Stand off drowning migrants and report – or face prosecution, sailors warned

Greciangirl

Yes. Macron certainly has blood on his hands.

Let’s face it. The french don’t like us and apparently couldn’t care less what happens to migrants, just so long as they don’t have to deal with them.

I’m astounded at the millions we have paid them to do bugger all.

Nothing seems to be done to try and catch the smugglers.
Surely a bit of detective work around the french camps, boat companies etc. This is the crux of the problem.
Apparently, french strict data protection laws means that aerial surveillance equipment provided by the UK has not been used.
It’s absolutely ridiculous.

Priti Patel ought to resign and see if someone else can do a better job.

Oh, FGS...RTFT

Now I've run out of acronyms

But yes, I'd be happy to see the back of Patel. And the rest of them.

They should be prevented from getting into the dinghies in the first place in France.I cannot imagine the RNLI not rescuing anyone and in those circumstances there is no way they are going to let anyone drown.

Well, having owned and sailed a 25ft boat across the Channel and down the French canals numerous times in the 70's and 80's with DH and two DC I can honestly say that the thought of attempting to cross the English channel in a tender ( rubber dinghy) with a less than adequate outboard motor among other things even in calm weather, fills me with complete horror. When I remember the preparation and safety equipment we had to have even for a daytrip round the IOW , the fact that these poor souls are being encouraged to set off ill prepared into such danger is just wicked. The sea is a dangerous, at times frightening place , wind changes, tide fluctuation, fog, shipping, and many other dangers even for the most seasoned sailors nevermind amateurs who have probably never been been in a boat before. I pray for the day these nightmare journeys are stopped before more accidents happen and more lives are lost.

It has been said one of the deceased was an Afghan soldier serving with the British Army. May I point out that it is less than 24 hours since the tragedy occurred, and since all potential immigrants destroy their id documents, it is impossible to know with any certainty who they are and where they originate from.

Alegrias1

Greciangirl

Yes. Macron certainly has blood on his hands.

Let’s face it. The french don’t like us and apparently couldn’t care less what happens to migrants, just so long as they don’t have to deal with them.

I’m astounded at the millions we have paid them to do bugger all.

Nothing seems to be done to try and catch the smugglers.
Surely a bit of detective work around the french camps, boat companies etc. This is the crux of the problem.
Apparently, french strict data protection laws means that aerial surveillance equipment provided by the UK has not been used.
It’s absolutely ridiculous.

Priti Patel ought to resign and see if someone else can do a better job.

Oh, FGS...RTFT

Now I've run out of acronyms

But yes, I'd be happy to see the back of Patel. And the rest of them.

I very much doubt Patel will resign. She is just as deluded as the PM and the rest of the Cabinet, convinced she is doing a great job. Heaven help us.

Sorry, I keep meaning to go and do something else then I read something daft.

since all potential immigrants destroy their id documents

What?!?!? We really are living in a world of completely made up sound bites

A couple of things I heard on the news at lunchtime from Peter Walsh from Oxford university
1. You cannot claim asylum in the UK unless you are IN the UK

2. We are behind France Germany Italy Spain in the numbers of asylum seekers we take.

I find it hard to understand the mindset of migrants boarding these hugely overcrowded inflatables. Wouldn’t warning bells have rung? They were already in a safe country, France so they had fulfilled their desire for safety.

What do we offer that France, or all the other safe countries they passed through don’t?

That’s the crux of the matter.

I believe there’s talk of doing what is obvious, and that’s to make it clear that boat migrants will automatically have their application refused,

As far as I can see it’s the only way to stop this influx, and of course stop the tragic deaths in the Channel.

Why should we refuse asylum? Why should some other country take them?

On what legal grounds?

How else can they get here???
They can’t apply for asylum until they are here.

How many times....?

Its clear that there is a subset of people who are unwilling to even try to assimilate the actual truth of what is going on. There is an opinion that goes along the lines of "well anyone can see its dangerous, why do they do it?" and "what we need to do is just break international law and tell them they can't claim asylum."

Firstly; they are probably so desperate to get here that they think its worth taking the chance on the channel. Also, if you come from a few thousand miles away, how do you know how dangerous the Channel is? You can see the other side from Calais, when they set out its usually calm. If you are that close to your goal, why would you not try it? How many of us know the status of bodies of water thousands of miles away from our homes?

Secondly, you can't stop people arriving here any way they like and then claiming asylum. That is how international law works. I think that the question comes down to what we think the crisis is; I think the crisis is that there are so many people who are in such dire straits and who are willing to take all these chances because they want to come to the UK, to work here and to make new lives for themselves and their families. Others seem to think that the crisis is to do with scroungers arriving on the south coast that need to be stopped at all costs.

I have only met a few young asylum seekers in a centre near here, but they said that while France was doing a lot to help and support them, they wanted to join family already in the UK.

I find it hard to understand the mindset of migrants boarding these hugely overcrowded inflatables. Wouldn’t warning bells have rung? They were already in a safe country, France so they had fulfilled their desire for safety.
I agree, JenniferEccles. Politics aside, what possesses these people to do this when the risk of drowning is so high? I was watching a documentary about WW2 PoW's escaping from camps this week and the historian said young men are often (recklessly) up for the adventure, despite the dangers involved. Of course, that can't be true for women with children. More tragic accidents with loss of life will inevitably happen at sea.

goodness Maudi - according to international law, asylum should be ranted to those at risk of persecution or death in the country they come from. Interesting that those who died yesterday are "migrants" not "people", with the attendant lives, hopes and dreams. If 30 people had drowned on a Thames cruiser there would be a public enquiry - here we blame the people smugglers. Fleeing persecution, abortion, alcohol and drugs and all other things which govts have attempted to make illegal will not stop people wanting them, it simply makes the means of acquisition more dangerous, and creates wealth for the criminal class which provides it. Have we learned nothing fro history?

Also, if you come from a few thousand miles away, how do you know how dangerous the Channel is? I assume they have access to social media and can read, maybe they even have mobile phones. How else would they organise their passage?

Lucca

A couple of things I heard on the news at lunchtime from Peter Walsh from Oxford university
1. You cannot claim asylum in the UK unless you are IN the UK

2. We are behind France Germany Italy Spain in the numbers of asylum seekers we take.

He's right.

Gabrielle56, why assume that they are not asylum seekers? Plenty of data on this thread to show that in fact they are just that. And who is offering just tea and sympathy? How do you know what we all do for others, when we are not tapping away here? Maybe some of us actually do put our money to use helping others. Yes, something IS needed, and it is not a Home Office run by that daughter of asylum seekers, welcomed into the UK in the 1970s.

^ How many of us know the status of bodies of water thousands of miles away from our homes?^
Even I know there are sharks off the coast of Australia and that's a few thousand miles away.

We are behind France Germany Italy Spain in the numbers of asylum seekers we take.

Has no one noticed how much bigger these countries are than the UK? There is no comparison. England is the most densely populated country in Europe.

Last month I went to Weston Super Mare, which used to be a smallish seaside town in the West Country. I hadn't been there for more than 10 years and was astonished at what had been done to it .... miles and miles of cramped housing estates all looking exactly the same. It was shocking.

Of course we feel compassionate about what has been happening but we cannot rescue the whole world. The population density in Europe is 34 people per sq. km. Alegrias will leap in to point out that some of this land is mountainous and uninhabitable, but so are areas of the UK. The population density in England is 426 people per sq km.

I think you are all worrying needlessly as many interviewed today said they will still come, no matter what happened yesterday, and theyve already paid their 2000 euros in order to do so. Therefore, plenty more will be arriving shortly. Some had travelled from Belarus where they paid 2000 euros, on to France another 1000 euros, channel crossing another 2000 euros. So for one person that is 5000 euros.

JenniferEccles

I find it hard to understand the mindset of migrants boarding these hugely overcrowded inflatables. Wouldn’t warning bells have rung? They were already in a safe country, France so they had fulfilled their desire for safety.

What do we offer that France, or all the other safe countries they passed through don’t?

That’s the crux of the matter.

I believe there’s talk of doing what is obvious, and that’s to make it clear that boat migrants will automatically have their application refused,

As far as I can see it’s the only way to stop this influx, and of course stop the tragic deaths in the Channel.

Firstly, the UK doesn't offer many people anything which other countries don't. That's why some other countries accept more refugees than the UK and the UK isn't even in the top five.

Secondly, (and this has been mentioned umpteen times), some refugees are more likely to speak English than other languages, some have family already in the UK and , for some, there have been historic, colonial links.

Why would "boat migrants" have their applications refused when there is no other way for them to reach the UK? That's inhumane and contravenes international law. They have done absolutely nothing illegal. It is not illegal to travel to the UK by boat and it is not illegal to disembark. They have a legal right to claim asylum. Refugees only become "illegal" if they have their application for asylum refused and still remain. How difficult is that to understand?

Forsythia

I think you are all worrying needlessly as many interviewed today said they will still come, no matter what happened yesterday, and theyve already paid their 2000 euros in order to do so. Therefore, plenty more will be arriving shortly. Some had travelled from Belarus where they paid 2000 euros, on to France another 1000 euros, channel crossing another 2000 euros. So for one person that is 5000 euros.

Why is worrying about people who could very easily drown needless?

Josianne

^Also, if you come from a few thousand miles away, how do you know how dangerous the Channel is?^ I assume they have access to social media and can read, maybe they even have mobile phones. How else would they organise their passage?

Yes, of course. Sitting in a cold damp tent in Pas de Calais, desperately hungry and with no hope, I'd be on Facebook every day.

Sparklefizz

^We are behind France Germany Italy Spain in the numbers of asylum seekers we take.^

Has no one noticed how much bigger these countries are than the UK? There is no comparison. England is the most densely populated country in Europe.

Last month I went to Weston Super Mare, which used to be a smallish seaside town in the West Country. I hadn't been there for more than 10 years and was astonished at what had been done to it .... miles and miles of cramped housing estates all looking exactly the same. It was shocking.

Of course we feel compassionate about what has been happening but we cannot rescue the whole world. The population density in Europe is 34 people per sq. km. Alegrias will leap in to point out that some of this land is mountainous and uninhabitable, but so are areas of the UK. The population density in England is 426 people per sq km.

Even accounting for geographic area and population, the UK still takes fewer refugees than some other European countries - and other countries such as Turkey and Uganda.