

[SkyBlueDom26]

View attachment 45295

Please stop arguing with him, he thrives off the attention on here!

 

[Briles]

Please stop arguing with him, he thrives off the attention on here.

Not arguing. Merely confused

 

[SkyBlueDom26]

Not arguing. Merely confused

We all are lol

 

[SkyBlueDom26]

We all are lol

He’ll be telling you to ‘go outside’ soon

 

[shmmeee]

View attachment 45294

I actually love this trend. And the mini roundabouts. Reminds me of this guy:



More of this and less burning down hotels.

 

[shmmeee]

We also have obligations as UN members and even as NATO members. The WTO is having discussions on how its members support asylum seekers.

Which begs the question. How many organisations do we have to leave before the Right has no one else to blame for a migrant crisis that they don’t really have any interest in dealing with?

What point of isolation from the rest of the world will be enough? North Korea?

We left the EU partly because that was the problem. We now have to leave Churchills legacy. The direction of travel from the UK right is clear.

I mean as I said there’s a reason that groups funded by the likes of Russia tend to be those that push fringe politics that ensure a perpetual state of frustration with the government by hyper fixating on things that are the result of global processes and a government can’t fix easily without harming key alliances.

It’s no coincidence we’ve got people on left and right talking about leaving NATO/WTO/EU and any other western alliance. Why on earth are people in Bedworth suddenly furious at the exact same things Putin and NK are?

People in this thread talking about Rome and the downfall of the west like a bad Putin speech. It’s all deeply weird. You see it in the Ukraine thread too. Just people swallowing Russian propaganda wholesale who clam to be free thinking patriots.

The internet is a hell of a drug.

 

[shmmeee]

I just don’t see any way you do what’s being asked without either paying through the nose in resettlement if you can find someone to take the numbers coming in, which no one anywhere has ever managed, or basically nuking the entire economy with the chaos from leaving everything were a member of basically as it all hangs on everything else. And even then any ship that’s not a UK ship coming in would still have a duty to rescue and bring to the UK.

I just don’t see any possible solution short of the long boring work of breaking crime rings, faster processing and work to get return agreements with other countries. That’s even if you disregarded all international law and morality. At absolute best you’re nuking your entire economy and losing all shipping rights and becoming a rogue state and still probably getting a thousands of crossings a year.

Happy to hear genuine alternatives.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

This may end up being a case of be careful what you wish for.

First and foremost the decision seems to have been made on the basis that planning permission is required to place asylum seekers in hotels. Going to ignore the legal side of that as I have no idea on what the basis is in law for saying if certain groups of people are staying in hotels it requires a change of use planning application but if that is valid it will apply across the country now. Councils will be racing to get cases into court citing this as relevant case law.

But they're not going to be putting the asylum seekers out on the streets, they're going to have to go somewhere and that will be dispersal accommodation. What that means is that they will be moved into private accommodation in the wider community.

I will leave it to others to decide if they believe that is a better option or not. I suspect that may well depend on if they end up living next door to them.

What I took from it is that the council are happy to grant planning permission for a hotel with paying customers, but if they intend to just build a ‘hotel’ really functioning as an asylum seeker holding pen, permission denied.

Rightfully so and hopefully it triggers what’s needed to stop using hotels for this and to return them to being used by the public. The people profiting from cramming people into their hotels while running a bare minimum staff and service though will clearly not want it to stop though.