Are the border force and the RNLI losing their touch?

Highway Man said:
He isn't making false claims..Grow up
Click to expand...

These quotes are not falsified:

motorbiking said:
MNW67 said:
If there was a deterrent effect, it was too small to see in the data.
Click to expand...

^^^ Oxford University's research on the Rwanda scheme.
Click to expand...

misquote as usual. YAWN.
Click to expand...

The screenshot of Oxford Univerity's Migration Observatory website was not falsified.

Motorbiking really did say that MNW67's quote, "]If there was a deterrent effect, it was too small to see in the data" was a misquote.

The document on Oxford Univerity's Migration Observatory website really does show that motorbiking's claim was false.
 
morqthana said:
These quotes are not falsified:



The screenshot of Oxford Univerity's Migration Observatory website was not falsified.

Motorbiking really did say that MNW67's quote, "]If there was a deterrent effect, it was too small to see in the data" was a misquote.

The document on Oxford Univerity's Migration Observatory website really does show that motorbiking's claim was false.
Click to expand...
False or a difference of someones opinion.
 
Highway Man said:
Just to put you right on a few points.
MBK knows more about sailing and martime law than anyone on this forum.
MBK is very astute with his financial knowledge.
MBK Uderstands the deterent that Rwanda would have given.

I think you will find that all of the above gives him more credability to voice his opinions than most on the subject.
Click to expand...

Strawman. I didn't post anything to do with the legality of the Rwanda scheme. (And anyway - its legality lay in the sphere of human rights law, not maritime).

But be that as it may, none of that expertise, no matter how relevant has any bearing on the issue I posted about. Even if the Rwanda scheme would have proved a huge deterrent, that would be irrelevant. It would be relevant to arguing that what the Migration Observatory said was wrong.

It would not be relevant to arguing that the Migration Observatory did not say what they demonstrably did.

The only thing relevant to my post was that MNW67's quote, "If there was a deterrent effect, it was too small to see in the data" really was 100% accurate, a fact unequivocally confirmed by the document on Oxford University's Migration Observatory website.

And motorbiking really did say that was a misquote.

And he really was wrong to say that


That was the ONLY issue I posted about.


I expect now you'll fall back on your traditional behaviour of repeatedly arguing about a different issue, refusing to address the real one, and go on and on and on hoping I'll get fed up or you can get me barred from the topic, and present that as a vindication.
 
Knave of Hearts said:
In order for there to be sufficient people, at the right place, at the right time, they would need some massive funding to predict where and when the next boat would arrive.

Perhaps you could start a whip round to buy the required surveillance equipment to predict where and when the next boat would arrive?
Click to expand...
How naive and ill informed are you ? the dinghies are escorted by the French Navy to the half way point across the Channel (for their safety !) and at the half way point they are taken off the dinghies onto either RNLI Launches or Border Control Boats who now Taxi them into Britain. It's a total Farce ! the Border Control Boats should be turning them back to France. And that's another hidden cost of these Illegal Migrants.
 
morqthana said:
That they said what they did is true, not false.

It is not possible for there to be a difference of opinion over what they actually posted on their website.
Click to expand...
Oh dear. I must educate you. I went to the university of Oxford and it is split up into 38 independent colleges and private halls. You are not accurate or well enough educated to argue with an academic such as myself. Now pipe down.
 
himmy might want to read what they actually wrote about the scheme at the time.

Hence my suggestion of it being a misquote. They did not say the Rwanda scheme deterrent effect was too small to see in the data.

migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk

Q&A: The UK’s former policy to send asylum seekers to Rwanda - Migration Observatory

This updated commentary answers some common questions about the Rwanda asylum policy and its implications, reflects the Labour government’s announcement that it is cancelling the Rwanda scheme, and to review the financial cost of the policy to date.
migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk

- they are clearly referring to political discussions about the scheme
- they acknowledge it is impossible to determine an effect of something not implemented.

It's still available to read.

A lot of words to say - they don't know.
"Because the Rwanda policy was never implemented, we cannot be sure what its impact would have been on the number of people crossing the Channel in small boats or claiming asylum in the UK.".
 
Highway Man said:
Oh dear. I must educate you. I went to the university of Oxford and it is split up into 38 independent colleges and private halls.
Click to expand...

Yes - you walked around some of it as a tourist.

Highway Man said:
You are not accurate or well enough educated to argue with an academic such as myself. Now pipe down.
Click to expand...

None of that nonsense has any bearing on the fact that MNW67 did accurately quote from a document on an ox.ac.uk website, which really does contain the sentence "If there was a deterrent effect, it was too small to see in the data.".

MNW67 did not misquote, and motorbiking was wholly wrong to say that he did.
 
We're fecked when it comes to having a truly robust immigration process/system. They were saying on the telly box this morning that Burnham may well row back on some of the plans proposed by Shabana Mahmood to appease the back benchers who are against such a 'hard line'.

We'll get nowhere fast on this under Labour and indeed probably not much further under any other party due to the wokies.
 
morqthana said:
Yes - you walked around some of it as a tourist.



None of that nonsense has any bearing on the fact that MNW67 did accurately quote from a document on an ox.ac.uk website, which really does contain the sentence "If there was a deterrent effect, it was too small to see in the data.".

MNW67 did not misquote, and motorbiking was wholly wrong to say that he did.
Click to expand...
MNW67 never quotes anything right
 
motorbiking said:
himmy might want to read what they actually wrote about the scheme at the time.

Hence my suggestion of it being a misquote. They did not say the Rwanda scheme deterrent effect was too small to see in the data.

migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk

Q&A: The UK’s former policy to send asylum seekers to Rwanda - Migration Observatory

This updated commentary answers some common questions about the Rwanda asylum policy and its implications, reflects the Labour government’s announcement that it is cancelling the Rwanda scheme, and to review the financial cost of the policy to date.
migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk

- they are clearly referring to political discussions about the scheme
- they acknowledge it is impossible to determine an effect of something not implemented.

It's still available to read.

A lot of words to say - they don't know.
"Because the Rwanda policy was never implemented, we cannot be sure what its impact would have been on the number of people crossing the Channel in small boats or claiming asylum in the UK.".
Click to expand...

Thank you for agreeing that that is the document in question.

Scroll down to https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac....-policy-to-send-asylum-seekers-to-rwanda/#kp4.

What is the last sentence of the first paragraph?

It matters not one iota if that sentence was wrong, or misleading, or needed clarification, or anything else.

The correctness or accuracy of "If there was a deterrent effect, it was too small to see in the data" is not what is at stake.

Wat is at stake is that that sentence really is there, MNW67 really did not misquote, and you really were wrong to say that he did.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top