Is the Home Office betraying us?

So what would you do with people who turn up on UK shores Ngaio?

The chances are that an asylum claim will fail, so they will be deported. Meanwhile, they're here and the best thing would be to screen them for Covid-19 and quarantine them. Under international law, the moment they step on British soil, they're entitled to apply for asylum, so are here legally until any asylum request is rejected.

Signed

A weepie

The MP for Rye & Hastings, Sally-Ann Hart has sent this letter to Priti Patel today regarding this issue:

She wrote: “What work is being undertaken with out European neighbours to ensure that these Channel crossings do not happen in the first place? What work is underway to work with other nations to clamp down on human trafficking and exploitation that is clearly behind a lot of these crossings?

“What checks are being done to ensure that when migrants arrive here in the UK, and are apprehended by the authorities that they are tested for Covid-19? Can it be established whether or not they are bringing coronavirus to the UK?

“What support is being given by the Government to the local authorities, including the coastguard, to patrol the Channel and this vulnerable stretch of coastline, and prevent these dangerous crossings from taking place?

“There have been reports that when migrants are landing at the beach of Pett Level they are being taken to locations in Hastings. Can you confirm that when the authorities, here in the UK, apprehend the migrants, where are they being taken for detention? Are there locations in Hastings being used for this purpose?”

In the past month, 52 migrants have been detained along the coastline between Hastings and& ^Rye after crossing the Channel.

On April 8, 23 migrants were stopped in Hastings and on April 12, a boat carrying 25 men and four women was intercepted as it approached the area.

According to the Home Office, all individuals – including groups taken from boats intercepted between Hastings and Dover – were taken to Dover where they would then be transferred to immigration officials.

In her letter to the Home Secretary, Mrs Hart added: “My constituents are rightly concerned and worries at these recent developments in the increase in the numbers making these journeys and the actions being taken by our authorities once the migrants land on our beaches.

“I have written to you seeking answers on their behalf and asking that, as a country, we do more with our European neighbours to bring an end the scourge of human trafficking and thereby reduce and eliminate these dangerous Channel crossings.

Nice one?

Because many of them have relatives in the UK, or they speak some English Fennel. They also see the UK as being more accepting to migrants than France is, where they are often on the brunt end of police brutality in the dead of night.

jennifer wrote
"The rules say they should seek asylum from the first safe country they reach."
I think this rule should be changed. If it was strictly kept Italy , Greece etc would be in an impossible situation. Bad enough as it is.
France made efforts to welcome them, but most don't want France, they want the UK, Why?

That sounds like a plan to me trisher regarding NF.

I agree, what is the Border Force supposed to do with immigrants ? We are aware of where they should be but the fact remains they are on British shores. Quarantine and test then take things from there.

I made this point a while ago and my post was removed! Of course it is risky to allow free access to anyone who may carry the virus. Just when will common sense take over from the "weepies" who would have no rules whatsoever.

Other countries are a little more sensible. A pilot (friend of the family) had a routine test before a flight out. It was positive so he has to isolate for now. He has absolutely no symptoms whatsoever.

I agree that everyone arriving in the UK should be quarantined. It should have begun months ago.

Everything seems to be done too little, too late, though. The virus is already widespread in our country so it will make little difference now.

Farage certainly knows how to push some people’s buttons doesn’t he?

He is such a spiv that I’m surprised anyone can take him seriously.

Sorry, I didn't think it was like you

Yes Callistemon , so do I, but I thought I’d play along

I think growstuff's remark was tongue-in-cheek!

Yes, maddyone
Better they are picked up and processed/quarantined than just disappear - carrying COVID19 with them and causing a new wave of he virus to spread through the population.

And actually growstuff had they slipped in undercover and disappeared, they would have been at an even bigger risk of spreading Covid19 into the population.

growstuff
If the British did that ( I know they wouldn’t) then quite rightly there would be a huge outcry all over the world. People can’t be shot!!! Or not be rescued when at sea in those dangerous little boats. My concern is about quarantine and testing. Actually as Maizie said, wherever they are housed, these particular people are sort of quarantined. However I think they should not be allowed out at all for the first 14 days. That still leaves the problem of people entering legally and going straight out into the community. Basically I think the lockdown was too late and too little (not strong enough.) Had we had a much stronger lockdown that was properly enforced then the problem of people entering the country wouldn’t have been a problem, including the migrants coming across in boats because they would have immediately been put into a strict quarantine.

Exactly Elegran. It really isn't that easy - probably simpler to hole their boats while they're still at sea or shoot them!

Border Force has done its job by intercepting them. The alternative would be for them to slip in undercover and disperse to some unknown place.

In which case almostelderly, they will apply for asylum in the UK, probably be rejected and deported.

Perhaps those who object so strongly to the Border Force picking up these immigrants would volunteer for a new force to replace them? They would have to have some clear objectives, though.

1) They would need to know where to go to intercept them, and when.

2) They would need a plan for what to with them once intercepted. Would they -
. 2a) tell the owner/pilot of the boat to turn round and go back (they would then need to make sure that he did so, and didn't sneak back in somewhere else under cover of night.)
. 2b) drill a hole in the hull of the boat so that it sinks and let them drown.
. 2c) arrest the owner/pilot for people-trafficking and take him into custody. They would need to interview the passengers first, to make sure they were indeed being trafficked, and not willing customers.
. 2d) arrest all of them and take them into custody. Some would escape when it was obvious that their fellow-passengers were being arrested.
. 2e) put everyone into a people-carrier and take them off to be interviewed

3) If they adopted plan 2c, 2d,or 2e, and found out that the passengers had no passports, or false ones, they would face another dilemma - what to do now? Should they -
. 3a) Deport them back to where they came from. But where was that? Was it where the boat set out from? Was it their country of origin? With no passport, how to tell what country that is? What if they just pick some desirable place where they would like to live? Checking could take some time, and without a passport they would probably not be admitted anyway - but Hey Ho! the problem would be handed on to somewhere else. And how to deport them? - flights are few at the moment and not to be wasted on unnecessary journeys.
. 3b) Put them into a holding camp. Errr - that has been done before, in Calais among other places. It wasn't 100% successful, and with the virus it could be lethal. Do they really want to kill them all off? If so, option 2b would be quicker and more honest - but not the most ethical!

And so on!

It is more complicated than just declaring that they are unwelcome!

I agree with Jennifer Eccles. The majority of immigrants arriving in the UK will most probably be economic migrants, a large number appear to be healthy young men. Legitimate asylum seekers should seek asylum in the first safe country they reach, and that is obviously not the UK unless they have flown here from their own country. If there was a survey I suspect most of the key workers from abroad have been here for years and are 2 or even third immigrants and are now British.

I am assuming that they are being quarantined and tested. There is no reason to assume otherwise.

They must be being held somewhere, Maddyone. They're not going to be free to go anywhere. So they won't be spreading it at large if they are infected. So they're sort of quarantined. Unlike the people flying in.

....temporarily.....

I don’t care where Nigel Farage is, but I do care about people entering the country and not being quarantined. We don’t actually know what’s happening with these people who have arrived in a somewhat unconventional manner, but we do know that people who arrive in aeroplanes are being allowed into the country with no testing or quarantining. We also know that Coronavirus, unsurprisingly, is in the camps that the migrants are using in France, and that is one reason given for their attempts to cross over to the UK.
I would quite like to know what is being done with these people, are they tested, and are they quarantined before being temporary accommodated until their status is decided? If the airports are anything to go by, then they’re probably not being quarantined. If we are to get a proper hold on the spread of Coronavirus, then everyone coming in from abroad, however they arrive, should be quarantined.

JenniferEccles, I'm certain I'm not the only poster here who is not "missing the point "you make about seeking asylum in the first country they arrive in.

Perhaps you can help me understand why other countries in Europe should help these people, and we shouldn't?

War, disease, famine, these are International problems and need an international response