Channel migrants face lifetime ban on returning to UK

[IT Minion]

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?

I'm guessing you don't know what the proportion of asylum seekers arriving without documents is.

Just like Mottie has no idea what proportion of asylum seekers claim one nationality but are determined to be lying is.

Or am I mistaken here and your beliefs are based on more than reading the paper or listening to the radio?

 

[fillyboy]

I'm guessing you don't know what the proportion of asylum seekers arriving without documents is.

Enlighten us.

 

[fillyboy]

Actually, allow me.

Almost all Channel migrants arrive without passports after being told to shred ID

Only 317 of 16,510 people making crossing had passports when picked up by Border Force, according to Home Office data

www.telegraph.co.uk

 

[Deleted member 18243]

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.

Notch claims not to know why they destroy their passports. Don't be dismayed at this though, because it shows an improvement in his condition. At one time he denied that they destroyed their passports and called anybody who claimed that they did "right wing extremists".

 

[transam]

So what is the limit on refugees entering the UK ???

Thousands ?
Tens of thousands ?
Hundreds of thousands ?
Million ?
Millions ?

No limit ?

 

[Justin Passing]

Limit, great idea.
Organise it all across Europe, great idea, so they apply in a high commission somewhere and we say ya or nay. Soooper idea.

"You're number 1.000.001, sorry mate".
Then, where was it we'd send him?

 

[Deleted member 18243]

Then, where was it we'd send him?

Why must we send him anywhere?

 

[Justin Passing]

Why must we send him anywhere?

That would be the consequence of having a LIMIT.
I'm demonstrating a difficulty of having a scheme with agreed limits. Extra folk will still turn up.

 

[Deleted member 18243]

Extra folk will still turn up.

Still, why would it be our problem?

 

[Justin Passing]

Still, why would it be our problem?

WHo else's would it be?

 

[Deleted member 18243]

WHo else's would it be?

Else isn't the point. Why would it be our problem?

 

[Odds]

Else isn't the point. Why would it be our problem?

The buck gotta stop somewhere.

 

[Brigadier]

While I "get" the problems with setting a limit (like setting rules: "make the rules clear, so we can work around them." as a banking representative said during the 2008 crash), take an engineering approach?

Estimate the likely number, and add (50%?)
Reviewed as relevant circumstances (wars and oppression, for example) change.


Far too complex an issue though, to be addressed with a few headline measures.

 

[transam]

Imo There has to be a limit to what any country can take in ??

 

[IT Minion]

The reason our Asylum policy is a mess is that we've rapidly slowed down the rate we're processing people.

During the last labour government we had much higher asylum seeker numbers but we actually processed them. They became subjects of the crown or were deported. Now we're taking ages to process people and so keep them in expensive purgatory.

Everyone agrees that the sensible thing to do is have processing facilities in France, but the rabid wing of the Tories can't stand the idea of asylum seekers so the government refuses to do it.