D
Deleted member 294929
That's a good idea if it true and doable.
I'm not as convinced by this as you seem to be.
Even Keir doesn’t want 'open borders' to help the NHS.
- Thread starter Mottie
- Start date
That's a good idea if it true and doable.
I'm not as convinced by this as you seem to be.
- Joined
- 31 May 2016
- Messages
- 24,854
- Reaction score
- 5,383
- Country
Looks like we are paying France another £60m to stop illegals crossing from France, In a deal to be signed on Monday. Personally, I think we should have shopped around. £60m buys a lot of patrol boats which could have been run by a non government agency and simply alerted or rescued migrants in French waters.
This is where the right-wingers can't get their terminology correct.
They intentionally refer to all asylum seekers as 'illegals'. There's nothing illegal (internationally and UNHCR speaking) about arriving in another country and claiming asylum.
UK and other right-wing governed countries may make internal laws claiming that it's illegal, but in the view of the UNHCR, it's not, and the domestic laws are subject to the UNHCR, (if that country is a signatory to the convention). So that domestic law is intended solely for internal populism.
I totally agree with the views that it is the process, or lack of it that is exacerbating the problem, and perhaps just as important for domestic sensitivity, the furore against asylum seekers that is generated by this right-wing government.
We should decide when to rescue them, in that case, as an ITV documentary discloses how UK and French coastguards passed the buck as the largest loss of life in the Channel for 30 years unfolded.
Who's to blame?
Does it matter?
When a distress call is made at sea the authorities responsible have a duty of care to send help as soon as they can.
UK could not operate such a service in French waters without the agreement and cooperation of the French.
And to create and operate such a service in the channel could be expedited by using any of the current privately funded NGO and civil rescue organisations, e.g. the MSF. This would of course require an agreement from France and UK to allow such civil rescue ships to operate within territorial waters. Something which, I understand, is currently not allowed. This is different to the designated Search and Rescue zones, which are determined by UNCLOS (UN Convention on the Law at Sea)
The UNCLOS requires coastal states to provide search and rescue facilities. UK is content to abdicate this responsibility to the RNLI.
UNCLOS also requires states to carry out non-discriminatory rescues irrespective of the nationality or status or the circumstances in which the person finds themselves.
UNCLOS also requires states to cooperate in that SAR operation, and in the disembarkation of the people rescued.
For further reading:
I cant see why the French will stop them. It’s not in the interests of France to keep more migrants.
Macron the centrist can’t afford to be seen to increase the number of migrants, at the last election he had the far right Le Pen and Zemmour on his heels at the last election (I believe Le Pen has been replaced now).
The French coastguard willingly disclosed their logs and documents pertaining to the case. UK coastguard refused to disclose such documents.
According to the Guardian, the programme is on ITV tomorrow evening at 10.45pm.
I’m not sure why
- Joined
- 31 May 2016
- Messages
- 24,854
- Reaction score
- 5,383
- Country
What currently happens is the boats are monitored as they leave in French waters and the RNLI is alerted as they enter british waters.
In other countries with similar problems, the “receiver” alerts the “sender” while they are still in the senders territory and if they are not intercepted they are “return to sender” at the territorial limit.
It would be perfectly possible and legal for the U.K. to fund rescue services operating in French waters.
I’m not convinced these extra UK funded French police services are going to significantly reduce the problem. I suspect we will see a few token raids and destruction of boats to appease the press and that’s about it.
Nobody should drown at sea in a preventable accident. However, individuals need to take some responsibility for their safety. If you set off in dangerous conditions, in an unseaworthy vessel without any safety kit, then you are mostly to blame.
Before anyone says they are desperate refugees, remember they are in a safe country at the time of departure.
Last edited:
Only with the agreement of the French.
Civil and NGO rescue services operate within maritime law, including the recognition of territorial waters where relevant.
Any attempt operate such a civil rescue boat without such agreement would limit the potential rescue area to seas outside the Straights of Dover, which would be a bit pointless.
This would be in contravention of UNCLOS if the boat was in distress.
Under UNCLOS, rescue organisations are required to enact a non-discriminatory rescue, irrespective of the nationality, status or the conditions that led to the boat being in distress.
If the boat is not in distress and does not require assistance there is little else that the French can do.
- Joined
- 31 May 2016
- Messages
- 24,854
- Reaction score
- 5,383
- Country
I’m not going to bore the rest of the forum arguing with you for the next 20 pages about maritime law.
Nothing you’ve posted limits a vessel issuing a May Day Relay on behalf of a vessel attempting to cross the channel while still in French territorial waters. Further that vessel as long as it was operating lawfully and displaying the appropriate courtesy could not be prevented from locating in French waters or even setting up an appropriate base in France.
Nothing you’ve posted limits a vessel issuing a May Day Relay on behalf of a vessel attempting to cross the channel while still in French territorial waters. Further that vessel as long as it was operating lawfully and displaying the appropriate courtesy could not be prevented from locating in French waters or even setting up an appropriate base in France.
Of course, no-one is suggesting that would not be allowed. Any vessel (or land base) can raise a May Day call on behalf of another vessel.
And any vessel in the proximity can be requested to assist.
But that is different from civil or NGOs operating a dedicated SAR operation in territorial waters without the appropriate agreement of the relevant state.
There are ways to block SAR vessels in port, to stop them operating, when and if they disembark any rescued refugees.
Last edited:
