newfhouse
pleb
Where does it specify marital or parental status in that table? Why didn’t you screen grab this note?
UK set to criminalise illicit refugee crossings....
- Thread starter Fab Foodie
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Where does it specify marital or parental status in that table? Why didn’t you screen grab this note?
OP
OP
Fab Foodie
Guru
Because some will be bona-fide asylum seekers and can have a green light to get on with their lives.
Some may be found to be criminal and can be tried/jailed/deported, whatever is appropriate.
Those that are chancing it as economic migrants we have a choice to either deport them if that's possible and safe, or we may decide they have something to offer the nation and let them stay.
An application and processing centre in Calais would have been a great idea, but since Brexit we've burned that boat....
BoldonLad
Old man on a bike. Not a member of a clique.
- Location
- South Tyneside
Yes, I get the bolded bit, I did vote "Remain".
As for the other three groups you describe, ie
- bona-fide asylum seekers
- economic migrants
- criminals
your proposed solution sounds reasonable, although, I can imagine that determining the status of each individual may take some time, after all, it is hardly going to be a case of having a series of doors marked "bona-fide asylum seekers"; "economic migrants" ; "criminals' is it?
Is there any evidence that any Government (of whatever party) have successfully operated such a vetting system for the kind of volume of people we are now seeing?
Last edited:
Mugshot
Über Member
Is the gotcha, well, it's not, but you know the MO.
Craig the cyclist
Über Member
Fucking hell, are you going to just write this every time I post a reply? I guess it is an easy way to dismiss anything that is slightly questioning of your viewpoint I suppose. Lazy, but easy.
Craig the cyclist
Über Member
So there goes your 'one per town' theory then, why on earth did you suggest that in the first place if even you thought it was nonsense?
Craig the cyclist
Über Member
So you are now suggesting that building houses for asylum seekers is the way forward? As the majority seem to be aiming to stay, we just keep building houses for anyone that arrives? I live near a town with a population of around 41,000, that is almost exactly how many people we would have to house if we built them houses. Does that sound anything like realistic to you?
Mugshot
Über Member
Now, if I was using your MO, I'd check how many posts you'd made, check how many times I'd posted "gotcha", post the results and think I'd scored a point 👍
Mugshot
Über Member
So far as I'm aware there's a shortage of housing, affordable and social, despite promises from various governments to address this. The looking after our own argument is a popular one when it comes to not housing Immigrants.
It seems to me that we could help with this by building more houses, it may be cheaper than paying hotel bills, they could be used for generations to come and we may find that some of the people arriving on our shores have the relevant skill set to be employed building them, meaning they're contributing to the economy and community.
So what's the cost difference between building houses and paying hotel bills?
OP
OP
Fab Foodie
Guru
Yes, they were doing 3 to 4 times better 5 years ago than they are now, so they can and must do it, there's no other choice unless we want to keep filling-up hotels....
OP
OP
Fab Foodie
Guru
The first question on R4's any questions is worth a listen.
AuroraSaab
Legendary Member
It's unlikely that Cyprus is going to be their permanent location though. Isn't it just a point of entry for the EU for Africans, in the same way as Italy's Lampadusa?
