What is the answer here?

I dont think there is one. I foresaw this happening to be honest.

I can’t see an answer. All I do know is, through a friend with connections in Dover harbour that employers of the lifeboat crews are getting a tad miffed at the amount of time crew members are taking off work.
A very contentious issue, I know, but it’s what’s being said.

The answer. Well, facts first.

Migrant figures for this year aren’t available yet. What I think you mean is that 3 times as many desperate people have crossed the channel compared with last year.

Secondly, there is no evidence whatsoever that they are bringing our infrastructure to its knees, although its handy for the powers-that-be who can’t run the country properly to blame it on the mythical migrants.

So, the answer? Treat the people who arrive by boat like human beings, deal with their asylum and migration claims quickly, send the people who have no right to be here back, say “Welcome “ to the ones who have a right to be here and recognise that the problems in this country right now are not caused by a few thousand desperate people.

Good answer, but how do they decide who has a right to be here when they’ve all arrived in the same boat?

The same way they do now. But quicker.

They can tell them apart, you know.

Seriously-how do they decide if e.g. two pregnant women or two 19 year old boys arrive all telling them same (appalling) story but one of each or one pair or 3/4 are genuine, how is the decision made?
They can tell them apart? How? Do they have stickers saying genuine or do only they genuine ones have real passports. I don’t know, which is why I’m asking.

I watched a documentary about the lifeboats last week. The staff were getting grief from the public because they rescued migrants from a dinghy.
It was upsetting for the lifeboat staff they just want to save lives. These wonderful volunteers do a brave and daring job unpaid. With no support from the government who are burying their heads in the sand. If the life boat staff are getting abuse for saving migrants it's not surprising they are taking time off. It was sad to see the immigrants there were little children amongst them. It was an upsetting programme to watch and its a situation that is not going away.

I meant migrants posted before proofing.

If the life boat staff are getting abuse for saving migrants it's not surprising they are taking time off.

I think you may have misunderstood MerylStreep's post, Redhead.

The lifeboat crews are not having time off rescuing people because of the abuse they are getting from the public for rescuing migrants. They're tougher than that.

Because they are having to go out so often to rescue migrants, as well as other rescues, they are having to take even more time off work.
As they're all volunteers, they are in paid employment and when the call comes, off they go.

I think that's what is meant.

Mollygo

Seriously-how do they decide if e.g. two pregnant women or two 19 year old boys arrive all telling them same (appalling) story but one of each or one pair or 3/4 are genuine, how is the decision made?
They can tell them apart? How? Do they have stickers saying genuine or do only they genuine ones have real passports. I don’t know, which is why I’m asking.

Your question mollygo, was how do they decide who has a right to be here if they all arrive in the same boat?

It doesn't matter how they arrive. Some of then will arrive with all the paperwork they need to prove who they are and what their claim is based on. Some of them will arrive with nothing but the clothes they stand up in.

I'm not an immigration officer but I don't expect they they make the decision on the spot, as soon as the people step off the boat. Or even a week later. I expect that the process for deciding if someone has the right to stay here takes weeks, or even months. Maybe even years. But in that time we have to treat them like human beings, with dignity.

There are going to be more and more people arriving in this country as time goes on, that will be one of the consequences of climate change. We can rail against the French, or whoever, and try to push the people back to the continent, and pretend they are somebody else's responsibility, but that's not true, If they get here, they are our responsibility, and we should be taking that seriously.

I think the only way to deal with this dreadful situation is to break the business model of the people smugglers, by clearly stating that any immigrants arriving here illegally by boat will be automatically barred from applying for asylum and will be sent home.

Once the message gets through that it’s hopeless, the numbers should stop.

I believe Australia did something similar and solved the problem within a year.

There is already a system in place for genuine asylum seekers but from the pictures of the arrivals it’s clear that the majority are young males.

Sarnia is absolutely correct. This situation can’t be allowed to continue.

Can we just stop trying to say that Australia's immigration policy is in any way something we should be trying to copy?

Is there a reason that young males can't be genuine asylum seekers?

Can you tell on sight?

www.refugeecouncil.org.au/asylum-policies/

Why should we stop mentioning Australia’s immigration policy when it worked?
Sarnia asked for sensible workable solutions and Australia found just such a plan.

Would that this were a simple problem.

My feeling is that if someone is prepared to risk their life in a rubber dinghy in the freezing channel then it might be reasonable to assume that they are desperate. That they are escaping from something that is so awful that they are prepared to risk their lives to get away.

But it begs the question as to why Britain? Presumably they have stopped off in a number of other countries en route. But they choose to plough on and risk the boat trip in order to get to Britain.

It may be that it is because they expect to be treated with humanity and kindness here, which is something we should be proud of; but I assume that other European countries might be expected to do the same.

I do not buy the headlines that talk of us being "overrun" or of our infrastructure being on its knees. There are inadequacies in various services (health, education etc.) but they were there before immigration became so headline-grabbing.

I do not know what the answer is - but I do know that we cannot turn back people whose lives are at risk afloat on flimsy boats. It would be inhuman.

I agree that the people at the helm of this "trade" who are making a lot of money out of others' misfortune are to be despised.

JenniferEccles

Why should we stop mentioning Australia’s immigration policy when it worked?
Sarnia asked for sensible workable solutions and Australia found just such a plan.

Ask the people losing their sanity on Nauru if it worked.

‘The Australian government’s policy is the exact opposite of what countries should be pursuing’ - Anna Neistat

www.amnesty.org.uk/press-releases/australia-conditions-nauru-detention-centre-amount-torture?utm_source=google&utm_medium=grant&utm_campaign=BRD_AWA_GEN_dynamic-search-ads&utm_content=

Redhead56

I watched a documentary about the lifeboats last week. The staff were getting grief from the public because they rescued migrants from a dinghy.
It was upsetting for the lifeboat staff they just want to save lives. These wonderful volunteers do a brave and daring job unpaid. With no support from the government who are burying their heads in the sand. If the life boat staff are getting abuse for saving migrants it's not surprising they are taking time off. It was sad to see the immigrants there were little children amongst them. It was an upsetting programme to watch and its a situation that is not going away.

I watched this and really felt for the lifeboat crew pulled in two directions. It's a situation that has been going on for too long with no effective procedure and as you say is not going away.

Alegrias1

Can we just stop trying to say that Australia's immigration policy is in any way something we should be trying to copy?

Is there a reason that young males can't be genuine asylum seekers?

Can you tell on sight?

I think what JenniferEccles is saying is that there appears to be a lot of single men travelling here and that concerns some people. As you say they may be genuine asylum seekers or have family already here that they are trying to reach. We shouldn't generalise that they are all up to no good. Perhaps families with young children seem more deserving of our help. I don't know. It's a desperate situation all round.

I agree with you about the generalisations that are made Sarnia. It is certainly desperate for those people trying to get here.

JenniferEccles

Why should we stop mentioning Australia’s immigration policy when it worked?
Sarnia asked for sensible workable solutions and Australia found just such a plan.

Australia's policy has worked in that the refugees are kept out of sight and therefore out of mind - on an island. I read the report linked by Alegrias! and it's damning.

So once here how and where do we accomodate those arriving on our shores unless already having relatives with properties.
Do they come with funds to buy property ? doubtful, so who then comes first for rentals ?

Luckygirl Many of them remain in other countries. The hundreds of thousands of refugees leaving their home countries do not all aim for Britain.