Channel migrants face lifetime ban on returning to UK

The last time the Tories proposed this sort of thing, under William Hague more than twenty years ago, it was estimated it would take £850m to build the detention centres and another £220m a year to run them. We can probably double those figures to bring them up to date. On top of that, every person sent to Rwanda costs £600,000. Soon all this adds up to serious money. I'm sure there must be more intelligence led ways to achieve the same thing, a lot more cheaply, without needing to detain every asylum seeker.
 
Sponsored Links
I'm led to believe these smugglers advertise how much it costs per boat trip on TikTok. Make of that what you will.
 
I'm led to believe these smugglers advertise how much it costs per boat trip on TikTok. Make of that what you will.
If that is right, I don't know about it, then why are we not able to get to the smugglers and actually take some positive action, for everybody's benefit?

I would fully support stopping the people smugglers, by any political party
 
That isn’t true. I would suggest you look at the recent data.
You only want to focus on Albanians

why?
A = because you want to present a false impression that everybody is an "economic migrant"



please note my wording "over the last few years the majority of arrivals by boat........."


the graph below shows in 2022, the numbers from Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Eritrea add up to the majority of the total. They are all countries of war and or persecution




_128875623_optimised-asylum_claims_by_nationality-nc.png.webp
 
Sponsored Links
You only want to focus on Albanians

why?
A = because you want to present a false impression that everybody is an "economic migrant"



please note my wording "over the last few years the majority of arrivals by boat........."


the graph below shows in 2022, the numbers from Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Eritrea add up to the majority of the total. They are all countries of war and or persecution




_128875623_optimised-asylum_claims_by_nationality-nc.png.webp
It’s the other way around.

You are ignoring the fact it has rapidly changed in the last 18 months or so. It’s also invalid to add other groups together to make a bigger group than the top group.

That’s like saying the majority of people didn’t vote for the government. True but irrelevant
 
over the last few years the majority of arrivals by boat have been from war torn countries or places of prosecution.
Until very recently you denied that there were "arrivals by boat". Now you're an expert!

And once out of harm's way, i.e. in a safe place, one can re-assess one's future direction. That is when other considerations come into the equation.

It's a natural progression of Maslow's Heirarchy of needs:
800px-MaslowHierarchy.png
Hello PatEx / Himmy / Bobby Dazzler etc!
 
Through the loony left smokescreen **cough cough** I'd like to remind readers of the reason why so many people are against immigrants coming here. It is only fair and in the interest of balance that the anti-immigrant case is heard.

This is about the best summation of the "Grooming Gang" phenomenon I've seen.

 
It’s also invalid to add other groups together to make a bigger group than the top group.

That’s like saying the majority of people didn’t vote for the government. True but irrelevant

I'm struggling with this explanation. Why is it invalid/irrelevant to add other groups together. Surely there is a difference between "largest group" and "majority". Albanians were the largest group in 2022. Nobody is denying that. But it is also true that taken together, people from Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Eritrea are the majority. Isn't this straight forward English?
 
It’s the other way around.

You are ignoring the fact it has rapidly changed in the last 18 months or so. It’s also invalid to add other groups together to make a bigger group than the top group.

That’s like saying the majority of people didn’t vote for the government. True but irrelevant
Wasn't the graph for 2022? In which case that is the last 18 months?

And if your groups are 'war torn countries' Vs 'not war torn countries' then of course you have to combine countries.
 
The surprising suggestion was that nationality of asylum seekers is actually a first past the post system.

So all asylum seekers are actually Ukrainian! We can let them all in after all!
 
But it is also true that taken together, people from Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Eritrea are the majority. Isn't this straight forward English?

Are they people from these other countries or are they people 'claiming' to be from these countries. What are the numbers of 'refugees' having destroyed their passports?
 
Sponsored Links
Back
Top