Farage Kent Coast discuss

[Munroast]

So, Farage has highlighted that kind nations such as France and GB do not sit by and watch while boats capsize and men, women and children drown in our seas. Well, maybe some people knew that already and didn't feel the need to take a fishing boat out to show us?

Would you really prefer to see dead bodies washed up on the beaches here? Once these little, overcrowded boats are in the water, they cannot be safely stopped, the risk of them capsizing, and drowning most on board, is too great. So the authorities shadow them (not escort) so if they do get into trouble, they can hopefully be saved.

Obviously, the French are responsible for their waters, and the British for ours, which is why the French navy does not sail all the way to our shores.

Why is this so hard for Farage and some people here to understand? The alternative is having our beaches closed while decomposing bodies are removed. Pretty sure nobody wants that. Do you have a better solution, and not just a theoretical one based on people not actually fleeing war zones?

the safe option would be to stop them leaving the french shore, you seem quite happy they are risking their lives with this perilous crossing. By trying to hush up and turn a blind eye to what is happening, it is people like you who will ultimately be the cause of any tragedy.

Are they fleeing a war in France ? No, therefor they should stay there or whatever safe country they were in before arriving in France.

If migrants and ex refugees want to come to the UK then they should apply from the first safe country they arrive in, and when suitable housing and jobs become available we should go and get them and bring them here safely. That would also be a fairer way to do it allowing a broad cross section of migrants access to our economy rather than your way of treating it as some sort of endurance event where the less able die on route.

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

Firstly, the UK coast guard nor any other organisation can simply turn boats around, to head back to where they came from. It's certainly inhumane (and UK would be ridiculed on the world stage for it) and possibly illegal under international law. Any refugees that land on UK shores (or are rescued in UK waters) must be processed as refugees.

Secondly, I suspect it is just as illegal (under international law) to apprehend a boat that is (to all intents and purposes) just going about its own business.
I suspect that there would be a real reason to intercept boats, such as suspected drug smuggling or some such.

Thirdly, I suspect it would be illegal under French and international law for the French to assist refugees to cross territory, or to leave their own territory.


So rather than throwing out speculative ideas, how about researching the genuine international and national laws on what is legal and what is illegal.

We have already dealt with the supposed belief that refugees must seek asylum in the first (or indeed any subsequent) country that they encounter. There is no legal or moral requirement for them to do so.

Whilst I totally agree, we should process migrants in the safe way that you suggest, the UK has refused to take it fair share of migrants.
Sadly the world is not fair, nor is it a model of how things should be done.

 

[motorbiking]

In French waters, its the French authorities who should take action if they believe there are "illegals" on board. In UK waters its border force, coast guard, navy etc under the powers they have. The migrants know, to not ask for help in French waters. Once they seek help then SOLAS will expect an assisting vessel to take them to their nearest safe port (probably in France). The convention makes it illegal to refuse entry. If the vessel is not in danger it can be turned back and of course illegals can be arrested as applicable.

http://www.imo.org/en/About/Convent...-the-Safety-of-Life-at-Sea-(SOLAS),-1974.aspx

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

In French waters, its the French authorities who should take action if they believe there are "illegals" on board. In UK waters its border force, coast guard, navy etc under the powers they have. The migrants know, to not ask for help in French waters. Once they seek help then SOLAS will expect an assisting vessel to take them to their nearest safe port (probably in France). The convention makes it illegal to refuse entry. If the vessel is not in danger it can be turned back and of course illegals can be arrested as applicable.

http://www.imo.org/en/About/Convent...-the-Safety-of-Life-at-Sea-(SOLAS),-1974.aspx

How will they know if there are 'illegals' on board?
And are refugees 'illegals' just because they haven't yet claimed asylum?
If the answer to the second question is 'yes', then why are they not all arrested in France, for being an 'illegal'?

Is it 'illegal' to go for a trip in a boat?

 

[Brigadier]

This behaviour is not caused by laws or religion.

How would we know that it isn't?

 

[festive]

Firstly, the UK coast guard nor any other organisation can simply turn boats around, to head back to where they came from. It's certainly inhumane (and UK would be ridiculed on the world stage for it) and possibly illegal under international law. Any refugees that land on UK shores (or are rescued in UK waters) must be processed as refugees.

Secondly, I suspect it is just as illegal (under international law) to apprehend a boat that is (to all intents and purposes) just going about its own business.
I suspect that there would be a real reason to intercept boats, such as suspected drug smuggling or some such.

Thirdly, I suspect it would be illegal under French and international law for the French to assist refugees to cross territory, or to leave their own territory.


So rather than throwing out speculative ideas, how about researching the genuine international and national laws on what is legal and what is illegal.

We have already dealt with the supposed belief that refugees must seek asylum in the first (or indeed any subsequent) country that they encounter. There is no legal or moral requirement for them to do so.

Whilst I totally agree, we should process migrants in the safe way that you suggest, the UK has refused to take it fair share of migrants.
Sadly the world is not fair, nor is it a model of how things should be done.

HE says with his little French Flag avatar. Go on you dodgy game show sex toy hybrid escargot! Have em all back, so full of no.2s!

 

[EFLImpudence]

Would be cheaper all round to run a train for them.

 

[JohnD]

How would we know that it isn't?

by observing behaviour in places and at times and in species that do not have the religion that some people think causes the behaviour.

For example, a person who, like myself, does not commit murder, theft, adultery, perjury but is not a follower of the supposed religion.

Or the standards in pre-Christian Rome, when such acts were considered undesirable, because they are contrary to the needs of social groups.

Or behaviour in other great apes, ducks and ants, where the animals are genetically programmed to behave in a way that most benefits the survival of the group and the species. The animals that didn't have generally not survived.

In order to persuade people to kill others, it is usually first necessary to break down their genetic programming, by brutalisation, or to convince them that the victims are in some way "different," for example by colour, religion, nationality, class, or social group. This helps the killers to overcome the innate barrier to killing one's own species. You will observe some political leaders who strive to portray outsiders as "different."

Insignia and uniforms are helpful in creating an artificial differentiation between the killers and the victims so that hatred can be inculcated.


Distinction by class

Distinction by religion

Distinction by skin colour

Distinction by colour of shirt

Distinction by nationality

Distinction by race

 

[Deleted member 18243]

Great virtue signalling John, you are just the best at it!

Don't overdo it though.

 

[motorbiking]

How will they know if there are 'illegals' on board?
And are refugees 'illegals' just because they haven't yet claimed asylum?
If the answer to the second question is 'yes', then why are they not all arrested in France, for being an 'illegal'?

Is it 'illegal' to go for a trip in a boat?

1. Suspicions
2. Requirement to Cary ID in france as well as entering without clearances / passport
3. Skipper commits an offence as he is required to have a passage plan and know the status of his crew and passengers

I think we know why they aren’t arrested in france

 

[Deleted member 18243]

1. Suspicions...

I think we know why they aren’t arrested in france

I think we all know they aren't refugees.

 

[JP_]

the safe option would be to stop them leaving the french shore,

you seem quite happy they are risking their lives with this perilous crossing. By trying to hush up and turn a blind eye to what is happening, it is people like you who will ultimately be the cause of any tragedy.

How do you do that? The French coast is big. And once at sea, not safe to forcibly stop.

As for the second part, why do you think I'm happy about it, hushing it up, and turning a blind eye? I am the cause of a tradegy? Don't be a ridiculous.

 

[IT Minion]

How will they know if there are 'illegals' on board?
And are refugees 'illegals' just because they haven't yet claimed asylum?
If the answer to the second question is 'yes', then why are they not all arrested in France, for being an 'illegal'?

Is it 'illegal' to go for a trip in a boat?

Common sense is useful at times.

IANANL but you can stop the boats we're talking about for a couple of reasons. Generally they're overloaded and not safe, they may not be obeying the rules of the road and under international law you are allowed to board vessels you believe are breaking local law.

Just on safety grounds alone the Navy and coast guard have good reason to intercept the boats before they get run down by s tanker.

 

[noseall]

IANANL

Eh?

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

1. Suspicions
2. Requirement to Cary ID in france as well as entering without clearances / passport
3. Skipper commits an offence as he is required to have a passage plan and know the status of his crew and passengers

I think we know why they aren’t arrested in france

So why don't the French stop all boats, and arrest the occupants? There must be a valid reason. Maybe they simply cannot detect them all? A friend sails out of Concarneau, including crossing the channel, but to my knowledge, he's never been approached by neither the French or the UK coastguard.
(No! He is not a people smuggler, before anyone suggests anything silly. He sails purely for pleasure.)

I've been living in France for many years, but I've never been stopped purely for ID purposes. I don't know anyone that has.

If the crew are people smugglers they obviously won't prepare a passage plan. But having a passage plan does not mean completing a formal document, or submit it anywhere, or even recording it in writing. For small vessels, simply an awareness of the environment is sufficient. Additionally, though it may be UK regulations for certain vessels over a certain size for UK registered vessels, foreign registered vessels need not abide by UK regulations.
The captain should make an assessment of the competence of his crew, (if he is following the SOLAS V requirements) he need not know the status of them. Quite obviously, making an assessment could result in the captain deciding that the crew have no competence, but he has made an assessment.