Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
Well Churchill had a plan during the war to 'merge' Britain and France, so under that the boat crossings would be irrelevant as they'd already be 'here'.
Well Churchill had a plan during the war to 'merge' Britain and France, so under that the boat crossings would be irrelevant as they'd already be 'here'.Churchill will be turning in his grave. We stopped the Germans invading our country and now we let any old so and so in.
The hotel still has recent reviews suggesting people have paid to stay there, and all the article says is he's 49 from Shropshire, not exactly the profile the poster was hoping for.It’s odd as this is a Brittania hotel and although it does take paying guests it’s predominantly a migrant hotel -well it was a couple of years ago
I've seen one first hand that we were meant to stay at which was a golf resort. We got moved to another hotel but still went back in the daytime for golf.Often 4-5* hotels.... that sounds and smells like utter sh!te as most of this post is. Where did you get this from?
Also do some research on what illegal immigrants are actually 'given' or 'entitled' to it's available on plenty of proper researched websites and government ones too.
We could perhaps stop being tight arses and pay for a lot more staff to process all these claims. May even be cost neutral or save money once the hotel contracts are scrapped.
Sorry, how are ECHR lawyers backing up the traffickers?Not sure it’s a case of just throwing more people at it, the problem appears to be the system and that most individuals that get claims rejected are appealing and clogging up the process. There was an interesting article in the times yesterday about Coopers efforts to accelerate and streamline the appeals process.
‘Appeals by asylum seekers refused sanctuary take an average of 54 weeks to be heard. There were 50,976 outstanding appeals as of March, almost double the number compared with 2024 and seven times higher than in 2023. It is the highest the backlog has been and is on top of the almost 79,000 claims awaiting an initial decision’
So there’s 79k awaiting a decision, let’s assume 50% rejection so another 40k into the appeals systems then adding to that will be the weekly new arrivals. The system just can’t catch up until there’s changes to it. Hopefully that’ll happen soon
Said it before it’s the traffickers backed up by the ECHR lawyers and then the hotels that are making huge amounts from everyone else’s misery and it’s totally unacceptable
Ps I blame a fair bit of this on france, they’ve intentionally been lax and that’s encouraged more traffickers. The bizarre thing is it has probably also attracted more migrants to France as a consequence some of whom will end up staying there
Sorry, how are ECHR lawyers backing up the traffickers?
He said it's them, the hotels and traffickers etc making money from it.
I've seen one first hand that we were meant to stay at which was a golf resort. We got moved to another hotel but still went back in the daytime for golf.
It had been trashed. Was like a third world country.
Sorry, how are ECHR lawyers backing up the traffickers?
That's presuming the government actually want the people processed, im becoming convinced that neither political party wants to stop or hinder immigration.We could perhaps stop being tight arses and pay for a lot more staff to process all these claims. May even be cost neutral or save money once the hotel contracts are scrapped.
That's presuming the government actually want the people processed, im becoming convinced that neither political party wants to stop or hinder immigration.
They just give out sound bites to placate the public, but the evidence would suggest they have no intention of actually doing anything that may slow the flood of people coming here.
That might infringe their human rights!It’s irrelevant with these child rapists anyway - they can’t be sent anywhere
Cant be the one @PVA knows about. No issues and great behaviour apparently
Cant be the one @PVA knows about. No issues and great behaviour apparently
That might infringe their human rights!
I think if the government won't do anything then the simplest solution is to not make this country quite the safe haven they think it is. It is getting worse and worse and will come to a head, at a guess, by the middle of next year. The hotel protests will look like child's play. Purely Conjecture of course
‘That’s a bit out of order’ as the question was genuine.Yep but he will defend it somehow
Not sure it’s a case of just throwing more people at it, the problem appears to be the system and that most individuals that get claims rejected are appealing and clogging up the process. There was an interesting article in the times yesterday about Coopers efforts to accelerate and streamline the appeals process.
‘Appeals by asylum seekers refused sanctuary take an average of 54 weeks to be heard. There were 50,976 outstanding appeals as of March, almost double the number compared with 2024 and seven times higher than in 2023. It is the highest the backlog has been and is on top of the almost 79,000 claims awaiting an initial decision’
So there’s 79k awaiting a decision, let’s assume 50% rejection so another 40k into the appeals systems then adding to that will be the weekly new arrivals. The system just can’t catch up until there’s changes to it. Hopefully that’ll happen soon
Said it before it’s the traffickers backed up by the ECHR lawyers and then the hotels that are making huge amounts from everyone else’s misery and it’s totally unacceptable
Ps I blame a fair bit of this on france, they’ve intentionally been lax and that’s encouraged more traffickers. The bizarre thing is it has probably also attracted more migrants to France as a consequence some of whom will end up staying there
The Tories don’t want to crack down on cheap immigration because it suits their interests just fine. As for Labour, perhaps they’re scared of being called racist or losing some core support.That's presuming the government actually want the people processed, im becoming convinced that neither political party wants to stop or hinder immigration.
They just give out sound bites to placate the public, but the evidence would suggest they have no intention of actually doing anything that may slow the flood of people coming here.
Eh?Would you like us to stop being rich or stop speaking English or stop being an ex colonial power?
The Tories don’t want to crack down on cheap immigration because it suits their interests just fine. As for Labour, perhaps they’re scared of being called racist or losing some core support.
Personally I see the issue as a red herring that distracts from the hard work and difficult answers people won’t want to see or do to improve the state of the country. Looking at foreigners might make people feel proud of themselves but they’re not the reason the country’s on its arse.
Hotels have got to stop being used as holding pens though, it should never have been a thing.
Yeah I'm sure it's just because of the language.Lots of people want to come here because of those three reasons. English is probably the most spoken second language. Lots of places in Africa, ME and Asia have links to the UK because we used to own them, and people will always prefer to be in rich nations like the UK. If you want to reduce demand you’ve got to change those things.
Sounds a bit Snapey to me.Iron triangle of demographics is you either need lots of young people paying tax, the young people you have to pay a lot more tax, or savagely cut benefits for the elderly like care and pensions.
Labour have promised not to do the second and when they tried to do even a bit of the third got slapped back hard, all that’s left is import young people. I think this is why they and other governments are happy to focus on the comparatively tiny issue of boats.
‘That’s a bit out of order’ as the question was genuine.
You're just here to light the contrarian touch paper.It’s pretty likely they are guilty. So what would you do with them on release?
There are many many issues that politicians should be dealing with, but im afraid if you stop the pensioners winter fuel allowance, and cap child benefits, and try and roll out welfare reform in order to save £5billion pounds, while at the same time putting illegal immigrants in 4 star all inclusive hotel accommodation you deserve all the shit that comes your way.The Tories don’t want to crack down on cheap immigration because it suits their interests just fine. As for Labour, perhaps they’re scared of being called racist or losing some core support.
Personally I see the issue as a red herring that distracts from the hard work and difficult answers people won’t want to see or do to improve the state of the country. Looking at foreigners might make people feel proud of themselves but they’re not the reason the country’s on its arse.
Hotels have got to stop being used as holding pens though, it should never have been a thing.
I mean If English is the most Second spoken language then the 4 or 5 safe countries they pass through to get here should be fine for them to stay inLots of people want to come here because of those three reasons. English is probably the most spoken second language. Lots of places in Africa, ME and Asia have links to the UK because we used to own them, and people will always prefer to be in rich nations like the UK. If you want to reduce demand you’ve got to change those things.
I don't know how many times this needs to be said, but there is no such thing as an illegal asylum seeker unless they have been denied and continue to stay. The problem long precedes the current government also. Do you at least accept that?There are many many issues that politicians should be dealing with, but im afraid if you stop the pensioners winter fuel allowance, and cap child benefits, and try and roll out welfare reform in order to save £5billion pounds, while at the same time putting illegal immigrants in 4 star all inclusive hotel accommodation you deserve all the shit that comes your way.
And when our children get raped as a result of the piss poor policies implemented by consecutive governments we're entitled to be pissed off.
There is NO issue more important than protecting our children.
Yeah I'm sure it's just because of the language.
It's because of the hand outs and how easy it is. Straight from the beach to a hotel, money, clothes etc. they can then get work on the black market cash in hand if they want it alongside the hotel, meals, pocket money, phone etc.
Fuck all to do with us speaking English.
You're just here to light the contrarian touch paper.
I mean If English is the most Second spoken language then the 4 or 5 safe countries they pass through to get here should be fine for them to stay in
What’s your answer if not processing legally?
There’s always going to be huge numbers wanting to come here. Unless you’re pulling out of International Sea Law you’ve got to go get them once they’re in the channel. At which point you’re pulling out of the UN convention, and then you’ve got to find somewhere to send them after pulling out of a load of international treaties.
So what’s the plan? You can’t realistically guard the entire border 24/7, people smuggling will always happen at some level. I don’t seriously believe despite the billy big bollocks talk on here people seriously want dead bodies piling up or concentration camps building.
I'm happy to talk with people who genuinely believe what they say. You've played the contrarian on here for years, it's mind numbingly tedious.You can’t answer so you resort to childish behaviour. I suspect if you had such a hotel in your leafy Leamington street you’d be the first to bitch and moan about it.
This isn’t acceptable in any shape or form. You can’t have people landing here then raping children.
You seem far more interested in protecting the precious principal of asylum and accepting there will be some collateral damage as in this case
It’s just odd
Not sure I’m answering question or not but firstly, as mentioned, Coopers trying to change/accelerate the appeal process. That should relieve a lot of the pressure on the processing side, also the quicker the rejections/returns process, the more likely it will put off economic migrants
I’ve always thought processing centre(s) elsewhere would make more sense but I guess if you do that you have to cap numbers. Priority given to women and children and from most dangerous/unstable countries
Whilst I would never have bothered with the Rwanda plan to start with, as we’d already paid tens or hundreds of millions in setting it up, if id have been the current government, I would have used it for all those whose claimants who had been rejected (at least for solo males with maybe women and children remaining here). If they were subsequently accepted on appeal they would be brought back over here. Any criminal offence whilst going through claims process (or within period post acceptance) instant deportation, back to country of origin or if no papers/details returned to Rwanda
In terms of actually physically ‘stopping the boats’ it really needs to be France or they need to accept that anyone caught in waters could be returned, but they haven’t got the political will to do it.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?