Ssssssshhhhhh, don't mention Reform.

[Deleted member 323070]

I’m not sure I’d trust your channel navigation you seem to think France is further away than England, in French waters.

Given your ability to misunderstand law and regulations, I'm not surprised you assume I said something that I didn't.

 

[Deleted member 323070]

Sure, the UK has advanced radar and drone surveillance monitoring the channel. All the normal shipping, fishing and leisure craft are easy to filter, because they (mostly) have something called AIS. This is basically your number plate and your radio broadcasts this constantly with your Lat/long. So you are only looking for small craft heading from France at lowish speeds that do not transmit an AIS. Almost no uncontrolled landings occur, because most of the small boats are tracked and intercepted. So finding them and tracking them is not the problem. It will take them at least 2 hours from departure to reach the limit. It will take an intercept less than 30 minutes to meet them.

Not so. On some days there are more than 10 small boats crossing the channel.

But border force only have tone to five boats available.

At any one time, the Border Force has a mix of cutters and Coastal Patrol Vessels (CPVs) deployed in the Channel, typically with two CPVs and three cutters actively patrolling.

Newly obtained coastguard logs from the incident in the early hours of 20 November 2021 show the boat – carrying 25 people – remained at sea for about three hours after the RNLI rejected two requests to go to the rescue in place of Border Force, whose only on-duty vessel was apparently busy going to the aid of other boats. ... Unlike the RNLI’s vessels, Border Force boats were not designed for search and rescue activity, the report noted, although they were the UK’s “principal assets” for responding to vulnerable migrant boats.

Those border force boats cannot interfere with the passage of boats in French waters. They cannot endanger life when they reach the border between France and England. The focus has always been on saving lives.

Sajid Javid said the operation would protect human life, as well as borders.

Two more Border Force vessels return to patrol Channel

The home secretary says two vessels will be redeployed from overseas in response to migrant crossings.

www.bbc.co.uk

As soon as the focus switches to attempted pushbacks and one single life is lost, the government will fall.

Before they get to UK territorial waters, that are intercepted and asked if they are in distress and require assistance.

Only the French can legally intercept them.
Sure any passing craft can ask, but the small boats are not obligated to answer.
They have no authority and no jurisdiction.

A yes, results in a mayday relay call to French coastguard, who will task the nearest vessel to assist, unless they have SARs vessels in the vicinity.

If any of the migrants threaten to repel boarders, or threaten any violent action against any attempt to stop them, then the "rescuing craft" must stand off. If they try to forcibly "rescue" a boat that is not in distress, they are pirates. Only the French can take another boat in tow, and against their will. But if violence is threatened, then the "rescuers" would be considered to be acting illegally.

Any vessel tasked to assist a vessel in distress has the right to take them to a French port, which will be the nearest, given they are not yet in UK waters.

"A vessel in distress" is the essential issue. If the boat claims to not be in distress, there is little that anyone can do. Any craft has the right to decide if and when they are in distress, which is why the RNLI can only advise and persuade. You cannot insist another boat is in distress and they must be allowed to be rescued.
Once the boat accepts that they are in distress, then a rescuing craft can take them to the nearest port, but they are not obligated to do so.

They do not require the permission of French authorities and cannot themselves be prosecuted for trafficking. SOLAS rules protect them.

The French would not refuse permission in genuine rescues. But the rescuing craft are not obligated to take those rescued to the nearest port.

Assuming the illegals are wise to this, and say they Do not require assistance (which is usual when in French waters), they are refused entry to UK waters and instructed to turn around.

And if they refuse?

All the time they are not in distress they can be forcibly pushed back at the UK limit

You cannot violently endanger another craft and their passengers.
To do so is to risk prosecution.

Border Force officers in the Channel face risks related to both their own potential prosecution and the enforcement of laws against migrants and those facilitating their crossings. The risk of prosecution for Border Force officers themselves arises from potential international law violations or actions that could be considered illegal pushbacks.

What can't happen is for the UK to just pop them on a boat when picked up in UK waters and take them back to France, without permission. So the way Reform describe it, is a little off,

As do wannbe right -wing maritme lawyers on a DIY site.

 

[Deleted member 323070]

Good enough for me to know you are the expert on these matters as I suggested. You know more than any of us on such things.

Like you're the expert on war because you claim to have been in the army?

 

[Highway Man]

Like you're the expert on war because you claim to have been in the army?

Exactly the same yes, MBK is more qualified than you in sailing and I am more qualified than you in military experience. Not sure why you have childish laughing emojis after everything you say, but I have noticed it is always after some silly comment from you that you think somehow it strengthens what you think to everyone else. Odd but then I am sure that in your head that you feel more qualified in both of these subjects. You are certainly not as your comments clearly show a definitive lack of understanding. Should I put these in for you

 

[pete01]

Exactly the same yes, MBK is more qualified than you in sailing and I am more qualified than you in military experience. Not sure why you have childish laughing emojis after everything you say, but I have noticed it is always after some silly comment from you that you think somehow it strengthens what you think to everyone else. Odd but then I am sure that in your head that you feel more qualified in both of these subjects. You are certainly not as your comments clearing show a definitive lack of understanding. Should I put these in for you

It's like I said before he tries to be clever but it never works

 

[Highway Man]

It's like I said before he tries to be clever but it never works

Shows himself up tbh. I have shown all of my evidence on here of my military experience, MBK has shown in both pictures of him on his yatcht and in his answers to questions regarding sailing. He chooses to ignore all of this and still insists that he is correct. Anyone would think he is an ex Naval commander and lawyer and realistically he played with an action man as a child and had a go in a pedlo on holiday.

 

[Highway Man]

It's like I said before he tries to be clever but it never works

Exactly

 

[Deleted member 323070]

Exactly the same yes, MBK is more qualified than you in sailing and I am more qualified than you in military experience.

You assume you are when you know nothing of my life.

Should I put these in for you

Why not. That's why they are available.

 

[Highway Man]

You assume you are when you know nothing of my life.

But you know all about mine, put a rollin eyes there to help you out.

 

[Deleted member 323070]

But you know all about mine, put a rollin eyes there to help you out.

I only know of what you claim on this site.
I don't know the veracity of what you claim.
For all I know you might be a Billy Liar type. So i do not accept your claims as factual. Thus your claim to greater knowledge, wisdom or experience is exactly that, and no more: a claim, not worth the paper on which it is printed.

 

[motorbiking]

Not so. On some days there are more than 10 small boats crossing the channel.
View attachment 381568

The fact they are logged is evidence they are detected.

But border force only have tone to five boats available.

They do not have to intercept all, just create the fear that those paying will be sent back, so maybe it's not worth the money. Also given it's costing us over £6Bn a year. I think a few boats can be purchased. £50M would buy 10 boats and cost £5M a year to run. Bargain.

Those border force boats cannot interfere with the passage of boats in French waters. They cannot endanger life when they reach the border between France and England. The focus has always been on saving lives.

Article 25 - Rights of protection of the coastal State

1. The coastal State may take the necessary steps in its territorial sea to prevent passage which is not innocent.

2. In the case of ships proceeding to internal waters or a call at a port facility outside internal waters, the coastal State also has the right to take the necessary steps to prevent any breach of the conditions to which admission of those ships to internal waters or such a call is subject.

3. The coastal State may, without discrimination in form or in fact among foreign ships, suspend temporarily in specified areas of its territorial sea the innocent passage of foreign ships if such suspension is essential for the protection of its security, including weapons exercises. Such suspension shall take effect only after having been duly published.

So (1) says they can do whatever is necessary, no mention of reasonably necessary or without force. (2) Gives them the right to act, when the ship is outside their internal waters. (3)Gives the state the right to create a limited exclusion zone in order to more easily manage their activities.

Only the French can legally intercept them.
Sure any passing craft can ask, but the small boats are not obligated to answer.
They have no authority and no jurisdiction.

Article 25 says they can do whatever is necessary to block access.

If any of the migrants threaten to repel boarders, or threaten any violent action against any attempt to stop them, then the "rescuing craft" must stand off. If they try to forcibly "rescue" a boat that is not in distress, they are pirates. Only the French can take another boat in tow, and against their will. But if violence is threatened, then the "rescuers" would be considered to be acting illegally.

They have three choices. Sit there all day, getting cold, turn back or accept the offer of a lift. It is very easy for a powerful vessel to interfere with a vessel with limited propulsion and manoeuvrability. The greeks do it all the time. They have 3 RIBs with 50 cals and a couple of 300hp outboards in KOS marina. The crew are armed and they forcibly encourage the illegals to head back to Turkey. Highly effective.

"A vessel in distress" is the essential issue. If the boat claims to not be in distress, there is little that anyone can do. Any craft has the right to decide if and when they are in distress, which is why the RNLI can only advise and persuade. You cannot insist another boat is in distress and they must be allowed to be rescued.
Once the boat accepts that they are in distress, then a rescuing craft can take them to the nearest port, but they are not obligated to do so.

Until such time the repelling vessel has power under Article 25 UNCLOS. Once the vessel seeks help SOLAS reg 33 applies.

The French would not refuse permission in genuine rescues. But the rescuing craft are not obligated to take those rescued to the nearest port.

So they will accept them - glad we agree

And if they refuse?
You cannot violently endanger another craft and their passengers.
To do so is to risk prosecution.

Article 25 UNCLOS says otherwise

 

[Highway Man]

I only know of what you claim on this site.
I don't know the veracity of what you claim.
For all I know you might be a Billy Liar type. So i do not accept your claims as factual. Thus your claim to greater knowledge, wisdom or experience is exactly that, and no more: a claim, not worth the paper on which it is printed.

My claim is backed by evidence. Muppet

 

[Notch7]

Trying to understand why anyone would vote for reform is like trying to pick up a turd by the clean end!

 

[pete01]

Heads up...Notch has Been at the wacky baccy again

 

[motorbiking]

Trying to understand why anyone would vote for reform is like trying to pick up a turd by the clean end!

Starmer seems to be running scared. His "nation of strangers" speech was directly aimed at Reform.

You wont be able to get your head around it all the time you think people vote differently to you because they are dumb, right wing, racist etc.