To all those that welcome/encourage the small boat migrants.

[motorbiking]

No. Just walk me through how you think this new treaty is going to lead to claims under Article 5 ECHR.

Is this all your own thinking. Is there an article you can link to which explains it.

No it’s been widely reported as the 1 in 1 out loophole.

 

[Deleted member 317777]

No it’s been widely reported as the 1 in 1 out loophole.

He’s on the ropes in 2 threads now.

 

[MNW67]

d and e, Anyone claiming asylum is not eligible for return.
c, arrived less than 14 days ago.

That gives a person the ability to claim asylum at the moment they are about to be told they are being sent back and the U.K. has almost no time to assess the claim.

I think we may find it difficult to find 50 a week who are eligible

That may be true. But it has nothing to do with the issue we are discussing.

 

[MNW67]

No it’s been widely reported as the 1 in 1 out loophole.

Thank you. You have finally said something relevant. I will have a look.

 

[mitch66]

As you say, the 50 is a starting point, hopefully it will increase once it is shown to work..

So it's 18 in 1 out?

 

[denso13]

So it's 18 in 1 out?

At the moment, have we got the 1 out yet?

 

[mitch66]

At the moment, have we got the 1 out yet?

Doubt it. I'm surprised to see Labour kicking the can like the tories did.

 

[denso13]

Doubt it. I'm surprised to see Labour kicking the can like the tories did.

Hopefully their proposals will help things, we'll see. There is no easy answer.

 

[MNW67]

No it’s been widely reported as the 1 in 1 out loophole.

I have looked into this now. It was very interesting. But essentially the opposite way around to what you originally posted.

Your initial post said that it would be against human rights to deport someone to France who had an open asylum claim. That was something I was unaware of. Especially as Greece have been doing it for almost a decade. Hence my questions. Your claim turned out to be totally wrong.

What you probably meant to say is that, under the new UK France treaty, the UK cannot send people to France who have an outstanding human rights claim. On the face of it, that appears to be the case. The government say this is not true, although I do not understand their reasoning.

 

[motorbiking]

I have looked into this now. It was very interesting. But essentially the opposite way around to what you originally posted.

Your initial post said that it would be against human rights to deport someone to France who had an open asylum claim. That was something I was unaware of. Especially as Greece have been doing it for almost a decade. Hence my questions. Your claim turned out to be totally wrong.

What you probably meant to say is that, under the new UK France treaty, the UK cannot send people to France who have an outstanding human rights claim. On the face of it, that appears to be the case. The government say this is not true, although I do not understand their reasoning.

Did it occur to you why the treaty has included these provisions?

 

[MNW67]

Did it occur to you why the treaty has included these provisions?

Not fully. What is your take on it.

 

[motorbiking]

Not fully. What is your take on it.

That they had to do it to get round the HRA/ECHR

Hence…

It will be interesting to see how Labour get round the human rights act when forcibly deporting people back to france who have open asylum claims.

When I made the above statement. I hadn’t seen the treaty wording.

 

[MNW67]

That they had to do it to get round the HRA/ECHR

So, we're back where we started.

Nothing in the ECHR stops an asylum seeker being deported to a properly safe country like France.

Certainly not the main articles 2 and 3. Neither does article 5.

So, I don't believe that is the reason.

Maybe it was simply down to the logistics of having a human rights case ongoing in the UK courts whilst living in France.

 

[motorbiking]

So, we're back where we started.

Nothing in the ECHR stops an asylum seeker being deported to a properly safe country like France.

Certainly not the main articles 2 and 3. Neither does article 5.

So, I don't believe that is the reason.

Maybe it was simply down to the logistics of having a human rights case ongoing in the UK courts whilst living in France.

Irrelevant of the above (as I’m not interested in arguing case law with you ) What is your take on the treaty?

 

[MNW67]

Irrelevant of the above

But that is the only part I am actually interested in. I had interpreted your initial post to be saying that we couldn't deport those with an open asylum claim because it would be against the ECHR. If that isn't what you were saying, then just please confirm, so that we can stop.